Land at Church Lane, Local Plan Part 2: Design Statement for 1871 & 2561 (including OBJECTIONS to Policy CC1)

December 2014

N

1. National Park, SSSI/SAC, Heritage Landscape & Ancient Woodland wrap the North, West & East of Colden Common. 2. Lack of open-space to the south of the Colden Common

3. Busy roads & tree-protection designations further restrict development sites 4. 1871 & 2561 can be shown to support a clear and rational opportunity for development

DECEMBER 2014 STRATEGIC CONCEPT Project Location LAND AT CHURCH LANE LP2 01 N Proposed site access and Masterplan Area: Footpath to school new pedestrian crossing 1871 (0,87ha, 2.14acres) 2671 (7.82ha, 19.32acres) Total (8.69ha, 21.46acres)

Site Location: Longitude: 50.9907N Latitude: -1.3201571E OS: SU 47811 21481

CHURCH LANE

1871 Green-zone setback can replicate other noted landscape on Church Lane and preserves existing character Revised Settlement Boundary

Why isn't settlement boundary revised across the south of 1871?

2561

Extract from Village Design Statement

New Public Open Space (see Landscape Strategy/LVIA)

DECEMBER 2014 LOCATION PLAN (1:2500) Project Location LAND AT CHURCH LANE LP2 02 N

Listed Buildings Village Centre SSSI / SAC National & School Park (generally) Drainage 1870 2494 Pipe

2497

Listed Landscape

888 889 275 Ancient Woodland 1874 Protected Tree Features

Non Car Dominated 2389 Pedestrian Access Proposed change to southern settlement boundary. Why not similar for 1871?

1871 2500 Access to Public Open Space 2561 Footpaths, Bridleways, 2498 KEY Cyclepath and Employment Bus Sites Stops Extended Public Right of Way National Park and Cyclepath Feature Public Open Space * with Public Art. (addresses short-falls in south Open Space of Colden Common) Listed Buildings Bridleway Protected Pylons and cyclepath Trees (inc to Stoke Park Woods)

DECEMBER 2014 OPPORTUNITY & CONSTRAINTS PLAN (NTS) Project Location LAND AT CHURCH LANE LP2 03 N

1871 REDUCED OPTION Non-car 2561 + 1871 (NOV 2013) dominated footpath to village centre Building line follows adjacent and sets back Existing from Listed Buidling frontage enhanced

Secure Landscape Buffer (Productive Landscape - Community Orchard) 15m Landscape buffer to the Western boundary Playspace

Pocket Play Space

Semi-Private Courtyards

Neighbourhood Sheltered Accommodation Open Space (central to the neighbourhood)

Visual Axis from Church Lane Perimeter Landscaping

Public Open Space with picnic features and access to wider footpath / cyclepath & bridleway network Public Landscape Feature (with Public Art)

Proposed access to wider Footpath / Cyclepath & Bridleway network

DECEMBER 2014 CONCEPT MASTERPLAN (1:2500 @ A3, 1:1250 @A1) Project Location LAND AT CHURCH LANE LP2 04 N

Note: Background Image extracted from Colden Common Village Design Statement (2012) for comparative analysis.

DECEMBER 2014 VDS: NEW PUBLIC OPEN SPACE FOR THE SOUTH (NTS) Project Location LAND AT CHURCH LANE LP2 05 N

32 20

23

12 12

80 18

25

24

15 17 17

18 20

25

DECEMBER 2014 REVISED DESIGN CONCEPT (c.45 dwellings) (1:1000 @ A3, 1:500 @ A1) Project Location LAND AT CHURCH LANE LP2 06 N

Community Orchard as Landscape Buffer

New Community Green

15m Perimeter Landscape Buffer

Public Open Space with extensive Perimeter Landscape Buffer

Long Vista with Landscape Feature

links to Footpath Network

DECEMBER 2014 ORIGINAL DESIGN CONCEPT (c.120 dwellings) (NTS) Project Location LAND AT CHURCH LANE LP2 07 N

DECEMBER 2014 VISUAL NOTES Project Location LAND AT CHURCH LANE LP2 08 N

LISTED BUILDINGS (X3)

LANDSCAPE BUFFER (20M) 0.58Ha

275 MAIN RESIDUAL SITE AREA (3.79Ha @30DPH = 114 DWELLINGS)

275 FRONTAGE RESIDUAL SITE AREA (0.62Ha @20DPH = 12 DWELLINGS)

2495 RESIDUAL SITE AREA (0.14Ha @20DPH = 3 DWELLINGS)

SITE CAPACITY = 129 DWELLINGS

WATER MAIN (6M SAFE ZONE) 0.35Ha

DECEMBER 2014 SITE 275 - DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT Project Location LAND AT CHURCH LANE LP2 09 N

NE CH LA CHUR

JUNE 2015 1871A - SHLAA SITE (1:2500 @ A3) Project Location LAND AT CHURCH LANE LP2 13

Hamill Davies Ltd

Ivydale Lower Chase Road HAMILL DAVIES LIMITED SO32 2PB 01489 893 596 07831 439 699 01489 890 715

[email protected]

Land at Church Lane, Colden Common LPP2: 1871 & 2561

Foul & Surface Water Drainage Strategy 1.0 Introduction

1.1 This planning statement offers a general overview of the feasibility of providing surface water and foul drainage to the proposed development on land south of Church Lane, Colden Common.

1.2 The development proposal, as shown by the plan included within Appendix A, is for the provision of between 20 – 150 residential units to be located on land to the south of Church Lane, Colden Common.

2.0 Foul Drainage Strategy

2.1 Foul drainage from each plot will be connected to drainage runs to be located below the site access roads prior to connection to the existing public sewer within Church Road.

2.2 The sewers will be designed and constructed in accordance with the current edition of ‘Sewers for Adoption’. The on-site drainage layout will be designed as a gravity fed system. An on-site pumping station may be required to allow discharge from the development site to the existing public sewer in Church Road.

3.0 Surface Water Drainage Strategy

3.1 The Code of Practice for Sustainable Drainage Systems provides a flexible approach to drainage systems with a wide range of components and includes a hierarchy of techniques. These are:-

1. Prevention - The use of good site design and housekeeping measures on site to prevent run-off and pollution.

2. Source Control - Control of run off at or very near to its source.

3. Site Control - Management of water from several sub catchment areas.

4. Regional Control - Management of run off from several sites, typically in a detention pond or wetland.

3.2 With the above in mind surface water disposal will respect the hierarchy of techniques outlined above.

3.3 Prevention will be at the forefront of the development of the site with the site set out to maximise the areas of soft landscaping. 3.4 Source control is to be introduced in the following ways:-

Site investigation works are expected to establish that deep borehole soakaways are feasible for the site.

Surface water from roofs will be discharged from individual plots to deep borehole soakaways located a minimum of 5m from the properties within open space areas.

Surface water run off from private drives and access roads will discharge to permeable paving where surface water will infiltrate to the underlying ground via deep soakaway boreholes. The infiltration design will ensure no surcharging or flooding occurs at the 1 in 100 year event with a 30% allowance for climate change. The porous sub base will be designed to the required storage volume for a 1 in 30 year rainfall event.

3.5 Rainfall within soft landscaped areas will be allowed to permeate thought the ground in order to mimic as closely as possible the natural drainage from the site before development.

4.0 Conclusions

4.1 The above shows that it is feasible to provide both foul and surface water drainage to the proposed development site on land to the south of Church Road, Colden Common.

Appendix A

Site Layout

Hamill Davies Ltd

Ivydale Lower Chase Road Swanmore HAMILL DAVIES Hampshire LIMITED SO32 2PB 01489 893 596 07831 439 699 01489 890 715

[email protected]

Land at Church Lane, Colden Common LPP2: 1871 & 2561

Flood Risk Assessment dated December 2015

Land at Church Lane, Colden Common LPP2: 1871 & 2561

Flood Risk Assessment dated December 2015

1.0 Introduction

1.1 Planning consent is to be sought for a residential development on land south of Church Lane, Colden Common.

1.2 The site is generally flat. A topographical survey is to be commissioned which will more accurately assess the level differences across the site.

1.3 The Technical Guidance to the National Planning Policy Framework was published to ensure that flood risk is taken into account at all stages in the planning process to avoid inappropriate development in areas at risk of flooding with the requirement for a flood risk assessment which appraises, manages and reduces the risk of flooding.

1.4 This site specific flood risk assessment is required to meet the minimum requirements set out in the Technical Guidance to the National Planning Policy Framework 2.0 Flood Risk Assessment

Tidal Flood Risk

2.1 The site is located inland 12.0 kilometres from Water and thus is not susceptible to Tidal Flood Risk.

Fluvial Flood Risk

2.2 The Environment Agency has been consulted to determine whether the site is at risk of flooding. The Floodplain Map attached, centred on land south of Church Road, Colden Common SO21 1TS shows that the site is outside the designated Flood Zone 3 (High Probability - flooding from a river with a 1 in 100 or greater chance of happening each year) or Flood Zone 2 (Medium Probability - flooding from rivers with up to a 1 in 1000 chance of occurring each year). The development site can therefore be designated as being within Flood Zone 1 assessed to have a less than 1 in 10000 annual probability of river or sea flooding in any year.

2.3 The closest source of fluvial flooding is a tributary of the River Itchen located 0.2 km to the north of the site. The EA flood map shows that the site is not susceptible to fluvial flooding.

2.4 Land within Flood Zone 1 is appropriate for all uses.

Groundwater Flood Risk

2.5 The 1:50 000 Geological Survey of Great Britain ( & Wales) sheet number 315 of the Southampton area shows the site to be located on the Reading Formation. Quaternary Clay with Flint deposits overlies the Upper Chalk Formation which outcrops to the north of the site. Ground water levels will be recorded during the proposed programme of site investigation works. Groundwater levels at depths greater than 10m depth are expected and thus the site will not be at risk of flooding from ground water.

Other Sources of Flood Risk

2.6 The site is generally flat. A topographical survey is to be commissioned which will more accurately assess the level differences across the site.

2.7 The new buildings will be set with finished ground floor levels a minimum of 150mm above proposed ground level. Proposed external levels will be set following the natural contours of the site falling away from the properties to ensure that flows through the site are redirected away from properties in the unlikely event of flooding taking place from other sources such as foul sewers as well as surface water sheet run off or infrastructure failure. 3.0 Surface Water Management

3.1 The Code of Practice for Sustainable Drainage Systems provides a flexible approach to drainage systems with a wide range of components and includes a hierarchy of techniques. These are:-

1. Prevention - The use of good site design and housekeeping measures on site to prevent run-off and pollution.

2. Source Control - Control of run off at or very near to its source.

3. Site Control - Management of water from several sub catchment areas.

4. Regional Control - Management of run off from several sites, typically in a detention pond or wetland.

3.2 With the above in mind surface water disposal will respect the hierarchy of techniques outlined above.

3.3 Prevention will be at the forefront of the development of the site with the site set out to maximise the areas of soft landscaping.

3.4 Source control is to be introduced in the following ways:-

The Environment Agency / Planning Authority require surface water run off after development to be no greater than the surface water runoff prior to development.

The site investigation report is expected to establish that deep borehole soakaways are feasible for the site.

Surface water will therefore be discharged to deep borehole soakaways.

3.5 Rainfall within soft landscaped areas will be allowed to permeate thought the ground in order to mimic as closely as possible the natural drainage from the site before development.

4.0 Conclusions

4.1 The flood risk assessment indicates that the proposed development is not vulnerable to flooding from tidal, fluvial, ground water or other sources of flooding and is thus appropriate.

4.2 In the unlikely event of flooding taking place an alternative over land flood route will be formed though the site to direct any flooding though the site and away from properties.

4.3 Sustainable surface water management techniques, as outlined above, will be adopted to minimise run off and restrict post development run off rates to that of greenfield run off rates prior to development.

EA Floodplain Map

Bloombridge Development Partners

Land South of Church Lane (1871 & 2561) Objection to Policy CC1 Colden Common

Transport Statement

December 2014

Contents

1 INTRODUCTION ...... 1

Report Structure ...... 1

2 EXISTING SITUATION ...... 3

Site Location ...... 3 Existing Accessibility...... 3 Pedestrians & Cyclists ...... 3 Public Transport ...... 5 Rail ...... 6 Accessibility Comparison to Other Sites ...... 7 Local Highway Network ...... 9 Church Lane ...... 9 Accident Analysis ...... 9

3 POLICY REVIEW ...... 10

National Planning Policy Framework, 2012 ...... 10 Hampshire Local Transport Plan, 2011 - 2031 ...... 11 District Local Plan, 2013 ...... 11 Winchester Local Plan Review (Saved Policies), 2006 ...... 12 Section Summary ...... 12

4 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ...... 13

Vehicular Access ...... 13 Service Vehicle Access ...... 13 Pedestrian and Cycle Access ...... 13 Off-site Highways Improvements ...... 14 Parking ...... 14

5 TRIP GENERATION ...... 17

Trip Generation ...... 17 Residential Units & Almshouses ...... 17 Care Home ...... 18 Gross Trip Generation ...... 19

6 SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORT STRATEGY ...... 20

7 SUMMARY & CONCLUSIONS ...... 21

i

Figures

Figure 2.1 - Site Location Figure 2.2 - Two Kilometre & Five Kilometre Isochrone: Local Accessibility

Appendices

Appendix A Site Access

ii

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Bloombridge Development Partners has appointed Vectos to provide traffic and transport advice in relation to the proposed allocation of land to the south of Colden Common for development.

1.2 It is proposed that the redevelopment of the site will include:

 45 residential units (C3 Use Class);  4 almshouses (C3 Use Class); and  A care home of 30 person capacity (C2 Use Class).

1.3 This Transport Statement supports the proposed residential development including the location and design for vehicular access. It is submitted as part of Local Plan Representations made on behalf of Bloombridge Development Partners and should be read in conjunction with the representations submitted by Bloombridge Development Partners on planning issues, Space Strategy on design, Paul Calder on landscaping and visual impact and Sedgehill Ecology on ecology.

1.4 The overriding summary of the representations being to demonstrate that the sites should be allocated for the level of development proposed and policy CC1 should be amended to reflect this as part of a dispersed housing strategy for Colden Common.

1.5 The Local Planning Authority is Winchester City Council; the Local Highways Authority is .

Report Structure

1.6 Following this introduction, the report is structured as follows:

 Section 2: Existing Situation – A review of existing transport infrastructure and services to and from the existing site;  Section 3: Policy Review – A brief review of relevant transport and land use planning policy;  Section 4: Proposed Development – An outline of the proposed development from a transport infrastructure perspective;

Land South of Colden Common 1 X:\Projects\130000\131083 - Colden Common\Word\R03-TB-ID-SGH Transport Statement (05 12 14).docx December 2014

 Section 5: Trip Generation – A forecast of the likely number of trips to be generated by the proposed development;  Section 6: Summary & Conclusions – Summarises and concludes the main issues raised in the report.

Land South of Colden Common 2 X:\Projects\130000\131083 - Colden Common\Word\R03-TB-ID-SGH Transport Statement (05 12 14).docx December 2014

2 EXISTING SITUATION

Site Location

2.1 The location of the site is shown in Figure 2.1. All Figures can be found at the back of this report.

2.2 The site is located to the south of Church Lane and has frontage onto this road. The site is on greenfield land. It is surrounded by greenfield land to the west and south and partly to the east. The land to the east of the site contains low density residential units. The site is approximately 5.3km from town centre.

Existing Accessibility

Pedestrians & Cyclists

2.3 One of the main factors demonstrating the suitability of a development site is its accessibility by non-car modes of transport. This helps to reduce the reliance on the use of the private car as well as promoting the aims of sustainable travel choices.

2.4 Manual for Streets (MfS), 2007 describes “walkable neighbourhoods” as those which are “typically characterised by having a range of facilities within 10 minutes’ (up to about 800m) walking distance of residential area which residents may access comfortably on foot” (para. 4.4.1).

2.5 It is generally accepted that trips up to 2km and 5km can reasonably be undertaken on foot and bicycle for day to day activities. The thrust of sustainability policy is that there will be an increasing propensity for people to use non single car occupancy modes, of which walking is one. People will choose their mode based on their journey purpose, and it is reasonable to conclude that a proportion of future residents will choose to walk to their destination of choice.

2.6 It is reasonable to expect that for a typical able bodied person a cycle distance of up to 5km is feasible and practical. Although it is noted that the tendency for people to choose to cycle will depend on journey purpose and individual ethos.

Land South of Colden Common 3 X:\Projects\130000\131083 - Colden Common\Word\R03-TB-ID-SGH Transport Statement (05 12 14).docx December 2014

2.7 Figure 2.2 shows that the site is conveniently located to a number of local facilities and amenities. Table 2.1 provides a summary of the facilities and amenities within a reasonable walking and cycling distance of the site.

Table 2.1 – Summary of Accessible Facilities and Amenities

Distance Average Walk Average Cycle Time Facility/Amenity (metres)* Time (5km/hr) (15km/hr) Bus Stop, Brambridge Brickmakers Road 156 2 mins <1 min Bus Stop, Church Lane/ Bishopstoke Lane 350 4 Mins 2 mins Business Park South 780 9 mins 3 mins Business Park North 792 10 mins 3 mins Holy Trinity 906 11 mins 4 mins Colden Common Primary School 668 8 mins 3 mins Co-op and Post office 797 10 mins 3 mins Colden Community Centre 806 10 mins 3 mins Methodist Church 1093 13 mins 4 mins The Rising Sun Public House 1052 13 mins 4 mins * The distance to local facilities has been measured from the centre of the site.

2.8 All of the above facilities are within both walking and cycling distance of the site and include bus stops, employment opportunities, the primary school, shop/post office and local churches, the community centre and a public house.

2.9 Section 4 of this report provides more information on the pedestrian improvements that will be introduced as part of the development proposals. This includes greater permeability and the introduction of a pedestrian crossing on Church Lane. With the combination of the northern and southern development areas as one site, both will benefit from improvements to the pedestrian network. It is considered on the completion, the sites will also have ‘good’ connectivity to the local primary school.

2.10 The site is also well located in terms of accessibility to the surrounding network of countryside footways and bridleways for leisure walking and cycling. There is also the potential to improve the existing footpath to the south of the site to improve connectivity to the surrounding countryside. This has local support and could be brought forward in association with the development of the site.

Land South of Colden Common 4 X:\Projects\130000\131083 - Colden Common\Word\R03-TB-ID-SGH Transport Statement (05 12 14).docx December 2014

2.11 The pedestrian provision in the vicinity of the site is considered to be relatively good, providing continuous links to key facilities and amenities and public transport provision through existing residential areas.

2.12 There are no designated cycle routes in the vicinity of the site. However, it is considered that the relatively moderate traffic levels that are in existence in the area and the relatively flat, local topography is conducive to comfortable cycling on the highway network.

2.13 The closest cycle routes are located in Eastleigh. National Cycle Route 23 is accessible from Bosville, approximately 3.2km from the site. National Cycle Route 23 runs between Reading and Southampton via , Winchester and Eastleigh.

Public Transport

2.14 The site is located within 400m of a number of bus stops to the east and west of the site. These stops are currently served by the ‘E1 and 8’ bus services that provide links to Winchester, Bishops Waltham and Eastleigh. Details of the bus services within the vicinity of the site are detailed in Table 2.2. The locations of the bus stops across the village are shown in the representations prepared by Space Strategy.

Land South of Colden Common 5 X:\Projects\130000\131083 - Colden Common\Word\R03-TB-ID-SGH Transport Statement (05 12 14).docx December 2014

Table 2.2 – Bus Services within the Vicinity of the Site

Service Origin Via Destination Frequency

(Mon-Sat) Boyatt Wood, Colden Eastleigh Winchester Hourly from Common and Twyford 07:00 to 18:50 E1 (Baby Bluestar)

Twyford, Colden (Mon-Sat) Winchester Common and Boyatt Eastleigh 7 services from Wood 08:00 to 18:50 (Mon-Sat) Bishop’s Swanmore and Hedge Eastleigh Hourly from Waltham End 07:02 to 17:02 8 (Brijan Tours) (Mon-Sat) Swanmore and Hedge Eastleigh Eastleigh Hourly from End 08:16 to 18:16 (Mon- Fri) Hourly from 07:00 to 18:55 Winchester Colden Common Fareham (Sat) Hourly from 69 (Stagecoach in 08:15 to 18:25 Hampshire (Mon- Fri) Winchester) Hourly from 07:10 to 18:42 Fareham Colden Common Winchester (Sat) Hourly from 08:37 to 18:42

Rail

2.15 The nearest railway station to the site is Eastleigh railway station. It is located approximately 3km south west of the site. The site is connected to the railway station by existing bus services which means journeys by train can be made as part of a sustainable multi modal trip to a number of larger destinations, such as Southampton.

2.16 The site therefore has a very good level of accessibility by all modes of transport either directly (i.e. by bus) or as part of a multi modal trip (i.e. bus/rail/walk).

Land South of Colden Common 6 X:\Projects\130000\131083 - Colden Common\Word\R03-TB-ID-SGH Transport Statement (05 12 14).docx December 2014

Accessibility Comparison to Other Sites

2.17 Table 2.3 below is a comparison of the accessibility of the two proposed sites in comparison to site 275 taken from the evidence base for the Local Plan The ratings and comments made has been reproduced from the evidence base and are disputed. It also shows the walking distances from the sites to various facilities.

Table 2.3 – Bus Services within the Vicinity of the Site Site Ped Cycle Public Ped Ped Site Summary Accessibility Accessibility Transport Accessibility Accessibility Accessibility to Shops to Schools 275 Good Poor Good Good Good No overriding 363m 1284m 1433m issues. However, this is a significant sized site and is considered as only having ‘adequate’ access to shops, facilities and schools and therefore sites with better access may be considered to be preferable. This site does not have existing uses and an existing access. 1871 Adequate Adequate Good Good Good No overriding 156m 797m 668m transport issues. A new access onto Church Lane would be required. From the site there is easy ready access to Colden Common facilities for both pedestrians and cyclists via residential roads and paths to the

Land South of Colden Common 7 X:\Projects\130000\131083 - Colden Common\Word\R03-TB-ID-SGH Transport Statement (05 12 14).docx December 2014

north of the site. 2561 Adequate Adequate Good Good Good No overriding 156m 797m 668m transport issues. A new access onto Church Lane would be required. From the site there is easy ready access to Colden Common facilities for both pedestrians and cyclists via residential roads and paths to the north of the site.

2.18 We note that Site 275 scores 933 for the average distance to facilities (it is 1200m from the school and Co-op), whilst 1871 scores 467m and 2561 scores 867m (noting that the 867m measurement assumes that the entire site is developed – a reduced site, as proposed, is below 800m).

2.19 In short, the accessibility rating for Church Lane (1871 and 2561) is substantially better than 275; and there is no need for school children to walk or cycle either 150m down Main Road (to Vears Lane) or 325m up Main Road, and then across a very busy commuter route, in order to access the school. Aside from the road safety concerns associated with pedestrians and cyclists having to travel up and down Main Road to reach any day to day services (which is a significant local concerns), we also note that paragraph 4.4.1 of Manual for Streets quoted above which defines 800m as the distance that residents will walk. Site 275 is a longer walk than this identified criteria.

2.20 Whilst 275 is described as “adequate” by the County Council, we vehemently dispute the soundness of this conclusion, especially in the context of a reasonable alternative such as our site at Church Lane (all of our reduced site is within 800m). Not only will a parent accompanying a child to school have to navigate the rush hour on Main Road (unlike our site where there is direct access across Church Lane to the footpath opposite) but the 1200m one way trip translates to 4.8 km once the drop off and pick up journeys are taken into

Land South of Colden Common 8 X:\Projects\130000\131083 - Colden Common\Word\R03-TB-ID-SGH Transport Statement (05 12 14).docx December 2014

account . It is therefore very likely that the car will be the preferred option for the school run from Site 275

Local Highway Network

Church Lane

2.21 Church Lane in the vicinity of the site is approximately 6.5m metre wide, providing a number of frontage access points to residential properties. Church Lane provides the main link to the south of Colden Common between the B3335 to the west of the site and the B3354 to the east of the site. In the vicinity of the site Church lane operates under a 30mph speed limit.

Accident Analysis

2.22 Reference has been made to road accident collision data for the five year period to the end of 2012. Accident data was obtained from www.crashmap.co.uk. The area of coverage includes the full extent of Brambridge from its junction with Highbridge Road and the full extent of Church Lane up to the junction with Main Road (S) / Elder Green / Main Road (N).

2.23 In total, there were eleven accidents occurring over the five year period. Of these accidents, ten were recorded as ‘slight’ accidents and one as a ‘serious’ accident. The serious accident occurred on Bambridge, when a car was proceeding along the carriageway on a right hand bend and collided with another car making a right turn manoeuvre. This resulted in a single casualty. No information was provided on the contributory factors of the accident.

2.24 There were no clear accident clusters. In total, three accidents occurred at the Bambridge junction with Highbridge Road and two accidents occurred at the Church Lane /Bishopstoke Lane / Brambridge junction.

Land South of Colden Common 9 X:\Projects\130000\131083 - Colden Common\Word\R03-TB-ID-SGH Transport Statement (05 12 14).docx December 2014

3 POLICY REVIEW

National Planning Policy Framework, 2012

3.1 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) set out the Government’s planning policies for England and how these are expected to be applied.

3.2 One of the 12 core land-use principles within the NPPF includes the need to ‘actively manage patterns of growth to make the fullest possible use of public transport, walking and cycling, and focus significant development in locations which are or can be made sustainable’.

3.3 Specifically, the ‘transport system needs to be balanced in favour of sustainable transport modes, giving people a real choice about how they travel…The Government recognises that different policies and measures will be required in different communities and opportunities to maximise sustainable transport solutions will vary from urban to rural areas’ (para. 29).

3.4 Where development generates a significant amount of traffic, consideration should be given to (para. 32):

 whether the opportunities for sustainable transport modes have been taken up with reference to the nature and the location of the site;  whether safe and suitable access can be achieved by all people;  whether improvements can be undertaken which mitigate the impact of development. ‘Development should only be prevented or refused on transport grounds where the residual cumulative impacts of development are severe’.

3.5 Paragraph 35 states that developments should be located and designed where practical to, among other things:

 accommodate the efficient delivery of goods and supplies;  give priority to pedestrian and cycle movements, and have access to high quality public transport facilities;  create safe and secure layouts which minimise conflicts between traffic and cyclists or pedestrians, avoiding street clutter…; and  consider the needs of people with disabilities by all modes of transport.

Land South of Colden Common 10 X:\Projects\130000\131083 - Colden Common\Word\R03-TB-ID-SGH Transport Statement (05 12 14).docx December 2014

3.6 Larger scale residential development should, where practical, have local facilities that are ‘located within walking distance of most properties’ (para. 38).

Hampshire Local Transport Plan, 2011 - 2031

3.1 HCC intend to ‘manage traffic to maximise the efficiency of existing network capacity, improving journey time reliability and reducing emissions, thereby supporting the efficient and sustainable movement of people and goods’ (Main Priority 3).

3.2 HCC aspires for an increase in the use of public transport modes and intends to work with bus operators to remove barriers that prevent people from using buses and reduce dependence on the private car for journeys (Policy Objective 4).

3.3 Increased participation in walking and cycling is also a priority, HCC will ‘invest in sustainable transport measures, including walking and cycling infrastructure, principally in urban areas, to provide a healthy alternative to the car for local short journeys to work, local services or schools…’ (Policy Objective 4).

3.4 The vision for , of which Colden Common is a part, is to create ‘a resilient, cost effective, fully-integrated sub-regional transport network, enabling economic growth whilst protecting and enhancing health, quality of life and environment’ (p. 67).

3.5 There are several challenges facing South Hampshire, one of which is the need to widen ‘travel choice to offer people reasonable alternatives to the private car for everyday journeys, and [reduce] the need to travel, moving towards a low-carbon economy’ (p. 69).

3.6 The Transport for South Hampshire authorities will seek to ‘promote active travel modes and develop supporting infrastructure’ (Policy H), which includes the development of a comprehensive walking and cycling network, crossing improvements for pedestrians and cyclists and the provision of secure cycle parking facilities at key destinations.

3.7 Policy I states that private investment in bus solutions will be encouraged in order to widen travel choice and enable access for those without a private car.

Winchester District Local Plan, 2013

3.8 The Council states that (para. 6.4):

Land South of Colden Common 11 X:\Projects\130000\131083 - Colden Common\Word\R03-TB-ID-SGH Transport Statement (05 12 14).docx December 2014

‘The vision for the market towns and rural area is to support development that serves local needs in the most accessible and sustainable locations, promotes the vitality and viability of all communities, and maintains their rural character and individual settlement identity’.

3.9 With respect to transport, policy CP10 states the following:

‘The Local Planning Authority will seek to reduce demands on the transport network, manage existing capacity efficiently and secure investment to make necessary improvements. Development should be located and designed to reduce the need to travel. The use of non-car modes particularly walking and cycling should be encouraged through travel plans, management and improvements to the existing network, and improvements to accommodate additional traffic should be undertaken (or funded) where necessary’.

3.10 Development proposals will be required to demonstrate conformity to the principle of ‘making the use of public transport, walking and cycling easy, to reduce non-essential car use’ (Policy DS1).

Winchester Local Plan Review (Saved Policies), 2006

3.11 The Council states that development required new accesses will be permitted provided that it does not ‘interfere with the safety, function and character of the road network’ (Policy T.2).

3.12 The site layout of new development ‘should be designed to encourage low vehicle speeds and incorporate requirements for safe and convenient cycle and pedestrian routes, cycle parking and links and access to existing or proposed cycle or pedestrian routes’ (Policy T.3).

Section Summary

3.13 The proposed development of the sites is consistent with national and local policy objectives as this is a sustainable location for new housing which is well located to local facilities including shops, the primary school and bus services.

Land South of Colden Common 12 X:\Projects\130000\131083 - Colden Common\Word\R03-TB-ID-SGH Transport Statement (05 12 14).docx December 2014

4 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

4.1 It is proposed that the redevelopment of the site will include:

 45 residential units (C3 Use Class);  4 almshouses (C3 Use Class); and  A care home of 30 person capacity (C2 Use Class).

Vehicular Access

4.2 Vehicular access to the site will be taken from Church Lane, linking up with the established public highway network that serves Colden Common. The access will be a priority junction designed to MfS standards.

4.3 The site access arrangement including highway geometry and visibility splay is shown in Appendix A.

4.4 The vehicular access will lead to the spine road corridor that provides onward access to a series of cul-de-sacs on secondary roads within the development, which in turn leads to the respective units.

Service Vehicle Access

4.5 Emergency and service vehicles will be required to follow the same access and circulatory strategy as other vehicles. Access will be taken from Church Lane and onward access will be provided to the secondary roads that lead to the respective cul-de-sacs. Each cul-de-sac will have turning space provision to allow vehicles to enter and exit in forward gear.

Pedestrian and Cycle Access

4.6 Pedestrians will be supported by the provision of footways on either side of the main spine road corridor.

4.7 The proposals seek to increase permeability for the site and will provide a north-south greenway through the site that links to an adjoining public footpath.

Land South of Colden Common 13 X:\Projects\130000\131083 - Colden Common\Word\R03-TB-ID-SGH Transport Statement (05 12 14).docx December 2014

Off-site Highways Improvements

4.8 As part of the proposed development a number of off-site highways improvements will be promoted to improve the connectivity for pedestrians and cyclists to local facilities and amenities in Colden Common. These improvements are summarised below:

 Provision of facilities to improve pedestrian crossing to the east of the site access, providing safe and convenient links to Colden Common Primary School and amenities to the north of the site;  A greenway through the site to adjoining public footpaths providing permeability and connections to local facilities; and  The potential for a traffic calming scheme along Church Lane, reinforcing driver awareness of the existing, and potentially extended, 30mph speed limit in the vicinity of the site access. This would need to be subject to detailed consultation, through a Traffic Regulation Order. The processing of this TRO could be funded in association with development on the sites.

Parking

4.9 Car parking provision will be in line with the adopted Council’s standards. According to Winchester City Council’s 2009 Residential Parking Standards, the following parking standards apply as shown in Table 4.1.

Land South of Colden Common 14 X:\Projects\130000\131083 - Colden Common\Word\R03-TB-ID-SGH Transport Statement (05 12 14).docx December 2014

Table 4.1 – Residential Parking Standards Dwelling Car Parking Standards Cycle Parking Standards Shared / Communal Parking Allocated Parking Spaces

Spaces 1 bedroom 1 1 allocated space per unit 1 per unit and 1 parking space per two (long stay) units for use flexibly 2 bedroom 1.5 2 2 spaces per unit (long stay) 3 bedroom 2 2

4+ bedroom 2.5 3

Visitor Additional parking above the requirements for residents’ 1 short-stay loop / provision will normally be required for visitors. hoop per unit Where it can be demonstrated that there is available in public off-street parking and on-street facilities, the need for additional visitor parking can be ignored -

4.10 Parking will be provided to ensure that it is well located, ensuring that on-street parking does not occur to any significant degree. This means that access to all parts of the site will be maintained at all times for larger vehicles (refuse and delivery vehicles) and for the emergency services.

4.11 This approach recognises the need to provide sufficient parking spaces to avoid parking that would adversely affect the operation of surrounding streets, but not providing parking to a level that would encourage car usage. This is a balanced approach that is consistent with local and national planning policies.

4.12 Hampshire County Council set down non-residential parking standards (including residential institutions). According to Hampshire County Council’s 2002 guidance, car parking standards for the care home is as shown in Table 4.2.

Land South of Colden Common 15 X:\Projects\130000\131083 - Colden Common\Word\R03-TB-ID-SGH Transport Statement (05 12 14).docx December 2014

Table 4.2 – Care Home Parking Standards Housing Type Car Parking (Maximum) Cycle Parking Nursing and rest home 1 space per 4 residents 1 long stay space per 6 1 space per employee employees 1 loop / hoop per 2 units

4.13 The proposed development will provide cycle parking in accordance with local parking standards.

Land South of Colden Common 16 X:\Projects\130000\131083 - Colden Common\Word\R03-TB-ID-SGH Transport Statement (05 12 14).docx December 2014

5 TRIP GENERATION

5.1 An interrogation of the TRICS database was undertaken to understand the likely impact of the proposed residential units (including almshouses) and care home.

Trip Generation

Residential Units & Almshouses

5.2 The almshouses are a form of residential unit, designed for independent living. As such, the four almshouses that will be provided as part of the development proposals are treated the same as other residential units for the purposes of the trip assessment. As such, it is assumed that the development will have 49 residential units.

5.3 The search criteria used is shown below.

 Land Use: Residential – Houses Privately Owned;  Regions: All England, except London;  Days: Weekdays;  Location: Edge of Town or Neighbourhood Centre; and  Survey Date: 2009 onwards.

5.4 The TRICS database had four sites that met the above criteria. The resulting all modes trip rates and trip generation at the conventional network peaks, 08:00 to 09:00 (AM) and 17:00 to 18:00 (PM) are shown in Table 5.1.

Table 5.1 – All Modes Trip Rates & Trip Generation: Residential Time Arrivals Departures Total Rate Trips Rate Trips Rate Trips

08:00 – 09:00 0.184 9 0.778 38 0.962 47 17:00 – 18:00 0.614 30 0.196 10 0.81 40

5.5 The vehicle trip rates and trip generation at the same time periods are shown in Table 5.2.

Land South of Colden Common 17 X:\Projects\130000\131083 - Colden Common\Word\R03-TB-ID-SGH Transport Statement (05 12 14).docx December 2014

Table 5.2 – Vehicle Trip Rates & Trip Generation: Residential Time Arrivals Departures Total Rate Trips Rate Trips Rate Trips

08:00 – 09:00 0.152 7 0.456 22 0.608 29 17:00 – 18:00 0.392 19 0.165 8 0.557 27

Care Home

5.6 The search criteria used on the TRICS database is as follows:

 Land Use: Health – Nursing Homes  Regions: All England, except London;  Days: Weekdays;  Location: Suburban Area or Edge of Town; and  Survey Date: 2008 onwards.

5.7 A total of three sites met the above criteria. All were used to inform the trip generation. For completeness. Table 5.3 shows the all modes trip rates and trip generation.

Table 5.3 – All Modes Trip Rates & Trip Generation: Care Home Time Arrivals Departures Total Rate Trips Rate Trips Rate Trips

08:00 – 09:00 0.150 5 0.143 4 0.293 9 17:00 – 18:00 0.120 4 0.188 6 0.308 10

5.8 The peak trip periods of the care home is not anticipated to coincide with the conventional network peaks. The care home will still generate trips during the evening mainly by visitors.

5.9 Table 5.4 shows the vehicular trip rates and trip generation for the care home.

Table 5.4 – Vehicle Trip Rates & Trip Generation: Care Home Time Arrivals Departures Total Rate Trips Rate Trips Rate Trips

08:00 – 09:00 0.068 2 0.068 2 0.136 4 17:00 – 18:00 0.083 2 0.113 3 0.196 5

Land South of Colden Common 18 X:\Projects\130000\131083 - Colden Common\Word\R03-TB-ID-SGH Transport Statement (05 12 14).docx December 2014

Gross Trip Generation

5.10 The quantum of trips produced by the residential units (including almshouses) and the care home is provided in Table 5.5 below.

Table 5.5 – Gross Trip Generation Time All Modes Vehicles In Out Total In Out Total

08:00 – 09:00 14 42 56 9 24 33 17:00 – 18:00 34 16 50 21 11 32 07:00 – 19:00 212 209 421 137 140 277

5.11 The development is anticipated to generate 33 two-way vehicular trips during the AM peak, approximately one vehicle every two minutes. The development is anticipated to generate a similar number of trips during the PM Peak, 32 vehicle trips. During the AM and PM peaks, the traffic associated with the proposed development would not have a material impact on the highway network around the site.

Land South of Colden Common 19 X:\Projects\130000\131083 - Colden Common\Word\R03-TB-ID-SGH Transport Statement (05 12 14).docx December 2014

6 SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORT STRATEGY

6.1 It is important to ensure that the site is accessible by all modes of transport. As set out in section 2 above, the site is within a short walking distance of both bus stops and of local facilities and there are some improvements that could be undertaken in association with the development of the sites that have been identified above.

6.2 A Residential Travel Plan (RTP) would be prepared prior to the occupation of the first dwellings on the site and this is likely to be secured by planning condition.

6.3 The RTP will be prepared to encourage travel to the site by sustainable modes. The primary objective of the RTP will be to set out a long term strategy to facilitate and encourage modes of travel to and from the site by means other than the private car, which reflects current central and local government policy.

6.4 The strategy needs to be long term as changing travel habits takes time and will only occur through a combination of incentives, improved facilities, government initiatives and changes in individual attitudes.

6.5 The RTP initiatives and measures will be a series of ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ measures.

6.6 Hard measures include the provision of facilities such as safe and secure cycle parking and connections to the existing links to the local facilities identified in Table 2.1. This includes the potential to walk and cycle to the school, local shops and employment opportunities.

6.7 In addition to this, facilities will be provided to support and encourage home working including high speed broadband. There is the potential to work with existing companies to promote the connections between technology and how it can be used to reduce travel demands or to encourage the use of more sustainable modes of transport.

6.8 Soft measures include initiatives such as providing information on public transport services. This can be achieved through the provision of information as part of the “Welcome Pack” given to new residents.

6.9 The RTP would be submitted prior to the occupation of the proposed development.

Land South of Colden Common 20 X:\Projects\130000\131083 - Colden Common\Word\R03-TB-ID-SGH Transport Statement (05 12 14).docx December 2014

7 SUMMARY & CONCLUSIONS

7.1 Bloombridge Development Partners has appointed Vectos to provide traffic and transport advice in relation to the proposed allocation of land to the south of Colden Common for development.

7.2 It is proposed that the redevelopment of the site will include:

 45 residential units (C3 Use Class);  4 almshouses (C3 Use Class); and  A care home of 30 person capacity (C2 Use Class).

7.3 The trip generation assessment confirms that the care home will produce minimal trips during the conventional network AM (08:00 – 09:00) and PM (17:00 – 18:00) peaks.

7.4 During the AM and PM peaks, the development proposals (inclusive of the residential units, almshouses and care home) will generate 33 and 32 two-way vehicle trips respectively.

7.5 The number of vehicle trips generated by the development during peak times will not have a material impact on the local highway network.

7.6 There are no road safety issues that would be exacerbated by the proposed development of the sites.

7.7 The residential element of the scheme will be supported by a Residential Travel Plan to be secured by a planning condition in due course.

7.8 The development proposals will benefit the wider community by introducing a range of measures, such as permeable pedestrian linkages with the existing off-site footpath/bridleway network; introducing an informal pedestrian crossing to the east of the site’s vehicular access and potentially introducing traffic calming on Church Lane subject to detailed design and consultation with Hampshire County Council. Where needed, mitigation measures can be provided.

7.9 In conclusion, the provision of 45 residential units, four almshouses and a 30-person capacity care home could be implemented in association with mitigation measures and sustainable travel planning measures.

Land South of Colden Common 21 X:\Projects\130000\131083 - Colden Common\Word\R03-TB-ID-SGH Transport Statement (05 12 14).docx December 2014

7.10 There is no significant highway or transport related reason why the sites should not be allocated for the proposed level of development in the Local Plan.

Land South of Colden Common 22 X:\Projects\130000\131083 - Colden Common\Word\R03-TB-ID-SGH Transport Statement (05 12 14).docx December 2014

Figures

Key: Bloombridge Development Partners Colden Common, Hampshire Site Location

Site Location Plan

Network Building, 97 Tottenham Court Road, London W1T 4TP Tel: 020 7580 7373 Email: [email protected] www.vectos.co.uk DRAWN: CHECKED: DATE: SCALES: DRAWING REFERENCE: SGH PW 22/07/14 Not to scale Figure 2.1

Key

Site Location

The Co-op School

2km Isochrones

5km Isochrones

Bloombridge Development Partners

Colden Common, Hampshire

2km Walking and 5km Cycling Isochrones

SCALES: NTS DRAWN: CHECKED: DATE: REVISION: 05/12/14 LK ID .

Network Building, 97 Tottenham Court Road, London W1T 4TP Tel: 020 7580 7373 Email: [email protected] www.vectos.co.uk

DRAWING REFERENCE: Figure 2.2

APPENDIX A

Site Access

6.0000 6.0000

2.0000 2.0000 (to MFS standards) Visibility Splay - 2.4m x 43m CROSSING POINT UNCONTROLLED PROPOSED REV. Notes: DRAWING NUMBER: DRAWN: SCALES: DRAWING TITLE: PROJECT: CLIENT: 131083-SK-01 DETAILS CHECKED: DRAWN DATE: CHECKED REVISION: DATE .

Land at Colden Common, Winchester, Hampshire

Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

for

Bloombridge LLP

CA Project: 770289

CA Report: 15783

October 2015

© Cotswold Archaeology Land at Colden Common, Winchester, Hampshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

CONTENTS

SUMMARY ...... 3

1. INTRODUCTION ...... 4 Outline ...... 4 Location and landscape context ...... 4 Summary of Development Proposals ...... 6 Scope ...... 6 2. METHODOLOGY ...... 7 General ...... 7 Sources ...... 7 Significance of heritage assets ...... 8 3. PLANNING POLICY CONTEXT ...... 11 Legislative framework, national planning policy and relevant sector guidance ... 11 Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act (1990) ...... 12 National policy: National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (2012) ...... 12 Local planning policy ...... 13 4. OVERVIEW OF THE HERITAGE RESOURCE ...... 15 Introduction ...... 15 Previous archaeological works ...... 16 Geology, topography and the palaeoenvironment ...... 16 Prehistoric (pre-43 AD) ...... 16 Romano-British (AD 43 – AD 410) ...... 17 Early medieval (AD410 – AD 1066) and medieval (AD 1066 – 1539) ...... 18 Post-medieval (AD 1539 – 1800) and modern (AD 1801 - present) ...... 20 Historic Landscape Character ...... 24 5. SETTINGS ASSESSMENT ...... 25 Grade II Listed Hill Farmhouse (A) ...... 26 Grade II Listed Woodcroft Lodge (B) ...... 28 Grade II Listed Keepers Cottage (C) ...... 30 6. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT ...... 32 Significance of recorded heritage assets within the site ...... 32 Summary of previous impacts ...... 33 Potential development effects...... 33 7. CONCLUSIONS ...... 34

8. REFERENCES ...... 36

APPENDIX A: GAZETTEER OF RECORDED HERITAGE ASSETS AND OTHER ELEMENTS OF THE HISTORIC ENVIRONMENT ...... 39

1 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Colden Common, Winchester, Hampshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Site location plan Figure 2 Recorded heritage assets

LIST OF PHOTOGRAPHS Photograph 1 View across the Site towards the north Photograph 2 View across the Site towards the south Photograph 3 Extract from the 1840 Twyford Tithe Map Photograph 4 Extract from the 1896 Second Edition Ordnance Survey Photograph 5 Extract from the 1937 Revised Edition Ordnance Survey Photograph 6 View across the Site towards The Manor House and the Church of the Holy Trinity (to the east) Photograph 7 Glimpse view across the Site towards Hill Farmhouse and Woodcroft Lodge (to the west) Photograph 8 View towards Keepers Cottage (to the north west)

2 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Colden Common, Winchester, Hampshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

SUMMARY

Project Name: Land at Colden Common Location: Winchester, Hampshire NGR: SU 447925 121301

Cotswold Archaeology was commissioned in October 2015, by Bloombridge LLP, to carry out a heritage desk-based assessment in relation to a planning application for development proposals on land at Colden Common, Winchester, Hampshire. This assessment has identified no overriding heritage constraints that are likely to prohibit development.

Prehistoric occupation in the surrounding area is evidenced by the presence of finds of flint- work and Bronze Age metalwork, although limited evidence for settlement has been identified within the immediate vicinity of the Site. Based on the evidence above, the potential for encountering further heritage assets of archaeological interest associated with prehistoric and Roman activity should not be dismissed, and could be mitigated by means of a watching brief secured by planning permission, subject to the requirements of the Winchester District Council archaeologist. Prehistoric finds will be characterised predominantly by isolated artefacts and surface scatters, possibly indicative of transient occupation by hunter-gatherer populations.

The Site is likely to have been in agricultural use since at least the post-medieval period, and therefore retains some potential for associated features to survive below ground. If present, it is anticipated that such remains would be of limited archaeological interest.

It has been established that, whilst a small number of Listed Buildings are located within the surroundings of the site, the proposed development would not result in any harm to their significance.

This assessment has concluded that, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework, the site does not form part of the setting of designated heritage assets located within its environs. The proposed development would be consistent with the requirements of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, regarding the preservation of Listed Buildings and their settings, as well as with relevant local planning policy relating to the protection of the historic environment.

3 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Colden Common, Winchester, Hampshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

1. INTRODUCTION

Outline 1.1 In October 2015, Cotswold Archaeology was commissioned by Bloombridge LLP, to carry out a heritage desk-based assessment of land at Colden Common, Winchester, Hampshire centred on NGR: SU 447925 121301 (henceforth referred to as ‘the Site’; Figure 1). This document is required to inform a planning application for a development proposal, Phase One (2014 – 2016), and is a requirement of the heritage advisors to Winchester District Council, the Local Planning Authority.

Location and landscape context 1.2 The Site is located on the southern boundary of Colden Common, a and village located between the boundaries of Winchester and Eastleigh. Located on the fringes of the Parish, the wider landscape is interspersed to the west by the hamlets of Brambridge and Highbridge, and on the south east by Nob’s Crook and Fishers Pond. The Site has been promoted through Local Plan Part 2 and comprises two elements, 1871 and 2561.

1.3 The South Downs National Park is located to the north, east and west of Colden Common. An area of ancient woodland, rising to the east of Colden Common and lying on the boundary of the National Park, is one of the many Sites of Importance for Natural Conservation (SINCs) in the area, protecting both semi-natural and ancient woodland. The River Itchen, with a tributary running 0.32km west of the Site, forms the western boundary of the parish. The River Itchen, and its floodplain, is an area of Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) and of European importance, and designated as a Special Area of Conservation (SAC). In addition, there are two historical parks within the vicinity of Colden Common: Brambridge Park is located approximately 0.89km north west of the Site, and House is located approximately 1.89km north of the Site. Agricultural fields lie to the south and west, with modern residential development situated to the north and east.

1.4 The Site covers 8.7ha in area, and is currently comprised of managed grassland, subdivided into two by wooden post and barbed-wire fence. The external site boundaries are demarcated by a combination of barbed-wire and wooden fences, and hedgerows. The northern parcel (1871) is approximately 0.87 ha in area, the southern parcel (2561) measures approximately 7.82 ha. The north, east, south and west boundaries are defined by hedgerows interspersed with trees, while property boundary fences form the north-east border.

4 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Colden Common, Winchester, Hampshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

1.5 Access to the Site is via Church Lane, running adjacent to the northern boundary of the Site. Church Lane connects Highbridge Road (B3335) in the west, to Main Road (B3354) to the east of the site. A public footpath runs along the southern boundary of the Site, behind a substantial field boundary hedge. The proposal will develop links to the existing footpath, connecting the Site with the footpath bordering the southern boundary of the Site and the footpath north of Church Lane.

Photograph 1: View across the Site towards the north

Photograph 2: View across the Site towards the south

5 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Colden Common, Winchester, Hampshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

Summary of Development Proposals 1.6 The Site is proposed for residential development, Phase One (2016 onwards) comprises up to thirty dwellings, together with associated landscaping, access and services. Phase Two is proposed for 2016 – 2020; thirty dwellings per hectare are proposed for the total Site, the development covers a total area of 8.7 ha. Access to the residential development will be obtained via the existing entrance off Church Lane, and a new pedestrian crossing will be constructed. Areas of open space will be provided in the south-eastern area of Phase One of the Site, the development proposals include picnic features and access to wider footpath/cycle path and bridleway network in the southern corner of Site. The existing vegetation at the boundaries of the Site is to be retained, with additional tree planting carried out across the proposed development areas. A landscape buffer is proposed at the western boundary of the site.

Scope 1.7 This assessment focusses upon the cultural heritage resource identified within the Site itself, as well as a minimum 1km ‘buffer’ around the site boundary, henceforth referred to as ‘the study area’ (Figure 2). This assessment also considers potential adverse impacts on the settings of designated heritage assets within the wider site.

1.8 The main objectives of the desk-based assessment are: • to identify designated heritage assets within the proposed development site and study area; • to gather information on non-designated recorded heritage assets; • to assess the above baseline information, and offer an analysis of the potential for currently unrecorded heritage assets within the proposed development site; and • to assess, as far as possible, the potential impact of the proposed development upon the significance of heritage assets, including the setting of designated heritage assets.

6 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Colden Common, Winchester, Hampshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

2. METHODOLOGY

General 2.1 The methodology employed during this assessment was based on key professional guidance, including the ‘Standard and Guidance for Historic Environment Desk- Based Assessment’ (Chartered Institute for Archaeologists 2014); and English Heritage’s (now Historic England) ‘Conservation Principles’ (2008).

2.2 The defined study area for the assessment of the heritage resource has been measured from the boundary of the Site, and encompasses a buffer area of a minimum of 1km around its edge (Fig. 2). The size of the study area ensured that data sources provided sufficient contextual information about the proposed development site, and its surrounding landscape, from which to assess known and potential impacts on the heritage resource. A minimum 2km buffer around the boundary of the Site was utilised for the setting assessment.

2.3 Known heritage assets within the study area are discussed in Section 4. Gazetteers of known and potential heritage assets in the study area have been compiled, and are presented as Appendices A. Assets are referred to in the text by a unique reference number 1, 2, etc., and are illustrated on Fig. 2.

Sources 2.4 The desk-based assessment involved consultation of readily available archaeological and historical information from documentary and cartographic sources. The major repositories of information consulted comprised of:

National Heritage List for England (Historic England) • List of World Heritage Sites; • Listed Buildings; • Scheduled Monuments; • Registered Parks and Gardens; • Registered Battlefields.

The Hampshire Historic Environment Record (HHER) (HER search: 5143): • Database of known archaeological sites, findspots, historic buildings and previous archaeological works (including features mapped from aerial photographs during the National Mapping Programme);

7 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Colden Common, Winchester, Hampshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

• Published and unpublished documentary sources (including development control site reports).

The Winchester Historic Environment Record (WHER: 1019): • Database of known archaeological sites, findspots, historic buildings and previous archaeological works (including features mapped from aerial photographs during the Hampshire Downland National Mapping Programme); • Published and unpublished documentary sources (including development control site reports).

Hampshire Record Office, Winchester • Published documentary sources; • Historic maps and photographs.

Historic England Archives • AMIE (Archives and Monuments Information, England) data, including known archaeological sites, findspots and previous archaeological works; • Aerial photography collections.

Other sources • Online sources, including the British Geological Survey (BGS) Geology of Britain Viewer, and local planning policy information.

2.5 A site visit was undertaken on 23th October 2015, in order to examine current land use and topography, and to assess the visible cultural heritage resource. Designated heritage assets in the vicinity were also assessed at this time.

Significance of heritage assets 2.6 The National Planning Policy Framework (Henceforward the Framework) (Annex 2) defines a heritage asset as ‘a building, monument, site, place, area or landscape identified as having a degree of significance meriting consideration in planning decisions because of its heritage interest. Heritage assets include designated heritage assets, and assets identified by the local planning authority (including local lisiting)’.

2.7 Assets designated include: World Heritage Sites; Scheduled Monuments; Listed Buildings; Protected Wreck Sites; Registered Parks and Gardens; Registered Battlefields; and Conservation Areas. Non-designated heritage assets include sites held on the Historic Environment Record, in addition to other elements of the

8 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Colden Common, Winchester, Hampshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

landscape understood to have a degree of significance meriting consideration in planning decisions (see below, Section 3).

2.8 Assessment of heritage value (significance) identifies how specific areas of a site and different periods in its evolution contribute to, or detract from, the identified heritage values associated with the asset.

2.9 Heritage significance is defined in the Framework (Annex 2) as ‘the value of a heritage asset to this and future generations because of its heritage interest. That interest may be archaeological, architectural, artistic or historic. Significance derives not only from a heritage asset’s physical fabric, but also from its setting’.

2.10 To determine the significance of heritage assets, the significance is weighed using the following criteria provided by Historic England (formerly English Heritage) in Conservation Principles, Policies and Guidance for the Sustainable Management of the Historic Environment (English Heritage 2008). Within this document, significance is weighed by consideration of the potential for the asset to demonstrate the following criteria:

• Evidential value derives from ‘the potential of a place to yield evidence about past human activity’ (ibid, 28). Primarily relating to physical remains or historic material, evidential value can be extended to include buried archaeology. • Historical value derives from ‘the ways in which past people, events and aspects of life can be connected through a place to the present’ (ibid, 28). Illustrative historical value depends on visibility in a way that evidential value does not; and ‘has the power to aid interpretation of the past […] through shared experience of a place’ (ibid, 29). Associative historical value creates resonance through felt connections with a notable family, person, event or movement; • Aesthetic value derives from ‘the ways in which people draw sensory and intellectual stimulation from a place’ (ibid, 30). Aesthetic value might be generated through conscious design and artistic endeavour, fortuitous and organic change, and the relationship of structures and materials to their setting; • Communal value is tied to historical (associative) value and aesthetic value, deriving from ‘the meanings of a place for the people who relate to it, or for whom it figures in their collective experience or memory’ (ibid, 31). Communal value may be commemorative, symbolic or social. The latter is typically

9 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Colden Common, Winchester, Hampshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

‘associated with places that people perceive as a source of identity, distinctiveness, social interaction and coherence’ and might only be articulated when the resource is under threat (ibid, 32).

2.11 Further information on good practice in implementing historic environment policy in the Framework is provided within the guidance Historic Environment Good Practice Advice in Planning Note 2: Managing Significance in Decision-Taking in the Historic Environment (Historic England 2015a). In providing advice on the assessment of the significance of heritage assets in support of applications for planning permission, information regarding heritage significance should be no more than would be necessary to inform the planning decision.

The setting of heritage assets 2.12 Historic England’s Historic Environment Good Practice Advice in Planning Note 3: the Setting of Heritage Assets (2015b) provides guidance on setting and development management, including assessment of the implications of development proposals. Quoting the Framework, this guidance reiterates that ‘the setting of a heritage asset is the surroundings in which a heritage asset is experienced. Its extent is not fixed, and may change as the asset and its surroundings evolve. Elements of a setting may make a positive or negative contribution to the significance of an asset, may affect the ability to appreciate that significance or may be neutral'. In accordance with the guidance, the extent of a heritage asset’s setting is not fixed, and can evolve periodically. All heritage assets have a setting, and features of a setting may make a positive or negative contribution to significance and may affect the appreciation of the asset. They can remain neutral. The extent and importance of setting is often expressed by reference to visual considerations, but can also comprise other elements which contribute to the ways in which a heritage asset is experienced, including factors such as noise, vibrations, dust or other pollutants; spatial associations; the rarity of comparable survivals of setting, and associative relationships between heritage assets.

2.13 The methodology for the assessment of the setting of heritage assets employed by Cotswold Archaeology has been informed by this guidance. A stepped approach is recommended for assessing the implications of development proposals. The first step is to coinsider the site context, and whether from a heritage point of view there are other reasonable alteratives that should be preferred for development. This step addresses the rudimentary question of whether there are designations of national

10 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Colden Common, Winchester, Hampshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

and international interest in or around Colden Common. In addition, this step identifies the heritage assets affected and their settings affected by the proposed development. Step 2 is to assess whether, how, and to what degree, these settings make a positive contribution to the significance of the heritage asset(s), i.e. ‘what matters and why’. This includes a consideration of the key attributes of the heritage asset itself, and then considers:

• the physical surroundings of the asset, including its relationship with other heritage assets; and • the way in which the asset is appreciated.

2.14 The third step (where appropriate) is to assess the effect of the proposed development on the significance of heritage assets through the consideration of the key attributes of the proposed development in terms of its:

• location and siting; • form and appearance; • additional effects; and • permanence.

2.15 The fourth step is to maximise enhancement and minimise harm, and the fifth step refers to making and documenting the decision and monitoring outcomes.

2.16 The settings assessment presented in this report includes consideration of Steps 1 to 3, which are the steps normally undertaken to inform the planning process. Step 4 is carried out when it is considered necessary to specifically design or redesign a scheme to take heritage assets into account. This is not considered necessary in this case. Step 5 is a subsequent stage, and also not applicable to this assessment.

3. PLANNING POLICY CONTEXT

Legislative framework, national planning policy and relevant sector guidance 3.1 This assessment has been compiled in accordance with the following legislative, planning policy and guidance documentation:

• National Heritage Act 1983 (amended 2002); • Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act (1990); • National Planning Policy Framework (2012);

11 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Colden Common, Winchester, Hampshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

• National Planning Practice Guidance: Conserving and enhancing the historic environment (Dept. for Communities and Local Government 2014); • English Heritage (now Historic England): Conservation Principles: policies and guidance for the sustainable management of the historic environment (2008); and • Historic England): Historic Environment Good Practice Advice in Planning: Note 2: Managing Significance in Decision-Taking in the Historic Environment (2015a); and • Historic England: Historic Environment Good Practice Advice in Planning: Note 3: The Setting of Heritage Assets (2015b).

Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act (1990) 3.2 The Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act sets out the laws on planning controls with regard of Listed Buildings and areas of special architectural or historic interest (Conservation Areas). The document states that, when making planning decisions with regard to developments affecting Listed Buildings or their settings, the local planning authority or the Secretary of State ‘shall have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest that it possesses’ (Section 66).

National policy: National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (2012) 3.3 The Framework, sets out national planning policy, relates to the conservation and enhancement of the historic environment. It defines the historic environment as ‘all aspects of the environment resulting from the interaction between people and places through time, including all surviving physical remains of past human activity, whether visible, buried or submerged, and landscaped and planted or managed flora.’

3.4 Individual components of the historic environment are considered heritage assets: ‘buildings, monuments, sites, places, areas or landscapes identified as having a degree of significance meriting consideration in planning decisions, because of their heritage interest.’

3.5 Heritage assets include designated sites and non-designated sites, and policies within the Framework relate both to the treatment of assets themselves and their settings, both of which are a material consideration in development decision making.

12 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Colden Common, Winchester, Hampshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

3.6 Key tenets of the Framework are that:

• when considering the impact of a proposed development on the significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight should be given to the asset’s conservation. The more important the asset, the greater the weight should be (Paragraph 132); • significance can be harmed or lost through alteration or destruction of the heritage asset, or development within its setting. As heritage assets are irreplaceable, any harm or loss should require clear and convincing justification. Substantial harm to, or loss of, a grade II listed building, park or garden should be exceptional. Substantial harm to, or loss of, designated heritage assets of the highest significance, notably scheduled monuments, protected wreck sites, battlefields, grade I and II* listed buildings, grade I and II* registered parks and gardens, and World Heritage Sites, should be wholly exceptional (Paragraph 132) • where a proposed development will lead to less than substantial harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset, this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal (Paragraph 133); and • with regard to non-designated heritage assets, a balanced judgement will be required having due regard to the scale of any harm or loss, and to the significance of the heritage asset affected (Paragraph 135).

3.7 Local planning authorities are urged to request applicants to describe the significance of any heritage assets affected by a proposed development, including any contribution made to significance by their setting. The level of detail required in the assessment should be ‘proportionate to the assets’ importance, and no more than is sufficient to understand the potential impact of the proposal on their significance.’

Local planning policy 3.8 The site is located within the administrative boundary of Winchester City Council. Currently, the development plan for the Winchester District is formed by the adopted policies of the Winchester and District Local Plan Part 1 (Joint Core Strategy), adopted in March 2013, and the saved policies of the Winchester District Local Plan Review 2006 (adopted in July 2006).

3.9 The relevant saved policies relating to the historic environment include:

13 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Colden Common, Winchester, Hampshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

Policy HE 1 – Archaeology: Where important archaeological sites, monuments (whether above or below ground), historic buildings and landscape features, and their settings (as identified and recorded in the Sites & Monuments Record), whether scheduled or not, are affected by development proposals, permission will not be granted for development unless the Local Planning Authority is satisfied that, where appropriate, adequate provision has been made for their preservation in situ and ongoing management, conservation and protection. Where such preservation is not possible or desirable, the Local Planning Authority will permit development to take place only where satisfactory provision has been made for a programme of archaeological investigation, excavation and recording before, or during, development and for the subsequent publication of any findings, where appropriate.

Policy HE 2 – Archaeology: Where there is evidence that archaeological sites, monuments (whether above or below ground), historic buildings and landscape features, and their settings may be present on a site, but their extent and importance is unknown, the Local Planning Authority will refuse applications which are not supported by adequate archaeological assessment which clarifies the importance of the feature and demonstrates the impact of development.

3.10 The relevant policies of the Local Plan Part 1 relating to the historic environment comprise:

Policy CP20 – Heritage and Landscape Character: The Local Planning Authority will continue to conserve and enhance the historic environment through the preparation of Conservation Area Appraisals and Management Plans and/or other strategies, and will support new development which recognises, protects and enhances the District’s distinctive landscape and heritage assets and their settings. These may be designated or undesignated and include natural and man-made assets associated with existing landscape and townscape character, Conservation Areas, scheduled ancient monuments, historic parks and gardens, listed buildings, historic battlefields and archaeology. Particular emphasis should be given to conserving:

• recognised built form and designed or natural landscapes that include features and elements of natural beauty, cultural or historic importance; • local distinctiveness, especially in terms of characteristic materials, trees, built form and layout, tranquillity, sense of place and setting.

14 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Colden Common, Winchester, Hampshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

4. OVERVIEW OF THE HERITAGE RESOURCE

Introduction 4.1 This section provides an overview of the historical and archaeological background of the study area, and the region surrounding it, to provide a better understanding of the context and significance of the heritage resource that may be affected by the proposed development. The assessment will assess the potential for encountering buried archaeological remains within the Site, and to predict their likely nature, date, extent and condition.

4.2 All heritage assets within the study area are illustrated on Fig. 2.

Setting 4.3 The most significant heritage assets within the wider setting of Colden Common are Brambridge House and its associated gardens. The River Itchen and adjoining areas of the South Downs National Park do not comprise heritage assets per se, but comprise elements of the wider landscape context of the site. For this reason, they do not fall within the scope of heritage assessment, and neither has any visual linkage with the Site. However, the range of visual and setting relationships assessed within this study indicates that principal significance attaches to those areas situated to the west, north and east of the Site, rather than to the south.

Designated heritage assets 4.4 There are no designated heritage assets within the Site.

4.5 The designated heritage assets within the study area comprise seven Grade II Listed Buildings scattered within the village: Hill Farmhouse, located approximately 0.26km west of the Site (Fig 2, A); Woodcroft Lodge, located approximately 0.31km west of the Site (Fig 2, B); Keepers Cottage, located approximately 0.05km north of the Site (Fig 2, C); the Church of the Holy Trinity, located approximately 0.75km east of the Site (Fig 2, D); and the Manor House and the associated outbuildings, a granary and barn to the west, located 0.85km north east of the Site (Fig 2, E, F, G).

4.6 The River Itchen, on the western periphery of Colden Common, and the watercourse and banks, are of national ecological importance. These areas have been designated Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) and Sites of Importance for Natural Conservation (SINCs). The channel has been designated a Special Area of Conservation (SAC).

15 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Colden Common, Winchester, Hampshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

4.7 There are no World Heritage Sites, Registered Parks and Gardens, Registered Battlefields or Conservation Areas within the environs of the Site.

4.8 Designated heritage assets within the study area, and surrounding landscape, are considered further in the settings assessment presented in Section 5.

Previous archaeological works 4.9 No archaeological investigations have previously taken place within the Site. A topographic survey was undertaken of the medieval fishpond at Fisher’s Pond, located approximately 0.94km south east of the Site (Fig 2, 35).

Geology, topography and the palaeoenvironment 4.10 The Site occupies a gentle north to south-facing slope; the northern boundary of the Site falls in line with the triangle formed by the B3335 (Highbridge Road), B3354 (Main Road) and Church Lane, which define the boundaries of Colden Common settlement. Encompassed within Colden Common settlement the Site is bordered on the east by Nob’s Crook hamlet. The surrounding landscape comprises an irregular field pattern of paddocks and pastures, a result of the enclosure of the historic water meadows. The Site is relatively level in the northern corner, lying at an elevation of approximately 25m above Ordnance Datum (aOD). The landscape rises in the middle of the Site, to an elevation of 33m above Ordnance Datum (aOD), and slopes towards the southern corner to an elevation of 31m above Ordnance Datum (aOD).

4.11 Colden Common lies on the higher valley slopes, gently sloping away to form a wide flat, low-lying floodplain to the west; the valley floor contains the River Itchen and Itchen Navigation, a southward-flowing river that unites with Southampton Water below the Itchen Bridge. The village has community facilities interspersed throughout, with areas of green space both within and outside the settlement. The core of the settlement lies at an elevation of 35m aOD

4.12 The underlying geology within the Site is mapped as London Clay formation comprising of clay, silt and sand, sedimentary bedrock laid down approximately 56 - 47.8 million years ago in the Eocene period (British Geological Survey).

Prehistoric (pre-43 AD) 4.13 No remains of early prehistoric date are recorded within the study area. Within the Site’s wider environs, findspots of flint handaxes, flint knives and axes, flake and retouched flint implements recovered from approximately 0.93km to the north (Fig

16 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Colden Common, Winchester, Hampshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

2, 2), 0.97km to the north east (Fig 2, 4), 0.50km north (Fig 2, 8), 0.98km to the west (15), 0.27km west (Fig 2, 18), 0.55km east (Fig 2, 20), 0.13km south (Fig 2, 23), and a rotary quern approximately 0.28km from the western boundary of the Site (17), indicate the presence of human activity in the landscape from the Palaeolithic period onwards. The concentration of findspots of Palaeolithic worked flint in this location is notable, but it is likely that many of these items have been re- deposited. Mesolithic tranchet axes and picks, blades and flakes have been recorded within the site’s wider environs, 0.55km north (Fig 2, 9), 0.13km south (Fig 2, 23), 0.86km south west (Fig 2, 30), 0.75km south west (Fig 2, 31). During the Mesolithic period, towards the end of the last glaciation, forest cover developed rapidly over this landscape. Mesolithic hunter-gatherer communities would have exploited the natural resources offered by the woodland and river. Such finds may reflect a background level of earlier prehistoric occupation in the local landscape, but do not necessarily indicate the presence of any remains associated with long- term or substantial settlement.

4.14 The Neolithic and Bronze Age periods witnessed an intensification of settlement and agricultural exploitation in Hampshire, resulting in a greater volume and variety of archaeological evidence. Within the study area, remains of these periods are limited to isolated finds, including two Neolithic axes found south of The Woodlands Centre, c. 0.55m to the east of the site (Fig 2, 20), polished blades and one barbed and tanged arrow-point recovered 0.98km north of the site (Fig 2, 15), and a Middle Bronze Age ‘founder’s hoard’ consisting of a flat axe, a flanged axe and three palstaves (one looped) which were discovered 0.43km north east of the site (Fig 2, 19).

Romano-British (AD 43 – AD 410) 4.15 Prior to the Roman period, Winchester was associated with the Iron Age hillfort of St Catherine’s Down and the slightly later fortified centre of Oram’s Arbour. Following the Roman Conquest in AD 43, Winchester was adopted as the centre of the new administrative region, or Civitas, of the Belgae. The landscape surrounding the town became dissected by a network of Roman roads, linking the major settlements. The archaeological landscape of , located approximately 6.45km from Site, and the site of the Twyford Roman Villa, approximately 3.8km north of the Site, has indicated the importance of the area for settlement and agriculture from the Bronze Age through to the Roman period. An Iron Age and Roman settlement and cemetery has also been discovered at , to the

17 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Colden Common, Winchester, Hampshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

south. The course of a Roman road leading from Venta Belgarum, bounding the parish of Twyford on the north-west, and travelling through Owslebury, is likely to have been a key influence in the development of local rural settlement patterns during this period. The course of this road runs c. 2.5m to the west of the Colden Common Site.

4.16 Unusually for this part of Hampshire, there is very little Roman evidence. At Upper Barn Corpse, located approximately 1.05km south of the Site, the surviving traces of an earthwork dating from the early Iron Age remain visible (Fig 2, 34). The earthwork is of the expected scale of a deer park boundary, although the surviving traces of a western ditch suggest that it once defined the eastern side of an enclosure of this type. If the bank pre-dated the medieval period, it is likely to have served as a major territorial boundary of late prehistoric date.

4.17 Within the study area, approximately 0.71km north of the Site, a As of Faustina the Younger, (a Roman imperial coin) was discovered (Fig 2, 3), and a possible Roman settlement evidenced by pottery, tile and part of a rotary quern was recorded approximately 0.99km north-west from the Site (Fig 2, 6). A further collection of pottery fragments and possible evidence of granary stores were discovered 0.61km north of the Site (Fig 2, 7). A probably Iron Age occupation site, with recorded charcoal and burnt matter, were recorded in the south-west side of gravel pits in this location.

Early medieval (AD410 – AD 1066) and medieval (AD 1066 – 1539) 4.18 Colden Common was formed into a separate ecclesiastical parish in 1843. Prior to this, Colden Common fell within the civil parishes of Twyford and Owslebury. The origins of Twyford are not well known, but an Anglo-Saxon settlement was present is the area, and St Mary’s church at Twyford is believed to be of Norman origin.

4.19 Twyford is first referred to in the Domesday Book of 1086 as one of the estates of Ralf of Fuegeres (or Ralph de Fougeres): ‘In Lamua Hundred: Ralph of Feugeres holds Twyford. It answers for 17 hides. Land for 18 ploughs; in lordship 6 hides. 3 ploughs there; a further 2 possible. 15 villagers with 10 smallholders have 11 ploughs; a further 2 possible. 9 slaves; meadow for 3 ploughs; woodland, 100 pigs. Total value £10; when acquired £8; before 1066 £12. Countess Goda held this land; there a man of Earl Harold’s had 3 hides as one manor; he could sell’ (Buckingham Archaeology Society).

18 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Colden Common, Winchester, Hampshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

4.20 The place name Twyford (Tueverde or Tuiforde) translates as ‘two-folds’ or ‘double fords’, referring to the double ford by which the old road from Twyford to Cowley crosses the two streams at Twyford Mill (Gelling, EPNS and Mills). Twyford was one of the Hundred Hides of the estate granted to the church at Winchester in the 7th century. Limited archaeological investigations have been undertaken at Twyford; however aerial photographs show the reduction in size and fragmentation of the parish from the medieval period onwards.

4.21 The parish of Owslebury has been recorded as early as 964, and was granted to the Bishop of Winchester by the King. The Domesday Survey of 1086 records the manor of Owslebury under the name of ‘Twyford with Marwell’. The separation came by the mid-14th century, after which the episcopal manor was known as Marwell and the parish, Owslebury. The manor of Marwell (Fig 2, 13), located approximately 0.88km north-east of the Site, is believed to have been constructed in the early 16th century, and was enclosed and passed to the crown shortly after, in 1551. Restored to the bishopric of Winchester during Queen Mary’s reign, the property was later passed to the Seymour family and then to the Mildmay and Paulet St. John families until the 19th century. Residing in 7 acres of land, the property was rebuilt in 1816 in the style of the former building. Throughout the 13th to mid-17th century, the Bishop of Winchester retained a deerpark at Marwell.

4.22 The southern border of the Site lies on the edge of the medieval Marwell deerpark, situated approximately 0.16km from the corner of the Site (Fig 2, 22). Three surviving sections of park pale are associated with Marwell deerpark, and are designated as scheduled monuments: Park pale at Marwell, located south of Fisher’s Pond; Park Pale at Marwell 400m west of Marwell Manor; and Park pale at Marwell 250m north west of Marwell Manor. These designated features fall just outside of the study area, and have been excluded from the assessment. The park pale represents an early example of land enclosure; the bank and ditch vary in their level of preservation around the majority of the deerpark boundary. Marwell Park was established by the Bishop of Winchester, Henry de Blois, during the 12th century, and the area emparked for the management of deer was approximately 256 ha. The fish ponds were also created at this time. The park was primarily used as a hunting-ground until the mid-17th century.

4.23 A further deerpark is located within the study area, adjacent to the southern boundary, approximately 0.06km from the boundary of the Site. Stoke Park stands within a landscaped park, which incorporates an earlier 13th-century deerpark.

19 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Colden Common, Winchester, Hampshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

Sections of the park pale of the large medieval deerpark survive on the north-west, west, south and east sides of Stoke Park Wood.

4.24 The Fishers Pond, located approximately 1.01km east of the Site, is the last remaining pond of six which originally belonged to Marwell Manor (Fig 2, 28). A medieval episcopal fishpond, originally constructed for the Bishops of Winchester, the fishpond was praised by the contemporary, Gerald of Wales, for its advanced engineering, and is one of the best preserved fishponds in Hampshire. Fishers Pond, also referred to as the Eleven Acres Pond, was laid dry in 1615. Fisher’s Pond, together with the adjoin episcopal deerpark and the neighbouring site of the Marwell Great Pond, comprise elements of an important medieval landscape and emphasise the influence of the estate controlled by the Bishops of Winchester during this period.

4.25 Further medieval activity is recorded within the study area in the form of Brambridge, a subject of the Royal Commission on the Historical Monuments of England Medieval Settlement Project. Brambridge, first documented in AD 909 as Bembridge, the old English form means ‘bridge by the place of broom’. A hamlet in the civil parishes of Twyford and Owslebury, Brambridge became part of Colden Common in 1843.

Post-medieval (AD 1539 – 1800) and modern (AD 1801 - present) 4.26 Colden Common was established in 1843 for civic purposes, with 1,618 acres formerly belonging to the parishes of Twyford and Owslebury. The Church of the Holy Trinity, located on the eastern boundary of Colden Common (Fig 2, D), originally stood on the borders of the two parishes. When Colden Common was established, the following hamlets were included within the parish: Brambridge, Highbridge, Hensting, Fishers Pond and Nob’s Crook.

4.27 Brambridge House, located approximately 1.22km north-west of the Site, was partially rebuilt after a fire in 1872, and converted into apartments (1). The house is situated on the site of an early 16th-century building. The shape of the gardens and park, of 19th-century date, are still visible in the double-row lime avenue leading from the small parkland with wrought-iron gates to the Highbridge Road (B3335), on the western boundary of Colden Common. These features have been attributed to Matthew Digby Wyatt (1820-1877), a British architect and art historian.

20 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Colden Common, Winchester, Hampshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

4.28 The economy of the post-medieval period has been closely related to the geology of the area. The underlying geology of the centre of Colden Common is predominately clay-based, and suitable for brick making. Within the study area, there are three known brickwork sites: Phillips’ Brickfield, Charles Mitchell and a site located at Nob’s Creek, located to the east, approximately 0.28km from the Site. Phillips’ Brickfield, located approximately 0.90km (Fig 2, 5) and 0.54km (Fig 2, 10) north east of the Site closed in 1940. A disused kiln remains standing in an area used as a caravan site. Charles Mitchell’s brickworks, located 0.56km (Fig 2, 11) and 0.63km (Fig 2, 12) north-east of the Site, was the last brickworks in the county, which closed only in 1957, to produce hand-made bricks by the clap method. Part of the site has been redeveloped as industrial works; the yard, however, one building, the clay quarry and associated hopper trucks and rails have survived.

4.29 Other recorded features within the study area include a boundary stone on Bishopstoke Road, located approximately 0.87km south west of the Site (Fig 2, 29); thatched cottages on Nob’s Crook Lane, approximately 0.07km from the eastern boundary of the Site (Fig 2, 26); and a number of post-medieval features. These inclue an area of disused watermeadows in the , located approximately 0.71km south west of the Site (Fig 2, 21); the River Itchen Bridge, located approximately 1.02km west of the Site (Fig 2, 14); and the drainage system at Bow Lake, Fishers Pond, located approximately 0.45km south east of the Site (Fig 2, 27).

4.30 Within the study area, the following recorded features have been identified as medieval and post-medieval earthworks, possibly the remnants of a field system: a group of singular ditch linear features, approximately 0.99km south of the Site (Fig 2, 33), and a linear ditch west of Leylands Farm, 0.31km south east of the Site (Fig 2, 24). The profile of the banks and ditches close to the margins of Upper Barn Copse (Fig 2, 34) are typical of the post-medieval period, and have been associated with the management of woodland, either as a small coppice enclosure, or defining the earlier north-western corner of the Copse.

4.31 During the post-medieval and modern periods, the site continued to comprise agricultural land created as a result of woodland clearance. Historic map regression has allowed the reconstruction of development within the site from the early 19th century onwards.

21 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Colden Common, Winchester, Hampshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

Development within the Site 4.32 The earliest cartographic evidence consulted for this assessment is the 1840 Twyford Tithe Map (Photograph 3), and the 1840 Owslebury Tithe Map (not reproduced). The Site is depicted as comprising four fields, with woodland along the western border of the site. The surrounding landscape is depicted as an area of both pre-parliamentary and parliamentary enclosures at this time.

Photograph 3: Extract from the 1840 Twyford Tithe Map

4.33 In addition, the enclosure maps for Twyford Down (1851 and 1853), Owslebury (1861), and Twyford: Colden Common (1855) were consulted. The common land in Owslebury parish was enclosed in 1851, the 5,399 acres of landscape consisted mainly of arable land, woodland and grass. Owslebury Common, part of Colden Common (originally referred to as Coldon Common), and Twyford Down, were inclosed by the order of 1861. The remainder of Twyford was enclosed by formal and informal agreements; Twyford Common was inclosed in 1855.

4.34 There was minimal development within the site and its surroundings by the 19th century. As recorded in detail on the Ordnance Survey maps (1869, not reproduced, and Photograph 4), the map shows that the current layout of fields on the Site was created by the removal of internal field boundaries. By the late-19th century, the woodland on the western boundary had been removed, and the land consolidated into its present form. The landscape surrounding the Site remains agricultural, but interspersed with small woodland areas. There is no evidence for ay development within the site in the early 20th century. Towards the north of the

22 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Colden Common, Winchester, Hampshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

Site, the settlement of Colden Common has been subjected to significant modern housing development in the 1960s, 1970s and 1990s.

Photograph 4: Extract from the 1896 Second Edition Ordnance Survey

Photograph 5: Extract from the 1937 Revised Ordnance Survey

4.35 Subsequent Ordnance Survey editions (Photograph 5) illustrate no developments within the Site. Modern activity within the site appears to have been limited. The land is predominately managed grassland bordered by hedgerows, infrequently interspersed with trees. By 1980, residential properties are visible towards the north and north-east boundary of the Site. The surrounding landscape to the west

23 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Colden Common, Winchester, Hampshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

and south of the Site remains agricultural. No evidence for archaeological features was observed during the site visit, or on the historic aerial photographs consulted.

Historic Landscape Character 4.36 The Winchester Landscape Character Assessment outlines four landscape types for Colden Common: ‘a. Mixed Farmland and Woodland (open and enclosed, b. Chalk and Clay Farmland, c. Historic Parkland, and d. River Valley Side’.

4.37 The Historic Landscape Characterisation (HLC) of the land east of the River Itchen is defined by the Winchester City Council and Hampshire County Council Historic Landscape Assessment (2004) as ‘Small Pre-Parliamentary Type Enclosures’ (HLC type 1.16) and ‘Small Parliamentary Type Enclosures’ (HLC type 1.9). The pre- parliamentary type enclosures comprise fields characterised by wavy boundaries, whose overall shape is more rectangular than that of assarts. The majority of these enclosures reflect late medieval and post-medieval enclosure, or rationalisation of earlier field patterns, prior to the Parliamentary Enclosure movement. Pre- parliamentary enclosures are usually larger than regular assarts, and are characterised by a lack of small scattered wood or copses. The parliamentary-type enclosures comprise fields characterised by straight boundaries, which were created as a result of the 19th-century Parliamentary Enclosure Acts. Small Parliamentary Enclosures are typically less than 6-8ha. The HLC data indicates that the majority of the Site falls within this HLC type.

4.38 The HLC defines the landscape, to the west of the site, as assart woodland (HLT 4.1 and 4.2), interlocked with old assart enclosures (HLC type 1.2 and 1.3). These enclosures are identified by their irregular form, and contain small, scattered woods and copses. The enclosures are approximately 2ha to over 12ha in size. Assarted woodlands are characterised by their highly irregular shapes, although there are pre-1810 areas of replanted woodland within the landscape.

4.39 During the site visit, it was observed that the boundaries enclosing the Site are demarcated by hedgerows. There are areas of woodland within the study area subject to Tree Preservation Order, although not within the Site itself.

24 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Colden Common, Winchester, Hampshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

5. SETTINGS ASSESSMENT

5.1 This section assesses the potential impact of the proposed development upon the significance of designated heritage assets, through the alteration of their setting. The assessment has been undertaken in accordance with the approach outlined in the guidance Historic Environment Good Practice Advice in Planning: Note 3: The Setting of Heritage Assets (Historic England 2015b).

5.2 An initial appraisal, carried out as part of Step 1 of the assessment methodology, utilised readily-available information to determine whether a heritage asset may be affected by the proposed development. Designated heritage assets within a 2km buffer around the Site, comprising 7 Grade II Listed Buildings, were considered. The initial review of designated assets within the wider surroundings of the proposed development site indicated that The Manor House (Fig 2, F) and its associated outbuildings (Fig 2, G and H), and the Church of the Holy Trinity (Fig 2, D) are located at sufficient distance from the Site to suggest that they have no historical or functional relationship with it. In addition, they are effectively screened by existing intervening built form, vegetation and topography. The site visit confirmed this assessment (Photograph 6). As such, these assets have no direct visual, physical or historical relationship with the Site, and were therefore excluded at an early stage in the settings assessment process.

5.3 Sandyfields Nursery was not the subject of this heritage desk-based assessment. However, despite no HER and HEA data relating specifically to the site at Sandyfields, we believe that the surrounding archaeological contextual data does suggest comparable levels of archaeological potential. Historically this area has undergone relatively little development or been subject to archaeological recording, hence there is potential for unrecorded archaeology at the site on the basis of recorded evidence of transient prehistoric activity and medieval farmsteads within the surrounding landscape. However, given the nature of available archaeological data, we are unable to offer substantive comparisons between the likely archaeological potential of the Church Lane site and other sites included in the Draft Local Plan, including Sandyfields and Site 275.

5.4 Three designated heritage assets, comprising the Grade II Listed Hill Farmhouse (Fig 2, A), Woodcroft Lodge (Fig 2, B) and Keepers Cottage (Fig 2, C), were identified as warranting detailed assessment.

25 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Colden Common, Winchester, Hampshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

Photograph 6: View across the Site towards The Manor House and the Church of the Holy Trinity (to the east)

Grade II Listed Hill Farmhouse (A) Significance of the asset 5.5 The Grade II Listed Hill Farmhouse is located approximately 0.28km west of the Site. A two bay by two bay two-storey dwelling, the building originates in the 17th century, with 18th century alterations and modern restorations (1964). Constructed with a timber frame and herringbone brick infill to the front façade; the remaining sides are encased in brick covered by a plain tile roof. A 20th century doorway is located under an open hip-roofed porch located on the front of the building, left of its centre. Internal features recognised in the listing include the single casement each side of the centre post on the first floor, and within the centre of each bay the small 18th century two-light casement. The windows at Hill Farmhouse have leaded lights, and the roofs are hipped by a connecting roof in the centre on which a large stack is situated.

5.6 The heritage significance of Hill Farmhouse is principally derived from the historic and architectural interest of its physical form. This interest relates to the evidential value of the architectural detail and form of the structure as an example of a 17th- century farmhouse with 18th-century alterations. As an illustrative remnant of the local post-medieval landscape, the Listed Building also retains important historical heritage value.

26 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Colden Common, Winchester, Hampshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

The asset’s physical surrounds 5.7 Hill Farmhouse is situated on high ground that slopes towards the west and south. The Farmhouse is accessed by means of Bishopstoke Road, on the southern side of Church Lane, which runs south to the B3037 and Bishopstoke. The building is located to the west of the proposed site for development, however partially screened by intervening built form and vegetation.

5.8 Beyond the building’s associated land, the wider landscape is characterised by arable fields. Through providing a largely unchanged rural backdrop, which reflects that within which the building was originally constructed, these broader surroundings also make some limited contribution to significance.

Experience of the asset 5.9 The architectural and historical interest of Hill Farmhouse, derived from its physical fabric, can be best appreciated at close proximity, most particularly from within the enclosed garden. The eastern elevation cannot be experienced along Church Road, as these views are constrained by established vegetation and built form.

5.10 While some views over the wider landscape may be possible from the principal south-eastern elevation, owing to the distance from, and partial seclusion of, Hill Farmhouse behind vegetation, long-ranging views towards the north of the Site are largely obscured. It is probable that there will be immediate views towards the eastern and southern end of the Site from Hill Farmhouse, although additional screening around the perimeter of the site is proposed to minimise this (Photograph 7).

5.11 Some distant, filtered views of the Site may be achieved during winter months from Hill Farmhouse, although these would not provide any meaningful contribution to the significance of the Grade II Listed Building.

Summary of development effect 5.12 The proposed residential development would introduce a new built element into the arable landscape of Hill Farmhouse, and would potentially result in change to any seasonal, glimpsed views of the landscape to the east and south-east of Hill Farmhouse. However, due to limited inter-visibility between Hill Farmhouse and the Site as a result of the proposed landscaping, in addition to the absence of any identifiable historical or functional relationship between the two, the land within the Site does not comprise a key part of the setting of this Listed Building. The proposal

27 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Colden Common, Winchester, Hampshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

will result in limited impact upon Hill Farmhouse, as the proposed residential development would affect the character of elements of the surrounding medieval and post-medieval landscape. The major contributors to the architectural and historical interest of Hill Farmhouse, as embodied within its physical fabric, would remain unaffected, as would the key elements of its setting. The proposed development would therefore not result in any harm to the overall significance of the Listed Building.

Photograph 7: Glimpse view across the Site towards Hill Farmhouse and Woodcroft Lodge (to the west)

Grade II Listed Woodcroft Lodge (B) Significance of the asset 5.13 The Grade II Listed Woodcroft Lodge is located approximately 0.33km west of the Site. A two-storey dwelling, the building originates in the 17th century, with 18th and 19th-century alterations. The building is constructed with a timber frame encased in brick, which since has become pebbledashed, and is covered by a plain tile roof. The building has five bays, with projecting full-height wings to the second and fourth bay. The doorway has since been moved to the left of the (left) projection. Each wing contains a two-light cast-iron casement in cambered head on each floor, and a single light in the gable, with similar windows in the left bay. Between these wings, a pent-roof porch is located, which has the addition of a three-light transomed casement, the two-light cast iron casement is positioned above. The right bay is

28 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Colden Common, Winchester, Hampshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

blank and narrow. Woodcroft Lodge’s roof is hipped to the left, with an external freestanding stack located at the left end. In addition, the roof is half-hipped to the ridge, with a large ridge-stack locate just left of the right wing.

5.14 The heritage significance of Woodcroft Lodge is principally derived from the historic and architectural interest of its physical form. This interest relates to the evidential value of the architectural detail and form of the structure as an example of a 17th - century house with 18th and 19th-century alterations. As an illustrative remnant of the local post-medieval landscape, the Listed Building also retains important historical heritage value.

The asset’s physical surrounds 5.15 Woodcroft Lodge is situated on high ground that slopes towards the west and south. The house is accessed by means of Bishopstoke Road, on the southern side of Church Lane, which runs south to the B3037 and Bishopstoke. The building is located to the west of the Site, but is partly screened by intervening built form and vegetation.

5.16 Beyond the curtilage of the building, the wider landscape is characterised by arable fields. Through providing a largely unchanged rural backdrop, which reflects that within which the building was originally constructed, these broader surroundings also make some limited contribution to significance.

Experience of the asset 5.17 The architectural and historical interest of Woodcroft Lodge, derived from its physical fabric, can be best appreciated at close proximity, most particularly from within the enclosed garden. The eastern elevation cannot be experienced along Church Road, as these views are constrained by the established vegetation and built form.

5.18 While some views over the wider landscape may be possible from the principal south-eastern elevation, owing to the distance from, and seclusion of, Woodcroft Lodge behind surrounding built form and vegetation, any long-ranging views towards the north of the Site are largely prevented. It is likely that partial views will be available across the south eastern end of the Site from Woodcroft Lodge, although additional screening around the perimeter of the site is proposed to minimise this.

29 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Colden Common, Winchester, Hampshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

5.19 Some distant, filtered views of the Site may be achieved during winter months from Woodcroft Lodge, although these would not provide any meaningful contribution to the significance of the Grade II Listed Building.

Summary of development effect 5.20 The proposed residential development would introduce a new built element into the arable landscape surrounding Woodcroft Lodge, and would potentially result in change to any seasonal, glimpsed views of the landscape to the south-east. However, due to limited inter-visibility between Woodcroft Lodge and the Site, in addition to the absence of any identifiable historical or functional relationship between the two, the land within the Site does not comprise a key part of the setting of this Listed Building. The proposal will result in limited impact on Woodcroft Lodge, as the proposed residential development would affect aspects of the character of the surrounding medieval and post-medieval landscape. The major contributors to the architectural and historical interest of Woodcroft Lodge, as embodied within its physical fabric, would remain unaffected, as would the key elements of its setting. The proposed development would therefore not result in any harm to the overall significance of this Listed Building.

Grade II Listed Keepers Cottage (C) Significance of the asset 5.21 The Grade II Listed Keepers Cottage is located 0.03km from the northern boundary of the Site. A two-storey dwelling, the building is of early 19th century date. Constructed in brick, the exterior is stuccoed on the ground floor, with fish-scale tiles hung on the first floor, with brick stacks, and covered in a plain tile roof. There are two bay-windows on the ground-floor, with a lean-to on the left. The listing for Keepers Cottage acknowledges the central gabled porch, stuccoed, with bargeboards and scrolled-end ridge-tiles. Each side has a three-light cast-iron casement with lozenge panes, and stuccoed hood-moulding. On the first floor of the building there are two two-light casements, and paired modillion brackets leading to the eaves. Adjoining Keepers Cottage to the left is an end-stack of cut brickwork, with a stepped off-set head.

5.22 The heritage significance of Keepers Cottage is principally derived from the historic and architectural interest of its physical form. This interest relates to the evidential value of the architectural detail and form of the structure as an example of an early 19th-century cottage. As an illustrative remnant of the local post-medieval landscape, the Listed Building also retains important historical heritage value.

30 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Colden Common, Winchester, Hampshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

The asset’s physical surrounds 5.23 Keepers Cottage is situated on relatively level ground, on the southern periphery of the core of Colden Common. The cottage is accessed via Church Lane, which is located on the northern side, connecting Highbridge Road (B3335) in the west, to Main Road (B3354) in the east. The building is located to the north of the Site, however it is partly screened by intervening built form and vegetation.

5.24 Beyond the building’s curtilage, the wider landscape to the north is characterised by modern residential development, with arable land to the south. Through providing a largely unchanged rural backdrop, which reflects that within which the building was originally constructed, these broader surroundings also make some limited contribution to significance.

Experience of the asset 5.25 The architectural and historical interest of Keepers Cottage, derived from its physical fabric, which can be best appreciated at close proximity, most particularly from within the enclosed garden. The southern elevation cannot be experienced along Church Road, as these views are constrained by the established vegetation, topography and built form.

5.26 While some views over the wider landscape may be possible from the principal southern elevation, owing to the distance from, elevation and seclusion of Keepers Cottage, any long-ranging views towards the southern end of the Site are largely prevented (Photograph 8). It is likely there will be partial views towards the northern end of the Site from Keepers Cottage, although additional screening around the perimeter of the site is proposed to minimise this.

5.27 Some distant, filtered views of the Site may be achieved during winter months from Keepers Cottage, although these would not provide any meaningful contribution to the significance of the Grade II Listed Building.

Summary of development effect 5.28 The proposed residential development would introduce a new built element into the arable landscape of Keepers Cottage, and would potentially result in change to any seasonal, glimpsed views of the landscape to south east of this building. However, due to limited inter-visibility between Keepers Cottage and the Site, in addition to the absence of any identifiable historical or functional relationship between the two, the land within the Site does not comprise a key part of the setting of this Listed

31 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Colden Common, Winchester, Hampshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

Building. The proposal will result in very limited impact on the setting and significance of Keepers Cottage, as the proposed residential development would affect aspects of the character of the surrounding medieval and post-medieval landscape. The major contributors to the architectural and historical interest of Keepers Cottage, as embodied within its physical fabric, would remain unaffected, as would the key elements of its setting. The proposed development would therefore not result in any harm to the overall significance of the Listed Building.

Photograph 8: View towards Keepers Cottage (to the north west)

6. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Significance of recorded heritage assets within the site 6.1 No designated heritage assets are recorded within the Site.

Potential buried archaeological remains 6.2 Prehistoric occupation in the surrounding area is evidenced by the presence of finds of flint-work and Bronze Age metalwork, limited evidence for settlement has been identified. Based on the evidence above, the potential for encountering further heritage assets of archaeological interest associated with prehistoric and Romano- British activity should not be dismissed. Such finds will be characterised predominantly by isolated artefacts and surface scatters, indicative of transient occupation by hunter gather populations.

32 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Colden Common, Winchester, Hampshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

6.3 Roman-period activity within the surroundings of the Site is represented by isolated finds and limited evidence of an occupation site; a Roman road and settlement remains are recorded within the wider landscape. As such, there is some potential for Roman period remains to occur within the site, although no specific evidence for settlement or other significant remains has been identified

6.4 The Site lies beyond the known extents of a medieval settlement and medieval deerpark, although this area is thought to have been located within the agricultural hinterland of the surrounding hamlets, as unenclosed land, prior to the establishment of Colden Common and its subsequent enclosure in the later post- medieval period. There may be some potential for features associated with agricultural activity to be present within the Site, although such remains would probably be of very limited heritage significance.

Summary of previous impacts 6.5 A review of the available cartographic and documentary evidence indicates that the Site has not been subject to any significant modern development. As such, any pre- existing impacts to any potential buried archaeological remains would chiefly result from agricultural practices, including ploughing and tree-planting.

Potential development effects Effects on archaeological remains 6.6 Construction effects will primarily arise from the excavation of building foundations, which may partially or totally remove any underlying archaeological remains. Outside of the footprint of the proposed new buildings, the potential impacts upon the archaeological resource are expected to be comparatively limited, and will likely comprise localised excavations associated with services and drainage, as well as topsoil stripping and resurfacing for the access roads and parking areas.

6.7 Any adverse impacts upon the buried archaeology resource would be likely to be permanent and irreversible in nature, though such impacts could be suitably addressed through a programme of archaeological mitigation, including a geophysical survey.

Effects on the setting of heritage assets 6.8 This report has assessed the potential effects of the development upon the significance of designated heritage assets within the surrounding landscape, through the alteration of their settings, comprising of seven Grade II Listed Buildings. It has been established that, due to the effects of intervening built form,

33 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Colden Common, Winchester, Hampshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

topography and distance, the Site does not comprise part of the settings of any of these designated heritage assets and, as a result, the proposed development would not affect their significance in any way.

6.9 The development proposals therefore do not conflict with the obligations of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, or with national or local planning policy.

Effects on historic landscape character 6.10 The construction of residential development would introduce limited change to the historic landscape character of the site, which largely reflects patterns of pre-19th century and 19th century enclosure. However, due to its modern origin and widespread occurrence within the wider region, this historic landscape character type is considered to be of limited heritage interest, and the overall impact would be both low and localised in extent, not least in the context of the potentially more sensitive settings to the west, east and north of Colden Common.

7. CONCLUSIONS

7.1 The effect of the development proposals on the known and potential heritage resource within the Site and its surroundings will be a material consideration in determination of the planning application. This assessment has identified no overriding heritage constraints that would preclude development.

7.2 Prehistoric occupation in the Site’s environs is evidenced by finds of flint-work and Bronze Age metalwork, which are largely concentrated on areas of higher ground. While there is no current evidence to suggest that the Site itself comprised a focal point for prehistoric activity, the potential for encountering remains of this period to should not be discounted.

7.3 The Site is situated beyond the known extents of medieval settlement and deerpark, and is likely to have been enclosed for agricultural use in the post-medieval period. As such, the potential for the presence of significant remains of medieval or later date is considered to be low.

7.4 This assessment has concluded that, in accordance with the Framework, the development would not result in harm to any designated heritage assets through alteration to their settings. The proposed development would be consistent with the

34 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Colden Common, Winchester, Hampshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

requirements of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, regarding the preservation of Listed Buildings and their settings, as well as with relevant local policy relating to the protection of the historic environment.

35 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Colden Common, Winchester, Hampshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

8. REFERENCES

British Geological Survey. 2013. Geology of Britain viewer, 1:50,000 geological mapping, bedrock and superficial - http://mapapps.bgs.ac.uk/geologyofbritain/home.html (accessed October 2015)

Buckinghamshire Archaeological Society. 2011. Twyford village Buckinghamshire Historic Environment Appraisal including HS2 high-speed rail line Impact Assessment (BAS Report No. 2011-06)

Chartered Institute for Archaeologists. 2015. Standard and Guidance for Historic Environment Desk-Based Assessment

Commonview. 2012. Colden Common Village Design Statement 2012 - www.winchester.gov.uk/assets/files/.../ColdenCommon-VDS-2.8.12.pdf (accessed October 2015)

Department for Communities and Local Government. 2012. National Planning Policy Framework Communities and Local Government 2012

Domesday Book. 1086. The Domesday Book Online – http://www.domesdaybook.co.uk/contents.html (accessed October 2015)

‘EPNS’ Mawer, A. and Stenton, F. M. 1925. The Place-Names of Buckinghamshire. English Place-Name Society, Volume 11. Cambridge University Press

English Heritage. 2008. Conservation Principles: Policies and Guidance

Gelling, M. and Cole, A. 2000. The Landscape of Place-Names. Stamford: Shaun Tyas

Historic England. 2015a. The National Heritage List for England - http://list.englishheritage.org.uk/advancedsearch.aspx (accessed October 2015)

Historic England. 2015b. Historic Environment Good Practice Advice in Planning Note 2: Decision-Taking in the Historic Environment

Historic England. 2015c. Historic Environment Good Practice Advice in Planning: Note 3: The Setting of Heritage Assets

36 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Colden Common, Winchester, Hampshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

Mills, A. D. 1998. Oxford Dictionary of English Place-Names. Oxford University Press.

Oxford Archaeology. 2004. ‘Appendix Three: Historic Landscape Character Assessment’ In Winchester City Council and Hampshire City Council Landscape Character Assessment Winchester District

Victoria County History. 1908. ‘Parishes: Owslebury’ In A History of the County of Hampshire, Volume 3, British History Online - http://www.british- history.ac.uk/vch/hants/vol3/pp332-335 (accessed October 2015)

Victoria County History. 1908. ‘Parishes: Twyford’ In A History of the County of Hampshire, Volume 3, British History Online - http://www.british- history.ac.uk/vch/hants/vol3/pp339-341 (accessed October 2015)

Wills, R. 2015. Land north and south of Forest Road, Waltham Chase, Hampshire (Cotswold Archaeology, Report No. 15143)

Winchester City Council. 2013. Winchester District Local Plan Part 2: Colden Common Landscape Sensitivity Appraisal

Winchester City Council and South Downs National Park Authority. 2013. Winchester District Local Plan Part 1: Joint Core Strategy, adopted March 2013

Cartographic sources

1840 Twyford Tithe map and apportionment 1840 Owslebury Tithe map and apportionment 1851 Twyford: Twyford Down Enclosure map 1853 Twyford: Twyford Down Enclosure map 1855 Twyford: Colden Common Enclosure map and text 1861 Owlesbury Enclosure map and text 1869 First Edition Ordnance Survey map, 1:2,500 scale 1896 Second Edition Ordnance Survey map, 1:2,500 scale 1909 Third Edition Ordnance Survey map, 1:2,500 scale 1937 Revised Ordnance Survey map, 1:2,500 scale

37 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Colden Common, Winchester, Hampshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

Photographic Sources Historic England Aerial Photography Search: 96640 (Verticals)

Sortie number Frame Date number

RAF/CPE/UK/1768 3152 07 OCT 1946 RAF/CPE/UK/1768 3153 07 OCT 1946 RAF/CPE/UK/1964 3135 10 APR 1947 RAF/CPE/UK/1964 3136 10 APR 1947 RAF/CPE/UK/1992 4207 13 APR 1947 RAF/CPE/UK/1992 4208 13 APR 1947 RAF/CPE/UK/2102 4162 28 MAY 1947 RAF/CPE/UK/2102 4163 28 MAY 1947 RAF/82/765 485 20 APR 1953 RAF/82/765 486 20 APR 1953 RAF/58/2843 291 06 MAY 1959 RAF/58/2843 292 06 MAY 1959 RAF/540/784 4086 24 JUN 1952 MAL/71004 60 29 JAN 1971 OS/71019 91 22 MAR 1971 OS/71019 92 22 MAR 1971 OS/77147 3 13 SEP 1977 OS/77147 4 13 SEP 1977 OS/66187 24 22 JUL 1966 OS/66187 49 22 JUL 1966 OS/66065 235 17 MAY 1966 OS/86144 37 25 JUN 1986 OS/88105 52 17 MAY 1988 OS/88105 53 17 MAY 1988 OS/94351 13 12 OCT 1994 OS/94351 33 12 OCT 1994 OS/96059 121 27 APR 1996 OS/96059 122 27 APR 1996

38 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Colden Common, Winchester, Hampshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

APPENDIX A: GAZETTEER OF RECORDED HERITAGE ASSETS AND OTHER ELEMENTS OF THE HISTORIC ENVIRONMENT HE ref. AMIE ref. No. Description Designation Period NGR WHER ref. HHER ref. Post- Grade II Listed A Hill Farmhouse medieval 447480 121422 1350492 Building Modern Post- Grade II Listed B Woodcroft Lodge medieval 447434 121433 1095821 Building Modern Post- Grade II Listed 1095822 C Keepers Cottage medieval 447737 121533 Building MWC1213 Modern Grade II Listed D Church of the Holy Trinity Modern 448635 121556 1095820 Building Grade II Listed Post- E Barn 5m west of the Manor House 448364 122176 1095819 Building medieval Grade II Listed Post- F The Manor House 448373 122187 1095918 Building medieval Grade II Listed G Granary 10m west of the Manor House Modern 448353 122188 1350490 Building Post- EWC1218 1 Brambridge House, Park and Gardens - medieval 447176 122214 MWC1218 Modern 31223 Palaeolithic implements found off New 2 - Prehistoric 448000 122400 53429 Road Romano- 3 Roman Coins - 447800 122200 25595 British Taylor Copse Depot Hoard: Palaeolithic hoard including 65 handaxes, 3 flake Prehistoric EWC1237 4 implements, and 5 retouched flint - Romano- 448200 122400 MWC1237 implements and Site of Roman British 53430 Settlement, Boyes Lane Post- Phillips Brickfield. Disused, a kiln 5 - medieval 448232 122309 33817 remains standing on site. Modern Roman Occupation Site: pottery, tile Prehistoric 231269 6 and part of a rotary quern. Worked flint - Romano- 446900 122000 25579 evidence is present on site. British

MWC1222 Iron Age Settlement: pottery fragments MWC1255 and possible evidence of granary 7 - Prehistoric 447720 122090 MWC6110 stores. Pits contained charcoal and 231274 burnt matter. 25585

Gravel pits containing lower Palaeolithic 8 implements: 65 handaxes, 5 flakes, 3 - Prehistoric 447800 122000 1098691 retouched flakes and 1 levallois flake. EWC1230 EWC1234 Mesolithic Tranchet axe and pick, and Prehistoric MWC1230 9 glass bead found, on the common. - 448000 122000 Modern MWC1234 Exact locations unknown. 25644 53428 Site of Philip’s Brickfield (brickworks). th EWC1236 10 Victorian to early 20 century. Closed in - Modern 448228 122051 MWC1236 1940. Charles Mitchell’s Works. The last Post- brickworks in the county to produce 11 - medieval 448400 121800 25709 hand-made bricks by the clap method. Modern Closed 1957. The yard, one building,

39 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Colden Common, Winchester, Hampshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

HE ref. AMIE ref. No. Description Designation Period NGR WHER ref. HHER ref. clay quarry and associated hopper trucks and rails remain. Post- Charles Mitchell’s Works. Site EWC1227 12 - medieval 448493 121795 redeveloped into industrial works. MWC1227 Modern 13 Marwell Hall - Medieval 448650 122084 MWC6359 Post- EWC1209 14 Itchen River Bridge - medieval 446748 121398 MWC1209 Modern Site of Palaeolithic Flint Implement Manufactory. The Palaeolithic and Neolithic flint working debris covers an 231277 area of 5-600yeards. The ‘Palaeoliths’ 25624 are archaic types in the stages of 25625 15 manufacture of Neolithic blades. - Prehistoric 446780 121550 25626 Approximately 65 Palaeolithic 25627 handaxes have been listed. Those 25628 suggesting Neolithic date range in type, 25629 some are polished and one is a barbed and tanged arrow-point. Brambridge, part of the RCHME Medieval Settlement Project. First Early 16 - 447500 121660 38866 documented in AD 909 as Brembridge Medieval (Bridge by the place of broom). Rotary quern found in digging pits at EWC1217 17 Hillside Cottage, Brambridge SE of - Prehistoric 447500 121600 MWC1217 Brambridge gravel pits. 25584 231240 Palaeolithic handaxe at Brambridge 231283 Farm. 9 bronze palstaves found at EWC1207 Brambridge Farm, three broken, along EWC1216 18 - Prehistoric 447500 121500 with flat and flanged axes (presumably MWC1207 found together as Middle Bronze Age MWC1216 founder’s hoard) 53424 25573 A collection of axeheads. A Middle EWC1226 Bronze Age founder’s hoard consisting 19 - Prehistoric 448400 121600 MWC1226 of a flat axe, a flanged axe and three 25588 palstaves, one looped. 231301 Findspot of two Neolithic axes. Four EWC1228 Palaeolithic implement: a ‘Thames MWC1228 20 - Prehistoric 448600 121400 Pick’, a small flaked flint knife and two MWC1256 Neolithic polished flint axes. MWC6111 25631 An area of disused watermeadows in the Itchen Valley, between High Bridge Post- and Allbrook. The post medieval 21 - medieval 446478 120868 MWC7709 drainage features visible as low Modern earthworks. A watermeadow in an area of valley bottom pasture remains in use. 22 Deer Park (Stoke Park) - Medieval 447996 119819 - 4 Palaeolithic implements, a ‘Thames 25630 23 Pick’ and a small flaked lint knife - Prehistoric 448000 121000 25632 presumably of Mesolithic date. Medieval 24 Linear ditch west of Leylands Farm - Post- 448248 121027 MWC7710 medieval EWC5750 Post- 25 Site of Brickworks at Nobs Creek - 448193 121245 MWC5750 medieval 57425 26 Thatched Cottages, Nobs Crook Lane. - Post- 448400 121200 520199

40 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Colden Common, Winchester, Hampshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

HE ref. AMIE ref. No. Description Designation Period NGR WHER ref. HHER ref. Houses built between 1771 – 1835. medieval Drainage system at Bow Lake, Fishers Post- Pond. Linear ditch/drain with associated 27 - medieval 448657 120795 MWC7711 parallel drains forming part of a post Modern medieval or modern drainage system. Fishers Pond, medieval episcopal 231332 fishpond. Last remaining pond of 6 28 - Medieval 449093 121194 Ewc4121 belonging to Markwell Manor, originally MWC4121 belonged to the Bishops of Winchester. EWC1212 Boundary stone north of Stoke Post- 29 - 447141 120596 MWC1212 Common medieval 53426 Two tranchet axes and multiple pieces 30 - Prehistoric 447300 120500 65921 of blade debitage. Two Mesolithic tranchet axes and 31 - Prehistoric 447500 120500 231321 approximately 12 blades and flakes. Stokes Park Farm, site of a destroyed 32 th - Modern 447906 120292 42414 barn of late 19 century. Group of single ditch linear features Medieval 33 likely to be the remains of a field - Post- 448152 120175 58255 system. medieval Upper Barn Copse, earthworks of Prehistoric possible territorial boundaries, Post- 57962 34 - 448400 120200 enclosures and the management of medieval woodland. Modern 35 Medieval Fishpond - Medieval 448900 120600 60499 Topographical Survey of medieval fishpond at Fisher’s Pond. The fishpond is known as the Eleven Acre Pond, associated with the Bishop of Winchester’s deer park at Markwell. 1367368 - The fishponds were praised by the - Medieval 448950 120665 EWC11897 contemporary Gerald of Wales for their MWC7522 advanced engineering. The fishpond is among the best preserved fishpond earthworks in Hampshire, it was laid dry in 1615.

41 TY OF WEST Andover 01264 347630 STOL N BERKSHIRE Cirencester 01285 771022

ND WINDSOR AND Cotswold Exeter 01392 826185 SET WILTSHIRE WOKINGHAM MAIDENHEAD Archaeology Milton Keynes 01908 564660 BRACKNELL FOREST w www.cotswoldarchaeology.co.uk SURR e [email protected]

PROJECT TITLE HAMPSHIRE Land at Colden Common Winchester, Hampshire WEST SUSS FIGURE TITLE CITY OF POOLE SOUTHAMPTON Site location plan ORSET 0 1km BRI ISLE OF CITY OF FIGURE NO. WIGHT PORTSMOUTH Reproduced from the 2015 Ordnance Survey Explorer map with DRAWN BY LG PROJECT NO. 770289 BOURNEMOUTH the permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of The Controller CHECKED BY LM DATE 28/10/15 of Her Majesty's Stationery Office c Crown copyright Cotswold Archaeology Ltd 100002109 APPROVED BY JS SCALE@A4 1:25,000 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 8 9 7 4 4 4 4448000 4449000 4447000

2 4

5

3 E,F,G

7 13 10 112200022000 1 6 8 9

site boundary 11 12 study area prehistoric

16 Roman-British early medieval 17 19 D 15 C medieval 18 medieval deerpark

B A National Park 14 8 20 6 7 post-medieval modern 1

2 26 cropmark 25 28 A Grade II Listed building

1 location and direction 24 of photograph

112100021000 23

21 22 27

0 500m

1:10,000

29 35 Reproduced from the 2015 Ordnance Survey Explorer map with the permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of The Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office c Crown copyright Cotswold Archaeology Ltd 100002109 30 31 Andover 01264 347630 Cirencester 01285 771022 Cotswold Exeter 01392 826185 Archaeology Milton Keynes 01908 564660 w www.cotswoldarchaeology.co.uk e [email protected]

32 PROJECT TITLE Land at Colden Common 34 Winchester, Hampshire 33 FIGURE TITLE Recorded heritage assets

112000020000 DRAWN BY LG PROJECT NO. 770289 FIGURE NO. CHECKED BY LM DATE 29/10/15 APPROVED BY JS SCALE@A3 1:10,000 2

Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey Land at Church Lane, Colden Common, Hampshire

Grid Reference: SU 479 213 May 2014

Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey Land at Manor Farm, Swindon Village

Executive Summary

The land at Church Lane, Colden Common is being promoted for development by Bloombridge Development Partners. The proposals are to convert the agricultural field into a residential development. It is considered that with respect to ecology there are no constraints to the development. With mitigation and enhancements the scheme is entirely deliverable.

The proposed development site comprises of managed pasture land with occasional small patches of scrub and tall ruderals. The scrub and ruderals on site are kept back due to the active cutting and grazing regime on site. The site has hedgerows with scattered mature trees on the boundaries of the site. The hedgerows on site have active management with several showing signs of a recent cut.

Habitats on the site are considered to be of limited ecological value and the presence of protected species is negligible. The nature of the proposed development (i.e. converting agricultural land into a residential), its location are all factors which will combine to result in no adverse impacts upon surrounding habitats, protected species and wildlife in general. Mature trees on the boundary of the site have been identified to have bat roosting features, however with sympathetic landscaping proposals and lighting scheme it is not thought that any potential bat roosts will be impacted. The site has notable animal paths within the eastern and western hedgerow boundaries; it is recommended that a wildlife corridor is put in place around the site to allow for the continuation of the site for traversing wildlife. With targeted recommendations to enhance biodiversity, the development of the site is likely to increase its ecological value and provide net gains to biodiversity in accordance with chapter 11 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (DfCLG, 2012) and relevant wildlife legislation. Enhancement proposed include woodland planting within the southern boundary of the site, a wildlife buffer around the hedgerow boundaries on site, and a community orchard within the northern boundary of the site.

The following precautionary methods are recommended:

 Site clearance to be undertaken outside the bird nesting season (March to the end of August) or immediately after an ecologist has confirmed the absence of active nests;

 The site is to continue to have active management to the grassland;

 All mature trees on the site boundaries that are scheduled for retention under the development proposals should be protected during construction following BS5387:12 (Trees in relation to design, demolition and construction – Recommendations); Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey Land at Manor Farm, Swindon Village

 Mature trees on the boundaries of the site have been identified as having bat roosting features, should proposals require any works on identified trees, then further echolocation surveys will be required to determine if the tree(s) support a bat roost;

 Two small log piles have been identified on site, located within the northern boundary of the site; it is recommended that these areas are cleared with an ecologist present. Should any individuals be found they will be relocated to a suitable area identified directly off site;

 A small section of hedge is proposed to be removed within the northern section of the site, the hedge must have careful checking and clearing with the ecologist on site during the works;

 No construction materials are to be stored adjacent to the hedgerow areas.

Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey Land at Manor Farm, Swindon Village

Contents

1.0 Introduction and Aims 1 2.0 Methods 2 3.0 Constraints 2 4.0 Results 2 5.0 Impact Assessment and Recommendations 7 6.0 Conclusions 14 7.0 References 16

Appendices

Appendix I: Phase 1 Habitat Map Appendix II: Statutory Designated Sites within 2km of the Proposed Development Appendix III: Recommended Wildlife Friendly and Native Plant Species Appendix IV: Photos of the Site Appendix V: Recommended Bird and Bat Boxes Appendix VI: Legislation

Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey Land at Manor Farm, Swindon Village

1.0 Introduction and Aims

1.1 Sedgehill Ecology Services was commissioned by Bloombridge Development Partners to undertake an extended phase 1 habitat survey of land at Church Lane, Colden Common (Grid ref: SU 479 213). The development proposals for the site are to convert the agricultural land into residential plots.

1.2 The objectives of this extended phase 1 survey were to:

• Map the main ecological features within the site and compile a plant species list for each habitat type;

• make an initial assessment of the presence or likely absence of species of conservation concern;

• identify any legal and planning policy constraints relevant to nature conservation which may affect the development;

• determine any potential further ecological issue;

• determine the need for further surveys and mitigation;

 make recommendations for minimising impacts on biodiversity and providing net gains in biodiversity, where possible, in accordance with Chapter 11: Conserving and Enhancing the Natural Environment, of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (DfCLG,2012).

1.3 The site survey was undertaken by suitably qualified ecologist Patricia Vaux MSc MCIEEM on the 16th May 2014. The weather conditions were dry and 20% overcast.

1

Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey Land at Manor Farm, Swindon Village

2.0 Methodology

Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey

2.1 The field survey comprised of an extended Phase 1 survey (JNCC, 2010) of the proposed development site. This is a standard technique for obtaining baseline ecological information for areas of land, including proposed development sites.

2.4 Incidental records of fauna were also made during the survey and the habitats identified were evaluated for their potential to support legally protected species and other species of conservation concern.

2.5 Sedgehill Ecology Services undertook an internet based search for records of species of conservation concern within the study area and up to 2km from its boundary using the National Biodiversity Gateway (NBN). This data search informed the survey, however due to copyrights the results cannot be reproduced within this report.

3.0 Constraints

3.1 The survey was undertaken during a sub-optimal period in the year for botanical surveys and some short-lived annual species may not have been identified. However, it is considered that no rare, threatened or invasive plant species are present on the site and therefore the timing of the survey does not significantly impact upon the findings detailed in this report.

4.0 Results

Extended Phase 1 Survey

4.1 The phase 1 habitat map of the site is shown within Appendix I. A plan in Appendix II shows the locations of statutory designated sites within 2km of the site.

2

Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey Land at Manor Farm, Swindon Village

Figure 1: Google Image with Redline Boundary

4.2 The site is an irregular shaped rectangular plot covering an area of approximately 8 ha. The site is used for pasture land and grazing and as such the grassland areas are mostly uniform across the site. Managed species rich native hedgerows are located on the boundaries of the site. Scattered trees are within the northern, eastern and western sections of the site. Given the active management on site, there are minimal areas of scrub and ruderals on site. The wider landscape is characterised further residential land to the north and east of the site, and further agricultural land to the south and west of the site.

4.3 Ponds are present within a 500m radius of the site; these are located east of the site. The nearest watercourse is Itchen which is located 1000 metres west of the site.

4.4 There are four broad habitat types found within the site and on the site boundaries, these are:

 Poor Semi-Improved Grassland  Scrub  Tall Ruderals  Hedgerows and Trees

4.5 Each habitat type is described below and their relative distribution is shown on the plan within Appendix I.

3

Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey Land at Manor Farm, Swindon Village

Poor Semi-Improved Grassland

4.6 The main habitat type on the site is Poor Semi-Improved grassland. The sward within the grassland at the time of the survey was actively managed and averaged 20 cm in height. The grassland fields are dominated by grass species including, perennial rye grass Lolium perenne,, annual meadow grass Poa annua and common bent Agrostis capillaries, Yorkshire fog Holcus lanatus, timothy Phleum pratense and occasional tussocks of cock’s foot Dactylis glomerata. Occasional forb species include, dandelion Tarraxacum agg., buttercup Ranunculus sp., thistle Cirsium sp and geranium.

Scattered Scrub and Tall Ruderals

4.7 Pockets of scattered scrub are located within the boundaries section of the site. These are patchy due to the active management from grazing cattle and regular hay cuts on site. Most hedgerow boundaries have less than 0.5 metres of ruderals or scrub that extend into the grassland.

A small patch of scrub is located within the north-western boundary of the site and consists of blackthorn Prunus spinosa saplings.

Ruderal and scrub species include: nettle Urtica dioica, bramble Rubus fruticosus ag, bracken Pteridium aquilinum, dock, cock’s foot, stitchwort Stellaria sp, sticky weed Gallium aparine, geranium, cow parsley Anthriscus sylvestris, thistle, cuckoo flower Cardamine pratensis, ground ivy Glechoma hederacea and ivy Hedera helix.

Hedgerows and Trees

4.8 Managed species-rich hedgerows with occasional mature trees are located along the site boundaries. Figure 2 and Table 1 below details the hedgerow characteristics and species on site.

4

Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey Land at Manor Farm, Swindon Village

Figure 2: Layout of hedgerows on site

5

Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey Land at Manor Farm, Swindon Village

Table 1: Hedgerow Characteristics on Site

Hedge Height and reference Width (m) Species Features

Ash, Field Maple, Hawthorn, blackthorn and managed hedgerow, 4 H 1 2 m x 1.5m oak mature oak trees

ash, bramble, blackthorn, elder, field managed hedgerow, 3 maple, hazel mature ash trees and 1 H 2 1.5 m x 1 m and oak mature oak

ash, bramble, gappy and managed H 3 1 m x 1 m dogrose hedgerow

mostly bramble with blackthorn, gappy and managed H 4 1 m x 1 m hawthorn, ash hedgerow

mostly blackthorn with field maple, H 5 2 m x 1m hawthorn managed hedgerow

ash, blackthorn, gappy and managed bramble, ash, hedgerow, five mature H 6 1.5 m x 1 m field maple oaks

blackthorn, field dry ditch with mostly maple, dogrose, nettles and sticky hazel, hawthorn, weed, managed H 7 2m x 1.5 m oak and bramble hedgerow

6

Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey Land at Manor Farm, Swindon Village

5.0 Impact Assessment and Recommendations

Statutory Sites

5.1 Three statutory designated sites lie within 2km of the proposed development. The site is within 1 kilometre of South Downs Park. The River Itchen (SSSI) and River Itchen Special Areas of Conservation (SAC) are located approximately 1000m north and west of the site. The River Itchen SSSI and SAC and is noted for its Annex I habitats: Water courses of plain to montane levels with the Ranunculion fluitantis and Callitricho-Batrachion vegetation. The SAC is also noted for Annex II species including, southern damselfly, bullhead, salmon, brook lamprey, white clawed crayfish and otter.

5.2 The development of the site will not impact upon the nature conservation status of the National Park, SAC and SSSI due to the nature of the proposals (i.e. converting a pasture land into residential plots) the distance between them (1 – 1.5km) and the intervening habitats (farmland, commercial land and major roads). The following are identified as possible risks to the adjacent SSSI/SAC:

• Siltation • Nutrient enrichment • Toxic contamination • Physical changes • Drainage • Disturbance • Groundwater flows

The site will need to ensure that erosion guards are in place on the southern, northern and western sides of the site to ensure that no substrate enters the adjacent landscape. Precautionary measures are to be in place with the fuelling of construction vehicles done with care and ensure that any spills on site are reported and cleared immediately. The site will need to maintain a vegetative buffer on the northern and western boundary of the site. The site is to have no run off into the adjacent landscape and it is proposed that the site has a reed bed or pond on site for the site’s run off and discharge. All drainage proposals will need to be reviewed with all risks identified and mitigated for. The site will have no fertilisers or insecticides used for the proposed landscaping proposals. The site has potential to enhance areas with further native planting and strengthening of the hedgerow boundaries.

Protected Habitats

5.3 Hedgerows are identified as a priority habitat in Hampshire in the Biodiversity Action Plan for Hampshire. The purpose of this Action Plan is to secure the conservation and positive management of hedgerows in Hampshire and to apply the aims of the UK Hedgerows Habitat 7

Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey Land at Manor Farm, Swindon Village

Action Plan at the local level. The hedgerows along the site boundaries are classified as ‘important’ under the Hedgerow Regulations (1997) due to the connectivity of the hedgerows and the species diversity displayed. The hedgerows on site have scope for improvement with filling in of gaps with native species and improvement of the hedgerows through rotational cuts on a 2 to 3 year cycle.

5.4 All trees on and adjacent to the site that are scheduled for retention under the development proposals should be protected during the demolition and construction phases of the development following BS5387:12 (Trees in relation to design, demolition and construction – Recommendations).

Protected Species

Plants

5.5 All plant species recorded on the site are common and widespread, and it is considered that no rare or threatened plant species are present on the site.

Bats

5.6 All bat species are legally protected under Section 9 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act (1981) (as amended) and Regulation 41 of The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations (2010) making bats a material consideration in the planning process.

5.7 Mature oak and ash trees within the site boundaries exhibited features which could be used by roosting bats (i.e. cracks, holes, lifted bark, aerial deadwood, or cavities). Refer to Target notes: 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 (Appendix I). The site does not have any proposals for tree removal and as such it is not thought that any potential bat roosts will be impacted on. Should the proposals require any tree works including crown lifts, further echolocation surveys on identified potential trees will be required to determine the likely absence or presence of roosting bats.

5.8 The site is classified as ‘medium’ in size under The Bat Conservation Trust Guidelines (Hundt, 2012) and the majority of the site is considered to contain ‘medium’ quality foraging habitat, as it largely comprises of hedgerows and grassland. There is an abundance of ‘medium / high’ quality habitat on site in the form of tree lines and hedgerows. It is possible that the site’s grassland provides some foraging in between active hay cuts. The nature of the proposed development without mitigation could cause interfere with bat dispersal routes. No further surveys are considered necessary.

8

Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey Land at Manor Farm, Swindon Village

5.9 There is scope within the proposed development to enhance the site for bats. This can be achieved through the inclusion of bat boxes on mature boundary trees to provide increased roosting opportunities. Boundary habitats are to be enhanced with further planting of native species and woodland within the southern section of the site to provide further traversing grounds for bats. The planting of flying-insect attracting flowers and shrubs through any landscaping scheme, in particular night-scented species, could also provide enhanced foraging opportunities for bats. Lighting will need to be direct and reduce light spill.

Birds

5.10 The site is characterised by disturbed grassland, and areas of hedges and trees. These habitats are abundant within the adjacent landscape.

5.11 The versatility of most bird species means they can utilise almost any habitats encountered and the sites scrub, hedgerows and trees provide moderate foraging and nesting opportunities for many bird species. The grazed pasture land provides little or no suitable ground nesting sites as these undergo regular disturbance.

5.12 It is considered that an appropriately designed landscaping scheme could enhance the site for nesting and foraging birds and that the development will not significantly affect local bird populations as the majority of the exiting boundary hedgerows and trees on and adjacent to the site will be retained. Furthermore, the planting of new tree, shrub and flower species and the installation of various bird boxes will provide nesting and foraging habitat for a variety of species post-development.

5.13 All breeding birds are protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended). Therefore, if any nesting bird habitat is to be lost or disturbed (i.e. hedgerows and trees) it should be cleared outside of the nesting season, which is generally March to the end of August, or immediately after an ecologist has confirmed active nests are not present.

Badgers

5.14 Badgers Meles meles are legally protected under The Protection of Badgers Act 1992 and as such, are of consideration when applying the principles of the NPPF (DfCLG, 2012). It is a criminal offence to:

• Wilfully kill, injure, or take any badger; • Possess or cruelly ill-treat a badger; • Possess any dead badger or part of one; • Possess or control a living, healthy badger; 9

Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey Land at Manor Farm, Swindon Village

• Intentionally or recklessly damage, destroy or obstruct access to a sett, or disturb a badger whilst it is occupying a sett.

5.15 The site found clear evidence of animal paths (Refer to Appendix I). No active setts were noted on or adjacent to the site. The site had evidence of foraging with digging and snuff marks. Clear paths were found within the eastern and western hedgerow boundaries. As the site proposals will impact on these foraging areas, mitigation will be required. The site will need a clear buffer area around the site to allow for future movement. Prior to works commencing a badger survey will be required to ensure that no new setts are found within the boundaries of the site. Construction site operations should ensure that open trenches are fenced, filled in, or provided with a means of exit so that badgers do not become trapped during nocturnal activities. The site proposals include an orchard area within the north-eastern section of the site, which will provide future foraging grounds for any potential badgers within the area.

Dormice

5.16 Dormice Muscardinus avellanarius are protected under law, primarily by The Wildlife and Countryside Act (1981) (as amended) and regulation 41 of The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations (2010).

5.17 Dormice are arboreal and ideally require a habitat of a diverse range of trees and shrubs, which provide food resources throughout the year. They are generally found to have low population densities across their range due to territory and food requirements (English Nature, 2006).

5.18 The hedgerows on and around the site are considered to be of some suitability for dormice due to a favoured food source species, their arboreal structure (in terms of dormouse suitability) and connectivity to potentially suitable habitat in the wider landscape. It is considered highly likely that dormice are using habitats on or adjacent to the site, however as the site proposals will incorporate a buffer area around the hedges it is not thought that further surveys are necessary. Within the northern section of the site is a small area of hedgerow to be removed for visibility splay, the proposed area is gappy and lacks favour food sources, it is thought with appropriate mitigation including the ecologist on site to assist with the careful clearing of the hedgerow section, the risks of harming any potential dormice is low. The site has scope to enhance the site boundaries for dormice including rotational cutting of hedgerows, filling in gaps with native hedgerow species including hazel and a four metre buffer put in place around the hedgerow boundaries.

10

Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey Land at Manor Farm, Swindon Village

Invertebrates

5.19 The site is unlikely to support significant assemblages of rare or notable invertebrate species. However, habitats on the site do provide some limited habitat for common and widespread species which may in turn act as a food source for birds and bats.

5.20 Considering the regular disturbance by grazing cattle and hay cuts, impacts upon notable invertebrate species or significant populations of widespread species from the proposed development are extremely low. Furthermore, the conversion of the northern and southern site into an orchard and woodland is likely to significantly enhance the site for invertebrates.

5.21 The inclusion of nectar rich plants in any landscaping design, coupled with the installation of ‘insect hotels/bug boxes’ would provide good invertebrate habitat on the site post- development. Night scented plant species such as evening primrose Oenothera sp., honeysuckle Lonicera sp. and jasmine Jasminium officinale would also attract moths in the evening, which would in turn attract foraging bats.

Great Crested Newts

5.22 GCN are legally protected under section 9 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act (1981) (as amended) regulation 41 of The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations (2010) thus making GCN a material consideration of the planning process.

5.23 The majority of the site is considered to be of limited value to foraging and sheltering GCN as it largely comprises of managed grassland. It is thought given the high amount of trampling and grazing on site and the regular management that the fields are of lower potential for shelter sites for great crested newts. It is thought that the hedgerows could provide potential traversing, foraging and shelter sites for great crested newts.

5.24 From studying OS maps and aerial photographs (see Figure 1 below), there are three ponds identified within a 500m radius of the site, located within woodland, east of the site. Given the suitable habitats in the immediate areas from this pond the likelihood of newts dispersing through the site is low; however the hedgerows do provide a traversing ground for newts across the landscape. Research suggests that a maximum migratory range has been estimated as 250m from a pond (Franklin, 1993; Oldham and Nicholson, 1986; Jehle, 2000), although one study has estimated this range to be only approximately 150m (Jehle and Arntzen, 2000).

5.25 It is considered that GCN could be within the area, however through precautionary measures it is not thought that any potential newts will be impacted on. The site is to continue to have

11

Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey Land at Manor Farm, Swindon Village

active hay cuts and grazing of livestock on site. The hedgerows on site will remain unaffected by the development. It is recommended that a buffer boundary area of four to five metres is placed around the hedgerows on site, which would be achieved through retention/enhancement of existing field margins. The site can incorporate further shelter sites through log piles and hibernacula within the southern boundaries of the site. The planting of woodland and an orchard within the northern and southern section of the site will create additional shelter and foraging sites for any potential newts within the wider landscape.

Reptiles

5.26 The site has a limited amount of mosaic of habitats that provide foraging and shelter habitat for reptiles and the site has potential basking spots, particularly the hedgerows bases with encroaching vegetation. The hedgerow bases on the boundaries could be utilised by foraging and sheltering reptiles and could also act as dispersal corridors for reptiles moving through the landscape. Two log piles were identified within the northern section of the site (Target note 1, 2, Appendix I).

5.27 It is considered that the habitats on the site are potentially suitable to provide some sub- optimal habitat for grass snakes and slow worms. These species of reptiles are primarily legally protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) making it an offence to:

 Intentionally, or recklessly, kill or injure any of the above species;  and/or; Sell, or attempt to sell, any part of the species, alive or dead.

5.28 Although the site provides some potentially suitable habitat for reptiles it is considered that with suitable mitigation in place a presence or likely absence reptile survey is not considered necessary. Certain management and clearance techniques can be used to ensure reptiles are not recklessly injured or killed. Firstly, a buffer zone of 4- 5 metres from the boundaries are to be put in place. On site the areas of grassland should continue to be regularly grazed and mown to ensure a short height is maintained which reduces the likelihood of reptiles using these areas. Secondly, any piles of debris such as log piles, on the site should be hand searched by an ecologist during the reptile active period (March to October) before they are cleared. If any reptiles are found, they can be safely relocated to the eastern offsite boundary. The site can be enhanced for reptiles by creating reptile hibernacula and areas of less frequently managed southern boundary of the site.

12

Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey Land at Manor Farm, Swindon Village

Other Terrestrial Mammals

5.29 The site’s hedgerows had potential for hedgehogs. The hedgerow areas provide areas of foraging and shelter sites for this species. The grassland could be used by hares but the grassland has limited cover and has regular disturbance by cattle.

5.30 The proposals do not have major hedgerow clearance. The northern section will have precautionary measures in place to ensure that care is taken to avoid harming of any potential individuals within the areas. Works on or adjacent to these hedgerow areas will require precautionary measures. No equipment is to be stored on or adjacent to these areas. It is recommended that a buffer of 4-5 metres is left around the hedgerow boundaries. The hedgerows on site should have rotational cutting and done on a 2-3 year basis. Potential hedgehogs will benefit from the enhancement of hedgerows on site.

13

Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey Land at Manor Farm, Swindon Village

6.0 Conclusions

6.1 Habitats on the site are considered to be of some ecological value and the site has confirmed presence of foraging badgers and also mature boundary trees with bat roosting potential. The nature of the proposed development (i.e. converting grazed agricultural land into residential), and its location (edge of existing residential areas) are all factors which will combine to result in little to no adverse impacts upon surrounding habitats, protected species and wildlife in general. A wildlife corridor in place around the site will ensure that movement of badgers and foraging areas for any potential badgers remains in place on site. The site has some potential for reptiles and newts but given the regular management and disturbance on site it is not thought that an established population is on grassland areas of the site, a buffer is recommended around the boundaries of the site. The hedgerows have potential for dormice and it is recommended that these are left with a buffer in place around the hedgerows. The mature trees have no proposed tree works and through a sympathetic landscape layout and lighting scheme it is not thought that any potential bat roosts will be impacted. As the site is within 1000 metres of River Itchen SSSI and SAC, precautionary measures and enhancements have been recommended with a buffer in place on the southern, northern and western section of the site.

The following precautionary methods are recommended:

 Site clearance to be undertaken outside the bird nesting season (March to the end of August) or immediately after an ecologist has confirmed the absence of active nests;

 The site is to continue to have active management to the grassland;

 All mature trees on the site boundaries that are scheduled for retention under the development proposals should be protected during construction following BS5387:12 (Trees in relation to design, demolition and construction – Recommendations);

 Mature trees on the boundaries of the site have been identified as having bat roosting features, should proposals require any works on identified trees, then further echolocation surveys will be required to determine if the tree(s) support a bat roost;

 Two log piles have been identified on site, located within the northern boundary of the site; it is recommended that these areas are cleared with an ecologist present.

14

Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey Land at Manor Farm, Swindon Village

Should individuals be found they will be relocated to a suitable area identified directly off site;

 A small section of hedge is proposed to be removed within the northern section of the site, the hedge must have careful checking and clearing with the ecologist on site during the works;

 No construction materials are to be stored adjacent to the hedgerow areas.

6.2 It is considered that any potential adverse impacts from the proposed development upon specific protected species will be able to be wholly mitigated for through and ecologically lead design process. In addition, a sensitive landscape design could provide enhancements to the habitats on and adjacent to the site which in turn will benefit multiple species and biodiversity in general, in accordance with chapter 11 of the NPPF (DfCLG, 2012). Proposed enhancements include:

 Nesting bird and bat boxes

 Proposed orchard and woodland within the northern and southern section of the site

 Log Piles within the boundaries of the site

 Wildlife friendly Planting Scheme to encourage diversity of invertebrates on site

 Buffer in place around the hedgerow boundaries of the site to provide additional habitat and shelter sites and a wildlife corridor

15

Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey Land at Manor Farm, Swindon Village

7.0 References

ARG UK (2010). Advice Note 5, Great Crested Newt Habitat Suitability Index. Amphibian and Reptile Group UK.

Department for Communities and Local Government (2012). National Planning Policy Framework. www.communities.gov.uk

Department for Communities and Local Government (2012). National Planning Policy Framework. London: HMSO, pp. 25-29.

English Nature (2001). Great crested newt mitigation guidelines. English Nature, Peterborough.

English Nature (2006). The Dormouse Conservation Handbook 2nd Edition. English Nature, Peterborough.

Franklin. P.S. (1993). The migratory ecology and terrestrial habitat preferences of the great crested newt (Triturus cristatus) at Little Wittenham Nature Reserve. De Montford University unpublished thesis.

Froglife (1999). Reptile Survey: An introduction to planning, conducting and interpreting surveys for snake and lizard conservation. Froglife Advice Sheet 10. Froglife, Peterborough.

Gent, A.H., & Gibson S.D. (1998). Herpetofauna workers’ manual. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough.

Gunnell, K., Grant, G. and Williams, C. (2012). Landscape and Urban Design for Bats and Biodiversity, Bat Conservation Trust.

Hundt (2012). Bat Surveys-Good Practice Guidelines 2nd Edition. Bat Conservation Trust, London.

Jehle. R. (2000). The terrestrial summer habitat of radio-tracked great crested newts (Triturus cristatus) and marbled newts (T. marmoratus). Herpetological Journal, 10, pp.137- 142.

Jehle. R. & Arntzen. J.W. (2000). Post-breeding migrations of newts with contrasting ecological requirements. J. Zool., Lond., 251, pp. 297-306.

JNCC (2010) Handbook for Phase 1 habitat survey- A technique for environmental audit. ISBN 0 86139 636 7.

Oldham. R.S. & Nicholson. M. (1986). Status and ecology of the warty newt Triturus cristatus. Report to the Nature Conservancy Council (Contract HF 3/05/123), Peterborough.

Stace, C. A. (1997). New Flora of the British Isles, 2nd Edition. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.

16

Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey Land at Manor Farm, Swindon Village

Appendix I: Phase 1 Habitat Map

17

Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey Land at Manor Farm, Swindon Village

Appendix II: Statutory Designated Sites within 2km of the Proposed Development

18

Magic Map

Legend Local Nature R eserves (England)

Moorland Line (England) National Nature Reserves (England) National Nature Reserves (Scotland) National Nature Reserves (Wales)

National Parks (England)

National Parks: Lake District and Yorkshire Dales Variation Orders 2012 - subject to confirmation (England) Ramsar Sites (England)

Ramsar Sites (Scotland)

Ramsar Sites (Wales)

Favourable Condition

Unfavourable Recovering

Unfavourable no change

Unfavourable Declining

Part D estroyed

Destroyed

Not Assessed

Sites of Special Scientific Interest (England) Sites of Special Scientific Interest (Scotland) Sites of Special Scientific Interest (Wales) Special Areas of Conservation (England) Special Areas of Conservation (Scotland) Special Areas of Conservation (Wales) Special Protection Areas (England) Special Protection Areas (Scotland)

Special Protection Areas (Wales)

Biosphere Reserves (England)

Scheduled Monuments (England) - points Buffer Z one

World Heritage Site

Registered Battlefields

Projection = OSGB36 xmin = 443000 ymin = 119300 xmax = 451400 ymax = 124000 Map produced by MAGIC on 4 December, 2014. Copyright resides with the data suppliers and the map must not be reproduced without their permission. Some information in MAGIC is a snapshot of the information (c) Crown Copyright and database rights 2014. Ordnance Survey 100022861. that is being maintained or continually updated by the originating organisation. Please refer to the metadata for details as information may be illustrative or representative rather than definitive at this stage. Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey Land at Manor Farm, Swindon Village

Appendix III: Recommended Wildlife Friendly and Native Plant Species

Wildlife Friendly / Native species

Large Trees Ash Fraxinus excelsior Beech Fagus sylvatica Elm Ulmus procera Oaks Quercus robur and Q. petraea Small-leaved lime Tilia cordata White willow Salix alba Wild cherry Prunus avium

Medium/Small Trees Alder Alnus glutinosa Aspen Populus tremula Crab apple Malus sylvestris Field maple Acer campestre Holly Ilex aquifolium Rowan Sorbus aucuparia Silver birch Betula pendula Yew Taxus baccata

Native Shrubs Blackthorn Prunus spinosa Dog wood Cornus sanguinea Elder Sambucus nigra Guelder rose Viburnum opulus Hawthorn Crataegus monogyna Hazel Corylus avellana

Plants for underneath trees or shady areas Archangel Lamiastrum galeobdolon Betony Stachys officinalis Bluebell Hyacinthoides non-scriptus Bugle Ajuga reptans Foxglove Digitalis purpurea Ground ivy Glechoma hederacea Lily of the valley Convallaria majalis Lords-and ladies/cuckoopint Arum maculatum Nettle-leaved bellflower Campanula trachelium Primrose Primula vulgaris Sweet violet Viola odorata Wild daffodil Narcissus pseudonarcissus Wood avens Geum urbanum

Climbers Bramble Rubus fruticosus Dog rose Rosa canina Field rose Rosa arvensis Ivy Hedera helix

19

Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey Land at Manor Farm, Swindon Village

Honeysuckle Lonicera periclymenum Wild privet Ligustrum vulgare

Exotic shrubs for wildlife value Serviceberry Amelanchier canadensis Butterfly bush Buddleja davidii Japanese quince Chaenomeles japonica Creeping cotoneaster Cotoneaster frigidus Variegated cotoneaster Cotoneaster horizontalis Mahonia Mahonia spp. Mock orange Philadelphus spp. Firethorn Pyracantha coccinea Lilac Syringa vulgaris Bodant viburnum Viburnum bodnantense Laurustinus Viburnum tinus

20

Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey Land at Manor Farm, Swindon Village

Appendix IV: Photos of the Site

Grassland on site

Northern section of site where proposed hedge removal for visibility splay

Oak trees with bat potential in northern hedgerow

Western boundary with mature oaks

21

Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey Land at Manor Farm, Swindon Village

Southern hedgerow with dead tree

Diggings on site

22

Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey Land at Manor Farm, Swindon Village

Appendix V: Recommended Bat and Bird Boxes

The Schwegler 2F general purpose bat box (or another manufacturer’s equivalent) would be suitable for this site. It can be mounted on mature trees around the boundaries of the site. It should be installed at a height above two metres and face between south-east and south-west.

The Schwegler 1B hole nest box (with both 26mm and 32mm openings) would provide nesting habitat for a wide variety of small birds on the site. These could also be installed on trees around the site boundaries.

Schwegler 2F bat box Schwegler 1B bird box

23

Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey Land at Manor Farm, Swindon Village

Appendix VI: Legislation

This section details the legislation relevant to the protection of species and habitats. It also details the relevant policies within national, regional, and local planning policy.

NPPF

The National Planning Policy Framework in summary requires that the planning system should aim to contribute and enhance the natural and local environment. The aims are to: protect and enhance valued landscapes as well as geological conservation interests and soils; recognising the wider benefits of ecosystem services; and minimising impacts on biodiversity and providing net gains in biodiversity where possible.

UK BAP The UK Biodiversity Action Plan was published in 1994 in response to the Biodiversity Convention. The plan aims to enhance biological diversity of the UK through implementation of the Habitat Action Plans (HAPs) and Species Action Plans (SAPs), written for priority habitats and species.

Biodiversity Laws Statutory protection is afforded to certain wild habitats and species through European Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and wild fauna and flora (the ‘Habitats Directive)’. This has been adopted into UK legislation through the provisions of the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations, 2010. At the national level protection is found in Wildlife and Countryside Act (WCA 1981; as amended) and it is designed to protect species and habitats considered to be of principal importance to safeguard for the purpose of conserving biodiversity.

Under Regulation 41 it is an offence to deliberately capture or kill a wild animal of a European protected species, deliberately disturb any such animal and to damage or destroy a breeding site or resting site. Since August 2007 amendments to the Conservation (Natural Habitats) Regulations 1994 have changed the term 'deliberately disturb' such that it is an offence if the species are disturbed in such a way that it is likely to significantly affect the colonies ability to survive, breed or rear their young; or affect the local distribution or abundance of that species.

The WCA 1981 as amended is the principle mechanism for the statutory protection of wild flora and fauna in the United Kingdom. Reptiles, including slow worms and grass snakes, are protected under part of Schedule 9(1) of the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) against intentional killing and injuring. Nesting birds are protected under the WCA 1981 (as amended) which makes it an

24

Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey Land at Manor Farm, Swindon Village offence to intentionally kill, injure or take any wild bird or take, damage or destroy its nest whilst in use or being built, or take or destroy its eggs.

All species of bats are strictly protected through UK and European regulations. Bats have been placed on protected lists due to the overall steady decline of species over the last century. They are protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended), under which bats are protected from intentional or reckless disturbance. Additional protection for all bat species is provided under Schedule 2 of The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010. Licences are needed if the disturbance is a significant effect on the bat colony and would otherwise be an offence. Licences are granted after strict following of Section 44 under the Habitat Regulations, following the submission of a licence application to Natural England. Licences permit the work that is otherwise considered to be an offence under the legislation.

Badgers are protected under Badger Protection Act 1992 and under Schedule 6 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended); badgers are classified as a species of conservation concern under the UK Biodiversity Action Plan and listed under Appendix III of the Bern Convention.

The dormouse is protected under EC Directive 92/43/EEC as transposed into UK law under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010. This makes it an offense for any one without an appropriate licence to: ‘Capture or kill a dormouse; disturb a dormouse; damage or destroy a breeding site or resting place; or transport, sell or exchange a live or dead dormouse or any part of a dormouse.’ The dormouse is afforded full protection under Section 5 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended). It is illegal to: ‘Deliberately or recklessly kill, injure or disturb a dormouse; or deliberately or recklessly damage, destroy or obstruct access to a dormouse breeding site or resting place.’

25