Bramley Parish Council has objected to the planning application for 20 houses at Land North of Sherfield Road, 23/03051/FUL. More details can be found on the planning portal on the Basingstoke & Deane Borough Council website.
Bramley PC’s objection is below – for the full document, please follow this link.
- Planning policies with which the application does not comply
SS6 New Housing in the countryside (section 3.1 page 3)
- This Proposal is against B&D local plan SS6 referring to housing in the countryside
CN1 affordable housing (section 3.2 page 3)
- BDBC Housing Strategy Manager does not support the application as the provision of affordable homes is not reflective of the whole site as proposals only relate to the provision of 1 and 2 bed dwellings and therefore does not accord with the localised need
CN6 Infrastructure (section 3.3 page 3)
- The Infrastructure in Bramley cannot satisfactorily support existing residents never mind more residents.
- No thought appears to have been given to linking with the paths in and around Centenary fields which could give walking / cycling access to the school and wider village
CN8 Community, Leisure and Cultural Facilities (section 3.4 page 3)
- We note that there has been no discussion with Parish or Ward councilors concerning provision and the developer is merely offering potential financial contributions
CN9 Transport (section 3.5 page 3)
- The Transport assessment conflicts with locally observed and quantified data.
EM1 landscape (section 3.6 page 4)
- Yet more loss of open countryside to the northern edge of Bramley and considerable impact on the setting of the Conservation Area.
EM4 Biodiversity, Geodiversity and Nature Conservation (section 3.7 page 4)
- Diverse range of wildlife will be displaced and erosion of the green corridor network across Bramley. Owls, newts, field mice and bats are some of the protected species present
EM7 Managing flood risk (section 3.8 page 4)
- Appendix G, flood mapping is a mirror image map, and therefore not helpful.
- Numerous ongoing sewage and flooding issues identified in the area of this proposal.
EM10 Delivering High Quality Development (section 3.9 page 5)
- The design and materials to be used are not in keeping with the
EM11 Historic Environment (section 3.10 page 5)
- There is a significant impact on the Views into and out of Bramley Green. The Conservation Area report of 1983 shows the Vista Views as does the Neighbourhood Plan these being views out of and into the Bramley Green area.
Policies – Bramley Neighbourhood Plan (section 4 page 6)
- Policy H1 – outside the settlement policy boundary
- Policy H2 – Provision of housing to meet local needs
- Policy CVA2 – not complied with as Bramley Parish Council has not been consulted
- Policy D1 – not complied with as Vista and important rural views are compromised.
- Policy T1 – improving footpath and cycle network
- Policy T2 – not in accord concerning road safety
- Policy RE1 – this proposal is on a flood plain and it seems short sighted to continue to build on such sites.
- Local plan update 2024 reg.18 consultation
The Basingstoke & Deane Borough Council Draft Local Plan (out for consultation) states that 55 new dwellings for the period 2021 – 2040 to be built in Bramley, and that this allocation is already satisfied by the Stocks Farm Development (140 dwellings).
References
Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan Update 2021-2040
Draft for Regulation 18 Consultation
Page 131 of 294
Policy SPS6: Neighbourhood Planning:
Bramley – Policy requirement at 2021 baseline: 55
Update since 2021: Permission for 140 homes at Stocks Farm
Outstanding requirement at April 2023: 0
Page 66 of the BDBC Integrated Impact Assessment document (Dec 2022)
Appendix I – Assessment of options for other settlements (pages 72-91)
From Appendix 4: Site Selection Report to inform Regulation 18 consultation (2023) – Page 183
‘A number of sites have been promoted at Bramley which are within FZ1 and generally at low level risk of flooding from other sources: However, given the recent approval for a significant number of new dwellings in Bramley, there is proposed to be no housing requirement in Bramley for the LPU period.’
- Comments in full
3.1 SS6 New Housing in the countryside
3.2 CN1 affordable housing
BDBC Housing Strategy Manager does not support the application as the provision of affordable homes is not reflective of the whole site. Proposals only relate to the provision of 1 and 2 bed dwellings and therefore does not accord with the localised need where a quarter of those registered want 3, 4 and 5 bedroom houses. The provision of the 1 and 2 bed houses is completely out of keeping with the site, having long blocks, supposedly like farm buildings; this is completely wrong. With the proposed 140 houses on Stocks Farm, which is going to provide 56 such homes, this requirement is met. Why have such homes on such a small site which almost outweighs the privately owned homes?
3.3 CN6 Infrastructure
The infrastructure in Bramley cannot satisfactorily support existing residents, never mind more. The School is at capacity, the surgery is at capacity with no further land available to expand and a shortage of Doctors, the shop is not capable of supplying the village as it stands with the service it deserves and it is situated 100 metres from the railway crossing with insufficient parking available. Cars park half on half off the pavement causing queues of traffic in both directions of the C32 (Sherfield Road), with cars standing on the crossing waiting for an outlet. The railway, whilst it gives transport capability to some of the community, divides the village with the barrier being down for local trains, goods trains travelling up north from Southampton and cross country trains. The downtime of the barrier can amount up to 40 minutes per hour with traffic queuing both sides, at times a quarter to half mile in both directions. Adding more cars will not help the unsatisfactory situation. The included transport assessment includes fantasy figures for the queuing at the level crossing and the traffic speed along the C32. It also references pedestrian refuge islands along the site frontage without mentioning that these are barely useable especially if pushing a pram/pushchair.
3.4 CN8 Community, Leisure and Cultural Facilities
We note that there has been no discussion with Parish or Ward councilors concerning provision and the developer is merely offering potential financial contributions
3.5 CN9 Transport
The comments by the Transport Officer of BDBC (Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council) says that the C32 at the access to the site is part of the NCN23 National Cycle Route. This cycle route from Reading to Winchester goes nowhere near the entry to this site as the route goes through Bramley via Minchens Lane and Cufaude Lane which are west Bramley.
The site entrance is some 100 metres from the 30mph sign, dropping from 40mph, but is on the bend of the C32, and with the heavy traffic through Bramley this is a dangerous access. The C32 floods opposite the proposed entrance forcing west bound traffic to the wrong side of the road.
We note that many of the included plans seem to show a length of Sherfield Road (C32) within the application boundary. Will this mean that the developer is responsible for the maintenance of the carriageway and footway and more importantly, the drainage to the south of the carriageway?
3.6 EM1 landscape
Yet more loss of open countryside to the northern edge of Bramley and considerable impact on the setting of the Conservation Area.
3.7 EM4 Biodiversity, Geodiversity and Nature Conservation
A diverse range of wildlife will be displaced and there will be further erosion of the green corridor network across Bramley. Owls, newts, field mice and bats are some of the protected species present. Also regularly observed are deer, hares, red kites and buzzards, which will be displaced by this proposed development. The idea that a housing estate will be more biodiverse than farmland with connected hedges and ditches seems somewhat fanciful.
3.8 EM7 Managing flood risk
This application is for 20 houses on arable agricultural land, not a brownfield site as said by Thames Water. This land is used regularly by Green Farm for agricultural purposes.
Thames Water says that there are high groundwater infiltration rates during certain weather conditions. These conditions are becoming more frequent. It is stated that that there is sufficient sewage capacity in the nearby foul water sewer network. It is suggested the connection is made into manhole 1002 near Rose Cottage downstream from the pumping station on the C32. The network from the pumping station to Sherfield is insufficient to take the foul water from the main part of Bramley and foul water has to be stored at the pumping station. The storage capacity is insufficient and back flow of sewage causes flooding in North Row, Strawberry Fields and Centenary Fields. Thames Water has all of this evidence and is looking to upgrade the network from the pumping station to Sherfield. Until the upgrade is complete and the excess capacity analysed during extreme conditions, then there should be (as Thames Water have stated on record) no more building in Bramley. The Stocks Farm development has restrictions applied before it can connect to the main network.
In the Flood Risk Assessment document, para. 5.4, it states that Thames Water has no records of internal sewer flooding AT the site. This is hardly surprising as this is agricultural land. There are however severe problems in the adjoining Centenary Fields housing estate, manholes overflowing and back flow within houses, a NEW HOUSING ESTATE.
Appendix G, flood mapping is a mirror image map, and therefore not helpful. It is supposedly centered on the New Barn in Bordon! This in itself displays the flippant approach by the developer for this application.
3.9 EM10 Delivering High Quality Development
The design and materials to be used are not in keeping with the area. Whilst the boarded houses are supposed to be in keeping with farm buildings signifying a connection with the rural history of the area, they are completely out of character for the area. The Conservation Report states, as does the Character Assessment report of the Bramley Neighbourhood Plan, that the typical traditional building materials are red brick, tile hung facades, painted brick and timber-frame with brick infill, and typical roof coverings are red clay tile. Boarded houses are completely out of character. On a more general note, why no solar panels? Also, the green space needs protection against unauthorized encampments
3.10 EM11 Historic Environment
Bramley Green, which this application borders, outside the settlement policy boundary, is a Conservation Area as dictated by BDBC in 1983. Whilst the Heritage Report goes through the points that have to be observed when building in or near a Conservation Area, it concludes that there is little or no impact on the listed buildings of Green Farm and Rose Cottage, and that whilst there is an impact on the views into and out of the Bramley Green, they are insignificant. The Conservation Report of 1983 shows the Vista Views, as does the Bramley Neighbourhood Plan; these being views out of and into the Bramley Green area. The impact on these views is significant. These views are “Important General views especially of the wider landscape setting” as illustrated by photo 4.8 of the Heritage Report. They make a positive contribution to the Bramley Green area, to its significance as a link to its historical significance as an isolated hamlet and to its historical agricultural history. Any impact on these views is significant and cannot be ignored and lost forever.
- Conflict with policies – Bramley Neighbourhood Plan (NDP)
4.1 Policy H1 – Outside the settlement policy boundary
4.2 Policy H2 – Provision of housing to meet local needs
Bearing in mind that there is permission for 140 dwellings at Stocks Farm which must satisfy local need means this application does not accord with NDP policy H2. It also does not appear to include purpose designed accommodation for older persons. This application appears to be a case of “build it and they will come.”
4.3 Policy CVA2 -Provision of new community facilities.
Not complied with as Bramley PC have not been consulted
4.4 Policy D1 – Protecting, complementing and enhancing the historic and rural setting of Bramley
Not complied with as Vista and Important Rural Views are compromised; specifically Vista 1 and rural landscape views 11, 12, 13, 14 and 16 shown on map 6c on page 44 of the NDP. More black boarded elevations than would be appropriate for character area G especially when viewed from the Conservation Area.
4.5 Policy T1 – Improving footpath and cycle network
No thought appears to have been given to linking with the paths in and around Centenary Fields, which could give walking/cycling access to the school and wider village avoiding narrow pavements adjoining a very busy road
4.6 Policy T2 – Improving road safety in Bramley.
The proposed site access presents a road safety concern as it is on a bend directly opposite a regularly flooded part of the road. This causes westbound traffic to cross into the path of oncoming traffic. The speed limit is only reduced to 30 mph about 100 metres from the proposed access and local speed watch figures demonstrate that 30 mph is not complied with when approaching Farriers Close. In 23 days of Speed Indicator Device deployment during 2023 the 85th percentile was 35 mph with a maximum speed of 72 mph.
The included Transport Assessment includes fantasy figures for the queuing at the level crossing and the traffic speed along the C32. It also references pedestrian refuge islands along the site frontage without mentioning that these are barely usable especially if pushing a pram/pushchair.
4.6 Policy RE1 – Reducing flood risk
This proposal is on a flood plain and, in view of recent flooding events, it seems short sighted to continue to build on such sites. In the Flood Risk Assessment document Para. 5.4, it states that Thames Water has no records of internal sewer flooding AT the site, hardly surprising as it is a field. However there are severe problems in the adjoining Centenary Fields.
Appendix E in FRA (2) includes a letter from Nicholas Short of Thames Water in which he states the location is a brown field site. NO. It is an agricultural field. One wonders if they were looking at the correct site. The mapping used does not show Centenary Fields which does have problems.
Appendix G shows a map in mirror image supposedly centred on The New Barn Bordon. This shows, yet again, the slap dash attitude to preparing this application.
- General comment
- On a more general note why are there no Solar Panels to help prevent yet more farm land being used?
- Bramley Parish Council would like to see the green space protected against unauthorised encampments.
- The lack of 5 year land availability is always the developers excuse, and contribution to the housing shortage of the Borough, but for 20 houses and the loss of so much as regards history, is it worth it?
- Many of these objections are included in the Parish Council’s Infrastructure and Housing assessment Oct 2019 https://bramley-pc.gov.uk/planning-applications/bramley-infrastructure-report-october-2019/
- This application has to be refused. It is not giving any benefits to the community of Bramley, it is contributing an insignificant number of houses to the Borough Council shortfall, and Bramley does not have the infrastructure to support the It is against Policy H1 of the NDP, against Policy H2 of the NDP and not in accord with Policies T1 and T2 concerning road safety. It will have a significant impact on the rural setting of Bramley Green. The sole beneficiary here is the developer.
- Finally, to plagiarise the MP for Doncaster
BRAMLEY IS FULL