Likely sustainability effects
Havant Core Strategy Issues and Options
Likely Implications for Sustainable Development
Key Issue – Sustainable Development
Information on Sustainable Development for the Borough is
contained within pages 8-12 of the Issues and Options Paper. It
also directly relates to Issues I and J and Objectives 15, 16 and
17 of the draft Sustainability Appraisal framework.
|
Questions 1&2
|
Likely Positive Impacts
|
Likely Negative Impacts
|
Uncertain Impacts
|
|
The Core Strategy should require all new
development to provide at least 10% of their energy needs from
renewable sources
|
- Reduction in demand for energy with attendant falls in carbon
emissions
- Reduction in dependency on imported energy supplies
- Residential development would reduce fuel poverty in low income
households
- Support business competitiveness through reliable and
affordable energy
- Will promote research, investment and employment in the
production and fitting of new technologies
|
- Potential cost implications may make regeneration of marginal
sites uneconomic.
- Visual impact in sensitive sites – conservation areas and
listed buildings will be damaged if there are no sympathetic
solutions
|
|
|
The Core Strategy should require high levels of energy
efficient measures in all new development
|
- Reduction in demand for energy with attendant falls in carbon
emissions
- Reduction in dependency on imported energy supplies
- Residential development would reduce fuel poverty in low income
households
- Support business competitiveness through reliable and
affordable energy
- Will promote research, investment and employment in the
production and fitting of new technologies
|
- Potential cost implications may make regeneration of marginal
sites uneconomic.
|
- Visual impact in sensitive sites – conservation areas and
listed buildings may be damaged if there are no sympathetic
solutions
|
|
The Core Strategy should promote the development of a
renewable/sustainable energy plant in the Borough. (e.g. arge wind
turbine or biomass woodchip burner)
|
- Reduction in demand for fossil fuels with attendant falls in
carbon emissions
- Will enhance the image of the Borough and promote other
sustainable infrastructure.
- Will promote research, investment and employment in the
production and fitting of new technologies
|
- Wind turbine has potential visual impact in sensitive
areas.
- Location of plant may make adjoining areas less attractive to
private investors.
|
- Possible disturbance to nature conservation sites.
|
|
The Core Strategy should allow the addition of sustainable
energy technologies to existing buildings
|
- Reduction in demand for fossil fuels with attendant falls in
carbon emissions
- Residential development would reduce fuel poverty in low income
households
- Will promote research, investment and employment in the
production and fitting of new technologies
|
- Visual impact in sensitive sites – conservation areas and
listed buildings will be damaged if there are no sympathetic
solutions
|
|
|
The Core Strategy should require water efficiency measures in
all new development
|
- Reduction in demand for water
- Will promote research, investment and employment in the
production and fitting of new technologies
|
- Potential cost implications may make regeneration of marginal
sites uneconomic.
- Appearance of listed buildings will be damaged if there are no
sympathetic solutions
|
|
|
The Core Strategy should promote the ‘waste hierarchy’. This
means reducing the amount of waste we produce in the first place,
then to reuse, recycle and recover as much value from the materials
before they are disposed of
|
- Reduction in the use of landfill
- Reduction in the use of carbon fuels in the production of new
goods
- Investment
- Will support new sources of employment in the recycling
industry.
|
- Visual impact – some recycling facilities can be
unsightly.
|
|
|
The Core Strategy should include a policy relating to
sustainable design and construction to minimise waste
production.
|
- Reduction in demand for energy with attendant falls in carbon
emissions
- Sustainable design in residential development would reduce fuel
poverty in low income households
- Will promote research and investment into sustainable
construction techniques
|
- Potential cost implications may make regeneration of marginal
sites uneconomic.
- Other important urban design factors such as local character,
legibility and natural surveillance may suffer
|
|
|
The Core Strategy should promote more local recycling
points
|
- Promoting recycling will reduce the amount of waste disposed of
in landfill.
- Reduction in the use of carbon fuels in the production of new
goods
- Will support new sources of employment in the recycling
industry.
- Will reduce the distance travelled to dispose of
recyclables
|
- Visual impact – some recycling facilities can be
unsightly.
|
|
Key Issue – Local Economy
Information on the local economy is contained within pages
13-18 of the Issues and Options Paper. It also directly relates to
Issue G and H and Objectives 3,4 and 18 of the draft Sustainability
Appraisal framework.
|
Question 3
|
Likely Positive Impacts
|
Likely Negative Impacts
|
Uncertain Impacts
|
|
The Core Strategy should release some poor quality employment
land and premises for alternative uses
|
- Will re-use previously developed land
- Will improve the appearance and quality of the built
environment
- New buildings will be constructed to higher fuel efficiency
standards
|
- Will fuel need for more greenfield sites for employment
land
- Will displace businesses which may not relocate within the
Borough, increasing the need to travel
|
|
|
The Core Strategy should focus on identifying sites for
offices, manufacturing and warehouse distribution.
|
- Providing a supply of sites for various uses will promote
economic growth and reduce out-commuting
- Identifying land for offices and manufacturing will maximise
the number of jobs created on each site
|
- May not meet the needs of a dynamic economy
- May restrict the supply of new employment land
|
- If located in accessible areas the allocation of sites will
promote sustainable transport.
|
|
The Core Strategy should identify land for employment
generally without specifying any particular type of end user
|
- Providing a supply of sites for various uses will promote
economic growth and reduce out-commuting
- A flexible supply of sites will encourage new development
|
- Open ended employment allocations may not match the needs of
existing businesses in the Borough to expand
- Too much warehouse distribution will deliver less employment in
the Borough
|
- If located in accessible areas the allocation of sites will
promote sustainable transport.
|
|
The Core Strategy should promote a major tourist development
on Hayling Island centred on its windsurfing/sailing
heritage.
|
- Additional tourism will boost the Island’s economy and
employment
- The development would promote Hayling’s history and
environment.
- A windsurfing centre would promote exercise and healthy
lifestyles.
|
- Transport to the Island is likely to be car-dominated
|
|
|
The Core Strategy should promote a marina development at
Boardmarsh, including related hotel and leisure facilities.
|
- Additional tourism will boost the Borough’s economy and
employment
- Development would provide additional housing
- The marina would provide a gateway to Havant, adding to the
distinctiveness of the Borough
|
- Potentially serious impacts on European designated sites of
nature conservation importance.
- Transport to Broadmarsh is likely to be car-dominated.
|
- The nature of public access and recreation provision at the
site will be changed
|
|
The Core Strategy should promote development in Havant and its
surroundings to establish the area as a short break
destination.
|
- Additional tourism will boost the Borough’s economy and
employment
- Tourism development will promote the Borough and build on its
history and distinctiveness
|
|
- The location of new facilities will determine whether
sustainable transport is encouraged.
|
|
The Core Strategy should continue to resist out-of-centre
shopping development in favour of in-centre or edge-of centre
development
|
- Will promote development on brownfield land.
- Will promote the vitality and viability of the Borough’s town,
district and local centres.
- Will focus new development towards regenerating the Borough’s
older urban areas.
- Promoting the retail function of the Borough’s centres
reinforces their sense of place as focal points for local
communities.
|
- May encourage shopping out of the Borough
|
|
|
The Core Strategy should promote the use of compulsory
purchase order powers to promote shopping development in the heart
of centres or on their edges
|
- Necessary development in or near the heart of centres will
promote their vitality and viability.
- Will assist the regeneration of the Borough’s older urban
areas.
- Will provide a wider range of services and facilities within
the Centre
|
|
- May blight existing property, delaying investment
|
|
The Core Strategy should seek to maintain the same number of
shops in Leigh Park Shopping Centre
|
- May promote refurbishment of existing units
- Will promote the vitality and viability of the shopping
centre
- Will introduce additional uses within the district centre
|
- Will reduce the retail offer in the district centre if shops
change to non-retail uses.
|
- Uncertain how many units will remain vacant in the long
term
|
|
The Core Strategy should promote the redevelopment of part of
Park Parade in Leigh Park Shopping Centre.
|
- Will re-use previously developed land
- Will result in less vacant units
- Will promote the vitality and viability of the shopping
centre
|
- Will displace some businesses which may not relocate within the
district centre
|
- There is the potential for good quality new design to improve
the appearance of the Centre
|
Information on the Borough’s housing is contained within pages
19-26 of the Issues and Options Paper. It also directly relates to
Issue F and Objective 1 of the draft Sustainability Appraisal
framework.
|
Question 4
|
Likely Positive Impacts
|
Likely Negative Impacts
|
Uncertain Impacts
|
|
The Core Strategy should require new housing to be built at
densities higher than the current average of 36 dwellings per
hectare, taking into account local character.
|
- Will reduce the amount of greenfield land required for new
housing
- Will deliver more housing closer to existing facilities,
reducing the need to travel by private car
|
- It is harder to build housing in a range of house types and
styles at higher densities
|
- Higher density housing requires good quality design to deliver
an acceptable living environment
- May result in dwellings without private gardens
|
|
The Core Strategy should raise affordable housing requirements
above the 30% currently sought
|
- An increase in the amount of affordable housing on each site to
meet housing need.
|
- Potential cost implications may make regeneration of marginal
sites uneconomic.
|
- Care is required to integrate affordable and market housing to
secure mixed communities.
|
The Core Strategy should require the majority of
affordable housing to continue to be social rented
|
- Will concentrate resources to those least able to meet their
housing needs on the open market.
|
- Focus on social rented will increase costs and may make
regeneration of marginal sites uneconomic
- Focus on social rented could undermine intermediate
market.
|
|
|
The Core Strategy should require larger housing developments
to include a range of dwelling types and sizes, and at least 50% of
all new dwellings to be either 1 or 2 bedrooms.
|
- Will deliver housing in line with the projected need for more
smaller dwellings
- Developments which include a range of house types and sizes can
be more visually interesting.
- Assists in the creation of mixed communities
|
- Per capita consumption of water rises with falling household
size.
- More small dwellings will increase car parking
created/required
|
|
|
The Core Strategy should provide broad guidance on the most
appropriate type of dwelling to be provided on each site, but
ultimately let the market decide.
|
- Less constraints will assist developers in bringing forward new
housing more quickly
|
- May not produce housing which meets the needs of the
Borough.
|
|
|
Question 5
|
Likely Positive Impacts
|
Likely Negative Impacts
|
Uncertain Impacts
|
|
Choose the right overall housing strategy for Havant – options
1, 2 or 3.
|
- All options will deliver homes to meet housing need in the
Borough.
- Option 1 will retain as much open space within the built up
area as possible.
- Option 3 will retain as much open countryside as possible.
|
- Option 1 will require more greenfield land and urban sprawl,
increasing distances to travel to services and facilities.
- Option 3 will remove some open spaces in the built up
area.
|
- The loss of open space may be mitigated if it leads to
investment to upgrade other local open spaces.
- The loss of countryside may be mitigated by increased access to
remaining spaces and access to other facilities.
|
|
Question 6
|
Likely Positive Impacts
|
Likely Negative Impacts
|
Uncertain Impacts
|
|
Please rank each area in terms of suitability for new housing
development – options 1 to 9.
|
- All options will deliver homes to meet housing need in the
Borough.
- Option 1 is relatively close to Milton Road Local Centre and
has good bus links.
- Option 2 is adjacent to an area of high housing need
- Option 3 is adjacent to an area of high housing need
- Option 4 is relatively close to facilities in Westbourne
- Option 5 is relatively close to Cosham and Portsmouth
centres.
- Option 6 is relatively close to Havant and Cosham centres
- Option 7 has a range of undeveloped areas and identified
highway capacity.
- Option 8 has substantial undeveloped areas
- Option 9 is close to Mengham / Gable Head District Centre
|
- Option 1 is subject to local nature designations
- Options 2, 3, and 4 are subject to local nature conservation
designations and are currently strategic gap.
- Option 5 would have a landscape impact and is currently
strategic gap.
- Option 6 is subject to an international nature designation
- Option 7 is subject to local nature conservation designations
and is currently strategic gap.
- Options 8 and 9 have limited accessibility, are at risk from
flooding and are adjacent to an area subject to international
nature designations.
|
- All options have strengths and weaknesses. They will be
considered further following consultation at this stage.
|
Key Issue – Improving
Transport
Information on transport is contained within pages 27-29 of
the Issues and Options Paper. It also directly relates to Issue N
and Objective 7 of the draft Sustainability Appraisal
framework.
|
Core Strategy – Question 7
|
Likely Positive Impacts
|
Likely Negative Impacts
|
Uncertain Impacts
|
|
Please indicate which 5 transport objectives are the most
important for Havant
|
- All objectives contribute towards promoting travel choice and
reducing the need to travel by the private car. The Local Transport
Plan has already been the subject of a Sustainability Appraisal to
ensure the objectives contribute towards sustainable
development.
|
- Works to deliver accessibility to key development opportunity
sites (Option 3) will lead to development of greenfield land and
increased traffic in those areas
|
- High density developments in areas with good public transport
links requires good design to ensure a satisfactory living
environment.
- The loss of countryside may be mitigated by increased access to
remaining spaces and access to other facilities.
|
Key Issue – Natural and
Built Environment
Information on the natural and built environment is contained
within pages 30-32 of the Issues and Options Paper. It also
directly relates to Issues B, C and D and Objectives 12, 13 and 14
of the draft Sustainability Appraisal framework.
|
Core Strategy – Question 8
|
Likely Positive Impacts
|
Likely Negative Impacts
|
Uncertain Impacts
|
|
The Core Strategy should require landscape enhancements within
new developments.
|
- Enhancements will improve the appearance of new
developments
|
- Potential cost implications may make regeneration of marginal
sites uneconomic.
- May not contribute towards the most efficient use of land.
|
- Areas could include Sustainable Urban Drainage features, to
reduce flood risk
- Landscape areas could contribute towards biodiversity
|
|
The Core Strategy should seek contributions from developers to
enhance the public’s natural and built environment.
|
- Will contribute towards the environment and identity of the
Borough.
- Will contribute to the regeneration of the Borough
|
- Potential cost implications may make regeneration of marginal
sites uneconomic.
|
|
|
The Core Strategy should protect the historic character of the
Borough as a priority
|
- Will contribute towards the environment and identity of the
Borough.
|
- May restrict redevelopment of brownfield sites
|
- Innovative designs might be constrained by conservation
requirements
- Designs which conserve historic character may not be
achievable
|
|
The Core Strategy should promote bold innovative designs where
they do not damage historic townscapes
|
- Will encourage new developments to include sustainable
features, such as energy and water efficiency.
- Will encourage regeneration by such measures as higher density
development and mixed use
- Innovative, sustainable designs will promote the image of the
Borough as progressive and concerned about the environment
- Well -designed development will improve the distinctiveness of
the Borough
|
- May involve building at higher densities which appears
different from existing suburban housing
|
- Innovative designs might be considered to be unacceptable if
they differ from established urban housing
|
|
The Core Strategy should promote urban design because it has
an important role in integrating new development into the built
environment.
|
- Good urban design will improve the built environment of the
Borough, being safer, more legible and more attractive.
|
|
- High quality design adds costs which must be balanced with
increased market value
|
Key Issue – Changing
Coastline
Information on the Borough’s coastline is contained within
pages 33-35 of the Issues and Options Paper. It also directly
relates to Issue A and Objective 8 of the draft Sustainability
Appraisal framework.
|
Core Strategy – Question 9
|
Likely Positive Impacts
|
Likely Negative Impacts
|
Uncertain Impacts
|
|
The Core Strategy should show existing coastal defences and
where they will/could be realigned and strengthened.
|
- Adaptive approaches to coastal defence and in some locations
managed realignment can be used to maintain, enhance and create
important areas of nature conservation.
|
- Coastal defences are expensive and will therefore require
additional investment particularly to defend against increasing
pressures resulting from climate change.
|
- Realignment of the coastline can result in a change in habitat,
this can be perceived as a loss of some important interest features
and a gain in others.
|
Key Issue –
Infrastructure
Information on infrastructure is contained within pages 36-38
of the Issues and Options Paper. It also directly relates to Issue
L and Objective 6 of the draft Sustainability Appraisal
framework.
|
Core Strategy – Question 10
|
Likely Positive Impacts
|
Likely Negative Impacts
|
Uncertain Impacts
|
|
The Core Strategy should focus on the quality of accessible
open spaces rather than their quantity
|
- High quality and well -used open spaces improve community
safety
- Re-development of poor open spaces which have low recreational
value will use land more efficiently at accessible locations
- Building on poor open spaces will reduce urban sprawl
- Well -designed housing could be more attractive than poor
quality open space
|
- Would reduce the number of open spaces and accessibility
- The visual value of greenspaces within built up areas would be
taken away
- Development might break up 'green chains'
|
|
|
The Core Strategy should review the future of the Havant
Leisure Centre to see if the pattern and range of recreation
facilities can be improved
|
- Improvements to recreation facilities will improve quality of
life in the Borough, encouraging healthy lifestyles.
- Additional provision could improve accessibility to facilities
especially for people who do not drive.
- Possibility of increased and more efficient use of existing
provision
|
- Re-development of Havant Leisure Centre would cause the loss of
a centrally located major recreation facility.
- The current location of Havant Leisure Centre reinforces the
town’s sense of place as focal point for the community.
|
- The existing facilities are at a location which has excellent
public transport links. Any other location may encourage greater
use of the private car
- Uncertainty whether existing provision has sufficient spare
capacity to cater for demands if the Havant Leisure Centre were to
close.
|