Change of use of land for the stationing of 14no. caravan compliant lodges to be used as holiday accommodation and associated infrastructure

1. The proposal represents an inappropriate and unjustified urbanisation of an area of designated countryside to the detriment of the rural character of the site, the surrounding countryside and the approach to the South Downs National Park. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policies S5 and DM1 of the Eastleigh Borough Local Plan (2016-2036) and provisions within the National Planning Policy Framework.
2. Insufficient information has been provided to demonstrate that a satisfactory means of access can be created to serve the development without resulting in undue interference with the safety and function of the highway network, or a material loss of vegetation or increase in hardstanding to the detriment of the prevailing countryside character. The application is therefore contrary to the requirements of Policies S5, S11, DM1 & DM13 of the Eastleigh Borough Local Plan (2016-2036) and provisions within the National Planning Policy Framework.
3. Insufficient information has been provided to demonstrate that a satisfactory level of car parking and manoeuvring space is available on the site (including for emergency and refuse vehicles) without which the development would encourage the parking of vehicles on Winchester Road and so interrupt the free flow of traffic and cause a hazard to road users. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policies S11 & DM13 of the Eastleigh Borough Local Plan (2016-2036) and provisions within the National Planning Policy Framework.
4. The proposed development is likely to result in direct and indirect detrimental impacts to the Hill Copse ancient woodland and Site of Importance for Nature Conservation, which is next to the site's north western boundary. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policy DM11 of the Eastleigh Borough Local Plan (2016-2036) and provisions within the National Planning Policy Framework.
5. Insufficient information has been provided to demonstrate that the proposal will not have a detrimental impact upon protected and notable species and their habitats or on important trees within the site and its immediate surroundings. The proposal also fails to demonstrate biodiversity net gain. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policies DM1 & DM11 of the Eastleigh Borough Local Plan (2016-2036), provisions within the National Planning Policy Framework and the Council's Trees and Development Supplementary Planning Document.
6. Insufficient information has been provided to demonstrate that space is available for a well-integrated sustainable urban drainage system of a capacity to serve the development while not resulting in a detrimental impact upon the quality of water entering the River Itchen Special Area of Conservation. The application is therefore contrary to the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017, the requirements of Policies S1, DM6 & DM11 of the Eastleigh Borough Local Plan (2016-2036) and provisions within the National Planning Policy Framework.
7. The application fails to provide for mitigation to offset the impacts of nutrient loading from the development on the European protected sites (i.e. River Itchen Special Area of Conservation, Solent Maritime Special Area of Conservation, Solent and Southampton Water Special Protection Area & Ramsar Site). The application is therefore contrary to Policies S1, DM10 and DM11 of the Eastleigh Borough Local Plan 2016-2036, provisions within the National Planning Policy Framework and The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017.
8. Note to Applicant: The application was refused following the assessment of the following plans: CWX1046 - 100 A, CWX1046 - 106 A & CWX1046 - 107 A. In accordance with paragraph 38 of the National Planning Policy Framework (July 2021), Eastleigh Borough Council takes a positive approach to the handling of development proposals so as to achieve, whenever possible, a positive outcome and to ensure all proposals are dealt with in a timely manner.

No related records were published in this section.