HVA Responses to Redbrown Planning Application North of London Road Holybourne - EHDC-25-0748-OUT

Over-Development will Urbanise our Rural Village
The proposed estate would increase Holybourne’s size by 30%—far beyond the “small-scale” growth permitted for rural villages and it is outside the defined settlement boundary, contrary to current planning policy. This objection is backed by EHDC’s own planning policies, national law and legal precedents resulting from official planning appeals.

Listed below are the documents containing the HVA's detailed objections to the original proposal, proposed revisions and responses to correspondence with East Hampshire District Council planning officers.  Click on the document name to open and view it.

1. Size scale and impact on existing community 
2. HVA Rebuttal to EHDC Policy Officer Comments
3. Freedom of Information Request to EHDC

Relevant Planning Appeal Decisions

These planning appeals directly support our objections concerning the totally inappropriate scale and location of this proposed development.  Click the document name to view the planning officer's official report.

• Aston Clinton - The Inspector found that development outside the settlement boundary of a “larger village” was inappropriate and that landscape harm outweighed the public benefits.
• Tibberton, Wychavon District Council - Scheme dismissed due to irreversible harm to local character, poor infrastructure alignment, and conflict with planning strategy - despite housing need.
• Burghclere  - The site lay outside the settlement boundary and was not identified for development. Despite a housing shortfall, the Inspector concluded that the adverse impacts  Significantly and demonstrably outweighed the benefits, and therefore the tilted balance under NPPF Paragraph 11d did not justify approval.
• Ascott under Wychwood, Oxfordshire - Scheme dismissed due to heritage and landscape impacts.
• Southminster, Maldon District Council - Despite significant public benefits, the landscape harm was so substantial that it outweighed the benefits.

Active Seasonal Springs

The development site lies on seasonal springs and waterlogged land. The developer’s plans rely on inadequate surveys and the proposed solution is not certain, depending as it does on incomplete data (no estimates on the volume of water generated nor the ability of the downstream infrastructure to cope). The development site is known locally as ‘Streamacres’ for good reason.

Listed below are the documents containing the HVA's detailed objections to the original proposal, proposed revisions and responses to correspondence with relevant parties.  Click on the document name to open and view it.

1. Flood Risk and Drainage - Objections
2. Response to Environment Agency and LLFA Consultation Response
3. HVA Response to HCC LLFA

Relevant Planning Appeal Decisions

These planning appeals directly support our objections concerning flood risk. Click the document name to view the planning officer's official report.

• Fairlight Cove, East Sussex -  Scheme dismissed due to risk of ground water flooding which was not justified through a Sequential test.
• Bailragg Lane, Lancaster - Scheme dismissed due to risk of fluvial, surface and ground water flooding which was not justified through a Sequential test.
• Wyboston - The appeal was dismissed due to harm to the setting of a Scheduled Monument and failure to apply the Sequential Test for flood risk.
• Thakeham - Amongst other reasons for dismissing the appeal, the Sequential Test was found to be flawed, with sequentially preferable sites identified.

More Houses, More Traffic, More Congestion
The proposed development represents a 30% increase in housing stock in the village, which will result in a significant increase in vehicle numbers and pedestrians using the network. Based on national averages, this could mean 300–400 additional cars using the village roads daily.  The existing London Road is at capacity at peak times, and a large increase in peak-hour traffic will threaten pedestrian safety near three schools and create congestion on narrow roads.

Listed below are the documents containing the HVA's detailed objections to the original proposal, proposed revisions and responses to correspondence with relevant parties.  Click on the document name to open and view it.

1. Highways Impact
2. Response to Transport Modelling Addendum
3. HVA Response to HCC Highways 2

The site lies outside Holybourne’s settlement boundary, forming part of the open countryside and contributing to the village’s rural setting. The landscape has very high value due to the outstanding countryside views and active community use of the Play Area and local footpaths. A housing estate in an open and undeveloped area would cause significant harm to the character and appearance of the area. It disregards the established scale and identity of Holybourne, failing to respond to the village’s capacity for growth and undermining its local distinctiveness.

Listed below are the documents containing the HVA's detailed objections to the original proposal, proposed revisions and responses to correspondence with East Hampshire District Council planning officers.  Click on the document name to open and view it.

1. Landscape & Visual Impact

We believe that significant harm that this development will have on the setting of this historically important Romano-British minor town.  The creation of a large housing estate right next to this nationally significant monument would reduce it to a fenced-off relic, stripped of its physical context.  The proposed relocation of the Holybourne play area and kick about area onto the Scheduled Monument itself risks trivialising and damaging a nationally significant heritage asset - an act that prioritises convenience over cultural responsibility.

Listed below are the documents containing the HVA's detailed objections to the original proposal, proposed revisions and responses to correspondence with relevant parties.  Click on the document name to open and view it.

1. Impact Upon Scheduled Monument
2. HVA Response to Historic England 2

Relevant Planning Appeal Decisions

These planning appeals directly support our objections concerning the harm that will result to the setting of the Cuckoo's Corner ancient monument from this development.  Click the document name to view the planning officer's official report.

• Morecambe, Lancashire – Scheme dismissed due to impact on setting of the Torrisholme Barrow Scheduled Monument.
• Sherfield on Loddon - The Sherfield on Loddon appeal was dismissed due to less than substantial harm to a Scheduled Monument, a Grade II listed building, and a Conservation Area. The
  Inspector gave very considerable weight to heritage harm and concluded that even a significant housing shortfall did not justify the development. This decision directly supports HVA’s heritage objections and the application of NPPF Paragraph 11d(i).
• Wormegay - This appeal was dismissed due to less than substantial harm to the setting of a Scheduled Monument (Motte and Bailey Castle). The Inspector found that the solar farm would erode the  monument’s open, undeveloped rural setting and diminish its significance. This decision supports HVA’s objection regarding harm to the setting of the Cuckoo’s Corner Roman Settlement.
• Wyboston - The appeal was dismissed due to harm to the setting of a Scheduled Monument and failure to apply the Sequential Test for flood risk. The Inspector found the heritage harm to be at the higher end of “less than substantial”

Cherished Community Asset

The Holybourne Play Park is a cherished community asset. The proposed relocation cannot replace the outstanding views and rural setting of the current park, which is frequently used by many families inside and outside the village. It is also a designated Local Green Space. and the proposed relocation is a poor replacement for the current site.
Parents and families value the park for its tranquillity, safety and convenient location, next to the London Road. The outstanding views hugely contribute to the well-being of visitors of all ages.

Listed below are the documents containing the HVA's detailed objections to the original proposal, proposed revisions and responses to correspondence with relevant parties.  Click on the document name to open and view it.

1. Loss of Holybourne Play Area

Relevant Planning Appeal Decisions

These planning appeals directly support our objections concerning the character and landscape harm that will result from this development. Click the document name to view the planning officer's official report.

• Sale - The Sale appeal was dismissed due to harm to the character and openness of a designated Protected Open Space, despite significant sports and community benefits. The Inspector found that the loss of informal recreational value and visual amenity outweighed the benefits. This supports HVA’s objection regarding the loss of Holybourne Play Area, a designated Local Green Space.

East Hampshire District Council have a vision for providing sustainable transport methods aimed at reducing overall traffic. This development does not comply with that.

Listed below are the documents containing the HVA's detailed objections to the original proposal, proposed revisions and responses to correspondence with relevant parties.  Click on the document name to open and view it.

1. Failure to Support EHDC's Sustainable Transport Objectives

Relevant Planning Appeal Decisions

These planning appeals directly support our objections concerning the unsustainable nature of the proposed development. Click the document name to view the planning officer's official report.

• Wyboston - Like Holybourne, Wyboston sits adjacent to a larger settlement—St Neots—yet the Inspector found the site unsustainable, noting that walking or cycling to services would be inconvenient and that residents would likely rely on private cars. This conflicted with Local Plan policies promoting sustainable access. The decision supports HVA’s objections on heritage, flood risk, and unsustainable location grounds.
• Thakeham - This appeal was dismissed due to conflict with the spatial strategy, unsustainable location, and failure of the Sequential Test. The Inspector found that the scale of development was inappropriate for a small village and that proposed transport improvements would not mitigate reliance on private cars.  This decision supports HVA’s objections regarding Holybourne’s classification, flood risk, and unsustainable development.

Sewage
The local sewage system already regularly discharges into the River Wey due to lack of capacity (375 hours of sewage discharge into the River Wey over the past three years). Current Thames Water data shows that Holybourne’s foul drainage system has failed repeatedly during heavy rainfall, with due to the Holybourne pumping station overload. Adding another 160 households (a 30% increase in Holybourne’s population) onto the existing network without significant upgrades is irresponsible.  Until then, any significant development in Holybourne must be considered unsustainable.

Listed below are the documents containing the HVA's detailed objections to the original proposal, proposed revisions and responses to correspondence with relevant parties.  Click on the document name to open and view it.

1. Local Infrastructure
2. Response to Thames Water Comments on Surface & Foul Water plus Sustainability & Infrastructure Concerns
3. HVA Request for EHDC to Clarify Education Capacity with HCC

Holybourne Conservation Area
The historic environment of Holybourne is an irreplaceable resource. The heritage assets should be conserved in a manner appropriate to their significance, so that they can be enjoyed for their contribution to the quality of life of existing and future generations.  The proposal destroys the rural setting of the historic village core, which includes the Grade II * Church of the Holy Rood and over 30 listed buildings. It will sever the connection of our historic village core from its rural surroundings, causing substantial harm to the fundamental character of the village.

Listed below are the documents containing the HVA's detailed objections to the original proposal, proposed revisions and responses to correspondence with relevant parties.  Click on the document name to open and view it.

1. Other Heritage Impacts
2. HVA Response to Conservation Officer Comments

Relevant Planning Appeal Decisions

These planning appeals directly support our objections concerning the harm that the proposed development will cause to the setting and context of the Holybourne Conservation Area and the many (32) listed buildings within this distinctive area. Click the document name to view the planning officer's official report

• Sherfield on Loddon - The Sherfield on Loddon appeal was dismissed due to 'less than substantial harm' to a Scheduled Monument, a Grade II listed building, and a Conservation Area. The Inspector gave very considerable weight to heritage harm and concluded that even a significant housing shortfall did not justify the development. This decision directly supports HVA’s heritage objections and the  application of NPPF Paragraph 11d(i).
• Ascott under Wychwood, Oxfordshire – Scheme dismissed due to heritage and landscape impacts.
• Holybourne - The Holybourne appeal was dismissed due to less than substantial harm to the setting of the Grade II* listed Holy Rood Church and the character and appearance of the
  Holybourne Conservation Area. aesthetic. Despite the Council’s lack of a five-year housing land supply, the Inspector concluded that NPPF Paragraph 11d(i) was engaged due to heritage harm, and the appeal was dismissed. This decision directly supports HVA’s objection regarding harm to designated heritage assets in Holybourne.
• Tibberton, Wychavon District Council – Scheme dismissed due to irreversible harm to local character, poor infrastructure alignment, and conflict with planning strategy - despite housing need.

Planning Appeals

The following recent planning appeal decisions from the Planning Inspectorate support our objections.  A summary of the each appeal decision and its relevance to our objections is available, along with each specific appeal decision and the reasons underlying the decision. Within each of the key objection sections above, specific cases are referenced in support of our objections.

• Summary of Planning Appeals supporting the HVA's Objections to the Redbrown Development Proposal

List of Individual Appeal Decisions & Their Relevance

Size, Scale & Community Impact

• Aston Clinton - The Inspector found that development outside the settlement boundary of a “larger village” was inappropriate and that landscape harm outweighed the public benefits.
• Tibberton, Wychavon District Council - Scheme dismissed due to irreversible harm to local character, poor infrastructure alignment, and conflict with planning strategy - despite housing need.
• Burghclere  - The site lay outside the settlement boundary and was not identified for development. Despite a housing shortfall, the Inspector concluded that the adverse impacts  Significantly and demonstrably outweighed the benefits, and therefore the tilted balance under NPPF Paragraph 11d did not justify approval.
• Ascott under Wychwood, Oxfordshire - Scheme dismissed due to heritage and landscape impacts.
• Southminster, Maldon District Council - Despite significant public benefits, the landscape harm was so substantial that it outweighed the benefits.

Flood Risk & Drainage

• Fairlight Cove, East Sussex -  Scheme dismissed due to risk of ground water flooding which was not justified through a Sequential test.
• Bailragg Lane, Lancaster - Scheme dismissed due to risk of fluvial, surface and ground water flooding which was not justified through a Sequential test.
• Wyboston - The appeal was dismissed due to harm to the setting of a Scheduled Monument and failure to apply the Sequential Test for flood risk.
• Thakeham - Amongst other reasons for dismissing the appeal, the Sequential Test was found to be flawed, with sequentially preferable sites identified.

Loss of Amenity and Designated Green Space

• Sale - The Sale appeal was dismissed due to harm to the character and openness of a designated Protected Open Space, despite significant sports and community benefits. The Inspector found that the loss of informal recreational value and visual amenity outweighed the benefits. This supports HVA’s objection regarding the loss of Holybourne Play Area, a designated Local Green Space.

Impact on Scheduled Ancient Monument

• Morecambe, Lancashire – Scheme dismissed due to impact on setting of the Torrisholme Barrow Scheduled Monument.
• Sherfield on Loddon - The Sherfield on Loddon appeal was dismissed due to less than substantial harm to a Scheduled Monument, a Grade II listed building, and a Conservation Area. The
  Inspector gave very considerable weight to heritage harm and concluded that even a significant housing shortfall did not justify the development. This decision directly supports HVA’s heritage objections and the application of NPPF Paragraph 11d(i).
• Wormegay - This appeal was dismissed due to less than substantial harm to the setting of a Scheduled Monument (Motte and Bailey Castle). The Inspector found that the solar farm would erode the  monument’s open, undeveloped rural setting and diminish its significance. This decision supports HVA’s objection regarding harm to the setting of the Cuckoo’s Corner Roman Settlement.
• Wyboston - The appeal was dismissed due to harm to the setting of a Scheduled Monument and failure to apply the Sequential Test for flood risk. The Inspector found the heritage harm to be at the higher end of “less than substantial”

Conservation Area & Other Heritage Impacts

• Sherfield on Loddon - The Sherfield on Loddon appeal was dismissed due to 'less than substantial harm' to a Scheduled Monument, a Grade II listed building, and a Conservation Area. The Inspector gave very considerable weight to heritage harm and concluded that even a significant housing shortfall did not justify the development. This decision directly supports HVA’s heritage objections and the  application of NPPF Paragraph 11d(i).
• Ascott under Wychwood, Oxfordshire – Scheme dismissed due to heritage and landscape impacts.
• Holybourne - The Holybourne appeal was dismissed due to less than substantial harm to the setting of the Grade II* listed Holy Rood Church and the character and appearance of the
  Holybourne Conservation Area. aesthetic. Despite the Council’s lack of a five-year housing land supply, the Inspector concluded that NPPF Paragraph 11d(i) was engaged due to heritage harm, and the appeal was dismissed. This decision directly supports HVA’s objection regarding harm to designated heritage assets in Holybourne.
• Tibberton, Wychavon District Council – Scheme dismissed due to irreversible harm to local character, poor infrastructure alignment, and conflict with planning strategy - despite housing need.

Failure to Support Sustainable Transport Objectives

• Wyboston - Like Holybourne, Wyboston sits adjacent to a larger settlement—St Neots—yet the Inspector found the site unsustainable, noting that walking or cycling to services would be inconvenient and that residents would likely rely on private cars. This conflicted with Local Plan policies promoting sustainable access. The decision supports HVA’s objections on heritage, flood risk, and unsustainable location grounds.
• Thakeham - This appeal was dismissed due to conflict with the spatial strategy, unsustainable location, and failure of the Sequential Test. The Inspector found that the scale of development was inappropriate for a small village and that proposed transport improvements would not mitigate reliance on private cars.  This decision supports HVA’s objections regarding Holybourne’s classification, flood risk, and unsustainable development.