The Theatres Trust welcomes and encourages the upgrade and renewal of cultural facilities to ensure they meet the needs and expectations of the community, staff and users of such facilities. We note the inclusion of the Ferneham Hall in this site allocation and support the requirement to provide a new cultural facility. We would strongly recommend the inclusion of wording such as - 'the development will be staged so that the new cultural facility is provided before the existing theatre is closed'. This will ensure continuous access to cultural opportunities in Fareham, and ensure the new theatre is not compromised or lost in favour of the other uses, particularly residential, proposed on the site.
As a resident of the High street in Fareham, our property is extremely close to the proposed development. [Redacted]. The traffic that passes through the High Street is already substantial considering that this is a conservation area, with many heavy delivery goods vehicles passing as early as 5.15am. The noise and pollution that this causes is terrible and, as the parent of three children, is a major concern. With so many beautiful, old houses in this conservation area I am completely opposed to any development that will increase traffic and pedestrians through this area. Furthermore, there is already insufficient parking for the residents of the High Street without increasing visitors to this area. I understand that there is a need for more housing, but this is being proposed at the cost of the people who already live in the area.
Being a commuter who travels out of Fareham to work each day I can safely say that the queues of traffic both inbound and outbound is horrific - At peak times it often takes 30 minutes to get from junction 11 to the Tesco roundabout. This is exacerbated by the endless queues in both directions along the M27 from Portsmouth to Southampton (and onward to the M3) at peak times and often during the day. My daily commute from Fareham to South Winchester regularly takes approx an hour each way to travel 22 miles. I have not seen anything in the supporting documentation that would be a feasible solution to this situation. The FBC council history on traffic solutions is abysmal - for example the number of time the roundabout & junctions around the station & Gudge Heath Lane areas have had to be reworked at a huge cost to the tax payer prove that the council are incompetent of providing realistic workable solution to traffic issues. The overall plan (excluding Welbourne) show around 8000 properties being added to the local area over the next 20 years. The increase in traffic issues that will bring the town and surrounding areas to a stand still and the additional pollution element is enough for me to object against the building of further housing in the local area.
Postcode not provided
These comments relate to the Welborne development. Greenfield site so not acceptable. If built then primary, secondary and sixth form colleges must be included. Unless the M27 is widened to 4 lanes with traffic control then you may as well rename it to M27 National Car Park. And this traffic control needs to be put in place before any more developments start.
• It is unclear why a Cultural and Arts facility is required when the Ashcroft Centre is nearby and provides the same services • It is understood that the existing multi-storey car park will be demolished and a new multi-story car park more suited to modern vehicles built in its place. This development will also include new dwellings. It will be vital that the multi-story car park proposed on the FTC2 Market Quay site is completed and fully operational BEFORE the demolition of the multi-storey carpark in the Civic Quarter is started. Failing to do so will cause parking chaos in the town centre. Lost trade may never be recovered. The redeveloped multi-story carpark must provide adequate parking spaces for the new dwellings as well as the hotel being developed locally now. It will also need to adequately compensate for the loss of existing carparks adjacent to the Civic Hall and Church Path. This could require a much taller building than the current multi-storey car park. Will this be in keeping with the overall appearance of the town centre? • It is hoped that there will be no loss of Civic Garden Open Space area when this is enhanced. • Plans must adequately address pedestrian access between the West Street and the Civic Quarter even when the shopping mall is closed.
• Many of the sites will require demolition and site clearance before construction work can start. Due to the location in the town centre these will need to be adequately phased over the years up to 2036 to avoid many disruption to the town centre. • This site may have insufficient car parking places for the residents of the new developments. There are proposals to provide under-croft parking. This will be essential and must be part of any planning applications. In addition, the under-croft must include adequate provision for refuse collection. Provision of clothes drying/airing and secure parking of cycles would be welcome. • The number of dwellings for this site could lead to over use of the shared facilities, problems with vehicle flow, and a tendency to make the accommodation too cramped. There is also a tendency for modern apartments to have fully enclosed rooms with inadequate access to natural light and good ventilation to the outside air. This should be avoided on health grounds. The need for shared access on many floors via stairs, corridors and lifts could result in safety concerns related to access or evacuation during an emergency. These will need to be adequately covered in any planning application.
I wanted to comment more generally on the whole of Fareham town centre plans - so I 'll guess I'll just copy and paste this for each section?. Broadly I think the plans for the town centre are good - there is less need for shops than the number of shops existing, and there is more need for suitable housing close to station and bus station. It would be good to see plans to reduce Fareham's car dependency - so making these sites suitable for people who choose not to have a car, (but to have a car share available for the limited times they need it) would make great sense in this area. Higher density housing - more specifically flats with lifts suitable for the rising number of older people (especially widows and widowers) - some of whom are/will become virtually house bound, when they can no longer drive - due to limited public transport availability, (higher density would be possible if car parking was not required).
Southern Water is the statutory wastewater undertaker in Fareham Town Centre. Development Allocation FTC1 allocates 100 dwellings in the Civic Quarter. In line with paragraph 162 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and the National Planning Practice Guidance (NPPG), we have undertaken an assessment of our infrastructure and its ability to meet the forecast demand for the proposed development. That assessment reveals that there is underground sewerage infrastructure that needs to be taken into account when designing the proposed development. An easement would be required, which may affect the site layout or require diversion. This easement should be clear of all proposed buildings and substantial tree planting. Accordingly we propose that the following criterion is added to policy FTC1 (new text underlined): Planning permission will be granted provided that detailed proposals accord with the policies in the Local Plan and meet the following site specific requirements: [...] l) Provide future access to the existing underground wastewater infrastructure for maintenance and upsizing purposes.
Southern Water is the statutory wastewater undertaker in Fareham Town Centre. Development Allocation FTC10 allocates 32 dwellings in the Civic Quarter. In line with paragraph 162 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and the National Planning Practice Guidance (NPPG), we have undertaken an assessment of our infrastructure and its ability to meet the forecast demand for the proposed development. That assessment reveals that there is underground sewerage infrastructure that needs to be taken into account when designing the proposed development. An easement would be required, which may affect the site layout or require diversion. This easement should be clear of all proposed buildings and substantial tree planting. Accordingly we propose that the following criterion is added to policy FTC10 (new text underlined): Planning permission will be granted provided that detailed proposals accord with the policies in the Local Plan and meet the following site specific requirements: [...] g) Provide future access to the existing underground wastewater infrastructure for maintenance and upsizing purposes.