11/29/2019 Mail - Woodgate, Jenny - Outlook

Large Development Sites - , , Soldridge

Wed 16/10/2019 11:42 To: EHDC - Local Plan

TITLE : Large Scale Site Development Comment

I wish to comment on the EHDC’s Large Development Site proposals.

I would like to SUPPORT the development at Whitehill & for the following reasons:

The area is a New Town, including shops, offices, restaurants, makers market, town square and parking. The addional housing will drive economic growth and employment. Mains sewage and water infrastructure will link well with exisng facilies. Plans drive the Suitable Alternave Natural Green Space (SANGS) and recreaonal green space. EHDC has a call to plant 120,000 trees in the district, the environmental planning of this site will go a long way to helping to meet this. Transport design that makes it easy to walk and cycle round. Cycle links are planned between green space/SANGS. The locaon has New sports pavilion/facilies (opened 2018) and a new Leisure Centre is planned. Plans support schooling. The Secondary school is being rebuilt and has the potenal to expand to 1200 pupils (inial capacity is 900 pupils). Plans include needs for a Primary School.

At the end of the current development period, Whitehill & Bordon will have a populaon of ~23,000, given its sustainability, its ability to ‘seamlessly’ absorb an addional 1284 dwellings (~3000 people) is beer than any other site put forward in this consultaon. A significant part of the proposed houses would be in the new town center giving people accessibility to services and facilies and a sense of place.

EHDC recommended.

I would like to SUPPORT the development at Northbrook Park for the following reasons:

A truly self-contained development that is able to more than meet the minimum housing demands without overly impacng exisng neighbours due to the Woodland that will be maintained North and South of the site. A development that will provide its own infrastructure consequently not dependent on exisng infrastructure. Plans include a good amount of Suitable Alternave Natural Green Space (SANGS) and recreaonal green space. It appears to provide a good blueprint for future garden village development. An already planned and extensive program of infrastructure developments, crical aspects of which to be in place before any housing is occupied. Vehicle access to the A31 to be provided at a point where the A31 is dual carriageway and is not normally subject to traffic congeson. Plans include to bring employment to the site once completed. There is a Village Trust that has an interest in long term support and investment in the future making the project sustainable. Reduces development in areas that lend themselves less well to infrastructure changes of this magnitude. EHDC recommended.

I would like to OBJECT the developments at Land South of Winchester Road, Land West of Lymington Boom Road and South Medstead, for the following reasons:

https://outlook.office365.com/mail/none/id/AAMkADIxNjE3NWJlLTMxYmEtNDEwZC1iOGM4LTYxOTllYjNmN2MzZQBGAAAAAABrEkrzGtHSSpsf… 1/3 11/29/2019 Mail - Woodgate, Jenny - Outlook Firstly, it risks changing the character of the area from Rural to Urban.

Secondly, it is developing into a ‘dormitory populaon’. As there has been no commensurate increase in employment within these parishes, the majority of the new residents commute to work in neighbouring towns. This not only increases traffic congeson at peak mes, it also undermines the sense of belonging.

Thirdly, investment in the infrastructure has failed to keep pace with the increase in the populaon. This has put an increased level of pressure on all the local services and is most concerning in terms of the lack of facilies for the young people in our community.

As a result of their locaon on the top of the ‘ Alps’, the selements of Medstead and Four Marks have always had a rural character to them and this has largely been preserved unl today. The Neighbourhood Plan sought to put in place policies to help retain the rural character of the parishes as this is seen to be central to the character of both selements and something to be cherished and protected. However, this plan seems to be being undermined and the residents of Four Marks and Medstead will not have a sustainable social infrastructure in terms of the sense of community, the feeling of belonging and the nurturing of civic pride.

· The main site at South Medstead is not actually large enough for 600 houses, so the ‘pig farm’ has been put forward in this development site as well as ‘Land West of Lymington Boom Road’.

o Site Reference: LAA/MED-016 Beverley Farm, Five Ash Road, Medstead, GU34 5EJ / Paddock View, Stoney Lane, Medstead, GU34 5EL /Land at Lymington Boom Road, Medstead an Site Reference: LAA/MED-009 Land at Five Ash Crossroads, Lymington Boom Road (pig farm). Previously given a status of Un-developable. o The Land on both of these applicaons is included within the South Medstead Development Site Plan. However, it has previously been rejected for many of the reasons noted above. Nothing has changed that should alter this previous decision. o The planning rejecon noce for the Pig Farm site said that "it maintains a rural character and appearance compable with its surroundings. The site is sensively located at the edge of the selement and forms part of the transion between the selement boundary and other dispersed developments in the countryside close by”. I agree with this. o Land West of Lymington Boom Road has also been included in a Separate Large Development Plan that I have also objected to for similar reasons as it will sll affect the rural hamlets and infrastructure.

· The land opposite Gravel Lane (employment area) and Land between Barn Lane and A31 (housing) have previously been given the status of ‘Undevelopable' in Land Availability Assessment. · § Site Reference: LAA/ROP-016 Land between Barn Lane and A31, : The area has a rural character, with low density sporadic development near the site. Development would be out of character with the area and would have an adverse impact on the intrinsic character of the countryside. Safe access would need to be established (Site slopes steeply up from the A31). Given the rural locaon, this is an unsustainable locaon for residenal development. § Site Reference: LAA/ROP-015 Land south of Gravel Lane, Ropley. Whilst idenfied potenal constraints could be overcome, the area has a rural character, with low density sporadic development opposite. Development would have an adverse impact on the intrinsic character of the countryside.

Furthermore the development is not recommended by EHDC.

END OF.

https://outlook.office365.com/mail/none/id/AAMkADIxNjE3NWJlLTMxYmEtNDEwZC1iOGM4LTYxOTllYjNmN2MzZQBGAAAAAABrEkrzGtHSSpsf… 2/3 11/29/2019 Mail - Woodgate, Jenny - Outlook

https://outlook.office365.com/mail/none/id/AAMkADIxNjE3NWJlLTMxYmEtNDEwZC1iOGM4LTYxOTllYjNmN2MzZQBGAAAAAABrEkrzGtHSSpsf… 3/3