11/18/2019 Mail - Woodgate, Jenny - Outlook

Local Plan Large Developments Sites consultation

Mon 14/10/2019 21:20 To: EHDC - Local Plan

1 attachments (250 KB) EHDC Letter14.10.19.pdf;

https://outlook.office.com/mail/none/id/AAMkADIxNjE3NWJlLTMxYmEtNDEwZC1iOGM4LTYxOTllYjNmN2MzZQBGAAAAAABrEkrzGtHSSpsf0nN… 1/1

Planning Policy East District Council Penns Place Hampshshire GU31 4EX

Via email: [email protected]

Dear Sir / Madam

I am the father of a resident over the age of 18. My wife and I frequently visit Medstead and enjoy the beauty and tranquillity of the village and the surrounding area. It is the kind of area that Hardy might have and referred to as Far from the Madding Crowd and therefore I wholeheartedly support his thoughts in connection with the Local Plan Large Developments Sites consultation as follows:-

I strongly oppose the proposed developments at the following sites: • Land South of Winchester Road, • Land West of Lymington Bottom Road • South Medstead • Four Marks South

I support the proposed developments at the following sites: • Northbrook Park • Whitehill &

My position in relation to each proposed development is outlined in further detail below.

Land South of Winchester Road, Four Marks – OBJECT – This site is in my view unsuitable, unsustainable and undeliverable for the following reasons:

• Social cohesion and sense of place o It is not appropriate to house people in such close proximity to the A31 o Remote and isolated location – the site is beyond the Western extremity of Four Marks and residents will be forced to walk along busy A31 to access the amenities of Four Marks o The development diminishes the sense of place and character of Soldridge. Soldridge is a small tight knit community with strong spirit which owns its own community assets and celebrates recurring events such as the long-running Soldridge Music Festival. Such community spirit and cohesion will be irreparably damaged by the development which would cause Soldridge to lose its separate identity o Soldridge is a quiet and peaceful rural area. The development will dramatically increase noise levels for existing residents both during and beyond the development period o The size and scale of the development harm the essential rural feel of South Medstead / Four Marks o The development will lead to a population density in South Medstead / Four Marks considerably in excess of what is appropriate for a rural village • Countryside o The proposed site is situated in what is currently appealing open countryside which marks a clear boundary between the semi-urban nature of Four Marks and the open space of the adjacent countryside o The site sits beyond the boundary of Four Marks, leading to sprawling strip development into o The site is situated at the crest of a hill and therefore impacts countryside views from a number of different perspectives and over considerable distances o The site would negatively impact views of open countryside from the , one of Hampshire’s key tourist attractions o CP19 of the Joint Core Strategy says: “The only development allowed in the countryside will be that with a genuine and proven need for a countryside location, such as that necessary for farming, forestry, or other rural enterprises” – this development appears to fail this test • Roads and transport o The site is in part accessed by single-track roads (Grosvenor Road and Gravel Lane) leading to derestricted dual carriageway. These access points are situated after blind turns against fast moving traffic and are not appropriate for high volumes of traffic o These single-track roads frequently flood after rainfall (water depth measured on Grosvenor Road on 13 October was circa 5 inches) o Traffic travelling up Grosvenor Road and onto Soldridge Road would be increased. This is a narrow windy road with dangerous blind blind turns after the tunnel. It is therefore not appropriate for increased traffic o Traffic through Soldridge would generally be increased and this would significantly impact safety of walkers and horse riders who use the area extensively, particularly when accessing the ancient Gullet Woods o Introduction of traffic calming measures to improve access to Gravel Lane and Grosvenor Road from the A31 will negatively impact traffic flow through Four Marks, which is already heavily congested o The majority of road users travelling through Four Marks are heading easterly towards Alton; a development on the western side of the village therefore creates disproportionately more congestion for the area o Four Marks has no train station o The Alton to Winchester bus route is infrequent and was recently reported as the most expensive in the UK (widely reported 5 May 2019) o The absence of a train service and regular/affordable bus service lead to a disproportionate increase in the number of car journeys. The UK parliament has publicly recommended measures to drastically reduce car use (reported in the Guardian 22 August 2019) • Environment o Soldridge benefits from superb night skies and low light pollution. The proposed site will significantly increase light pollution o The site is in close proximity to Gullet Wood which is home to extensive wildlife and is a treasured local walking route o Adders and wild boar have been sighted on the south side of Gullet Wood o More broadly, South Medstead, Four Marks and Soldridge enjoy profuse and diverse wildlife which will be adversely impacted by the development. The area enjoys rare plants and creatures such as Bee Orchids, owls, bats, Red Kites, butterflies, moths, shrews and Sparrow Hawks. o The site experiences surface water flooding which has the potential to increase nitrate levels in Solent basin • Public amenities o Primary school spaces are already very limited. The plans do not envisage the development of any new primary school until the end of the development period o No additional medical facilities • Deliverability o The developer’s proposal is very brief and it is therefore very hard to adequately evaluate the proposal o No building contractor is identified o The area’s current plan is for provision of 175 homes. This development significantly exceeds that level and therefore constitutes unnecessary overprovision o The outlined plan refers to provision of 260 affordable homes although it has been made clear by the planning inspector (Appeal findings – section 68) that more affordable housing is not required. If the proposed affordable housing is not built then the size of the development drops to 390 units and consequently would not meet EHDC requirement for a Large Development Site o There is no mains sewer and current drainage would require extensive development o The site is significantly sloping and is therefore assumed to be challenging to develop o The access is via either derestricted dual carriageway or single-track country lanes which limits the safe access for construction vehicles o The land opposite Gravel Lane and land between Barn Lane and A31 has previously been given the status of 'Undevelopable' in Land Availability Assessment o Much of the site is outside the Local Plans Settlement Policy Boundary o There is no firm commitment to provide additional local employment

Land West of Lymington Bottom Road – OBJECT – This site is in my view unsuitable, unsustainable and undeliverable for the following reasons:

• Social cohesion and sense of place o Soldridge. The development diminishes the sense of place and character of Soldridge, which borders the development. Soldridge is a small tight knit community with strong spirit which owns its own community assets and celebrates recurring events such as the long-running Soldridge Music Festival. Community spirit and cohesion will be irreparably damaged by the development. o Soldridge is a quiet rural area. The development will dramatically increase noise level for existing residents o The size and scale of the development harm the essential rural feel of South Medstead / Four Marks o The development will lead to a population density in South Medstead / Four Marks considerably in excess of what is appropriate for a rural village • Protection of countryside o The proposed site is situated in what is currently appealing open countryside overlooked by a number of residents and which is a home to diverse wildlife o CP19 of the Joint Core Strategy says: “The only development allowed in the countryside will be that with a genuine and proven need for a countryside location, such as that necessary for farming, forestry, or other rural enterprises” – this development appears to fail this test • Roads and transport o Traffic travelling up Grosvenor Road and onto Soldridge Road would be increased. This is a narrow windy road with dangerous blind blind turns after the tunnel. It is therefore not appropriate for increased traffic o Traffic through Soldridge would generally be increased and this would significantly impact safety of walkers and horse riders who use the area extensively, particularly when accessing the ancient Gullet Woods o Increased traffic on single track roads with no pavements would significantly impact safety of walkers and horse riders who use the area extensively o Parts of the development will be considerable distances from current public transport which will encourage further car usage o Introduction of traffic calming measures will negatively impact traffic flow through Four Marks, which is already heavily congested o Four Marks has no train station o The Alton to Winchester bus route is infrequent and was recently reported as the most expensive in the UK (widely reported 5 May 2019) o The absence of a train service and regular/affordable bus service lead to a disproportionate increase in the number of car journeys. The UK parliament has publicly recommended measures to drastically reduce car use (reported in the Guardian 22 August 2019) • Environment o Soldridge and the western edge of South Medstead benefit from superb night skies and low light pollution. The proposed site will significantly increase light pollution o The site experiences surface water flooding which has the potential to increase nitrate levels in Solent basin o South Medstead, Four Marks and Soldridge enjoy profuse and diverse wildlife which will be adversely impacted by the development. The area enjoys rare plants and species such as Bee Orchids, owls, bats, Red Kites, butterflies, moths, shrews and Sparrow Hawks. • Public amenities o Proposed school is close to the A31 junction which will result in further car journeys o No additional medical facilities • Deliverability o The developer’s proposal is very brief and it is therefore very hard to adequately evaluate the proposal o The area’s current plan is for provision of 175 homes. This significantly exceeds that level and therefore constitutes unnecessary overprovision o The outlined plan refers to provision of 260 affordable homes although it has been made clear by the planning inspector (Appeal findings – section 68) that more affordable housing is not required. If the proposed affordable housing is not built then the size of the development drops to 390 units and consequently would not meet EHDC requirement for a Large Development Site. o Challenging site to develop due to the access, drainage and sewerage issues, making it less deliverable and more at risk given high affordable housing proportion o The site is owned by seven land owners o The land proposed for the employment site and land to the West of Lymington Barn has previously been given the status of 'Undevelopable' in Land Availability Assessment and both are outside the Local Plans Settlement Policy Boundary o The access is via small village roads or country lanes which limits the safe access for construction vehicles o Much of the site is outside the Local Plans Settlement Policy Boundary o There is no firm commitment to provide additional local employment o There is no mains sewer

South Medstead – OBJECT – This site is in my view unsuitable, unsustainable and undeliverable for the following reasons: • Social cohesion and sense of place o The size and scale of the development harm the essential rural feel of South Medstead / Four Marks o The development will lead to a population density in South Medstead / Four Marks considerably in excess of what is appropriate for a rural village o Medstead has a distinct community from South Medstead / Four Marks and this sprawling development reduces the green space between the two communities • Protection of countryside o The proposed site is situated in what is currently appealing open countryside overlooked by a number of residents and which is a home to diverse wildlife o CP19 of the Joint Core Strategy says: “The only development allowed in the countryside will be that with a genuine and proven need for a countryside location, such as that necessary for farming, forestry, or other rural enterprises” – this development appears to fail this test • Roads and transport o The site is a considerable distance from the A31 bus stop and there are no pavements o The site would primarily be accessed by Lymington Bottom Road which is single track when passing under the railway. Lymington Bottom Road is already busy at this point and could not sustain further traffic o The Lymington Bottom Road/A31 junction is extremely busy and at rush hour it takes considerable time to turn right. This would be exacerbated by the additional traffic o Four Marks has no train station o The Alton to Winchester bus route is infrequent and was recently reported as the most expensive in the UK (widely reported 5 May 2019) o The absence of a train service and regular/affordable bus service lead to a disproportionate increase in the number of car journeys. The UK parliament has publicly recommended measures to drastically reduce car use (reported in the Guardian 22 August 2019) • Environment o South Medstead benefits from superb night skies and low light pollution. The proposed site will significantly increase light pollution o South Medstead enjoys profuse and diverse wildlife which will be adversely impacted by the development. The area enjoys rare plants and species such as Bee Orchids, owls, bats, Red Kites, butterflies, moths, shrews and Sparrow Hawks. • Public amenities o Primary school spaces are already very limited. The plans do not envisage the development of any new primary school o No additional medical facilities • Deliverability o The plan erodes the green space or “local gap” between Medstead and South Medstead / Four Marks. Policy 2 of the Local Plan says any development in this area should only be permitted if “a it would not undermine the physical and/ or visual separation of settlements; b. it would not compromise the integrity of the Local Gap, either individually or cumulatively with other existing or proposed development; and c. it cannot be located elsewhere”. The development appears to fail this test on all three counts o The developer’s proposal is very brief and it is therefore very hard to adequately evaluate the proposal o The area’s current plan is for provision of 175 homes. This significantly exceeds that level and therefore constitutes unnecessary overprovision

Four Marks South – OBJECT – This site is in my view unsuitable, unsustainable and undeliverable for the following reasons:

• Social cohesion and sense of place o The size and scale of the development harm the essential rural feel of Four Marks o The development will lead to a population density in Four Marks considerably in excess of what is appropriate for a rural village • Protection of countryside o The proposed site is situated in what is currently appealing open countryside overlooked by a number of residents and which is a home to diverse wildlife o CP19 of the Joint Core Strategy says: “The only development allowed in the countryside will be that with a genuine and proven need for a countryside location, such as that necessary for farming, forestry, or other rural enterprises” – this development appears to fail this test • Roads and transport o The A31 junction is extremely busy and at rush hour it takes considerable time to turn right. This would be exacerbated by the additional traffic o Four Marks has no train station o The Alton to Winchester bus route is infrequent and was recently reported as the most expensive in the UK (widely reported 5 May 2019) o The absence of a train service and regular/affordable bus service lead to a disproportionate increase in the number of car journeys. The UK parliament has publicly recommended measures to drastically reduce car use (reported in the Guardian 22 August 2019) • Environment o South Four Marks benefits from superb night skies and low light pollution. The proposed site will significantly increase light pollution o South Four Marks enjoys profuse and diverse wildlife which will be adversely impacted by the development. The area enjoys rare plants and species such as Bee Orchids, owls, bats, Red Kites, butterflies, moths, shrews and Sparrow Hawks. • Public amenities o There are no firm commitments for additional infrastructure • Deliverability o The developer’s proposal is very brief and it is therefore very hard to adequately evaluate the proposal o The area’s current plan is for provision of 175 homes. This significantly exceeds that level and therefore constitutes unnecessary overprovision o The number of affordable homes are unspecified. The area does not need further affordable homes o The site is outside the settlement boundary o The site is fragmented and each area is to be developed by a separate developer o The development plan is to last 11 years which will have significant long-term impact on residents o The development includes land for which planning permission for a housing development has already been refused (EHDC reference 56082/003)

Northbrook Park – SUPPORT – This site is in my view suitable, sustainable and deliverable for the following reasons:

• Social cohesion and sense of place o Northbrook Park appears to be a coherent and highly planned approach to development. The plan includes a square, open spaces, access to woods and new schools. The design appears to give considerable thought to how to foster a cohesive community. This contrasts significantly with the hap-hazard and opportunistic plans offered elsewhere. o The plans also include pub, hall, shops, hi-tech community hub and will be managed by a village trust o This genuinely seems like a brilliant approach to sensitive development and is exactly the sort of thing we need to be supporting • Protection of countryside o Appears that much of the site is already screened by existing woodland o The plans contemplate considerable additional green space for recreational use • Roads and transport o The site is well located for easy access to dual carriageway A31 o Most commuters head east towards London. This therefore has less traffic impact than Four Marks developments • Environment o Set up and management of a village car sharing scheme o Provision of centralised (on road) electric car charging hub facilities and provision of on-plot car charging points o The site is close to Bentley train station o The developer has committed to supporting further bus provision • Public amenities o Village school to be created during the development • Deliverability o Single landowner who appears to be offering long-term engagement and support for the project o 800 houses in single site, which provides a significant proportion of the required total homes

Whitehill & Bordon – SUPPORT – This site is in my view suitable, sustainable and deliverable for the following reasons:

Whitehill and Bordon – Rationale for my support

• Social cohesion and sense of place o The area is already a town of considerable size and so is better able to absorb the quantum of homes envisaged than many other proposals o Site has easy access to existing town centre • Protection of countryside o Unlike many other plans, this plan makes use of brown field sites. should do everything it can to protect its countryside, so it makes sense to develop brown field wherever possible • Roads and transport o Excellent local infrastructure following recent investment • Environment o Considerably less environmental impact than some other plans due to brown field nature of development o The town has considerable employment opportunities so makes commuting by car less likely than some proposals • Public amenities o Provision for development of appropriate facilities such as cinema and employment hubs o Primary school planned o Existing mains drainage in the area • Deliverability o One developer and one major landowner o Landowner has the potential to release further land in future

Yours faithfully