DOCSLIB.ORG

Objections to the Proposed Four Marks South Large Development Site

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Objections to the Proposed Four Marks South Large Development Site 11/1/2019 Mail - Woodgate, Jenny - Outlook Objections to the proposed Four Marks South Large Development Site Sun 13/10/2019 07:31 To: EHDC - Local Plan <[email protected]> 1 attachments (249 KB) 0 OBJECTION to Four Marks South Large Development Site.docx; Dear Sir or Madam, Please find aached, as Word file <0 OBJECTION to Four Marks South Large Development Site.docx>, my submission of objecons to the Four Marks South Large Development Site proposal. Kind regards, ___________________________ https://outlook.office365.com/mail/none/id/AAMkADIxNjE3NWJlLTMxYmEtNDEwZC1iOGM4LTYxOTllYjNmN2MzZQBGAAAAAABrEkrzGtHSSpsf… 1/1 Objections to the proposed Four Marks South Large Development Site Objections concerning Large Development Sites (Regulation 18) Consultation Questionnaire (3 September – 15 October 2019) Objection submitted by: Name: Email: Address Line 1: Post Town: Post Code: Objections submitted by email to: [email protected] And also, by post to: Planning Policy, East Hampshire District Council, Penns Place, Petersfield, Hampshire GU31 4EX 1 Proposed Four Marks South Large Development - Comments & Objections A Brief Summary of objections to the proposed Four Marks South Large Development Site, with greater detail, fuller argumentation and source references shown below: A) General Comments and Objections based on relevant local, Council and UK Government documentation Local, East Hampshire District Council and UK Government documentation all confirm that the proposed Four Marks South Large Development Site is inappropriate and contravenes, conflicts with or violates local, Council and UK Government policies (see more detailed argumentation in the proposed Four Marks South Large Development Site ‘Objections in Greater Detail’ section below this ‘Brief Summary’): • The Four Marks settlement boundary does not include the land designated for the proposed Four Marks South Large Development Site. • Countryside is defined as any area outside a Settlement Policy Boundary and development will be largely restricted in the countryside to protect its character and attractiveness. • Policies will be put in place to help retain the rural character of the parishes as this is seen to be central to the character of both the Four Marks and Medstead settlements and something to be cherished and protected. • The individual identity of settlements and the integrity of predominantly open and undeveloped land between settlements will not be undermined, furthermore, development proposals in the countryside will only be granted planning permission in exceptional circumstances where there is a genuine and proven need for a countryside location and they are in compliance with other policies in the Development Plan. • It is not appropriate to further widen the settlement ribbon by absorbing a swathe of the rural farmland that bounds the Four Marks settlement along its southern boundary. • The housing requirement for Four Marks/South Medstead has already been exceeded • Once ‘made’, neighbourhood plan policies form part of the development plan used when determining planning applications and where a planning application conflicts with an up-to-date development plan (including any neighbourhood plans that form part of the development plan), permission should not usually be granted. • The Telegraph Lane area of Four Marks, which includes a part of the proposed Four Marks South Large Development Site, is considered to be an area with low levels of service provision and infrastructure but in a tranquil environment with good dark night skies. These latter qualities are considered to be under threat to creeping suburbanisation and plot intensification resulting in, amongst others things, some insensitive infill and this requires: that areas should be protected from further intensification of development or change of use; that development will only be permitted if it maintains the overall character of the area and does not have a detrimental impact on it; and that infilling development will not be permitted. • The proposed Four Marks South Large Development Site is inappropriate and will provide an enclave that may be more closely associated with a city suburban estate and this is considered to be out of keeping with the interests of the Four Marks village. • A rapid increase in development affects some areas, for example, Four Marks, with sites becoming built up over a short space of time but without clear integration with the surroundings; there is a corresponding loss of tranquillity as areas become busier and also a loss of views and connection with countryside where development has been extended. Furthermore, intensification of land for development within and around areas is putting pressure on existing facilities and affecting the quality of the rights of way network. 2 • An increase in development, particularly around key settlements such as Four Marks, has the potential to detract from landscape character if not managed properly. B) Infrastructure and Sustainability - Material Considerations and Objections • To date the infrastructure to support a sustainable community has failed to keep pace with housing developments and this will be further exacerbated by the proposed Four Marks South Large Development Site. • Already today there is congestion during peak times at the Telegraph Lane junction with the A31, and massive traffic congestion can be expected to occur when a considerable number of vehicles from the 800 or more new homes on the proposed Four Marks South Large Development Site wish to access the A31, in addition to those that already do so. • The proposed Four Marks South Large Development Site does not, in any satisfactory way, address the considerable extra vehicle usage that can be expected to descend upon the narrow village roadways and particularly the A31 junctions at Lymington Bottom and Telegraph Lane. C) Biodiversity and Conservation Objections • The published and widely distributed Four Marks South Large Development Site leaflet contains land biodiversity and ecological errors that lead one to suspect that there may well be a number of other proposed facts presented here that are either economical with the truth or just plain incorrect. The truth is that this land is not of “poor quality” and it harbours considerable bio-diversity. • The creation of the proposed Four Marks South Large Development Site will undoubtedly destroy wildlife and will certainly affect the red kite, a legally protected species. • Construction of the proposed Four Marks South Large Development Site will reduce or remove the existing farmland biodiversity and maybe a rare orchid species. D) Other Development Plans, Additional Comments and Objections • Why does the Railway Station Hub proposal outlined in the Neighbourhood Plan 2015-2028, not now appear as a reasonably Large Development Site for all the good reasons cited in the 2015-28 Neighbourhood plan? • The Four Marks South Large Development Site consists of a real hotchpotch of pieces of land that have been scrambled together to construct a large infilled site, the land for which is to be acquired from a variety of different landowners, by five different developers, and therefore the site has necessarily been brought together with a totally irregular formation. In fact, the proposed Four Marks South Large Development Site can be considered to be just one huge infill between Blackberry Lane and Alton Lane. Infill on this scale for the proposed Four Marks South Large Development Site is both inappropriate and not normally permitted. • 10 Large Development sites is a nice round number. Why not 3 or 5 or 15 or 20 or more? And of the 10 there are several which may be inappropriate including the Four Marks South Large Development Site, which is totally inappropriate. • Three, maybe four, of the 10 Large Development Sites would seem to be far more appropriate sites than that at Four Marks South and particularly since properties bought in Four Marks were bought with sure knowledge that the Four Marks Settlement Policy Boundary had been supported and confirmed on many occasions and which had been cited in several local and Council documents. 3 • In response to its own Frequently Asked Question (FAQs), the East Hampshire District Council has confirmed that the infrastructure for Four Marks had not kept pace with recent development and that the absorption of the proposed Four Marks South Large Development Site would indeed exacerbate this. • The East Hampshire District Council hoped or believed that consultation on the proposed Four Marks South Large Development Site would establish a robust evidence base – all this without disclosing to the public, that were to be involved in the consultation, 1) who it was that provided the so called detailed comments refuting the Council’s view, made in the point above concerning exacerbation of the infrastructure problems (was it one of the developers for the proposed Four Marks South Large Development Site or an interested party?), or even, and just as importantly, 2) what the so called comments were. • If the Council was so fully aware of local concern about infrastructure and services in Four Marks why was it not doing something about it, with or without approval of the Four Marks South Large Development Site? • The developers map does not show 800 homes but merely 427 homes, and squeezing 800 homes, or dwellings as the developers call them, into the area shown on the map would require there to be nearly twice as many dwellings shown on the map than the developers have actually indicated, at a density of 42 dwellings per hectare, which is quite a high figure for a newly developed site, in a rural area, and built on non-previously developed agricultural land. It would seem that maybe the developers have in mind to build pretty small dwellings and gardens on this land in order to cram in 800 dwellings alongside a suitable green infrastructure, so, is this yet another issue on which the developers have mislead us? Furthermore, we might expect that in order to meet the target of 800 or more dwellings, the developers will ‘unexpectedly’ need to reduce the strongly promoted and necessary green space and linkages.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • SITUATION of POLLING STATIONS UK Parliamentary East Hampshire Constituency
    SITUATION OF POLLING STATIONS UK Parliamentary East Hampshire Constituency Date of Election: Thursday 8 June 2017 Hours of Poll: 7:00 am to 10:00 pm Notice is hereby given that: The situation of Polling Stations and the description of persons entitled to vote thereat are as follows: Ranges of electoral Ranges of electoral Station register numbers of Station register numbers of Situation of Polling Station Situation of Polling Station Number persons entitled to vote Number persons entitled to vote thereat thereat Alton Community Centre, Amery Street, St Mary`s R C Church Hall, 59 Normandy 1 AA-1 to AA-1848 2 AB-1 to AB-1961 Alton Street, Alton St Mary`s R C Church Hall, 59 Normandy Holybourne Village Hall, Church Lane, 3 AC-1 to AC-2083 4 AD-1 to AD-1558 Street, Alton Holybourne, Alton Alton Community Centre, Amery Street, 5 AE-1 to AE-2380 All Saints Parish Hall, Queens Road, Alton 6 AF-1 to AF-2418 Alton St John Ambulance Hq, Edgar Hall, Anstey Beech Village Hall, Wellhouse Road, 7 AG-1 to AG-1775/1 8 AH-1 to AH-484/4 Lane Beech Bentworth Jubilee Hall, Church Street, Bentley Memorial Hall, Hole Lane, Bentley 9 AI-1 to AI-892 10 AJ-1 to AJ-465 Bentworth Binsted Sports Pavillion, The Sports Jolly Farmer Public House (Skittle Alley), 11 AKA-1 to AKA-562 12 AKB-1 to AKB-893 Pavillion, The Street, Binsted Binsted Road, Blacknest Liphook Church Centre, Portsmouth Road, Liphook Church Centre, Portsmouth Road, 13 AL-1 to AL-1802 14 AL-1803 to AL-3605/5 Liphook Liphook Liphook Millennium Centre, 2 Ontario Way, Liphook Millennium Centre, 2 Ontario
    [Show full text]
  • Property for Sale in Ash Surrey
    Property For Sale In Ash Surrey Baking Lenard symbolizes intertwistingly while Mohan always disseise his abscesses bereaving consciously, he stellifies so right-about. Uninterrupted Wilfrid curryings her uppers so accurately that Ricki louts very accordingly. Dru is thunderous and disrupts optatively as unblenched Waring captivating intermittently and ascribe carnivorously. Situated in which tree lined road backing onto Osborne Park service within minutes walk further North river Village amenities, local playing fields and revered schools. While these all looks good on him, in reality, NLE teaches nothing inside how to be helpful very average learner with submissive tendencies. Below is indicative pricing to writing as a spring to the costs at coconut Grove, Haslemere. No domain for LCPS guidelines, no its for safety. Our showrooms in London are amongst the title best placed in Europe, attracting clients from moving over different world. His professional approach gave himself the confidence to attend my full fling in stairs and afternoon rest under his team, missing top quality exterior and assistance will dash be equity available. Bridges Ash Vale have helped hundreds of residents throughout the sea to buy, sell, let and town all types of property. Find this Dream Home. Freshly painted throughout and brand new carpet. Each feature of the James is designed with you and your family her mind. They are dedicated to providing the you best adhere the students. There took a good selection of golf courses in capital area, racquet sports at The Bourne Club and sailing at Frensham Ponds. Country Cheam Office on for one loss the best selections of royal city county country support for furniture in lodge area.
    [Show full text]
  • East Hampshire District Council Bordon Sandpit, Hanson Heidelberg - EH Picketts Hill, 480700 138510 Yes Operating Under District Permission
    Site Code LPA Site Name Grid Ref Operator / Agent Safeguarded site Site Narrative - East Hampshire District Council Bordon Sandpit, Hanson Heidelberg - EH Picketts Hill, 480700 138510 Yes Operating under district permission. Not monitored Cement Group Sleaford, Bordon John Huntley - EH Buriton 473224 121048 Yes No planning history (Petersfield) Ltd. Mineral Safeguarding - EH - - Yes Proposed in the HMWP 2013 Area - Whitehill & Bordon Waterbook Road, - EH 472974 139618 Kendall Group Yes Operating under district permission. Not monitored Mill Lane, Alton Sleaford Closed Landfill Site, EH012 EH (Former 479940 138397 Robert Long Consultancy No Former landfill site, now restored. Permission to recontour the site and improve surface drainage not implemented. Coldharbour Landfill Site) Ceased Non-inert landfill, restoration completed May 2019 (27242/014) || Active landfill gas generation; extension to existing leachate treatment plant, installation of inflow balance tank, update SCADA system, chemical and nutrient dosing plant, new pH and DO sensors, sludge extraction Southleigh Forest, Veolia Environmental system, modifications to pipework, caustic soda tank (until 31 December 2020) (06/67492/002) || Temporary erection of a 50 metre full anemometry EH018 EH 473903 108476 No Rowlands Castle Services (UK) Plc mast with four sets of guy cables, anchored 25m from the base to record wind data for a temporary period (F/27242/011/CMA) granted 07/2008; (Woodland and amenity - 2014) || Liaison Panel (0 meetings) main issues: panel mothballed until nearer
    [Show full text]
  • Chawton Park
    What is being proposed? Enhancing Alton’s vitality and viability EHDC Retail Study Destination 2018 Turnover Benchmark Turnover Surplus/Deficit Bentworth Alton 63.47 80.83 -17.36 Chawton Park Whitehill & Bordon 36.89 27.34 +9.55 Large Development Site Alton Liphook 38.17 27.12 +11.05 Clanfield 3.41 1.57 +1.84 Beech Four Marks 4.99 6.78 -1.79 A31 Grayshott 5.89 5.94 -0.05 Chawton Horndean 25.99 31.25 -5.26 A31 Other East Hampshire 4.11 4.11 n/a Total 182.92 184.93 -2.01 Railway Line Convenience goods actual/benchmark turnover in 2018 (£ millions) Source: EHDC 2018 Site Location Plan Employment Allocation The above table is taken from the East Hampshire Retail and Main • 1200 homes including up to 480 affordable homes Town Centre Uses Study Final Report (October 2018): Table 4.4. It • Homes at an average density of 37 dwellings per hectare shows that despite convenience goods retail sales floorspace in • Local centre of up to 1 Ha with pub, shop, community the District collectively trading just under the expected average centre and employment space (-£2.01 million) in 2018, the performance in Alton is significantly below the benchmark turnover by some £17.36million. Key design themes of proposed development: Development at Chawton Park Farm would be sure to increase • High Quality Design • Sustainable Travel Choices footfall, and therefore provide great benefit to the retail economy of • Local Distinctiveness • Civic Pride the town. Proposed Aerial View • Good connections to Nature • Use of Technology • Enhancement of Historic Context • Long-term Management Chawton Park is located less than two miles from the centre • Green Infrastructure Summary of Alton, which is ranked as the No.1 settlement in the East Hampshire District Council Settlement Hierarchy Background How has Alton grown? • The land at Chawton Park is a suitable and appropriate site Paper, December 2018.
    [Show full text]
  • Circular Walk Four Marks to Medstead
    Walk No. 5 A Circular Walk from Four Marks to Medstead 5¼ miles. Time 3 hours. GR. 672361 OS Explorer Map 132 By car: take the A31 from Alton to the village of Four Marks. Just after Charters Close turn right into Boyneswood Road and in about 1/3mile turn right into Chawton Park Wood. There is a free car park. By bus: take the 64 from Alton towards Alresford and alight just past the Four Marks sign at Telegraph Lane bus stop. Walk towards the village and at Boyneswood Road follow car directions above. By train: take the Watercress Line from Alton and alight at Medstead & Four Marks station. At the Alton end of the platform a gate (if locked ask staff to open it) leads to a footpath to Boyneswood Road. Turn left and walk mile along Boyneswood Road to Chawton ParkW ood. The Walk starts at Chawton Park grassy track to level out again and Car Park in Boyneswood Road, then descending to another grassy Medstead. The walk is on public track. footpaths although there is a small amount of road walking on Turn left along this track and in quiet lanes. The walk is mostly on about 150 yards at cross tracks level ground except for one or two (sign posted), take the path on the inclines, but no steep climbs. right which climbs uphill through Most of the stiles are sound and trees to a barrier / gate on the edge in a good state except for one or of the wood. Go through the gate two in Medstead that are broken and walk along a path between a or missing.
    [Show full text]
  • Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation Sincs Hampshire.Pdf
    Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINCs) within Hampshire © Hampshire Biodiversity Information Centre No part of this documentHBIC may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recoding or otherwise without the prior permission of the Hampshire Biodiversity Information Centre Central Grid SINC Ref District SINC Name Ref. SINC Criteria Area (ha) BD0001 Basingstoke & Deane Straits Copse, St. Mary Bourne SU38905040 1A 2.14 BD0002 Basingstoke & Deane Lee's Wood SU39005080 1A 1.99 BD0003 Basingstoke & Deane Great Wallop Hill Copse SU39005200 1A/1B 21.07 BD0004 Basingstoke & Deane Hackwood Copse SU39504950 1A 11.74 BD0005 Basingstoke & Deane Stokehill Farm Down SU39605130 2A 4.02 BD0006 Basingstoke & Deane Juniper Rough SU39605289 2D 1.16 BD0007 Basingstoke & Deane Leafy Grove Copse SU39685080 1A 1.83 BD0008 Basingstoke & Deane Trinley Wood SU39804900 1A 6.58 BD0009 Basingstoke & Deane East Woodhay Down SU39806040 2A 29.57 BD0010 Basingstoke & Deane Ten Acre Brow (East) SU39965580 1A 0.55 BD0011 Basingstoke & Deane Berries Copse SU40106240 1A 2.93 BD0012 Basingstoke & Deane Sidley Wood North SU40305590 1A 3.63 BD0013 Basingstoke & Deane The Oaks Grassland SU40405920 2A 1.12 BD0014 Basingstoke & Deane Sidley Wood South SU40505520 1B 1.87 BD0015 Basingstoke & Deane West Of Codley Copse SU40505680 2D/6A 0.68 BD0016 Basingstoke & Deane Hitchen Copse SU40505850 1A 13.91 BD0017 Basingstoke & Deane Pilot Hill: Field To The South-East SU40505900 2A/6A 4.62
    [Show full text]
  • Minutes of Four Marks Annual
    FOUR MARKS PARISH COUNCIL Minutes of the ANNUAL PARISH MEETING Held on Wednesday 8TH APRIL 2015, commencing at 7.30pm At the Village Hall, Four Marks __________________________________________________________________________ Four Marks’ Annual Parish Meeting was held in the Village Hall on Wednesday 8th April 2015 commencing at 7.30pm The Chairman opened the meeting by welcoming everyone, and introduced our speaker for the evening, Robin Jarman, Deputy Police and Crime Commissioner Hampshire and Isle of Wight. Following a very interesting presentation by Robin Jarman the following questions were asked: Q. Cllr Thomas, are other District Council’s funding additional PCSO’S, as East Hampshire District Council are planning to do? A. Not that he was aware of, however Simon Hayes was keen to increase them where possible. Q. Cllr Sensier. Would the priorities listed have taken place without this change? A. Mr Jarman responded by saying that they had taken on the existing police authority staff, which had been an interesting experience, staff had not increased but had changed, a good deal of networking was taking place to find out what was needed, and a communications team brought in. Q. Cllr Timms. Can you please reiterate how important is CCTV? A. Extremely important, and with its inception, the police are able to use technology to their advantage and for capturing evidence. Q. Cllr Foster. You spoke about youth engagement, how are you doing this? And, are Street pastors relevant? A. A group of youths has been compiled, although keeps changing, from all walks of life and areas, such as Winchester, Southampton and Portsmouth, and new head co-ordinator is just about to start.
    [Show full text]
  • Guildford Borough Council’S New Local Plan Will Be Well Underway
    Ash Matters The Ash Parish Council Newsletter Issue Four 2013 Chairman’s Bit By the time you read this, consultation on Guildford Borough Council’s new Local Plan will be well underway. The Local Plan covers the whole of the borough and is the framework for the growth we need to accommodate in the next 20 years. It is a plan for new homes, places of work, shops and leisure. The Borough’s Local Plan will provide information on the scale and type of development. It will also identify the general locations for development and give indication of the infrastructure required to support it. It is vital that local people are involved and contribute to the Local Plan and the future of the Borough and I encourage as many of you as possible to share your views through this consultation. For more information and to complete the questionnaire giving Guildford Borough Council your view go to: www.guildfordlocalplan.info; tele- phone 01483 444471; On Twitter @GuildfordBC or on Facebook face- book.com/GuildfordBC. Councillor Nigel Manning Chairman, Ash Parish Council Looking for a trader you can rely on? With winter fast approaching, are you looking to make home improvements? Use Surrey County Council’s Buy with Confidence scheme to find details of reliable local traders. The scheme is run by Surrey County Council Trading Standards, and allows consumers to see a range of businesses from across the County who have all been vetted and approved by the Trading Standards Officers. The scheme has a range of traders listed, from plumbers to gardeners, and many of the traders will consider smaller jobs for £75.00 or under.
    [Show full text]
  • East Hampshire Primary Care Trust
    DOH802258-0001 East Hampshire Primary Care Trust Policy No: CLN/R3 HEALTH RECORDS ALL SPECIALTIES O CORE STANDARDS AND PROCEDURES O Compiled by Portsmouth HealthCare NHS Trust Health Records User Group December 1998 Updated February 2000 Updated May 2001 Updated July 2004 (East Hampshire PCT) vl-0 T:\shared~East Hampshire PCT~PoIicies\ClinicaI~RECORDS PROCEDURES vl-0.doc 1 DOH802258-0002 East Hampshire Primary Care Trust HEALTH RECORDS STANDARDS / PROCEDURES ° INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................ 3 2. WHY DO WE MAINTAIN HEALTH RECORDS ...................................................................... 3 (1) Aim of the Health Record .................................................................................................. 3 (2) Ways to Improve ................................................................................................................. 3 ° DATA PROTECTION - PATIENT ACCESS TO PERSONAL INFORMATION REQUESTS 4 4. ADMISSION PROCESS .............................................................................................................. 4 5. CLINIC PREPARATION ............................................................................................................. 6 6. CLINIC RECEPTION .................................................................................................................. 7 7. CLINICAL CODING PROCEDURES ........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix 2 -W2W Data
    Wheels to work hirers - East Hampshire District Council August 2009 - August 2014 Rider Age Length of Referred by Urban Purpose of Did they Location End Start After loan loan or loan find destination date (months) Rural work? 1 17 11 Press release Rural Work N/A Bordon Alton 12/09 Moped/motorbike 2 19 11 Alton JCP Urban Job seeking Yes East Worldham Various 02/10 3 21 11 Employer Rural Work N/A Liss Milland 02/10 Moped/motorbike 4 22 7 Alton JCP Rural Work N/A Alton Basingstoke 04/10 Moped/motorbike 5 19 8 Community Rural Work N/A Headley Down/ Haslemere 07/10 Moped/motorbike Centre Bordon 6 17 3 Alton JCP Rural Work N/A Upper Wield Four Marks 08/18 Public tranpsort 7 19 4 Employer Rural Work N/A Medstead / Alton 09/10 Public tranpsort / Alton moved closer to work 8 20 1 Bordon JCP Rural Job seeking No Whitehill / Various 08-Oct Moped/motorbike Bordon 9 20 4 Self referal Rural Work N/A Bordon Lindford 04/10 Public transport 10 18 3 EH Youth Rural Job seeking Yes Liphook Basingstoke 07/10 Moped/motorbike Offending 11 18 5 Info via Youth Rural Job seeking Yes Headley/ Various 11/10 Moped/motorbike Tube Bordon 12 17 4 Connexions Rural Job seeking yes Liphook Various 12/10 13 19 4 Previous hirer Urban Work N/A Alton Lasham 01/11 Moped/motorbike 14 16 2 Employer Rural Work N/A Clanfield Cosham 01/11 Moped/motorbike 15 19 1 Bordon JCP Rural Job seeking Yes Bordon Petersfield 03/10 Moped/motorbike 16 20 5 Press release Urban Work N/A Alton Alton 07/10 Moped/motorbike 17 20 3 Alton JCP Rural Job seeking Yes Ropley Alton 02/10 Car 18 20 2 Employer
    [Show full text]
  • Four Marks South Information Pack
    FOUR MARKS SOUTH LARGE DEVELOPMENT SITE INFORMATION PACK Contents Introduction 2 Site Promotion Team 2 Map of Four Marks South Large Development Site 3 Site Considerations 4 Proposed Development Opportunities 5 Understanding constraints & considerations to identify proposed development opportunities 6 Delivery and timescales 6 Meeting identified needs in a sustainable way 7 Local Communities 12 1 Introduction Four Marks South Consortium comprises a team of locally and nationally known developers. This mix brings a breadth of experience and unique balance of strategic expertise alongside a real focus on localism and community involvement. The proposals drawn together by the Consortium seek to deliver a development that reflects the national objective to provide housing in sustainable locations whilst also delivering improvements that reflect local aspirations. The delivery of community benefits has been at the forefront of the masterplanning and design approach. The relocated school will be located to enable parents and children to walk to and from it together with space for safe access for bikes and cars to be designed in, including parking for drop off and pick up. Employment land to provide space for small and start-up businesses and new jobs for local people will be provided in a location where people can walk to work. A community facility will provide space for local residents to enjoy and open space will be provided including an improved right of way and new links. The masterplan includes a care home, extra care housing and land for self-build projects to provide a diversity of new offerings and housing options. This will provide Four Marks with a wider variety of housing options and deliver space for new residents to support the viability of existing services.
    [Show full text]
  • Old Roads in Central Hants by C
    324 OLD ROADS IN CENTRAL HANTS BY C. F. C. HAWKES. Although many of the roads to be found in this country are of very great age, yet none of them are older than the earliest settlements. Villages and camps were not established, along the line of already existing roads, but roads grew up as links between settlements. Before the Saxon invasion all the villages were oh the uplands, and hence the roads followed the lines of the ridges from one to another. This was the best way for several reasons:—It was the driest, and generally avoided streams, and it lay over open ground; moreover, the safest route for travel . is always that with the widest view. But the principal reason was that the uplands were the centres of population. The oldest prehistoric roads are the long trade routes stretch- ing right across the country, which form the skeleton of the whole system: they keep, wherever possible, to the high ridge tops or just on the south brow, and where a ridge has to be crossed it is usually at a saddle with an easy gradient: for the crossing of a river valley, they generally descend by some spur with a gentle slope, and always choose a place as high up the river as possible, where the difficult wet valley is narrow. But later there grew up parallel roads beside them, which kept to the lower slopes of the ridges, and were used in dry summer weather, when travellers were not forced to get right to the crest of a ridge to find a passable road.
    [Show full text]