DOCSLIB.ORG

Northbrook Park Whitehill & Bordon West Of

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Northbrook Park Whitehill & Bordon West Of 10/17/2019 Mail - Woodgate, Jenny - Outlook Large development sites consultation Mon 07/10/2019 16:56 To: EHDC - Local Plan <[email protected]> 1 attachments (25 KB) MEDSTEAD FOUR MARKS BUILDING THREAT.docx; Please find enclosed my support for: NORTHBROOK PARK WHITEHILL & BORDON And my objections to; WEST OF LYMINGTON BOTTOM ROAD, SOUTH MEDSTEAD LAND SOUTH OF WINCHESTER ROAD FOUR MARKS SOUTH MEDSTEAD FOUR MARKS SOUTH The attachment to this email provides my reasons. https://outlook.office365.com/mail/none/id/AAMkADIxNjE3NWJlLTMxYmEtNDEwZC1iOGM4LTYxOTllYjNmN2MzZQBGAAAAAABrEkrzGtHSSpsf… 1/2 10/17/2019 Mail - Woodgate, Jenny - Outlook Best regards https://outlook.office365.com/mail/none/id/AAMkADIxNjE3NWJlLTMxYmEtNDEwZC1iOGM4LTYxOTllYjNmN2MzZQBGAAAAAABrEkrzGtHSSpsf… 2/2 SUPPORT TO NORTHBROOK PARK • Outstanding and innovative design, containing high levels of sustainability, with proven, proactive and effective engagement with the local community. • The proposal exhibits a strong sense of place, using the arrangement of streets, spaces and building types that creates an attractive, welcoming and distinctive places to live, work and visit. • It is underpinned by a village trust that is fully funded in perpetuity upfront by the landowner. This will manage community assets including village bus services, village hall, work hub, local pub, village stores and shops, playground, outdoor gym, village green and a village management team, thus creating an outstanding, unique sustainable community. • Safe and convenient access to and from the A31, and the creation of vehicle accessible routes that will ensure optimum traffic flow, east and west between Farnham and Alton • It is by far the preferable solution to meeting a substantial amount of the future housing needs of East Hampshire District Council. It fulfils the draft policy by concentrating a large proportion of development on one site that prevents sporadic development on areas where existing infrastructure is already stretched. • One land owner and one developer. • As well as the benefits from reinforcing existing communities there would be both significant direct inward investment into the local area through job creation (during the construction phases and within new employment generating uses), and additional local expenditure. The new supporting employment land will generate business uses that supports economic growth and jobs, along with the relative sustainability in the rural areas surrounding Northbrook Park. • When this development is complete it will become one of England’s outstanding garden villages. The blueprint for other sites to copy! SUPPORT TO WHITEHILL & BORDON • Excellent site, already under way for 2,400 dwellings, a new town centre, new schools, roads, open space and community/sports/leisure facilities, employment development, supporting infrastructure. • It is a logical further development phase of a new town. • New transport links already in place. • There is scope for the further sustainable expansion to provide additional homes, employment land, and open space/SANGS. It represents logical further phases of development within the HPA area and under pins the re-use and redevelopment and regeneration of the area. • 1,284 homes will be classed as affordable, a significant percentage of the total. • Primary school planned and “state of the art” secondary school to be opened shortly. • Outstanding proposal for a Green Town where quality of life, opportunity and environment will be achieved for both existing and new residents. Equally for those living in older homes as well as those in new homes. • Whitehill & Bordon will show what is possible to create a 100% sustainable community and be an example for other towns and areas needing to grow. OBJECTION TO WEST OF LYMINGTON BOTTOM ROAD, SOUTH MEDSTEAD • The development is neither self-contained nor separate, it is simply more housing “bolted- on” to an existing settlement. • Current pupil availability in existing schools is over committed. The children of the occupants of the 650 houses cannot wait eight years for the 2 form school to be built. When built there will be inadequate capacity for the expected 900 children. • Where will these 900 children receive secondary education? Nothing is proposed in the plan. • No plans for increasing GP surgery capacity. Existing surgery cannot cope with existing population. In September 2019. Medstead/ Lymington Bottom residents have a current 3 weeks wait for an appointment. The additional 900 residents virtually doubles the workload of the current medical facilities. • Traffic volumes created by this development will put over 1,000 extra vehicles onto Lymington Bottom Road, in turn impacting traffic safety on the highway network. This will create severe jams, (especially at rush hour) on the approaches to the single carriage way under the Lymington Bottom Road railway bridge. These idling cars, queuing, will cause great harm to the environment by adding circa 100 tonnes of carbon into the atmosphere. Especially harmful to children who have to walk along these routes and then wait at bus stops for the school bus to arrive. • In summary this proposal is ill thought out and written to justify building 650 houses. It does not provide the ongoing needs of a potential 1,000 residents. The proposal is un-stainable, undeliverable, un-necessary and unsuitable. OBJECTION TO Land South of Winchester Road Four Marks • It is in direct contravention described in the EHDC Core Strategy. Section CP19 (development in the countryside). The site is located across the boundary between Four Marks and Ropley and is outside the settlement policy boundaries of both M+FM neighbourhood plan and Ropley neighbourhood plan. • It is ugly urbanisation, building ribbon development of the worst type, sprawling out into the countryside, destroying a long established, quiet and peaceful rural community. • The potential for a new roundabout to facilitate access between Grosvenor Road and Gravel Lane would create a rat run for vehicles travelling to Basingstoke/by passing Four Marks. Ensuing safety problems for the Soldridge community together with associated noise and atmospheric pollution. Traffic would need to negotiate a blind S bend to pass under single lane restricted Railway Bridge that will create severe unsighted traffic congestion jams. As there is no pavement pedestrians safety will be critically endangered. • Heavy rainfall, especially in the winter, flows down the entire length of Grosvenor Road, (starting from the intersection of Upper Soldridge Road, north of the bridge, outside the area) creating at times impassable ford at the intersection with A31. • Additionally dangerous nitrates from this area will ultimately flow into the Solent with severe biodiversity consequences. • The views of passengers travelling on the long established rural heritage railway will be destroyed. The Watercress Line as an attraction will lose its appeal. No visitors will patronise a heritage railway that only provides a vista of urban development. • Provision of 15 gypsy and traveller pitches and 15 travelling show people plots would be out of character for this area. It would severely impact the integration and social cohesion of the environment. • In the same way consideration for the allocation of employment land for the erection of workshop/mini factories would be a significant blot on this rural landscape. Panoramic views for the residents of Gravel Lane and visitors wishing to enjoy the countryside would only see industry replacing verdant pastures of Hampshire’s heritage. • Overall the developer’s plan is very sketchy with insufficient infrastructure for the needs of circa 1,000 residents in a major housing estate. Maybe this is because no building contractor is identified, indicating this proposal is speculative. For example they cannot have surveyed access to the employment area in Gravel Lane where their map proposal shows access is from the A31. At present this route is almost unsafe for small private cars. When commercial vehicles and HGV’s attempt this risky manoeuvre; from the high speed derestricted A31 (crossing a central reservation coming from the east) then entering a virtually blind single deep gradient carriageway it makes a nonsense of the developer’s literature that states “Key design considerations for the site include safe access from the A31”. This will mean it will be only a matter of time before an accident happens. • What other flaws have they overlooked in their proposal? OBJECTION TO South Medstead • Proposes to construct un-required housing which significantly exceeds the planned development of 175 units by 2028 (M+FM neighbourhood plan). Recent developments, on- going developments and developments for which planning permission has already been given already exceed the required development by 81%. • The proposed development is outside the settlement policy boundary for Medstead (M+FM neighbourhood plan). Conflicts with EHDC Joint Core Strategy CP19. • The proposed development will diminish the undeveloped “local gap” which exists between Medstead and South-Medstead-Four-Marks the preservation of which is a priority addressed in Policy 2 of M+FM neighbourhood plan. • The development is neither self-contained nor separate but is simply more housing “bolted- on” to an existing settlement. • Although the proposal mentions a “potential” for the development of employment and a school there is no commitment to construct any infrastructure. Four Marks and Medstead are already deficient
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]
  • Special Collections Online
    • 1104 RI<~F TRADE~. ( HAMPFEIRE • REFRESHMENT RooMs-continued. Eccleshall J. & Sons, Pier street, San- Lodge A. 2()6 Commercial rd. Landpi1 Alesso Emilio, 23 King's rd. Sthsea down, Isle of Wight Lowe Mrs. S. Blackgang,Chale,Ventnr Andrews Mrs. M. 53Normandy st . .A..ltn Edwards Miss Mary, Medina rd.Cowes ¥adden Mrs. Eliza, 6t Forton l'Oad, Applin Mrs. Louisa., I3 Stour road, Emery John, 43 High street, Alton Forton, Gosport Christchurch English Mrs. Emily L. The Home" ~adden John, Handyman Avery Mrs. F. 19 Ordnance rd.Portsea stead, Highcliff, Christchurch Unicorn road; 7, g, II & I3 Spring Baker Fredk. 53 Osborne rd. Southsea Evans J. & Co. Lee-on-the-Solent, street & Station street, I.a.ndport Balfry Cecil, Toll Gate house, Slea- Gosport Marshall Mrs. L. Redhill, .Moordown, ford, Bordon Evans & Co.13 Above Bar st.Sthmptn Bournemouth Barton Frederick A. 6 Pier st. Ryde Fall Mrs. Alice, Victoria road, Wool- Martin Mrs. S. C. 86 Wimborne rd. Barton Tea House (Mrs. Zoe Fur- ston, Southampton Winton, Bournemouth neau:x, proprietress), Barton-on-Sea, Ferrari & Jacomelli, IBo High street, Mattocks J. 26 Triangle, Bournemth :New Milton SouthamlJtOn Mitchell Henry, I Parkwood l'O!id, Basselt R.2 to 6Commercial pl.Landpt Ferris Chas. I.B .A..lbert rd.Southmptn Pokesdown, Bournemouth Beacham Francis, Branksome chine, Ferris Silvanus John, 59 Victoria rd. Moretti & Lambert, 139, I40 & 141 BranksQme park, Bournemouth W uolston, Southampton High street, Southampton Beer Mrs. G. IBChurch st.Christchrch Field .A..lbt. Church st. Whitchurch Morgan Goorg~. 332 Shirley road, Bell Mrs. E. Lee-on-the-Solent,Gosprt Fisher Hy.
    [Show full text]
  • Planning Agenda
    Planning Agenda You are hereby invited to attend the PLANNING COMMITTEE MEETING of Binsted Parish Council on Thursday August 1st 2019 @ The Pavilion, Binsted GU34 4PB at 7.00pm Sue Hodder Clerk 1. Apologies for absence 2. Chairman’s announcements 3. Declarations of Interest: Councillors are reminded of their responsibility to declare any disclosable pecuniary interest which they may have in any item of business on the agenda no later than when that item is reached. Unless dispensation has been granted, you may not participate in any discussion of, or vote on, any matter in which you have a pecuniary interest. You must withdraw from the room or chamber when the meeting discusses and votes on the matter. 4. To consider requests for Dispensations to allow Councillor’s with Pecuniary Interests to speak and vote Planning Applications received a. SDNP/19/02052 Location: 2 Wheatley Place, Wheatley Lane, Kingsley GU35 9PA Proposal: Single storey rear extension following demolition of existing rear extensions b. SDNP/19/03172/HOUS Location: 15 Clements Close, Binsted Alton GU34 4NY Proposal: Conservatory following demolition of existing conservatory c. 32576/004 Location: 5 Weybank, Bentley Farnham GU10 5LB Proposal: Single storey extension to front and porch canopy to front d. SDNP/19/03220/HOUS Location: Per Ardua, Back Lane, Bucks Horn Oak, Farnham GU10 4LW Proposal: Revised plan to reposition front dormer, additional front dormer, pitched roof in lieu of garage flat roof,3 additional sky lights, parapet to side flat roof, pitched roof in lieu of flat roof over utility. e. SDNP/19/02915/HOUS Location: Shumac, Back Lane, Bucks Horn Oak, Farnham GU10 4LN Proposal: Single storey garage extension and garage conversion addition of dormers to front and rear.
    [Show full text]
  • WOOLMER FOREST LIBERAL DEMOCRATS (WFLD)1 COMMENTS on COMMISSION’S DRAFT RECOMMENDATIONS (V1.4) General 1
    WARD BOUNDARY REVIEW 2017 WOOLMER FOREST LIBERAL DEMOCRATS (WFLD)1 COMMENTS ON COMMISSION’S DRAFT RECOMMENDATIONS (V1.4) General 1. This is WFLD’s response to the Commission’s draft recommendations on Liphook, Headley Whitehill Chase, Whitehill Hogmoor & Greatham wards. We accept the recommendations on Grayshott, Lindford and the single-councillor wards in Whitehill & Bordon. 2. We are disappointed by the Commission’s decision to create yet more, multi-councillor wards, especially after most respondents stated their preference for retaining the existing ward structure with its single-councillor wards. As we stressed in our earlier submission, these give an electoral advantage to the biggest party, make it exceedingly difficult for independent candidates and smaller parties to stand and discourages large swathes of the electorate from voting, as can be seen by the poor turnout in local elections. 3. Our experience, from talking to thousands of voters on the doorstep, confirms this discouraging trend. Where there are single-councillor wards most voters tend to get to know the candidates, read their policies and ask questions; in multi-councillor wards most just vote along tribal lines on the assumption that ‘their party has selected the best candidates.’ Indeed, in these larger wards voters seem to lose interest in both the candidates and their policies. This trend is borne out by the consistent party vote ratio in most district elections. Giving voters’ more than one vote does not create electoral equality, it just leads to one party rule which isn’t good for democracy. 4. As we explained, in our initial proposals, we had provided maps on splitting the wards within the existing boundaries.
    [Show full text]
  • Whitehill & Bordon Eco-Town Traffic Management Strategy Hampshire
    Whitehill & Bordon Eco-town Traffic Management Strategy Hampshire County Council February 2013 QM Issue/revision Revision 1 Revision 2 Revision 3 Revision 4 Remarks SECOND DRAFT FINAL DRAFT FINAL REPORT FINAL REPORT Date 16/03/12 13/04/12 17/09/2012 19/02/2013 Prepared by Chris Williams Chris Williams Chris Williams Chris Williams Signature Chris Williams Chris Williams Chris Williams Chris Williams Checked by Nigel Wilkinson Nigel Wilkinson Nigel Wilkinson Peter Day Signature Nigel Wilkinson Nigel Wilkinson Nigel Wilkinson Peter Day Authorised by Peter Day Peter Day Peter Day Peter Day Signature Peter Day Peter Day Peter Day Project number 11581409 11581409 11581409 11581409 File reference J:\11581407 - Whitehill Bordon - Traffic Management Study\TEXT\REPORTS\Whitehill & Bordon Eco-town TM Strategy - February 2013 WSP UK Limited Mountbatten House Basing View Basingstoke Hampshire RG21 4HJ Tel: +44 (0)1256 318800 Fax: +44 (0)1256 318700 http://www.wspgroup.com WSP UK Limited | Registered Address WSP House, 70 Chancery Lane, London, WC2A 1AF, UK | Reg No. 01383511 England | WSP Group plc | Offices worldwide Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 1 Preamble and Background 3 2 National and Local Policy Context 5 3 Eco-town Proposals 9 4 Data Collection 17 5 Town & Parish Council / Public Consultation 23 6 Summary of Existing Concerns 26 7 Option Evaluation 40 8 Proposed Traffic Management Strategy 50 9 Summary & Conclusions Traffic Management Strategy 77 Appendices Appendix A – Phase 1 Consultation Meetings Minutes and Correspondence Appendix B – Phase 2 Consultation Minutes and Correspondence Appendix C – Phase 3 Consultation Responses Appendix D – Matrix of Traffic Management Measures Executive Summary The aim of this study is to develop a Traffic Management Strategy that will provide practical and deliverable strategies for the implementation of physical and softer measures to reduce the impact of the Eco-town proposals on local villages and communities, and to discourage the use by traffic of inappropriate routes.
    [Show full text]
  • Neighbourhood Character Study for East Hampshire District Council Classification and Description December 2018
    Neighbourhood Character Study for East Hampshire District Council Classification and Description December 2018 Section 3: 4. Site Specific Character Area Studies 4.2. North Eastern part of East Hampshire 4. Site Specific Character Area Studies 4.2. North Eastern part of East Hampshire 101 North Eastern part of East Hampshire The Study Areas 4.2.1. Neighbourhood character studies were undertaken for seven areas in the North-East part of East Hampshire and are listed from north-east to south-west: 9. Headley Fields (current H9 Policy Area) 10. Headley Down (current H10 Policy Area) 11. Whitmore Vale and Hammer Lane (suggested as potential H9/H10 policy area) 12. Kingswood Firs, Grayshott (current H9 Policy Area) 13. Waggoners Way Estate (suggested as potential H9/H10 policy area) 14. Eastern Liphook 15. Chiltley Way Area, Liphook (current H9 Policy Area) The study area of Headley Fields is situated on the southern side of Headley, within, but abutting the settlement boundary. The study area of Headley Down lies within Headley Down settlement boundary. Kingswood Firs lies within the settlement boundary of Grayshott on the western side, whilst Waggoners Estate lies to the west of the settlement. Eastern Liphook and the Chiltley Way Area are within but abutting the settlement boundary of Liphook. Whitmore Vale and Hammer Lane area of interest is situated within an area designated as countryside. Landscape Character Areas of North Eastern part of East Hampshire 4.2.2. The Landscape setting of this part of Hampshire is characterised predominantly by the Greensand Hills to the East, and by Lowland Mosaic Small Scale to the West and Lowland Mosaic Heath Associated to the South.
    [Show full text]
  • 18 Bus Time Schedule & Line Route
    18 bus time schedule & line map 18 Aldershot - Whitehill/High Lane Estate View In Website Mode The 18 bus line (Aldershot - Whitehill/High Lane Estate) has 3 routes. For regular weekdays, their operation hours are: (1) Aldershot: 5:41 AM - 8:50 PM (2) Bordon Camp: 5:50 AM - 8:15 PM (3) Farnham: 7:40 AM - 6:43 PM Use the Moovit App to ƒnd the closest 18 bus station near you and ƒnd out when is the next 18 bus arriving. Direction: Aldershot 18 bus Time Schedule 58 stops Aldershot Route Timetable: VIEW LINE SCHEDULE Sunday 8:43 AM - 7:45 PM Monday 5:41 AM - 8:50 PM Eco Station, Bordon Camp St Lucia Park, Whitehill Civil Parish Tuesday 5:41 AM - 8:50 PM Community Centre, Bordon Wednesday 5:41 AM - 8:50 PM Canada Way, Bordon Thursday Not Operational Friday 5:41 AM - 8:50 PM Catholic Church, Bordon Saturday 6:54 AM - 8:59 PM Saville Crescent, Bordon Branson Road, Bordon Norman Close, Bordon 18 bus Info Direction: Aldershot Neptune Road, Bordon Stops: 58 Trip Duration: 66 min Apollo Drive, Whitehill Civil Parish Line Summary: Eco Station, Bordon Camp, Forest Centre, Bordon Community Centre, Bordon, Canada Way, Bordon, Catholic Church, Bordon, Saville Crescent, Bordon, Pinehill Road, Whitehill Civil Parish Branson Road, Bordon, Norman Close, Bordon, Jacaranda Road, Bordon Neptune Road, Bordon, Forest Centre, Bordon, Jacaranda Road, Bordon, Forest Surgery, Bordon, Forest Road, Whitehill, Bus Turning Circle, Whitehill, Forest Surgery, Bordon Oldƒeld Close, Bordon, Highview Business Centre, DENE CLOSE, Whitehill Civil Parish Bordon, Canada Way,
    [Show full text]
  • Design & Access Statement Unit 2
    DESIGN & ACCESS STATEMENT UNIT 2 Replacement HALFWAY FARM DOCKENFIELD ROAD BUCKS HORN OAK GU10 4LP Contents: 1. Introduction 2. Location 3. The Site 4. Planning History 5. The Proposal & Design 6. Energy 7. Environment 8. Access 9. Occupancy and Movement 1. Introduction: This Design, Access, Energy & Environmental statement is in support of a planning application on behalf of Martin Cashmore Property Limited and relating to Unit 2, Halfway Farm, Dockenfield Road, Bucks Horn Oak, Near Farnham, Surrey The application seeks full planning permission to demolish an outdated brick built car maintenance/MOT unit with asbestos roof and to replace it with a purpose-built workshop with associated offices, rest rooms and storage areas. This new building will be split into two units of equal size. One of the new units will be used for a continuation of motor trade use but to a much lesser extent and the other unit will be used for an extension of Martin Cashmore Fencing, already operating from the site. DESIGN & ACCESS STATEMENT : UNIT 2 REPLACEMENT HALFWAY FARM, DOCKENFIELD RD. BUCKS HORN OAK, 1 GU10 4LP 2. Location: The small village of Bucks Horn Oak lies 6km directly to the south of the Surrey town of Farnham, close to the Surrey/Hampshire border. The market town of Alton in Hampshire is 6km to the west. Bucks Horn Oak is on the A325 Farnham to Bordon road that links with the A31 to the north and the A3 to the south. Bentley railway station on the Waterloo line is a short walk away. Bucks Horn Oak has a community of approximately 115 houses and a number of commercial operations including this application site.
    [Show full text]
  • East Hampshire Retail and Main Town Centre Uses Study Final Report
    East Hampshire Retail and Main Town Centre Uses Study Final Report East Hampshire District Council 31 October 2018 © 2018 Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners Ltd, trading as Lichfields. All Rights Reserved. Registered in England, no. 2778116. 14 Regent’s Wharf, All Saints Street, London N1 9RL Formatted for double sided printing. Plans based upon Ordnance Survey mapping with the permission of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office. © Crown Copyright reserved. Licence number AL50684A 16499/02/PW/PW 16684975v1 East Hampshire Retail and Main Town Centre Uses Study : Final Report Executive Summary Lichfields has been commissioned by East Hampshire District Council to prepare a Retail and Main Town Centres Uses Study to inform future planning policy in the District excluding the South Downs National Park area, together with a wider strategy for the future of the District’s centres to 2036. It will form part of the Council’s evidence base in progressing the review of the adopted Local Plan. The economic downturn had a significant impact on the retail and leisure sectors, and continuing uncertainties are still having an effect. Market conditions are still challenging. The high pre-recession expenditure growth rates are unlikely to be achieved. The growth in the demand for floorspace is expected to slow, particularly in the short term. New forms of retailing (multi-channel shopping) have continued to grow. Given the likelihood that multi- channel shopping is likely to grow at a faster pace than total retail expenditure, the retail study assessment has adopted relatively cautious growth projections. The NPPF states that local planning authorities should assess the quantitative and qualitative needs for land or floorspace for retail and leisure development over the next 10 years as a minimum.
    [Show full text]
  • Why, When and How to Get Involved Guide
    Why, when and how to get involvedSeptember 2019 Large Development Sites Consultation • Every planning authority has a Local Plan that provides all the planning rules and policies for that area. • East Hampshire District Council is reviewing its Local Plan. • A Local Plan makes decisions about where new development should go. These big decisions should Introduction be informed by effective public engagement. • This guide helps to explain how to get involved in the Large Development Sites consultation 3 September - 15 October 2019. Where are the potential sites? • The North West (A31 corridor) – Alton, Four Marks and South Medstead, Bentley, Chawton, Ropley • The North East – Whitehill & Bordon, Liphook • The Southern Parishes – Horndean (Rowlands Castle Parish) • Everywhere else in East Hampshire is inside the South Downs National Park and will be subject to the planning rules and policies in the South Downs National Park Authority’s own Local Plan • You may live, work, shop, or play near the potential large development sites. If you are interested in your area, street, or own property, then this will be relevant to you. • You should take every available opportunity to influence decisions about where future development Why get will be located. The earlier you get involved the involved? better. • The only way the local planning authority will know what you want or what you think, is if you tell them! • For many people, the first time they come across a proposed development, is when they are commenting on a planning application in their local area. • All too often, they find that their objection or support is futile because decisions have already been taken in What if you the local plan and agreed a number of years ago.
    [Show full text]
  • Site Evaluation and Watching Brief at London Road, Holybourne, Alton
    Proc. Hampsh. Field Club Archaeol. Soc. 47, 1991, 107-115 SITE EVALUATION AND WATCHING BRIEF AT LONDON ROAD, HOLYBOURNE, ALTON By DAVID GRAHAM with contributions by M A B L.YNE and R A MERSON ABSTRACT 1986) lies immediately to the west of the current site and is crossed firstly by the north- Site evaluation and subsequent watching brief at a housing south Silchester to Chichester Roman road development on land previously occupied by Croucktr's and secondly by an east-west road running Factory. The work located the badly disturbed remains of from Winchester towards London (Fig 1). The Roman timber buildings, pits and wells and showed that the excavations under Vindomis Close also re­ Roman town at Neatham had originally extended across most vealed the remains of an internal street system of the site. lined with timber buildings and their associ­ ated yards, which contained wells, hearths and rubbish pits (Fig 2). INTRODUCTION In addition, lst/2nd century Roman crema­ tion burials have been found along the stream The site of Croucher's factory NGR 74144116 to the north and to the south of Bourne Place (now known as Bourne Place) lies on the south (Fig 1). side of London Road and immediately to the Several large Roman buildings are also east of Vindomis Close on the eastern out­ known to have existed in the countryside skirts of Holybourne (Figs 1 and 2). The area immediately surrounding the town. was potentially significant in that Vindomis Close was built on the centre of a Roman small town and there was every expectation that this settlement had originally continued eastwards Topography and Geology under the present site.
    [Show full text]
  • Heathlands Reunited - Project Sites
    Kingsley Common [MoD] Heathlands Reunited - Project Sites Broxhead Common (East) [HCC] Broxhead Common (West) [ARCT] SiteName Source Partner Site_ID Parish Blackmoor Sites_of_Special_Scientific_Interest_SSSIs_42 ARCT Blackmoor Whitehill Shortheath Broxhead Common (West) Special_Protection_Areas_SPAs_46 ARCT Broxhead Common Whitehill Common Weavers Down (East) Digitised using Google Earth screenshots and OS base ARCT Weavers Down (East) Bramshott and Liphook [HCC] Weavers Down (West) Digitised using Google Earth screenshots and OS base ARCT Weavers Down (West) Whitehill; (Bramshott and Liphook) Bordon Woolmer Forest Digitised using Google Earth screenshots and OS base ARCT Woolmer Forest Whitehill [Whitehill Woolmer Forest Digitised using Google Earth screenshots and OS base ARCT Woolmer Forest Whitehill Town Council] Lord's Piece Lords Piece.png digitised usign OSMM Barlavington Estate Lord's Piece Sutton; Bury; (Fittleworth) Coldharbour Wood Forestry_Commission_Legal_Boundary_45 Forestry Commission Coldharbour Wood Rogate The Slab Combe Hill Forestry_Commission_Legal_Boundary_45 Forestry Commission Combe Hill Rogate (North) [MoD] Hambledon Piece Forestry_Commission_Legal_Boundary_45 Forestry Commission Hambledon Piece Rogate The Warren, Iron Hill Forestry_Commission_Legal_Boundary_45 Forestry Commission Iron Hill Linch; (Fernhurst) Shufflesheeps Forestry_Commission_Legal_Boundary_45 Forestry Commission Shufflesheeps Milland Selborne Ludshott [MoD] Common Tullecombe Tullecombe.png digitised from OSMM Forestry Commission Tullecombe Rogate
    [Show full text]