Murrell Green Development Objections
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Murrell Green Development Objections As a resident of Murrell Green I strongly object to the proposal of developing the fields surrounding our home in Totters Lane. I feel that it is not the responsible thing to do for the community, for the land and for future generations. I completely agree with the CPRE’s District Group comments: CPRE’s District Group for North East Hampshire are concerned that the Local Plan has no coherent strategy but is instead a series of tactics to deliver a housing and development supply without any recognition of the role of countryside and the value of the natural environment. My objections are based on the following. Based on inflated housing numbers Siting Access Landscape Amenities Design Archaeology and Natural impact Gas Pipeline DMRBS criteria Environmental Impact-Cumulative Assessment and ‘In Combination’ Assessment Brownfield Sites Fleet is a dying town Social responsibility- Starting Point The starting point of the whole Murrell Green Plan would appear to result from the inflated SHMA of 8000+ houses. Then on top of this inflated figure, Hart DC has added a further 2000+ to that, resulting in a false requirement of over 10000 houses in the Hart District. If sanity prevails, then the figures should be reassessed and neither should we be including other districts’ overflow. Why should we as a district take on other areas housing needs? Use it or lose it. Siting If the more rational figures were being used the Murrell Green site would not even be required, but as this is on the table, why this site? It appears to be an easy target for developers as there is a low population in Murrell Green itself, unlike Winchfield that has a larger density of homes and therefore more people to fight the objections. There are fewer landowners, and the majority of whom are being tempted by large sums of money for their land. One particular landowner does not even live here anymore so will not have to live amongst the devastation of the land that she will be party to. However, putting that aside, the site of Murrell Green is not a great position for such a development and schools because of its geographical position. It is essentially landlocked by roads that simply cannot cope with the projected volume of traffic. I will discuss this more in a later section, but to get the flavour of the impact on the A30, you only have to be present when the M3 is shut and traffic is sent off at Junctions 4, 4a, 5 and 6. The traffic on the A30 is nose to tail and the function of the villages around us is catastrophic. These events are currently few and far between, but if a development of 1800 houses is passed, you are looking at 2500 additional cars per day on the A30 and the Odiham Road trying to go about their daily lives and the roads just cannot cope. Access As I said above, access to the Murrell Green site will have to be via Odiham Road, A30 and logically, Totters Lane. These roads are inadequate to cope with the projected volume of traffic from the Murrell Green site alone, not to mention the already approved site in Hook for 550 house (another 750-1000 cars). As this is also the proposed site of the new schools, access for these is also from the A30. The schools will be large with many students arriving by bus and car, which will create more pressure on these roads. The only students who can walk to school will be those who live on the development, but many will probably be driven as the site will be large and parents want to ensure their child arrives safely and will drive them. If the development wasn’t there, the need for new schools would also disappear or be greatly decreased. Meaning that investment in the established local schools would be more able to cope with the natural increase of the local population. Landscape This is an aspect that should be viewed in two ways. Firstly, the impact on the local landscape, but also the landscape within the development itself. Obviously, the local landscape would change irrevocably. Where we have green rolling countryside, there will be redbrick and tarmac. This devastation can never be undone. The wildlife will not just conveniently move to the ‘nature reserve’, some will be eradicated from the local area. Has an independent assessment of local wildlife been undertaken? Both of our neighbours have large ponds, one of which is natural. Has the wildlife been assessed? The land is currently rolling countryside and has dips and troughs as would be expected in a natural landscape. Once the natural lay of the land is developed the houses on the hills would dominate the horizon, where trees, sheep and cattle currently stand. This is a rural community and should not be developed to the point where we lose this quality for our community of today and for future generations. Murrell Green, which lies close to Hartley Wintney, Winchfield and Hook, is a potential greenfield settlement for 1,800 houses and a secondary school. The site contains endangered woodland, ancient lanes and hedgerows, and lakes and ponds. The proposals show no regard for these natural features and there are concerns about water supply for the high level of proposed housing. CPRE’s District Group for North East Hampshire Amenities We know that new schools are planned within this development, which will be needed if the development is built. The requirement for these will be greatly reduced if 1800 houses are not built. The ‘necessity’ of school places is being bumped up by the creation of a new community. With this new settlement, people need to get to work via trains, cars and buses. I have already touched on the impact of the cars. The three local train stations of Winchfield, Hook and Fleet, in order of geographical proximity cannot cope with the current demand, let alone the massive increase that will come from such a settlement. Winchfield is a small country station with no more available land on which to develop more parking. Hook is in a similar position and Fleet has recently had its parking increased and already is too small to cope with demand. There was talk about creating another station at Totters Lane Bridge. Is it really sensible to add another station between Hook and Winchfield, as they are so close, let alone the land that would need to be set aside to accommodate the number of cars that would use it? Again, access would be a huge issue as well as the pressure on the developers to increase the density of the new houses as they would lose many acres if they had to set aside space for the train station. We also have to consider that even if the station sizes are increased to accommodate the demand, there is no guarantee that the train companies would increase the number of trains or add more rolling stock to the already overcrowded services. Doctors Surgeries, Shops, Buses, dentists are all areas that would be needed to service the new settlement and I haven’t seen any evidence that these have been addressed. Design The design within the development itself will also not be conducive or fit with the environment. We are being led to believe that the site will have a more sympathetic design and that the footprint of each home will be able to accommodate the house as well as the cars. I doubt this will be the case. The developers will wish to squeeze every last drop of space out of the site and if they have to leave a swathe of land undeveloped through the site to accommodate the stand-off distance dictated by the M.O.P. for the mains gas line, then they will develop the other areas far more densely to maximise the return on their investment. The pressures on increasing the housing density within the settlement are 1. Gas Pipeline-stand-off distance 2. Potential new train station 3. Return on investment for the developers. 4. Acreage set aside for local amenities. 5. Scale of nature reserve 6. Scale of schools By the time all these areas have been addressed the developers will have to create far more densely populated houses to ensure a reasonable return on investment. So, instead of the spacious considered design we are being led to believe will happen, I expect that the houses will be squeezed in tightly with small garden plots, minimal parking and three storey town houses. There will not be the ‘affordable housing’ that should be there as it is not cost effective for them. The site will be strewn with cars that have no proper place to park. Archaeology and Natural impact Winchfield and the surrounding villages are historical sites going back centuries with Winchfield being a Doomsday village. Has an Archaeological report been done? Do we know whether there are any historical treasures lurking that would benefit the country? To me the impact on our green and pleasant land is heartbreaking. Once the landscape has been developed and destroyed we cannot take it back. What is more devastating is that we have a choice and that the morally wrong choice is being favoured due to laziness and greed. I was at the planning meeting in which the possibility of developing brownfield sites was addressed. We were told that the reason the brownfield sites are not being considered is “ because they have not been made available to us”.