SOLVE remains an apolitical organisation but unfortunately we currently have no option but to fight a political battle. We support Councillors who support our aims of protecting greenfields to the North and East of Basingstoke in, and adjacent to, the Loddon Valley. To that end, at this time, we are supporting two Independents and a Conservative candidate standing for the Borough Council in the May elections. They are Jo Walke standing in Chineham, Chris Tomblin standing in Bramley and Sherfield and Cllr. Sven Godesen standing in Basing.
In our opinion Councillors Still (Chineham), Vaughan (Bramley and Sherfield) and Leek (Sherborne St John) have not been completely transparent in their communication over the Manydown issue. They have played a prominent role in the development of a Core Strategy that has been found to be unlawful, and not represented the best interests of their residents in this matter. For those reasons we are unable to support their candidacy.
SOLVE believes that the people in these wards are best served by councillors who have the courage to stand up for the interest of their own wards. SOLVE urges you to vote for a candidate whom you can trust to represent your ward, rather than their party, and we believe that Jo Walke, Chris Tomlin and Cllr. Sven Godesen will do this.
Manydown Development Company (MDC freeholders of the Manydown Land) - Submission to the Manydown Executive Committee who manage Manydown as leaseholders on behalf of the BDBC. It spells out very clearly why the latest attempts by the Council to exclude Manydown from the current planning process and the Officers’ recommendations on planning for future use, are both ill-informed and a deliberate attempt to effectively kick the issue into the long grass. A similar submission was put forward during the Judicial Review. We encourage you to take up the points raised with your local Parish, Borough and County Councillors.
From the MDC
These representations are made without prejudice to the Company’s position before the court in the judicial review proceedings before the Hon Mr Justice Lindblom. Any future decision in relation to Manydown will be obliged to take the findings of that judgment into account.
To be frank, the Officer’s report (‘the Report”) and the recommended decision are plainly an attempt by the Council to kick the issue of development on the Manydown land into the long grass, with an unnecessary “assumption” of starting again from scratch to consider all possible options, a protracted and drawn-out process, unnecessary steps, and inflated costs.
It is premised on the assumption that “the requirement is for a fundamental review of the options for Manydown, which will include comprehensive consultation with the public on its views and preferences” (para 9.1). This includes “a range of potential new options yet to be identified”. There is no basis for this assumption in the 15 December 2011 Council resolution, or otherwise. It is also inconsistent with the Council’s own view as local planning authority.
The Report appears to be an example of what Sir Humphrey Appleby famously called “Plan B” to scuppering any project: make it appear long and expensive[1]. The Report estimates a cost of up to £500,000 for work to get to the point where the Council decides whether the land should be promoted or not. Total costs before a final decision on whether to promote the land for development are up to £1 million, with a timescale of three years or more (at Stage 11). Yet we note that Hampshire County Council’s email of 12 October 2011 to Karen Brimacombe estimates less than £250,000 to get to the same point (ie production of a development framework / masterplan). A great deal of work of continued value and relevance has already been done.
Read on for more
[1]Yes Minister : Bed of Nails, Series 3, Episode 3.
Since the formation of SOLVE in 2009 we have been successful in lobbying for lower housing growth in the Borough. Further, we do not support large scale development on any Greenfield sites east or west. However, the Council has reneged on their pre-election promise not to build large scale developments on Greenfield sites. The proposals in the Core Strategy for some 3,000 houses on Greenfield sites around Old Basing & Lychpit, Chineham, Sherfield-on-Loddon, Newnham, Mapledurwell & Up Nately and Bramley ignores the central theme of the public consultation that residents do not want to see these large scale developments.
This is a direct result of the Council’s decision to exclude 2,000 acres of land, Manydown, to the west of the Borough. Land bought specifically for planned development including housing. We believe that Councillors have a duty to consider ALL sites on their merits, not on procedural sleight of hand and backroom deals. Therefore our immediate aim is the get all potential sites considered on their merits. At the same time we are opposing large scale building on the sites to the NE. If we allow the proposed Core Strategy to go ahead then the threat to the rest of the Loddon Valley is very real.
Major house-building companies are pushing for these developments and ultimately 9,000 houses could invade the Loddon Valley and its hinterland. To put this in perspective, there are around 3,200 dwellings in Old Basing and Lychpit now. The plans could mean 20,000 extra people on your doorstep. These huge developments could swamp our communities. If these massive housing schemes go ahead, we can expect:
Destruction of a North Hampshire Conservation Area and important wildlife habitats
A significant loss of rural character to the east of Basingstoke
A complete loss of Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINCs)
Increased risk of flooding and pollution of the EU protected Loddon River
A massive increase in traffic, pollution and noise on already crowded roads. A nightmare A33.
Insufficient infrastructure to cope with the increased population
Increased school class sizes, hospital waiting lists and strain on policing
Many years of continual building work, noise pollution and heavy vehicles
It's time to make a stand
Visit – “What Can You Do?” for further information including how to donate to SOLVE.
You will recall that our councillors in the P&IOSCOM meetings will be selecting land for housing development. Agendas are published seven days before each meeting so we will confirm when our sites (102, 103 & 121) will be discussed.
You can check the agenda on the council web site here:
A further threat to our Environment – Comment now!
Closing date 17th October
During July the Government published its draft NPPF for public consultation. This could represent the biggest shake-up in planning for over 50 years and many organisations, including the Council for the Protection of Rural England (CPRE), National Trust (NT) and Friends of the Earth, believe this is a major threat to the countryside.
Developers have welcomed this document and have lobbied the Government for changes by pointing to their own research which blames planning laws as a barrier to growth in the UK. Like many, SOLVE cannot see why the planning system is held up as an obstacle to growth now when the current planning laws have been protecting the countryside for over 50 years with no discernable effect on growth either way.
Unfortunately, with the document as written, developers only need to show that their proposals will deliver growth. The assumption of a default ‘yes’ to sustainable development will have devastating impact on the environment and greenfield areas.
See two BBC Newsnight videos originally shown on 1st of September 2011 about the new National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).
The potential impact on a village community in Gloucster under treat from Barratt homes:
A hard hitting interview by Jeremy Paxman highlighting the flaws in the governments proposal - specifically that it is a licence to build on the countryside.
Solve Letter to the Gazette published Thursday, 25th August 2011.
Sir.–We are disappointed, although not surprised, that councillors and residents, who challenged the decision to reduce the housing target for Basingstoke, continue to pursue the “we know best” brand of politics by blatantly seeking to undermine the overwhelming majority of the borough’s residents’ wishes to reduce significantly the number of houses being built...
Article in Basingstoke Observer in which SOLVE and other campaign groups tell the council that current housing numbers will mean building on large areas of greenfield land.
