Blog

ADD Update: 3 February 2025: On 8 January, Bloor Homes launched a blatant attempt to circumvent Eastleigh’s Local Plan process with an application to build 245 homes on greenfield land at Mortimers Lane in Fair Oak. We wrote about this five days later, urging local residents to object formally to the application. The deadline to do so is this Friday, 7 February, so if you are yet to give your feedback to Eastleigh Borough Council (EBC), we would be extremely grateful if you could do so by emailing Eastleigh’s planning specialist Clare Martin at [email protected]. Every comment counts!

ADD Update, 24 January 2025: Local residents will be aware that Eastleigh Borough Council (EBC) has recently fired the starting pistol to create its new Local Plan. The process is at its earliest, yet critical phase, which involves an “Issues and Options” report that is currently out for consultation.

If you have not yet contributed to this consultation, please do so by next week’s deadline of 29 January. Click here for the short survey, and here and here for recent articles on points you may wish to raise.

As you will know, traffic is a hugely significant factor for the council’s planners. ADD’s longstanding traffic consultant, who helped win important arguments during the last Local Plan process, has now stated he is unhappy with the lack of detail being provided on transport assessments at the Issues and Options stage.

The newly revised National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) states (Section 9, Promoting Sustainable Transport, para 109): “Transport issues should be considered from the earliest stages of plan-making and development proposals, using a vision-led approach to identify transport solutions that deliver well-designed, sustainable and popular places. This should involve…making transport considerations an important part of early engagement with local communities.”

Government guidance to planners adds: “An assessment of the transport implications should be undertaken at a number of stages in the preparation of a Local Plan: as part of the initial evidence base in terms of issues and opportunities; as part of the options testing; [and] as part of the preparation of the final submission.”

When we asked our traffic consultant to examine the traffic information provided in the Issues and Options report, he replied: “In my opinion, there is simply not enough evidence-based detail about the traffic impacts of the various options to allow respondents to give an informed view. For example, the traffic impacts of Strategic Development Option (SDO) A, the plans for 4,600 new homes north and east of Fair Oak, are covered by the simple statement: “Relative to the other SDOs, SDO A may have more effect on the South Downs National Park in terms of traffic” – and that’s it!” This contrasts significantly with information on ‘the retention of gaps between settlements’, another key factor that planners will have to consider, on which the EBC evidence base involves a detailed 200-page paper.  

ADD chair, David Ashe, said: “Traffic congestion is not something EBC can sweep under the carpet – creating car dependent new developments would cause chaos in surrounding communities and trash its aspirations to ‘tackle climate change’.  Minimising car use should be fundamental to the whole process of planning new developments. Last time around Eastleigh took decisions without thinking seriously about the traffic impacts and got its plan thrown out by the government inspector, after a lot of grief, angst – and expense. We hope that this time around the new planning team will have learned the lessons from that debacle.”

As the Local Plan process unfolds, the ADD team – and all our supporters – will be working hard to hold council leaders to account, not least by demanding that all the evidence is in place and in the public arena before they take crucial decisions. Failing to do so will cost them dear.  

We encourage everyone to make their voice heard by completing the consultation’s short survey by 29 January. Thank you for doing so!

ADD Update, 12 January 2025: Further to our last article on the current consultation by Eastleigh Borough Council (EBC) on its new Local Plan, the council has produced this short survey, which enables everyone to give their views in answer to the following four questions:

1. What are the key issues that you want the plan to address, and how?
2. We won’t be able to build all the new homes we need within urban areas. Where should we develop greenfield sites and why? 
3. What do you think we should prioritise when planning new developments?
4. Do you have any wider comments on the plan? 

We now believe it is easier to complete this survey than to send the council an email.

We hope that everyone concerned about the future of Eastleigh and its surrounding areas will respond to the consultation before the cut-off date on 29 January. Please spread the word.  To help with this, we have outlined below some key points that we think you may wish to consider when completing the survey.

By way of background, ADD welcomes EBC’s open-minded approach to the options being taken in this review. Having completed the process, its officers will take around 18 months to come up with a way forward. They certainly have a lot to do to gather the evidence needed to make an informed decision, but if we all add our voices we hope it will make their jobs easier!

In the face of the very high housing targets that Westminster has thrust upon the council, we appreciate that it will have hard choices to make about its plans for new developments. However, we strongly believe:

1. Opportunities to redevelop unused or underused brownfield sites should be taken before more green fields are lost.
2. Where greenfield development is necessary, supporting infrastructure must be provided, for the benefit of both the new communities and existing ones.
3. New housing must be located in places that most encourage the use of trains, walking and cycling – and minimise car dependence. Not only will this help tackle the growing challenge of climate change (a key objective of the council), but also limit additional traffic load on the already highly congested roads in Eastleigh, Fair Oak and Bishopstoke, elsewhere in the borough, and in the District of Winchester and the South Downs National Park.
4. Any new housing must prioritise local needs and be within the reach of first-time buyers as well as people hoping to rent at a reasonable price. These needs are not the four and five bedroom executive homes of the type promoted by developers.

We hope that taking these points together might help contextualise your answer to question 2, namely “where should we develop greenfield sites and why?”

Again, by way of background, EBC reckons it will need to put 9,500 homes on new greenfield sites. It identifies 52 small and medium size sites in and around existing communities, which will contribute to the numbers, but has also identified four ‘Strategic Development Options’ (SDOs). See map here.

Taking these in reverse order:

• Option D (North of Hedge End Station), which EBC estimates could provide 1300 homes.
  • This location, next to the existing rail station, makes a promising option for a sustainable greenfield development.
• Option C (between West End and the railway), which EBC estimates could deliver 4,600 homes, and Option B (between the railway and Bishopstoke), where it estimates 2,800 homes could be built.
  • Taken together with One Horton Heath these two options could create a community of approximately 9,000 homes, separated from West End, potentially centred on a new station at Allington Lane, and within easy reach of Eastleigh town centre.
  • A new mass transport station was first proposed 10 years ago by the Solent Local Enterprise Partnership (a collaboration between business and local authorities) as part of an enhancement to public transport links from Portsmouth to Southampton. The time has come to explore this again.
  • There is also the potential for a level cycleway that would link Allington Lane to central Eastleigh.
  • In summary, Options C and B offer real potential for excellent public transport access, together with easy walking and cycling access to Eastleigh. As a recent government directive calls for ‘vision led’ transport planning, we believe Eastleigh’s planners should look carefully at these options.
• Option A (North and East of Fair Oak), which EBC estimates could deliver 4,600 homes.
  • ADD’s thousands of supporters won’t fail to have noticed that this is the old Option C from the previous plan, which – after our assiduous campaign – the government planning inspector dismissed in 2020. This option is now rehashed, but this time without the accompanying road linking Mortimers Lane to the M3 at Junction 12 – a road that the council previously said was crucial to the viability of any major development in this area.
  • The council will therefore be more than aware of the massive traffic problems associated with Option A, not least because it is far from any railway station.
  • In 2020, the planning inspector said the previous proposals (which included the now non-existent link road) would have an unacceptable impact on roads through local villages as well as narrow lanes within the South Downs National Park. If Option A was given the go ahead this time, the roads through Colden Common, Twyford, Fair Oak, Bishopstoke and Bishop’s Waltham – which are already highly congested – would suffer complete gridlock on a daily basis, with all the devastating knock-on effects to neighbouring areas, especially the South Downs National Park.
  • As the planning inspector concluded last time: “Given the statutory importance of the National Park, the scale of development proposed and the potential impacts of increases in traffic movements within and on the edge of the National Park, I am unable to conclude that the selected SGO [Strategic Growth Option] represents the most suitable option when considered against all other reasonable alternatives.”
  • Put simply, the rail, walking and cycling possibilities that are available in Options B, C and D are not available in Option A.
  • Separately, ADD supporters will also recall that much of the land in Option A drains down through central Fair Oak, where the storm drainage system currently struggles to cope. Even with well-designed Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS, which sterilise a large area of ground), there would be significantly enhanced flood risk through the centre of Fair Oak.

Conclusion

Overall, we believe that developments that will cause the most significant traffic mayhem and environmental damage should only be considered once all other options have been exhausted.

In particular, we hope EBC will show vision and leadership in its transport planning. As always, we will be scrutinising its plans and progress very carefully.

We trust this article has given you some useful information to complete the council’s survey and hope you will do so as soon as possible. Of course, if you think we have missed any key arguments, please let us know!

With huge thanks for your continued support. It is enormously appreciated.

ADD UPDATE: 1 January 2025: First of all, a very Happy New Year to everyone!

2025 is all set to be a momentous year for Eastleigh and its surrounding areas.

As you may be aware, Eastleigh Borough Council (EBC) has given the public until 29 January to make views heard on its emerging new Local Plan, which will change the face of the area for ever.

To see a map of the four massive Strategic Development Options, click here. EBC has said it will welcome your feedback. We urge you to seize the opportunity to take part – it will not come again.

The government requires EBC to allow more than 18,000 new homes (including those in the pipeline) over the next 20 years. This is potentially great news for people hoping to buy places of their own. It could enhance existing communities or lead to the creation of vibrant new ones.

At the same time, the plan will undoubtedly be unpopular with many residents. After all, who wants more cars on their already overcrowded roads and the loss of yet more green space? And there’s a real danger that, without any overarching vision, the plan could just create yet more urban sprawl.

The right homes in the right places

In these circumstances, EBC’s challenge will be to ensure that the right types of home are built in the right places.  A top priority should be to make full use of brownfield sites – urban locations that can be repurposed for housing. The council currently estimates that such sites could accommodate slightly more than 2,000 new homes, but we believe that it can do much better than that.

Eastleigh needs, above all, more starter homes, as well as reasonably priced rental accommodation. Developers, on the other hand, prefer to build executive estates in rural or semi-rural locations. How this inevitable conflict of interest plays out will largely determine the plan’s success.

Transport is key

If Eastleigh’s slogan ‘Tackling climate change’ means anything, EBC’s decisions must minimise car use. Homes should be built as close as possible to existing urban centres and public transport routes, and people must be encouraged to travel by train, bicycle, or on foot. Otherwise EBC’s aspiration to become a carbon-neutral borough will be meaningless, and our roads will become even more unbearably crowded.

ADD has, therefore, commissioned its transport consultant to set out clearly and professionally what EBC needs to consider when it does its own review, so that we can hold the council to account. We will make the findings public once this report has been completed.

We will also urge the council to pursue the possibility of a rail station at Allington Lane – a potential game-changer that could be at the heart of a new green development with an easy level cycleway into the centre of town.

Don’t repeat old mistakes

Of the four main candidates for development (for more details, see our previous post and, again, this map), we are especially concerned that one of them – Strategic Development Option A – would mean 4,600 homes north-east of Fair Oak. That would effectively revive Option C of the previous Local Plan, which was slammed and dismissed by the government’s planning inspector (see our previous article’s here and here).

This would be incredibly damaging to the South Downs National Park, Colden Common, Twyford, Fair Oak and Bishopstoke.

But what do you think?

These are some of our initial thoughts, but what about yours? We would be interested to learn but, above all, please take part in the council’s consultation.

For more details on the emerging Local Plan, click here.

The link to the council’s consultation is here. We realise this is long, so you can either complete the consultation in full or email your views to [email protected], making sure you include your name and state that you agree to your name and comments being published.

Forthcoming opportunities to view the proposals

• Hedge End – Tuesday 7 January, 3.30pm – 7.30pm, St Johns Underhill Centre, St John’s Road
• Boorley Park – Wednesday 8 January, 3.30pm – 7.30pm, Boorley Green Sports Pavilion, Wallace Avenue
• Fair Oak – Monday 13 January, 3.30pm – 7.30pm, Fair Oak Village Hall (Grace Mears Room), Shorts Road
• Bishopstoke – Thursday 16 January, 4pm – 8pm, Bishopstoke Community Centre, Church Road
• Eastleigh – Monday 20 January 3.30-7.30pm, Eastleigh House, Upper Market Street

As always, if you would like to get in touch with us, please email [email protected].

ADD UPDATE, 27 November 2024: Although Eastleigh has seen significant development growth over the last few decades, it is on the cusp of the biggest housing expansion in its history – and residents will soon have a chance to comment on the proposals put forward by developers to achieve it. The emerging Eastleigh Local Plan will shape the borough and affect every aspect of life here for generations to come. So this is a pivotal moment, and we encourage people to get involved.

The government requires Eastleigh Borough Council (EBC) to find room for 11,600 new homes over the next 20 years (18,040 if you include those already in the pipeline), of which 9,570 are earmarked for greenfield sites. On 4 December, EBC will formally publish all the available options; the public will have until 29 January to send in their comments before councillors decide on the best course of action.

There are currently four possible main development areas: north-east of Fair Oak (potentially 4,600 new homes); south of Bishopstoke (2,800); north of West End (4,600) and north of Hedge End (1,300). There are also 52 much smaller proposed sites.

ADD recognises the need for new homes as long as they are of the right sort and in the right places. We will be following the plan closely, commenting on the various schemes once we have scrutinised them and had discussions with officers. In the meantime, however, here are some of the main criteria we will use to judge them.

Brownfield sites: We believe it is possible to be more ambitious in the number of homes to be built on brownfield sites. The town centre and riverside in particular are ripe for the high-density, low-cost housing that would appeal to first-time buyers and people looking to rent. It is perfectly placed for all the amenities, as well as bus and rail transport. This kind of development would bring vibrancy to an area that needs a boost.

Minimising car use: It is hard to overstate the importance of choosing sites that reduce the need for car travel and that encourage people to use public transport and walk or cycle to their desired locations. A criticism of the previous Local Plan was that it involved building on environmentally sensitive locations well away from urban centres. The estates would have been almost entirely car-dependant, adding to the borough’s carbon footprint and yet more traffic to our already over-crowded roads. The railways, in particular, have the potential  to fulfil the council’s number one pledge of tackling climate change. We believe there is potential for a new station near Allington Lane.

Types of housing: Another criticism of the previous Local Plan was that it favoured executive estates over starter homes and social housing. Options B and C of the plan, which were rejected by the government inspector, would have attracted wealthy outsiders and done virtually nothing to meet Eastleigh’s housing needs. We hope very much to see a better mix, including high-density housing so that more people can get onto the ladder or rent at prices they can afford. We also anticipate, of course, that the new homes will be fully energy-efficient making use of renewables where practical.

The National Park: The government inspector slammed the previous Local Plan for the traffic impact development close to the South Downs National Park would have had on roads in the Park itself. This issue is as important and mission-critical as ever.

Don’t forget people: While there have been some excellent examples of people-friendly developments, this is by no means the norm. According to the Design Council, 75% of new housing schemes are either poor or mediocre – we cannot trust developers to get it right on their own. We shall be looking for imaginative lay-outs, with plenty of green spaces and parkland. We don’t need any more urban sprawl! Quality of life is every bit as important as meeting (frankly arbitrary) government targets.

If you have any views we should be delighted to receive them. Please contact us at [email protected]

ADD UPDATE, 7 October 2024: The new government has instructed Eastleigh Borough Council (EBC) to find room for another 3,675 homes – on top of the already challenging requirement to deliver 9,675 over the next 15 years. Although brownfield sites are part of the solution, it means that swathes of much-loved countryside are potentially under threat. We are due to get a better idea of the direction of travel when EBC publishes an options document towards the end of the autumn. That is when we need to be on full alert.

“The conundrum that has yet to be resolved is the mismatch between the executive estates on attractive rural or semi-rural sites that developers want to build and what is actually needed – affordable homes in or near existing urban centres,” says ADD chair David Ashe. “Unless they think outside the box, the government’s ambitions to build 1.5 million new dwellings will not necessarily make owning a home more affordable. There’s currently little sign of the imaginative thinking required.”

The UK now has substantially more houses per head of population than it did 50 years ago – yet prices have soared dramatically in that time.

Whilst ADD recognises the need for more housing, we are strongly of the view that it should be determined strategically and collaboratively by the planning authority after consulting local residents and businesses. We know from the previous Eastleigh Local Plan, and from experience elsewhere, that this is too important to be left to developers, whose objectives will inevitably be to maximise profits rather than protect the local environment and quality of life. In particular, attention needs to be paid to the impact on local services and our already over-stretched roads, accentuating the need to keep car use to a minimum.

What is more, quality is important or the dream of owning your own home can quickly turn sour. According to the Design Council, 75% of new housing schemes are either poor or mediocre – another reason not to trust developers to get it right on their own.

As if the picture is not already complicated enough, the government’s requirement to build 13,350 homes in Eastleigh is unrealistic. As EBC acknowledge, the government targets could well result in thousands more homes being built than the borough will need over the next 15 years, according to population projections. And developers will only build houses they can be confident of selling at a profit. There is also a serious skill shortage in the industry, which is bound to get worse as a high proportion of building workers are over 50 years of age.

Of course, ADD cannot influence government policy, but it is our intention to play a constructive role locally, pressing for the best possible outcomes. In short, the right houses in the right places.

We will continue to keep you updated as events unfold.

ADD UPDATE: 19 August 2024: If Bloor Homes were hoping that their low-key public consultation for a proposed 250-home estate in Mortimers Lane would go under the radar, they have certainly had a rude awakening. More than 60 residents sent objections in just eight days after ADD alerted supporters to the plans, an exceptional response that shows the strength of feeling locally.

To put that number into context, when Eastleigh Borough Council launched a much more widely publicised and accessible consultation into plans for two new developments in Allington Lane back in 2015, they received just five objections.

Whilst we have not yet had time to study residents’ views in detail, nearly everyone was concerned about the impact on our already overcrowded roads, with many expressing similar worries about GP services. No one disputed the need for new homes, but there was considerable annoyance at the apparent attempt by the company to pre-empt the planning timetable, which will determine the best locations for future development.

“I would like to express our heart-felt gratitude to our supporters for their prompt response in sending their objections,” said ADD chair David Ashe. “We totally endorse the need for more housing, but we regard the Bloor plans as a textbook case of the wrong homes in the wrong place.”

To view ADD’s own response, click here.

Separately from ADD’s initiative, local Liberal Democrat councillor Nick Couldrey has made his opposition clear, telling the Daily Echo that “the current proposal should be resisted…There are many proposals and these need to be compared to each other before deciding where any new homes should be built.”

ADD will keep supporters updated. If you or anyone you know would like to receive our emails, please use this sign-up form to do so. You can also contact us at [email protected].

ADD UPDATE, 2 August 2024: We reported recently that Bloor Homes have announced plans for a 250-home estate on Mortimers Lane, Fair Oak – part of the Option C plan rejected by the planning inspector in 2020. The company have since launched a swift ‘public consultation’, which has all the hallmarks of an empty PR exercise.

If you give local residents just three weeks to respond during the holiday season – and don’t make it clear how to do so – you may not get any feedback. And then, of course, you can truthfully say that no one objected to your scheme.

So we urge anyone concerned about the future of our area to examine the plans at https://www.mortimerslaneconsultation.co.uk/ and to submit their views by the deadline of 8 August 2024. The relevant email address for responses is [email protected].

ADD, while recognising the need for more housebuilding in Eastleigh, considers this site to be totally unsuitable. In particular, it will cause even more pressure on our already heavily congested roads, adding to traffic to Winchester through Colden Common and Twyford, to Eastleigh via Bishopstoke Road, and on the rural lanes of the South Downs National Park.

Bloor Homes are clearly trying to pre-empt Eastleigh Borough Council’s planning process, which is due to go out to public consultation late autumn. We shall be keeping a close watch on developments.

We recognise that you may wish to keep your submission to Bloor Homes confidential. However, please do copy us at [email protected], if you feel inclined to do so. Your comments could provide useful evidence, though we will not be publicising any names. 

ADD UPDATE, 25 July 2024: ADD has received several reports from concerned residents of Fair Oak and neighbouring areas who suspect that developers are pre-empting the planning process by earmarking large areas of countryside for new housing estates. If successful, they would go a long way to reviving Option C of the previous Eastleigh Local Plan (see image above), which was so roundly rejected by the Planning Inspector only a few years ago.

Whilst endorsing the need for new housing, ADD fears that some companies are trying to force the hand of Eastleigh Borough Council (EBC), ignoring the agreed timetable for determining where new homes should be built. It is our view that the sites being promoted remain totally unacceptable on environmental and infrastructure grounds and would be unlikely to provide the type of housing that the area needs.

As we reported last year, Croudace have acquired the rights to build 1,500 new homes on a 192-acre site off Mortimers Lane. Since then, their surveyors have been out in force sizing up the area with a view to creating detailed plans.

More recently, Bloor homes have unveiled proposals for a 250-property estate between Pembers Hill Park and East Horton Golf Club. They have launched a ‘public consultation’ (in reality a superficial PR exercise), giving people just three weeks to respond during the summer holiday period with no clear instructions as to how to do so.

Ominously, their website states: “The site is currently being promoted for residential development as part of Eastleigh Borough Council’s emerging Local Plan.”

In response to an email from ADD, EBC planning policy manager Graham Tuck gave an assurance that the council is still a long way from deciding which sites to favour for future building. He said he expects to undertake an ‘issues and options’ public consultation in late autumn, adding this would be led by the council rather than developers.

“We are reassured that the council intends to take control of the new Local Plan, unlike with the previous one,” said ADD chair David Ashe. “It is vital that we end up with the right type of housing in the right places, rather than bending to the profit-driven motives of the developers.”

ADD will be providing regular updates as the new Local Plan process hots up. If you wish to be on our mailing list, please contact us at [email protected]. We greatly value feedback and tip-offs from residents, so do keep us informed of developments.