Blog

Letter to Hampshire Chronicle, 12 April 2018: The Hampshire Chronicle has today published this letter from Geoff Naylor of Colden Common about the threat posed by Eastleigh Borough Council’s Local Plan to the Woodland Trust’s bluebell woods in Eastleigh.

Geoff Naylor wrote:

“SIR: Bluebells will flower later than normal this year. This is because of the recent ‘beast from the east’ cold weather. They are likely to be at their best at the time of the local council elections on May 3.

One of the most spectacular bluebell woods open to the public, around the south Hampshire conurbation, is Upper Barn Copse, owned by the Woodland Trust. This ancient woodland is easily accessible on public footpaths from Fair Oak and Bishopstoke.

However, this spring may be the last chance to see them in all their glory, as there is another – permanent – ‘beast from the east’ coming: beastly plans from Eastleigh BC that threaten to build 5,200 houses, partly on adjoining meadows, and construct a new major road to the M3 at Allbrook.

This development, if it goes ahead, will have an adverse and irreversible impact on this splendid wood and our beautiful bluebells.”

Geoff Naylor
Birch Close
Colden Common

For the Woodland Trust’s view on Eastleigh Borough Council’s plans, read this: “Eastleigh’s ancient woodlands are threatened by council’s Local Plan”, says Woodland Trust. 

ADD UPDATE, 10 April 2018: The Woodland Trust has for some time been extremely concerned about Eastleigh Borough Council’s draft Local Plan. By way of example, click here for a transcript of the statement the Trust asked local campaigner Rob Byrne to read to the councillors at the council meeting on 11 December last year. At this meeting, Eastleigh council voted for a Plan that includes 5,200 new houses and a new road north of Bishopstoke and Fair Oak.

In the last few weeks, in the wake of the government’s recent announcement to give increased protection to our precious ancient woodlands, ADD campaigners have been back in touch with the Trust who report that their concerns have in no way diminished – in fact they remain as high as ever.   We believe the Trust has more expertise to opine on the impact of the Plan on ancient woodlands than the councillors who have been sharing their views on the subject in recent videos.  As such, we are doing all we can to ensure the Trust’s voice is heard.

Jack Taylor of the Woodland Trust said: “Once again, the Woodland Trust finds itself having to state that the proposals at hand are of utmost concern to us.  A number of ancient woodlands are threatened by large areas of housing development and a new road that could scythe between two of our own ancient woods.

“Our role is to protect ancient woodland. We therefore feel it is imperative that Eastleigh councillors fully understand the value of the area they wish to build on.

“Appendix 2a, Maps of Allocated Sites, p.10 [uploaded by the council] indicates that the proposed road would run hard up against the edge of Upper Barn Copse, one of our ancient woods. A road hard against the woodland edge could easily result in the loss of ancient woodland via incursions at its edge but it would also sever natural links with another of our ancient woods, Crowdhill Copse, and the Forestry Commission’s ancient Stoke Park Wood. We have previously been clear, and remain of the opinion, that we don’t believe that there is appropriate space for this road in this location. [See picture above.]

“Further along the route, the road is shown to run along the edge of the section of Park Hills Wood designated by Natural England as ancient woodland and also alongside the nearby Tippers Copse, which is currently believed to be an area of unmapped ancient woodland. Clearly, and despite the Master Plan Update, Appendix 16, sketch on p.22 [uploaded by the council] noting that protecting the setting of the ancient woodland is a constraint, and indicating that the road would be situated equidistant between the woodlands, our concerns remain. Aside from habitat severance these ancient woods would also suffer from damaging indirect impacts such as road noise, air pollution and light impacts.

“Ancient woodland is irreplaceable. It can’t be moved. It can’t be recreated. It has been there and evolved over centuries and this must remain the case.

“Our sites, Upper Barn Copse and Crowdhill Copse, are home to an array of flora and fauna. Bluebells, Butcher’s Broom and Solomon’s seal can be seen flowering in the spring and long-tailed tits and goldcrests are commonly seen and heard within the woods. For local people, these woods are their quiet, natural places away from the troubles of everyday life. Taking that away from the locals who enjoy them would be a tragedy.”

Click here for a map of the seven ancient woodlands that are threatened by Eastleigh’s Local Plan.

 

ADD UPDATE, 8 April 2018: As ADD supporters will be aware, there has been widespread praise for the government’s recent announcement to give increased protection to our precious ancient woodlands. The new draft of the National Planning Policy Framework now states that “development resulting in the loss or deterioration of irreplaceable habitats such as ancient woodland should be refused, unless there are wholly exceptional reasons”. Click here for the Woodland Trust’s view.

Eastleigh Borough Council’s Local Plan threatens no less than seven ancient woodlands, engulfing five in concrete and flanking a further two. See map here. There are no (legitimate) wholly exceptional reasons for doing so.

The government’s new clarity on protection for ancient woodland makes Eastleigh’s Local Plan look more unworkable than ever.

ADD UPDATE, 6 April 2018: There are local elections on Thursday 3 May for Eastleigh Borough Council and Winchester City Council. On the same day, there are also several parish elections, including for Allbrook and North Boyatt, Chandler’s Ford, Hiltingbury, Colden Common and Owslebury.

The ADD campaign is supported by members of all political parties as well as by local residents who do not support any political party. The ADD campaign has always been, and remains, politically neutral, working with anyone who shares the view that Eastleigh Borough Council’s draft Local Plan would be destructive if implemented.

ADD will not be endorsing or supporting any candidate in the elections.

Eastleigh’s draft Local Plan will be a key issue in these elections for local people. ADD’s coordinator will be inviting all candidates to submit a short statement giving their views on Eastleigh’s draft Local Plan and will be publishing these online as virtual hustings. Should candidates wish to submit their statements prior to this formal request, or in case we are unable to make contact, they should send them to [email protected].

Thank you.

Statement from the Member of Parliament for Eastleigh Mims Davies, 30 March 2018: After last week’s letter from Secretary of State Sajid Javid to Keith House, leader of Eastleigh Borough Council, about Eastleigh’s Local Plan failure, Eastleigh MP Mims Davies issued this statement. We have printed it below:

“Eastleigh Borough Council has done just enough to avoid a major intervention by the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, Sajid Javid.

The Secretary of State is now continuing to keep an eye on and monitor the Council’s progress due to its persistent failure to put a Local Plan in place over many years to protect the community, environment and reflect local housing need.

In a strong letter to the Council, the Secretary of State points out he will not hesitate to use the full range of powers given to him by Parliament to ensure the full Plan is in place, and will be holding the Council to their new stated timeline.

The Secretary of State felt strongly enough to put a warning shot across their bows, and it is my strong belief that the Council has really only just done enough to avoid further action.

It is important to point out that this process is absolutely no endorsement of the Plan they’re working on and merely to say they have done just enough to hold officials from the Department back from coming through the door to take them to task.

I do feel very concerned like many local residents that even if the new and very late timetable is adhered to and the Plan comes forward, it is made of sand, as it may not get past the scrutiny of the independent inspector as recent stormy and hugely attended meetings have shown. The Council is not bringing the community with them on the choices they are making and this delay doesn’t help matters.

This is absolutely the final warning for the Council to buck up and make sure that they produce a sound, well supported Local Plan based on evidence which will protect green spaces and plan for the housing that we need.”

ENDS

Letter from Housing Minister Sajid Javid to Eastleigh Borough Council Leader Keith House, 29 March 2018: ADD supporters will be interested to know that this letter was sent by Sajid Javid to Keith House last Friday, 23 March. We have also printed it below:

“Dear Councillor House,

LOCAL PLAN INTERVENTION

Following your Council’s persistent failure over many years to get a Local Plan in place, on 16 November 2017, I expressed concerns about the lack of progress your authority has made on plan-making. The housing White Paper set out that intervention in Local Plans will be prioritised where:

• the least progress in plan-making has been made
• policies in plans had not been kept up to date
• there was higher housing pressure; and
• intervention would have the greatest impact in accelerating Local Plan production

We also made clear that decisions on intervention will be informed by the wider planning context in each area (specifically, the extent to which authorities are working cooperatively to put strategic plans in place, and the potential impact that not having a plan has on neighbourhood planning activity). I gave you the opportunity to put forward any exceptional circumstances by 31 January 2018, which, in your view, justifies the failure to produce a Local Plan under the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 regime.

I note that your Council has made some progress since my letter of 16 November 2017. Whilst this is welcome, your Council still remains without an up to date Local Plan which undermines public confidence in the plan-led planning system.

Therefore I will hold you to account for your Council’s actions. Your Council needs to continue to meet your published timetable. I will continue to monitor your progress closely and any further significant delays in meeting your timetable will cause me to have considerable doubt as to whether your Council is doing everything that is necessary in connection with the preparation of its Local Plan. I will not hesitate to consider how to use the full range of powers Parliament has given me to ensure that a Plan is in place.

My officials will continue to engage with your officers.

 

RT HON SAJID JAVID MP
Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government

Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government
4th Floor, Fry Building
2 Marsham Street
London SW1P 4DF
Tel: 0303 444 3450
Email: [email protected]
www.gov.uk/mhclg”

Colden Common & Twyford Focus, Spring 2018: “New Lib Dem candidate for Colden Common & Twyford, Hannah Williams, has made it clear that she strongly backs Richard Izard’s opposition to Eastleigh’s current plans for development,” says this month’s Lib Dem Colden Common & Twyford Focus. To view an image of the article, click here. Alternatively,  we have printed it below:

“New Lib Dem candidate for Colden Common & Twyford, Hannah Williams, has made it clear that she strongly backs Richard Izard’s opposition to Eastleigh’s current plans for development.

Richard attended and spoke out at both the July 2017 and December 2017 public meetings opposing the proposals to build on Sites B & C [namely Eastleigh Borough Council’s plans for 5,200 new houses and a new link road between Lower Upham and Colden Common, north of Fair Oak and Bishopstoke].

Hannah’s recent surveying of local residents showed that people’s biggest concerns with the Eastleigh plans were the impact on traffic and local roads. Environmental impact was a close second.

Hannah believes development must work with surrounding communities not against them:

“We need a plan to CUT traffic through Colden Common and Twyford. A lot of the traffic on our roads is heading north from Fair Oak and Hedge End. The current plans mean that this pressure on our roads can only get worse.”

“Winchester City Council is generally very poor at making sure that proper traffic measures are taken in response to extra development. It frequently won’t oppose planning proposals when traffic measures are not adequate – and definitely needs to take a tougher line on Eastleigh’s proposals.”

“As they stand, the proposed Sites B and C are dependent on residents having cars: no bus, train or cycle provision has been made to serve this new community. Allbrook railway bridge also isn’t engineered to take the extra traffic – which will force the traffic north. The plan just isn’t thought through.”

Richard and Hannah have been backed by their Lib Dem colleagues. Chair of Winchester Liberal Democrats District Local Party, Cllr. Martin Tod, commented:

“Liberal Democrat part policy on issues like this is made locally. The Winchester local party and council group strongly back Richard and Hannah. And whatever has been reported, no one else in the party – no matter how senior – can tell us to do differently.””

ADD UPDATE, 22 March 2018: Last week, Sarah Charters, a resident of Bishopstoke, sent an official letter of complaint to Eastleigh Borough Council (EBC) accusing Liberal Democrat councillors of misleading local people about Eastleigh’s Local Plan in their leaflets and social media.

She addressed her letter to Richard Ward, EBC’s monitoring officer, and – in the accompanying Code of Conduct documentation – specifically cited Cllrs Trevor Mignot, Vickieye Parkinson and Anne Winstanley (the latter two pictured with Vince Cable, leader of the Liberal Democrats) for criticism. We posted her letter on 16 March and said we would also publish any reply.

On Tuesday, 20 March, Sarah Charters received the following reply for Richard Ward:

STARTS

Subject: RE: Complaint Against Cllrs Trevor Mignot, Vickieye Parkinson and Anne Winstanley

Dear Mrs Charters,

I refer to your code of conduct complaint.

The “Code of Conduct” system is designed to deal with the ethical conduct of Councillors whilst acting as Councillors. Accordingly under it I can investigate matters such as Councillors not declaring interests, bullying staff or disrupting meetings etc. It would not be appropriate to use the code to look at the statements of intended candidates in election or political literature.

The Electoral Commission has published the following guidance regarding political literature:

“In general, political campaign material in the UK is not regulated, and it is a matter for voters to decide on the basis of such material whether they consider it accurate or not. This includes the design of the material. There is one exception to this, which is making or publishing a false statement of fact in relation to a candidate’s personal character or conduct (not their political views or conduct), unless there are reasonable grounds to believe the statement is true. The Commission does not regulate this rule however, and any allegations should be made to the police.

“The Advertising Standards Authority regulates advertising, but non-broadcast political material whose principal function is to influence voters is exempt from its remit. Further, as broadcast political advertising is prohibited in the UK, Ofcom retains responsibility for considering whether television and radio advertisements have been directed towards a political end or placed by a body whose aims are wholly or mainly of a political nature.

“The Electoral Commission is also not responsible for regulating party election broadcasts (PEBs), however, these must observe the wider law – for example, on copyright, libel, contempt, obscenity, incitement to racial hatred or violence. In addition, all broadcasters’ PEBs must also comply with the harm and offence and incitement rules of the Ofcom Broadcasting Code. BBC PEBs must comply with relevant provisions of the BBC Editorial Guidelines. More information on the production rules for PEBs can be found on the website of the Broadcaster Liaison Group here. The Commission also has no role in the arrangements for any broadcast leadership debates, which are managed between the relevant broadcasters and political parties directly. The content of any broadcast leadership debates must comply with the Ofcom Broadcasting Code and/or the BBC Editorial Guidelines as appropriate.

“The wider law does generally apply to political campaign material, and if you believe any material breaches have been made, for example, with regard to equalities or public order legislation, you may wish to report this to the police or seek your own legal advice”

With regard to your concerns regarding the local plan as you may be aware the Council has to comply with a highly complex legal procedure and with detailed consultation requirements and ultimately has to convince an Independent planning inspector appointed by the Government. The procedure allows for detailed participation by members of the public including making their concerns known to the independent inspector. Further details of the local plan process can be found on the Council’s web site and also on the websites of organisations such as the CPRE.

Kind regards,

Richard Ward
Monitoring Officer
Strategy – Monitoring Officer
Eastleigh Borough Council | Eastleigh House | Upper Market Street | Eastleigh | SO50 9YN

ENDS

ADD DISCLAIMER, 19 March 2018: In the last few weeks, ADD has been made aware of a Twitter account under the name ‘Keith buildaHouse’, which refers to the leader of Eastleigh Borough Council and the draft Eastleigh Local Plan. ADD wishes to make clear that this account has no connection to our campaign and we have no knowledge of who is behind it.

ADD UPDATE, 16 March 2018: Sarah Charters, a resident of Bishopstoke, yesterday sent an official letter of complaint to Eastleigh Borough Council (EBC) accusing Liberal Democrat councillors of misleading local people about Eastleigh’s Local Plan in their leaflets and social media.

Addressing her letter to Richard Ward, EBC’s monitoring officer, and specifically citing Cllrs Vickieye Parkinson, Anne Winstanley (both pictured with Vince Cable, leader of the Liberal Democrats) and Trevor Mignot in the formal documentation, she said:

“I am writing to complain about the misleading communications being provided to the residents of Bishopstoke by Liberal Democrat Councillors through the ‘Bishopstoke Focus’ electioneering leaflets and social media.

Please note that this is not a complaint about the policy being put forward, but the way in which it is being communicated.

Having been a Liberal Democrat voter for many years, I thought the party represented strong community values and an honest and balanced approach to local and national politics.

I have been horrified by the way the Eastleigh Borough Council has been conducting itself through the ‘emerging local plan’ and believe that the way politics is being practised locally is dishonest and immoral.

I would be grateful if you could respond to me with an explanation of my following observations:

1. In the Bishopstoke Focus for January 2018, the Bishopstoke Councillors have stated that they are ‘Fighting for Bishopstoke’ in that they are opposing building across greenfields between Bishopstoke and West End. However, nowhere within this leaflet does it mention that the Bishopstoke Councillors are ‘fighting for’ 5,200 houses to be built within Bishopstoke and Fair Oak [so-called options B and C].

2. The same leaflet states that local Conservative MPs called on the Borough Council to urge more work on a plan that would create an ‘urban sprawl’ and yet they have not told local residents that the ‘urban sprawl’ that the Liberal Democrats wish to create within Bishopstoke and Fair Oak will contain 2,000 more houses than the Government requires. It seems that the author of the leaflet is hypocritical.

3. The Christmas and New Year 2017/18 leaflet states that the alternative option promoted by Mims Davis MP and colleagues comes with no infrastructure improvements and will cause more road gridlock but does not even mention that there is a plan to build 5,200 houses in Bishopstoke and Fair Oak, and that current traffic impact report indicates there will be no improvement to the current traffic chaos, let alone acknowledge the additional traffic chaos the scheme will cause in Allbrook.

4. It is folly to suggest that the additional traffic caused by the additional 5,200 homes will all exit Bishopstoke and Fair Oak via a new M3 link road. I believe the Liberal Democrat Councillors should be advising Bishopstoke residents that, due to their preferred option for the Local Plan, Bishopstoke residents will need to accept much heavier traffic within many entry / exit points from Bishopstoke.

5. The photographs used by the Liberal Democrat Councillors show them smiling next to green fields, which gives the impression that they are protecting our local rural areas but the preferred option of building on B and C is viewed as being the most environmentally damaging by organisations such as the Woodland Trust and Campaign to Protect Rural England, as well as wildlife expert Chris Packham.

6. A video both shared and paid promoted on Facebook by Eastleigh Borough Council, shows the Liberal Democrat Councillors talking about protecting our ancient woodland. Encircling ancient woodland with housing and building a major road through a narrow field which separates two parts of the ancient woodland (Stoke Park Woods and Crowdhill Copse / Upper Barn Copse) cannot be viewed as protecting ancient woodland as it will impact on the natural habitat through noise pollution, loss of migratory routes and loss of hedgerows / verges used by a huge variety of wildlife. Is this not misinformation?

7. The councillors also suggest that they are protecting the woodland for local residents. Currently this green space (the ancient woodland and green fields between them) is enjoyed by thousands of Bishopstoke / Eastleigh / Fair Oak residents as a peaceful, safe, pollution free environment to exercise (walking, dog walking, jogging, horse riding, cycling etc) and enjoy nature. The preferred option of building on B and C will destroy this natural heritage and an environment that promotes health and wellbeing of local residents forever.

The misleading information being provided to all residents of Bishopstoke is likely to influence their voting in local elections and is likely to provide a false sense of reassurance that Bishopstoke will not be adversely by the Liberal Democrats preferred option.

I believe that the same misleading communications are being provided to the residents of Fair Oak.

At a meeting with Cllr Anne Winstanley and Cllr Vickieye Parkinson on Monday 12th March 2018, I asked why the truth had been misrepresented and requested that the next edition of the Bishopstoke Focus clearly outlines what the Bishopstoke Councillors have voted for. I was informed that it was their publication and they could write what they wanted. I was given a very clear message that they had no intent to tell the whole truth in the Bishopstoke Focus, thereby removing the opportunity for the voting public to make an informed decision in the forthcoming local elections.

I would be very grateful for your consideration of my complaint about misleading communications from the Liberal Democrat councillors which, sadly, I can only conclude are part of a wider dishonest electioneering campaign to reduce the opposition to options B and C by local residents.

I am anxious that my complaint will not receive due consideration within Eastleigh Borough Council because I believe there has been a startling lack of democratic rigour throughout the whole process of drawing up the local plan. I fear my complaint will either be ignored or manipulated to provide further misinformation. I therefore request a review of my complaint at a national, as well as local, party level.

As mentioned, I have always been a loyal supporter of Liberal Democrat policy because of the values and the party represents. I feel let down and ashamed by the behaviour exhibited by the councillors I voted for and would therefore welcome an early response to my complaint.

With kind regards,

Sarah Charters
Bishopstoke Resident

ENDS

We will publish any reply that Sarah Charters may receive.