Blog

ADD UPDATE: 18 January 2018: We write with wonderful news of an initiative by local writers Amanda Oosthuizen and Louise Taylor who have launched a website to compile stories and poems about the countryside. What’s more, their website, Words for the Wild, will form the basis of an anthology that they will publish in support of the ADD campaign against Eastleigh Borough Council’s shocking Local Plan. To visit Words for the Wild, click here.

Amanda Oosthuizen explains:

“Words for the Wild publishes stories and poems that refer to the countryside. At the moment, work can be read on the website, with plenty more to come, and we will publish a book in the spring. People have all sorts of countryside concerns and interests, and we will publish a variety of writing – joyful, mysterious, funny and also work by writers who are as horrified by its destruction as we are. 

“We are thrilled and proud that so many writers have given us their support. The profits from book sales will go to ADD, and we’ll be promoting the venture, and the ADD campaign, at literary events.”

There are already poems and stories to read on this fabulous website – do take a look. And if you have writing you would like to contribute to this exciting project, the criteria are explained on the site.

Thank you Amanda and Louise! We greatly look forward to your book launch!

ADD UPDATE, 9 January 2018: In response to Isabelle Fraser’s article in the Daily Telegraph on 3 January, entitled “Meet the ‘Yimbys’ arguing for more homes to be built in their area”, the letter below was published in the paper this morning. Thanks to everyone’s support over the weekend, it was co-signed by Mark Lloyd, CEO of The Angling Trust; Stephen Joseph, Chief Executive of Campaign for Better Transport; and Dees Haas, Chairman of Campaign to Protect Rural England Hampshire, plus 252 others. To view an image of the letter, see above, click here or view the Daily Telegraph’s letters page. We continue to work hard to defeat Eastleigh’s proposed Local Plan. If we stick together, we remain confident that we can do so. Eastleigh deserves better.

STARTS

Sir – It is true that Eastleigh borough council in Hampshire, led by Keith House, recently voted to pursue a Local Plan that involves building nearly 2,000 more houses than the Government requires (“Meet the ‘Yimbys’ arguing for more homes to be built in their area”, Business, January 3).

However, Mr House gives the wrong impression by saying that the decision was taken “to foster growth rather than manage decline” in line with emerging Yimby (‘Yes In My Backyard’) thinking.

Yimby groups espouse housing infill close to transportation. Mr House’s plan sits on the very edge of his borough in ancient Hampshire countryside, miles from Eastleigh’s town centre and existing infrastructure.

Indeed, Mr House’s plan isn’t even in his backyard. It’s in adjacent Winchester city council’s backyard. The reason Mr House wants the extra 2,000 houses is because they enable the developer to pay for a costly new road that is central to the scheme (though it has no proven wider benefits). House has doggedly pursued this plan, repeatedly rejecting expert transport, planning and environmental advice.

Even now the plan lacks critical evidence to support its deliverability, sustainability and affordability. Mr House and his fellow councillors have gambled that the Government’s planning inspector will be blind to these glaring gaps.

It’s not too late for Mr House and his fellow councillors to change their minds.

A more credible alternative proposal, once supported by them, waits in the wings. The irony is that this proposal fits far more neatly with Yimby ideals.  

Mark Lloyd
CEO, The Angling Trust

Stephen Joseph
Chief Executive, Campaign for Better Transport

Dee Haas
Chairman, Campaign To Protect Rural England, Hampshire

and 252 others; see telegraph.co.uk

ENDS

 

 

ADD UPDATE, 7 January 2018: Important: to give your consent to be a co-signatory to one of our supporter’s letter to the Daily Telegraph, please ‘like’ THE COMMENT (on our Facebook page – see screenshot above), NOT THE POST ITSELF. As many of you know, one of our supporters has written a letter to the Telegraph following Wednesday’s article about Keith House, Eastleigh’s Local Plan and Yimbyism. We posted this letter as a comment on our Facebook page on Friday evening and are collating as many co-signatories as possible before sending it to the paper tomorrow morning (Monday). Together with email agreements, we are gathering an excellent number. Of course, the Telegraph may not want to publish our letter, but we can try. Thank you to everybody for your continuing support. Together, we can win this fight!

 

 

ADD UPDATE, 5 January 2017: On 11 December, Eastleigh council leader Keith House (above) and his fellow Liberal Democrat councillors ignored the expertise and common sense of thousands and voted to pursue a Local Plan that lacks critical evidence to support its deliverability, sustainability and affordability.

In front of 800 aghast members of the public (and many hundreds more following on social media), they forced through so-called options B and C of their Plan which – if completed – would deliver 5,200 new houses, well in excess of the 3,350 needed to meet the borough’s housing target in the period to 2036. 

No one seems to be able to understand House’s intransigence on this issue. Can it be that his Plan is politically motivated? We believe he is set on options B and C because they deliver the balance of all housing needed in Eastleigh for the next 20-plus years in the relatively less populated north of the borough, adjacent to neighbouring Winchester. Building on this countryside, far from Eastleigh’s town centre and existing transport infrastructure, might be electorally advantageous for his majority-controlling group, especially ahead of ‘all-out’ elections in May. House has led the council for a remarkable 24 years and is clearly desperate to stay in power.

House has gambled that the government’s planning inspector, who will have to scrutinise his Plan, will be blind to the many glaring gaps in evidence, including in particular transport and biodiversity, that thousands of others can see so clearly. Amongst those sounding the alarm are Hampshire County Council (the Highways Authority), Winchester City Council (through whose land a proposed new road to serve the new houses would run), the three local MPs, seven local parish councils, the Campaign for Better Transport, the Woodland Trust, the Campaign to Protect Rural England, the Angling Trust, the Test and Itchen Association, Chris Packham, the conservationist who grew up in the area, the list goes on… and on. You simply could not make it up, particularly given House has on his desk a very credible alternative plan that he once supported but now chooses to ignore.

House had tried to bury the fact that his Plan includes nearly 2,000 more houses than mandated by the government. However, at the meeting on 11 December, he was forced to explain, clearly under pressure, that this was because the “government might change its mind on housing numbers” and that he needed “a buffer”. Of course, everyone knows that the real reason he needs these extra houses is that, without them, the developer would be unable to meet the cost of the proposed new road, which he has made central to his Plan but has – to date – no proven wider benefit. Indeed, after 18 months of work, Eastleigh council is still unable to offer any evidence that the road will provide relief for traffic in the surrounding communities.

Having regrouped over Christmas, House has now had the gall to tell Isabelle Fraser of the Daily Telegraph, in an article published two days ago (click here; you may need to register, but it’s quick and free), that the decision to build 2,000 extra houses was taken “to foster growth rather than manage decline”. Isabelle Fraser describes what he proposes to do as Yimby-ism (‘Yes In My Back Yard’).

Rather clumsily, House also let slip to Fraser that key benefits of the scheme will be more jobs and council tax revenue. Could more council tax revenue really be emerging as a key justification for House’s destruction of the finest remaining countryside in the borough?

Last month, House and his fellow councillors took a massive decision that will impact Eastleigh and its neighbouring communities for generations to come. Nowhere in its public consultation exercise, which was predictably a sham, was there a question about whether the public agrees that the council should ‘seek to build 2,000 more houses than the government requires in order to provide more jobs and council tax revenue’. Nor was there any reference to this Yimby ‘policy’ in the council papers before the meeting. How did House suddenly reach this conclusion? What further surprise arguments, without any evidence base, are yet to emerge?

 

ADD UPDATE, 16 December 2017: OUT NOW!! Only 99p – Ray Bellinger’s Local Plan Song (Save our Countryside). Available on Google Play, iTunes, Spotify and other leading digital music platforms. Thanks to Ray, all proceeds will go to the ADD campaign fund. Technical note: If you have an android phone, Google Play is preloaded. If you have an iPhone, iTunes will be preloaded. To buy on iTunes, click here. PLEASE BUY, ENJOY AND HELP SAVE OUR COUNTRYSIDE… AND SHARE SHARE SHARE. Thank you!

ADD UPDATE, 14 December 2017: Eastleigh Borough Council (EBC)’s meeting on Monday (11 December) left ADD as convinced as ever that we can defeat the council’s proposed Local Plan. This is despite the vote going the wrong way, as we had fully expected. The occasion highlighted the extraordinary lack of evidence to justify the council’s decision and the failings in its process. This will serve us in good stead when the plan goes before the government inspector for a final decision.

The meeting gave conditional approval to options B and C, which would involve 5,200 homes near Bishopstoke and Fair Oak and an environmentally catastrophic new road. Councillors also voted to give the final decision to the chief executive, who will have to assess the outstanding evidence when it is ready.

So, the most important decision affecting Eastleigh and surrounding area for a generation will be taken by an unelected officer without allowing councillors or the public to scrutinise the facts.

Council leader Keith House justified this affront to democracy with the blatantly untrue statement that only about 1-2% of the necessary evidence was missing. In fact, as the council report acknowledges, there are still 14 uncompleted studies waiting to be received – 37% of the total. These include highly significant traffic, environmental and flooding assessments.

The real reason for this unseemly haste is that Cllr House wants to have the Local Plan in place in time for the local elections in May.

Around 800 supporters who had braved the freezing weather applauded enthusiastically as they heard more than thirty submissions against the proposals from a wide range of speakers, including a river keeper on the Itchen, the Woodland Trust, Campaign to Protect Rural England, numerous parish councils, Winchester City Council and local MP Mims Davies.

There then followed a debate. Several majority-party councillors who spoke appeared not to have read the report, and were unable to produce a single piece of hard evidence to support their arguments. It had all clearly been orchestrated in advance. Speakers from the opposition Tories and the Independent Liberal Democrats spoke out against the plan, but were hopelessly outnumbered. The final vote was 25 for; 9 against with one abstention. We will publish the recorded vote as soon as it is available.

The concluding speech by Cllr House was littered with factual errors and highly contentious statements presented as facts. He did not quite say: “I am the only person who understands this subject, so you guys were just wasting your breath.” But he might as well have done.

Despite this entirely expected setback, we remain confident of ultimate victory.

• There is insufficient evidence to support the plan when it goes to the government inspector;
• It contradicts national planning guidelines in many important respects;
• The outcome was clearly pre-determined in advance, which is not allowed;
• Hampshire County Council (the Highway Authority) has written to EBC to express concern at the lack of supporting evidence;
• Winchester City Council, which must give planning permission for any changes on Highbridge Road (despite what Cllr House said), opposes the plan;
• Many powerful groups such as the Angling Trust are vehemently against it;
• The new road may be undeliverable as EBC has seriously underestimated the cost.

To keep up the pressure, we will soon be asking everyone to dip (further) into their pockets to pay for our continued use of professional advisers. Stay tuned!

For now, thank you all for your magnificent support. It is hugely appreciated. Together we will succeed.

Daily Echo, 12 December 2017: CIVIC chiefs backed plans to build thousands of homes near ancient woodland in Hampshire, despite protesters claiming there was not enough evidence about the impact on environment and traffic. Councillors from Eastleigh Borough Council voted in favour of the proposed Local Plan which includes proposals for 5,200 new homes and a new road north of Bishopstoke and Fair Oak. Residents, protesters and council bosses presented their arguments during a council meeting held at the Ageas Bowl which finished at about 1am this morning. While civic chiefs said their choice is “the most logical option”, protesters and opposition councillors all agreed that “Eastleigh deserves better.” Members of ADD voiced their view by singing a song before the start of the meeting.

ADD UPDATE, 11 December 2017: This evening, 11 December, Eastleigh Borough Council will be asked to vote on its Local Plan to 2036. As our supporters know, the council’s leader, Keith House, is pressing councillors to vote in favour of a Plan that includes 5,200 new houses and an expensive new link road north of Bishopstoke and Fair Oak (its options B and C). The council has two clear alternatives to deliver a major new housing development – what it calls a Strategic Growth Option (SGO). The plan north of Bishopstoke and Fair Oak has always been House’s favourite, though there is little evidence to support his case.

Over the last few years, many myths about Eastleigh’s Local Plan have been planted and allowed to take hold. One of these is that the council’s SGO needs to deliver over 5,000 houses. This was the case but because of recent planning approvals is no longer so. Whilst ADD has been aware of this for a couple of months, buried in the papers for this meeting, the council now concedes the point too. Are all councillors aware of this?

The meeting papers state that within the Plan period, which is to 2036, Eastleigh actually needs to find the means to deliver a further 3,350 houses. Not 5,200 – but 3,350. Indeed, the papers make clear that the 5,200 number is merely an aspirational one to 2046! It’s therefore irrelevant.

Why, therefore, is the council fixated on finding land for 5,200 houses? The reason, of course, is that Cllr House knows that without this number of houses the developer would be unable to meet the cost of the proposed road in options B and C. He needs this excessive number of houses to support his case.

The Plan that councillors are being asked to vote on this evening also includes space for 30,000 square metres of employment-related development to accompany the new houses. But this, too, is development that Eastleigh does not need. The borough already has the potential to deliver much more than this at better locations, at the former railway works and Eastleigh Riverside. We don’t need 30,000 square metres of employment space, and certainly not on green fields to the north of the borough.

Nobody doubts that new development is needed, but Cllr House seems intent on building more than required and locating houses in an area where there is the least likelihood of the developer building the kind of housing the borough most needs – i.e., affordable and social housing. Moreover, other councils seem to be catching on to this idea of spare capacity. We have it on good authority that a letter has been sent to Eastleigh by New Forest Borough Council asking Eastleigh to build extra houses to make up for the New Forest’s shortfall!

Does Eastleigh really want to build more houses to accommodate the needs of others – beyond, of course, what it is already doing? Don’t forget Eastleigh is already helping Southampton. Whilst Cllr House may see this as an opportunity to rake in more council tax revenues, is it really in the best interests of Eastleigh residents?

Several councillors say that options B and C is the only SGO that can deliver the required development. This is simply NOT true – not at 5,200 houses, and certainly not at 3,350 houses! Even with Cllr House’s recent, and rather convenient, stipulation that there must be a 1 kilometre gap between settlements within the alternative SGO, options D and E, Eastleigh has two very clear alternatives which could deliver the balance of housing it requires to 2036.

Should the council ignore this fact, and choose Cllr House’s preferred plan without properly comparing both options B/C and D/E, we have legal opinion to suggest that there is a strong possibility it would ultimately fail the planning inspector’s test. Now that is not a myth.

If you – like thousands of others – want an evidence-based Local Plan for Eastleigh, PLEASE, PLEASE TURN UP TO TONIGHT’S COUNCIL MEETING. BRING YOUR FAMILY AND FRIENDS TOO: 7PM, TONIGHT, MONDAY 11 DECEMBER, AT THE HILTON AT THE AGEAS BOWL (SO30 3XH). 

There is masses of parking, so don’t let that put you off. If you need a lift, just contact us!

Next year an independent planning inspector will scrutinise Eastleigh’s Local Plan submission. Whilst it will already be clear to the inspector (whoever he or she may be) that the council’s decision-making is totally unsound, we must emphasise this point again on 11 December by showing up in large numbers.

 

ADD UPDATE, 10 DECEMBER 2017: Hampshire County Council has become the latest authority to tell Eastleigh Borough Council that it lacks sufficient evidence to make a decision on its preferred Local Plan, namely the development of 5,200 new houses and a new link road north of Bishopstoke and Fair Oak (to view an annotated EBC map here). Eastleigh Borough Council is due to vote on its Plan at a key meeting tomorrow evening. 

Writing earlier this month in the County Council’s position as Highway Authority for Eastleigh’s Local Plan, Stuart Jarvis Director of Economy, Transport and Environment, makes clear that he does “not believe that we are yet in a position in terms of the technical work and evidence base, to reach any final conclusions on the transport impacts and therefore final spatial distribution of development, from a transport perspective.”

He concludes: “In the context of the transport technical work and evidence seen to date it is our view that there is insufficient evidence to conclude a proper transport assessment, and therefore to finalise spatial development option decisions in transport terms, at this stage.”

To view the full letter, click here.

If you – like thousands of others – want an evidence-based Local Plan for Eastleigh, PLEASE, PLEASE TURN UP TO THE COUNCIL MEETING AT 7PM ON MONDAY 11 DECEMBER AT THE HILTON AT THE AGEAS BOWL (SO30 3XH).

Next year an independent planning inspector will scrutinise Eastleigh’s Local Plan submission. Whilst it will already be clear to the inspector (whoever he or she may be) that the council’s decision-making is totally unsound, we must emphasise this point again on 11 December by showing up in large numbers.

 

 

ADD UPDATE, 10 December 2017: Tomorrow is Eastleigh’s Local Plan D-Day.

At a meeting at 7pm tomorrow, at the Hilton at the Ageas Bowl (SO30 3XH), Eastleigh Borough Council will be making its choice on its Local Plan. In summary, it wishes to bulldoze through a half-baked plan for 5,200 new houses and a new link road north of Bishopstoke and Fair Oak and south of Colden Common, Owslebury and Upham, significantly affecting Allbrook, Boyatt Wood, Chandler’s Ford, Otterbourne, Brambridge, Highbridge, Twyford, Chandler’s Ford and Bishop’s Waltham too (its options B and C – see an annotated EBC map here).

If you wish to STOP the council making a BAD decision for Eastleigh, then…

…WE URGE YOU TO MAKE EVERY EFFORT – WHATEVER THE WEATHER – TO ATTEND THIS MEETING. TOGETHER, WE CAN DEFEAT THIS PLAN BUT A MASSIVE TURN OUT TOMORROW IS ESSENTIAL.

As ADD’s supporters know, we have a large and growing number of organisations that support our cause (see list here), but tomorrow is all about individuals who are against this plan turning up and being counted.

Many volunteers will be speaking out against EBC’s proposals and the more public support these speakers have, the better our chances of making a difference!

SO PLEASE, PLEASE TURN UP TOMORROW. BRING YOUR FAMILY AND FRIENDS TOO: 7PM AT THE HILTON AT THE AGEAS BOWL, SO30 3XH.

THERE IS MASSES OF PARKING, AND IF YOU NEED A LIFT, JUST CONTACT US!

BE THERE OR BE BULLDOZED… BY THE COUNCIL TOMORROW AND ULTIMATELY THE BULLDOZERS THEMSELVES…