Blog

ADD ALERT, 23 November 2016: At its next council meeting on Thursday 15 December, we believe Eastleigh Borough Council (EBC) is likely to decide in favour of its Local Plan’s options B and C, its most destructive proposals, which would involve the development of 6,000+ houses and a major new road in, and north of, Bishopstoke and Fair Oak.  We are appealing to anyone who is against these options to attend this meeting to leave EBC councillors in no doubt about the strength of local residents’ opposition.  The meeting will be at 7.00pm at Kings Community Church, Upper Northam Road, Hedge End, Southampton, SO30 4BZ.  If you need a lift, let us know.  We look forward to seeing you there! 

So far:

• Over 1,400 people have signed the petition against options B and C, submitted to EBC on 21 July 2016.
• Over 1,060 people support our cause on Facebook.
• Over 1,060 people have signed the petition to get the Chickenhall Lane Link Road built as soon as possible.
• Over 20 key local and national organisations support our cause.
• All three local MPs support our cause.
• Not a single person has responded positively to our question about whether anyone is in favour of options B and C!

ADD has done a vast amount of work getting to grips with EBC’s options and is strongly of the opinion that options D and E represent a better solution for our housing needs and for the future of our area.

If you value this area, and wish to protect it, please do SHOW UP to this crucial meeting!  If you don’t, it could be too late.

Thank you very much.

New ‘night blight’ maps for England, released by the Campaign to Protect Rural England this summer, show the problem of light pollution worsening across the country.

The maps, which come at a time of increasing awareness of the harmful effects of light pollution on the health of people and wildlife, provide powerful support for CPRE’s campaign to encourage local councils and developers to take light pollution into account when planning new developments.

In Hampshire, CPRE is campaigning for a Green Belt for South Hampshire, which would protect the countryside between the urban conurbations of South Hants and the New Forest National Park to the east and the South Downs National Park to the west and north. This, they say, would not only assist with urban regeneration but also prevent unnecessary sprawling of large built-up areas into unspoilt countryside – which only results in more light pollution and a shameful waste of energy and money.

As Eastleigh Borough Council weighs up the options for its Local Plan ahead of its meeting in December, let’s hope it doesn’t abandon its much-vaunted hopes for a greener world at the crucial moment and takes CPRE Hampshire’s recommendations for a Green Belt, amply supported by its ‘night blight’ map of the borough (above), into account.

ADD UPDATE, 20 November 2016: It was standing room only as around 175 people packed into the community centre at Colden Common to hear an update on the Eastleigh development plan from representatives of Action Against Destructive Development (ADD).  The meeting gave its strong backing to the action group and its campaign to ensure that the borough’s housing needs are met in a way that protects top-quality countryside and the characters of local communities.

Opening the meeting, Kate Beal Blyth of ADD said their campaign had the support of a wide range of organisations and individuals.  She read a message from local MP Steve Brine, thanking the action group for its work and pledging his continued help.

John Lauwerys told the gathering that there were more appropriate ways open to the Council than options B and C of the Eastleigh plan, which would mean building more than 6,000 houses in Bishopstoke and Fair Oak.  Options D and E, he said, made better planning sense.  They would locate housing nearer to existing public transport and to places where people wanted to be such as urban centres, public transport and motorways.  B and C would maximise car usage, meaning at least an extra 30,000 vehicle movements a day.  Furthermore, options D and E were more compact, making it possible to create a central community focus, whereas B and C amounted to ribbon development.

Mark Baylis said that option B, which involves building a major new road through part of Colden Common, would permanently change the character of the village. He said the plan was developer-led, and it contradicted Eastleigh Borough Council’s stated objectives of protecting the countryside, promoting biodiversity, preserving the identities of individual communities and tackling climate change.  The new road, he said, was likely to increase rather than relieve congestion, and make it more likely that Colden Common would eventually become a suburb.

Caroline Dibden of the Campaign to Protect Rural England told the meeting that, from their perspective, options B and C were by far the worst of all those under consideration.

As well as ADD members, there were words of support from district councillors Richard Izard (who also chairs Colden Common Parish Council) and from Sue Cook, with the latter reading out a message from the chair of neighbouring Twyford Parish Council.  There was also backing at the meeting from Otterbourne and Allbrook and North Boyatt Parish Councils.

There followed a lively question and answer session lasting more than hour, with several of those present saying there was an urgent need for the Chickenhall Lane Link Road.

Afterwards Kate Beal Blyth, who chaired the meeting and is a founding member of ADD, said she was “very encouraged” by the level of support shown by villagers and by the number of people who came forward offering to help their work.

ADD UPDATE, 18 November 2016: Yesterday we asked you to write to your local Eastleigh Borough Councillors or Winchester City Councillors ahead of Eastleigh Borough Council’s crucial meeting on 15 December in which we believe it will decide in favour of its most destructive proposals for its Local Plan, namely options B and C.  Whilst we gave you correct email addresses for all the relevant Eastleigh Borough Councillors, Winchester City Councillors, Hampshire County Councillors and MPs, we made a mistake regarding a physical address.  Should you wish to send a letter rather than an email, please find all the correct details below.  Thank you again for all your support.  Our campaign is gathering incredible momentum!

NEWSFLASH: EBC LOCAL PLAN – CRITICAL MOMENT APPROACHING. PLEASE WRITE TO YOUR BOROUGH / CITY COUNCILLORS NOW!

ADD UPDATE, 17 November 2016: ADD believes that Eastleigh Borough Council will make a crucial decision regarding its proposed Local Plan at its full council meeting on 15 December.  In particular, we believe it will decide in favour of its most destructive options for the plan, namely options B and C.

As time is now ticking fast, we are urging everyone in Bishopstoke, Fair Oak, Upham, Owslebury, Allbrook, Colden Common, Twyford and Otterbourne to write to their local Eastleigh Borough Councillors or Winchester City Councillors to ask what they are doing on your behalf to prevent this planning and environmental catastrophe, either directly (if you live in Eastleigh) or by taking up the case with neighbouring politicians (if you live within Winchester City Council).  Borough / City Councillors should know what their constituents think and value, particularly given the magnitude of this issue!

Whilst we strongly encourage you to make your letter/email as personal as possible (using your own reasons to object to options B and C), please find below a draft to give you some ideas.  NB Please do make this letter/email your own as duplicate copies only get counted once!

Please also find below email addresses for all relevant Borough / City Councillors, plus relevant MPs and County Councillors (whom we encourage you to copy on any emails).

If you are sending a hard copy letter to an Eastleigh Borough Councillor, please send to Eastleigh Borough Council, Eastleigh House, Upper Market Street, Eastleigh, SO50 9YN.  Alternatively, if you are sending to a Liberal Democrat Borough Councillor, Eastleigh Liberal Democrats have a Freepost address: Freepost RTLH-YXCX-BKXE, Eastleigh Liberal Democrats, 107 Leigh Road, Eastleigh, SO50 9DR.  No stamp is required for the Freepost option.

If you are sending a letter to a Winchester City Councillor, please send to Winchester City Council, City Offices, Colebrook Street, Winchester, SO23 9LJ.

Thanks to everyone’s support, our campaign is gathering momentum!  Please keep up the pressure!

DRAFT LETTER/EMAIL (CONTACT DETAILS BELOW)

STARTS

Dear [your Councillor],

I am writing to ask what you are doing to address the threat to [name of your village/ward] posed by Eastleigh Borough Council (EBC)’s current development proposals within their proposed Local Plan till 2036.  Anyone who has studied options B and C of EBC’s proposed Local Plan to build 6,000+ houses and a major new road (https://www.eastleigh.gov.uk/media/184064/151217-Issues-and-Options_postcabformat.pdf) will realise that we face a planning and environmental disaster [and, if you live in Eastleigh, huge financial risk to the borough] if EBC chooses these options (the website www.add-eastleigh.org is informative on these issues).

In particular, options B and C would:

• Destroy much-loved, precious countryside, impacting a Site of Special Scientific Interest, two sites of Ancient Natural Woodland and numerous Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation.
• Destroy the unique identity of each of our communities.
• Destroy our quality of life in many ways, including through vastly increased traffic congestion (due to the estimated 30,000 extra daily car journeys that, despite the proposed new road, would ultimately end up back in the current road system).

Incredibly, I am told that EBC is likely to favour options B and C at its council meeting on 15 December so – as I am sure you are aware – time is of the essence to ensure this does not happen.

Of course, I understand that we need new homes in Eastleigh but options B and C seem to be calculated to cause maximum damage to our precious environment whilst there are other places in the Borough that could absorb this kind of growth with far less impact, in particular EBC’s options D and E in the area around Allington Lane. One would never believe that EBC’s slogan is “tackling climate change”!

Indeed, from a planning perspective, there are plenty of reasons why options D and E make the most sense, not least because they would produce a compact, sustainable community, well connected to the centre of Eastleigh and therefore directly boosting the town centre.  In contrast, options B and C would produce a series of unconnected housing estates strung along a road (of questionable value) that won’t relate to Eastleigh town centre at all.

As my local Borough [City] Councillor, I assume that you are also very concerned about this issue and are doing everything in your power to ensure EBC [or if you live within Winchester City Council – “to lobby neighbouring politicians to ensure EBC”] makes the right choice regarding its Local Plan.  Are you, for example, lobbying hard for the Chickenhall Lane Link Road to be built as soon as possible?  As you’ll no doubt know, this long-planned road, favoured by many stakeholders, would increase the viability of more appropriate development options.

I much look forward to hearing what actions you are taking to prevent this planning and environmental catastrophe.

Yours sincerely,

ENDS

CONTACT DETAILS

Borough / City Councillors – prioritise contacting the ones for where you live!

Eastleigh – full list (with postal addresses) is at: http://meetings.eastleigh.gov.uk/mgMemberIndex.aspx?fn=ward

Bishopstoke West: Cllr Anne Winstanley (cabinet member) [email protected]
Bishopstoke West: Cllr Vickieye Parkinson-McLachlan [email protected]

Bishopstoke East: Cllr Trevor Mignot [email protected]
Bishopstoke East: Cllr Angela Roling [email protected]

Fair Oak: Cllr Des Scott [email protected]
Fair Oak: Cllr Rob Rushton [email protected]

Allbrook: Cllr Sarah Bain [email protected]
Allbrook: Cllr Maureen Sollitt [email protected]
Allbrook: Cllr Chris Thomas [email protected]

Winchester – full list (with postal addresses) is at: http://www.winchester.gov.uk/meetings/councillors/

Colden Common & Twyford: Cllr Sue Cook [email protected]
Colden Common & Twyford: Cllr Richard Izard [email protected]

Upham and Owslebury: Cllr Lawrence Ruffell [email protected]
Upham and Owslebury: Cllr Amber Thacker [email protected]

Otterbourne: Cllr Jan Warwick [email protected]
Otterbourne: Cllr Brian Laming [email protected]
Otterbourne: Cllr Eleanor Bell [email protected]

FOR COPYING ON EMAILS

Relevant MPs
Steve Brine, MP for Winchester [email protected]
Mims Davies, MP for Eastleigh [email protected]
George Hollingbery, MP for Meon Valley [email protected]

Hampshire County Councillors
Bishopstoke and Fair Oak: Cllr Martin Lyon [email protected]
Bishopstoke and Allbrook: Cllr Andy Moore [email protected]
Colden Common, Twyford, Upham, Owslebury: Cllr Rob Humby [email protected]
Otterbourne: Cllr Phil Bailey [email protected]

IN ADDITION:

As we believe EBC will favour its most destructive options at its meeting at on 15 December, we need as many people as possible to attend in order to demonstrate support for our cause.  The meeting will be held at 7.00pm at Kings Community Church, Upper Northam Road, Hedge End, Southampton, SO30 4BZ.  Please ink this date into your diary now!  If you need a lift, let us know.

IF YOU HAVE NOT ALREADY DONE SO, PLEASE ALSO:

• Sign this petition to get the Chickenhall Lane Link Road built as soon as possible.  This long–planned road, favoured by many stakeholders, would increase the viability of more appropriate development options.
• Email us to register your support and offer your help.  In particular, we want volunteers to deliver campaign leaflets and to help with our research.
• Consider donating to our cause to enable us to afford the best planning and traffic / highways consultants and other professionals to ensure we have the highest possible chance of success.  Donate here.  Any donation – big or small – will make a difference.

If you value living in this area, and wish to protect it, please ACT NOW!

ADD UPDATE, 17 November 2016: ADD believes that Eastleigh Borough Council will make a crucial decision regarding its proposed Local Plan at its full council meeting on 15 December.  In particular, we believe it will decide in favour of its most destructive options for the plan, namely options B and C. 

As time is now ticking fast, we are urging everyone in Bishopstoke, Fair Oak, Upham, Owslebury, Allbrook, Colden Common, Twyford and Otterbourne to write to their local Borough Councillors to ask what they are doing on your behalf to prevent this planning and environmental catastrophe, either directly (if you live in Eastleigh) or by taking up the case with neighbouring politicians (if you live within Winchester City Council). Borough Councillors should know what their constituents think and value, particularly given the magnitude of this issue!

Whilst we strongly encourage you to make your letter/email as personal as possible (using your own reasons to object to options B and C), please find below a draft to give you some ideas.

Please also find below email addresses for all relevant Borough Councillors, plus relevant MPs and County Councillors (whom we encourage you to copy on any emails).

If you are sending a hard copy letter to anyone at EBC, please use the available free post address: Freepost RTLH-YXCX-BKXE, Eastleigh Liberal Democrats, 107 Leigh Road, Eastleigh, SO50 9DR.  No stamp is required.

Thanks to everyone’s support, our campaign is gathering momentum!  Please keep up the pressure!

DRAFT LETTER/EMAIL (CONTACT DETAILS BELOW)

STARTS

Dear [your Councillor],

I am writing to ask what you are doing to address the threat to [name of your village/ward] posed by Eastleigh Borough Council (EBC)’s current development proposals within their proposed Local Plan till 2036.  Anyone who has studied options B and C of EBC’s proposed Local Plan to build 6,000+ houses and a major new road (https://www.eastleigh.gov.uk/media/184064/151217-Issues-and-Options_postcabformat.pdf) will realise that we face a planning and environmental disaster [and, if you live in Eastleigh, huge financial risk to the borough] if EBC chooses these options (the website www.add-eastleigh.org is informative on these issues).

In particular, options B and C would:

• Destroy much-loved, precious countryside, impacting a Site of Special Scientific Interest, two sites of Ancient Natural Woodland and numerous Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation.
• Destroy the unique identity of each of our communities.
• Destroy our quality of life in many ways, including through vastly increased traffic congestion (due to the estimated 30,000 extra daily car journeys that, despite the proposed new road, would ultimately end up back in the current road system).

Incredibly, I am told that EBC is likely to favour options B and C at its council meeting on 15 December so – as I am sure you are aware – time is of the essence to ensure this does not happen.

Of course, I understand that we need new homes in Eastleigh but options B and C seem to be calculated to cause maximum damage to our precious environment whilst there are other places in the Borough that could absorb this kind of growth with far less impact, in particular EBC’s options D and E in the area around Allington Lane.  One would never believe that EBC’s slogan is “tackling climate change”!

Indeed, from a planning perspective, there are plenty of reasons why options D and E make the most sense, not least because they would produce a compact, sustainable community, well connected to the centre of Eastleigh and therefore directly boosting the town centre.  In contrast, options B and C would produce a series of unconnected housing estates strung along a road (of questionable value) that won’t relate to Eastleigh town centre at all.

As my local Borough Councillor, I assume that you are also very concerned about this issue and are doing everything in your power to ensure EBC [or if you live within Winchester City Council – “to lobby neighbouring politicians to ensure EBC”] makes the right choice regarding its Local Plan.  Are you, for example, lobbying hard for the Chickenhall Lane Link Road to be built as soon as possible?  As you’ll no doubt know, this long-planned road, favoured by many stakeholders, would increase the viability of more appropriate development options.

I much look forward to hearing what actions you are taking to prevent this planning and environmental catastrophe.

Yours sincerely,

ENDS

CONTACT DETAILS

Borough Councillors – prioritise contacting the ones for where you live!

Eastleigh – full list (with postal addresses) is at: http://meetings.eastleigh.gov.uk/mgMemberIndex.aspx?fn=ward

Bishopstoke West: Cllr Anne Winstanley (cabinet member) [email protected]
Bishopstoke West: Cllr Vickieye Parkinson-McLachlan [email protected]

Bishopstoke East: Cllr Trevor Mignot [email protected]
Bishopstoke East: Cllr Angela Roling [email protected]

Fair Oak: Cllr Des Scott [email protected]
Fair Oak: Cllr Rob Rushton [email protected]

Allbrook: Cllr Sarah Bain [email protected]
Allbrook: Cllr Maureen Sollitt [email protected]
Allbrook: Cllr Chris Thomas [email protected]

Winchester – full list (with postal addresses) is at http://www.winchester.gov.uk/meetings/councillors/

Colden Common & Twyford: Cllr Sue Cook [email protected]
Colden Common & Twyford: Cllr Richard Izard [email protected]

Upham and Owslebury: Cllr Lawrence Ruffell [email protected]
Upham and Owslebury: Cllr Amber Thacker [email protected]

Otterbourne: Cllr Jan Warwick [email protected]
Otterbourne: Cllr Brian Laming [email protected]
Otterbourne: Cllr Eleanor Bell [email protected]

FOR COPYING ON EMAILS

Relevant MPs
Steve Brine, MP for Winchester [email protected]
Mims Davies, MP for Eastleigh [email protected]
George Hollingbery, MP for Meon Valley [email protected]

Hampshire County Councillors
Bishopstoke and Fair Oak: Cllr Martin Lyon [email protected]
Colden Common, Twyford, Upham, Owlsebury, and Otterbourne: Cllr Rob Humby [email protected]  

IN ADDITION:

As we believe EBC will favour its most destructive options at its meeting at 7.00pm on 15 December, we need as many people as possible to attend in order to demonstrate support for our cause. Please ink this date into your diary.

IF YOU HAVE NOT ALREADY DONE SO, PLEASE ALSO:

• Sign this petition to get the Chickenhall Lane Link Road built as soon as possible.  This long–planned road, favoured by many stakeholders, would increase the viability of more appropriate development options.
• Email us to register your support and offer your help. In particular, we want volunteers to deliver campaign leaflets and to help with our research.
• Consider donating to our cause to enable us to afford the best planning traffic / highways consultants and other professionals to ensure we have the highest possible chance of success. Donate here. Any donation – big or small – will make a difference.

If you value living in this area, and wish to protect it, please ACT NOW!

ADD UPDATE, 16 November 2016: Last week we invited Keith House, Leader of Eastleigh Borough Council (EBC), to respond to two recent letters supporting ADD’s position, namely one from Mims Davies, MP for Eastleigh, and the other jointly from Mims Davies, George Hollingbery, MP for Meon Valley, and Steve Brine, MP for Winchester.

On Sunday 13 November, Deborah Mitchell, received the following reply from Keith House:

Dear Deborah‎,

Having reviewed the content of your website it would not be appropriate for the Borough Council to comment on yours or any other one-sided campaign group’s site.  The Council has a duty to weigh policy objectives rationally and will do so over the coming weeks and months. ADD can best add value if it contributes in this spirit rather than seeking to simplify complex issues from a partisan perspective.  We quite appreciate this is difficult given that planning issues can be emotive, but this is in the best long-term interests of the Borough as a whole.

Yours sincerely,

Keith House
Leader, Eastleigh Borough Council

We are grateful to Councillor House for taking the time to reply although we are disappointed that he has opted not to respond to the MPs’ comments, as we had asked.

As a group of local residents, neither linked to nor against any political party, we actually share much more than he thinks we do.

We share Councillor House’s concern about the complexity of the issues: this is why we are engaging professional consultants in planning, traffic and the environment in order to build our understanding and guide our responses.  We are giving up considerable time to assessing this information objectively, in the hope that we can contribute meaningfully to this critical decision for our area’s future.

We share too EBC’s objective of having a Local Plan that is in the best long-term interests of the Borough as a whole and welcome Councillor House’s long-held recognition that it makes sense not to rush into a decision until councillors have access to all the evidence, including – we hope – highways ‎evidence.

We also share Councillor House’s spirit of cooperation.

We therefore invite Councillor House and all other EBC councillors to engage with us to reach the best possible solution, both for the current population and future generations to come.

At the Colden Common Public Meeting on 14 November 2016, Steve Brine, MP for Winchester, asked for the following statement expressing his support for ADD to be read out:

“First of all, a HUGE thank you to ADD for all they are doing. The group have, from a standing start, put together an effective and coordinated campaign which is never easy.

I am in regular contact with ADD and also with my colleagues in Parliament, Mims Davies MP and George Hollingbery MP. We are as one in wanting Eastleigh Borough Council to listen to your aims and objectives. The Council are seemingly wanting to impose options B & C as its preferred way forward for mass development, and the consequences this would have for my constituents in Colden Common, which while under Winchester City Council directly borders Eastleigh, are obvious.

We want the Council to look towards solving traffic and infrastructure issues before committing to any final option, as in its current state the leader, Cllr House (and his colleagues), are pushing against the wishes of residents and doing so without proper consultation. These proposals will require massive and so far unfunded new road infrastructure to deal with the huge increase in traffic and the countryside threatened is of the highest quality which is why it’s so important we have CPRE support here.

I look forward to receiving the read out from tonight’s meeting and to continue working, alongside my parliamentary colleagues, with the ADD campaign group. You ARE making a difference so keep going.”

ADD UPDATE, 11 November 2016: Nearly five months after refreshing our website and, more generally, committing to contribute more forcibly to the debate about Eastleigh Borough Council (EBC)’s forthcoming Local Plan, over 1,400 people have told us they are opposed to the ‎proposed development of 6,000+ new houses and a major new road in, and north of, Bishopstoke and Fair Oak, namely EBC’s options B and C.  We have also heard strong criticism for these plans from the three affected MPs, as well as 20 organisations with a direct stake in the area.  Lastly, we have also heard doubts about these plans from local borough councillors.

Extraordinarily, bar some remarks from EBC Leader Keith House alluding to his support for options B and C, we have not yet heard a single voice in favour of these options, or indeed any opposition to our message at all.  Given our strong desire to provide a balanced view – our campaign is not linked to, or against, any political party – we would love to do so.

We recognise we must build new houses but believe options B and C to be the most destructive and unsustainable of all EBC’s options.  However if you prefer these options over other ones, such as D and E, please do email us to convey your perspective – particularly if you are an elected official (whether or not you are in a leadership role).

Thank you.

ADD UPDATE, 29 October 2016: We are holding another public meeting at 7.00pm on Monday 14 November 2016 at the Colden Common Community Centre (St. Vigor Way, Colden Common, SO21 1UU) to explain what we’ve found out so far about Eastleigh Borough Council’s developing Local Plan.

This meeting follows similar recent public gatherings in Upham on 29 September 2016 and in Bishopstoke on 17 October 2016, and is intended mainly for residents of Colden Common, Highbridge, Brambridge and Twyford. That said, if you missed either of the first two meetings and would like to come, we’d be delighted to see you!

We want everyone to know that EBC is seriously considering the development of 6,000+ houses (over three times the size of Colden Common) and a major new road in the area north of Bishopstoke (see map above) that will:

• Destroy much-loved, precious countryside.
• Destroy the unique identity of each of our communities.
• Destroy our quality of life in many ways, including through increased traffic congestion and pressure on local services.

If you value this area, please support us by:

• Signing our petition to get the critical Chickenhall Lane Link Road built as soon as possible. This long-planned road, favoured by many stakeholders, is vital to allowing more appropriate development options.
• Donating to the cause – whilst we are volunteers, we have also hired planning, traffic / highways consultants and other professionals to ensure the highest possible chance of success. We’ve raised £18,600 but will need c.£50,000. Email us now at [email protected]
• Contacting us at [email protected] to offer your services – whatever you feel able to do (deliver leaflets, arrange an event, offer your professional skills), we would love to hear from you.

About Action against Destructive Development

Our campaign has been formed by a coalition of residents’ associations and parish councils. We are local people concerned about the impact this ill-considered development will have on our lives. We recognise we must build new houses, but this location is too destructive and the new development will be unsustainable. We are fighting to get our message across before it is too late. The campaign is not linked to, or against, any political party.

We desperately need your support. Please join us on 14 November to find out more!

ADD UPDATE, 8 November 2016:  As ADD supporters know all too well, one of the main objections to options B and C of Eastleigh Borough Council’s Local Plan is the implications for traffic in the area north of Bishopstoke and Fair Oak.  The proposed Bishopstoke ‘link road’ (or so-called bypass), if indeed this folly is affordable, would not only be an environmental disaster but would also fail to deal with the traffic.  Given the predictable bottleneck caused by the tiny ‎Allbrook railway bridge, the much-increased volumes of traffic would look for other ways to reach the M3 and beyond.

A transcript of a recent Winchester Southern Parishes meeting, at which EBC Leader Keith House spoke about EBC’s Local Plan process, shows that House himself is far from convinced by, or indeed abreast of, the traffic arguments associated with options B and C.

In a Q&A session after House’s set-piece remarks, an Owslebury parish councillor asked him: “Our main concern in Owslebury is traffic, or traffic volume.  Do you have any data that speculates properly on the amount of traffic that you think is going to come north out of this, because at the moment we have a major problem in Owslebury, which there is no plan to alleviate.  Basically, everyone coming from Portsmouth, Bishop’s Waltham, Waltham Chase, Wickham, Fair Oak, and beyond, doesn’t go through Twyford and Shawford onto the M3, they try and get there through Owslebury.

“There is no capacity left on those roads, they are dangerous, and yet it appears that a rule of thumb says that 20-25% of the people who could live in those [6,000+] homes we are now talking about are going to try to do that. It isn’t going to work.”‎

House’s reply, which was both rambling and unconvincing, betrayed a remarkable lack of attention to detail, given his position and the magnitude of the proposed development.  “The Borough Council is not the highway authority,” he said, “so we have to be reliant on data given to us by Hampshire County Council [HCC], as the highway authority, so we are a bit ‘piggy in the middle’ on the traffic issue, between the development interests, who will always say, ‘it works, doesn’t it?’… and the County that has to model projections based on what the developers tell them.”

“Hampshire claim that their modelling is pretty sophisticated and that it takes into account just about every factor possible coming out of a new development.  Their modelling, as we understand it at the moment, suggests that the effect of creating this new northern bypass, effectively from Fair Oak across to Allbrook, will actually take traffic off roads in the Owslebury area, because it will give traffic coming from Fair Oak and Bishopstoke and south an escape route to the M3 where they are trying to get to, rather than going through the existing villages.  Now I can’t comment on whether that’s true or not, I can only say that that’s what the County Council [claims].”‎

And then came the bombshell.  Pressed on whether he had seen the data he was talking about, House replied: “I haven’t personally seen the data, again I am not a traffic engineer, so I wouldn’t be confident in analysing it anyway.  It’s a work in progress at the moment, as I understand it, and we are expecting more of that to come to pass before we take our own reports through to cabinet in December.”

Given House’s current state of preparedness, let’s hope he and his fellow councillors do not, as we fear, plump solely for‎ options B and C at their meetings in December, but rather keep as many options on the table as possible.  They are clearly not ready to make an informed decision – and to do so would not only be a dereliction of duty but a disservice to everyone, for many generations to come, who will have pick up the pieces.