Debate on new housing sites for Basingstoke and Deane

Basingstoke Gazette: Farmland at Manydown is earmarked for housing Farmland at Manydown is earmarked for housing

PROPOSED sites for thousands of new homes in Basingstoke and Deane up to 2029 will be discussed by borough councillors on Thursday night.

Members of the planning and infrastructure committee will discuss a report outlining suggested sites for the Local Plan – the planning ‘blueprint’ that will guide how the borough develops to 2029.

The council’s decision-making Cabinet has accepted a provisional housing requirement of between 730 and 770 per year for the draft plan and must now decide where the majority of these new homes should be built.

Thursday’s meeting is only one step in the tortuous process of deciding which fields and spaces should be built on. But representatives of the public have been given brief opportunities to speak at the start of the meeting. Provision has been made for the meeting to reconvene on Monday night.

The plan is to focus development around Basingstoke and the larger settlements of Bramley, Kingsclere, Oakley, Overton and Whitchurch. Further large housing developments around Tadley are not deemed possible because of emergency planning zone restrictions related to the AWE atomic weapons plant at Aldermaston.

Overall the council needs to find locations for between 7,083 and 7,803 homes on larger sites within the 15 years of the plan. Some sites included will already have been granted planning permission.

Nine sites are being proposed in areas around Basingstoke in three phases throughout the period of the plan:

  • 3,080 homes on three parcels of land at Manydown, west of Basingstoke 1,000 homes on Basingstoke Golf Course land
  • 900 homes on land east of Basingstoke adjacent to the A33
  • 450 homes on land North of Popley Fields (Marnel Park)
  • 420 homes at Razor’s Farm adjacent to Taylor’s Farm/Sherfield Park
  • 390 homes at Cufaude Farm off Cufaude Lane
  • 250 homes at Kennel Farm to the west of the A30 near Kempshott
  • 150 homes at Redlands, opposite the entrance to Taylor’s Farm/Sherfield Park
  • 100 homes on land at Swing Swang Lane in Old Basing.

Two sites are being proposed in Overton:

  • 120 homes at Overton Hill
  • 150 homes at Two Gate Lane.

Two sites south of Bloswood Lane totalling 150 homes together are being proposed in Whitchurch.

In some areas of the borough a housing figure has been set to allow the local community to decide the best sites to meet their needs through a neighbourhood planning process – a new initiative under changes to national planning guidance. These are proposed as:

  • 200 homes for Bramley
  • 50 homes for Kingsclere
  • 200 homes for Oakley
  • 200 additional homes for Whitchurch.

The committee will make comments on the proposed sites. Following this the Cabinet will consider whether it feels these are the best sites to include in the draft Local Plan. If so, further work will be undertaken on elements such as transport before a final version of the draft Local Plan is considered by Cabinet in the spring. The consultation period on the draft plan is scheduled to start in May, with residents and other interested groups having the chance to give their views.

Cabinet Member for Planning Cllr Donald Sherlock said: “I am keen to hear the committee’s views about the sites. New housing developments are never popular but we need to give communities clarity about housing sites for the future rather than being under the constant threat of developers focusing on sites they want to build on.”

“Our decisions need to be based on finding the right balance between protecting our countryside and unique character and ensuring the borough continues to thrive, and that our growing population has homes. These decisions need to be taken by the Cabinet working with local communities to draw up a Local Plan that meets the borough’s needs, rather than by developers winning planning appeals.”

The final Local Plan will be submitted to a planning inspector, later this year, who will consider whether it is ‘sound’ before it can finally be adopted and future planning decisions can be made under its umbrella.

Comments (5)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

12:20pm Wed 16 Jan 13

nothingchanges says...

I think we all have to accept that new houses have to be built in all areas of Basingstoke - everyone has to take their share even Old Basing! But the key thing is the infrastructure - it's essential that when considering development, the council sets out the infrastructure requirements for each development no matter what the cost. The roads just aren't adequate for the further expansion of the town to the West.

Also, I've wondered why the don't consider developing the land to the south of the J6 roundabout on the M3? Perfect link to that motorway junction and quick access into town/onto the motorway without disrupting the already overstretched parts of the existing sprawl to the West and North.
I think we all have to accept that new houses have to be built in all areas of Basingstoke - everyone has to take their share even Old Basing! But the key thing is the infrastructure - it's essential that when considering development, the council sets out the infrastructure requirements for each development no matter what the cost. The roads just aren't adequate for the further expansion of the town to the West. Also, I've wondered why the don't consider developing the land to the south of the J6 roundabout on the M3? Perfect link to that motorway junction and quick access into town/onto the motorway without disrupting the already overstretched parts of the existing sprawl to the West and North. nothingchanges
  • Score: 0

2:23pm Wed 16 Jan 13

Hiliter says...

It should be interesting to see the Tories in action on Thursday evening at the P&I Committee with each one of them arguing there should be no inclusion of any site that falls within their patch.None of them will mention that if they hadn't supported the unlawful exclusion of Manydown in 2006 we would have been 7 years down the track in preparing this key site for development and most of the sites now being included in the list would not have been considered or put forward by opportunist developers.Hopefully the electorate will note the dishonesty of the Tories when the local elections are held in 2014 and vote them out.
Yes of course proper infrastructure planning will be required for Manydown for this exceptional development but that can be done if there is a will to do so on the part of this Administration.It has the money in reserves and in the new homes bonus fund to prepare this development in a way never done before.Lets see what late vision the Tories have on this now that they stopped playing their dishonest political games having acted unlawfully for years.
Interestingly the Golf Club land remains in the list.I am sure Cllr Finney won't take part in discussions about its inclusion - or will he.
Watching the webcast of the second part of the Council meeting held last Thursday he stated he had been exonerated despite the fact that he was found guilty of a serious breach under the Council's Code of Conduct.Presumably his public apology made in the first half of the meeting about his misconduct was meaningless so anything is possible regarding his role in site selection in the future.
It should be interesting to see the Tories in action on Thursday evening at the P&I Committee with each one of them arguing there should be no inclusion of any site that falls within their patch.None of them will mention that if they hadn't supported the unlawful exclusion of Manydown in 2006 we would have been 7 years down the track in preparing this key site for development and most of the sites now being included in the list would not have been considered or put forward by opportunist developers.Hopefully the electorate will note the dishonesty of the Tories when the local elections are held in 2014 and vote them out. Yes of course proper infrastructure planning will be required for Manydown for this exceptional development but that can be done if there is a will to do so on the part of this Administration.It has the money in reserves and in the new homes bonus fund to prepare this development in a way never done before.Lets see what late vision the Tories have on this now that they stopped playing their dishonest political games having acted unlawfully for years. Interestingly the Golf Club land remains in the list.I am sure Cllr Finney won't take part in discussions about its inclusion - or will he. Watching the webcast of the second part of the Council meeting held last Thursday he stated he had been exonerated despite the fact that he was found guilty of a serious breach under the Council's Code of Conduct.Presumably his public apology made in the first half of the meeting about his misconduct was meaningless so anything is possible regarding his role in site selection in the future. Hiliter
  • Score: 0

7:59pm Wed 16 Jan 13

popleyrebel2 says...

There has never been a more blatant attempted of Gerrymandering since Dame Shirley Porter‘s "homes for votes" gerrymandering is illegal and the law took its course and she was prosecuted.
In the case of B&DBC the high court judgement fell short of accusing them of gerrymandering however, the protection of Manydown was judged to be unlawful, therefore, gerrymandering was on the agenda and as consequence area’s like Popley have been swamped.

It’s been said that the cost of the Manydown sags will be £400,000 (legal fees) so who “did” advised the Council?? Will any Councillors be brought to account??
Questions that must be answered.
There has never been a more blatant attempted of Gerrymandering since Dame Shirley Porter‘s "homes for votes" gerrymandering is illegal and the law took its course and she was prosecuted. In the case of B&DBC the high court judgement fell short of accusing them of gerrymandering however, the protection of Manydown was judged to be unlawful, therefore, gerrymandering was on the agenda and as consequence area’s like Popley have been swamped. It’s been said that the cost of the Manydown sags will be £400,000 (legal fees) so who “did” advised the Council?? Will any Councillors be brought to account?? Questions that must be answered. popleyrebel2
  • Score: 0

5:17pm Mon 21 Jan 13

jmwturner says...

Just keep remembering that development on Manydown was stopped by a planning enquiry some years ago on the grounds that the site was of significant landscape value.
Does anyone really want the road chaos that would come when services are brought to the site, and when new residents join the roads!
And remember that there is inadequate water and sewage to permit most developments!
And surely we need to stop building in the overcrowded southeast anyway!
Just keep remembering that development on Manydown was stopped by a planning enquiry some years ago on the grounds that the site was of significant landscape value. Does anyone really want the road chaos that would come when services are brought to the site, and when new residents join the roads! And remember that there is inadequate water and sewage to permit most developments! And surely we need to stop building in the overcrowded southeast anyway! jmwturner
  • Score: 0

10:57pm Mon 21 Jan 13

popleyrebel2 says...

Jmwturner.
I am confident the points you raise were submitted as part of the Councils defence in the high court, furthermore, I would be even more shocked and disappointed if the advice given to the council did not cover all aspects of infrastructure.
That said, the council acted unlawfully and questions must be asked, “what advice, legal or otherwise did they receive that has cost £400,000.”
Jmwturner. I am confident the points you raise were submitted as part of the Councils defence in the high court, furthermore, I would be even more shocked and disappointed if the advice given to the council did not cover all aspects of infrastructure. That said, the council acted unlawfully and questions must be asked, “what advice, legal or otherwise did they receive that has cost £400,000.” popleyrebel2
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree