Reply to THIS thread
Start a NEW Talkback Thread
Talkback Home

More new homes ? - Editor (24th Jan 2012 - 17:08:37) This press release just in.. Local people in Liphook will get the opportunity to view plans for 58 new homes when Barratt launches a public exhibition at The Millennium Hall, Liphook on Tuesday January 31. The proposals, which would see 58 new homes being built together with a care home and commercial space, will be displayed from 1pm until 7pm. Barratt and its professional consultants will be on hand to discuss the plans and a dedicated children’s corner will be set up with activities for youngsters while parents look at the housing proposals. In addition to the public exhibition, the plans will also be available online at Barratt’s dedicated community website from January 31 and interested parties can submit their comments via the website. Comments submitted at the public exhibition and online will be considered by Barratt before submitting its plans to East Hampshire District Council in the form of the planning application. Julian Jones, development director said: “Barratt has a strong commitment to working with local communities in the areas in which we operate and we are keen to engage residents and find out their views on the scheme. “The feedback we receive will then be reviewed and, where possible, incorporated into our detailed planning application and by having a public consultation and the website we hope to reach as many interested parties as possible.’’ For further information about the plans and public exhibition log onto www.barrattsotoncommunity.com.

Re: More new homes ? - Katy (24th Jan 2012 - 18:15:51) Let's hope that if/when they get planning permission the Parish Council and all concerned obtain a large sum of money from Barretts. This could then be used for local causes, I suggest the new football pitch for starters, followed by the skate park improvements, new COUNCIL owned allotmnents at reasonable rents, improved access/parking for the schools etc etc

Re: More new homes ? - Rob (24th Jan 2012 - 18:31:55) This developers money has, I think, already been allocated to provide a ramp to the South bound platform to enable disabled etc to catch the train, intead of having to get a taxi to Haslemere. It is the old OSU site.

Re: More new homes ? - bdavies (24th Jan 2012 - 20:19:48) So no chance that we can get some business units or shops set up on this site instead of more houses and yet another nursing home? We need our local plan to be completed otherwise the rush to build before the rules change will see Liphook swamped with more unwanted housing and no new infrastructure.

Re: More new homes ? - sarah (24th Jan 2012 - 21:10:43) Isn't that sad, it's such a great area for wildlife.

Re: More new homes ? - tina (24th Jan 2012 - 22:19:51) BDavies, Surely the point is that we cannot agree what the town needs and we don't have a plan how to ensure that it happens. Developers do not have to provide anything for the existing or for the new residents of the town (look at thread here on the ridiculous Lowsley farm proposals) . We only have ourselves to blame if the planners can't be bothered to ensure that new facilities or employment are provided because there is no agreement in the town and there is no lead given by the parish council on what developers should have to provide if they want to come here.

Re: More new homes ? - Simon (25th Jan 2012 - 10:30:54) I for one will be pleased if this gets the go ahead - the site is an eyesore at the moment and will give a boost to this part of Liphook.

Re: More new homes ? - liz (25th Jan 2012 - 11:55:52) Simon In what way are more 'Barratt Boxes' "a boost for this part of Liphook" ? I thought there was outline planning for this anyway so this particular site is probably a bit of a lost cause - however Tina makes some very good points about our lack of a local/parish plan. As for 'public exhibitions' and 'community involvement' those of us who became involved with the initial development of the Sainsbury's site will remember just how much notice was taken of local input. e.g. I'm sure I can remember Sainsbury's 'gentlemens agreement' not to compete with local businesses by selling electrical goods.....

Re: More new homes ? - Barry (25th Jan 2012 - 12:48:46) Is that the site opposite sainsburys?

Re: More new homes ? - tina (25th Jan 2012 - 17:56:35) Well well, our crusading chairman of planning in the parish council and the founder of the justice and anti-corruption party is be investigated, if we are to believe the latest thread here. This is of course the same councillor who says that he does not want any new facilities at the price of a housing estate in the parish !! Instead it seems that he is happy to let housing estates sprout up all over the town without any of those pesky public facilities that we all say we do desperately want here! The OSU site was originally allocated to employment and then on planning appeal it was to become residential care which at least created a few low-paid jobs. Now however it will be all private housing without the employment or any public facilities. Well done Parish Council, your logic is astonishing !!

Re: More new homes ? - bRian (26th Jan 2012 - 01:09:08) Simon None of the other postings, not even the first, have identified the site of this development/blight. You seem to know where it is ......WHERE IS IT? Not that we want it - but it would be useful to know where we\'re talking about. Brian Hi Brian, had you followed the Barratts link in the first post you could have located this - www.barrattsotoncommunity.com/site/... Also this PDF - www.barrattsotoncommunity.com/files/...

Re: More new homes ? - bdavies (26th Jan 2012 - 07:59:10) Surely it's not that difficult to identify what Liphook needs: 1. Better and more frequent public transport, buses paticularly 2. More shops and lower rents to enable those that are here already to survive and those enterprising enought to start a business to do so without fear of failure 3. Safer roads in an around the village 4. Public amenities and leisure facilities. 5. No more nursing homes or infill housing so that the land available can be used for the above. 6. Greater and more emphatic local Parish control over land use to prevent developers dictating what goes where. Now, Parish Council, stand up to EHDC and the planners and fight our corner. This is what you have been elected to do.

Re: More new homes ? - Simon (26th Jan 2012 - 09:19:07) Whether you like it or not, the UK needs more housing. This is a good site for development. It is vital that the housing is matched with community facilities. The proposed site is large, however I would favour a smaller number of houses, along with leisure (play park/gym etc) and retail facilities.

Re: More new homes ? - E (26th Jan 2012 - 09:56:43) I am not opposed to small developments as younger people need affordable housing. But there should be a benefit to the community. In particular the local sports facilities. Not just football. Resurfacing of Bohunt's tennis courts and re-doing their sports hall and making these available to the community, benefitting local children and residents would be a great start. (I am not a teacher or a parent of a pupil there, just keen for local, good sports facilities that should benefit everyone.) Perhaps with a few more residents the local businesses may have more customers which will help to sustain them. If these builds are inevitable then perhaps the community need to propose what they would like to gain from the developers and put as much energy into that instead of moaning about it.

Re: More new homes ? - Dawn Hoskins (26th Jan 2012 - 19:13:00) I am not on the planning committee but would like to correct the misconceptions that people seem to have about the powers (or lack of) the Parish Council. The planning committee has no executive powers whatsoever. This is entirely the job of EHDC. Of course EHDC have to ask the planning committee what it thinks – but there is no obligation upon EHDC to pay any attention at all. Applications get a designated case worker and they look at the number of complaints – objections. If there are a certain number they have to look at it in their committee and vote on it. Even then, it can be appealed and decided by Whitehall. Things that are being talked about now have been decided years and years ago. The PC have objected very strenuously at all possible opportunities. It is up to members of the public to write their objections about planning applications and send them to EHDC. As a rule, there is nothing decided locally in these matters. When you read about the Council make a decision to approve etc – it is EHDC that you are reading about – that is where the power to decide is based. So please don’t blame the Parish Council for things they have no power to prevent. The best thing to do is to come in and talk to a planning committee member, or come to a planning meeting. That way you can get information as to what the PC is objecting to [and why] straight from the horses mouth.

Re: More new homes ? - Jeanette (27th Jan 2012 - 07:26:24) There have been several comments about not needing any more homes for the elderly. Whilst I am not yet at the stage of requiring one for myself I think it is worthwhile considering the positive elements of having this sort of housing. Eventually we will all need appropriate care in our twilight years. The demographics of the country show that we have an ageing population and surely it would be better to have purpose built accommodation close to existing families? Bramshott Place has provided a beautiful setting for those who can afford it. A large number of homes have been built there but no-one complained about the possible impact of traffic congestion from this estate. We are being pressurised by government to build more homes. Surely it is better to build higher density, smaller unit homes such as these, together with affordable housing for the younger members of our community to meet the needs of all. Residental homes will not have the impact on our infrastrucure system as travel times are going to be fewer, and certainly not required for travel to work or school runs! Residents will be able to access medical care, local shops and visits to larger towns via the rail network. All in all a more sustainable use of the area. Liphook has a high number of very large family homes so it seems logical to me to have the right mix of housing from starter homes to family homes to supported housing. That way communities can stay together and support one another. My only concern about this development is that the Millenium Green is already partly circled by a huge amount of hard built landscape. We have become accustomed to the wild green area that was once the OSU site. I would like to see a lot more green landscaping (native trees, shrubs, hedging etc.) to soften the outline of buildings and to provide at least some habitat for urban wildlife.

Re: More new homes ? - jeanette (27th Jan 2012 - 14:59:58) The current allocations for new housing are at OSU, Silent Garden and Lowsley Farm. Developments have to make an allowance for affordable housing either by providing houses or making a financial contribution to be used for affordable housing elsewhere. Even with these 3 developments we still have to build another 25 affordable houses to meet EHDC's future housing requirements. We need to check whether any amendments to the OSU plan at outline approval affects this ratio otherwise we may have to find room for more affordable houses on other sites.

Re: More new homes ? - liz (27th Jan 2012 - 16:29:27) Simon The UK needs more housing but I would suggest Liphook has contributed far more than its share in recent years Dawn I recognise the limited powers of the PC but they have failed to come up with a decent local plan in the past. No proper use appears to be made of the Parish Survey carried out a few years ago. -Views expressed in this were very similar to E's posting. This process has now been 'farmed out' under new government guidelines (as I understand it) but nothing appears to be happening. This may be unfair but there are certainly no signs of any progress. A member of the PC is supposed to be providing initial guidence - perhaps they should be doing a bit more guiding as to process (or progress for that matter!)

Re: More new homes ? - Dawn Hoskins (28th Jan 2012 - 02:11:22) Liz, I can't comment as I am completely ignorant in this area - but I do hope that you can come in and talk to a planning committee member about it. Then you can post here to tell us the outcome.

Re: More new homes ? - tina (28th Jan 2012 - 11:16:14) Dawn, thanks for making it clear that the Parish Council has no powers in planning matters affecting the town, your point is well made. You are far too modest in claiming to be “completely ignorant” about planning as you do make regular worthwhile public statements on such matters! Besides, this is about looking after the best interests of the Parish rather than just a technical or legal issue. Many of us are frustrated that the Parish Council dos not appear to grasp the significance of the impact of past and future housing development on the lives of people in the town. Many of us expect the Parish Council - irrespective of its “limited powers” - to be far more active in identifying what people need in the town and communicating to all developers a very clear message on behalf of the local community exactly what we expect of any development proposals. Growth is happening right under our noses right now (over 500 houses about to be built if we don’t force a pause right now!). The Parish Council has every right (and duty) to ensure that their top priority is that any growth must lead to improvements in the quality of lives for all of us rather than allowing the town to deteriorate into a lifeless dormitory as it is doing at present. We all know that decisions made by “outsiders” mean that we will continue to grow as a town but at least let’s try to guide that growth in such a way as to ensure that we all benefit - both existing residents and the new residents that will be coming here – whether it be more local jobs, better opportunities for local enterprise, improved public facilities, more public sporting and recreational amenities, improved retail prospects, better transport networks, improved educational capacity and so on. Unfortunately, the Village Plan that Jeanette has been valiantly promoting is just playing ‘catch-up’ with the real world, and loosing the race. Jeanette's efforts don’t seem to attract significant support or much enthusiasm. With no disrespect intended, statements by Jeanette such as: “Residential homes will not have the impact on our infrastructure system” or “Residents will be able to access medical care, local shops and visits to larger towns via the rail network” might explain why Jeanette’s support for housing in preference to jobs, public facilities and so on are not winning people over. I disagree with her and my personal preference is that any housing growth here should be conditional on developers providing more permanent jobs, public facilities and better infrastructure within the parish itself – and should not mean that we have to travel out of the area to get these things (how unsustainable is that, Jeanette?). However, I do accept that we as a community need a grown-up conversation to decide what is best mix of development growth in the town for us. Even if we are powerless to stop change, as you say Dawn, I am sure that community can and would come together to formulate a clear and well thought-out picture of how we wish see the town coping change. Dawn, our Parish Council still seems to spend inordinate amounts of time on in-fighting, secrecy, trivia and personal grudges which I and others witness at your public meetings and read about in the press and here on Talkback. Let me be frank and suggest that the Parish Council has taken its eye off the most important thing that affects to most of us, namely the quality of life in the parish during a period of great change. Please let me challenge you Dawn - the champion of public communication - and challenge the Council to re-focus your efforts on this public duty as a matter of priority and urgency.

Re: More new homes ? - Jeanette (28th Jan 2012 - 14:12:53) Tina I completely agree with your comments about needing jobs and community facilities. However (and this is probably very disappointing for most residents) the housing allocations for Liphook had already been set in the Local Plan and carried forward into the draft Joint Core Strategy (joint between EDHC and the South Downs National Park authority). In other words we don\'t really have a say about the number of houses that are planned to be built here; but we can have a say in what they look like, the layout, impact on traffic, noise etc. The OSU site has had outline planning permission for some years. It is a brownfield site. Ok it was originally allocated for business use but often developers know what they want to build (maximising their profits) and keep putting in amendment after amendment hoping for less and less objections until they get what they want! If people believe that we can demand vast sums of money for each new development they are a little misguided. There are fixed rates for each dwelling built and for each development a certain percentage has to be for affordable housing or a financial contribution to affordable housing elsewhere. So on a positive note there will be an amount of money available to go towards community facilities. We hear of vast numbers of new houses being built across the country but apart from Silent Garden, the OSU site and Lowsley Farm, which have been allocated for several years, Liphook is only being asked to find another 25 affordable houses. These can be built anywhere in the parish. If people want to complain about the density of some of the proposed developments they can (but they must outline a good reason) but any reduction in the number of dwellings on one site would have to be made up somewhere else in the parish. I don\'t like change. I don\'t like the idea of lots of houses and traffic congestion, but EHDC has to comply with Government policies. Within East Hampshire a lot of the new housing is proposed for Alton and Petersfield (as well as Whitehill/Bordon of course). So what I am saying is that It could be a lot worse for Liphook and my original comments about having housing which results in minimised impact on our infrastructure must be a good compromise. I agree that we need business opportunities for local employment so what would be valuable is suggestions about possible locations for these, and perhaps types of businesses which could be encouraged to come here. Think of ones which don\'t involve large lorries driving through our village centre! Do we want business parks or are there buildings which could be converted? We now have huge opportunities for employment relating to leisure and tourism as a result of the opening of the Hindhead Tunnel and the South Downs National Park on our doorstep. (Even residential homes offer employment opportunities for some local people). We are desperately trying to complete the Village Design Statement for Liphook but it is being done by volunteers in the community, many of whom work full-time but are nonetheless committed to getting it right. The results of surveys and any comments here will be noted and incorporated into the completed plan as appropriate.

Re: More new homes ? - Dawn Hoskins (28th Jan 2012 - 14:52:06) Well said and well spoken Tina. Although I am one of the few Councillors who post here - I can assure you that all the others actively read it. It is true, and you have witnessed, childish behaviour - some Councillors seem to want to shout at everyone at every given opportunity, others can\'t wait to slip their one sided gripes to the local press which then get regurgitated into stupid articles every week. The problem is - that these are the personalities that have been elected. They cannot be \'un-elected\'. I hope that other people, like yourself, will be able to attend and see who these people are with their own eyes - and not believe the drivel that is constantly put into the public domain by persons not brave enough to even put their names to their allegations. That aside, I know that the PC planning committee are working very hard on all the issues that you have raised in your very well articulated post. They are trying for example to arrange a public forum for all to attend to discuss the Bohunt development - as most people have no idea of the state of play there. To my knowledge, at this moment they are trying to get dates when the South Downs National Park Reps can attend etc There is a lot of organisation behind the scenes that has to happen before events like this can commence. The best interests of the Parish are in the forefront of the Councillors minds - none more so than the Planning Committee who have a very frustrating task. They are permanently trying to get officials who are more interested in \'number crunching\' to see the results at ground level. Sadly, Government targets do not pay attention to how our lovely villages and their surrounds are being decimated. They do not pay for facilities or even recommend them - they just give the EHDC the set number of houses that they MUST build in a given period of time. [That is why I will never be on the Planning Committee. All they can decide is whether to let hedges be pruned, or alterations/additions to be approved.] Small fry that doesn\'t impact. The \'big fry\' decisions that should be taken by the communities affected - are taken by nameless, faceless public servants who claim to be acting in the best interests of the country as a whole. We all feel strongly about our lovely village, and the speed it is changing. Please don\'t think that the Parish Council are sitting on their hands - they are not. Just because the voices of Parish Councills have very little weight [if any] does not mean we are not using that voice at all. Tina, and everyone, Please come in or make an appointment to see someone from the planning committee. They can tell you more directly about the problems we face when trying to deal with this threat. I am sorry if I sound defeatist. I hope that one of our Councillors with more knowledge than I can post here and give a greater insight about the current mechanisms in place to fight the machine that is central government policy.

Re: More new homes ? - Pam (28th Jan 2012 - 17:13:04) I refer to Liz’s contribution on 27 January in the “More New Homes” posting and particularly her reference to the limited powers of the PC and their apparent failure to come up with a decent parish plan in the past. I had a look at the Liphook Parish Plan website and it appears that this has not been updated since 2010 which rather reinforces her point. With regard to the limited powers of Parish Councils, it is my understanding that they are able to discuss the merits of and comment on planning applications and their comments should reflect policy guidelines and the wishes of the people of Bramshott and Liphook. The District Council do take notice of local opinion and local parish plans. In addition Bramshott and Liphook have three district councillors and these democratically elected councillors have the power to vote at EHDC level. However if they do not actually sit on EHDC’s planning committee they are entitled and indeed should make the views and comments of the Parish Council and opinions of the people of Bramshott and Liphook very clear and this is taken into account by the members of the planning committee. I find it very frustrating that Dawn seems to be the only councillor contributing to Liphook Talkback even when by her own admission she says and I quote “I can't comment as I am completely ignorant in this area”. It rather begs the question, why bother to reply at all if that is the case. Do any of the parish councillors who sit on the planning committee of B&L PC have anything to contribute? One of them must know about the Parish Survey, parish plan and planning. Is this lack of response due to the fact that they do not think that Liphook Talkback is the proper forum for answering questions in these postings? If this is the case then one of them should say so, because, then I for one, and I am sure others as well, would not waste time asking them to respond. I refer now to Tina’s excellent posting on 28 January which needs no embellishment from me. I hope that the parish councillors to whom this refers read this posting and take heed. The following phrase sums up the parlous state in which the council finds itself and I quote “our Parish Council still seems to spend inordinate amounts of time on in-fighting, secrecy, trivia and personal grudges which I and others witness at your public meetings etc etc.” There was never a truer word written and I heartily endorse her suggestion that the Parish Council should “refocus their efforts on their public duty as a matter of priority and urgency.” I was about to post this on Talkback when I noticed a further posting from Dawn Hoskins. As I would like to get this posted today and her posting was a long one, I will refrain from comment and leave others to reply as they see fit. All I would say is that from the remark she made in an earlier posting to the effect that she was completely ignorant in this area, meaning planning, she seems to have acquired a great deal of extensive, (albeit in my opinion, inaccurate and misleading in many respects), knowledge and insight into the planning system both at parish and district level. I wonder where that came from.

Re: More new homes ? - helen (29th Jan 2012 - 10:48:57) Pam, the only way the district will know what the people of Liphook "want" is by having the Parish Plan finished. The Parish council website has the results of a survey undertaken about 2-3 years ago which I am suprised the Parish Plan Committe are not taking into account to speed up publishing the plan. In this survey, from memory, the majority felt there was already too much new housebuilding in Liphook. These were the opinions of residents two years ago. Also I have lived in Liphook and surrounding districts for 18 years, and during that time have only heard about the close links that some previous and present District Councillors have to housebuilders and landowners. One of the current district councillors who votes on the new planning committee at EHDC is married to an estate agent in Liphook. Do our District councillors really know what the people of Liphook overwhelmingly want? Are their own connections too close to be comfortable Pam?

Re: More new homes ? - Dawn Hoskins (29th Jan 2012 - 15:14:05) Geez! Can't win can I? I post because people ask me direct questions Pam. I am not on Planning and have my own general views. I do not know what plans are submitted, which are recomended or which refussed. I do not know who speaks to EHDC. That is because I do not attned or contribute to this committee. It is fair to say then that I am ignorant in the area. That does not mean I have no views or opinions. Pam - do you dislike me personally for a specific reason, if so I would be obliged if you could e-mail me. As far as I recall I have not met you, but do not want to carry on offending you so - lets talk purplecurly@hotmail.co.uk

Re: More new homes ? - Pam (29th Jan 2012 - 17:00:18) Liz In your posting under “More New Homes” dated 29 January, you state that you have heard that there are close links between some previous and present District Councillors and housebuilders and landowners. By this statement are inferring that there has been or may have been some wrongdoing? I cannot think of any other reason why would you make such a comment. Do you have any proof at all that something untoward has ever taken place? If you do, please let us all hear it. If you do not back this statement up with some hard facts it might possibly be concluded that you have taken a leaf out of the JAC Party’s book whose members spend their time creating doubt and suspicion, spreading misleading and inaccurate gossip, mud slinging and pursuing their own agendas. They do not produce proof but just say “If it’s untrue, why don’t they sue?” You also state that one of the District Councillors on the new planning committee at EHDC is married to a Liphook Estate Agent. So what? Again if you have any evidence of wrongdoing please have the courage to produce it.

Re: More new homes ? - helen (30th Jan 2012 - 01:41:29) It was not Liz but me who mentioned the District Councillors, I did not accuse anyone, and if I, as the archetypical woman in the street have heard rumours about what goes on- (not from anyone in the JAC party by the way] then most people around have also heard the rumours. Many many years ago I realised the links between councillors and land ownership, If a company owns development land and is registered in this country it is easy to find who the directors and major shareholders are, unless it is registered in a place like Switzerland, or Lichtenstein, then it is more difficult. It is also easy to search land registry documents. People are not idiots Pam, developers need to cultivate those who are deciding the applications, .

Re: More new homes ? - liz (30th Jan 2012 - 08:24:13) Pam I have said nothing of the sort. Please be more careful with your accusations.

Re: More new homes ? - pam (30th Jan 2012 - 09:22:50) Liz My mistake. Please accept my sincere apologies.

Re: More new homes ? - liz (30th Jan 2012 - 09:59:31) Apology accepted. Mistaken identity I see - easily done.

Re: More new homes ? - Russ& Irene Ellis (2nd Feb 2012 - 22:47:19) Well well well we are now coming to the end of the saga of the OSU site. For those of you that are new to Liphook this was the last piece of brown field site in Liphook. Because of this when Sainsbury’s bought the land they promised to keep part for a ring road and part for retail and commercial. They also said they would not have a petrol station or enlarge the store. So the plans were approved. First the store was built, then the Petrol station then the houses. They then had a traffic survey done and said there was no need for a ring road and got approval to build houses on it. At the same time the store was enlarged and now we come to the last bit. Yes that’s right Liphook does not want retail-commercial, want they want is more houses and a nursing home. Of course when they have built the houses they will say there is no call for a nursing home and they will have completed their aim which was to cover the whole site in houses. JUST AS WE SAID RIGHT AT THE BEGINING A BIG STITCH UP We cannot do anything about the past but we could put up a fight for the last piece. Everyone I have spoken to said if we have more housing we need more infrastructures. Well as I said the OSU site is the last piece of brown site land in Liphook if they build houses on it where are they going to put this infrastructure. They say they have advertised the land for commercial use but have had no interest shown. NOT TRUE they have never marketed it and if anyone contacted the agents they were told it was not available. All the units on the beaver site are full as are all the other small units around the village. They have said there are empty shops in Liphook which no one wants. Well I can only think of 2. One being the old carpet shop and I know that a lot of people have been interested in it but the owners for some reason do not want to let it and the other one is the nationwide office which has only been empty for a fairly short time. They have also said there is other land available for commercial use. Perhaps someone can tell me where. Developers have built on all brown fields sites i.e. garage workshops, petrol station, builders yards etc are all covered in houses. This piece of land was ear marked to regenerate the commercial and retail businesses to supply the infurstruter that is badly needed for what is now a town and will soon become a large town. If this does not happen Liphook will become a dormitory town with all the problems which go with it. They say 100 people attended their presentation mainly retired people and they were happy with the plans. What happened to the rest of the 9,000 residents? I have to tell you that all the long standing residents I meet there were dead against the plans. These plans effect the whole community not just a handful that live next door to it as it is in the centre of the village (town). You should all realize commercial and retail businesses are the main supporters of our voluntary organisation which do so much to make our village such a fantastic place to live. Without them some of the organisations would not exist. Are we the only people who think like this if not you need to attend the consultation at Penns Place to let the District Council know your views?

Re: More new homes ? - helen (3rd Feb 2012 - 01:15:50) There will only be opportunity to speak for 3 designated people, which will include the parish council so 2 free spaces, no public debate, your view will have to wait for the planning application. There are plenty of office spaces though, still to let in Liphook.

Re: More new homes ? - Katy (3rd Feb 2012 - 08:53:34) Hi We attended the presentation and at that time there were ten other people there well under retirement age so not sure where they got their figures from saying the majority that attended were retired people? Anyway, I live on the Barratt estate and when we moved here in 2000 that piece of land was designed as a row of shops with flats above, and small industrial units behind. Ideal for small and start up businesses and affordable homes. It would also have helped to join up Station Road and the Square via the Midhurst Road more creating a better foot fall for both sets of shops at either end. Despite this design looking great and in keeping with the rest of the estate, plus providing local employment opportunities, it seems to have been swept under the carpet. The current Barrett plans have the mimimum employment opportunity in the nursing home. However, I feel this is a smoke screen as they will not be building the home but leaving it for a "specialist company". I suspect they will build the houses then leave the land for the nursing home for a few years, say it unviable financially and put some more houses on it. It's a shame as it would be great to link Station Road and The Square more. The other concern is the lack of parking spaces for visitors. It is already extremely hazardous driving down Canada Way when the commuters are all parked down the side to get free parking. I don't expect they will be very happy when the building starts, no more free spaces! Lets hope pressure can be put on them to at least build the nursing home and some smaller units too.

Re: More new homes ? - helen (3rd Feb 2012 - 09:55:35) I too went to the presentation and there is dont forget already permission for houses against the railway line which will have to be accessed throught the Barrett development. I questioned the the guy on the car parking for the station, and there are apparently no firm plans for these as the land beongs to the industrial estate. There are no firm plans apparently for the care home as Bupa had told him there is not enough demand for another care home in Liphook. As I uderstand it they have not purchased the land and will only do so if permission for houses goes ahead. I think that as it is a departure from policy they will struggle.

Re: More new homes ? - liz (3rd Feb 2012 - 12:45:23) I think, being central, the remaining OSU land would be the ideal site for the Medical Centre. There would, I suspect, also be room for small industrial units behind, near the existing ones. I don't suppose there's much chance of that happening though - not enough money in it.

Re: More new homes ? - Russ Ellis (3rd Feb 2012 - 14:50:20) Liz you have knocked the nail on the head. The plans that Katy mentioned were submitted to the parish council and it included space for a medical centre. The Parish council were in favour of it and gave the go ahead put before it reached the district council it was withdrawn. You can draw your own conclusion on that. Then the developers put in the application for the nursing home and associated housing. The parish council were against it and when it went to district council a good many of local residents went to the meeting including Dr Rushton who then had the money for a medical centre but no land. I believe that that funding has now gone with a change of government. The district council threw the application out but as usual the developers appealed. This was held in the millennium hall and lasted 4 days which I sat through to speak on behalf of the local residents but with the developers having the money to hire good solicitors they won the day and were given the go ahead. At that time they were adamant they were going to start the development straight away. That I believe was 4yrs ago and they have just renewed the plans. Helen you are right only 2 people can speak but we need to show the developers and council we back the speakers. This is exactly what they did when the application came up for the Gospel Hall and they won the day. Sometimes you do not need to speak just your presents speak louder than words.

Re: More new homes ? - M (3rd Feb 2012 - 22:03:52) Maybe you all should read the thread LIPHOOK UNITED FACILITIES/PITCH, the most needed thing is new Facilities for the club so why cant the OSU site be given to Liphook FC for turning into Grass root Football pitches and training area then the Pitch at the Rec can be turned and flood lights put on it, we are told on the Bohunt Estate if they build the houses then Liphook FC will get new Facilities but this plan is getting blocked so how is it the OSU site can get through with out offering facilities for clubs in the village

Re: More new homes ? - h (4th Feb 2012 - 12:47:51) Hi the owners of the site are apparently sainsburys..There is no guarentee that the Barretts plan will be accepted, so I think what happens is Barretts put the application in without owning then land, if the application is successful they then build the houses but Sainsburys still own the land. I think!

Re: More new homes ? - Dawn Hoskins (6th Feb 2012 - 12:23:26) To M, Sadly this world revolves around money. No one gives valuable land away for nothing. Who would pay for the football pitch?

Re: More new homes ? - liz (6th Feb 2012 - 13:13:20) I thought Sainsbury's had sold the remaining OSU land - but I'm not sure either!

Reply to THIS thread
Talkback Home