<img src=images/arroww.gif width=9 height=9> The Community Site

Search Business Directory:  Add your business entry
 Community Magazine

 South Downs National Park

 Local News
 Local Events
 Local Traffic
 Local Trains
 Local Weather

 Give Blood

 About Liphook

 Local MP
 Parish Council

 Bike Ride
 Day Centre
 Heritage Centre
 In Bloom
 Millennium Ctr
 Neighbourhood Plan


 Clubs & Societies
 Local churches
 Local shops
 New Mums & Dads
 Useful Contacts

 Food & Drink
 Places to Visit
 Tesla chargers

 Website Links
 Online Directory
 Add Entry
 Edit Entry
 Business Help
 Web Design
 Privacy Policy
 About Us

Local Talkback
Talkback is for the residents and businesses in Liphook to voice their views and opinions about local issues and events.

Reply to THIS thread
Start a NEW Talkback Thread
Talkback Home

Development in Chiltley Lane
- Jen (1st Dec 2022 - 11:10:20)

Just delivered - a flyer from Bloor Homes stating they are going forward with their proposed housing development in Chiltley Lane at Chiltley Farm.

I know this has been discussed here previously but I have to say that I can't understand how this proposal has got this far. All the approach roads to the site are little better than single track and all those people in cars will have to traverse the Square to access schools and the A3.

Do we have the power to stop this?

Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- BD (1st Dec 2022 - 12:34:45)

Here's a link to the proposal website:

Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- AF (1st Dec 2022 - 13:24:58)

Unlike most of the people who will comment i have looked at the proposal and it looks fine to me.
Just an extension to the Berg estate.

Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- Resident (1st Dec 2022 - 13:36:50)

Been here before several times. They will keep trying until EHDC caves in . It’s completely a wrong place to build houses no access , no Sangs, more traffic through the square. We have more suitable sites on the other side of the square if we need more houses We have the Neighbourhood Plan that’s supposed to be in place to stop this sort of indiscriminate development it’s time these developers that are completely ravaging our community are stopped. EHDC needs to listen to the voice of our community and throw out these totally ridiculous applications.

Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- Nimby Who Me? (1st Dec 2022 - 13:55:51)

On the plus side nearly half of it is said to be affordable, what exactly is affordable housing nowadays and who subsidises it I wonder, affordable to who? I guess affordable to people moving out of London to a pretty little village dream, upsizing from a poky half million pound two bedroom flat, but give it a couple of years and they'll be moaning about traffic, lack of infrastructure and overdevelopment with the best of us😂

Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- PR (1st Dec 2022 - 14:55:41)

Nimby Who Me

Well written

In a couple of years it will be " What ~ No Foie Gras in Sainsbury's

Happy Days

Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- Joe (1st Dec 2022 - 17:56:02)

Someone mentioned Neighbourhood plan? It is only about finding more houses not stopping any current developments the plan is not finished yet it will take at least another year before the public get to vote on it.

Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- M (2nd Dec 2022 - 17:52:13)

This proposal has to be looked at in the wider Liphook context.

As the proposal stands it no way conforms to the current thinking of a "20-minute neighbourhood" that Government, HCC and EHDC are suggesting. It takes far longer than 20 minutes to walk to the village centre and any of the schools so will only increase the traffic issues suffered by all residents of Liphook.

It has been said by a previous poster that "It's just an extension to the Berg Estate so they see no issue with it". The proposal will get access fromn the estate and then onto the Midhurst Road, but The Berg Estate has additional planning policies on it which restricts all residents from altering / extending / changing their property to ensure the look and ambience of the estate is maintained.

These planning restrictions (put in place by the District Council, Policy H9) appear to be being disregarded by Bloors as what they propose is a high-density housing development with no parking, no gardens and limited open space that relies on a car to gain access to facilities.

Any development of this size should also provide a SANG and there is no mention of this in their proposals.

Overall, this is a very poor proposal with no benefit to Liphook residents and will cause more issues to the wider community than any provision of affordable homes. The only winners will be Bloors and the landowner!

I'd suggest letting Bloors know this in on their consultation site!

Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- paul (2nd Dec 2022 - 20:34:44)

Bloor Homes proposal Chiltley Farm for 100 homes.
There must be a balanced view to local housing needs.
Yes it easy to say Liphook does not need housing development.
We are a small British Isles, but with huge Brown field sites ( reuse areas that have buildings).
A long term plan up to 20 years + is the answer, but sadly our short term democracy never allows this.
It is sad to need to build in a county area of natural area beauty.
Who would want to live in a former field, with no transport links or facilities?

Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- Joe (3rd Dec 2022 - 01:00:59)

M, Hampshire policy H 9 is due to be inapplicable to the Berg Estate in the proposed new local plan. Bloor homes obviously know that, in the same way they know that EHDC have sanctioned the site in the proposed local plan. That may change though as EHDC have recently had to do another “ call for sites” which means that the development sites previously picked will probably be re assed against any new sites coming forward, but they need to find more houses so they will probably not throw it out, as there is limited development land in the areas available for them to pick from.

Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- Joe (3rd Dec 2022 - 01:06:22)

Paul, you could apply that logic to any former agricultural land, such as the former lowesley farm, now a housing estate. 100 years ago most of Liphook was farmland without any facilities. I also believe that the Bloor homes site does have buildings on it, and was classified as a brownfield site.

Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- M (3rd Dec 2022 - 09:02:32)

EHDC Policy H9 is fully applicable to The Berg Estate and various other roads in Liphook (check the policy map for the current EHDC Local Plan). Policy H9 is a policy that will need to be conformed with for any planning application on the estate, and as the proposed access is from the estate it should be referred to. EHDC made the policy not local residents.
The emerging new EHDC Local Plan still has the same type of policy, now called DM30, but that new Local Plan is not a Planning Document at this time so will not apply.

EHDC did have Chiltley Farm in their draft new Local Plan but that has now been rescinded and EHDC have started again as they know their draft plan wasn't fit for purpose. How can a site be fully rejected by EHDC when the previous application was submitted, and also rejected by a government planning inspector on appeal, and then a few years later be included in the districts local plan? I think we can see why EHDC has had to start again.

Bloors and the landowner appear to be taking advantage of the hiatus and planning policy gap that EHDC have caused by their incompetence in producing a valid and worthwhile Local Plan for our district.... strangely also applicable to our own NDP! As a community Liphook will be the ones to suffer because of it.
There is plenty of development land in the district that is better located to facilities. Large areas of brownfield land in Bordon that could provide housing and business developments, and much needed infrastructure if EHDC were to plan things properly, as well as greenfield sites better located to facilities in Liphook (but of course that is in the SDNP....and that's another issue all together!)

You are incorrect to say that Chiltley Farm is a brownfield site. Chiltley Farm is a working Poultry Farm, and the site is classified as a greenfield site, not brownfield.

Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- Jen (3rd Dec 2022 - 10:29:14)

This is not a brownfield site but greenfield. The clue is in the name - Chiltley Farm! But whichever it does not change the access issues, lack of footpaths, etc.
Sorry, but in my opinion to say they are including "affordable housing" does not make the development acceptable.

Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- Life time resident (3rd Dec 2022 - 11:29:17)

This application has been refused so many times for many reasons . It is not a viable site until there is a ring road around the square that will take all the traffic away from the centre of our village. No more developments on that side of the square should be considered. EHDC must sort this out they have let liphook down so badly over the last few years. There is no good reason to build on that land as said plenty of land available on the A3 side of the square. And if the national park people come to their sense’s we could have houses AND infrastructure link road etc etc which is so badly needed. EHDC are the stumbling block they don’t seem to listen to the people of liphook that tell them time and again what’s needed. Our square is the MOST important thing to save for our future more important than a piece of farm land in the national park someone must step up and talk sensible.

Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- paul (3rd Dec 2022 - 14:04:06)

I appreciate our citizens need to live affordably somewhere.
There are not enough homes being built, or funding new social housing by government

Why do we need to build new in a rural village area like Liphook?
This proposal of 100 new houses, brings even more traffic to our roads, pressure on schools, and doctors etc.

I am not a Liberal Democrat, but they had a much better idea of building new homes on new villages, and towns. This was using brownfield and greenbelt land. To have a new conurbations with infrastructure to support people at home, schools, and for work.

Leave our towns and villages alone, start new ones for our future generations.

Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- StevieR (3rd Dec 2022 - 14:19:17)

Having now lived in this “village” for nearly 64 years it always never ceases to amaze me the arrogance of some in the expression of their opinions.
“The other side of the Square” is a classic example of this. For those of us who live the “other side of the square” we have for years endured extensive development on both the Longmoor Rd & Headley Road in addition to the A3 bypass. With the original route plans for the road specified, never was that going to go anywhere near the Berg Estate, Highfield and don’t forget the Golf Course.
Get used to the fact development is going to keep coming and until someone with the balls to actually instigate what actually we are going to get in return from these developers it will continue with false promises etc etc.
We all know the problems with this “village” are mainly attributed to conjestion caused by Bohunt School, ridiculous crossing arrangements in the Square plus the parking on the approach roads into the square. For those of us who can remember the traffic is as bad now as when the A3 came right through the centre.
I am no fan of the continued development but appreciate it has to happen, but we need to hold developers to account in securing the best possible outcome for us, the actual people who live here. As was pointed out at the public hearing when the OSD was sold off for example, we had a chance to really develop and grow the centre of the village and provide the facilities in line with a small town and really join both ends together The Square to Station Rd with retail park, sports facilities etc etc. But no, Sainsbury’s purchased, promptly sold off the remaining for houses basically paying for their store plus major profit, stuck up the Millenium Hall and we know the problems that incurred for the handover (for years it was laughably rumoured to be going to be Homebase) and we let it happen. Now look what you have got, a store which fundamentally is poor and a single garage holding us to ransom with prices for fuel.
Infrastructure is key, we all know this no matter “what side of the Square you live on".

Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- Editor (3rd Dec 2022 - 15:40:22)

for those of us wondering about the H9 policy, here is a link to it

Special Housing Character Areas report.pdf

Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- M (3rd Dec 2022 - 16:32:58)

Apologies but the link you provided is incorrect.
That link is the report into the H9 policy for the emerging local plan (now scrapped and being started again).

The existing H9 Policy, which is still an adopted planning policy, is here.

Pages 29 and 30 are relevant.

Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- Joe (3rd Dec 2022 - 17:08:26)

Thanks Ed for providing the link the report. As you can see M from reading this it is due to be abolished, and will not be applied by the time the next local plan is finished.

Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- Re (3rd Dec 2022 - 17:22:42)

Sorry stevier I think what people mean is until there is a way to get round the square there should not be any more houses built on land that side of the square. If for some reason the square has to close as has happened you have a ten mile round trip to get from one side to the other. Ok not much of a problem but if there is an emergency not so good. When we have access to all the schools and the A3 without going through the square then perhaps if needed building on that side would be feasible.

The square is the living heart of our community a conservation area we should be saving it not destroying it we have 50 mts of road between two roundabouts which is so narrow that some vehicles have a job to pass the pollution is way above acceptable. Having lived here all my life with six generations I have seen it all very very bad planning not listening to the people of liphook.

Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- M (4th Dec 2022 - 08:43:04)

I don't disagree that if/when EHDC get their new Local Plan re-formed, assessed and "made" then the current policy H9 will no longer be valid.
In their draft Local Plan it has been replaced with Policy DM30, see the following link.
Draft Lical Plan - see page 252

DM30 is a slightly watered-down version of H9 but still an important policy to protect areas of special housing character.
Policy H9 is still a current Planning Policy for EHDC, and will likely still be when the proposal is being decided, so will be a relevant policy to judge the proposal on, along with all the other issues with this proposal for the wider Liphook community.

I've also noticed there is no mention of any SANG for this development. My understanding is that any development of this size must provide a suitably sized SANG?

Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- D (4th Dec 2022 - 09:21:25)

I think the person who wrote the letter we all seem to have received is the same person who put together the glossy public relations publication concerning the 600 houses issue three years ago. You will find a link for this on the 600 houses thread...

600 houses consultation
- Eric Benson (5th Sep 2019 - 17:15:33)

The proposed sang in there is a piece of ancient woodland close to the Milland road. I'm not sure how a house builder can give you something that already exists and claim they are providing a new area of natural green space but there you go. This publication alludes to other unrealistic utopian ideals as well, all very unrealistic in my opinion.

The final part of the Berg estate was not finished until the mid 1970's. Me and my fellow urchins often had a dinnertime kickabout with the builders and I remember asking why the access gate to the farm was being left when they could fit two more houses in. The answer given was along the lines of so that in fifty years time they could build more houses there, but at the time they weren't allowed to. This would correspond with the point made in this thread that the (H20 agreement?) was in fact for a determined time and not indefinite.

One poster on this thread seems to think the chicken farm is still in business. I don't think there have been any chickens there for some years now, it is also a brownfield site. Such a shame we may be losing another Liphook farm with a long heritage. But as with all products, if they can be sourced cheaper elsewhere, and a farmer is offered enough money for his land, this is going to happen.

Going back to my dinnertime activities with builders, one comment I also remember is "Russia will have invaded Europe by then and we'll be on the verge of nuclear war, so I wouldn't worry."


Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- Re (4th Dec 2022 - 16:58:12)

Another thought in the last few years the expansion of Highfield School and Churches College school the midhurst road has become extremely busy. The junction coming out of the berg estate is extremely dangerous and the railway bridge is far to narrow for the volume of traffic. All this has been ongoing since the last time this application was refused as unsuitable because of road access. So now it’s much worse it can’t be viable to add to the traffic using the midhurst road. And of course more traffic through the square totally ridiculous.

Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- Joe (4th Dec 2022 - 17:14:29)

M I do not disagree that the H9 policy is current but as it is only a Hampshire policy and not compliant with the NPPF, then if the developers went to appeal EHDC (who, from published consultations are likely to replace the policy with a national guideline, as you admit) would not win an appeal. If EHDC put the site into the next plan they will not oppose it.

Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- M (5th Dec 2022 - 09:49:52)

I don't agree with your view that the H9 and DM30 EHDC Planning Policies are not valid Planning Policies. I'm not a planning expert, don't know if you are either, but if they are/would be in a made Plan then they must be enforceable, otherwise they wouldn't be in the plan after it had been inspected by the relevant government inspector.

There does seem to be something not right with EHDC putting Chiltley Farm into their first Draft of the new Local Plan when only 5 or 6 years ago they refused an identical planning application and even went to all the cost of fighting the appeal Bloors submitted.

What has truly changed that makes the development any better located and that it won't have a terrible effect on the local community and it's infrastructure?

Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- Lifetime resident (5th Dec 2022 - 12:07:09)

Which ever way you look at it it’s the same EHDC just carry’on their own sweet way completely oblivious of what people are saying. They really are a joke as for planning don’t hold your breath. Liphook is just not on their radar they don’t care what happens in liphook it’s been going on for years. They ask us for feed back loads of surveys questionnaires and the like tick’s all the boxes then they bin it . So what do we do ???.

Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- Les (5th Dec 2022 - 14:07:59)

Irrespective of whether you think this is a 'good' or 'bad' development, whichever 'side' of the Square you live and whatever your social aspirations are, this development - if allowed to succeed - will put another c. 200 vehicles onto the already overstretched infrastructure in the Village. This will affect us all and we should fight to prevent it. The consultation invites comments from residents wherever they live. We must respond!
PS And yes, this is a greenfield site development (not brownfield).

Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- Joe (5th Dec 2022 - 14:12:10)

M, having Googled policy DM 30 it appears to mean different things to different local authorities and not really relatable to the H9 policy. Also the area for the H9 policy was shrunk by EHDC so even if still applicable to the Berg estate it would not be applicable to the Chicken Farm estate. I think the planners were thinking ahead, because it did not cover just the Berg.

Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- M (5th Dec 2022 - 16:11:35)

Joe you may be right, although I don't agree with all of your views.
I think EHDC are pulling a fast one and maybe have done some sort of deal with Bloors to push this through for their own good, and then take the pressure off themselves for not having an up-to-date Local Plan and housing land supply.
They refuse a similar application and fight the appeal and then include it in a draft plan a couple of years later.
Water down/ignore a policy to protect areas of special housing character so the developer can build what he wants.
Ignore the community and impose an unwanted development in a village with overstretched infrastructure.
Come to some sort of arrangement with a developer to propose a major scheme with no SANG.
Too many co-incidences that makes this look all wrong.
As Les says this proposal isn't about just The Berg estate, it impacts all of us. The wrong development in the wrong place with no benefits to anyone except the developer....and maybe EHDC?

Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- Villager (5th Dec 2022 - 17:27:40)

Why is it that developers are carving up our village and devastating our community with no redress. Our water , drainage, and other supplies are stretched to the limit. The roads are totally inadequate for the huge amount of traffic passing through every day. What are EHDC thinking of letting this happen surly someone must stop this before we grind to a halt . Our local Parrish council don’t seem to have a say in it or are just closing their eyes to it . Can we perhaps get on to the government and tell them of the total inept of EHDC in planning. Someone must be held to answer for this totally inept way of planning.

Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- Joe (5th Dec 2022 - 19:23:59)

It is not just in Liphook it happens all over and while there is an absence of a long term agreed local plan, the developers will take advantage EHDC did not get their plan finished 2 years ago, and have now put it on hold because they have been given higher housing numbers to find. Also it should be made more financially attractive for developers to convert existing office blocks etc into residential units in city centres to fulfil housing numbers, instead of which they prefer to buy a cheap field in the countryside, and persuade us we need to build there.

Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- Eric Benson (12th Dec 2022 - 16:35:26)

Time for a contribution from me.

The possible/probable planning application by Bloor Homes on the chicken farm site in Chiltley Lane must in many senses be regarded as “speculative”, given the terms and conditions set out in the appeal decision of 2016, when the last attempt to erect houses on the chicken farm failed.

There are many reasons which can put forward for rejecting the concept promoted anew by the private consultation organised by Bloor homes through the village recently, but the bottom line is there is nothing the appeal decision, factual matrix or law which has changed sufficiently for a fresh application to succeed. That is unless there is some “backdoor” deal with the EHDC on the subject; complete speculation on my part of course.

There is then the latest EHDC consultation as regards to its District Plan, which ends in January. It is hard to work out quite what this consultation wishes to achieve given the evidence already taken in the previous consultations. Perhaps the most significant point is the introduction of the “20-minute village” concept, whereby everything is no more than 20 minutes on foot from elsewhere. By the way, that is one the reasons why the formal planning application soon to be made Bloor Homes should fail, such things as schools rather more than 20-minute walk from that distant site in the East being a relevant factor.

What is needed is a coherent groundswell of opinion to say that in planning terms there is every need to include those parts of the parish which are part of the South Downs National Park within a single planning authority, rather than the split situation now, which causes problems in different allocations for any new house target imposed by central government. Conflict between EHDC on the one hand and SDNP on the other needs to be resolved.

“As any fule kno” the best site for future development is the land bounded by the triangle from the Deer’s Hut to The Links and Bohunt school the west of the old Portsmouth Road; is just a question someone (in essence all of our elected politicians for the area) being brave enough to grasp the nettle and drive it through.


Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- Joe (12th Dec 2022 - 17:03:27)

Eric, I cannot see a merging of the authorities happening the SDNPA was formed to protect the rural landscapes we have left within a certain area. Some years ago there was many millions spent on a judicial review with the intention of having the Liphook boundary redrawn. This did not happen and I do not think local taxpayers have any enthusiasm to pay out what would now be billions spent probably. If more homes are needed developers need to be given incentives to convert redundant office blocks to starter home accommodation. That would be cheaper than court cases.

Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- Local (12th Dec 2022 - 18:12:16)

But Joe that’s ok perhaps for starter homes but we then lose work opportunities which we desperately need. The amount of houses we will probably be allocated we need a much larger area and also much needed infrastructure looking at liphook as a whole the only obvious place is bohunt manor northcott land the national park people must listen to the community who are suffering because of their head in the sand attitude.

Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- Joe (12th Dec 2022 - 20:18:35)

Resident, many former office workers are permanently working from home - take for example the former Alliance building in Liphook no longer required by a global organisation, being turned into housing. Office work and commuting is a contracting job market. Plenty of former commuters do no longer use trains due to strikes and high fares they are vacating offices in all city centres and demanding the right to work from home. By regenerating city centres it reduces the need to build on designated green belt and agricultural land.

Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- Local (12th Dec 2022 - 21:34:35)

No Joe let them be used for other forms of employment engineering, small workshop’s all sorts of possibilities. We desperately need to have places for people to start their own business. Houses should be built where they can benefit the community with the appropriate infrastructure and bohunt fill’s that criteria.

Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- Joe (13th Dec 2022 - 05:57:51)

Conversion of offices would be far easier to achieve than conversion to an engineering premises. Besides which, importation from China has made the market for English produced goods very uncompetitive. It would not be a wise businessman to sink funds into an expensive start up on this country. Also developers have to contribute towards the local community whatever and wherever they build.

Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- Local (13th Dec 2022 - 10:50:23)

Still disagree Joe. We must not lose work places of any sort we need to have these places for our future entrepreneurs that are the backbone of this country.

We have the finest engineers in the world and designers did you see RED BULLS head quarters in Milton Keynes will be making all of their cars and ENGINES there by 2026 because they say the very talented work force around there is second to none. And of course many of the other teams are in this country because of the same reason.

This all filters down to small business around the country this country is built on that system we must provide places for this to flourish. The only thing I will say is these properties should be available to buy so people can own their own business ie live above the shop.My option Joe having run my own business for 40 years and see in liphook so many self employed working their socks off.

Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- Eric Benson (13th Dec 2022 - 17:31:56)


I’m not suggesting a major reworking of the SNDP boundaries, simply moving the boundary in that part of Bramshott and Liphook parish of the from the north-eastern side of the field adjacent to the Portsmouth Road/old A3 down to the south and west, from the Deer’s Hut to The Links or thereabouts.

As part of the transfer a proportionate part of the SNDP’s housing requirement would go with it, based upon the total land area of SNDP on the one hand and the area of the relevant triangle of land being transferred on the other. This will not move many houses from the SNDP allocation overall, and indeed they could be safely swallowed up within the current EHDC requirement.

The suggested transfer will have the advantage of having the relevant lands within one planning authority and conurbation and with it scope for other infrastructure developments, be they CIL funds or otherwise, arising thereafter for the benefit of Bramshott and Liphook and not a trade-off against some far-flung area of SNDP in East Sussex.


Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- Joe (13th Dec 2022 - 19:43:23)

The National Parks were set up by the Government and the boundary set by government. It was not set up by EHDC so they cannot interfere with any part of the boundary. You are also making the huge assumption that to please a developer every interested National agency would agree to it. The Bohunt Manor land is owned by a virgin island nominee trust comprising of different people who have hidden behind Swiss Accountants to not reveal who they are. I am sure that they can afford to submit a planning application in the normal way.

Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- Local (13th Dec 2022 - 20:12:45)

Joe you do talk a load of bu??? Don’t know where you get it all from thin air I think. Everything can be challenged and needs to be when it’s obviously wrong I know you are dead against giving liphook what they want a link road and infrastructure on land that’s not used. Yes we have to have houses to pay for it but it’s better to have houses with some gains rather than nothing. It’s not rocket science when you look at a map of liphook.

Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- realist (13th Dec 2022 - 21:09:20)

I think what Eric says about them moving a little bit of the SDNP and a bit of it's housing quota into the EHDC is a a bit wishful thinking, for a start Talkback doesn't constitute a groundswell of opinion and we can't even agree here, there would probably need to be all sorts of Parliamentary consultations and surveys and votes and public consultation and debate and etc etc and can you see that happening soon anyone?

I no more wish to see '...the triangle from the Deer’s Hut to The Links and Bohunt school the west of the old Portsmouth Road...' infilled than I do some old chicken warehouse along the back end of nowhere which leads through the existing Berg Estate, there is nothing appealing about that chicken building.

I don't know who now owns Bohunt but whoever it is, it didn't end up as what the previous Lady owner wanted and bequeathed, to become a nature reserve for the people of Liphook, when she donated it to a well known charity!

If I remember correctly, at the first, or maybe second, subsequent housing estate application Bohunt was by then owned by a company in Lichtenstein which I know nothing more about, while at least Bloor homes is owned by a proper good bloke who resurrected Triumph, which ties nicely into the arguments about British engineering and entrepreneurs!

The 20 minutes walk is probably a better argument for Bohunt Manor, the chicken farm is nearer 30 to the schools but a lot less of course to the station than the Deers Hut part of the triangle. Don' forget the pedestrian alleyway into the Berg which shortens that still.

Overall the land around the Bohunt, Deers Hut area is much, much more appealing to me and worth preserving than the chicken farm, agreed the lanes around Devils Lane are nice walks but that's it and the chicken farm application (unlike the massive Devil's Lane one last year) wouldn't really change that. I live close to the general Berg area and it wouldn't really bother me, the application I think is mainly aspirational houses, apart from any affordable housing (or maybe including them too?), so we will get along great, won't we?😜

Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- Local (13th Dec 2022 - 22:02:36)

Realist you miss the point of development in liphook we need gains from it , chicken farm none except more traffic through the square. Bohunt Northcott relief road rear entrance to bohunt school outside class rooms viewing areas for the public to view your wetlands which You CANNOT do know it’s private farm land NOT NATIONAL Park . Could go on with loads more but you don’t seem to get it as for access 5 minutes to the station NO CAR needed 5 minutes to sainsburys and NO need to go through the square to access the A3 . Very very close to all schools. More like 45 minutes from chicken farm so most will drive and then go on to work to the A3 . And does it really matter who owns it as long as the development is carried out to the benefit of liphook not like all the other developments in the last few years ie Canada way , lowsley longmoor road , silent garden, we must make developers put in the much needed infrastructure.

Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- Joe (14th Dec 2022 - 08:57:42)

Is a possible (if allowed by Hampshire highways and the SDNPA) really a gain for Liphook? I doubt whether it really would be a ring road through a private housing estate ? More like a private access route residents only road. The planning permission for a new busy public road would take at least 5 years to obtain.

Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- Judge Rinder (14th Dec 2022 - 09:08:16)

Well summing up , benefit’s for liphook chicken farm 0 out of ten . Bohunt Northcott 10 out 10 . Detrimental to liphook chicken farm 10 out 10 Bohunt Northcott 0 out 10 . No contest.

Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- Local (14th Dec 2022 - 09:28:14)

Joe that’s were EHDC comes in no proper link road NO development easy as that. You make all the objections but none of them stand up all supposition.

Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- D (14th Dec 2022 - 09:29:49)

The acquisition of a small part of Liphook by the Downs National Park is a handy place to plonk a few estates if really forced to by a ministers pen. Thereby avoiding building in the nicer places of the Downs Park. A handy little dustbin.

On a separate note, why don't we ever see environmentalists protesting in this weather? Probably because they're at home with the gas wacked up like the rest of us.

Time to get a few more logs in.

Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- Resident (14th Dec 2022 - 10:17:58)

Well I suppose it comes down to where best to put future developments for the benefit of liphook. I for one would like development where it takes pressure of our conservation square because that’s what we need to save it would be fantastic if we could take all the traffic away from the square I see Billingshurst have built a ring road around with houses with no problem. Everyone keeps saying the piece of land behind Bohunt school is national park yes it is but of no use to liphook NO one can access it it’s private farm land, you cannot walk there only on one path across it . So I’m completely baffled why people keep saying it’s national park so we have to save it ?? . If it could benefit liphook with taking some traffic away from the square it should be considered.

Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- Joe (14th Dec 2022 - 11:24:59)

Local it is not supposition- EHDC are not the planning authority for the SDNPA they are their own planning authority. All matters regarding new roads of any kind are dealt with by Hampshire Highways or at National Level. If as you imagine -EHDC are the deciding authority why has housing development there never happened? I remember going to public meetings called by the developers back in 2008. Nearly 15 years ago. They gained permission for a medical centre and sports facilities many years ago. Nothing built.

Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- Local (14th Dec 2022 - 13:14:05)

Yes Joe back then it was EHDC that were the planning authority the reason that nothing was built was no money for a medical centre and the same for the sports facilities. Then in came the SDNPA with their totally ridiculous boundaries not listening to the community cutting our Parrish in two. Yes the roads are HCC HIGHWAYS and they recommend a road through BOHUNT as one of their options. Ok EVERYONE must work together to achieve a good result for liphook. But as I see it the chicken farm development CANNOT give us ANYTHING.

Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- realist (14th Dec 2022 - 13:48:15)

I recall we got permission for a swimming pool, of course nothing was ever built, except the houses of course!

I can see arguments for both, for and against.

But even if we got 'permission' for a new road would we ever see it I wonder, that's another question, we really don't have that much power just because we already live here, to think we can 'tell' them to build a road or we won't allow them to build estates is pie in the sky, they tell us what we get, not the other way around, the most developers will say is 'we will allow you to build a road on part of our land once we've built our houses', then it's our problem if EHDC decide to spend the money else where!

Be careful with these things, from past experience, promises are worth almost nothing, are they even promises or aspirations or intentions and how can they then be forgotten, perhaps a commercial property lawyer would know, but I do know once we open the door to housing from the Deers Hut to the Links with our support, they will bite our hand off but as I understand it, I don't think the developers will build us a road, that's the councils job, because if the developers build it, it would be a private road surely.

Same with the GP surgery, football club etc, land might well be allocated but as night follows day will be subject to covenants, funding etc, if not built in a certain timescale as agreed, I think the land and permission reverts, will EHDC still be thinking of our ring road once the developers have come and gone and with people screaming for more houses food and care services schools etc etc and they can't even repair the roads they've got?

Anyway, how exactly would a road through the Bohunt/ Links/ Deers Hut estate from Longmoor Road to Newtown Road be a ring road, the most it can be is a link road, developers don't like busy roads cutting through their estates, it lowers house prices, I've noticed they seem to prefer rambling, narrow mazes that you need a guide to get through!

All this 10/10 versus 0/10 shows how deep the debate is delving (not), if Liphook is really that short of houses why don't we ask for both, or do a lot of worried people live on the Berg I wonder😂😂😂

The chicken farm development is a natural progression, anyone moving onto the Berg from day one must have known it was coming eventually, they even left the road 'going into' it at the end, how much clearer could they be than that, it won't blight anyone or change Liphook's character like a further raft of big new estates between the Links, Bohunt/Deers Hut, I'm not sure those extra few homes by the chicken factory will add much traffic to the square where most of it is through traffic from Haslemere Road to Longmoor/Hindhead/London/Portsmouth anyway and I doubt everyone will be diverting down Newtown Road/The Estate/Longmoor/the Avenue/Headley/Tower Road etc as this does not constitute a ring Road if we're not careful in 10 years we'll be living in a rambling commuter town wondering where our ring road, jobs and infrastructure went to, still without a proper ring road anyway, I hope not, so I won't be supporting any huge new developments on that gorgeous part of Liphook without cast iron promises and clarity of funding first, we want to see the money first before we sell our silver.

Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- Steve (14th Dec 2022 - 15:03:18)

100 years ago the population of Bramshott and Liphook was approximately 3000 people which has risen to something just over 10000 based on the latest figures. During this period the amount of change would have seemed bewildering to the residents in the early 20th century.
Looking ahead it is difficult to see why the community will not continue to grow given the current pressure on housing. It seems highly likely to me that over say the next 20 years several other areas of Liphook will be built on and in my view this is likely to include both the Chicken Farm and the Bohunt Manor/Northcliff land.
Looking at an aerial photo of the village on Google maps it is difficult to understand why the chicken farm site is considered by some to be too far from the village centre given that several other already developed parts of the community are at least as far out from the centre.
Similarly the case for eventual development of the land south of Portsmouth Road looks self evident and the clear error in including part of this land within the National Park boundary will eventually be corrected.

Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- Avenue Resident (14th Dec 2022 - 15:35:19)

Well the avenue has already become a rat run through to the A3 not just school time don’t go there school time . All this calling Bohunt land beautiful and gorgeous beats me it’s just farm land same as the chicken farm. And as for the chicken farm development not making any difference to the square who are you trying to kid . If we don’t need ring roads why did HCC suggest 5 options around liphook for us to consider when developments arose to be included if possible??. EHDC let us down very badly at the lowsley development which should have included that option most of the planning committee wanted it but the chairman thought differently not saying he was not impartial BUT ?? . That’s why the avenue has become a rat run very poor planning. Bohunt northcott land could make such a difference to liphook if we could develop it in the right way . Other places do it so why can’t we seems so strange.

Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- M (17th Dec 2022 - 12:52:02)

I understand one of our EHDC Councillors is of the opinion that Liphook should have no new development until infrastructure is improved?
Someone told me there's a report in this weeks Liphook herald but I haven't seen it.
Anyone any details they can share?

Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- SAB (17th Dec 2022 - 17:13:30)

Totally agree with Avenue Resident!!.. Lived here for forever & always!,,.. The Berg estate was a beautiful green flowing space when I was a child & loved walking & playing with friends there!!!... But looking at it now, it’s still looking good with beautiful houses built with thought & families who appreciate living in LIPHOOK!!!.. BOHUNT MANOR is the ideal place to build more houses & roads to take traffic away from our Village centre!!!... Just take a look at the Berg estate & try and imagine the beautiful trees & green land!I!... I can with no regrets as we are surrounded by beautiful trees & walks in our Countryside!!... Forward thinking is needed here for the Future of LIPHOOK!!.....

Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- Joe (17th Dec 2022 - 21:24:51)

If you really think 600 is going to look like the low density housing development of the Berg you are not a realist in todays world. Apparently the 600 high density houses would be surrounded or fronting a ring road- hardly the bucolic vision of the above poster. Not all of the Bohunt Manor land is being used for the 600 houses - some land is being held back probably to build more there in future when they have established a precedent.

Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- Jen (not the OP) (18th Dec 2022 - 09:21:57)

Sadly, SAB, developments like the Berg estate are a thing of the past. Were that site to be developed nowadays, it would likely contain twice as many, maybe three or four times as many, houses as the existing setup.

One only has to look at the more recent developments in Liphook (the Sainsbury's estate, the Lowsley Farm estate, the Silent Garden, Victoria Way etc) to see what sort of density we could expect from another one. There would barely be room enough for one or two specimen trees to remain. I doubt there would be any front gardens, let alone anything even vaguely resembling the wide open spaces of the Berg.

Properties on the Berg estate remain in very high demand and command high prices because it's so different from other developments. It almost looks as though it were built to create a lovely place for people to live, rather than to generate the largest possible profit regardless of the detriment to quality of life! Can you imagine that ever happening nowadays? Sadly, I can't.

Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- M (18th Dec 2022 - 09:59:08)

Jen you are so right.
Whether people like it or not "The Berg Estate", as it's locally known, is a special housing area and is recognised by EHDC as being so. It's current H9 designation (and DM30 designation in the proposed new Local Plan) means it has protection, but the proposals from Bloors do not conform to those policies.
Protecting our environment isn't always about protecting green fields and open spaces, it's also about protecting our special built environment.
The centre of our village is a conservation area and has protection but it's being slowly eroded by the constant peak time traffic and the pollution and damage that causes. Traffic dominates the area and needs to be reduced (and/or taken away if possible)...... not be increased and cause even more destruction.
Building a high density development on The Berg will do exactly the same, erode the protection and lose what is special about the well as increase traffic in The Square.
If the green field site of the working chicken farm must be developed it should only be done with adherence to the relevant planning policies and reflect the design and layout of the existing estate. Half the number of houses proposed would be more in keeping with the area and reduce the impact the development would have on The Square.

Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- er (18th Dec 2022 - 14:18:29)

The Berg is unique and so special because Chiltley Place was so special, as was indeed Liphook, we are still living off our past fame and glory, soon perhaps we'll be no different to any other faceless dormitory commuter town, minus the ring roads, this is why it's so important to know our history.

Chiltley Place, the southern half of Chiltley Manor after it was dissected by the railway, one of half a dozen great Liphook/Bramshott estates of old, became one of the greatest arboretums in the world, Goldenfields House was a later addition which still remains, although split up, as do a few parts of the massive walls inside the gardens of a few lucky homeowners, the Berg did it's best to retain many of the trees and spaces which are protected, correct me if I'm wrong but no home owner may build a garden fence or remove a tree, that's what I recall anyway.

In the cities dense housing is ok as people generally don't have kids, but places like Liphook are, or were, places where couples move to start families, attracted by the safer neighbourhoods, open spaces and larger gardens etc.

Go to the all the new estates though and see how our values have shifted, each subsequently smaller and more dense, the front garden if you are very lucky may fit one car, but probably not, only a few have garages (no pottering about for hours on some old motorbike engine for the old man anymore, what will dad do now, watch TV and drink, who cares!), the back garden if you are even luckier you could swing a cat, but only a very small one, everything is fenced off with six foot high fences, to keep prying eyes and the light fingered our, not that it does nowadays, in the past the poorer kids without proper gardens could run around the streets from toddlers up, those times have gone, so everyone has cameras and are filming each other with a paranoia worthy of Alfred Hitchcock, and then everybody starts thinking about extending upwards, downwards and into any little space they can find that the planners missed, to give little Mikey a bit of his own space to play, a different world yes, but better?

The only certainty is that you'll never see another Berg unless it's behind gated security fences and has 24 hour armed patrols, to keep those dangerous plebs out.

I fear we are building the slums of the future and trouble is inbuilt into our new dense estates, didn't we learn anything from the seventies?!

Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- D (19th Dec 2022 - 18:22:23)

SAB and er, if you remember Chiltley House before the Berg was built I would love to read of your experiences. I remember my grandmother telling me about it being used as a maternity hospital during the war.

Re: Development in Chiltley Lane
- er (20th Dec 2022 - 12:15:41)

Sadly not D, being used as a hospital sounds very likely it happened to many of the big old houses round here, the first I heard of the Berg was because one of my colleagues from London had seen an advert I think in one of the papers, came down, fell in love with them and bought one of the first Berg ones when they were just built, I moved down years later so I'm a relative newby, its only as I get older that I'm beginning to get interested in local history, I wish I'd asked my in-laws more questions, the older generation remembered so much and love to tell but the when we're young we're too busy rushing around to stop and listen properly!

Reply to THIS thread
Talkback Home

Please contact us with any changes to entries, or posts that you feel should be removed, ensuring that you include the posts subject. All messages here are © 1999 - 2023 Liphook Ltd and must not be reproduced elsewhere without permission.

Get 50 cashback when swapping to Octopus Energy

Swish Fibre, theres no place in your home sweet home for poor broadband

D P M Leadwork Ltd provide a wide range of domestic and commercial lead roofing and roof tiling services in Liphook, Hampshire and surrounding areas.

Liphook Tree Surgeons offer a full range of arboricultural services from planting right through to felling and stump grinding.

JMB Accounting, let us help you concentrate on what you do best

© 1999 - 2023 Liphook Ltd Supported by DG & YSH Hosting
This website is owned and operated by Liphook Ltd, a company registered in England and Wales - company number: 07468258.