Hart Local Plan

It is important to establish some facts. It is not Hart's desire to want to build 7,534 homes in the plan period 2011-2032. This is the number imposed upon us by the government's National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and its mandate that we address 'objectively assessed housing needs'. If we don't find sites for these houses then developers can effectively dictate where they go.

Of this 7,534 at least 3,516 have already been given planning permission. The majority in and around Church Crookham, Fleet and Hook. Building on brownfield sites is an option but will only address a small part of the 4,018 still left to find. The option of intensifying development in our existing settlements is also being taken up in the plan. However, within the plan period around 3,250 houses will need to be built on greenfields. This is the result of the housing targets imposed on us by the policies of the national government, it is not our choice.

Hart desperately needs to get a formally adopted Local Plan (LP) in place so as to have some control over where new development goes. The plan does not stop development but rather provides a framework that indicates where development should go to meet the supply of houses which Hart is deemed to need to provide. Once Hart has an LP in place we can use it to fend off inappropriate planning applications by pointing to the LP as proof that we’ve got our future housing needs covered.

Based upon Hart’s “objectively assessed housing needs” the LP will need to identify locations to build roughly 4,000 new houses, over and above those 3,500 already granted planning permission but which have yet to be built.

For this reason a new settlement option looks likely to be the mainstay of the new LP. Even with the allocation of a new settlement, additional development will be needed across the rest of Hart. Development within existing settlements such as blocks of flats on the site of disused office blocks, would look to account for 750 new homes. Sites adjoining existing settlements would also be looked at to deliver up to 650 homes.

A new settlement is beneficial because it would justify having its own new secondary school. Conversely, incremental development on the edge of existing towns can only ever lead to the corresponding growth of existing secondary schools; so putting at risk the personalised child focus for which our local schools are noted. A new settlement can also be planned with a suitable road network, rather than simply exacerbating existing highway pinch points as has been the case with the ‘bolt on’ developments of the recent past.

A new settlement will have the capacity to help address the future housing needs of Hart beyond the plan period. It will also help us to deliver the required housing stock if the government foist the unmet demands of our neighbouring authorities upon us.

Issue	Facts
Hart does not need all these additional houses	The original attempt to get the local plan through was rejected on duty to cooperate. This means in reality that the authorities in the strategic housing market area had not conducted an up to date Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA). This has now been undertaken following the recognised methodology and has identified a need for 7,534 homes in the plan period 2011-2032.
Why are all these houses being put in a new settlement?	They are not. 3516 have already been granted permission, mostly in Fleet, Church Crookham and Hook. Of the further 4018 left to be allocated only up to 2400 are being suggested in the plan period for a new town.
Why not build on brownfield sites?	Development on brownfield sites within settlement boundaries is likely to only deliver 750 houses (and are in the proposal). There are plans to build around 400 houses on the Guillemont Park site, these are in addition to the 750 already mentioned.
Why not continue the ‘onion’ style development around the major settlements as we have done in the past	Incremental growth does not work. New developments on the outer edge of Fleet are closer in journey time to Winchfield station than Fleet station (especially true at peak times). Onion skin development can not address the capacity issues on local roads, which are already over loaded. A new settlement can be designed from the ground up with road infrastructure and can reach critical mass for secondary school provision.
But why build on greenfields?	With 7,534 homes to build and very little brownfield capacity homes will get built on greenfields somewhere. That is the sad but inevitable consequence of the government’s drive for more housing.