Hart Tories claim victory despite abject failure

Hart Tories (NE Hampshire Conservatives) claim victory despite abject failure

Hart Tories (NE Hampshire Conservatives) claim victory form abject failure

North East Hampshire Conservatives have managed to claim victory, despite their abject failure to plan for a sensible amount of housing for Hart District.

On Thursday, the Conservative led Hart Cabinet agreed to plan for more than 10,000 houses. This is many more than is required to meet the needs of Hart residents. Yet, because they have managed to avoid putting those houses near Fleet, they claim it as some sort of victory. They show no concern for Hart residents who live in the more rural areas.

Apparently, the Hart Tories are concerned about over-development, transport, traffic, education, loss of green space and the impact of development on existing infrastructure. But only in the immediate area around Fleet. The rest of us will just have to suffer.

To recap, to meet the demographic projections for Hart residents and meet the needs of those who can’t get on the housing ladder, we need to build 6,000-6,500 new dwellings. Anything over and above that requires massive in-migration to Hart. That is, massive in-migration of people whose housing needs are supposed to be met elsewhere. The SHMA also assumes that most of these people will work outside the district, putting even further pressure on local infrastructure.

Hart is planning for more than twice the demographic projections. They are not alone, other nearby districts are planning for 42% more houses than the demographic projections require.

However, their so-called victory may be short lived. The Grove Farm application is being appealed by the developers. The Planning Committee also has to make a decision about Pale Lane soon. It seems likely that they will turn it down. However, it seems equally likely the developer will appeal that decision too. With no Local Plan, out of date policies and a questionable 5-year land supply, the inspector may well grant permission for both these sites.

The only sensible way out of this, is to remove the extra 2,000 houses they voted through on Thursday and demonstrate that the houses are not required.

Posted in Hampshire, Hart District Council, Hart Local Plan, We Heart Hart Campaign, We Love Hart Campaign and tagged , , , , , .


  1. I would suggest that they are not concerned about Fleet either. Regardless of it being brownfield, Hartland’s is a large urban extension to Fleet that will have a large detrimental impact to Fleet as well as cause damage to a nature reserve. This is being supported by the local conservative councillors.

  2. Or Murrell Green which will effectively join up Hook, Phoenix Green and Winchfield.

    I think the word missing from their assertions is delusional.

    Do they think we are so stupid that we can’t see what’s going on? Their only concern is Fleet and what happens there. All the concerns with regard to infrastructure apply equally to either Winchfield or Murrell Green. In fact, you wouldn’t easily be able to walk into Hartley Wintney or Hook to find a doctor or a shop if you were elderly or a parent with children. The Whitewater surgeries are already overstretched. Public transport is none existent. The A30 at peak hours from the M3 through Hook and Hartley Wintney are already at a standstill with mile long queues on school days. Winchfield Railway station car park is already full each day. Local schools are at capacity. There is no difference between building in Fleet, excepting that the government prefers urban extension to building on green spaces.

    The article is just spin. They needed to make a disaster look like a success. Well, they failed and all they succeeded in achieving is an even greater lack of faith in their ability to plan their way out of a paper bag.

  3. In the age of ‘alternative facts’ this should come as no surprise. Especially from a councillor who has ‘frequently expressed deep concern about the need to protect our community from overdevelopment’ – unless ‘our community’ meant Winchfield in which case go ahead.

Comments are closed.