Breaking News: Berkeley Homes enters into joint venture agreement to develop Pyestock

Posted on

Hartland Park (Pyestock) near Fleet, Hart District, Hampshire, warehouse development not started

In a very exciting development, We Heart Hart understands that Hart Council announced tonight that St Edward (part of Berkeley Homes) has signed a joint venture agreement with M&G (part of the Prudential Group) today to redevelop Pyestock (aka Hartland Park) and build around 1,500 new homes on the site.

This is testament to the hard work from Daryl Phillips and the council team in trying to get the land released for housing.

We believe this effectively kills off the flawed plan for a new town at Winchfield and should also mean that we don’t need any urban extensions and can meet our housing needs on brownfield sites alone for decades to come. We now think that the brownfield capacity in the district is around 4,000 homes, well above our residual requirement of around 2,500.

This is exceptionally good news.

More to follow when we hear more…..

[Update 1]

The agreement commits to build subject to planning permission. We understand that contamination is a major concern. For commercial use, the cost of decontaminating the land was expected to be £8m. For residential use the cost is likely to be much more.

There is also a traffic limit imposed through the previous commercial permission which is a source of concern. There are also some worries that Rushmoor will seek to object to the development and some residents may also object because the traffic levels will be perceived to be higher.

However, if everyone works positively, and are realistic about viability, then this project should happen.

[Update 2]

We Heart Hart understands that the new development will require significant SANG, by our calculations around 28-30 Ha.

[Update 3]

Hart Council publishes press release regarding Hartland Park redevelopment.

Hart Council Press Release regarding Hartland Park (Pyestock)
Hart Council Press Release regarding Hartland Park (Pyestock)
Download Now!231 Downloads

[Update 4]

BBC news report here and Eagle Radio report here

Posted in Brownfield Sites, Hart District Council, Hart Local Plan and tagged , , , , , , .

68 Comments

  1. Pingback: Lib Dems come out against Winchfield New Town | We Heart Hart

  2. Pingback: Local Elections 2016: Where do Hart candidates stand on new town and Pyestock redevelopment?

  3. Pingback: Hook Herald covers Pyestock and brownfield study stories | We Heart Hart

  4. Happy to hear this has happened. Of course there are many hurdles to clear between now and a completed development (amongst them the argument put so neatly above by Gareth Price about density). However I think that regardless of the density this announcement is, effectively, the nail in the coffin to the Winchfield New Town plan. With 1500 houses built as a minimum in Pystock (along with other brownfield developments) the need to concrete over the greenfields of Winchfield disappears.

  5. Now is the time to start formulating a strategy for autonomous vehicle support i.e. strategic charging points for driverless electrically powered taxis and buses powered by renewable energy.

  14. Sue Beagley We can live in hope that the new SHMA will reduce the housing requirement, not just for Hart but for Rushmoor and Surrey Heath too, which will mean we won’t have to build 3,000 houses for them.

  15. Sue Beagley We can live in hope that the new SHMA will reduce the housing requirement, not just for Hart but for Rushmoor and Surrey Heath too, which will mean we won’t have to build 3,000 houses for them.

  18. I am hoping that the residents who live near Pyestock will see it as the lesser of two evils. I would rather have cars than big trucks going in and out at all times of the day and night. But above all I woul

    • We’re trying to Sue, either way it’s not great, I sit in my office and watch the queues to the traffic lights as it is in a daily basis, but, rather cars than dirty great lorries 24/7

    • We’re trying to Sue, either way it’s not great, I sit in my office and watch the queues to the traffic lights as it is in a daily basis, but, rather cars than dirty great lorries 24/7

    • I understand your fear but this is where the density comes in, if its 1500 units there will probably not be a school, GP, shops, community centre etc because that is not enough dwellings to justify having them. Therefore there will be more traffic as parents take their kids to school and other amenities by car and probably use Rushmoor facilities. We have to break the cycle and not let our towns expand at low densities otherwise your fueling the reason why you get all the existing traffic. If I had the decision I would make pyestock into a eco village/town where densities are between 40-150 depending on plot to give a diverse range of housing and include employment, schools and other amenities where it can be more self-sufficient and encourage people not to own cars. If only 1500 houses get built Hart are once again shooting themselves in the foot and not looking to the future.

    • I understand your fear but this is where the density comes in, if its 1500 units there will probably not be a school, GP, shops, community centre etc because that is not enough dwellings to justify having them. Therefore there will be more traffic as parents take their kids to school and other amenities by car and probably use Rushmoor facilities. We have to break the cycle and not let our towns expand at low densities otherwise your fueling the reason why you get all the existing traffic. If I had the decision I would make pyestock into a eco village/town where densities are between 40-150 depending on plot to give a diverse range of housing and include employment, schools and other amenities where it can be more self-sufficient and encourage people not to own cars. If only 1500 houses get built Hart are once again shooting themselves in the foot and not looking to the future.

    • Yes, we know that but sadly councils don’t seem to, the doctor’s surgery here is already oversubscribed and is no way efficient, not sure tge Fleet ones, but in essence it’s madness. Hey ho, they’ll worry about that when it’s too late no doubt. If I had my way, I’d buy it up and Winchfield etc to prevent any more random, uncontrolled planning, but there we are

    • Yes, we know that but sadly councils don’t seem to, the doctor’s surgery here is already oversubscribed and is no way efficient, not sure tge Fleet ones, but in essence it’s madness. Hey ho, they’ll worry about that when it’s too late no doubt. If I had my way, I’d buy it up and Winchfield etc to prevent any more random, uncontrolled planning, but there we are

  19. I am hoping that the residents who live near Pyestock will see it as the lesser of two evils. I would rather have cars than big trucks going in and out at all times of the day and night. But above all I woul

  20. Pingback: Hart District Council launches important brownfield study

  21. Well look (favourite and very irritating politicians’ comment!) I live extremely close to this Pyestock development, it will cause me and my neighbours grief, However, I would far rather they use this site than build on our precious countryside. I don’t like it, I’ll be honest, it’s nightmare enough morning and evening getting out of Southwood, but at least it’s built on already. If we must have these buildings let them be there and not on greenfield sites. I’ve been here all my life, I hate it now, it’s destroyed, but let’s keep what green stuff we have. 🙁

  22. Well look (favourite and very irritating politicians’ comment!) I live extremely close to this Pyestock development, it will cause me and my neighbours grief, However, I would far rather they use this site than build on our precious countryside. I don’t like it, I’ll be honest, it’s nightmare enough morning and evening getting out of Southwood, but at least it’s built on already. If we must have these buildings let them be there and not on greenfield sites. I’ve been here all my life, I hate it now, it’s destroyed, but let’s keep what green stuff we have. 🙁

  25. We need to keep vigilant but this is a big step in the right direction. I did hear that some councillors were a bit stoney faced when listening to the announcement this evening

    • Oh I would so loved to have been a fly on the wall. Some of the councillors’ behaviour in relation to a proposed new town has been appalling. I hope we will see one or two stepping down

  26. We need to keep vigilant but this is a big step in the right direction. I did hear that some councillors were a bit stoney faced when listening to the announcement this evening

    • Oh I would so loved to have been a fly on the wall. Some of the councillors’ behaviour in relation to a proposed new town has been appalling. I hope we will see one or two stepping down

  27. I just don’t trust those District Councillors/Planners – they’ll still find a reason to build all over our fields. Or am I just being cynical!!! Note use of ‘forbidden’ exclamation marks!

  28. I just don’t trust those District Councillors/Planners – they’ll still find a reason to build all over our fields. Or am I just being cynical!!! Note use of ‘forbidden’ exclamation marks!

  35. I agree Jo Dale. However, there are other moves afoot to get to the bottom of the brownfield capacity in the district. Expect a further announcement soon.

  36. I agree Jo Dale. However, there are other moves afoot to get to the bottom of the brownfield capacity in the district. Expect a further announcement soon.

  39. This is such good news and is basic common sense when it comes to land lying idle for extensive periods of time. There must be so many significant sites such as this across the country that could make a difference if developed with vision.

  40. This is such good news and is basic common sense when it comes to land lying idle for extensive periods of time. There must be so many significant sites such as this across the country that could make a difference if developed with vision.

  41. Tesco built at the old brewery in reading / M4 j11 nothing to do with money, they were only looking for one site and tesco pulled out of pyestoxk very early in favour of the brewery.

  42. Tesco built at the old brewery in reading / M4 j11 nothing to do with money, they were only looking for one site and tesco pulled out of pyestoxk very early in favour of the brewery.

  43. No work has happened on the site for at least a year. The mega-dept’s fate was sealed when Tesco announced their results last year (loss of over £6bn).

  44. No work has happened on the site for at least a year. The mega-dept’s fate was sealed when Tesco announced their results last year (loss of over £6bn).

Comments are closed.