Edited by Keren Burney, media and communications officer, CPRE Hampshire

A feeling of tranquillity

When we peek over a stile at the view beyond, our hearts do not fill with glee to think of how many houses we can squeeze into a small field. We do not giggle and believe that any old tree can be cut down and replaced by a new sapling; that it will all be OK as long as we call the new development 'Oak Tree Close', 'Beech Place' or Greenfields Avenue'.

We are a different breed. When we look across an open field, we breathe its air and feel its peace enter our veins. We know the crops that can grow from its soil, the wildlife that thrives in it and around it; we wonder at the silhouette of the oaks that line its edge.

That's the emotional side of things. But let's get real. In order to make a difference and to protect what we believe is important, for residents, neighbours, visitors and the children to come, we have to work with the system where possible. We need to understand the intricacies of the planning system, to work with those who make policies and influence those in power to introduce lasting changes that everyone can live with.

In a way it will be too late to put in planning objections, or feebly ask for more Tree Preservation Orders when the Plan is in place. That would be like locking the stable door once the horse has bolted.

What Plan?

The South East Plan, the latest statutory regional plan for the South East will be the first ever Regional Spatial Strategy under the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act. It will become the Development Plan for the region to which all Local Development Frameworks (formerly Local Plans) must conform. As the Regional Planning body, the South East England Regional Assembly (SEERA) based in Guildford, Surrey is tasked with processing the preparation of the Plan. CPRE members have found themselves on several advisory groups and our involvement has improved the original draft Plan. We have commented in detail at every stage of the public consultation.

SEERA submitted its draft Plan for the region to the Government Office for the South East (GOSE) on 31st March 2006. The Plan covers the county areas of Kent, East and West Sussex, Surrey, Oxfordshire, Berkshire, Buckinghamshire, Hampshire and the Isle of Wight. Our county lies within England's most built up, pressurised region and the new Plan will shape its future for the next 20 years.

The current phase of the process is an Examination in Public (EIP), which takes the form of a roundtable discussion and debate led by a Panel of one Chair, appointed by the Secretary of State and two Planning Inspectors. It began on 28th November and is expected to last until the end of March. It involves participants from a wide range of organisations, discussing and facing probing questions about the region's future - its housing, transport, economic development, quality of life and environmental protection up to 2026. However, the EIP is not an adversarial process, unlike a public inquiry. It is undertaking a probing examination of the Plan.

Once the examination ends, the Panel of Inspectors will write a report with recommendations for any changes to the draft Plan for the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, Rt Hon Ruth Kelly MP. The report is expected to be sent to her during the summer, and she will then decide whether to make any changes to the Plan before issuing the final version.

How many houses?!

The Plan must address the need for hundreds of thousands more homes in the South East, as population grows and household sizes shrink, but what does this mean for Hampshire itself? We are mainly affected in the south of the county, which comes within the so-called South Hampshire Sub-Region, and in the north of the county in an area named the Western Corridor and Blackwater Valley (WC&BV).

The draft Plan calls for house building levels in the South East to rise from the current planned level of 28,000 homes per year to 28,900 per year over 20 years. On this basis, in the geographic county of Hampshire (including Portsmouth and Southampton) we would be looking at 122,000 additional dwellings over 20 years, or 6,100 dwellings per annum. Of these, 80,000 are destined for the South Hampshire sub-region and 26,000 for the WC&BV sub-region, leaving 16,000 for Central Hampshire and New Forest.

From CPRE's point of view we would broadly support this level of house building but would argue that it needs to adopt a more sustainable approach. We advocate that at least 75% of new development should be sited on brownfield land, so that housing is not built on Greenfield land unless the need is proven and as a last resort. It is essential also that the right balance of affordable housing is catered for, to avoid a glut of pricey market housing that key-workers and local people cannot afford.

So, we were disturbed by the announcement of the Government Office of the South East (GOSE) early in 2006, that at the EIP they may support a 60% increase on the draft Plan figures - up to 46,000 homes a year (rather than 28,900). There is no doubt that new house-building at this sort of level would have serious impacts on the environment of the South East and in CPRE's view would not be sustainable. However, Government likes the idea of more housing development, so as to grow the economy by expanding the workforce. Hugh Sheppard, of CPRE's Hart and Rushmoor district group, says:

"We prefer the approach of Lord Adair Turner's Pensions Commission and others who believe the nation's workforce will expand of itself due to various factors, particularly the equalisation of later retirement dates for men and women, the collapse of occupational pension schemes, the failure of many people to make alternative provision for their old age and greater longevity. With more people working longer and less able to afford to move, this could mean that a quarter of the new homes will not be needed."

Dedicated volunteers from CPRE Hampshire have been working hard with colleagues from CPRE South East Region, to prepare detailed statements for submission to the EIP prior to attending sessions to discuss the subjects of the statements.

In all, CPRE South East Region and the individual Branches have together been listed to attend 39 sessions of the Panel. Christine Drury, Chair of CPRE South East said:

"This is a phenomenal achievement! It confirms CPRE's pre-eminent understanding of and engagement in planning issues - even the dry, dusty, but all important regional strategy agenda."

Western Corridor (and Blackwater Valley)

In 2004, CPRE set up a sub-group of members from five county branches including Hampshire, to coordinate a response to the draft South East Plan. The substance of their concern was, and is, the impact of coordinated policies on the proposed 'Western Corridor and Blackwater Valley Sub-region'; a development area centred on Reading that stretches from Slough to the Wiltshire border.

Hart & Rushmoor and North Hampshire district groups were to the fore in 2005 in a successful sub-regional group campaign to have the Regional Assembly exclude some 50 square miles and 20 Hampshire villages from the sub-region.

When PUSH comes to SHUV

The South Hampshire sub-region consists of Portsmouth, Southampton, Fareham, Gosport, Eastleigh, Havant and parts of East Hampshire, the New Forest, Test Valley and Winchester Districts. The local authority work in the sub-region is coordinated by the Partnership for Urban South Hampshire (PUSH).

At the EIP, CPRE has been working on topics that cover Strategy and Economy, Housing & Countryside and Infrastructure & Implementation for South Hampshire. We would approach the proposed housing numbers (80,000 over 20 yrs) with caution, preferring to see how things 'pan out' before greenfield land is ever given up for development. We shall argue that a proportion of these new houses be kept in 'reserve'. We also believe that economic growth can be stimulated without attracting in-migration or building employment areas outside of urban centres.

SHUV stands for South Hampshire's Unheard Voices. Early in 2006, Caroline Dibden of CPRE Hampshire worked closely with Claire Smith of the Green Party to bring together around 30 member organisations to form the non-party political umbrella group known as SHUV. It includes residents' associations, parish councils, and other environmental and amenity groups. The members are proud that together, as informed volunteers, they have succeeded in submitting a coordinated response to the draft South East Plan. SHUV has, in its own right, been offered a seat at the Examination in Public, a fantastic achievement by the individuals involved.

Claire Smith, of SHUV said:

"We are concerned that the whole of the draft South East Plan is based on economic growth rather than what is needed, achievable and sustainable. The economic growth targets are based primarily on an incoming population rather than existing population figures and indigenous growth. We think more attention should be paid to empty homes, of which there is approximately 4,000 officially logged for the South Hampshire. These represent a significant wasted resource.

Also, we do not think that the Plan as proposed would help the deprived areas that really need it, although we support the argument that any housing must be preceded by infrastructure."

The Government has committed to assessing environmental impacts of the South East Plan, but CPRE and SHUV believe that the policies for protection of the environment are not strong enough. Massive amounts of infrastructure would be needed to enable South Hampshire to even begin to cope with this number of extra homes: from public transport to sewage treatment works. But recent funding decisions make the prospect of the necessary investment unlikely.

The South East Plan recommends two major areas of building in South Hampshire - called Strategic Development Areas (SDA). One would be located north of Fareham (imagine a new town of 10,000 houses on greenfield land) and the other near Hedge End. Other houses would be built in and around existing urban areas.

The Fareham SDA would be located on land that was designated as an "Area of Special Landscape Quality" (before such designations were discouraged by planning guidance and so removed within Hampshire). English Nature has stated that the area of the proposed extension to the Waterlooville MDA is characterised by attractive and ecologically rich landscapes. We are disputing the idea that employment land allocated in the SDAs and MDA would aid urban regeneration. They would just be the modern day equivalents of creating out-of-town centres (albeit on a larger scale). In our view, employment sites would be better located within or nearer to the large urban centres of South Hampshire. Under-performing and run-down areas should be renewed and supported to increase economic and social well-being, negating the need for these SDAs.

What of the 'Rest of Hampshire'?

The rest of the county, apart from the Western Corridor and Blackwater Valley, and the South Hampshire Sub-Region, comes in the Plan under the inspiring banner of 'Rest of Hampshire' (RoH). It includes central Hampshire and the New Forest. Around half of this area is nationally designated landscape, including the New Forest National Park and a significant part of the designated South Downs National Park. The remainder of its designated landscape lies within Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB). There are also significant areas of national wildlife designation, and one area of greenbelt in the New Forest.

CPRE believes that this high quality environment and countryside remains one of the priceless assets of Hampshire to be nurtured for the future. The results of the research conducted by MORI for SEERA showed that 94% of residents consulted were of the view that protecting the countryside was important for them personally - for its attractive landscapes, production of food and crops, wildlife habitats and recreation opportunities. In the results of the Community Discussions and "Your Shout" the figure was even higher at 97%.

The natural beauty and other environmental benefits have given rise to business opportunities that have fuelled considerable growth in Central Hampshire and New Forest over recent years. Development that would adversely impact on the environment of this will diminish those opportunities, so the innovation value needs to be a key focus for future growth, not growth led by development or in-migration.

We believe that retaining the beauty and tranquillity of Central Hampshire and New Forest is important not only for those who live here, but for the benefit of those living in the sub-regions that are targeted for higher levels of development.

Still more to do…

In a future article, we would like to explain in more detail (there is plenty of it!) what the South East Plan will mean for local people in the county, with more information about the Western Corridor and Blackwater Valley to the north; and for towns and villages in the south.

For information in the meantime, readers can look at various websites (see the links above) or speak to CPRE representatives. Or they may telephone 01962 843655.

December 2006.