Hook Christmas Cracker Conservative Raffle

The winning raffle tickets numbers are as follows;

372, 360, 307, 353, 332, 329, 305, 269 and 279.

Plese contact Lindsay MacDougall for the collection of your proze if you have one of the winning ticket numbers above on 07747 345155.

Congratulations to all the winners.

CLLR MIKE MORRIS WORRIES ABOUT SAINSBURY'S

As far back as December 2013 Cllr Mike Morris was alerting the district of Hart and it's residents of his concerns about the Sainsbury's development and the subsequent increase in traffic at the NE of Hook. See just one of his many articles below:-

Sainsbury's Hook plans spark traffic fears

By Stephen Lloyd 

December 13, 2012

A NEW Sainsbury’s store planned for Hook could cause traffic misery in the village, a councillor has warned.

The supermarket giant is looking at building a new store on the corner of the A30 London Road and Griffin Way North.

Sainsbury’s says its plan would increase food shopping choice and competition locally, as well as creating up to 200 new jobs.

But Mike Morris, who represents Hook on Hart District Council, has expressed concerns.

He said his main worry, along with many other Hook residents, was that the road infrastructure surrounding the proposed store would be unable to cope.

The Conservative councillor said he was particularly worried about the proposed delivery entrance and exit junction, as very large delivery lorries needing to turn right to join junction 5 of the M3 would have to do so against the flow of traffic. He also said he was against all development that was to the detriment to any of village life which included heavy traffic.

He was quoted to say. " No one in Hook wants more houses but we are left with the burden of the Labour Government insisting the amount of houses that should be built in the district. Then the multi party committee at Hart distributed the houses around ward and so Hook was given 600 houses, I'm very angry at this" 

Councillor Morris who is Hooks Planning member Hart District Council recently retired from a successful business to spend full time ensuring  that the village has a voice in the council. He also is adamant that the villagers have their say on issues that affect their daily lives.

Stephen Lloyd

Get Hampshire Magazine

ONE OF THE MANY LETTERS SENT TO RESIDENTS REGARDING DEVELOPMENT IN HOOK

Dear Mr Webber,

I'm happy to detail the facts with regard to what's happening in Hook with respect to development and not add to the misconceptions that are being spread by certain people.

Yes the District Councils Local Plan was failed by the Government inspector and it's general belief that it was intentional so that more housing can be built as the Local Plan would have capped housing numbers for the next 15 years. 

So what can we do? .....certainly knee jerk reactions will not help the situation and the best way forward is to help the current District Councillors with their work to deal with these difficult times we currently face. Support and not criticism is required!

Thank you for requesting that District Councillors support your concern but we are already ahead dealing with the concerns you have already highlighted. I summarise below:-

1. TRAFFIC

The Highways Authority is the Hampshire County Council and they are a consultee on every planning application. When a planning application comes forward which involves vehicle movement or junction loadings they assess each element of congestion, junction safety and safe vehicle movement and includes pedestrian safety. This analysis determines also the vehicle movements from all roads and all junctions taking into account planning applications already passed. As the Authority it's they who have the final word on statutory Highways policy. As your planning member for Hook I ensure along with fellow Councillors we firstly check that the Highways Authority have covered all aspects of safety and question all decisions made. An example of your Councillors good work is the £1.7m being spent on the Griffin North/A30 roundabout to alleviate the extra vehicle movements which Sainsbury's will bring.

2. SEWERAGE

It's common knowledge that the Crooked Billet sewerage Pumping Station fails when Hook experiences heavy rain fall and Thames Water accept that this problem is due to surface water permeating  into their pipework systems causing the pumps to overload and fail. This results in a Thames Waters "fire fighting" technique sending tankers to empty the pumping station sumps. This is unacceptable and causes flooding problems to residents nearby. So what has been done about this ? Your District Councillors have placed a Grampian Clause, which is a very restrictive condition, on the Sainsbury's, Reading Road and Browncroft's ( and will soon do so to Hop Garden planning application) which ensures no work can proceed unless Thames water resolves the sewerage problems. Thames Water accept they cannot at present accept further loading to their sewerage system and what's required is extensive engineering works.

3. HOUSING NEED

The District Council is currently working very hard on the new Local Plan and so that we can accurately bring forward the correct housing number needs for the District the housing 'need' is being OBJECTIVELY assessed. This analysis looks at the evolving resident growth, the young that are living in parents homes and want to move but not out of the area, older residents that want to move into smaller homes locally and those on the Housing Register waiting for rented dwellings. The retail industry growth in the area is also taken into account along with the growing workforce. This arduous work will produce an accurate objectively assessed housing need for the District. This figure is equality shared around the district and these decisions include the disruptive "Independent" Councillors in Fleet who push as much development away from themselves and towards rural villages. 

The last Local Plan used housing numbers from the now out of date 'South East Plan' (236 houses to be built per year for the next 15 years) but after much of the work for the new local plan had been carried out the numbers appear to be more around 400 houses to be built by Hart each year for the next 15 years.

This will increase the amount of houses being built by everyone in the district. For Hook this will probably mean that the developments in the NE of Hook, Reading Road, Browncroft and Hop Garden will more than likely be part of the new Local Plan and this is one of the reasons why they are so hard to turn down.

Therefore coupled with the Government's progressive National Planning Policy Framework planning policy which favours " Presumption in favour of Sustainable Development" and the probability of new housing numbers being raised to around 400 it's difficult to actively object to granting the current developments. The Local Plan should reach the Draft proposal stage by the end of the year which will give more protection to further development. Therefore if a site is deemed sustainable then it could be developed upon (subject to restrictive conditions)....but if it's not sustainable then It can't.  Sustainability is something I've been challenging Hart with recently and using a test case I have deferred the Reading Road development for some weeks now because of this. There are other subjects that have a restrictive value to any further development which may present itself like the Thames Heath Special Protection Area capping policy Hart is looking at and viability of any development site as 40% of new dwelling built have to be affordable homes.

As you can see planning is a complicated subject and a good deal of experience and knowledge is required to understand the process and manage the way ahead.

I'm sorry this has been a long reply but there is much work being carried out on behalf of all Hooks residents and I wanted to ensure you your worries are being looked at and dealt with the best way possible.

Regards

Mike

Mike Morris BEM

Hart District Councillor

Hook and Rotherwick

READING ROAD DEVELOPMENT Adjacent To John Morgans Close ( gas reducing station)...UPDATE

At last nights HDC planning meeting the Reading Road development was discussed and the access to the site will now be brought to the Major Sites Planning sub committee to determine where and how site access is achieved.

Cllr Mike Morris 

Should Britain build more bungalows to cope with the ageing population?

Local authorities have recently been advised by central government that they need to build more bungalows to cope with the ageing population. David Kingman reports…

Here is an interesting question for you to ponder: if you had a completely free choice, what type of home would you choose to live in? A castle? A Victorian townhouse? A new-build flat?

This question has been asked in a number of nationwide surveys looking at peoples’ housing preferences, and the answers they gave may seem surprising. According to a report from Policy Exchange entitled Housing and Intergenerational Fairness (published in April of this year), the most popular type of housing is actually the bungalow. A MORI poll conducted in 2002 found that 30% of people would prefer to live in a bungalow if they had the choice, and the preference is even stronger among older people. These findings have since been confirmed by several subsequent pieces of research.

The unexpected popularity of the bungalow raises a number of interesting questions for the UK housing market – questions which have become even more important in light of recent policy changes which could mean that more of them end up being built.

The decline of the bungalow

Of course, people usually only have quite a limited choice when it comes to what type of housing they live in. The most obvious constraint is that they have to live somewhere they can afford, which in an era of rising house prices has meant many of us now have much less space than we would like – Britain now has some of the smallest newly-built homes in Europe, and the problem of shrinking homes has got so bad the government is planning to take action against it.

People also usually want to live in a particular area to be near their friends and family, or so they can be close to their job, which means they are often stuck with whatever type of housing is available there. A notable flaw with the British housing market is that it is not very good at giving people what they want; numerous surveys have shown that the majority of tenants would prefer to be able to buy their own home, while a study produced by the OECD in 2011 (The Price Responsiveness of Housing Supply in OECD Countries) found that the housing supply in the UK is less responsive to demand than in most other developed countries.

Bungalows have been a particular casualty of Britain’s lack of flexibility over the supply of housing. Owing to fears of using up too much of Britain’s green and pleasant land to build houses, as well as the need to regenerate more brownfield sites, government planning policy for a prolonged period has sought to create more housing at higher densities. The current national planning framework handed down to Britain’s local authorities by the central government calls for new housing to ideally be built at a density of at least 30 dwellings per hectare; this focus on higher densities has led to more blocks of flats and identikit suburban developments being built, but has been the enemy of the bungalow.

Only 2% of all houses that were given planning permission during 2012 were bungalows – 1,700 new homes – compared to more than 27,000 bungalows being built each year during the 1980s. Pre-existing bungalows have often been targeted for demolition in recent years so that the land they occupy can be re-used for new developments at higher densities. Some estimates suggest that there could be as few as half a million bungalows left in the entire country. However, if the government gets its way this could be about to change.

A new direction

According to a recent article in the Daily Mail, local authorities are about to be issued with new advice instructing them to build more housing which is adapted for older peoples’ needs. It is projected that over the next 20 years or so, half of all the new households created will be over-65, and the new advice warns councils that the supply of new housing needs to reflect this trend:

“The need to provide housing for older people is critical given the projected increase in the number of households aged 65 and over.”

Local authorities are now being told to encourage the development of greater numbers of bungalows, in addition to retirement villages and developments of sheltered and supported housing. The planning minister, Nick Boles, gave the following quote:

“We must build more homes or suitable accommodation for older people if we are to avoid problems further down the track...We’re all living longer and there will be a big rise in the number of older people in future years. Making sure councils plan for this and for enough suitable homes like bungalows in their area will help ensure the ageing population can live in the places they want and enjoy their retirement.”

Could this help young people too?

Although it is primarily aimed at assisting older people, this policy shift could well turn out to be beneficial for younger people too.

This is because housing is closely tied to a person’s life-cycle. Generally speaking, when someone is alone or co-habiting they need a relatively small amount of space to themselves, but their housing needs then increase once they start to have children and get involved in permanent relationships; they typically need additional bedrooms and a bigger garden. Once someone reaches old age, their children have usually left home, and it may no longer be economic for them to pay for all the bills and upkeep costs which living in a larger home entails; they may even start to develop health problems which mean they need some form of supported housing.

Therefore, a well-functioning housing market should enable people who can afford it to trade up to larger houses while their housing needs are growing and then downsize once they feel it would be beneficial to do so. However, Previous research undertaken by IF (Hoarding of Housing: The intergenerational crisis in the housing market) has shown that Britain could have 25 million “missing” bedrooms in houses which are being under-occupied because not enough older people are downsizing, creating a bottleneck in the housing supply which makes it harder for younger people to move into family-sized homes.

This is partly because the large baby boomer cohort, which is now ageing, came of age during the years when Britain was building many more houses than it is now, so the market was able to respond to their need for family-sized homes. However, as we have now had an extremely inflexible supply of new housing for over 20 years, the market is not responding to their need for properties which are designed for older people to downsize into. If the government’s new planning regulations lead to more older people downsizing then more of us might get to live in the kind of homes we actually want to live in, which would be a better outcome for all of us, young and old alike.

http://www.if.org.uk/archives/4182/should-britain-build-more-bungalows-to-cope-with-the-ageing-population

Nick Boles wants more bungalows built

Planning minister Nick Boles wants more bungalows built because most pensioners want to “end their days” in one.

Nick Boles

He told a planning conference the amount of bungalows built in the past few years had dropped because developers were focusing on higher density developments.

“When you ask people where they would like to end their days, a lot of them say they want to end their days in a bungalow,” he said in comments reported by the Daily Telegraph.

“If we’re going to provide for more bungalows we’re going to have to provide more land than we otherwise would.”

Boles said developments with bungalows could face less local opposition and said that more housing for pensioners should be built in town centres.

http://www.bdonline.co.uk/build-more-bungalows-says-planning-minister/5062937.article

MEET YOUR MP AND DISCUSS DEVELOPMENT ISSUES

   Dear All

I've been able to put together a 'village to meet your MP' meeting so that the development issues within hook can be discussed.

Therefore would you please forward the below details of the meeting which is being held on Friday 14th at 7.30 pm at the Basingstoke Country Hotel to all your contacts so we can have a good attendance.

James Arbuthnot and Ranil Jayawardena intend to absorb the detail of the many emails James has received from the residents of Hook and try to answer these questions.

The general format will be :-

1. Cllr Stephen Parker the planning portfolio holder at HDC Cabinet will speak on how current planning policy affects planning decision making in these difficult times

2. MP and Candidate for MP to respond to the many emails sent by residents and explain what they are going to do about these problems

3. Questions from the floor

Time limit 1 hour.

Regards

Mike Morris BEM

Hart District Councillor

BROWN CROFT PLANNING APPLICATION

The Corporate Director of Planning at Hart District Council has informed me that the Highways Scheme for Brown Croft has been assessed by an outside agency, an expert in this feild, and the Scheme is deemed safe and within policy. 

Cllr Mike Morris

Councillor Mike Morris States His Annoyance Over Development in Hook

http://m.basingstokegazette.co.uk/news/11028923.Two_new_estates_in_Hook_get_the_green_light/

PUTTING THE RECORD STRAIGHT REGARDING HOUSING DEVELOPMENT IN HOOK

It is very unfair when negative comments are made from the written word of some residents having read an activist site. It's certainly not the view of the thousands of residents that actively play a part in village life within the local pubs, restaurants, sporting clubs, churches, charity groups, retailers and Neighbourhood Watch activities which make this village special. These residents who I know personally realise I and other councillors have diligently represented them for many years.

I'm aware and fully sympathise that many residents in Hook are upset at the outcome of the Brown Croft ( High Ridge farm)  and Reading Road ( Adjacent to John Morgan Close ) planning applications and I would like to put the record straight regarding the process and outcome. 

We are in worrying times and very different from previous years when then a current Local Plan protected the Village of Hook. The failure of the new Local Plan (LP) by the Government Inspector was a disaster for Hart and all the residents within the district, as it opened the doors to developers who have obtained options to buy land, especially around Hook. It's commonly believed that it was failed because the Government didn't want to cap the housing numbers captured within a LP and so to enable the Government to build more houses many Districts LP's were not agreed. The resubmitted plan would have to increase it housing numbers allocation with the intention of triggering the economy into growth by the notion of building more dwellings.

The land areas most at risk are those already identified on the Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) list which includes the applications to Brown Croft (SHLAA 9), Hop Garden (SHLAA 8) and land Adjacent to Reading Road..Gas Reducing Station (SHLAA 7). They were identified as possible development sites some time ago and so the development concept for those areas for housing has been well known by residents for many years as developers have tried before to gain planning permission on these sites but the then current LP helped block these.

The tools that Hart District Council planning committee use to determine planning applications come in the form of policies. The policies utilised without a LP are saved polices from the last LP and the " over-riding" document the National Planning Policy Framework ( NPPF).

Objections could only be raised at the planning meeting if they were 'material planning reasons' which contravene planning policies. Even resident objections have to focus on policies and not like....don't want affordable homes near my house, country views lost and perceived loss of house value. Every detail is looked at by professional planning officers, the planning committee and before that by me. Unfortunately having worked many hours on these applications trying to locate issues outside of policy none were show stoppers and those found could be mitigated by conditions. 

At the heart of the lead document the NPPF is a 'presumption in favour of sustainable development', which should be seen as a golden thread running through both plan-making and decision-taking.

Where the LP  is absent, silent or relevant policies are out-of-date, the Local Planning Authority should grant permission unless:-

"any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweighs the benefits, when assessed against the policies in this Framework taken as a whole". That statement from the NPPF doesn't give much opportunity to decline applications. This is frustrating and annoying but it's the times we are currently in without a LP!

The only chink in the policy armour with the Brown Croft application was the traffic numbers and road safety. Even though at the planning committee meeting the Highways Authority Officer bungled his report, the Senior Planning Officer interjected and informed the Planning Committee that the amount of presumed vehicle movement to and from the site was within policy. Once he quoted that it then wasnt a material planning objection matter and this argument had no legs. However, myself and the planning committee questioned the officers regarding additional vehicle movements to and from the Suitable Area of Natural Green (SANG). That's why the SANG was discussed and a good job it was as we were able to obtain single use for that amenity space SANG for the proposed houses and for those local residents that could walk there only! Which means No additional car movements to or from the SANG from outside the development.

Both Brown Croft and the Reading Road applications went to Full Council on 27th February because they were a departure from the LP and Interim Housing Delivery Strategy (IHDS). The only reasons that can be discussed at full council are those that contravene planning policy and as previously stated without a local plan and with the NPPF's presumption to develop there were no such reasons. However, as I was concerned about the  Internal Highways advice regarding vehicle movement numbers, I have helped arrange that the Brown Croft highways element undergoes a further full and thorough investigation of traffic numbers and road safety assessment. This will be  carried out by an non political outside expert. Should this expert find fault in the safety of the road or entrance/exit to the site it could be a show stopper. However, if he considers everything within Government policy or mitigation allows the road scheme to become safe, the Director of Planning will then and only then release the grant documentation. Even then the developer has to abide by all the conditions that are placed upon the grant documentation. These conditions are similar to those at the Reading Road and include foul water and surface water conditions to ensure adequate facility before development commences along with many other conditions to mitigate the effects of the development on the village.

The Reading  Road development had a condition placed upon it at the planning meeting to review the safety of Junction into the site. I will be meeting with the applicants highways engineers and a senior Hart District Council Planning manager to discuss a new layout to make it safer. Once this has been resolved then the application goes back to the planning Committee in March. In the mean time the safety of the new junction will be independently sanctioned by the same expert used on Brown Croft. As the planning committee had already granted permission for this development only the changes to the entrance can be discussed when brought back to the planning meeting.

The application then goes back to Full Council. As before only contravened policies can be discussed at this meeting and unfortunately there are none and so there's no grounds like that at Brown Croft to 'call in' the application.

As previously said I was very disappointed with the Highways Officer at the planning meeting so I requested at Full Council that the Leader request the portfolio holders of Environment and Planning to look into and review the current level of internal highways representation and advice received at planning meetings and to report back on their conclusions.

The Failed LP identified sites SHLAA 1, 2 ( North East of Hook ) and possibly 7 (Land Adjacent to Reading Road..Gas Pumping Station) for housing/retail development and the amount of housing to each SHLAA site, totalling 600 dwellings. That has all changed including the numbers. It is expected that the new LP which should be ready for inspection by Government inspector early next year, will more than likely need to raise the numbers of housing to be delivered by Hook and other settlements within the district. Therefore if it would have been possible to prevent the developments SHLAA 7 and 9 there was no guarantee that, even with the housing numbers from rejected LP which would have brought forward 600 , those numbers may not have be enough to fulfil the new LP housing number requirements for Hook. Meaning SHLAA 7, 8 and 9 and the NE Hook Development (600) may be part of the new LP after all!

Much has been spoken about the IHDS Hart produced and that it's housing numbers mentioned in the document should prevent any additional development . However the IHDS is only a preference (strategy) to what Hart would like housing numbers to be, it's not policy and could not be used for valid argument regarding housing numbers or where they were sited. There is hope with this Strategy as Hart District Council are furiously working on a housing number capping strategy to hopefully align with the IHDS and this maybe will have a restrictive value for applications coming forward in the future.

As your Ward planning member I have spent many hundreds of hours studying hundreds of planning applications within Hook and Rotherwick and I have worked conscientiously with each Parish Council to ensure applications are fairly and honestly determined. Even though I was fully aware that Brown Croft and The Reading Road developments were within policy I went against my impartial principles and was one of only a few on the planning committee to vote against both applications as I didn't agree with the locations and still had concerns about the traffic. The later concern I will deal with professionally and the former I'm still not happy with but policy has determined its outcome.

With regard to Sainsbury's the majority of Hook residents were in favour of a Sainsbury's store within the village including those near the store (I know I live there!) and although I was never in favour of its position the NPPF and saved policies allowed the application to be granted. Hundreds of hours were expended by the planning officers at Hart, myself and the Parish Council ensuring mitigation was carried out to minimise the effects on the village. An enormous amount of funding will be spent by Sainsbury's in the form of Section 106 legal contributions on extensive highways improvements to cope with the addition traffic, including a larger and more efficient roundabout. Other conditions include to control light pollution, noise, surface and foul water removal, safety cameras to car parks and junction for safety, acoustic fencing to protect the Hook House Hotel, silent unloading bays to protect adjacent dwellings. In addition the surgery car park will be free for the first 4 hours and the Grand Parade car park will also be refurbished.  Even if it was possible to defer/reject this application (which it wasn't) all the section 106 mitigation funding to benefit Hook would have been lost when the inevitable granting permission would have taken place at appeal. 

Tesco's application came on the scene after Sainsbury's application was granted and even should Tesco's get planning permission it's still unclear whether it will be built as it's thought Rawlings has not yet found a alternative location to move to!

I'm sorry this is long winded but it's a complicated subject and I wanted to make clear the process.

Cllr Mike Morris BEM

District Councillor 

Ward Planning Member for Hook and Rotherwick.

OLDEST AND YOUNGEST HOOK CONSERVATIVE

It was a real pleasure to meet again yesterday Mrs Helen Rouche who is a sprightly 99 years young and Hooks oldest Conservative member. We both discussed how the Party had changed over the years and she reflected on how Margret Thatcher had impressed her with her leadership. Helen's sense of humour is infectious and the hour I spent with her was so rewarding.

   Mike Morris visiting Mrs Helen Rouche at her home in Geffery's House

Our youngest Hook Conservative member is Livvy Gibson who is 18 and lives with her parents in Hook. Livvy is an enthusiastic individual and as soon as she has completed her studies I'm sure she will take an active part in Hooks Conservative Branch committee.

    

    Livvy Gibson 

Mike Morris

District Councillor

DEVELOPMENT POSTER DISPLAYED IN WHITE HART HOTEL , HOOK

Development in and around Hook

I'm constantly being asked details about the many planning applications which are proposed for Hook and so I have compiled a poster which is hung in the White a Hart Hotel giving details of such applications. This will be updated as and when I'm aware of fresh information but should anyone wish to contact me regarding any issues please do not hesitate.

Photo below showing poster.

Regards

Mike Morris

mike.morris@hart.gov.uk

Hook Christmas Cracker 7th December 2013 Conservative stand....Raffle Prize Winners

The Hook Conservative Ward team Hugh Spencely, Lindsay Mcdougall and David Burke really enjoyed engaging with hundreds of people who attended what was a brilliant Hook Christmas Cracker this year. Thank you all for your support and friendly chat. 

Below are 2 of the raffle prize winners:-

Mr Rider a Hook resident accepts first prize a 1 ltr bottle of Famous Grouse Whiskey From Cllr Mike Morris 

Mr Eaves another Hook resident accepting his bottle of 'perfume' from Mike. Mr Eaves displaying a generous smile at the thought of his prize !!