Ashford Hill villagers urged to protest over housing development application

Lack of time to prepare case

AN ASHFORD Hill group opposing a large housing development opposite the village primary school has urged residents to shout long and loud over the lack of time to prepare their case to present to borough councillors.

This was in view of a looming date on Wednesday, January 13, for a decision by Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council on the application, which is tagged with a recommendation for approval.

The proposed development, of 35 houses on a plot at the junction of the B3051 and Ashford Hill Road, is to go before the borough council’s development control (planning) committee for a decision.

The planning application was submitted by joint developers of the site, Vortal Properties Ltd and Charles Church,

The chairman of the Ashford Hill Community Action Group, David Henning, said he received a letter before Christmas from the borough council, confirming the committee meeting on January 13 in Basingstoke.

Mr Henning pointed out that the period between his having received the letter and the meeting – including the Christmas and New Year holidays – precluded any “sensible public meeting and follow-up action”.

Receipt of the letter prompted Mr Henning to circulate a missive to parishioners, highlighting the lack of time for objectors to compile a case to present at the meeting.

Pre-meeting papers detailing extensive findings of the application and the outcomes of various consultations were also unavailable.

He said: “On this timetable we shall only have three working days to consult our advisers and consider our response to the report and recommendation.

“We have not had time to fully consider a recent ruling where the planning officer in Bristol upheld a district council which dismissed an application in similar circumstances to ours.

“Please ask for a delay to the date for consideration to allow us those fairly basic rights.

“Please help to save our rural village.”

Mr Henning added that the fact that 90 per cent of the village had objected, and the fundamental issues of hazard, environmental, traffic, settlement policy boundary, flooding and sewage, had not been enough to dissuade planners from recommending approval.

He said: “One wonders in the circumstances what would be enough to constitute grounds for planning rejection.

“Fight hard and make a noise about it.”