In reply from “Cynical of Bishopstoke”: name & address details supplied to the Editor. 

Yes, there was a fantastic turnout to lobby against the above two developments, thanks to the concerns of local residents and the work of the Residents Association, in making residents of Bishopstoke aware of

the local Councils predetermined planning aims and objectives regarding both developments.

“The biggest concern raised was the lack of infrastructure for the houses we've got already.”

So, local councilors, and our local M.P.  acknowledge the lack of infrastructure: clogged roads, roads being constantly used as ‘Rat Runs’, the lack of school places, grid lock on the Fair Oak, Eastleigh main road, the ‘rat run’ single track to Brambridge, ‘all day parking’ in lower Bishopstoke, overloaded, inaccessible doctors surgeries: and their response!

Your local Lib Dem councillors are determined that all development proposed for the Bishopstoke and Fair Oak area must result in enough contributions to sort out the current lack of capacity in local schools and roads as well to cover the need from new development.

And how on earth do they propose to satisfy their publically announced intentions?
 

Summer 2013
 

Can Bishopstoke residents really believe everything they read?

 Front page from the latest Bishopstoke (Liberal democrat) Focus.


Simply: ………………………………they cannot!

According to the Councils own Highways experts:-

If the entire monies contributed to the Council of £1.3 million  from the developers of the Mount retirement Village, were to be spent upon highway improvements, to improve traffic conditions in and around Bishopstoke: “the resulting highway improvements would be minimalistic when compared to the additional 1069 extra vehicle movements that they estimate will be generated from The Mount, the Cemex, and the Stoke Park Farm developments every day!!!!

Comments made in the Summer edition of  Focus appear to be simply platitudes!

One local resident wrote to Mike Thornton, our local M.P regarding concerns for both developments: this was his reply:- 

 “I understand that that one bit of the proposed development (the field at Stoke Park Farm)  is in the draft local plan – I support this development as it would help provide much needed cemetery space and allotments, which are needed in our local area”!!

  So here we have our local M.P. totally ignoring the wishes of the majority of local residents, attempting to minimize the size of the likely development ( 60 new builds covering about 3 -4 acres) telling his constituents, a developer and land owner, that their awaited application for development meets with local political approval, even before the developer has  submitted an outline planning application!!!!!

If we really are in need of more allotments, and I acknowledge there really is a need to increase the cemetery size: simply use £20,000 of the contributions from the Mount developers to purchase two acres of farmland at today’s agricultural prices: double the size of the cemetery, provide ample plots for allotments in Bishopstoke: no need for more building development, and no resulting extra 6 – 700 hundred extra vehicle movements per day, which the village roads are already incapable of handling!!!!!

The Cemex Development.

This comes before the Fair Oak & Bishopstoke Area Planning Committee for decision: 27th November 2013. According to the above Liberal Democrate Focus article: a decision on this application will be decided at that Meeting. Why then are Gas Board contractors currently installing a larger gas main supply facility up through Church Road, past the Mount site and right up to the gates of the proposed Cemex quarry site: ( My discussions with the contractors have assured me that the improved supply is to cover anticipated extra demand to both the Mount & to the Cemex site!!!!!!)

Let me tell you why: because the Cemex development is a done deal, despite the latest undertakings and procrastinations contained within the latest Liberal Democrat Focus, and I can assure Bishopstoke residents that at the Fair Oak & Bishopstoke Local Planning meeting which will be held 27th November, that the majority Lib/Dems. sitting on that Committee: Councilors Smith,, Mignot, Winstanley, Thornton, Roling, Scott, Cossey, will, despite vociferous local objections, and objection from the Bishopstoke Parish Council, vote the Cemex application through: fait acompli;  as I said previously it is already a done deal……..  so much for the democratic process, and the wishes of Bishopstoke residents!!

The Stoke Park Farm Development

Where lies the truth regarding this application? Local councilors say that they are awaiting an Outline Planning application from the Land owners agents, having already heard detailed draft proposals to build 60 units on land east of the Bishopstoke cemetery, in exchange for a donation of land to extend the cemetery and allocate more allotments, together with an area of Public Usage land. The simple solution to this conundrum I have detailed previously, and it entails nil building and no extra traffic movements?

 In addition, in recent discussions with the Landowner, he has confirmed that it is Eastleigh Council that are attempting to persuade him to make the land available, and that for his part he would be happy to maintain the status quo, by keeping the majority of the land as pasture for dairy farming, as Stoke Park Farm currently has a shortage of grazing land!! I have had recent discussions with Eastleigh Borough Planners regarding this particular pending development application, and again I was told: “this application, when submitted, is already a ‘Done Deal’: it will only be the final number  and position of the new dwellings to be decided, together with associated services!!”

So, once again the so-called Lib/Dem. democratic process is moving into gear! What is the point of belatedly asking for the views of Bishopstoke residents in the Summer edition of The Focus, when the majority Planning decisions appear to have been made outside, and before, the accepted democratic process?

In conclusion: much remains to be proved and witnessed, but by the time both of these development applications have been fully processed, I believe that I will justifiably still be called:- 

“Cynical of Bishopstoke”
 (30/08/2013)