List of Important Council documents move to the Reading List page
Link to an article in The Daily Echo
"Other funding for the project comes from the developers of Welborne Buckland Development, the Solent Local Enterprise Partnership and the Department for Transport."
... Councillor Rob Humby, Hampshire County Council’s executive member for environment and transport, said: “These improvements will play a key factor in enabling the network to cope with the increase in vehicle movements accessing Welborne garden village, along with encouraging economic development in the area.”
Does he really mean that these improvements will play a key factor in enabling another few thousand cars to join the rat race that is the M27?
According to an e-mail sent by National Rail to FBC they are:
"... aware of the aspiration for a new station at Welborne, and will continue to work with the council to consider the feasibility of this in terms of its potential impact on our current operations, identifying necessary enabling infrastructure, impact on timetabling and the necessary property rights that may be required."
And then go on with another 5½ pages on how difficult it is going to be to even get the busses to stop at Fareham Station. Will it happen when they have refuses to allow one in Eastleigh for their 5,000 houses? Somehow I doubt it.
Link to an article in The Daily Echo
The Government recognised the potential at Welborne to design and develop a new community with much needed new homes and awarded the site Garden Village status in January 2017. A true Garden Village, diverse, innovative and characterful with a large central park at its heart, Welborne will provide around 6,000 new homes, 5,735 new jobs and 108 hectares of natural green space, play areas, allotments and sports facilities for residents to explore and enjoy.
The Council has ambitions to help more people realise their dream of owning their own home through a variety of new homes and associated initiatives. Welborne will deliver a wide range and mix of much needed private and affordable housing to meet the existing and future needs of the Borough.
In early 2017, Homes England (then the Homes and Communities Agency) allocated £228,000 of its Capacity Funding (round one) to assist the Council in accelerating the site forward for development.
In August 2017, the Council applied to Homes England for additional round two Capacity Funding and on 5 December 2017, received notification that Welborne Garden Village secured £275,000 of funding for 2017/18.
These external funds will be used to commission two strategies and seven studies that will help accelerate the delivery of Welborne and fund additional project management capacity in the Welborne team.
Community Consultation Event
Knowle Water Meadows
Exhibition: Friday 2nd February from 3pm - 7:30pm at Knowle Village Hall
Site Tours: Friday 2nd & Saturday 3rd February from 10am - 1pm
Homes England (formerly Homes and Communities Agency), in conjunction with Wickham Parish Council, Winchester City Council and Wickham Community Land Trust invite you to come and have YOUR SAY on the proposals for the development of about 200 new homes, the creation of 58.7ha of open space and a safeguarding of Knowle Triangle to act as a buffer between Knowle and the strategic allocation of Welborne. The open space can be seen on the masterplan below in green; this extensive area covers the water meadows, Knowle Triangle and proposes a new connection into the Meon Valley Trail. The land adjoins the eastern and northern boundaries of Knowle village. The total area of land which is the subject of consideration extends to 65.9 hectares in size.
The proposals have been the subject of two earlier consultation events, which demonstrated support for the proposals at the time. We are now looking to engage with the local community to explore the proposals in more detail than before.
Since the earlier consultation events, the site was sold to the Homes and Communities Agency (now Homes England), who are now looking to secure outline planning permission on the site.
Public Consultation Event
Homes England are a public body set up to bring together land, money, expertise, with a clear remit to facilitate delivery of sufficient new homes, where they are most needed, to deliver a sustained improvement in affordability.
Tours of the site will leave Knowle Village Hall on the hour between 10am and 1pm on both Friday 2nd and Saturday 3rd February. If you would like to join a tour, please either turn up 5 minutes before the hour or email firstname.lastname@example.org with your name and preferred time to reserve a space.
More details about the exhibition, including the exhibition boards (from Friday 2nd February), can be found on the Wickham Parish Council website:www.wickhamparishcouncil.org
According to this article in The News Buckland want to become a good neighbour. I believe them BUT they still have their priorities wrong:
Mark [Thistlethwaite] said: "We do understand the politicians need certainty that we will put in infrastructure and we are quite happy to give those commitments as they are absolutely part of our model.""
Let's be honest our politicians couldn't care less about infrastructure - just look at the rest of Fareham. It's the CURRENT RESIDENTS that need certainty. So far EVERY major development in this area, Whiteley, Cherque Farm, et. al. have completely failed to supply the promised infrastructure in the timescale that was promised - in fact it still isn't there after 10+ years. Mark may be able to create a Shangrila in Welborne, but you will still need to enter the Hades of the future Fareham infrastructure when you leave it.
It isn't JUST the new developments that need the infrastructure but who is going to pay to upgrade the existing roads, etc. to cope with the run off from the new builds? In fact, HOW are they going to upgrade the existing infrastructure, not just the M27 but the A32, North Hill, Kiln Road, Highlands Road, Park Lane and the A27 as well.
Just to remind ourselves about what Buckland has intended for Welborne:
In summary, the application is for:
We have been focusing our attention on the Draft Plan which addresses development outside of Welborne and the strategy FBC has adopted in meeting the housing allocations which need to come forward if FBC is to meet its responsibilities on the thorny issue of the 5-year land supply that Fareham needs to demonstrate.
However, Welborne is still there and forms part of the Draft Local Plan. This huge development is quietly coming together. Buckland as we understand it, now controls all of the land necessary to bring the proposed J10 rejig/redesign forward and the funding for this important piece of infrastructure is mostly in place or has been identified and awaiting a final decisions.
The developers are working with all the Statutory Agencies to overcome and bring forward solutions to the many hiccups which have delayed Welborne coming forward. There is still much to do which demonstrates how complex the Welborne development is and will continue to be so.
The plan is to have the Buckland outline planning application presented to the Planning Committee in the Spring with the first housing coming on stream probably in late 2019 / early 2020.
Welborne is alive, it’s heart beats just a matter of watch this space....
Two interesting documents:
Welborne Garden Village
A Delivery Trajectory for Welborne
Interim Evidence for the Draft Fareham Borough Local Plan 2036
Fareham Borough Council - October 2017
UPDATING THE WELBORNE PLAN
A slightly different reading of this comment really needs to be made abundantly clear. Her Majesty's Government in it's great munificance has in fact granted Fareham funding of just £275,000, this is almost certainly the same cash that was granted back in March of this year. The £25M is to be split between ALL of the Garden Villages and Towns.
And we get accused of spreading misinformation. The words kettle and pot spring to mind.
Considering that the costs for Junction 10 are now around the £60M pound mark and presumably still rising so £275,000 isn't going to go very far, in fact it won't even cover the cost for one three bed semi on Welborne so how much of a difference is it going to make. It has always been stated that Junction 10 MUST be resolved BEFORE any work can be started on the 'Garden Village' itself. What's the betting that the first brick gets laid long before Junction 10 has been resolved?
Link to The News article
"Concerns have been raised after it was revealed Fareham council has spent nearly £1.9 million on delivering homes at the Welborne new town before a single brick has been laid."
And another quotable quote from our EL
"I would hope most right minded people would support the dream of home ownership in Fareham of Fareham people. We are trying to deliver for that. 1,000 familes on our housing waiting list today with more joining all the time. Please spare a thought for them."
I would have thought that the 1,000 families that mentioned in the comments section of the article will NEVER be able to afford to own a home of their own, a long term roof over their heads at a price that they could comfortably afford would probably be of far more benefit. The current Welborne plan isn't going to help those that are on the Council's waiting list. Even 'affordable' will still be beyond the reach of so many local residents.
Link to The News article
It looks as if it might be time to start thinking about just how WE want the Garden Village to proceed.
"The 6,000 home Welborne garden village near Fareham will go before the borough council planning committee in early 2018.
As well as delivering 6,000 homes, the new garden village will create 5,700 jobs and will feature a new secondary school, three primary schools, recreational and community space and health facilities for more than 20,000 people."
Although there will be no REAL health provision. It's funny really how the CCG seems to think that this can be provided for 20,000 people at Welborne, but just down the road at the Newlands site they said
"Thank you bringing the application for development for the site at Longield Avenue to our attention. We are writing to formally raise an objection to the proposed housing development on this site, for the construction of up to 1,100 new dwellings. The current position of Primary Care medical provision for this area is under signiﬁcant pressure and any additional population growth will destabilise the existing services.
Capacity in primary care provision in the Stubbington and Lee on the Solent areas is already much stretched. The wider area has high numbers of GP vacancies, and the availability of GPs coming into general practice to fill these vacancies is low. The existing surgery at Stubbington already has a high ratio of GPs (per whole time equivalent) to patients, with the practice averaging more than 400 patients per GP over the average. In addition to the high numbers of patients per GP the local practices have high consultation rates per patient, which further impacts on GP time and overall practice capacity. Further signiﬁcant housing development in the area at this time would exacerbate this already signiﬁcant pressure. The inclusion of an 80 bedded care home in this application would require additional healthcare support for this community and subsequently create greater pressures on the local practice who would be required to provide home visits to this facility.
The provision of a new health centre in this location would not address the issues of healthcare provision, within this area. I hope that we have been able to articulate sufﬁciently why we would be unable to support an application of this size at present. If you have any questions I would be grateful if you would direct them to …
It seems funny that such different conditions can apply to two areas so close together and both under the control of the same organisation, Fareham and Gosport Clinical Commissoning Group.
Planning Application Reference: P/15/1279/OA
Link to The News article
And now our latest quotable quote:
‘I am delighted that our strategy has proved successful and we can now move on.'
What a shame that such a successful strategy was almost certainly very expensive (will we ever find out just how expensive?) and also just a few years too late. In fact just late enough to force ANOTHER 3,300 dwellings onto the poor old Fareham and South Hamsphire infrastructure.
How many times, starting back in 2011, was Cllr. Woodward told that the Welborne plan was deeply flawed, did he listen? It was pretty obvious to most of us that with the land ownership of the site split the way that it was, Buckland was going to succeed eventually. If FBC had helped them instead of getting all beligerent it might have saved us from the unnecessary cost and the latest Local Plan.
As everybody has said, the original costings were so ambitious that this had to happen. As inflation has been around the 2% mark for the last 10 years an increase to about £48M might be understandable but to £60M? I wonder if government schemes have their own inflation calculations or could it just be that the original idea was wrong?
Link to The News article
Joint Press Statement
04 September 2017
NHS Fareham and Gosport - Clinical Commissioning Group
Residents of the new Welborne Garden Village will have a health and wellbeing hub on their doorstep within Welborne – that's the message from Fareham Borough Council and lead NHS commissioner for Welborne, Fareham and Gosport Clinical Commissioning Group, after a recent productive meeting to agree how the authorities would work together.
Hampshire CCG Partnership Chief Executive Maggie MacIsaac and Chairman Dr David Chilvers met with Fareham Borough Council Executive Leader Cllr Seán Woodward and Chief Executive Officer Peter Grimwood to begin planning health and wellbeing services for the proposed new community of Welborne.
On the agenda for both sides was the growing demand for health services, the difficulty of recruiting new GPs and the innovative ways that technology could be used to help people better manage their own health and communicate with health professionals. Fareham is already one of the areas pioneering web consultations for GPs and a new 'Same Day' GP service will be available to 40,000 local people in the autumn to help manage the demands on local GP practices and cut waiting times for patients.
Dr David Chilvers, Chairman of the governing board for Fareham and Gosport CCG, said: "The CCG is committed to ensuring local people have a range of high quality, local health services to meet their needs. New technology, an ageing population and a shortage of GPs means that we have to change the way that care is provided in the future to ensure that we can deliver that commitment.
"We know that the way healthcare is delivered is changing so this is a fantastic opportunity to work with Fareham Borough Council and other partners to plan a hub which gives the future Welborne residents the best possible health and wellbeing support."
Cllr Seán Woodward said "I am delighted that we have agreed a way forward with the CCG that will bring a health and wellbeing hub to Welborne. There are some exciting opportunities to develop innovative, hi-tech solutions in Welborne which we hope will be attractive to new residents.
"We now expect to forge a strong partnership so that we can work together over the life of the development to get the right health services as the population grows. We want to achieve this in partnership and consultation with local people and will be holding special Community Action Team meetings with our CCG colleagues to gain people's views on what I know will be an exciting, healthy future for Fareham."
The press statement doesn't describe quite what a health and wellbeing hub is. Hopefully it will be something a little better than a receptionist and a PC connected to Skype. We will just have to wait and find out what it will consist of, will there even be a GP there occasionally or will the local surgery be at Fareham Community Hospital? Who knows, this certainly doesn't tell us anything.
Sources close to Buckland Developments are saying that the developer is continuing to work on their outline planning application, and are addressing a number of key issues flagged up by various agencies during the public consultation period.
As to when Buckland's outline planning proposals are going to be determined by Fareham Borough Council one needs a crystal ball. Sources which have lines of communication to Buckland are of the opinion that we are almost certainly talking early 2018 at the very soonest.
Anyone submitting an outline planning application for such an elaborate and complex planning scheme like Welborne will know, or should I say, will be mindful, that such schemes are tortuously difficult to deliver and one needs patience and some composure while those who have the unenviable task of sorting through the many problematic issues get on with the job of trying to bring solutions forward. Buckland is doing just that, and the community of Fareham look forward to examining those solutions currently being worked up
In November 2014 when the community of Fareham communicated that the Welborne Plan was immature, others laughed. Well, we are now nearing November 2017, perhaps those who had a good chuckle back in 2014 would like to apologise. Of course, they never will, that word sorry is very short but very difficult to articulate.
The Community of Fareham has been proved absolutely right in their assessment that Welborne would never be delivered in the time frame set out at the Welborne public hearings. In saying that, we need Welborne to come forward to help mitigate this full frontal attack by developers on our greenfields south of the M27. This Friday the Council receives legal opinion which will hopefully address the issue as to whether FBC has a case to challenge the Cranleigh Road Inspector's decision to grant planning approval on the local fields and the issue of costs.
The next important date, 9th October, is the publication of the review of our Local Plan and the associated plan to try and defend other greenfield sites which are not allocated for housing.
Inform Fareham will endeavour to keep residents up to speed. Please visit our Facebook page
Inform Fareham would like to thank all residents who support our work which is informing you, the residents, about what is going on here in Fareham. We are 3 years old now, and have come along way in such a short period of time.
This has been achieved through a lot of effort and personal time given over to the cause. While others have a huge PR machine to call on, Inform Fareham relies on personal sacrifices.
Thank you Shaun, Mike and David
Well Jeremy Hunt has got one of his minions to reply to my e-mail - So this is what he meant by 'Getting to the bottom of it'.
Absolutley typical politician's speak and so much for supporting our Suella. I guess it means that there will be no Government intervention.
"Thank you for your recent correspondence about local health facilities. I have been asked to reply.
I note your concerns about the provision of local healthcare services.
It is the responsibility of the local NHS to plan, develop and improve health services according to the healthcare needs of the local population. However, in light of your concerns, Departmental officials have made enquiries with Fareham and Gosport Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG).
The Department is advised that the CCG has been providing input to the Welborne planning process since December 2014. Throughout its involvement, the position over the implications of providing health care for the additional 6,000 new homes proposed for the Welborne development over the next 20 to 25 years has remained unchanged.
Fareham and Gosport CCG and West Hampshire CCG wrote to Fareham Borough Council in October 2016, stating that the CCGs did not support a new eight-GP surgery serving the Welborne population because it was not a sustainable future model, given GP recruitment and changes to the way primary and community care services will be delivered. It is the view of the CCGs that there is a significant risk a new surgery would destabilise the primary care services that already exist in the area.
The CCGs have held discussions with GP practices that are closest geographically to the Welborne development. It is anticipated that existing practices would be able to provide services for the first third of new homes, to be provided over the next ten years approximately, with other practices absorbing additional patients from the future development
The CCGs advise that they remain fully committed to working with Fareham Borough Council and local GP practices to ensure that the highest-quality primary care services are available to residents as they move into the new Welborne development. This is an ongoing process.
I hope this reply is helpful."
The Welborne Standing Conference (WSC) was dissolved in July 2016. The decision was made by Fareham Borough Council against some members wishes, in fact, members of the WSC were not even asked for their opinion, merely informed they were part of history and they were to become part of the historical archives that one day some kind soul will use to write a book on the birth of Welborne.
In winding up the Welborne Standing Conference Fareham Borough Council closed down the only forum which allowed the community groups to connect with those who had the onerous task of bringing Welborne forward, but more importantly Fareham Borough Council denied the community their last voice to shape an agenda which allowed discussions on the many issues surrounding Welborne, issues that generated profound concerns within our community. Some of us took the view that although the Welborne Standing Conference had issues it was important for 2 very good reasons.
Buckland Developments wanted a much more robust public engagement on their plans for Welborne but were stopped from doing so. They have a real passion and belief that they can deliver a development which we can all be proud off, a development which will not follow the normal convention that many modern housing developments architecturally follow with promises usually buried in the first assignment of bricks.
To hear Buckland are engaging with our community groups is good news. While others left the scene because they had got what they wanted, Buckland is at least demonstrating to us that the community is important to them and that must be welcomed, although many in our community will still have a high degree of pessimism on what will be delivered and when.
Welborne is part of the landscape now and has been since June 2015. For those who have forced Welborne upon us it is time for them to start delivering the promises they made. The community can still try and shape Welborne and we must take every opportunity to do so.
There is still time to submit your comments on the Buckland’s outline planning application. Please do so before the 11th August 2017. Time is short I know.
Link to the Planning application
If you would prefer to e-mail your comments the address is email@example.com
The Local Community Groups (Wallington, Funtley, Knowle, Wickham, Fareham Society, CPRE (Hants) etc have consistently opposed the concept of Welborne from the outset.
Fareham Borough Council chose to largely ignore/pay little regard to that - which is perhaps why (when FBC decided to abolish their only means of communication aka: "The Welborne Standing Conference") they ceased to have any further "Community Engagement".
The upshot of which, is that "The Local Community Groups" decided and agreed some 9 months ago, that our only pragmatic course of action was to liaise directly with Buckland re: Welborne.
Welborne Garden Village – Dean Estate
The Executive Leader announced that Buckland Development Limited’s persistence has led to its purchase of Dean Farm. He stated that land assembly has always been a key consideration for the Council in devising plans for the new community and this is a major step forward for Welborne and he was delighted with today’s announcement. The Council’s planning team has been working with BDL over a number of years and will continue to do so.
The Executive Leader stated that the Council’s aim is, and always has been, to secure a comprehensive delivery of the new Welborne Garden Village. It will provide a very significant amount of the new homes required for Fareham over many years to come, including thousands of affordable homes and importantly all of the required infrastructure will be identified and funded including a new motorway junction, schools, open spaces, community centres and healthcare facilities.
Welborne Garden Village will play an important role in delivering housing for Fareham. It is now time for every organisation, local and national, with an interest in Welborne Garden Village to work together so that it can achieve its full potential
Welborne Garden Village – Healthcare
The Executive Leader provided clarification statements regarding recent media attention and indeed misinformation being spread by other parties following the Council’s engagement with the various Health Authorities throughout the Welborne Plan process over a number of years.
The Executive Leader stated that this was a statutory plan-making process, one of the principal objectives of which is to provide certainty to developers, infrastructure providers and the local community as to the social infrastructure to accompany new residential development. The provisions of the Welborne Plan relating to on-site primary healthcare provision are entirely consistent with the Council’s discussions with the previous Fareham & Gosport Primary Care Trust in 2011 during the early stages of Plan preparation. Additionally, the Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust (responsible for Queen Alexandra Hospital) also confirmed their support for the Welborne Plan and highlighted the need to secure the provision of Primary Care facilities as part of the development.
The Executive Leader stated that, despite numerous fully documented efforts to subsequently engage with and seek the views of the new Fareham & Gosport Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) during 2013 and 2014 as part of the formal statutory stages of Plan preparation, no responses were received. Indeed, the lack of engagement from the CCG received significant adverse comment from participants at the Welborne Examination-in-Public in October 2014.
Significantly in September 2011 the Fareham and Gosport Primary Care Trust (the predecessor of the Clinical Commissioning Group) indicated the need for a surgery providing one GP per 1,800 population equating approximately to a 9-GP practice.
The Executive Leader stated that in both 2013 and 2014 the Fareham and Gosport CCG was consulted but did not submit a response on either occasion.
This means that the Fareham and Gosport CCG, the body responsibility for the entirety of Welborne's primary healthcare, did not participate in the Welborne Plan's development or examination in public.
The Executive Leader further stated that at the end of 2014, the CCG did give a helpful presentation to the Welborne Standing Conference but no indication was given that the CCG were not supportive of the requirement for the development to include primary healthcare accommodation, as clearly set out within the Welborne Plan.
It was in late 2016 the CCG wrote to this Council, following pre-application discussions by Buckland Development, bizarrely objecting to primary care being delivered in Welborne and asking for its removal. This position was reiterated in a further letter last month which only had one helpful point which was confirmation that Welborne sits within the boundary of the Fareham and Gosport CCG which we already knew.
The Executive Leader announced that he has invited the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the CCG to meet him next month where he will be firmly explaining to them that the Welborne Plan cannot be changed and healthcare facilities will be provided within the new community.
With Dean Farm now sold to Buckland Developments, where are we now? I hope this post does not generate a 4-page rebuttal from Sean Woodward, it is unfair on Council Officers who are extremely busy people trying to keep up with all the new housing he has personally sign up to. There's an awful lot of work which goes into bringing Welborne forward and of course, all the other sites which must be advanced to give the additional 2000 new homes on top of Welborne 6000, well a home.
We are still waiting for a copy of Cllr. Woodward's announcement at Council on Thursday with regard to the battle over Healthcare provision at Welborne. It would be better if members had a copy of lengthy announcements. By the time that he had finished, all of the detail was a distant memory. Once a copy is available we will post it.
What I think the message was, was that he was angry that misinformation was being circulated by Inform Fareham, in that there was not full consultation between the Council and the local Community Commissioning Group on Healthcare provision for Welborne.
Sorry, Cllr. Woodward can huff and puff all he likes, the truth is, the only document presented as evidence to the Welborne public inquiry in support of healthcare provision at Welborne was that single famous E-mail from Portsmouth NHS Trust. In fact, community groups and residents who took part in the round table discussion on the matter at the Welborne Inquiry categorically asked the question, "is that it?" Everyone was surprised that such an important issue could be dealt with in such a lazy way.
If there was evidence available and not effectively presented to the Welborne Inquiry when it should have been, that's his problem and not one of Inform Fareham's.
Whether we have doctors and nurses is of course down to the Fareham and Gosport Community Commission Group, who are saying very clearly, NO. Cllr. Woodward also read out a 4, maybe 5, page defence of Fareham Borough Council's consultation exercise with the local CCG. The issue that he did not address was - why wasn't all that information made available to the Welborne public inquiry? The only correspondence made available to the inquiry is the famous single E-mail From Portsmouth NHS Trust.
Inform Fareham will of course post a copy of Mr Woodward's announcement when one comes available, like all good Keyboard Warriors do.
The land assembly seems to be coming together, whether all the landowners, because there are a few smaller ones, are now signed up and singing from the same hymn sheet is not clear.
The Pendulum had now shifted in favour of Buckland, they haven't spent approximately £32 million to play second fiddle to FBC. Buckland now holds the keys to Welborne.
I am sure in the coming weeks more detail will emerge on the road ahead, however, what is clear, there are still major issues to overcome with the Buckland outline planning application, which Buckland are actively addressing.
Everyone must now accept Welborne is part of our landscape and has been since the government inspector declared Welborne sound in June 2015. Welborne was forced on us by a few, who in my opinion had little regard to the public sentiment. The resentment which surrounds Welborne will never fade and those who have pushed Welborne through have a heavy weight of responsibility on their shoulders and their promises must not be allowed to be fudged or rewritten.
I know Buckland are passionate believers that they can deliver a Welborne we can be proud of, I also know Buckland wanted a more inclusive public consultation on their plans but were stopped in doing so.
History will be the judge of Welborne and of those who have taken 1000 acres of our countryside.
(On behalf of the Keyboard Warriors, better known as Inform Fareham)
Fareham Borough Council have announced that their aim of placing all of the Welborne site under one owner has now been achieved.
Fareham Borough Council has today been advised that Buckland Development Ltd (BDL) has exchanged contracts on the acquisition of Dean Farm. This means that BDL is now the major landowner for the site proposed for Welborne Garden Village.
27 July 2017
Welborne takes major step forward
Leader of Fareham Borough Council, Cllr Seán Woodward said: "I am delighted that BDL's persistence has led to its purchase of Dean Farm. Land assembly has always been a key consideration for the Council in devising plans for the new community.
"This is a major step forward for Welborne and I'm delighted with today's announcement. The Council's planning team has been working with BDL over a number of years and will continue to do so. Our aim is and always has been to secure a comprehensive delivery of the new Welborne Garden Village. It will provide a very significant amount of the new homes required for Fareham over many years to come, including thousands of affordable homes and importantly all of the required infrastructure will be identified and funded including a new motorway junction, schools, open spaces, community centres and healthcare facilities."
Further information about Welborne can be viewed at: www.welbornegardenvillage.co.uk.
Link to an article in The News
Link to Buckland Development website
Fareham Borough Council has today been advised that Buckland Development Ltd (BDL) has exchanged contracts on the acquisition of Dean Farm. This means that BDL is now the major landowner for the site proposed for Welborne Garden Village.
This just confirms that there is absolutely NO intention of either of the CCGs supplying health services to the'self-contained garden village'.
Communication from F&G CCG
A question has been asked of Jeremy Hunt today with the following text:
On the 16th June this year an article appeared in the Southern Daily Echo from which I have taken the following quotation:
“A GOVERNMENT minister has stepped into a growing row over a garden village’s health facilities, vowing to “get to the bottom of it”.
Health secretary Jeremy Hunt has told Fareham MP Suella Fernandes that he will look into the situation after plans for healthcare provision at the new 6,000-home Welborne development were thrown into doubt. “
Our MP, Suella Fernandes made a great play of this during her parliamentary campaign as the health provision the Fareham and Gosport area. According to the Royal College of GPs along with Swindon, this area is now recognised as being probably the worst in the country (See an article in the BBC South Today programme 23-07-2017, A copy of the audio is available should you wish to hear it). With the addition of another 12,000 houses in the area over the foreseeable future and with this one conurbation of 6,000 being on a greenfield site and with inadequate GP provision already in the Fareham and Gosport CCG area, I would be extremely interested, as I am sure would most of Ms. Fernandes’s constituents, whether you have ‘got to the bottom of it’ or indeed whether you have made any attempt to do so to date. If you have concluded your enquiries into the matter, what your findings were.
A reply at your convenience would be greatly appreciated.
A reply is awaited
"Fareham Borough Council will embark on the next phase of its delivery strategy to bring forward the new Garden Village at Welborne.
Four highly experienced organisations were recently selected as potential delivery partners following a detailed technical evaluation exercise. These will now be invited to introductory meetings with the Council to begin the process of developing innovative and creative solutions for Welborne.
Welborne provides an outstanding opportunity for the Council to work with a delivery partner experienced in creating large residential projects that are great places to live and work.
Leader of Fareham Borough Council, Cllr Seán Woodward, said: “Following a significant level of interest from the development market, I am delighted that we can now begin detailed conversations with each of the four selected bidders. We will assess their visions and aspirations and consider how they propose to successfully work with us to deliver a new Garden Village.”
The aim is to appoint a delivery partner in early 2018"
Thoughts of Cllr. Cunningham
The local community did say at the public inquiry with regard to Welborne, that the timetable set out for delivering Welborne was ambitious. Local residents have been proved right and should take a bow.
It is in everyone's interest that Welborne is now delivered in as orderly way as possible. The battle to shape Welborne is not lost for local residents however, through the outline planning process, which is an important next stage, we need a credible outline planning application. We don't currently have one. The present Buckland outline planning application is not convincing because Buckland does not own or have control of all the land in their submitted outline planning application.
We are still waiting to hear news on who has purchased Dean Farm, the key to any solution to this sad saga of land assembly. I believe some are over egging the interest in Welborne. There may have been 50 or so interests in tendering to become Farehams Borough Council's delivery partner however only a fraction of those who demonstrated an interested actually returned the tendering documents.
I still believe this whole process has the potential to get very messy. Compulsory Purchase of the land by FBC is one of last resort and God forbid if we ever reached that point. Buckland developments have spent approximately £10 million of their own capital on Welborne, one can't expect them to ride off into the sunset and allow others to take the lead.
For those who were hell bent on bringing Welborne forward, regardless of what others said, they carry a heavy responsibility to deliver a Welborne residents can generally be proud of. History will be their judge.
I sent the following e-mail to the West Hampshire CCG back in May of this year:
Having attended two of the Fareham Council CAT meetings on the subject of the proposed Welborne development there seems to be a level of confusion over who’s auspices the development will fall, Fareham and Gosport’s or West Hampshire’s. As neither of you seem to have commented on the proposal could you please elucidate and tell me categorically who will be responsible for providing health services to the new ‘garden village’?
If you have the responsibility can you say whether or not you will make comment to the council in a way that we can all see or are you quite sanguine about the situation. If you do have any fears or concerns about this development, surely we are entitled to know and given the chance to raise these concerns with our Council.
A swift response to this e-mail would be greatly appreciated as there is still one CAT meeting to go this evening. I apologise that I have not raised this before but was hoping that the question may have been resolved before now.
I received this as a reply on the 10th of May:
I am currently liaising with my colleagues within West Hampshire Clinical Commissioning Group regarding the Garden Village housing development and hope to have a response with you shortly.
In the meantime, should you have any further concerns please feel free to contact me using the contact details below.
Finally an actual reply on 10th this month:
Further to our communication below, I am very sorry for the delay in getting back to you. Please see the following response received from our Senior Commissioning Manager for Primary Care:
Both West Hampshire CCG and Fareham & Gosport CCG have commented on the Welborne development and continue to have meetings with Fareham Borough Council regarding the development. The Welborne development area is within the Fareham & Gosport CCG boundary and so they will lead for health with support from West Hampshire CCG. We are aware that the population of this development will also be able to register with the Wickham practice which is situated in the West Hampshire CCG area and we are working closely with the practice to ensure that the first phasing of the development has access to high quality medical services.
Both West Hampshire CCG and Fareham & Gosport CCG will continue to work with the local GP practices and Fareham Borough Council during the planning and phasing of the Welborne development.
I'm not sure if that clarifies anything but it seems certain that Jeremy and our Suella have done nothing so far to 'Get to the bottom of this' even though they were both re-elected. With the way that Welborne is still getting completely bogged down I would suggest that there is no real panic.
Fareham Borough Council released this document on 22nd March this year in their quest to find a (possibly) new development partner - I notice that they seem to have stopped their kite-flying and replaced it with a village green cricket match. I wonder who won, FBC, Buckland, or some other as yet unnamed competitor, one thing is for sure, it wasn't the current residents of Fareham.
Some of the more interesting quotes from the document:
"The Council is determined to place communities at the heart of Welborne and has attentively consulted during the progression of the Welborne Plan to ensure that the real and essential benefits that people expect are hardwired into the project planning from the very start."
"Welborne has secured the backing of the local community and is fully endorsed in planning policy through the adopted Welborne Plan. It has also been strongly supported by landowners and site promoters over many years."
"Welborne is well positioned, not just in terms of ready and easy access to Fareham town centre, but also within the wider Solent and south east region."
Key connections to the strategic road network mean Welborne is well connected to the area’s major road network via the A3(M) to the east and M3 to the west, both of which provide direct links to London." (Do you remember the original quotes that this development was for the benefit of the local populace?).
The key commercial requirements that FBC are looking for are:
Link to the document
Published by Shaun Cunningham on the Inform Fareham - Focus Group Facebook page.
Primary healthcare for Welborne Garden Village
The disagreement over Primary Healthcare for Welborne rumbles on. Everyone involved is merely blaming each other for a degree of shortsightedness which is intolerable.
The rush to bring Welborne on stream inevitably meant a measure of imprudence was always going to be part and parcel of the process to undermine those who were demanding much more robust supporting evidence on a whole range of issues at the Public Inquiry into Welborne, held in November 2014.
The request for this robust evidence was always meet with the same lines,
"the matter will be resolved at the outline planning stage". That line was repeated time and time again. It reminded me of the days when playing music, one would place a vinyl record on the record player only to find the stylus would get stuck, repeatedly playing the same musical tones over and over again. One hoped the stylus would somehow resort to its forward progress without human intervention, it never did. Well, here we are at the outline planning stage and do we have clarity? I think not, merely parties disagreeing with each other, not hopeful, is it?
I remember clearly the issue of Primary Healthcare facilities was explicitly raised at the Welborne public inquiry by community groups and residents. They unequivocally asked about an E-mail which formed the main supporting evidence on the subject of Healthcare provision at Welborne. That E-mail covered the issue of Primary Healthcare at Welborne in no less than 6 lines or so, It was from the Portsmouth Hospital Trust.
The E-mail raised all sorts of questions but the reply was always the same
"the matter will be resolved at the outline planning stage". Was the Portsmouth Hospital Trust the right body to talk to about primary healthcare in Welborne? At that stage, the Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCG) were not involved in any discussions. Some didn't even know they existed. Why not? The CCG's held some very important information like it takes 10 years to train a General Practitioner and worst, out of 44 surgeries in the area 24 have a vacancy for a GP. Worst still many GP's are leaving the profession because of underfunding and stress.
If only others had the strength of purpose to listen, this mess could have been prevented. Instead of blaming others perhaps they should look at themselves.
And now Jeremy Hunt wades into row over 6,000-home development.
Link to article in The Daily Echo
West Hampshire Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) have again urged land provision on the proposed site of Welborne to be removed from the plans for the town.
We always knew that Fareham and Gosport CCG weren't really responsible, why did Cllr. Woodward keep insisting that it was? Let's hope that Jeremy manages to talk to the right people.
Link to article in The News
I received this from an a Fareham based GP the other day - for obvious reasons he wished to remain anonymous but I found what he said extremely worrying.
"Our MP and local politicians have their facts incorrect. Provision of health care for Welborne will fall squarely with West Hants CCG and this will mean either they providing a new surgery and staffing it or Wickham surgery taking on huge amounts of patients."
There was another part to his comment that I would like to add but unfortunately I only asked his permission for this paragraph so cannot in all fairness add another bit, my fault for not being a bit more careful in my original request.
I have updated the pdf file with the latest additions as it seems that the discussion is now at an end.
It was interesting while it lasted, a bit of a shame that Cllr. Woodward seemed to find it hard to accept that, as a simple member of the public with absolutely no background in council business or how planning applications actually work, I managed to confuse him with geographical ideas or that I got confused over who sent what to HCC. That side of it, to me is totally unimportant, it was what was IN the documents that he used to argue his case that is important, not whether the base information was sent from FBC or Bucklands. The fact that HCC didn't have enough information to make a sensible case describes the whole situation. The original plan was not adequate way back in 2014. FBC should or even MUST have known about the problems that the high voltage power line would cause, the limitations that the HSE would impose on development above and around the gas pipeline, the fact that drainage was going to cause a problem and the problems that placing 6000 houses just north of the M27 would cause to the existing residents of North Fareham.
Funnily enough the only objection that I have some sympathy with is the one that is causing so much anxiety, the CCG issue. Funding for the service has been, and is still being cut, so dramatically that I can certainly believe there was the honest intention that a surgery would be built there. It's really a shame that Cllr. Woodward could not have been honest at the CAT meetings and admit that the vast majority of Welborne would fall under the West Hampshire CCG instead of insisting time and again that Fareham and Gosport would be responsible for the whole development.
All of the other problems that are now arising should have been addressed in the very original plan. More care and investigation should have been undertaken by the developers before this OPA was submitted, especially as they were supposed to have been working in very close liaison with FBC and this information was surely known to them.
Updated transcribed file is here
I have just been having quite a long Facebook exchange with Cllr. Woodward about Welborne, 'affordable housing and North Fareham traffic problems. It started with a crack that he posted about the general election, so don't get confused and went on for quite a while. I know that some people don't DO Facebook so I thought that I would transcribe it for all to see. It turned into a 5 page pdf file and I have specifically printed it absolutely verbatim as I don't want to be accused of mis-informing people so there are comments from other people. The only thing that I have amended are any links to external pages so that they work from within the pdf file.
Transcribed file is here
I think that I may have to start a brand new page just to cover the number of statutory consultees concerns and refusals. So far:
If anybody comes across any more let me know and I shall add to the list, at the moment there seems to be a new one every week.
At tonight's Executive Committee meeting Cllr. Woodward announced that there had been 51 expressions of interest in becoming development partners of which 4 are reportedly 'highly experienced organisations' who have been invited to participate in the next formal procurement stage.
I wonder if they all know about the objections that have been raised by the statutory consultees over the last few weeks?
See the videos page for videos of the this and and the rest of the meeting.
Mr Hunt, replying to a letter from Suella Fernandes – Tory candidate for Fareham, said: ‘I want to assure you that if we are back in government after the general election we will make it a priority to get to the bottom of this. General Practice in this country is the backbone of our NHS and we will ensure all residents, including those at Welborne, can count on good access to GP and primary care services.’
Only trouble is that the CCGs haven't said no to healthcare - just no to healthcare actually IN Welborne, their argument is that there are enough surgeries within a reasonable distance that another surgery isn't needed.
Still let's see if he can do anything. At her election meeting our Suella said
"... I am aware that Fareham and Gosport CCG are turning round now and suddenly coming out of the woodwork and saying 'sorry, we are not going to provide a health care service in Welborne, it's not our responsibility and you can sort it out for yourselves' I'm sorry that's not good enough. They were given ample opportunity to make that known at the time. It was clearly projected that there would be a demand, initially for one GP, two GPs by 2022, and eight GPs ultimately located in a health care hub in Welborne, not outside ... but in Welborne, with access to a dentist and pharmacist and optician. So that was consulted on by many experts, by many local bodies and for them now to say sorry, that's wrong, that doesn't wash in law actually. So they are not able to turn around retrospectively and renege on their very clear obligations to deliver health care which is clearly and undoubtedly within the remit of Fareham and Gosport CCG and I recently raised this issue on the health care with Jeremy Hunt himself over the last week or so. I'm very concerned about the anxiety that it is causing, and Jeremy Hunt has recently just said that he will, if re-elected, makes sure that he gets to the bottom of this after the election. He cannot compel the CCG to do anything but if it is properly approved in a local plan which this is, and there have been proper opportunities for consultation, then really there is no basis in law for anybody to retrospectively decline their responsibilities".
Link to article in The News
Quote from the East Hampshire Catchment Partnership.
"East Hampshire Catchment Partnership urges Fareham BC to defer any approval of the application before these two matters have a detailed response from the developer."
Fareham Borough Council's problems with Welborne just continue to grow. Nobody can accuse us of not warning them about flood risk.
“We have developed the Welborne plan to highlight all the elements that may hold back the developments and have found ways to deal with any setbacks.”
The Daily Echo finally picked up on the Wickham Residents Association submission to the OPA (you saw it here on the 23rd of May). Such a shame that they couldn't even lift a quote correctly as Wickham will adjoin NOT adjourn Welborne (oh wouldn't that be nice) and the submission was written by Anton Hanney not Anton Heaney. Still it's much better than just being ignored.
And the best quote of the lot from Cllr. Woodward:
“We have developed the Welborne plan to highlight all the elements that may hold back the developments and have found ways to deal with any setbacks.”
So that is now health, gas, highways, police and electricity demurring. How many more utilities and infrastructure suppliers have got to say it before Fareham Borough Council finally realise that just maybe they have overtstretched themselves. FBC and PUSH agreed to the 12,000 houses for Fareham and thanks to them we will get them, if not in Welborne then distributed throughout the borough. Either way we all knew that it was too many, just a shame that our representatives on the council and at PUSH couldn't be bothered to listen to us and fight for what WE wanted.
Link to FBC Planning portal
We've had the BBC, now the local papers are getting behind the story - wonder if we could find a method of moving it up a step and get one of the nationals involved?
Link to article in The News
Link to article in The Echo
The lack of diligent planning in the provision of infrastructure to support the 6,000-dwelling Welborne plan threatens to have a serious, negative impact on adjourning communities such as ours at Wickham.
Nice one Wickham - The more people that say it hopefully the more it will be heard.
Link to Wickham Residents Association OPA submission
Link to The Wickham Society OPA submission
Just as a matter of interest the pipeline cuts right through the bottom right hand corner of the plan which is designated as sports fields on the BDL (Buckland) OPA. If this was established as such then any events like a football tournament could very well attract more than 1000 players and spectators which was mentioned in the HSE objections as a no no. Furthermore, I am not surprised that Buckland designated this as sports fields. In the winter it is perpetually wet and boggy.
What does the Welborne Plan say about this High Pressure Pipeline.
3.8 Utilities infrastructure
Two significant gas pipelines (high and intermediate pressure) run diagonally across the site. These necessitate development-free areas along the entire length of the pipelines within the site boundary.
Due to Health and Safety standards, no development can take place within a zone of between 6 and 26 metres above each of the gas pipelines, depending on the pipeline size and construction.
Furthermore, high occupancy facilities which are difficult to evacuate in an emergency, such as schools
The map on page 160 shows the line of the pipeline.
Welborne - Buckland's Planning application Consultation response from Health and Safety Executive .
Quote from the HSE communication in the FBC Planning Portal.
Therefore HSE would Advise Against the whole Welborne development as the Secondary School has received Advise Against advice.. The secondary school would need to be moved out of the outer consultation zone and only areas that are inaccessible to students (eg staff car parking) would be acceptable in the HSE zones. We would also have concerns regarding the district centre as this straddles the pipeline. We would be able to give further advice
Someone hasn't done their homework.
School may have to be moved and the District Centre. The health centre is not a problem now, we have no doctors to man it, that's a relief. Well it's not, is it?
The document is within the public domain, on the Internet. The document is a statutory reply to a planning application. Only the link has been copied not the letter.
Clearly, anyone can comment on the statutory reply if they wish.
We may need a round table discussion to sort this issue out. Sure there's a work around out there somewhere. There was always going to be slight problems flagged up within the consultation.
Quote by Cllr. Woodward
Councillor Sean Woodward, the leader of Fareham Borough Council, told the Daily Echo last night: “The NHS is failing to provide health care for people in the local community.
“When the Welborne plan was adopted, which has already been agreed in a public inquiry, a new health facility was already agreed so why are they turning back on their promises?”
Agreed by whom? We didn't, obviously the CCG and QA didn't (they didn't bother to comment). The only organisations that I can think of that really seem to be behind it are FBC and PUSH.
Link to Daily Echo article
After Cllr. Woodward's categorical statment that "THE WHOLE OF WELBORNE WILL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF FAREHAM AND GOSPORT CCG." (sic). Here is what the CCGs have to say on the matter:
With regard to your specific queries, please be assured that there is no confusion between our CCG and West Hampshire CCG, as to whether one organisation is solely responsible for meeting the health needs of the population living in the proposed development area. In reality, the proposed development will include land in both CCG areas – the majority in West Hampshire, with the remainder sitting within the area served by NHS Fareham and Gosport CCG.
Given that, both CCGs will have a responsibility for meeting the health needs of the Welborne residents – that shared responsibility is reflected in the fact that our CCGs have provided a joint submission to Fareham Borough Council, stating our position regarding the health provision for the planned development. I have attached a copy of our letter for your information.
With the Welborne development sitting across the boundary of the two CCG areas, it will be served by primary care services from both West Hampshire, and Fareham and Gosport. The Wickham Surgery, in the West Hampshire CCG area, was developed with the potential population growth in mind, and is expected to provide the majority of the primary care capacity for the residents. In the Fareham and Gosport CCG area there are three practices which have boundaries extending over the Welborne site, and so patients will be able to have a choice regarding where they can receive primary care.
I hope that this answers you question, and once again please accept my apologies that I was not able to reply on the day that your enquiry was received.
Note the second para.
It could not be stated more clearly - Fareham and Gosport CCG is NOT the ONLY commissioning group involved, in fact it is the minor partner.
Along with this e-mail was the this attachment sent to Mark Wyatt of FBC on 24-10-2016.
Quotes from the document
"Proposing a new facility to serve a population of a maximum of 15,000 patients, some of which will be registered at existing GP practices within the area is therefore not part of the CCG’s strategies as it is not a sustainable model for the future.
We would urge you to remove the land provision for health facilities in the Welborne plan and work with both West Hampshire CCG and Fareham & Gosport CCG’s to ensure that appropriate developer contributions can be made to support the growth planned for the Welborne community"
So even if Buckland supply a surgery Fareham and Gosport CCG would not seem to be prepared to man it.
Before you do anything else please read the whole of the document to make sure that you agree with my interpretation.
I am currently liaising with my colleagues within West Hampshire Clinical Commissioning Group regarding the Garden Village housing development and hope to have a response with you shortly.
In the meantime, should you have any further concerns please feel free to contact me using the contact details below.
Patient Experience and Complaints
West Hampshire Clinical Commissioning Group
NHS Net Account WHCCG.YourFeedback@nhs.net
Phone: 0800 456 1633
112 Southampton Road
Hampshire SO50 5PB
All requests for information about NHS West Hampshire Clinical Commissioning Group made under the Freedom of Information Act (FOI) or the Environmental Regulations 2004 should be directed to the FOI Team via firstname.lastname@example.org
Although they seem to be quite confident about their ability to supply the required amount of water - if you look at the above graph you will see that they expect demand to remain virtually static up to 2040 although supply will actually drop. Somehow I find this hard to believe with all of the development happening, but then I am no expert, presumably they are.
This pdf document was attached to their response to my e-mail querying their ability to cope with the additional developments in their area.
10-05-2017Thank you Sandie for a completely unbiased view of the meeting. We could do with more totally independent reviews as a personal bias to a site like this is bound to grow over time.
Videos are available on the You Tube page
CAT Meeting Wickham May 8th 2017.
Approximately 60 residents attended this meeting which followed the agenda of previous CAT meetings re Welborne. Both Chris Nixon and I attended: Me to video the meeting and take notes and Chris to ask some pertinent questions. The usual matters predominantly arose: Roads and Transport and Health Care provisions.
The recently published layout for Welborne, around J10, was discussed in some detail. Whichever way you dress it up residents across the borough are unhappy with the current proposals: Particularly the number of roundabouts incorporated in the scheme and the fact that a large volume of traffic will eventually be directed through Welborne itself with a road that will start south of the site and will join up with the Knowle Road in the north. This would be a worrying concern for future Welborne residents. Do not be confused here. If what was said is correct this is NOT the A32 we are talking about, it is an additional parallel road to the west of the A32. Cllr Woodward did state that these proposals will have to be agreed too by both HCC and Highways England or it (Welborne) WILL NOT HAPPEN. Apparently both authorities are already voicing their concerns. We, as the Inform Fareham Focus Group, urge the residents to make their views known to FBC: and, indeed to HCC before it is too late. You have until May 29th.
HEALTH PROVISIONS: The current proposed phasing will see the Welborne development start around the Knowle Road - to the north of the site. This is causing concern for those who run the Wickham surgery who will be in the immediate firing line as residents move in. Just for the record the surgery comes under the West Hants CCG. This led, again, to a question about which CCG Welborne will come under. Cllr Woodward again said it will come under the Fareham & Gosport CCG. This is in direct conflict to an answer given by the lead of the Fareham & Gosport CCG at a STP Meeting on January 18th 2017, where the same question was asked. This was the answer given on that occasion. “The majority of these (Welborne houses) will be under the West Hampshire CCG which is based at Omega House in Eastleigh. The cut off in fact for our own CCG HQ is at the top of the hill (Fort Southwick). If you go out of our backdoor you’re already in someone else’s CCG – but that doesn’t mean we will ignore it (Welborne). Primary Care will fall into someone else’s commission but we will work together” So just who is correct? Chris Nixon is in the process of trying to discover the true facts.
Videos are available on the You Tube page
About 42 members of the public attended the meeting, whilst the hall is an excellent venue for racquet sports and the like, it is an appalling place for meetings such as this because the acoustics are absolutely terrible. I was filming from the back of the hall and most of the questions were inaudible although Cllr. Woodward’s responses were pretty clear, presumably because he was virtually facing the camera so he wasn’t really relying on the sound system. It would probably have been better if questioners had stood and addressed the meeting without amplification.
One interesting point was dropped during his presentation (which wasn’t recorded because it is virtually the same at all of these meetings). The bids for Dean Farm must be lodged by 01-06-2017 so presumably something will start happening soon after that.
Another little thing is that somewhere in one of the videos Cllr. Woodward states that
“I am NOT a highways expert”. Still I would guess that was proved when, as head of Hampshire Highways, he instigated the traffic jam known as Newgate Lane, the replacement of Newgate Lane South with a road that has virtually no extra carrying capacity, St Margaret's roundabout with the daft lane markings, Quay Street roundabout and the extraordinary amount spent on the A27 ‘improvements’.
He also states in one of the health questions that Welborne will come under the auspices of the Fareham and Gosport CCG although he did say at the same time that the boundary is a little bit murky.
One to go at Wycombe, let’s see what comes out of that one.
p.s. It's not a town, it's a Garden Village
Quote from an article in The News
"Fareham Borough Council’s Mark Wyatt, principal planner for strategic sites, said along with Cllr Woodward that getting the infrastructure right first was a top priority and that the road plans were made by experts Highways England".
But that is only a part of the infrastructure. What about all of the other bits - health, hospitals, education, existing roads and all of the other services? Are they not just as important? But then of course none of them come under FBCs purlieu - they are all the responsibilty of somebody else as far as our council is concerned and will just have to cope with the problem that PUSH and local coucils have lumbered them with. - Don't forget who the original instigator and current chairman of PUSH is.
Whilst editing the videos for the Funtley CAT meeting on Friday (videos yet to be posted), Cllr Woodward made this statement in relation to Junction 10@
"We rely for this on Highways England so this is the only part of the plan which is in detail, nothing else is."
This seems to contradict Highways England response to the OPA:
"We are continuing to review the available information supporting the above proposal. We are in ongoing dialogue with the applicant and with Hampshire County Council to understand the impact of and therefore deliverability of proposals as currently set out. This work continues and will enable us to understand if any further information is required.
We would ask that Fareham Borough Council does not determine the application (other than a refusal) ahead of us fully reviewing the available information. In the event that the authority wishes to permit the application before this point, we would ask the authority to inform us so that we can provide a substantive response based the position as known at that time."
Who are we to believe?
Videos are available on the You Tube page
Report by Michael Stephenson (italics is a comment added by me)
As expected the leader of F.B.C. used the opportunity of this CAT meeting to decry Buckland Land Development and the Benge family - and the Outline Planning Application for Welborne in general. At the end of the meeting any person who has been following the Welborne saga might have asked the question ‘what was the purpose of holding the CAT meeting in the first place?’ However, if nothing else, it underlined the immensity of Welborne and all that it entailed. One of the questions asked was whether Buckland had the necessary expertise and resources to deliver such a large project as Welborne – one might have asked the same question of FBC who, over three years, seemed to have made a dogs-ear of the whole process. Anyway, Cllr. Woodward just decried Buckland once again.
Of the 18 questions that Cllr. Woodward allowed to be asked many begged the obvious. What about health care? Cllr. Woodward’s answer was inadequate and inaccurate. He stated that is was down to health-care-providers to tell the developers what they wanted and then implied that they would build the necessary structures – if you believe that then you'll believe pigs can fly. I’m sure that is not how it works. He also stated that the Fareham & Gosport Care Commissioning Group would sort it out. Wrong! Under the current set up Welborne will come under the East Hants CCG which is based in Eastleigh. That made a bit of a mockery of Cllr. Woodward’s quote about how closely FBC works with health providers!! He also brushed aside a question about QA.
Another question asked was about the road structure and the proposed layout – which in the eyes of many would be a nightmare. True. Woodward spoke a lot about money. Although Welborne will affect North Hill, Kiln Road, Highlands Road and Funtley Road more than anywhere else, all of his comments about the road improvements applied to getting to and from his hobby-horse of Daedalus, nothing about the roads that will be affected by Welborne. Well, it was obvious too that Welborne will need lots of money thrown at it. He quoted £300 million! I suspect that this will turn out to be a very conservative estimate. He bumbled on about the availability of a £1 billion government pot. What he didn’t say was this would to be shared between the so-called Welborne Garden Village and, I think, 14 other similar ideas throughout the country.
In the end, of course, if FBC pursue their preferred option (to bring in their own developer) then the Buckland Welborne plan will be irrelevant and a new plan will have to be drawn up – and that could be a real possibility. As I said, what was the point of the CAT meeting!
Link to an article in The News.
"On behalf of Wallington Village Community Association (WVCA), I offer the following comments on what is clearly a very comprehensive Outline Planning Application (OPA) by Buckland Development Ltd (BDL):"
This is the Association's response to the recent Outline Planning Application for Welborne. Well worth a read and it may help other residents to pen their own observations about our new "village".
Link to the submission
THE first detailed planning application for homes at Welborne has been submitted by Buckland Development. (ps. If you read the article Welborne will NOT be a town, it's only going to be a village).
Link to the article in The News.
The following pages make up Buckland's Transport Assessment for Welborne and the surrounding area. One of the biggest areas of concern for most residents I would say.
ALL links take you to the Fareham Borough Council Website. Due to the size of the document and the difficulties some residents will have in downloading it, the document has been broken down into manageable chapters.
After a lengthy public inquiry where local residents and community groups tried to shape the Welborne Plan, time not wasted in our opinion even though not a crumb was offered by the developers or FBC to residents, history will be kind to those who stood up to Fareham Borough Council, The Welborne plan was adopted in June 2015.
During the rest of 2015 a degree of nervousness set in. However even though residents and the community groups said at the public inquiry that the Welborne Plan was a complex and immature beast, in early 2016 Fareham Borough Council set out a new delivery strategy for Welborne, they suddenly announced they wished to have their own delivery partner and would consider compulsory purchase of the land. The result of this action was clear to everyone, Welborne would be delayed. For others now to say that the delay in Welborne is down to the community of Fareham and not the sole responsibility of FBC is comical and beyond belief.
Welborne is sadly with us, part of the long term landscape of Fareham, Welborne will not go away, it is there sitting waiting for the green light. The community of Fareham lost the battle for those green fields in June 2015 and it is now the responsibility of Fareham Borough Council and the developer of the site to ensure that all the promises made about Welborne are delivered in the timely manner they ecstatically set out.
The role of those who still have an interest in Welborne is to scrutinise Buckland's outline planning application to ensure all the answers the community stride to obtain at the public inquiry have been addressed.
There will be many hurdles to overcome before we see the first bricks being laid and we know that many in our community will ensure those who are responsible for Welborne do not walk away and leave a legacy for others to sort out, history will be the final judge.
Well FBC have their planning application but obviously one isn't enough. Considering that they need to make a decision by 6th of June they seem to be cutting the whole process extremely fine, or will they just defer a decision? Presumably the longer it goes on the more in-filling will have to be allowed.
Link to The News article
And here is the original 'NOT A BRICK WILL BE LAID' quote published in Fareham's own Conservative Party paper way back in Winter 2011. Note the quote actually says
Not a brick will be laid until plans are in place to ensure all the rquired infrastructure is commited to and properly funded"
And again in Summer 2011
“However, we still give residents the same pledge that has been made by the council’s leader Councillor Seán Woodward – not one brick will be laid of the SDA before the infrastructure requirements have been properly assessed, costed and funding guaranteed.
“This includes roads, schools, public transport, shops, employment, open spaces and strategic gaps that separate the development from Funtley, Knowle and Wickham.””
The Outline planning application has now been verified by FBC Planning and the whole shebang is available at
Fareham Borough's planning portal.
It is the longest list of documents that I have seen. In fact, to be honest, it is quite daunting just to look at the number of documents involved. Maybe we need to set up a series of sub-committees to look at and comment on the different parts of it, as far as I can see there at in excess of 200 documents, plans and drawings. Any volunteers?
Buckland Development have kindly posted some of their planning application here.
It might help us to get our thoughts together in preparation for the planning application going forward. If you look at the Structure Plan Pt1 the pictures look really great. Nice wide, green verged streets, houses with good sized front gardens, an old fashioned street market. They have even used pictures taken around the original Garden City of Letchworth (MAXIMUM housing density of 12 per acre). Even the most ardent supporter of the scheme must admit that such a vision is totally unrealistic.
Plans for the south's biggest new housing development have taken a significant step forward after months of arguments and delays. A planning application has been submitted for Welborne Garden Village which would bring six thousand new homes to fields outside Fareham in Hampshire
BBC South Today video on Facebook (You don't need to be a Facebook member to watch it)
Quote from Suella to the Daily Echo
"I understand that some people may be concerned about the plans. But the garden village model is designed so there is no or minimal strain on neighbouring villages and towns"
I wonder if she has factored in the problems at QA and the lack of GPs. They are just a couple of the problems that are out of the control of any of the developers or planners. Then the overcrowding in our secondary schools for the next 20 years as the new school is not planned to be delivered until the very end of the project. Don't forget that this is only 5% of the planned developments over the next 20 years in South Hampshire.
Platitudes are all very well but with the way that major service funding is being cut, another 12-18,000 residents in just one of the developments that are happening in South Hampshire I can see that it is going to make our future pretty heavy going for some considerable time.
Link to The Daily Echo article
"Buckland Development Ltd (BDL) is looking to build Welborne Garden Village on 1,000 acres of land on the north side of Fareham, across the M27 motorway. The plans envisage 6,000 new homes being built on the greenfield site.
BDL is a Hampshire-based development company chaired by Mark Thistlethwayte, the owner of Southwick Estate and majority landowner of the Welborne area. He has been working on the Welborne project for nearly a decade. He is also involved in the proposed Berewood development at nearby Waterlooville with Grainger plc.
However, Fareham Borough Council is also looking to lead development of the new village itself and intends to begin the procurement process this month to select its own development partner. Its final choice is expected by the end of the year. For details see www.fareham.gov.uk. It remains to be seen whether BDL is chosen ahead of any other bidders that may emerge.
The Construction Index full article for this is available here. It probably gives the most coherent view on the situation at the moment.
Link to the Daily Echo article
Link to the The News article
It was announced at tonight's Executive Committee meeting that Buckland Development have submitted a planning application for the WHOLE of the Welborne site (but if I heard correctly they STILL won't own ALL of the land after the acquisition of that part subject to a the CSO made by Murray Rosen QC last month).
I have recorded the announcement and will post when it is available. The best part is that Cllr. Woodward said that it was thanks to the council's threat of a CPO we are now only 3 months behind schedule. When the application has been registered FBC will open the system for consultation and comment.
So all of the great hoo-hah about the wonderful idea of new 'Garden Towns' and 'Garden Villages' will mean that the 6,000 extra houses at Welborne are worth just an extra £200,000 or £33.33 per house. That will really help to build the missing infrastructure.
Could this be the end of the road for the Compulsory Purchase Order? I must admit that I have never heard of a Compulsory Sales Order before but Judge Murray Rosen QC ruled on whether two-thirds of the Benge family should be forced to sell Dean Farm against their wishes obviously has. I hope that the developers don't want to develop MY house and get a judge to force me to sell it.
The judge has said that Dean Farm MUST be put on the open market, I wonder if we could crowd-fund the odd £40M or so?
Article in The News
Article in The Daily Echo
Network Rail is undertaking a scoping study into creating a two-platform station for the new town of Welborne.
Denis Fryer, co-ordinator for South Hampshire Rail Users’ Group, said:
"With both the M27 and Fareham town centre prone to suffering road congestion, the proposed new station would make a useful addition to public transport in the area."
Well it makes total sense even though Welborne Garden Village is going to be self-contained, it should make commuting a whole lot easier and help to ensure that house prices are even further out of the reach of local people.
Article in The News
The station has been known as Knowle Asylum Halt & Knowle Platform being renamed Knowle Halt on 5.10.1942. It was closed 12.8.1963 but was re-opened the next day following union objections. The station was built to serve Knowle Asylum (later Knowle Hospital)
History of the old station
Wel 18, Welborne Plan sets out the policy for Affordable homes at Welborne.
WEL 18 allows a figure of only 10% Affordable homes to be built. The policy hopes any short fall of Affordable homes in any phases will be carried over. Is that credible?
The forthcoming White Paper on Housing could have a huge impact on Affordable Homes, we wait the publication in the weeks ahead Clarification regarding affordable housing provision
Amendment to policy WEL18
"Development at Welborne shall provide a total of 30% affordable housing. (approximately 1,800 homes) with an initial tenure split of 70% affordable or social rent and 30% intermediate tenures. The tenure split will be kept under review based on evidence of need.
Each residential phase of development shall be required to meet the target of 30% affordable housing provision unless a robust and transparent viability appraisal proving this not to be possible is accepted by the Council.
In exceptional circumstances where viability considerations require, the minimum affordable housing numbers on any phase will be 10% (subject to viability and the implications for other infrastructure) and the maximum required will not normally exceed 40%.
Where it is agreed that a residential phase will not meet the 30% target of affordable housing, the subsequent phase or phases will be required to meet that shortfall in addition to the 30% target if possible in viability terms.
The initial tenure split will be 70% affordable or social rent and 30% intermediate tenures. The tenure split will be kept under review phase by phase based on evidence of need and viability"
The really worrying part is the very last word. What is viable and who decides whether they are viable? It will certainly override the pleni-penultimate word - need.
Fareham Borough Council's latest flyer
Click image to enlarge
I noticed that there is no mention of a kite-flying area - surely a small oversight on Cllr. Woodward's part.
Well these are Cllr. Woodward's bullet points. When you read them, how many does he actually have any control over?
And he still hasn't addressed the ever present problem with housing - how many locally employed people will be able to afford to buy these homes? How many of the 2000 LOCAL families that he claims Fareham has that need housing will it help? To afford one of these houses people will have to work outside of the local area, almost certainly in London, so even more traffic into and out of Welborne.
Article in The News
Suella has backed the 6,000 house so-called 'new village'. Having failed fairly miserably to get funding for the M27 and Stubbington by-pass, she is now saying that we can dip into a part of the massive £6M that has been put aside for 17 new villages, so that is a grand total of £353k per village, might just about pay for a light controlled pedestrian crossing somewhere. I just wonder, do these people live in the REAL world? Once again absolutely no thought for the wider infrastructure problems that this will cause and certainly no comment on the situation.
"A lack of infrastructure is a very big problem. I have given a commitment over many years where Welborne is concerned that WE WILL NOT LAY A SINGLE BRICK OF WELBORNE until we have identified exactly what infrastrucuture is needed, where it's going and most importantly how it's going to be funded."
Isn't it funny how words can mean different things to different people - Welborne, a development the size of Petersfield is termed a 'village' by HMG - most other people would call it a new town.
By Government definition
"These developments will be distinct new places with their own community facilities, rather than extensions to existing urban areas
The Government announced the planned 17 new large development sites in England today. They are:
New garden villages and towns
The three new garden towns will be in:
Homes are already being built in Aylesbury, Taunton, Bicester, Didcot, Basingstoke, Ebbsfleet, and north Northamptonshire.
These 17 new developments will all be fighting for a share of the £6M government technical and financial support fund. Welborne will need all of that and much more just to develop the M27 junction. They will also have access to infrastructure funding programmes across government, such as the new £2.3B Housing Infrastructure Fund announced at this year’s Autumn Statement, that amounts to an AVERAGE of about £13M per development or £1150 per house. Still not a great deal of money when you think of the infrastructure problems that they are going to create.
Funnily enough according to their definition of a garden village - a development of between 1500 and 10000 houses - if Newlands gets the green light we will have two garden villages and yet another one if all of the additional developments were rolled into one.
Additional links that might be of interest:
I have just received an e-mail from one of our members that makes for VERY interesting reading:
In response to an earlier correspondence regarding this junction which I don't have, Buckland Development replied with this:
"Further to our recent correspondence and your notes (attached for convenience) please find below responses from our traffic consultants.
1) What is the likely effect on traffic of any proposed changes made to the M27/A32 Wickham Road junction whilst the access road/route into and through Welborne is built?
The existing westbound off-slip (the 270 degree loop) will remain open and operational throughout the construction of the new junction. It will only cease operating when the new junction is complete and open to traffic.
2) …anyone using the next exit after the main M27 Fareham junction will have to travel west along a slip road parallel to the M27 to the small roundabout, go beneath the M27 and travel north to another roundabout, then turn east through two me roundabouts before joining the A32…who thought this up?
The distance between M27 Junctions 10 and 11 is sub-standard, which means there is an insufficient length of motorway between the junctions for traffic accessing and egressing the motorway to safely weave, according to current design standards. In addition, the geometric design of the existing westbound off-slip (the 270 degree loop) has safety implications, particularly for HGVs. Two significant advantages of constructing a new westbound off-slip to the east of the A32 are the increase in weaving distance from Junction 10 and the removal of the loop. These are important safety related improvements. Traffic wishing to access Fareham using the existing westbound off-slip has to join the A32 and travel north before U-turning at the existing Pook Lane junction. The new junction layout removes the need to U-turn.
Although traffic leaving the motorway from the east will have to negotiate the new junction with its additional roundabouts, it is considered that the safety related improvements by increasing the weaving distance between J10 and J11 outweigh this perceived disadvantage. The advantages of the new junction also means that all turning movements are provided, rather than only the eastbound on and westbound off movement at present and the requirement for traffic wishing to access the A32 from the west, or access the motorway and head west, to U-turn at J11.
3) To make these changes we need to see TRAFFIC SURVEYS and the impact of the proposed changes to a) the considerable volume of traffic leaving the M27 after 4pm on working days….and b) the volume of traffic currently using the A32/North Hill as an alternative route, leaving the M27 at the A32 junction, travelling north, then turning south and using the A32 and North Hill to get into Fareham.
There will be changes in traffic flows at the M27/A32 Junction (J10) as a consequence of both the development and the new junction layout. These traffic flow changes have been identified by the Sub Regional Transport Model (SRTM) for the area that has been prepared for Transport for South Hampshire to assess the implications of development in the sub-region. It has been agreed with the highway authorities (Hampshire County Council and Highways England) that it is the appropriate tool to determine the impact of the Welborne development.
Traffic flow changes are to be expected when such a significant new piece of highway infrastructure is delivered. Generally, during the peak hour period of 0800-0900, traffic flows leaving the motorway will be in the order of around 1000 vehicles per hour from the west and 600 from the east. Some of this will be traffic associated with the development. Traffic joining the motorway will be about 1300 vehicles per hour to travelling to the east with around 900 vehicles per hour joining the motorway to travel to the west.
There will be similar levels of traffic during the evening peak hour of 1700-1800. During both peak periods, considerable traffic flow reductions are shown along the M27 to the east, but increases are shown along the A32 from Fareham. We are reviewing the modelling to understand this and what the implications are as ideally, traffic would remain on the M27 and use the A27 at J11 to access Fareham rather than using A32 Wickham Road.
The work we have done shows that the new Motorway Junction would operate satisfactorily and the level of traffic shown to use this junction is not uncommon for a piece of infrastructure of this size. Ultimately all of the traffic flows will be contained within the Transport Assessment that will accompany the planning application and will be discussed with Hampshire County Council who are responsible for roads within Fareham.
I hope this helps with your enquiry.
Our member's reply:
"It was a pleasure to meet you at the Ferneham Hall recently, and I do appreciate you taking time and effort to compose a considered response to my concerns. I suppose we'll just have to wait and see what the outcome of the proposed changes set out to the two M27 junctions and consequent traffic flows will be - but I'm not optimistic that the changes will improve anything, quite the contrary. Fareham MP Suella Fernandes is taking an active interest - as she rightly should - in the Welborne plans.
However, in view of the attached, which questions their inaction at the junction of Speedfields Park with Newgate Lane in Fareham, I have reason to doubt the competence of Hampshire Highways, one of the advisers quoted in the Welborne Development plan, since this is an example of so-called "traffic consultants" who in my opinion lack any commonsense and do not appear to be able to "consult" with anyone. The sheer ignorance, incompetence and inertia of so-called "experts" at Hampshire Highways is perfectly illustrated locally, where what is - and remains to this day - a major problem for some local car drivers/shoppers at Speedfields Park, made worse by the feeble and ill thought out excuses from Hampshire Highways, together with their unwillingness to act upon a relatively simple and inexpensive solution suggested to them. All that happened since February is for HCC to announce yet another "review" (first review was announced by Sean Woodward, who appears to know very little about traffic management) which means that they will sit on their hands and do absolutely nothing; by the time they get round to doing anything it will be almost a year after first being alerted to the problem. What on earth are these people paid for ?
In conjunction with the RAC Foundation I have recently produced a report called The Real cost of Travel (in which I also question the competence of traffic planners) and which you might find of interest. I do hope that your plans for proposed changes to the two M27 Motorway junctions are properly considered before implementation, although I doubt that I will still be around when they are. Nonetheless there will be many other residents of North Fareham taking a very keen interest. So there will be more than one beady eye keeping watch on Buckland Development, Hampshire Highways, Highways England and the competence of the so-called "traffic advisers""
Link to The News article that started this
Relevant additional material supplied by our member with the above e-mails - all files are in pdf format.
|Speedfields Park suggestions||Dominic McGrath, Strategic Transport Manager, HCC|
|Hampshire Highways||The real cost of transport|
|Welborne traffic assessment|
It strikes me like another one of those 'Not my problem Guv. It's the duty of somebody else to cope with that so don't bother me at the moment'.
Article from Fareham and Gosport View; Issue 32; 28th October 2016
Click image to enlarge
Quote from the article
"Plans for the development have slowed down in the past year, with major landowners Buckland Developments Limited and the Benge Estate still yet to submit a
planning application for the whole site."
According to one of Buckland's representatives at Wednesday's event the Benge Estate have agreed that Buckland should lead on the development and they will follow whatever Buckland decide.
To be honest, as far as I could tell there was very little difference between Wednesday's bash and the one held in July. The pictures were slightly different in some instances but there are no different answers to all of the questions that were raised then. It seemed as if the most common answers to any point raised about the effect that the new town will have on existing residents was similar to Cllr. Woodward's one on health "they have a duty to supply". The HCC have a duty to supply answers to the road problem, the CCG and PHT have a duty to supply health care, HCC have a duty to supply interim education solutions, and so on and so on.
The key public sector organisations that they are engaging with on Welborne include:
‘This is something we will be able to deal with, by making Junction 10 of the M27 accessible both ways and providing multiple site access from the A32, we are going to soak up all the traffic.’
Here is a copy of a letter sent by one of the original Inform Fareham members to the editors of The News and The Daily Echo - as it is critical of Fareham Borough Council and especially of it's
Executive leader it will be interesting to see whether it ever gets published.
WELBORNE – WHY IS THERE A DELAY?
19-10-2016Buckland Development are intending to run another information show at Ferneham Hall on Wednesday 2nd November. Various people have been sent personal invitations but it is open to all. Not sure how they are going to go ahead unless they now have full control of all 1,000 acres as the Council don't seem to be doing much at the moment, maybe this is why?
Link to latest Buckland Development brochure
One or two little points from the brochure:
"For a new development like Welborne to be sustainable, it needs to be supported by a comprehensive and integrated approach to transport and utilities.
We are refining and continually testing the strategy, working with Hampshire County Council to agree the most appropriate improvement to the existing network.
There will be a network of pedestrian and cycle routes within the site connecting to, and improving, the existing network in order to allow movement to Fareham and other local areas.
Welborne will have excellent public transport links, particularly bus related".
But let's see how it can screw up the transport system outside of Welborne. No mention you notice of the J9 improvements and I'll bet that they haven't given a thought to roads like North Hill, Kiln Road, Highlands Road, the A32 into Fareham and all of the other roads that will inevitably be negatively affected.
"The eventual population at Welborne will call for a total of three primary schools and one secondary school. Each will be located within different neighbourhood and character areas;
they will be easy to walk to and will be on public transport links. The first primary school is expected to be delivered in the very early phases of development to the north of the site, at the village centre,
whilst the secondary school will be located nearer the district centre.
The schools will be an integral part of the community and neighbourhoods, providing some public facilities and located to ensure strong links to green corridors and adjacent open spaces".
Although we will probably have to wait until virtually the end of the project to see the secondary school.
And not a word as to how it will all affect the Health Service at QA or how they are going to dragoon the new doctors and other health specialists into setting up practices. That's not their problem, it's down to the CCGs and other health trusts involved.
Could Welborne have its own Grammar School?
If our Chief Executive's latest plan goes ahead it would have an enormous effect on commuting in and out of Welborne. As the only grammar school in the area parents from miles around will be desperate to get their offspring through those particular gates. If it is in place of the comprehensive then you should be able to completely block Welborne out for a few hours every day as all of the non-grammar children will be exiting whilst grammar pupils will be going the opposite way and vice-versa in the afternoons.
Still we must not stand in the way of progress.
I recently received an e-mail from the Remarkable Group on behalf of Buckland Development (one of the possible developers of Welborne) to say that I had mistakenly accused them of building
some of the houses shown lower down this page when in fact some of them were Taylor Wimpey's - I have now corrected this and sorted them into Buckland's Berewood and others,
It does however, bring to mind the old Pete Seeger classic of Little Boxes, little boxes all made of ticky-tacky and they all look just the same.
Link to The News article
The event seemed to be basically just a re-iteration of what has gone before. They are still not sure where the sewage will go, can't work out how the BRT will run from Welborne to Fareham except for
'down the A32'. Hospitals are not their problem it's down to the Health Service to sort that one out, probably with a bit of financial aid from the developers but then again, possibly not.
Education will be down to liasing with HCC but no real plans other than those already outlined. I did hear that the proposed build rate was supposed to be 500 p.a. but one of their representatives
reckoned that 350 would be a more realistic figure.
At the moment Buckland reckon that the other landowners will be on side next year but I would think that it depends far more on the economic climate. Let's be honest, it doesn't look too rosy for house builders at the moment and the amount of investment that will be required isn't exactly beer money. All we can do is hope that FBC really DO stick to their guns and don't allow another Cherque Farm to appear (I know that was Gosport's problem but it could just as easily happen here). As our Executive Leader on more than one occasion
"all Cherque Farm got was traffic lights" We need to make
absolutely certain that Welborne gets AT LEAST two sets of traffic lights and a couple of zebra crossings across the main northern route.
I couldn't see anything intended to help alleviate the problems that this development will cause to existing residents - eg. Highlands Road, A32 into Gosport, A27, etc. As Sėan Woodward said at one of the
CAT meetings the 'improvements on the A27 are intended to move the bottlenecks further on' (or words to that effect) so another 6,000 houses just north of an already congested motorway and A27 isn't going to help the matter.
There are so many points that really need addressing BEFORE we, the ratepayers, can make really sensible observations. Hospital services, provision of secondary education until the new school is built, the BRT route..... The whole thing is still so woolly and really the exhibition at Ferneham Hall today really throws no new light on the subject, but it was nice to know that somebody, somewhere, likes to try and keep us in the loop and at least they are asking us for e-mail feedback.
Their proposed timescales are
Review of feedback
Further technical work and progression of outline application proposals
Further meetings with Fareham Borough Council
Further information event to be held (date to be confirmed and informed by progression of above work)
Liaison with Fareham Borough Council and key stakeholders
Anticipated submission of the outline planning application
Anticipated decision by Fareham Borough Council on the outline planning application
But that still depends on so many things over which Buckland have absolutely no control.
Apparently the large Berewood development in Waterlooville - Purbrook is also one of the developments in which Buckland Development is involved.
Buckland Development have arranged for an 'informal information event' to explain where they have got to in the Welborne development plans.
So make a note in your diaries and hope to see you there.
I notice that the Welborne Standing Conference has disappeared from the FBC diary. Could it possibly be that nothing has happened AGAIN! No explanation, no statement as to whether it has been postponed
or cancelled. Could it be that if there is an appeal for Newlands the inspector will be able to use this as an argument for Hallam?
I was of the understanding that the idea of FBC taking over the development via CPOs was to speed the process up. According to the original developers at the last conference we would have had a planning application by now but it all seems to be taking even longer. I reckon that the image of "Welborne in chaos" seems to be just about spot on.
I have never really believed the pictures in sales brochure for new developments so I popped round and took some pictures of modern, new estates under construction by different
developers in different parts of South Hampshire.
For instance these are an artists impression and the actual build of the front of the Buckland development at Berewood, Waterlooville
They both look very nice but then I went round the back to see what the larger part of the site looked like.
Having done that I noticed that they looked very similar to other developments so took some photo's of the Taylor Wimpey, Wellington Park site in Waterlooville, a couple of the Lakeside development in Eastleigh and just to finish it off a couple of The Limes development in Fareham. Most of the pictures look very similar so at a guess, if you would like to get an idea of what Welborne might look like, pop over and have a look at either of the developments along the west side of London Road and north of Hambledon Road in Waterlooville or Lakeside in Eastleigh. They are the three large sites large that these pictures were taken at, or even The Limes in Fareham..
Life does seem to be getting monotonous nowadays - all shopping areas look alike now and now housing estates or new towns are starting to as well.
According to the Daily Echo
"Fareham Borough Council leaders say work on Welborne may only start in 2019"
Link to article
"The move, if it is successful, could be such a drawn out process that Cllr Seán Woodward acknowledged instead of later this year, it would be early in 2019 before a brick will be laid."
I wonder if the infrastructure will be in place - remember the famous phrase "Not a brick will be laid...."
A video posted on 23-02-2016 of Fareham Borough Council's justification for Welborne. Unfortunately it doesn't seem to be that easy to find from their YouTube website so the link
These two small quotes are from the video and said by Cllr Keith Evans:
"People need somewhere to live. Welborne is essential for future generations of Fareham."
"People need somewhere to live in the area. They need to stay close to family, they need to stay close to friends. We neeed more affordable homes. Welborne will deliver up to 2000 affordable homes that local people can afford to live in."
But will the future generations of Fareham be able to afford even the so-called 'affordable' dwellings that will be available? Don't forget that the number still needs to be 'viable', it can be reduced if developers can't make enough profit overall and can show that therefore they are unviable.
All of the talk is about Junction 10 yet the picture in the video is of Junction 11 but then both junctions will need upgrading to cope with thousands of cars that will need to access Welborne.
Watch the video and see what your opinion is. It's just over 4 minutes long, and there isn't a kite in site.
11 February 2016
Council considers options for Welborne delivery
Fareham Borough Council is considering taking steps to expedite progress on the new Welborne development. A special meeting of the Executive has been called to consider the proposal.
Councillor Seán Woodward, Executive Leader of Fareham Borough Council said: "It is being recommended to the Executive that the Council considers the compulsory purchase of land allocated for Welborne, and to seek a development partner in a bid to progress activity on site.
"Collectively the principal landowners and site promoters have been saying their land is available for development for more than 10 years. The site was identified in the Council's core strategy in 2011 and, more recently, the Welborne Plan was formally adopted in 2015. However, despite all parties being fully committed to the development, to date no planning application has been received. It is important that the development is progressed not only to provide the housing that Fareham needs but in order to help protect our countryside strategic gaps."
By considering the use of compulsory purchase and seeking a development partner, the Council is aiming to ensure the development can be delivered broadly within the timescales set out in the Welborne Plan.
Lines of communication between the Council, the principal landowners and site promoters remain open.
The Executive Meeting to discuss the options will be held at 6.00pm on 22 February in the Council's offices.
A council has voted to buy up huge swathes of land if that is what it takes to build a 6,000-home new town.
Article in The News
Fareham Borough Council's cabinet members tonight approved proposals to seek a compulsory purchase of the land on which the £1bn new town to the north of Fareham Welborne would be built.
Article in the Daily Echo
The meeting last night was all about showing the flag, no more. There was nothing else to be achieved.
The main point is that Fareham Borough Council are in a very big hole, it was pointed out to them last night by Shaun Cunningham, with the normal response - he was being rude.
The hole that FBC has dug for themselves is simple; with the delays to Welborne, Fareham Borough Council are not able to bring forward the housing numbers which they signed up to on behalf of Fareham residents.
Very rude of THEM some would say! The result is that other green spaces like the fields of South Fareham and Cranleigh Road in Portchester will come under attack from developers.
Although FBC will scream NO, the developers have a crafty tool in their armoury known as an appeal process which will then see FBC lose control of the process to an independent government inspector.
An example of this was given at last night's meeting. There is a very strong possibility that an independent inspector would grant an appeal, for example Newlands, because Welborne is slipping to the right.
This very large hole FBC have dug is of their own making, it has nothing to do with the joint promoters of Welborne. FBC is saying that the joint promoters have had 10 years to bring forward a planning application - a ridiculous statement - and in fact shows it is not the public who does not understand the planning process, it is our Council executive who need to book a course on planning as quickly as possible.
The Welborne plan was only adopted last year after the government enquiry. The Government inspector could have made all sorts of pronouncements and therefore to expect the joint promoters to have a final, detailed plan on the table ready to go is a little rich. Once again FBC is spinning the facts. Of course the joint promoters have done a substantial amount of design work at a joint cost of £10 million, but that is very different to having a fully detailed plan encompassing all of the huge issues surrounding the Welborne Plan. Once again FBC is being economical with the facts. The site promoters can look after themselves and if FBC are not careful they will found that out.
The four deputations.
Clearly they are in a position to bring forward plans. However, if they did so, in all probability any plan of theirs would fail to meet a key objective in that there should be one master plan for
the Welborne site. Southwick Estates plans must effectively be a joint planning application with the other site promoter BST.
FBC also have concerns as to whether Southwick Estates have the expertise to control such a large and complex development. Southwick Estates have spent over £5 million to date on Welborne, speaking to them last night, they actually wanted to have a public dialogue with local residents, but were blocked from doing so by - yes - FBC.
There is a legal dispute with regards to the land they own, it is none of our business to know what that is. The problem is that BST say that they cannot bring forward any
joint planning application for at least a year. Dark clouds over the Tall White Building for the reasons given above.
They have also issued a legal letter to FBC saying that FBC are acting in an unlawful manner. The chairman of last night's meeting was not particularly happy due to the fact he didn't receive a personal copy.
Jason asked Cllr Woodward to resign. This wasn't put to a vote. Jason spoke for many of us who feel that the majority of Fareham councillors are simply not interested in the thoughts of local residents.
Well...he did try and point out the very big hole that FBC are in, which is one of their own making, but of course Councillors were more interested in carrying on digging. Sometimes people seem to be beyond help.
Cllr Pam Bryant - Fareham North
Spoke in favour of the compulsory purchase order
Today Hallam Land posted a revised Planning application for Newlands which went live on the FBC website. The executive must have known last night that this was to happen.
"I have already given assurances to Residents, that not one brick will be laid until the infrastructure and funding is in place"
"But not a brick will be laid at this new Community until we have the infrastructure in place and most importantly the funding"
Please be under no illusion whatsoever, that we will try our hardest to hold him to those pledges!
All of the videos for this conference have now been uploaded to our YouTube page. See what your opinion of this 'conference' is.
The important document that should have preceded all of this is this one. It would have made sense surely for members of the Standing Committee to have seen this document, which has such far-reaching effects, prior to the meeting. Effectively everybody sat through in excess of an hours lecture which this document virtually negates.
At the Welborne Conference held at FBC Council Offices on 11th January, bombshells were dropped by Mr. Thistlethwaite of Buckland development, one of the major Welborne landowners,
when he said that FBC had ceased communicating with them some months ago after they had invested millions of pounds in creating development plans for Welborne.
Apparently after decrying the idea of compulsory purchase orders right from the original idea, they are now seriously thinking of taking that route.
This should add years and millions of pounds to the cost because of the legal implications that will be involved. These comments were supported by Mr. Smith of BST Group, the other big land owner.
Katrina Trott, Councillor for Fareham East, said after the meeting that she was absolutely apalled by the way that the council had been kept in the dark about this matter - the looks of amazement that appeared on many representatives faces was quite apparent. Under council regulations any matters that need to be raised as questions at next week's full council meeting would have needed to be sent in by last Tuesday so nothing that was revealed tonight will be able to be discussed by our councillors on Friday - is it possible that it was done like this to stop any awkward moments next week?
Quote from David Walton - Inform Fareham Committee member and Wallington representative on the Steering Group:
"There are 2 edges to every sword !! and I fear that FBC are about to embark (at our expense!)
on an extremely high risk strategy, in order to try and "save face". (Leigh Park MK II beckons!)The concensus around the table tonight, was one of absolute disbelief - Having been involved with Welborne-
Akin to 53,000 Junior Doctors can't all be wrong!"
The big downside to this is that it probably makes Newlands a fait accompli. If Welborne is delayed then we cannot meet the housing requirements forced on us by PUSH so any appeal would almost certainly be bound to succeed.
Article from the Daily Echo It is worth comparing this with that from The News
And the BBC's take on the matter
"Mr Woodward said: "Welborne's been talked about for over a decade, we've been through the planning process, public inquiries, we've had the plan adopted - everything has been agreed""
... by everybody except the residents (my words)
Henry Cleary OBE, the Independant Chairman of the Welborne Standing Conference, is a member of the Town and Country Planning Association. These are some of the projects that the TCPA is involved with.
The full report titled
The TCPA New Communities Group: ambitious councils working together to deliver large-scale new communities is available here (PDF File 3.29MB - 19 pages)
was published in January 2015. The cover picture is actually our Fareham Kite - We're nationally famous.
Can we explain the possible implications
Some will feel any delay in bringing forward Welborne is good news. Well Yes and No. For those who enjoy the fields it is good news.
Fareham Borough Council must show they have a 5 year land supply for housing. The problem for those fighting Newlands and Cranleigh Road is that any delay in Welborne could potentially be catastrophe if developers launch appeals
The game to be played out...Would the appeal inspector support the thoughts of David Hogger or the thoughts of the inspector who looked at the Navigator site. FBC is confident they can show a five year supply of land for their projected housing numbers, but then they were confident Welborne would be underway by now...
Within this guidance plan have FBC really taken into account the fact that 1 in 100 weather events are trending towards becoming 1 in 10 year events?
Don't forget to allow for the additional water caused by the run-off from Welborne, no matter what SUDS alleviation plans are put in place.
These pictures were taken on 27-01-2016 opposite Titchfield Abbey.
Link to Titchfield Village website for more examples
This is the guidance plan that Welborne Develpers will be expected to meet, it is said by our local councillors, to be very easy to read and understand, and we NEED to read and understand it. The ramifications of getting it wrong at this stage are horrendous.
PDF 14.6MB 93 pages Welborne Design Guidance Supplementary Planning Document Adoption Link to external site
We can expect the landowners to bring forward their outline planning application for the fields North of Fareham sometime in the first quarter of this year. The question many are
asking is when? Although the local communities are not privy to the goings on backstage, be in no doubt the clock is ticking, the development brief must come forward soon otherwise FBC will need a
plan "B". The problem is, of course that they haven't got one....
This is bad news because there could be a ripple effect from Welborne to the other green fields of Fareham due to the fact that Fareham needs to meet the new development projections.
There's a meeting of the Welborne Standing Conference hopefully in February, but then it could be March or April. You only have to look at the number of cancelled and postponed that have happened in the past
"Bovis is concerned about the mechanisms for delivery of this vast new settlement given the varied land ownerships, the absence of an accord between the parties and the need for smaller landowners to prepare the same level of information, planning documentation and environmental assessment as the primary landowners of Welborne. Without a single promoter of the settlement the certainty and delivery of Welborne could be threatened by disagreements between landowners, between landowners and the ‘ownership’ of technical documents required to address relevant issues associated with Welborne, and with landowners aspirations about the land uses of the ‘allocated’ land as suggested on the Strategic Framework Diagram."
What is it? 163 pages mapping out the foundations so dreams can move to reality. The Welborne Plan effectively sets out the boundaries and ingredients required to make the Welborne development
work. The plan is effectively 163 pages of guidance and principles – a roadmap to an end with plenty of wriggle room to allow for various adjustments…..like the issue of affordable homes
- anyone who believes the target of 40% will be reached in our view will be disappointed, however it is a target and it is for others to judge whether it is make believe.
The Welborne plan however has yawning gaps within it. What the plan does not say is how transport issues will be overcome, it merely says they will. How major infrastructure packages will be delivered, the plan merely sets out dates when they should be achieved. One could make a list of issues where the Welborne Plan fails to set out in any real detail how major ingredients of the plan are to be achieved.
Government Independent Inspector David Hogger considered the Plan and announced it to be sound.
Welborne Final Report
Game over. Not really.
Another Independent inspector when looking at the Navigator site at Swanwick, had some interesting comments to make on Welborne. Navigator Decision - Reference 51
Outline Planning application.
This is the next stage of getting Welborne moving and is a very important document. The landowners are responsible for drawing up this development document, not Fareham Borough Council, although what goes on behind the scenes is anyone's guess. Today we are still waiting for the landowners to forward this document to FBC who are desperate to see it.
This document should layout in some detail how all the parts of the Welborne Plan jigsaw fit together and are to be achieved but more importantly funded. This should be a very detailed planning document mapping out and providing most of the answers. An application for outline planning permission establishes the principle of development.
Outline planning applications can be used to find out whether a proposed development is likely to be approved by the planning authority before substantial costs are incurred in developing a detailed design. Outline planning applications allow the submission of outline proposals, the details of which may be agreed as 'reserved matters' applications at a later stage.
As a minimum outline, planning applications should include information on:
Welborne is a new housing development - to the North of Fareham (some 6,000 Houses), plus a further 4,000 as agreed by FBC in their Core Strategy Document. It will be the size of a small town.
Observations suggest that most people in Fareham are aware but have little idea of what the scale of the development is?
Fareham Borough Council seem bent on pushing this development through regardless of need, viability, sustainability and the views of the local people, the voters.
You bet they are? While Fareham council are dreaming up ways of adding to the problems of the already breaking M27, other councils along the way in Eastleigh, Hedge End, Winchester (Whiteley) and Havant and Waterlooville are doing their best to make sure that Fareham don't have it all their own way.
A very good question. There are 1400 families on the council waiting list but that includes downsizing, upsizing, change to a different location within the Borough etc. There are lots of people who would like to buy there own home but can't afford it, who knows how many but what we do know is those needs are rarely met by new housing developments. And of course there are "the build them and they will come contingent" but it is unreasonable to incorporate them into any claim of Fareham housing shortages.
There is no evidence that it will help the people referred to in the above question.
Health provision is the responsibility of the NHS who are required to support the growing population caused by these developments. As far as the council is concerned, somebody else's problem. Similarly roads and other parts of the infrastructure are all somebody else's problem.
No single body
We all respect that ongoing development is good for a healthy economy and peoples well being. If that development has to be in our back yard so be it. What we object to is unsustainable, unsupported and unnecessary development that is being pushed through without proper consideration and planning.
Definitely not, we welcome input from people of all political persuasions. The opposition to Welborne and other developments would be opposed whoever the ruling council was.
FBC's publication Link to external site
Based on the analysis completed at the time we considered that whilst the development delivered a considerable ‘residual surplus’ in all scenarios; when taking into account landowner and/or enabler returns (including ‘input site value’) the scheme appeared unviable and therefore undeliverable.
Sometimes it's good to look back and remember what has been said. Things don't seem to have changed much as far as funding is concerned in the last 3 months.
We are still waiting to see where that £30M is going to come from.
Take a note Miss Moneypenny
"We have always said we must identify the funding we need before we start building Welborne and we're nearly there and we haven't started and won't be building anything this year or probably next year," Cllr. Woodward said.
"We are naturally very disappointed by the Inspector's decision. Fareham neither needs nor wants, development on the scale of Welborne, which will destroy almost 1,000 acres of open Countryside and high
grade farming land, for what purpose?. Residents were told by FBC (May 2011 Special Edition of Fareham Today) that the rationale behind Welborne was to provide affordable housing for local people. That myth
was exposed years ago when FBC were forced to admit, that such homes could not be "ringfenced" for Fareham residents. To compound matters, recent changes to the Welborne plan now allow the Developers to
undershoot targets for the delivery of affordable homes, on viability grounds.
The traffic impact assessment work is both incomplete and we believe, fundamentally flawed (The HCC prediction that a mere 2% of Welborne traffic will head North on the A32 does little to generate confidence in their Transport model as a whole). There are no funded plans as to how capacity on the existing local road network/M27 can be increased to cope with the additional traffic generated by Welborne and the design for M27/J10 has yet to be agreed, let alone funded. Existing Fareham residents ought to prepare themselves for yet more traffic congestion, increased journey times and worsening air pollution.
Settlement buffers between Welborne and existing Villages are a derisory 50 metres, the downstream flood risk assessment to Wallington, Funtley & Titchfield has yet to be even started and FBC's confidence that this will be a "sustainable development", is now so low that even the sustainability targets, have been removed from the Welborne Plan.
The timely provision of infrastructure and its funding, remains as uncertain today as it was when the issue was first raised over 5 years ago and to make matters even worse, neither FBC nor the local Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG), can provide assurances that primary & secondary healthcare provision can cope with development on this scale. This includes not just the 5,500 homes @ Welborne, but the further 4,500 elsewhere across the Borough and the yet further development that is planned across the wider QA catchment area.
What has now become abundantly clear, is the extent to which FBC are totally subservient to an organisation that most people in the Borough have probably never heard of namely the undemocratically constituted, Partnership for Urban South Hampshire (PUSH), for it is PUSH who have been setting the housing target figures. In declaring the Welborne Plan "Sound" the Planning Inspector appears unfortunately, to have succumbed to what was no doubt immense pressure from his political masters and has allowed a deeply flawed plan, regardless of the consequences, when patently the Welborne plan is anything but sound.