
advertisement
Plans for 200 homes rejected
By Stephen LloydMay 21, 2009
CAMPAIGNERS are celebrating a government decision to throw out plans for more than 200 homes overlooking Fleet Pond.
Helical Bar (Fleet) Ltd had applied to build 202 homes at Waterfront Business Park, next to Fleet railway station.
Hart District Council threw out the application in February last year but Helical appealed and the issue was thrashed out before a government-appointed planning inspector during a detailed inquiry in January.
Inspector Paul Dignan’s recommendation that the appeal be rejected has now been ratified by Hazel Blears, Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government.
The news has delighted campaigners, including Cllr Sharyn Wheale.
“As ward councillor for Pondtail, I have always supported the fact that the principle of housing on this quality employment site was wrong,” she said.
“It would have had a detrimental effect on adjoining properties and the Fleet Pond Nature Reserve.
“It has been a long battle and, having represented residents at the appeal, I am delighted the secretary of state has agreed with us and dismissed the appeal.”
Dr Richard Pinchin, who presented evidence at the inquiry, is also delighted. He said: “This news will please many hundreds of Fleet residents. Loss of employment land is cited as one of the reasons the appeal was rejected.
“Unfortunately, many small businesses on the Waterfront Business Park have closed, some people have already lost their jobs and several small industrial units are now looking quite neglected.
“I hope the council will, with the developers, seek to regenerate the site for small business use.”
The council and developer clashed over the proposal during the public inquiry at Hart’s Fleet headquarters.
Michael Bedford, representing Hart, warned that one planned four-storey block would be at least 14m high – twice the height of houses in nearby Darset Avenue.
Mr Bedford added: “In short, what is proposed is excessive for the site.”
However, Craig Howell-Williams, representing Helical, told the inquiry: “The scheme will create a pleasant place to live and enhance the townscape and the environment.”
He said there was no likelihood of further office development taking place on the appeal site as Helical had stated that this was not an option.
Mr Howell-Williams claimed residents’ fears that the homes would cause traffic problems were unjustified as there had been no objections from the highway authority to the application.

Browse Sections


