News

Artist's impression of new homes in planned Aldershot Urban Extension
advertisement

New homes will 'join Aldershot and Farnborough'

By Amy Taylor
February 13, 2013

FARNBOROUGH’S North Camp village could reap the benefits from the planned Aldershot Urban Extension (AUE), with consultation for the development currently under way.

The AUE, if approved, would be based between Aldershot and North Camp and bring thousands of new residents to the borough.

Local politicians have underlined their hope that the AUE will increase trade for the village and act as a boost for North Camp businesses.

Public have say on 3,850 new homes
Homes will lead to new school places

Hampshire county councillor John Wall, who represents Farnborough South, said: “In principle, I see the AUE as a good thing for North Camp.

“It would mean new people being not that far away who can spend money in North Camp – and that to me is good news.

“I certainly hope it would bring trade to the area. There are some first-rate shops and businesses in North Camp and I hope that they can benefit from those extra people.

"But it is not just good news for businesses in North Camp, it is good news for Farnborough – I think it will reach into central Farnborough.”

Plans and images went on display at the Wellington shopping centre in Aldershot at the weekend, with representatives from development partners Grainger answering questions from more than 400 visitors.

John Beresford, development director for Wellesley, said it had been very positive with people focusing favourably on the pleasing architecture and open spaces.

“We have seen this as one of the final parts,” he said. “We’ve had four of these exhibitions to date, where the early ones were taking comments and factoring them into our plans.”

The main issue flagged up to the team was health provision, he added, with many worried that health centres and hospitals would be overcome with the influx of new residents, but he said existing facilities had confirmed they would be able to cope.

Rushmoor councillor Diane Bedford said she felt the AUE could fill the void between Aldershot and Farnborough, and pull the borough together.

“I think it would be good for Aldershot and Farnborough, as it would bond the area together,” she said.

“Bit by bit it will actually join the two towns together, there will be people coming into North Camp and people going over to Aldershot. It will be a good mix and match.”

She added: “My main concern though is the transport aspect. We realise it is going to bring a lot more traffic and at this stage we have got no idea how much. There is the potential to make it quite a lot worse.”

The important factor now, said Mr Beresford, was for people to submit their comments on the application either in person at Aldershot Library or the Rushmoor Borough Council offices, or on the council website using reference number 12/00958/OUT.

| Submit Comments | View Comments (33)

« Previous Story | Next Story »

Most recent user comments 15 of 33

1 | 2 | 3 | Next Page Show 15 | 25 | 50 per page

I should note Ms Geeta Nanda, Chief Executive, presides over the shambles at Thames Valley Housing.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/housing-network/2012/jun/08/thames-valley-housing-association

Here's what it says in the TVHA's Financial Review 2012 ( http://www.tvha.co.uk/~/media/Files/About%20Us/Reports/TVH%20Financial%20Review%202012.ashx ) page 13:

"Improving Customer Satisfaction General Needs Resident (i.e. rental residents in PLAIN English) satisfaction improved from 72% to 79% during the year, whilst leaseholder satisfaction declined from 46% to 44%."

IN PLAIN language:

>> Leaseholder DISsatisfaction INCREASED from 54% to 56%!!!

Which calls into question TVH's claim:

>> Rented tenants "satisfaction improved from 72% to 79%"!!!

Given that Leaseholders and rental tenants use the SAME TVH and its Contractors services it is NOT CREDIBLE claim.

She arrogantly tweeted to Mr Grant Shapps, former Minister for Housing:

https://twitter.com/grantshapps/status/238267888107126784

Grant Shapps tweeted : "Drive towards Housing Association transparency unstoppable as Thames Valley joins £500+ expenditure publishing online "

Ms Geeta Nanda tweeted: "nice personal letter the Board will enjoy reading on transparency!"

Clearly Ms Geeta Nanda NOT enthusiastic about Thames Valley Housing being transparent.

Why is Hampshire County Council and Rushmoor Borough Council NOT DEMANDING such transparency?

unhappy (now disgusted)
06/03/2013 at 21:17

Just been looking at the plans for withdraw of troops from Germany. Seems that they are planning to relocate additional forces back to Aldershot.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/136406/regular_army_basing_plan.pdf

Just wondering where they are going to put them?

Dawi, Aldershot
05/03/2013 at 16:25

Follow the example of the Eastliegh voters.

unhappy (now disgusted)
02/03/2013 at 19:27

@PJA: "5 years living on no money at all has taken it toll enough is enough!!"

You must have invented the perpetual motion machine!

Judging by the RUBBISH you post I am inclined to conclude you are a Tory troll.

unhappy (now disgusted)
01/03/2013 at 02:06

as for unhappy my wife has signed herself off against her surgeon and doctor recommendations but she has had no choice because both Labour goverment and the now goverment would not help her.

She is suffering from cancer still having chemo yet cannot get any help on benefits, so as she gets no help has nothing to lose other than her life!!

5 years living on no money at all has taken it toll enough is enough!!

PJA
26/02/2013 at 05:25

I am not a Tory/or a right whinge troll, i find this ofensive and so wrong from the truth!!

The council also sold of most of the housing to associations as well, who might I add do not charge low rents.

Those council homes that were sold off for right to buy and the homes sold through to housing associations- those homes the council got full cost of the homes and what did they do with the money from the homes it certainly didn't go on more homes did it?.

And might I add the people in council homes did get a vote in the begining to go with a housing association landlord they thought they would be better off with a private landlord, so they have themselves to blame if they are not happy now.

Their are many who do not live within their means weather poor or rich - the fact is we have seen thousands of new homes been built in and around rushmoor and yet we still seem to not have enough homes, but it is also a fact that we have single people in 2-3-4 bedroom homes who could downgrade to make way for families, I have some neighbours that are in small 2 bedroom homes where their are more than 4 or 5 people living in them, certainly overcrowded but have no where else to go.

yet single people live in large 2 bedroom homes that could be converted into 3 bedroom homes and make way for families with 2 and 3 or more children.

PJA
26/02/2013 at 05:08

"Labour's food spokeswoman, Mary Creagh, said the investigation highlighted how behind the curve ministers were when it came to food poverty. "They have an awful lot of catching up to do on the reality of the nutritional recession affecting large numbers of people in the UK.""

"nutritional recession"

Is this the best you can come up with to articulate the plight of the poor?

In plain English Dear: "Tories are starving the poor into jobs that don't exist as their failed Work Programme has proved."

Out of touch and out of brains Labour vs the Tory Fat Cats. What a mismatch.

unhappy (now disgusted)
25/02/2013 at 20:25

@SpongeBob NoPants, Farnborough

PJA is a Tory/Right Whinge Troll.

So when s/he says: "If everyone in this country lived within their means we would not have a housing problem at all!!"

What he means if those who can't afford it lived on the street! Just like in the good old days!!!! Just watch BBC's "Call the Midwife" episode for Sunday, 17.02.2013 about a mom with 11 kids.

You see first the Tories got rid of affordable social housing (aka Council Houses). Which meant the private sector had no competition and so they raise the rents to the rafters. Now the Tories do Part-II cap the Benefits and force the people on the lower rungs of the society out to poorer parts of the UK. Social cleansing.

Guess what the Government is 'concerned' at the rise of food banks and are launching an investigation!!!

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2013/feb/24/food-banks-increase-defra-inquiry

Hey, PJA I am waiting for your FULL particulars so we can see what Benefits you and your Mrs qualify for.

I tell you what, why don't you and your missus change places with the Mom and her partner with 11 kids, seen as you think they are so better off than you?

Meanwhile have a look at what is happening in Westminster House of Conmans:

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/4811695/mps-computers-in-whitehall-used-to-look-up-porn.html

unhappy (now disgusted)
25/02/2013 at 13:59

PJA, The reason why we have a shortage of social housing is because It all got sold off for right to buy. That's why tax payer has to meet the bill for privately rented accomodation when none remains for those that need it. As far as home owners are concerned you simply cannot be telling them to sell up if they have spare bedrooms that would be madness.

SpongeBob NoPants, Farnborough
25/02/2013 at 11:52

The reason why we have shortage of social or private housing is due to say a single person living in a 2-3-4 bedroom home when in fact they only need a 1 bedroom home, these people could free up these homes so that the families who live in bed and breakfast waiting for homes at the cost of tax payers can move into them.

If everyone in this country lived within their means we would not have a housing problem at all!!

PJA
23/02/2013 at 10:25

On the subject of housing cost and MP’s, I would like to see the systems of selection changed so that it is a requirement that only people who already live in a constituency (and have lived there for at least 5 years) are allowed to stand for that constituency (no more “parachuting” high profile candidates in to “Safe Seats”). That way there is no need for a housing allowance for the constituency or “little extras” at the public expense, they pay their full way for their own homes.

Each constituency should have an MP’s office of a standard size and standard fixtures and fittings (located in a local council office) which is occupied by whoever is elected. That should make them easily accessible to the people who elected them.

For all MP’s who are outside of London (as served by London Transport), there should be one central location that is comprised of identical accommodation (possibly 2 bedroom flats) with identical fittings and furniture to house MP’s when attending the House, which can be maintained and serviced by a Housing Association under a contract for a fixed fee per unit (it might also help keep MP’s in touch with what “ordinary people” have to put up with).

That would help keep down the “running costs” of our MP’s, and reduce the opportunities for fiddling expenses.

Dawi, Aldershot
19/02/2013 at 20:41

@PJA: They say being on benefits is hard - just look at following story in todays paper: -http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/378643/Mum-of-11-gets-free-designer-eco-mansion-paid-for-by-you

That story, sTory being the operative word, is full of rumour, supposition, hearsay and speculation, and taken out of context. The media hype it up as an "eco-mansion"!! when it's clear from the story ALL the housing on that estate is designed the same way except this one residence is combined into one large residence.

What's the big deal? It's NOT one family but several families living together. Isn't family life a Tory thing?

If they were housed separately it would cost a LOT more. In fact the REASON why we have shortage of housing is because so many people live as singles requiring one-bed housing with its own living room, kitchen, bathroom!! While the wealthy Tories have 2nd and third homes driving up the prices beyond the affordability of the locals. Yet here we have a family of 11 sharing one kitchen and two bathrooms. Far more efficient I say.

I bet they cost us less than what our useless Tory MP's second home costs which is most of the time unoccupied!!! 3-4 Bedroom house with a garage and drive-way and large front and rear gardens for an MP and his wife?!!!!!!

The ACTUAL build cost is probably no more than £30K and yet the rabid Right-Whingers quote the market value.

Just looked up prices of houses there and a 5-bedroom house costs £350-500,000. So housing 11 people in one £400K - sorry £30-40K - house seems rather efficient.

Employment rate in Tewkesbury is72.0% and for Gloucestershire it's 75.8% according to DWP data ( http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/cpa-gloucestershire.xls ). i.e. 28% are unemployed!! Clearly the Government (aka IDS) needs get his finger out and create jobs.

unhappy (now disgusted)
19/02/2013 at 18:52

When all these homes are built and we join with farnborough we might as well just be one town, their will be no seperation between us, we might as well be called one town.

Then the rest of Aldershot will become a giant housing estate allowing Farnborough town to be built up?.

I think that would be great do you not think so?

PJA
19/02/2013 at 08:38

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/378643/Mum-of-11-gets-free-designer-eco-mansion-paid-for-by-you

where do you think this person should live then? and do you think the tax payer should fund the family?

Because I doubt if this is the only family in the uk that is depending on the British Tax Payer?.