Long Copse Lane is being compared with Greenaway Lane in Fareham where planning permission has been granted. The comparison is tenuous as Greenaway Lane is a cul-de-sac.

Land & Partners continue to submit new documents to support their application for 210 houses to the North of Long Copse Lane. 

Despite the submitted local plan being withdrawn, the proposed development of 210 houses North of Long Copse Lane is still included in HBC’s 5 year housing targets. The developer continues to propose unsatisfactory solutions to the many problems that exist with this site, including those raised by statuary bodies.

There is an ongoing debate on whether a stretch of LCL can be made wide enough to accommodate increased motor and pedestrian traffic. Both the developers and Hampshire Highways claim that a fair comparison is Greenaway Road in Fareham, despite there being no through traffic and not being used by horse riders. Please see the photograph below. Lack of a footpath in LCL would require pedestrians to take refuge in existing resident’s gardens with all the safety and legal hazards that entails. Suggesting that a footpath may be provided in the future, should more development be permitted in Long Copse Lane, cannot be considered a responsible solution. Hazards to pedestrians from traffic heading to Westbourne are a major concern but only Westbourne Parish Council seem willing to question the developer’s assertion that proportionately the development will result in less traffic travelling east towards Chichester.

Disposal of waste water is a serious concern as the latest reports confirm that the remaining capacity in Thornham WwTw is now limited to less than 150 houses. This number reduces for every new property that is connected to the Thornham WwTw. Allowing development to proceed, even for a very small number of houses based on expectations or promise of some future increased capacity is not a responsible solution. The developers have proposed building a local sewage works for the development. This is not a solution that is likely to be accepted by the Environment Agency. On site treatment works have a poor record.

The proposal to buy prime agricultural land from Stansted Estates and  replace crops with trees, in a vain attempt to compensate for nitrates produced by the development, is not well publicised. It is questionable in light of the latest guidance from Natural England. There is likely to be a significant time lag of many years before there is any reduction in Nitrates reaching the sea, since the proposed tree planting site is on chalk soils. This problem requires discussion now and cannot be set aside for a later date.

No matter how many times the proposal for a development North of LCL is reviewed, the same answer is reached, namely that the serious problems to overcome have no realistic or safe solution.

The Case Officer is still accepting comments. To raise objections to the application email adrian.ellis@easthants.gov.uk quoting planning application APP/21/00893.  Each individual in a household may submit their own objection.