Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

Biscoes
Sponsored by
Official Portsmouth Football Club Partner
www.biscoes-law.co.uk - 0845 4566 944
 
 
Monday, 8th September 2008

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The News site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

South escapes yet more new homes



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date:
18 July 2008
Today marks a major victory for The News' Save Our South campaign after the government announced Portsmouth and south Hampshire will escape a fresh wave of housebuilding.
The welcome news comes as the rest of the south east was reeling at the revelation that councils across the region will have to find room for an extra 5,000 homes a year for almost two decades – on top of the annual 28,900 already planned.

But as part of that announcement the secretary of state for communities and local government, Hazel Blears, yesterday confirmed that the number of new homes built across south Hampshire during the next 18 years will stay at 80,000.

Council leaders welcomed yesterday's development, after bracing themselves for bad news.

Portsmouth council leader Gerald Vernon-Jackson said: 'I made it absolutely clear that if they tried to force more homes here I would oppose it every step of the way. I am very pleased they have listened to our lobbying and aren't going to be doing that.'

The new figures were revealed in Ms Blears' response to the South East Plan – a blueprint for how the region will develop up until 2026.

The document, along with the changes she has made, will now undergo a 12-week consultation before finally getting the rubber-stamp from the government.

The Partnership for Urban South Hampshire – a body of 11 local councils – helped work out where the 80,000 homes will go.

Chairman Cllr Sean Woodward said: 'I am absolutely delighted that the work of PUSH has been vindicated and the numbers have stayed exactly the same.

'We put forward very credible arguments that were all evidence based as to why we should have that number and no more.'

But campaigners have sent out a clear message that the government must now stump up the cash to build infrastructure for the thousands of new homes.

Claire Smith, of Gosport, formed South Hampshire's Unheard Voices (SHUV) for members of the public to have their say about the massive housebuilding programme.

She said: 'It is really good news that there is no additional houses – if there had been any more it would have been a disaster.

'But the original figure of 80,000 was already too high. We are going to struggle with a lack of dentists, hospitals, schools and sewage.'

The full article contains 399 words and appears in The News newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 18 July 2008 8:45 AM
  • Source: The News
  • Location: Portsmouth
 
Prev
1
Next
1

Whiteley Resident,

Whiteley 22/07/2008 15:54:48
'But the original figure of 80,000 was already too high. We are going to struggle with a lack of dentists, hospitals, schools and sewage.'

I dont think there will be a lack of sewage - quite the opposite in fact :-)
2

Woodward is the messiah,

24/07/2008 21:13:08
Its ok, Winchester Council will squeeze 70,000 of them into Whiteley - its far enough away from the City not to bother them.
3

Yocal,

Waterlooville 26/07/2008 12:46:44
Grainger are already building a portacabin city at Waterlooville despite the credit crunch.
Prev
1
Next

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.