Alton Town Partnership
The Alton Town Partnership oversees the delivery of the Alton Town Plan recommendations and also helps to develop Alton.
Please contact us by telephone at +44 (0) 1420 549684, by email:
or write to:-
The Alton Town Partnership, 66 High Street, Alton, Hampshire. GU34 1ET. UK.
Thank you to everyone who came to our meeting on Saturday 28th February 2009
and made it a tremendous success.
Based on your feedback the results are published below.
If you wish to see the original questionnaire, presentation and minutes
please click here.
Local Development Framework & Core Strategy for the Future of Alton
We have produced five detailed documents which you can download using the links below.
The ATP Executive Core Strategy
Final Report is also summarised in the text beneath the table.
To view the tables and diagrams, please download the Word file.
Here is a rolling presentation of
pictures of the Station Approach (40mb file).
The Station Approach Diagrams and Plans are contained in the six pdf files in the table below.
The key issue for us in Alton is the shape of the next Local Plan, or Local Development Framework (LDF) as
it will now be called. This will define the areas and scale of development in Alton until 2026.
East Hampshire District Council (EHDC) is trying to establish the Core Strategy for this plan.
REPORT ON PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT CONCERNING THE DEVELOPMENT OF EHDC’S CORE STRATEGY
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1. The consultation process reported on above was carried out in response to EHDC Officers and Councillors meeting with Alton Town Council
and representatives of other organisations in July 2008. At the meeting Altonians were encouraged to propose general sites for new housing within
Alton, to meet government targets for North East Hants under the process of the Core Strategy until 2026. Much effort and time has been invested
on a voluntary basis throughout the process of consultation and development of this report. It was heartening that we had such a magnificent
response from the public who attended in numbers exceeding 400. They were very willing to engage and eager to be kept informed of future
developments of the Core Strategy including the numbers of new houses and additional population this may bring to Alton. Mr Ian Godfrey is our
nominated EHDC focus concerning this work and he has been kept informed of our progress throughout. In addition he has been requested to provide
feedback from EHDC on issues impacting our work. General top level results were as follows:
1.1 On the selection of how housing quota requirements should be distributed throughout NE Hants we adhered to the EHDC CH1, CH2 and CH3 options.
From these CH2 closely followed by CH3 were those of preference to Altonians.
1.2 From the sites selected by us as having potential for development as part of this consultation the Station area received
the most support for development. This was followed by North 1, East 2 and North 3 in that order, but closely grouped.
Least preferred were South West and West.
1.3 There were many reasons for support of the sites, but the main ones were access (by roads and to the town centre),
already developed sites, low visual impact and areas in need of improvement.
1.4 In a similar way the reasons for opposing were green fields/belt, violation of scenery/gateway views and flooding/drainage issues.
These were key elements defined in the Alton Town Design Statement.
1.5 Each of the infrastructure options we offered received much support as they are all key issues to the town. However, notable for
their greater support were road and rail links and sewerage/drainage.
1.6 We received a healthy response to various questions posed as part of the questionnaire. These have been tabulated in the report
and are too detailed to summarise here.
The ATP hopes that this report will contribute towards the EHDC’s preparation of the Core Strategy paper for submission to government.
NEXT STEPS
ATP is keen to have further discussion concerning the data and comments gathered in the consultation. A meeting with Alton Town Council is
scheduled for 13th May 2009 .It is clear from the response received that the people of Alton believe that EHDC needs to engage in a much more
detailed consultation, particularly now that the National Park situation has become clearer, and to do so before the recommendations about
strategy and numbers are settled. The ATP is anxious overall and particularly with regard to the more detailed identification of preferred sites,
that EHDC should arrange early liaison meetings with ATP, ATC and other Altonians about its Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment.
Report Contents
A. INTRODUCTION
B. THE PARTNERSHIP’S PRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AND ASSUMPTIONS
C. THE PUBLIC RESPONSE TO THE PARTNERSHIP’S QUESTIONNAIRE
APPENDICES
A. ATP PowerPoint presentation as publicly delivered on 28 February 2009
B. ATP consultation questionnaire including the accompanying map
A INTRODUCTION
1 Alton Town Partnership organized a public engagement event concerning Core Strategy issues, with housing as the focal point.
The event was held on Saturday 28 February 2009 between 10.00 am and 2.00pm in Alton Community Centre. More than 400 people attended.
Participants were asked to complete a questionnaire either before their departure or at some subsequent point, and to date almost 200
responses have been received.
B THE PARTNERSHIP’S PRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AND ASSUMPTIONS
2 During the course of the event, Mike Heelis, Leader of the ATP Environment Group, presented on four separate occasions
a contextual summary of the aims of the Core Strategy and the objectives of the engagement exercise together with an explanation
of the assumptions the Working Group had made in arriving at the range of housing figures that might be required in Alton (Appendix A).
3 The commentary made clear that the EHDC was being required by Central Government to plan for 4,000 new dwelling units in the relevant parts of
Central Hampshire (excluding Bordon/Whitehill and the ‘Southern Parishes’) over the period 2006-2026, and that, within this overall figure, some 700
dwellings had already been built or approved by the planners for previously agreed sites in Alton.
3.1 An explanation was given of the Council’s three broad strategic options for additional development, coded as CH1, CH2, and CH3, and of
the Partnership’s best estimates of the implications that each of these choices might have for the scale of future residential building in the town,
over and above the 700 units.
3.2 It was noted that the final decisions (which had yet to be announced at this stage) about the designation and boundaries of any
South Downs National Park will have an important bearing on the overall pattern of the district’s housing distribution, particularly as
between Alton and Petersfield, and that (as the Appendix makes clear) certain assumptions had been built into the Partnership’s provisional estimates.
3.3 It was explained that, given present information and pending further clarification from the EHDC, ATP believed it reasonable to focus on
obtaining Altonians’ reactions chiefly to the option represented by CH2.
3.4 It was pointed out that, on the best estimates currently available and with the eventual National Park decisions still pending,
CH2 might produce a requirement for Alton to take anything from 1,365 to 1,995 new dwellings (or from 665 to 1,295 units beyond the 700 already
allocated),
3.4.1 The mid-figure of 980 units extra dwellings when added to the 700 already approved, indicated a potential growth of Alton’s
population to around 21,220 by 2026.
3.4.2 It was further noted that, although the proposals for building around 5000 new units in a Whitehill/Bordon ‘ecotown’
lay beyond the scope of the current consultation, any implementation of such a scheme would inevitably have some impact on the broader
surrounding area.
4 It was explained that via the questionnaire and the accompanying sketch-map (see Appendix B and below), ATP was now inviting
preliminary public comment on eight general areas for possible residential development, over and above those which might constitute ordinary
‘windfall’ or ‘brownfield’ sites:
4.1 The Partnership’s decision to consult about potential locations followed on from a meeting held in July 2008, when representatives of the
EHDC had stressed to Town Councillors and others that additional housing had to be placed somewhere in Alton and that it was desirable for the local
community to suggest some broad options.
4.1.1 Seven of the areas that the ATP was now proposing for discussion lay within the Alton civil parish, while the eighth
(labelled ‘South West’) was located beyond but had been included because of quite regular public reference to its alleged suitability.
4.1.2 It was explained that, with the exception of Station Approach all of these areas were being presented (as the EHDC itself had advised)
only in the broadest schematic terms. Nor was there any intent to identify, at this stage any more specific development sites within them.
4.1.3 It was emphasized that ATP Environment Group had not previously published the areas, and was now offering the listing simply as a
reasonable pump-primer for the start of public debate. Similarly, the Group had formulated no assumptions as to whether any particular amount
of residential enlargement for the town should be either concentrated within a very few of these areas or otherwise widely dispersed around them.
5 The considerable interest aroused among participants by these issues was reflected in the vigorous question-and-answer sessions following
each presentation. There were also maps and photographs on display, and these too helped to promote lively debate on the pros and cons of each
area option.
C THE PUBLIC RESPONSE TO THE PARTNERSHIP’S QUESTIONNAIRE
6 At the time the following analysis was conducted there were 184 responses. The geographical distribution by Postcode of responses received was
as follows: Please see Word Document.
7 Core Strategy options.
The CH1, CH2, and CH3 options were as per EHDC consultation in 2008 as follows;
CH1 - Focus new development at the larger towns of Alton and Petersfield.
CH2 – Focus new development at Alton, Petersfield and modest amounts at other
places (Liphook, Liss and Four Marks) to take advantage of existing services and facilities or to meet identified local needs.
CH 3 – Spread new development throughout central Hampshire area of the district to
meet identifiable local needs.
7.1 The numbers supporting each of these were as follows:
7.2 The quite substantial ‘nil’ return (27%), is most probably due to the questionnaire layout which failed to draw adequate
attention to this particular question. Amongst the large majority of respondents who did complete the question there is virtually no
support for CH1.
7.3 There is a slight preference for CH2 over CH3 although this is only marginally significant,
8 General areas in and around Alton for possible development.
People were asked to indicate which of the areas were considered suitable for development. There was no limit set on the number
of areas for which they could vote, respondents could therefore use as many as 8 votes (1 per area) or as few as none.
The following table shows the number of votes received for each area, and also the percentage of respondents voting for each area.
8.1 The general indication is a preference for development more to the north and east rather than to the West of the town,
with the area surrounding the Station being the most favoured of all.
8.2 Respondents were then asked to rank all the areas in their order of suitability for housing development. The table in the Wrod Document
summarises the overall ranking (with 1 as for and 8 against) which in general terms reinforces the development preferences indicated above,
with Station Approach being placed in the first and indeed in the first three positions, most often. Once more there was greater concern
expressed regarding development towards the west of the town.
8.3 The figures in the Word Document make the relative acceptability of the different areas even more clear.
This analysis groups the areas ranked 1 and 2 as being ‘For’ and those ranked 7and 8 as being ‘Against" with the ‘votes’ for and against being
expressed as percentages. It should be noted that additional analyses weighting the rankings in various ways produced very similar results.
8.4 Respondents were also asked to give reasons for their choice of most acceptable and least acceptable options.
Their ‘open-ended’ responses have been analysed, grouped and summarised in a table.
8.4.1 The table suggests that the factors which are most important to Altonians are access roads, areas needing
improvement, and low visual impact. Altonians also strongly favour ‘killing two birds with one stone’ and view Station
Approach in real need of development and ideal for housing given its proximity to public transport and also to the Town Centre.
8.5 In similar fashion respondents were asked to give their reasons for opposing development in each of the areas:
8.5.1 The totals in the right hand column of the table present a clear general picture. In this as in all other surveys conducted in
the process of developing Alton 2020 and the Town Design Statement, the greatest concern is for the protection of Alton’s position within
the surrounding hills, its scenery, vistas, and ‘gateway’ views. Also high on the list are concerns over flooding (not simply restricted to
the areas on which development might take place, but highlighting the additional load imposed on the drainage system by the run-off from hard
landscaping), the loss of green fields, spaces and amenities, and the leakage of development out of the current containment boundaries.
9 Additional Infrastructure requirements. Respondents were also asked to rank the importance of identified infrastructure requirements and
these are recorded as follows (ranks 1 and 2 are most important and 7 and 8 least important).
9.1 Particular attention clearly needs to given to the strength of feeling expressed about adequate sewerage and drainage provision,
which doubtless reflects the problems that many Altonians already encounter even with housing numbers at their current level.
We must record one further important comment. This question was framed in a way to elicit the order of priority that should be given to
additional infrastructure occasioned by an increase in dwellings. Thus it would be incorrect to draw the conclusion that any of the
lower-rated items (in particular the provision of fit for purpose sports facilities to match existing and future needs) are thought
by the townspeople to be unimportant in any absolute, as distinct, from relative sense.
10 Responses to particular propositions
Respondents were asked to tell us the extent to which they either Agreed or Disagreed (on a scale of 1-7) with a number of statements.
10.1 This table supports the general view that Alton will grow, although Altonians seem unsure whether such growth will necessarily impact favourably
on the town. It is not thought that growth will automatically result in a more vibrant and sustainable settlement nor that it will inevitably lead to
a more prosperous town centre economy.
It is clear that Altonians wish that any further development is carefully planned and takes full account of the town’s needs and its existing character
which is highly valued: thus the very substantial levels of agreement about the need for incremental infrastructure to support growth; the recognition
of the importance of affordable housing; and respect for the guidelines regarding the style and location of development detailed in the Town Design
Statement. It would also appear that Altonians are not happy to leave matters as they stand but anticipate, indeed expect, further detailed involvement
in planning before matters are finalised.
Alton Town Partnership. May 2009
Thank you to the people of Alton for contributing so comprehensively to these Reports.
If you wish to comment on these reports please email Chris McCallum
top of page
The Alton Town Partnership is making major contributions to the Core Strategy for Alton, and also the future of
our district in East Hampshire.
Some of these links download a Word document.
If you are on a slow internet link be patient as some of these documents may take a short time to load.
If you do not have Word (or Openoffice), and you wish to view a particular document, send us an email and we will try and accommodate you.
Last Change - June 2009
Legal stuff - Details are subject to change but believed to be correct at time of writing (allowing for typing errors).
If you see a mistake, please send an email to comment67 
(Change the " at " to @)
If you would like to use any of the material here, please email us. Feel free to link to us at any time.
Copyright of external sites remains and shall be that of the respective owners.
Copyright © Alton Town Partnership 2006 - 2009