Charlton Parish Council Dpd Draft Comment Section 14 Local Gaps

CHARLTON PARISH COUNCIL – DPD DRAFT COMMENT – SECTION 14 LOCAL GAPS

1) Charlton Parish Council considers that the Core Strategy Pre-Submission(Draft) Development Planning Document (DPD) is unsound in relation to its lack of consideration of Charlton as a discrete community meriting its own identity for planning, housing and for inclusion in the list of areas requiring local gaps to preserve the unique identity of the community.

2) It is not a matter of Charlton, as a distinct Parish, fighting the laudable aims, targets and objectives in the DPD, but it is about making a distinction between the inclusion of the parish in the “Andover Area” in the DPD – which includes a large number of distinct parishes around Andover town, and NOT including it when just the town of Andover(which is a collection of unparished areas for which Test Valley Borough is directly and solely responsible) is being considered and discussed. It is this lack of clarity which causes unsound conclusions and decisions to be reached within the DPD which can be corrected by a number of simple revisions.

3) Charlton is an old, but not ancient village. Incorporated within its Parish Boundaries is Foxcotte with its deserted medieval village (Scheduled Monument), and seven Grade II listed properties. As the manor of Foxcotte waned so Charlton slowly grew, separated from Andover to the south by the fledgling tributaries of the Anton. The village was absorbed into Andover’s Urban District in the era of heavy handed Urban/Rural local government divides, but its individual character was recognised in the local government re-organisation of the mid 1980’s when it was granted Parish Status separate from Andover within Test Valley Borough. This was granted after concerted and strong local pressure and successful management of a Village Association.

4) The independent nature of Charltonians has been measured twice in the last 15 years, and it is these measurements which form one of the planks of the argument that the DPD is not soundly based. The name Charlton derives from a saxon word “Cherels” for free peasant farmers, and Ton meaning settlement. Thus Charlton means the place where the free peasants live – and free and independent they have certainly indicated they wish to be.

5) Two major surveys have been conducted in support of government sponsored local community initiatives. The first took place in 1992 as a “Parish Appraisal” and the current leader of Test Valley Borough Council was a volunteer supporter. In this survey which had an astonishing 77% return rate of questionnaires delivered to every household, 76% of respondents said “Yes” to the question “Do you think of Charlton as a Village”. When this question was repeated in the second questionnaire in preparation of the Village Plan in 2006 this figure had risen to 89% responding “Yes”. This is a community which, despite indications to the contrary from the Borough Council, values its independence and wishes to be treated as an independent village, and not as a suburb “included in Andover” which is the phrase used in the DPD.

6) In addition, a further example of the growing independence of Charlton is the change that is occurring in the Parish organisation. St Thomas’s is de-linking from Andover and is joining the rural areas of Penton, Weyhill, Hatherden and Tangley to form “Pastro Beneficus” under an independent rural parish.

7) Turning to the matter of “Local Gaps”, the villagers of Charlton have given much thought to preserving the very evident green band around the village and have expressed very strongly their wish for it to remain. In the 2006 survey in preparation for the Village Plan which received a very high level of return of 67%, an additional question had been added to those asked previously in 1992 and that was “How important is it to you to preserve the remaining green gap around the village” Only very rarely can a questionnaire ever have produced such an unequivocal response. 88% of those replying (487 households) said it was “Very Important” and 10% said it was “Important” - a total of 98%. This is an astonishingly strong voice of a local community which sends a very clear message. As the Parish Plan is still in preparation, it would not necessarily have been possible for the Borough Council to have been aware of this strong local feeling before preparing the DPD, but the Parish Council urges the Borough to amend the DPD to include Charlton in the list of communities to be protected by a local gap. Charlton Parish Council would be happy to assist in the definition of the boundaries and take a part in the Andover Area Action Plan.

§ Section 14 of the DPD (Strategy for Andover) should therefore be amended to reflect this, in particular para 14.1 should be amended to read :

“….in addition to Andover, Charlton, Enham Alamein,……..”

§ ACSP1 Local Gaps should be amended to:

“Andover-Charlton – See Inset Map”

§ ACSP2” Settlement Boundaries should be amended to:

“…boundaries of Andover, Charlton, Abbots Ann……”

8) The arguments for a local gap between Charlton and Andover Town are numerous, and do not wholly rely upon the 98% vote of the Charlton survey population who consider its retention as “Very Important” or “Important”, and they are consistent and supported by many of the aims and objectives contained elsewhere in the DPD. These arguments have not been fully presented or considered prior to the selection of communities for consideration for local gaps. This is a serious oversight and in many ways undermines those laudable aims themselves.

9) The use of small scale topographic maps has been commented upon by the Parish Council elsewhere, particularly the fact that they are prone to exaggerate some features (for specific illustrative purposes). The topographic maps used in the draft DPD show hardly any space between Charlton and Andover town because of the blurring of features, the low resolution, and the exaggerated size of topographical features such as roads. In contrast, the larger scale print taken from a Google Earth aerial scan in spring 2008 shown at Enclosure 1 gives a much more realistic view of the nature of the existing significant green gap.

10) Whilst this gap is narrow in places, and there is still an umbilical of residential development along Charlton Road, nevertheless the DPD ACSP1 recognises the tremendous value of such gaps, how highly they are valued and that thye are “considered to be an integral part of the overall strategy of the town”. It is very disappointing that such an unduly high importance has been place on the perception of vehicular traffic in selecting local gaps, and this is not a true reflection on the physical separation that is clear from pedestrians, walkers, countryside users and those living on both sides of the current, valuable gap, the overall impact of which is much clearer from the aerial photographic view. In any event, where the gap is at its narrowest, the term “gap” must be examined closely – the gap is that between built structures and at the narrowest points of the gap the individuality and visual separation sought in ACSP1 is provided by dense plantings of trees and shrubs of various maturity which is being added to year on year by the Parish Council in a managed programme.

11) One of the very significant arguments in favour of designating the existing green space between the two settlements as a local gap is the geography of the river basin. Enclosure 2 is an illustration from the Environment Agency Website showing the floodplains separating Charlton and Andover, and Charlton and Saxon Fields. This illustrates that these areas are entirely unsuitable for development. In addition, these are designated areas for enhancement in accordance with paragraph 6.22 and the recently announced “River Anton Enhancement Strategy”. CSP9 also directs the policy in relation to development by introducing measures to Reduce the Risk of Flooding.

12) The Charlton Parish Council therefore believes that the lack of consideration for a local gap between Charlton and Andover ignores the legitimate wishes of the villagers and makes these areas of the DPD unsound. Additionally, it proposes that there should be a local gap “Andover – Charlton” the boundaries of which should be discussed in the proposed Andover Area Action Plan, and suggests that such a gap would be in compliance with, and support many other areas of the DPD.

Enclosure 1 to Charlton Parish Council Comment on DPD Draft Submission – Section 14 – Local Gaps.

Fig 1 – Charlton Spring 2008

Fig 2 – Proposed Andover – Charlton Local Gap

Enclosure 2 to Charlton Parish Council Comment on DPD Draft Submission – Section 14 – Local Gaps.

/ Flooding from rivers or sea without defences
/ Extent of extreme flood
/ Flood defences
/ Areas benefiting from flood defences

Fig 3 – Flood areas as designated by Environment Agency – Andover – Charlton Local Gap