COUNCILLORS have united in a campaign to stop a free for all for housing developers in the Test Valley.

Civic chiefs are very worried that Labour's national plans for a huge increase in house-building will undermine the local plan and create a bonanza of speculative development.

The Government has told Test Valley to plan for 921 homes a year rather than 524. The supply of earmarked land would run out within three years opening the way for developers to promote their schemes and get planning permission via appeals.

Currently developers are promoting schemes for land that is deemed 'countryside' in the local plan including at Halterworth, south of Ganger Farm and Ampfield.

A motion at the full council of Test Valley Borough Council was unanimously supported by Liberal Democrats and Conservative councillors.

It was proposed and seconded by Lib Dem councillors Mark Cooper and John Parker.

Cllr Cooper said the council needs more time to update its local plan to prepare for the additional housing. The current plan which would run to 2040 is a late stage of consultation.

He said: "We are very worried. The problem we have is that Romsey is a very popular area for people to want to live and there is a lot of pressure for additional housing.

"What we are trying to do is retain control of housing allocation sites by democratically-elected councillors and planning officers and not leave it to developers to come pouring in making speculative planning applications which may get granted by the Planning Inspectorate on appeal."

Conservative member Nick Adams-King, a borough councillor and also leader of Hampshire County Council, agreed: "This motion was vital, and I desperately hope the Government will listen to the concerns raised within it.  Unless the Government agrees a reasonable transition to their proposed new housing targets Test Valley, along with all other Hampshire districts, will be left exposed to speculative applications from developers.

"As a consequence not only will we fail to provide the housing we need, but also the infrastructure that’s vital if population growth is to be supported.”

In the last 20 years around 1,500 homes have been built north east of Romsey around Abbotswood and Cupernham Lane.

The motion passed on Wednesday October 16 states: 1  The Council believes strongly in a plan led system to provide housing, employment land and appropriate infrastructure and is concerned by the implications contained within the revised NPPF, in particular the inadequate transitional arrangements, and which will lead instead to a speculative development system. 

2  The Council thus strongly supports the letter written by the Council Leader and Planning Portfolio holder to the Deputy Prime Minister to express Test Valley Borough Council's concern about the implications of having to halt our draft Borough Local Plan at the Regulation 18 stage 2 as a consequence of being required to move from providing 524 dwellings per year in the next plan period to 921 dwellings per year. This would mean that our housing land supply would fall from over six years to less than three years resulting in developers making speculative planning applications on the land they either own or on which they have options. The location of those applications will thus be decided by the developers and not the local planning authority leading to piecemeal and ad hoc developments. 

3  This Council believes that once developers get their planning permissions because of our lack of HLS, they may then land bank their permissions in order to constrict housing supply and thus maintain high prices and their profit margins.

4)  Council thus supports:- 

a) that the housing provision stays at 524 p.a. until such time as Test Valley Borough Council has had time to progress a revised BLP to an advanced stage which allocates sites for the required 921 p.a. thus allowing the Council to retain a plan led system.     

b)  That once a permission is issued there should be a set timeline to bring the houses to market and further that if an agreed timeline is not adhered to, then the land be subject to financial penalties (which may include an annual Site Value Tax) as a disincentive for land-banking and in order for the Council to continue to meet its five year housing land supply.

c)  Notes that the creation of a financial disincentive for land-banking will require legislation at a national level and requests that the Council writes to the appropriate Ministers urging that Parliamentary time be given to facilitate housing delivery.