News: There is no magic wand

Local MP Caroline Nokes gave a stark warning to a packed Village Hall. Talking about the outline planning application for 75 homes, she said “This is a challenge. I cannot wave a magic wand and make this go away.”

The organisers had laid out ninety seats, and by the time the meeting started almost every seat had been filled.

Peter Collis welcomed everybody and explained that the purpose of the meeting was foremost to hear from the Rt Hon Caroline Nokes MP. There would also be news on what was being done to craft the Parish Council’s response to the planning application.

Caroline Nokes

Caroline Nokes’s opening address was a sobering experience for everyone there. The Government’s ambition to build 1.5 million homes during the life of this parliament has put a great deal of pressure on Test Valley Borough Council. It has also opened up opportunities for developers.

“There are planning applications all over the place,” she said. “The village where I live has applications for 200 houses.”

She pointed out that one of the problems for TVBC is that there are simply not enough brownfield sites within the borough.

Ms Nokes was a member of TVBC’s Southern Area Planning Committee for twelve years. She admitted that her planning knowledge was “a little rusty”, but she gave some thoughts on how villagers could best respond to planning applications.

She reminded residents that Chilbolton has a Neighbourhood Development Plan. It policies could be used in objection. She also said that developments had to be sustainable, and that traffic and its associated risks were valid concerns.

Making objections based on valid planning reasons was important because it was those that councillors on TVBC’s Planning Committee used to make their decisions.

She strongly emphasised that anyone objecting should use their own words. Template responses are not as effective.

Reminding the room how high the stakes are with outline planning permission, she said “Once it’s granted, it is set up as a development site.”

Questions from residents

A resident asked “What do you suggest when TVBC ignore the [National Planning Policy Framework] and the [Chilbolton Neighbourhood Development Plan]?”

Ms Nokes said “TVBC is between a rock and a hard place. If they reject an application for spurious reasons, the Planning Inspector will rule against them on appeal.” When councils lose these appeals, they are liable for the costs. “Council tax will rise,” she said.

She was asked for her thoughts on local government reorganisation in Hampshire and the effect it would have on planning issues. “Lumping Test Valley in with Southampton, I live in real fear of what it will do, " she said. “Already Southampton are putting pressure on Chilworth to take their overspill.”

Cllr David Hall asked about what could be done if Southern Water simply say “Yes, we can deal with this development”. Ms Nokes replied “I don’t think there’s a golden bullet. Southern Water have a legal obligation to say ‘yes’. They say that they don’t have the bandwidth. My view is that they should be commenting on every application.”

She added “Southern Water can’t cope with the drainage and they can’t deliver water competently. They’ve failed to deliver clean water at an adequate pressure.”

Cllr Hall asked “How prepared are you to speak out on [the outline planning application]?”

Ms Nokes said “I appreciate the land and the environment and I will always do what I can. But I can’t dictate to local councillors, they have to make their decisions on valid planning grounds.”

At several points during her session, Ms Nokes apologised for sounding “bleak”, but as she concluded she was applauded warmly in the room.

Traffic

Traffic Survey

A key theme at this meeting was the effect the proposed development would have on traffic volumes and safety in the Village. Cllr Hall observed that the consultants’ traffic report only covered volumes to and from the site and didn’t consider the rest of the Village. Peter Collis added “It doesn’t feel like the consultants actually visited the Village.”

He announced that a traffic survey, commissioned by the Parish Council, would begin next Tuesday, 9 Dec 2025. It will last for seven days and the results will be available in time for the Parish Council to include in their response to the outline planning application.

Road safety perception survey

At the meeting, Cllr Martin Watson revealed a road safety perception survey, It aims to find out “how safe people feel when travelling around the Village. The results will be available in early January and will also inform CPC’s response.

Survey forms were filled in by attendees at the meeting. If you would also like to complete the survey, download it here and print it out. When you’ve completed it, deposit it in the egg shelter outside Cllr Martin Watson’s home at the very bottom of Drove Road on the western side.

Road danger pinboard

Cllr Watson also announced a novel feedback mechanism. At the back of the room was an aerial map of Chilbolton. Everyone attending the meeting was invited to take a single map pin and place it at the point on the roads of the Village where they felt most danger. The results were interesting, and made sense:

Road width measurement

Alisdair Campbell told the meeting that additional data would be gathered, measuring road widths in the Village. This too will be used in responding to the application.

The measurement take place next Thursday 11 Dec 2025. Mr Campbell said that he and Cllr Neil Connor would be undertaking the work. He said that they would be wearing hi-visibility jackets. This was not only for safety, but also to identify themselves as working on behalf of the Parish Council.

Some new objections

Presentations were made by the working group responsible for preparing Chilbolton’s response to the 75-home planning application. They reported on progress and highlighted some new developments and ideas that have arisen since the last meeting.

Environment

The Environmental Protection team at TVBC have reported on the plan, and have concluded “we are unable to support the application at this time”.

The main reasons they gave were with respect to the proposed community facilities, they said “we are concerned that careful consideration of the uses permitted, and layout and design of the site are fundamental in avoiding adverse impacts between the proposed facilities and residential dwellings.”

The issues they raised were:

• The inclusion of community sports, a café and other facilities requires careful consideration of layout to avoid noise, odour and other impacts from adversely affecting existing and proposed new dwellings.
• It should be noted that pickle ball is noisier than tennis and noise arising from play may give rise to adverse noise impacts on existing and proposed dwellings.
• Community facilities such as cafes and other buildings can give rise to noise impacts from fixed plant, e.g. air conditioners, fans and etc. as well as odours from cooking. Buildings used to host events and or entertainment can give rise to adverse noise impacts from amplified music and from other entertainments or activities hosted.
• The siting of children’s play areas should also be carefully considered to ensure that they can be used fully and not be located so as to be likely to cause noise complaints.
• It is not clear what lighting may be required for the various community facilities proposed, nor how adverse impacts from this would be prevented.

Ecology

The Ecology Team has also raised objections. They are not happy that Biodiversity Net Gain has been properly assessed. BNG is a means of measuring biodiversity. Developers are required to include a 10% increase in this measurement.

They do this by creating biodiversity on the site they are building on, by buying biodiversity units from other people, or from the Government.

Of more interest, perhaps, is that the Ecology Team say

there are concerns that the presence of hazel dormice could be possible within the site. The report states that it is unlikely hazel dormouse will be affected by the development proposals but there is no evidence of survey efforts to assess their potential presence/absence given that suitable habitat is present.

They say that “Protected species surveys for hazel dormice and reptiles should be undertaken and submitted to fully inform a planning decision.”

Observatory

Discussing other possible objections, Duncan Revolta said that the Observatory might be considering one. This might be because of possible electromagnetic radiation from the development site. It could also affect sight lines for their observations and affect what they term “clear horizon”.

Light pollution

The Observatory may also be affected by light pollution. Mr Painter in his recent letter to CPC said that he “would not propose street lighting in the development, protecting dark skies.” However, their is also light from homes and vehicles.

An extremely detailed response, majoring on “dark skies” by Clementine Barrow at TVBC’s webpage for the application says:

the site lies only a short distance from the Chilbolton Observatory, a nationally important scientific facility. This observatory is an internationally-recognised research station specializing in radio astronomy, atmospheric science, and space communications. It was established in this rural location precisely for its unobstructed skies and minimal electromagnetic interference. The Observatory’s highly sensitive instruments – including optical telescopes, advanced meteorological radars, and the UK’s [Low Frequency Array] radio telescope – rely on a dark and interference-free environment to detect faint signals from distant sources. Even relatively small increases in sky brightness or radio-frequency noise can compromise the data and experiments being conducted.

She also says:

The proposed development, by introducing 75 modern homes’ worth of lights and electronic equipment, poses a serious risk of both optical light pollution and electromagnetic interference to the Observatory. Dozens of new outdoor lights (streetlamps, porch and security lights) and vehicle headlights will create glare and skyglow that brightens the local atmosphere, hindering optical observations. Moreover, each home will contain countless electrical devices (WiFi routers, appliances, etc.) that cumulatively emit radio-frequency noise. This is not theoretical – it has been demonstrated in other cases that residential developments can impair observatory operations.

GP Surgery

The response by the Hampshire and Isle of Wight Integrated Care Board, does not support the establishment of a GP surgery within the development. Instead it requires a contribution from the developer towards the expansion of Stockbridge and Gratton surgeries.

At the meeting, Andrew Flanagan noted a comment made by a partner in a GP practice who asked him to read it out at the meeting:

I have an important comment about the claim of the provision of a GP surgery. There is no way this could be true. There is no possibility that that aspect was researched and would’ve come out with that as a suggestion. This is not in line with NHS England plans, policies or strategies. Sadly due to economic need, satellite surgeries (that are convenient to patients) are a thing of the past. Making this kind of untrue claim as part of their argument makes me doubt their credibility entirely.

Who will live in the 75 homes?

A resident pointed out that a big development near Havant had difficulty finding occupants for their affordable homes. “There were not enough locals to fill the homes,” he said, “so they had to ship people in from Birmingham.”

Cllr David Hall reprised the affordable homes in Mr Painter’s development: 21 social rent and 9 shared ownership. He said “These homes would not be sustainable. They will be filled with people from outside the Village.”

TVBC Councillor Susanne Hasselmann, who lives in Wherwell, said that she had recently been part of a panel on social housing. Within Test Valley there were 2,600 looking for homes of whom 1,300 wanted single bedroom accommodation. The list is only open to people who have lived locally for one year.

She said that it was starting to become difficult to get housing providers to take on affordable houses. The popularity of social renting is declining in favour of 80% affordables. She said “you can build two affordable homes for each social rent house.”

Cllr Hall added “there are only two one-bed homes in the plan.”

Time to respond

The working group emphasised that villagers should respond to TVBC in the coming week, if possible, and certainly before Christmas.

Cllr Hall said “Pick issues you really care about.” Echoing Caroline Nokes, the point was made “Use your own words.”

Cherish Chilbolton

The team from Cherish Chilbolton had a table at the back of the Hall where they were on hand to give advice. They sold all the campaign mugs that they had brought with them. They also received a number of donations to their fighting fund.

If you weren’t at the meeting and are feeling a little FOMO at the prospect of not getting your own mug, don’t worry. More mugs are on their way and will be available next week.

If you want to make a donation to their fighting fund, the new Cherish Chilbolton Information sheet has bank account details.

Summary

Despite our MP’s bleak assessment, there was much to think about after this meeting.

The working group have accumulated a great deal of useful information. The pinboard traffic danger map and the road safety perspective review were innovative tools. The traffic survey and road measurements will add to their store of knowledge.

Objections raised by official consultees gave heart to those at the meeting. They may also have inspired new thoughts for those residents who haven’t yet commented.

The working group are due to present their draft response to the Parish Council on 5 Jan 2026. The draft response will be available in the week preceding that meeting.