From an article in Yateley News

PUBLIC opinion is divided over whether a new care village should be built in Yateley.

An application to site a new care village for the elderly at a currently unused nine-acre area of land off the Sandhurst Road has produced mixed views from those living in the town.

The bid, which has been submitted to Hart District Council, is for a £34 million project to be built at the site.

It would see the construction of a 36-bed care home along with 19 close care and 97 assisted living apartments.

Although the plans have gained the support of many in the community, who see the care village as a better proposal to most other alternative developments at the site, voices of concern have been expressed over some aspects of the development.

Located close to the Blackwater River, Cricket Hill and Tudor streams, many people feel that any large scale development will potentially increase the risk of flooding along homes in the Sandhurst Road. The area has been blighted by this problem in the past.

Recent heavy rainfall had put parts of the Blackwater Valley, including Yateley, on a flood alert, and the prospect of what impact a large scale development would have on the area’s sewer system has alarmed many. Commenting on Wednesday, one Sandhurst Road resident said: “The flood assessment indicates that having taken advice from Thames Water, the foul drain can cope with this development.

“How can they quote this when the drains block and back-up on a regular basis?

“Over the last few weeks there have been numerous occasions when Thames Water have been out on ‘emergency projects’ working on the drainage during the night.”

Objections have also been raised to the application’s proposals to remove a number of trees which are bordering the site.

This is despite a planning statement saying that as many trees as possible would be kept to help with screening.

One Kings Glade resident said that removal of the trees would result in a significant loss of privacy for residents there.

Another objector labelled the felling plans as unnecessary.

They said: “Why the request to cut down so many trees on the border? It makes no sense.

“These trees are under TPOs [tree protection orders] and form a natural border to the site. The sheer number of trees proposed for removal is disgusting.”

The Anchor Trust, the developer behind the plan, said it was well aware of concerns over flooding and that measures to offset the risk of this had been factored into the plans.

These include increasing an existing culvert running through the site and putting in a ‘balancing pond’ to store excess water near the entrance to the site. The trust has also stated that trees of ecological value would be kept and that additional planting would be made to replace the lost trees.

Hart DC is yet to decide on the application.