Hampshire's education authority objects to 2,160 homes at Murrell Green, saying the school plan would not work. Four parish councils also want it refused.
Hampshire County Council has objected to the plan for up to 2,160 homes at Murrell Green, between Hook and Hartley Wintney. As the education authority, it says the developer’s school proposal would not work.
The county’s response was added to Hart’s planning register on 8 October. It says the scheme would bring about 648 primary and 454 secondary pupils, and that the all-through school on offer “would not be viable for a 2160 home development”.
It lands days after four parish councils lined up against the scheme. Hook, Hartley Wintney and Winchfield submitted a joint objection on 5 October, backed by their own transport, ecology, landscape and heritage experts. Odiham Parish Council added its support for that objection the next day.
The application, reference 26/01201/OUT, is from Lightwood Group. It seeks outline permission for the homes, a local centre, employment space, education land and green space, with three new accesses from the A30 and one from the B3016 Odiham Road. Our planning page has the full background.
What the county says about schools
The education response, dated 2 October, makes these points:
- Primary: the nearest schools, Oakwood Infant and Greenfields Junior to the east and Hook Infant and Hook Junior to the west, are too far away and too small to take the extra children. The site needs its own new primary school, built for two forms of entry and able to grow to three.
- Secondary: the site is in the catchment of Robert May’s School in Odiham, which the county says “is full and forecast to be full”.
- The all-through school: about three forms of entry of secondary pupils is not enough to run a secondary school properly. The county says that would typically take “4,500-5,000 or more” homes.
- Expanding existing schools: Robert May’s site is already below the recommended size, and Court Moor in Fleet is unlikely to have room. Calthorpe Park in Fleet had expansion options identified in the past, but other growth, including Hartland Village, would have to be weighed first.
- School location: the school site in the masterplan sits towards the western edge. The county wants it moved to the middle, within about 800 metres’ walk of most homes.
The county also says it was not consulted before the application went in, and that it had already told the applicant it did not support an all-through school on this scale.
If secondary pupils have to travel to existing schools, the county warns of a “substantial requirement for dedicated school transport”. That would add daily traffic and a cost it calls “in-perpetuity”.
The county wants three sums, plus a free, serviced 2.8-hectare school site:
| What for | Contribution sought |
|---|---|
| New primary school | £22,190,000 |
| Secondary places, if existing schools are expanded (minimum) | £26,036,446 |
| Special educational needs provision | £1,460,000 |
| Total | £49,686,446 |
Without that land, money and mitigation, the county “objects to the proposal”. It says the scheme would otherwise put “unacceptable pressure” on schools and undermine its legal duty to provide enough places.
The parish councils’ case
The three parishes’ joint representations run to 82 pages, plus seven appendices. Winchfield Parish Council led the work. Hook Parish Council published the full set on its website on 5 October.
The covering letter is signed by the three chairs. It says: “We absolutely recognise the need for new homes. Our objection is to the scale and location of this proposal.” It also says the land is “the green lung of Hart” for many residents.
The full representations set out proposed reasons for refusal. The main ones are:
- the site is not well related to any existing settlement and would close the gap between Hook, Winchfield and Hartley Wintney
- about 184 hectares of mostly open countryside would be built on
- 115.1 hectares of the best farmland would be lost, including 61.5 hectares of Grade 2
- the site is car dependent, with almost all local facilities more than 25 minutes’ walk away and no bus service now
- harm to the Grade II listed Murrell and North Lodge, and unresolved effects on other heritage, including a Second World War defensive line
- veteran trees would be lost where new roads cross Brenda Parker Way, an old sunken lane used by barbastelle bats
- no full retail impact assessment and no mineral resource assessment
The Odiham Parish Council comment of 6 October says it “supports the objections set out in the reports submitted by Winchfield, Hook and Hartley Wintney Parish Councils”. It had already objected in August.
What the other statutory bodies have said
The parishes lean heavily on responses already on the register. We read each one:
| Body | Position | Date |
|---|---|---|
| Environment Agency | Objects and recommends refusal until there is an adequate flood risk assessment | 7 Aug |
| National Highways | Recommends permission is not granted before 13 November, so the applicant can supply more information | 13 Aug |
| Natural England | Wants a revised green space (SANG) design and a site visit; says it “may need to object” without them | 18 Aug |
| Hampshire highways | Holding objection until further information is provided | 7 Sep |
| Lead Local Flood Authority | No objection, with recommendations on drainage | 25 Sep |
| Hampshire education | Objects unless school land, money and mitigation are secured | 2 Oct |
Thames Water says it has been “unable to determine” what foul water infrastructure the scheme would need.
How many people have commented
Hart’s register shows 571 comments from the public as of 9 October. Of those, 567 are objections and one is in support.
This is not the first time
Murrell Green has been here before. Hart’s last Local Plan tried to name an area of search at Murrell Green and Winchfield for a new settlement of up to 5,000 homes.
The planning inspector examining that plan had “a number of fundamental concerns” about it. In a letter of 26 February 2019, which the parishes attached to their objection, the inspector said the most appropriate course was to remove the policy. The plan was adopted in 2020 without it.
The difference now is that Hart has had no five-year housing land supply since May 2025. That makes speculative schemes harder to refuse. The council’s new Local Plan, which will set out where growth should go, opens for its first consultation on 19 October. Our report: Hart Local Plan consultation.
What it means for you
- Nothing has been decided. The application is still registered, with no committee date set. Hart’s case officer is David Raper.
- You can still comment. Search 26/01201/OUT on Hart’s planning register. Comments carry most weight when they deal with planning matters, such as roads, schools, flooding, landscape and wildlife.
- The parishes have asked to be re-consulted if the applicant sends new information. Anyone who has commented should watch for that too.
- Parents in Hook, Odiham and Fleet: the school places question affects Robert May’s, Calthorpe Park and Court Moor catchments, not only the new homes.
- The bigger choice is in the Local Plan. The parishes argue a scheme this size should be decided there. The consultation from 19 October is where residents can say where Hart’s homes should go.
Have your say