Table of Contents
Issues raised by members of the public
Mr Witt welcomed the council’s rapid response to his report of a dead cat having been found at the Compton Street play area but acknowledged that, since it had been removed by the time the police arrived, there was little chance of discovering who was responsible. In response to a question on street lighting, Councillor Southgate informed him that both he and the clerk would be attending a briefing on the installation of new ‘white’ street lights on 23 September. While at the meeting he would keep in mind Mr Witt’s earlier request for improved lighting along Compton Street. Mr Witt also repeated his request for parking restrictions to be imposed near the bus stop at Martins Fields. Councillor Southgate said that he would speak to WCC officials about the possibility of ‘white lining’.
Issues raised by members of the public
Mrs Caffyn expressed concern about the delay in the construction of a traffic island on Otterbourne Road, between the bus stops near to the junction with Shawford Road. They are located in an extremely dangerous position, where the line of sight is impeded by the upward curvature of the road. County Councillor Bailey undertook to investigate but suspected that funding may be an issue. Mr Bennett expressed concern about the council’s decision not to support the proposed reduction in the speed limit along Otterbourne Road. Mr Witt noted that there continues to be some opposition to increased street lighting in Compton Street but hoped that the council could consider installing ‘non-intrusive lighting’ that could be automatically switched off at an agreed time.
Statements from Members of the Public
Mrs Mason spoke on behalf of Mrs Pridham, who was concerned about the proposed development at ‘Southgate’, Crossway. Councillor Bell indicated that the council had not intended to object to the development but that he was happy to have a discussion with Mrs Pridham (and Mrs Mason) to see whether her concerns could be addressed by the planning officers at Winchester City Council.
Mrs Caffyn indicated that the Shawford Village Residents’ Association supported Councillor Southgate’s efforts to improve parking at Shawford station and expressed disappointment that the ‘kerbing’ of Pearson Lane, promised earlier in the year, had still not taken place.
In the period set aside for members of the public, Mr Andrew Witt expressed concern at Winchester City Council’s plans for the Old Post Office and stores building. He had raised objections because he considered the proposed development was inappropriate for the village and that insufficient parking spaces could result in potential parking problems in Attwoods Drove. His concerns about parking were endorsed by Mrs Wilmshurst. Following discussion amongst councillors, later in the meeting, it was agreed that the Council should object to the WCC plans for the Old Post Office Building on grounds that it was an overdevelopment of the site and because of potential parking problems.
During the session open to the Public, there was considerable discussion on the issue of Car Parking in Shawford village. With the improvement of Rail services into and out of Shawford Railway Station, together with the free car parking availability in Shawford, people are being encouraged to drive to Shawford to catch trains, rather than travel to Winchester and incur expensive Car Parking charges. It was considered now to be appropriate for the Parish Council to pursue the possibility of acquiring some of the Land between the road to the Malms and the Railway Station. The purpose of acquiring this land being to construct a Car Park and reduce if not eliminate the Car Parking problem in Shawford Village. It is understood that if such Car Parking has acceptable capacity, then there may be some financial assistance forthcoming from South West Trains. However, it was also noted that if such Car Parking continues to be free of charge, the problem will only re-emerge as more people take advantage of the free Car Parking. The question of managing and charging for this proposed Car Park will have to be addressed in detail before any commitment is made.
The Parish Council meeting this month was held in the Reeves Scout Hut, Martins Fields, Compton. This was to enable local residents in Compton Village to attend more easily and it was rewarding to note some eighteen members of the Public attending. The Chairman, Cllr. Adrian Walmsley, welcomed everybody and outlined the procedures for a Parish Council meeting. It was commented that it is hoped that such Parish Council meetings can be held more often in Compton Village.
During the session open for public discussion, matters such as contact details for Councillors, the Land opposite the Church in Compton Street, Car Parking in Attwoods Drove, street lighting that was not working and horses fouling the footpaths, were all discussed. These discussions proved to be most useful to Councillors and enabled the Parish Council to have a better understanding of the concerns of local Parishioners.
Public question time
During the session open to members of the Public, Mrs Ros. Pugh, Chairman of the Compton and Shawford Lawn Tennis Club raised the matter of demolition of the Old Sports Pavilion. It was readily agreed that this matter has been significantly delayed and the site was considered now to be a danger in terms of health and safety. Mrs. Pugh was assured that this matter will be addressed with urgency and a date for demolition determined.
During the Public session, Mrs Gillian Webster requested that attention be given to the repainting of the Double Yellow Lines at the end of Bridge Lane and in the village of Shawford, opposite the Bridge Hotel. Whilst this will be pursued with Traffic & Transport Department, Winchester City Council, Mrs. Webster’s second request for Street Lighting in Bridge Lane will require further consultation with other residents in the area.
During the session open to Members of the Public, Councillor Mrs. Jean Millar introduced the Reverend Paul Baird, the new Priest in Charge, to the Parish Council.
During the session open for comments from members of the Public, Mrs Jo Lockett spoke about her letter of objection to the proposal by the Tennis Club to erect windbreaks on the northern wire fence around the Tennis Courts. The Farmer, Mr. J.Venn spoke about his letter to the Parish Council requesting the Parish Council’s support in relaxing the conditions imposed by the Planning Permission on the hours of use of the Grain Dryer at Silkstead Farm.
Whilst reviewing the minutes of the last meeting, it was clarified that contrary to what was suggested last month, Mr Roy Freeland was not speaking on behalf of the Southdown Residents Association concerning the Mawdlam Lodge Planning issue, but was speaking on behalf of residents of Southdown who attended the meeting.
Mrs Patricia Caffyn on behalf of the Shawford Village Residents Association raised various questions during the Public Questions session. The Chairman will answer these in writing. During the same session, Mr Tim Hunt made representations concerning a new Mawdlam Lodge Planning application.
This month, the Parish Council meeting was dominated by the public session during which representatives of the Southdown Residents Association voiced their objections to the position adopted by the Parish Council on the “Mawdlam Lodge” Planning appeal. Mr. Roy Freeland spoke on behalf of the Residents present, stating that they objected to any form of development on this site, as they felt it would destroy the character of the Area. Current Planning Policies designate this area as a low-density residential area characterised by large houses in large plots of land and is protected from development by policy proposal EN1 which is currently in force. The requirements of Government Planning policy as stated in PPG3 can be overruled as such policies should not apply to the area in question, which is protected by policy EN1.
Councillor George Beckett explained the Parish Council’s position in that whilst the Parish Council had previously objected to any development on this site, it had been acknowledged that the overall policy situation had changed since the initial objection. The need for higher density housing had to be accepted and it is recognised that the proposed policy of PPG3 is intended to achieve this and thereby prevent extensive development of Greenfield sites. However, in this instance, it is not proposed to implement the full requirements of PPG3, but to allow development of a maximum of two dwellings, which the site can sustain. By this means, it is hoped that the Parish Council can achieve some credibility with the Planning Authority by not objecting to such a modest development, which is in keeping with the surrounding area. Objecting to all Planning Applications and development is a course of action, which is deemed not to be sustainable. For these reasons the Parish Council has supported the Appellant, a position consistent with seeking the lowest density of development, where development is considered inevitable.
Questions from the public
Questions were raised by members of the Public concerning the Procedures for Elections and the Co-option process. These were satisfactorily answered by the Chairman. Questions were also raised by the Shawford Residents Association concerning the state of the pavements and parking restrictions in Shawford village, opposite the Bridge Hotel. Cllr Celia Simmons is to investigate the matter.
Questions and submissions from the Public
These encompassed issues relating to the Tennis Club membership policy, maintenance of private roads within the Parish together with the sweeping of those roads.
Questions from the public
Questions were asked by the public concerning discrepancies in the parish council accounts and audit thereof, the money held at Julian Hodge Bank, expenditure on the cricket square, dog bins on Shawford Down, allocation of capital to projects, the proposed development at Longacre and 27 questions on the need, location and funding for the proposed children’s play equipment.
Questions from the public
Questions were asked by the public concerning the pavilion, the Parish Hall, Shawford Park, the train service and M3 noise.
Questions from the public
Questions were asked by the public concerning moving play equipment and written questions were received about the pavilion.
Questions from the public
Questions were asked by the public concerning the development at Shawford Park, the replacement pavilion, the chairman’s letter and the threat of development between Hurdle Way and Shepherds Lane.
Matters raised at the Annual Parish Meeting 29 April.
Following submission of Ms A-M McCarthy that she was unaware of any formal decision to have a further referendum on the pavilion issue, it was proposed by Ann Kelly that a referendum be held, seconded by Mr E W Beckett, and carried by 35 in favour and 22 against. Following a proposal by Mr G Beckett, it was also resolved, by a vote of 49 for and 1 against, that the referendum ask parishioners to approve the Parish Council plans of the pavilion as regards size, funding, position and design as advised with a Yes’ or alternative ‘No’ only. An amendment to the proposal by Mr M Bell seeking an option on the size of the pavilion to be stated in the referendum was lost by a clear majority.
It was pleasing to see so many members of the public at the meeting. Numerous questions were answered, mainly concerning previous precepts, budgets, current precept increase, parish hall retaining wall and the old chestnut of the new pavilion.
Of the issues still of concern: a review of the budget and precept will be made at the next meeting of the council; the council is preparing a document to distribute to all parishioners setting out facts and costings concerning the replacement pavilion as proposed and a suggested, smaller alternative.
Questions and submissions
continue to be submitted to the Council concerning the proposed new pavilion with a request for a further referendum, which matter had been considered and voted against at the January meeting, also, matters concerning the larger revised plan, appointment of new architect and his failure to address concerns expressed, costs to date, maintenance costs and support for the new plan etc. A written reply is to be made to Mr M Bell. Mr Jordan expressed concern regarding finances and the plan for the precept, also, that disquiet had been expressed by derogatory remarks made at the by-election on 17 December.
Questions and Submissions from the public.
- The reports of the new pavilion subcommittee in the Parish Magazine were incomplete and also contain information that the questioner could not recall having been mentioned in Council.
- The New Pavilion subcommittee was asked to consider how to make up-to-date information on the project available. In the meantime of course anyone who has any questions or would like to look at the latest plans is welcome to talk to one of the Councillors.
- Does the Chairman have to be impartial?
The NALC guidelines on Chairmanship state that “it is not his duty as Chairman to suppress his own convictions”.
- Are the Tennis Courts being used for coaching non-members from outside the parish?
To be referred to the Tennis Club.
- Should there be a referendum on the new pavilion?
The Parish Council decided unanimously that, following the results of the 1996 referendum and extensive consideration of input on the subject from the public at subsequent Parish Council meetings, no further referendum was required.
Questions and submissions from members of the public included whether there was an alternative plan for a lease on the Memorial Playing Field, progress of measures regarding fouling by dogs and the Village Design Statement by the Countryside Commission, which were responded to.
Parking on the road at Shawford
Concerns about the speed of traffic on the road from Twyford and the parking situation opposite the Bridge Hotel were raised by several parishioners during the public session. It was agreed to invite a speaker from the County Council to address the May meeting of the Parish Council on possible solutions to the problem, and to ask the County Council to carry out a traffic speed survey.
Fouling by dogs
The Council’s policy regarding the matter was raised by a parishioner. Cllr R Whitaker agreed to consult Winchester City Council concerning legislation governing the problem and availability of grants, and obtain ‘poop and scoop’ costings.
Questions and submissions from members of the public
concerned management of the parish hall, routes through Shawford for the proposed national cycle network in Hampshire, and the nuisance of fouling by dogs, all of which were responded to at the time of raising.
Public Participation in Council meetings.
The Council passed a resolution to accept questions and submissions from members of the public near the beginning of future meetings. Discussion by the Council of matters raised during the public session will take place immediately after the coffee break, at about 9.p.m. The full text of this resolution will be submitted for publication in the February Parish Magazine.