Mark Cooper's Annual Statements to:
Romsey Town, Test Valley Borough and Hampshire County Council

Borough Councillor’s Report to Romsey Town Council’s
Annual Parish Meeting 19th April 2011

My Borough Councillor workload continues to be dominated by panning issues. Since the last RTC APM there have been 215 planning applications in the Romsey Town area, an average of 13.4 per Town Council Planning meeting. This contrasts with 11.8 per in 2009-2010 so perhaps there is a glimmer of a little more activity in the building and home improvement industry. A modest 52 of the 215 were Tadburn applications. Abbey Ward dominates the planning application lists.

In the wider context Test Valley Borough Council remains without a Core Strategy and so is reliant for planning policy on the 2006 Borough Local Plan. This means the Council is vulnerable to appeals from developers testing out Test Valley’s ability to meet its five year housing supply commitments. Because the Stanborough Development for 200 plus dwellings at the Brewery Site has not significantly progressed and because of delays starting the Abbotswood scheme, it has been difficult to prove to the Planning Inspectorate that the Council has the requisite five year land supply. It was on this basis that the Redbridge Lane, Nursling, developer was allowed his appeal for 350 dwellings.

The application for 59 dwellings at Halterworth was also designed to exploit Test Valley’s lack of housing delivery. The site selected is furthest from the town, is the highest land and has some of the best hedgerow structures in the area. So it was patently a Trojan Horse application. Get permission for this, the most contentious area, and the rest, the ‘easier’ sites, soon follow. It is not difficult to envisage that with permission the rest of Halterworth between Halterworth Lane and Highwood Lane would have been rapidly allocated a further 1000 dwellings. We unanimously refused the Halterworth application and the threatened appeal seems to be on hold as Abbotswood appears to be underway and the Redbridge Lane permission has resolved the immediate housing land supply shortage.

If nothing is happens on the Brewery Site I will, for the third time, push TVBC to compulsory purchase the site so it can be sold on to a developer who will deliver the extant planning permission.

The South East Plan, with its allocation of 3,920 dwellings to southern Test Valley, has been shelved by the Government. Housing figures, we are told, are no longer ‘imposed’. However, in June 2010, the Government announced that Councils must provide:- “A sufficient quantity of housing taking into account need and demand and seeking to improve choice”. That’s quite an imposition! To do the necessary research, Test Valley Borough Council commissioned planning consultants Nathaniel Lichfield and Partners. The research is complete; the consultants report is finished. But Test Valley steadfastly refuses to publish the housing numbers within it until after the local elections. One is forced to wonder what they are keeping secret, and why? As the outgoing Chairman of the Romsey and District Society said at a recent Romsey Forum, and I paraphrase…’if the same set of demographics is used as was used by the South East Plan than the eventual housing numbers will amount to roughly the same’.

Most Romsonians I speak to appreciate there is a need for a healthy housing supply. What they object to is allocating it all to Romsey. An interesting year ahead.

Secrecy seems to have permeated Test Valley in more ways than just the NLP Report. The 50% increase in charges for TVBC’s rodent service was debated and agreed in secret…the response from TVBC’s Cabinet was that it wasn’t done in secret – it was done ‘in confidence’. Secret, also, is the treatment of a small number of Romsey residents as TVBC demands a huge and retrospective cash payment for a way-leave over land that the Council realised, belatedly, it held in trust. I have satisfied myself that Test Valley’s actions are legal: but whether they are moral? Well, that is another matter.

Cllr Mark Cooper - 18th April 2011

---

Borough Councillor’s Report to Romsey Town Council
Annual Parish Meeting 27th April 2010

The Council year 2009 to the end of April 2010 has continued to be dominated by planning applications and planning issues. Members may be interested to know that there were 236 planning applications in the three Romsey Town Wards in the 209-2010 year, 47 of them being in the Tadburn Ward.

For the record, there were 254 applications in 2008-2009, 312 in 2007-2008 and 333 in 2006-2007. It is an interesting and probably accurate measure of the impact of the recession on Romsey citizens and the local building trades.

Two of the Tadburn applications were appealed and both dismissed by the planning inspectorate. It was significant that local residents’ concerns about the development of the Little House site on Winchester Hill to create 8 flats were entirely supported by the Inspector. He agreed with the local residents and me that the bulk and mass of the development would create an incongruous feature in the street scene, that the parking arrangements would make the building conspicuous from the road and that it lacked amenity space for future residents. I mention this appeal specifically, as it is a good precedent to defend other similar sites in Romsey.

Of the six appeals in Romsey Town for which I have records in the last Council year, all were dismissed. An excellent record.

However, the most significant event of the last Council year at borough level was the withdrawal by Test Valley of its Core Strategy and its allocation of 1,600 dwellings at lower Whitenap. In Borough Council meetings both public and private I had constantly pointed out that the drafting of the Core Strategy was flawed, based on incomplete information and did not adhere to the processes laid down by the Government Office for the South East. But planning officers and the Borough’s Cabinet were obdurate that all was well. I was forced to go direct to GOSE and the Inspectorate with my concerns. Subsequently, on May 1st 2009, the Planning Inspector, in her Exploratory meeting, said that the Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment, the key document that informs the process of housing site selection… “had been written too late to shape the plan, had conclusions that did not reflect the existing strategy, did not appear to have been a collaborative exercise with key stakeholders and that the site selection process raised concerns”.

The Borough Portfolio holder’s response was that “the Inspector was having a bad day”.

The contiguous built up area of Romsey and Romsey Extra has a population of 17,200. The definition of a market town is “a population up to 20,000”. Adding Whitenap to Romsey and then factoring in Abbotswood brings the population to 23,000.

In the meantime the Borough Council is having to bear the cost of re-drafting the Core Strategy which I have estimated at £250,000 (not £8000 as was claimed) and the costs of having to fight off numerous planning applications, and probably appeals at a later date, submitted by developers trying to take advantage of the withdrawn Strategy.

I am confident that my Town Council colleagues will continue to work with me to protect Romsey’s market town character and designation. It is a tremendous privilege to be entrusted, with others, to look after and promulgate the interests of Romsey and its citizens.

Cllr Mark Cooper - 27th April 2010

---

County Councillor Annual Report 2009-2010
Romsey Town Council Annual Parish meeting 27th April 2010

The County Council year started a little later than usual on 4th June so that the Local elections could be held on the same day as the European Elections. 5,684 Romsonians from an electorate of 11,925 cast their votes and I was pleased to be entrusted with a further four years of representing all 14,588 citizens of our town at The Castle in Winchester.

My County Colleagues re-elected me as their spokesperson on the Regulatory „A? Committee and additionally I have been appointed to the Environment and Transportation Select Committee and to the Regulatory „B? list.

The Select Committee performs a scrutiny role and recently, after a delay, we were able to recommend that the County Council sign up to the 10:10 Carbon Reduction campaign. Hampshire?s carbon reduction has been helped to some extent by the refurbishment of the old Ashburton Court building and whilst the £40 million cost of the project certainly was controversial, what is incontrovertible is that County Council staff now have much better working conditions and enhanced morale as a consequence.

Regulatory A is Hampshire?s Planning Committee dealing with many difficult minerals and waste issues, schools? developments and often fascinating rights of way determinations. During the year we dealt with the Gosport to Fareham rapid bus transit phase 1, aligned on the old railway. There was almost universal regret that a modern tramway couldn?t be built on the existing track-bed as the first step in a South Hampshire Rapid Transit system that could eventually have extended all the way to Romsey. But the Government grant of £20 million was for a busway only. A great opportunity lost, not by the County but by obdurate central government decision making.

Regulatory B is a panel of Councillors who deal with such matters as staff disciplinary appeals, pension appeals and school transport appeals. I have sat on three panels in the last year and they are always fascinating and intellectually challenging.

Having spent four years as a member of the Hampshire Fire and Rescue Authority I have now moved on to the River Hamble Harbour Management Committee. In answer to the unspoken question, I can confirm it has nothing to do with Romsey but it chimes with my infatuation with the sea, with shorelines and estuaries and saltflats and with boats and ships of every kind.

Most of my County postbag relates to roads and pavements and 2010 rates as “The Year of the Pothole”. However, the pothole problem considerably pre-dates the cold weather of the last winter. Heavier lorries, more traffic, high water tables and inadequate term maintenance have all conspired to pockmark our highway network. But it is fair to say that Hampshire County Council has, on the whole, been constructively responsive to my requests that work be done. Not least of these is the complete re-construction of Fishlake Meadows last summer although I have opined that the new surface is nowhere as smooth as it should be. Officers agree, but say it is within contract tolerances.

After lobbying by local residents a new pavement has been constructed under the Abbey Arch and many of my elderly constituents now have a safer walk down to the War Memorial Park. Rivermead Close pavements are now all reconstructed and are a good illustration that the new County Council Contractor, Amey, is capable of excellent work. Harefield Court has been reconstructed, too, after a resident complained to me about the tilted and broken paving stones and intermittent work on the Great Woodley Estate continues to upgrade that area gradually.

I have been involved in the detailed design and public consultations for the rebuilding of the river wall in Abbey Water and a very significant environmental enhancement of the area is to be undertaken at the same time. Again. this is an example of local residents working together with their local Councillor and County Council officers. The „system? works, albeit slowly and with scarce financial resources.

There has been much focus on the Middlebridge Street pavements in recent months after a number of constituents have tripped and been injured on uneven pavements. The street is now in the County maintenance programme and some remedial work has been done this spring. Although tarmac is not as attractive as paving stones it does have a smooth. trip free finish.

My Schools continue to thrive. Romsey School?s Executive Headteacher has played an exemplary role in dealing with some recent staffing difficulties at the Abbey Primary School whilst the new Headteacher at Romsey Primary has produced a remarkable turn round in that school?s performance. I was pleased to be able to have funding reinstated at RPS to ameliorate some of the unforeseen issues that arose from the schools rebuild.

The County Councillor?s Devolved Grant scheme continued in 2009 – 2010 and the following were awarded…
1. Transition Town Romsey:-£900.
2. Friends of Romsey Primary School new adventure play equipment:- £2000.
3. RAODS Disability Chairlift:- £1000.
The Devolved Grant Scheme is scheduled to roll on in the coming financial year.

Cllr. Mark Cooper

---

2008 – 2009 Report from Cllr. Mark Cooper, County Councillor for Romsey Town Division made to Town Council Colleagues at the Parish Annual Meeting

May 2008 to April 2009 is my fourth year on the County Council and during this time I have continued as the Liberal Democrat spokesperson on the County’s Regulatory Committee.

Regulatory meets on a monthly cycle and deals with County Council planning applications; these involve minerals and quarry sites and recycling applications so they are often very contentious.

Committee members are acting in a quasi-judicial role and have the difficult task of balancing actual and perceived local interests with the rights of applicants to proceed within Government and County policies. Less contentious, usually, are ‘Rights of way’ issues and planning applications relating to the County’s large stock of Primary and Secondary Schools. There has been much rebuilding of Primary Schools in recent months to incorporate Children’s Centres. The Romsey Primary School, which has just appointed an excellent new head teacher, Ruth Linsley, is an excellent example and the new buildings have been constructed very much to a green agenda including, for example, a sub-soil heat exchanger to reduce the use of fossil fuels. One of the most interesting aspects of Regulatory membership are the across County site visits Councillors have to make although scrambling over mineral workings in driving rain and icy winds is not to
everyone’s taste.

My colleagues have continued to nominate me to the Hampshire Fire and Rescue Authority where I sit on the Finance and Governance Committees and am a member of the Corporate Management Team. The Fire Service, unlike many other facets of local government, has a very positive public image and this is being used successfully to reduce the number of fires and accidents across the County. About half the Fire Service is full time, the other half are Retained Firefighters. This means fire officers will usually have a full time job within a few minutes of the fire-station and then will drop everything to respond to an emergency call-out. The training regime is the same for both Full-time and Retained Firefighters. Romsey, I am pleased to report, continues to be very well served by its Retained Officers.

Potholes, puddles and pavements

About 85% of my Hampshire County Council County casework is Highways and much of that is puddles and highway drainage issues. They take ages to sort out and as soon as I get some of them repaired, new ones appear. When the County announced its £1 million pound pothole busting campaign last summer, my emails were overwhelmed with complaints and reports of potholes. That such a campaign is necessary rather begs the question as to why the County has allowed the roads to get into this state in the first place.

Church Street, Palmerston Street, part of Winchester Road and Botley Road up to the top of Cemetery Hill have been reconstructed recently but these localised areas of good work only serve to show up the rest of our crumbling road surfaces.

Fishlake Meadows is a case in point; there are potholes and detached layers of tarmac producing drifts of loose stones resulting in a surface that is dangerous, damaging and has led to numerous complaints both to me and the County Council. The problem results from a number of factors. The road is on a slightly raised embankment and built over what is regarded as ‘difficult terrain’ being a river valley. Fortunately, whilst there is some localised evidence of settlement, there are no deep-seated problems regarding the embankment or the foundation of the road. The problem is a surface deterioration of the ‘base course layer’ which is the structural layer beneath the surface course. When the road was first opened some 15 years ago traffic was allowed to run on the ‘base course layer’ for a considerable time before it received its final surfacing layer. The base course layer, being permeable, allowed water to penetrate to the lower structural levels causing localised softening and failure. This layer became friable producing the surface cracking and surface deterioration we now see. The road was formally ‘adopted’ and there is nothing inherently deficient in the road’s original specification or materials used so there is no redress against the original builder of the road. However, I am told “There are lessons to be learnt about the early and extended use of ‘base course layer’ surfaces that has led to the current premature surface failure”. So if the County had got on and completed the road 15 years ago and not allowed it to be used in its ‘base course layer’ condition, it wouldn’t be breaking up now. Remedial action is being designed and will include planing off the failed surfaces and their replacement with new material. This re-build is programmed for the coming financial year. Of real concern, too is the amount of time and effort it takes to get a problem recognised and action taken. I have one email stream where it took 11 (eleven) emails to get a pavement puddle seen to by Hampshire Highways West. So, besides Fishlake Meadows, what’s going wrong with our roads and pavements? According to the Audit Commission, HCC ranks 28th out of 34 Counties for highways spend per head and 34th out of 34 for footpath maintenance. Think about that. We have the lowest spend per head of any United Kingdom County Council on pavement repairs. So lack of resources is an issue. Thus, there is a lack of routine maintenance such as re-sealing tarmac surfaces, and there seems to be no cyclic drain maintenance. Whenever I or a constituent complain of a blocked drain it is eventually cleared but it is reactive maintenance not proactive. When I ask the County Council Leader for more Highways resources is answer is: "What to you want me to cut instead; Adult Social Care or Children’s Services?”....I can't win that argument. The County Highway officers seem to be few in number for the volume of work that needs to be done and are often trying to keep up with routine work before they can start on re-acting to County Councillor and public complaints. As best I can work out, all the reported matters go into a list...then the list is prioritised for urgency ...of course, safety issues come top, so other issues, such as puddles never get to the top of the pile. I suppose the excuse is that it only rains for 7% of the time...or so an old hydrology textbook of mine tells me. Amey is the company that has a long term contract for Hampshire Highway maintenance - won in a bidding process. How does any Contractor make his profit? By doing the work as quickly and cheaply as possible. No comment! If County officers were less busy they’d have more time to supervise the work done by the contractor ...sometimes the repairs 'look good' but when it rains it is found the water can't access drain covers. Then, getting roads and paths to drain correctly can involve some very expensive re-leveling...I refer you back to the underlying problem. Money.

Because of
(i) reduced routine cyclic maintenance
(ii) the increase in heavy lorry traffic,
(iii) the wetter than average sequence of months recently
(iv) the coldest, frostiest winter for 10 years … suddenly all the faults that were gradually building up have been 'found out'.

But I’m not giving up… if you spot a new pothole or are concerned by yet another new street corner flood, let me know. The best way is by email, and I’ll email the Hampshire Highways West officers with a request that the work be done. But remember: it can take up to 11 emails to get the work completed!

On a much more positive note I spent much of the 21st January on a ‘walkabout’ with two Hampshire County Council Highways officers putting together a list of potholes, puddles and pavement problems. We came to the conclusion that the pavement down Middlebridge Street needs complete reconstruction to make it safe and comfortable to walk along. Again, that will go into the future programme of works but will have to compete with all the other highway
priorities.

Another positive story is the improvement and upgrading of the footpath along the Old Barge Canal from the Plaza Theatre northwards. I have walked the site with officers and approved the basic designs that will now go forward for public consultation. The steps will be removed at the theatre end and the path will be resurfaced and footpath lighting installed.

Other activity and casework in the last year has included sorting out the Halterworth School parking issues by creating yellow lined areas to allow through vehicles to make some progress. School drop off and pick-up is a major issue in and around town; I have supported the improvements at the Mountbatten School to try and allow my residents to get out of their driveways each morning; more children need to walk or cycle to school but that needs safe pathways, crossing points and cycleways. With the Great Woodley Residents Association I am trying to get the County to continue the refurbishment to the estate’s road and path infrastructure.

I attend the Three Rivers Community Rail Partnership, a volunteer group trying to increase the use of local rail travel; the Romsey Hospital Land Development Group, the Yokesford Hill recycling site Liaison Panel … among the many other organisations that cement our local community together.

Council Tax has increased again this year. It is an iniquitous tax because its not based on how much you can actually afford to pay but on an approximate, historic value of your house.

Pensioners are especially badly affected. Good taxes, if there is such a thing, are PROGRESSIVE,

In other words based on what you can afford. Bad taxes are REGRESSIVE, that is the less well off you are, the larger the proportion of income you pay in tax. Council Tax is a regressive tax and the sooner it’s abolished the better.

The increases this year seem quite small sums when expressed as pennies per week; for example:-
Hampshire County Council is up by…………………….…… 37 pence per week.
The Police Authority is up by……………………………… …13 pence.
Test Valley Borough Council by……………………………... 10 pence per week.
The Fire & Rescue Authority by……………………………… ..4 pence per week.
Romsey Town Council up by.……………………………………3 pence per week.
Doesn’t seem a lot, but at 67 pence a week (or £34.84 a year) that’s a lot of cash if you
are on a fixed income.

The Council Tax bands for the Romsey Town:-
Band A £914.37
Band B £1,066.76
Band C £1,219.16
Band D £1,371.55
Band E £1,676.34
Band F £1,981.13
Band G £2,285.92
Band H £2,743.10

Test Valley Borough Council is the tax collector and often gets the blame for the iniquities of the
Council Tax. However, the share of the Council tax at Band D is:-
Hampshire County Council £1018.17 (c.74.23% of the Council tax)
Hampshire Police Authority £142.11 (c.10.36%)
Test Valley Borough Council £118.44 (c 8.63%)
Hampshire Fire & rescue Service £60.30 (c. 4.40%)
Romsey Town Council £32.53 (c. 2.37%)

That should all add up to £1,371.55, that is, the Band D figure above.

The tax base of Test Valley Borough Council is 45,327 Band D equivalents which roughly coincides with the number of dwellings in Test Valley’s area. That means TVBC's income from its part of the Council Tax is £5.37 million. This is the TVBC Precept. TVBC's gross spend is £73.4 million and its gross income is £60.1 million so its shortfall is c.£12.5 million. This revenue requirement of £12.5 million is a lot more than the Council Tax raises so there are other monies coming from a business rate equalisation grant and support grant (£6.8 million) and the Andover Levy £325,476. All the authorities listed above will have an element of central government grant aid except the Town Council which has to fund itself entirely.

The County Council Tax increase in percentage terms is 1.9% this coming year but when seen in the context of recent increases, doesn’t look quite so good. County Council tax increases in the past three years have been:-
4.7% in 2006/07,
4.9% in 2007/08 and
4.5% in 2008/09.
Inflation in the cost of County Council services in the same three years has been:-
3.2% in 2006/07,
3.3% in 2007/08 and
3.2% in 2008/09.

This has allowed the County Council to salt away £180 million in reserves and balances as a result of the above inflation council tax increases for the past three years which is above the level the County actually needs in reserves and balances. With the past overcharging in mind, I supported an amendment to the County Council budget that would have produced a 0% increase. The alternative budget would also have given a £5 million boost to road, footway and verge maintenance throughout Hampshire to clear the backlog of potholes and to get us out of 34th out of 34 on footpath maintenance. This budget alternative allowed Hampshire residents to have a council tax increase holiday this year. People need relief in these harsh economic times.

The County Council rejected the alternative budget proposals.
The County Councillors’ Devolved Budget Scheme
In the last year a total of 15 projects have been grant aided from my devolved budget: they
are:-
1. RTC Town Marshals scheme; Tabards, Road signs, barriers for volunteer marshals £1,276.56
2. Cupernham Infant School PTA: purchase of notice boards for the CIS PTA - £386.00
3. Romsey & District Society ‘Look at Romsey’ publication; guide to design & character £600.00
4. Romsey 7 District Chamber of Commerce new Christmas Lights sets - £1,000.00
5. Eastleigh (& Romsey) Homestart; Counselling Young and single parents in Romsey £500.00
6. Romsey Ju-Jitsu Academy: seed-corn funding for a new young persons club - £325.00
7. Cupernhan Infant School PTA; Educational Play Materials - £249.70
8. Romsey Town Council Wedding Chairs; 30 Additional Chairs - £750.00
9. STOIC Southern Test Valley Older Independent Campaigners Newsletter - £200.00
10. Test Valley Contemporary Crafts: funding of the Summer Exhibition in Romsey - £300.00
11. Transition Town Romsey: seed-corn funding to assist in Romsey’s reduction of CO2 £1,500.00
12. TVS Volunteer Event; part funding of an event celebrating the role of volunteers - £300.00
13. Three Rivers Rail Partnership; outdoor seating for waiting passengers - £1,000.00
14. Romsey Bandstand Contribution to 2009 Summer Trustee Concerts - £750.00
15. Romsey Abbey Church Rooms Hearing Loop and speaker systems - £882.00

Mark Cooper 2nd March 2009

---

2007 – 2008 Report from Cllr. Mark Cooper, County Councillor for Romsey Town Division made to Town Council Colleagues at the Parish Annual Meeting

Over the last 12 months a number of familiar themes have kept me busy as I seek to represent the 14,660 residents of Romsey Town at the County’s headquarters in Winchester.

I remain the Minority group Spokesman on the Regulatory Committee. Regulatory deals with the County Council’s Planning Applications, especially those relating to minerals working and processing, waste disposal matters such as the Ashfield Tyre Depot, schools and numerous complex and fascinating rights of way issues across the whole of Hampshire.

Additionally, I have continued to serve on the Hampshire Fire and Rescue Authority as a member of the Corporate Management Team. One of the most interesting tasks this year has been as a member of the Lyndhurst By-pass County Select Committee which has come forward with an interesting possible solution to that village’s traffic problem.

Dealing with Highways matters first. I have responded to the Romsey and District Society’s campaign to instigate street-sign de-cluttering in Romsey and have asked the Council Leader if Romsey can be made a trial area for such an initiative. I understand that part of Winchester is favorite for a trial rather than Romsey. On the 14th May I requested that flashing light speed indicator devices (SIDs) be set up on Winchester Hill and Cemetery Hill on Botley Road and I still await their installation. After Winchester Hill was resurfaced I was involved in and approved a revised white lining scheme to reduce the road from three lanes to two lanes to try and make access to Southgate Garage and the Co-op Store safer and I have continued to press for a 30mph limit along this stretch of the A3090.

It is a relatively wide road all the way to the town’s edge but has numerous road accesses off it leading to many large housing estates. It is the only road inside the town with a 40 rather than 30mph limit. Officers are reluctant to progress 30mph without traffic calming that might be associated with a revised junction at Cupernham Lane.

The difficulty of exiting from Cupernham Lane remains a very live issue. I was disappointed when a junction improvement plan was previously deferred by HCC for two years although the scheme mooted was an expensive option at more than £300,000. Subsequently, I asked officers to look at some alternative more cost effective schemes. The problem arises because successful traffic management elsewhere in the town means that there is a constant traffic flow of vehicles west to east along Winchester Hill so that exiting right from Cupernham Lane takes an inordinate amount of time especially at peak hours. Some vehicles now turn left and then execute a dangerous U-turn across the main road to achieve their right turn.

Three designs were drawn up to help resolve the problem at the Cupernham Lane junction. Two involve altering the detailed design of the junction, cost £24,100 but don't actually deal with the problem in my view. The third involves a mini-roundabout. It seems the most logical solution and one which has had a lot of support from bodies such as the Town Council and the Romsey Forum. It will cost £47,400 but to be safe the mini-roundabout requires additional traffic calming so that Winchester Hill can be reduced from a 40mph speed limit to a 30mph speed limit; this will cost £43,500; so the whole scheme, therefore would cost £90,900. Not only is the junction exit resolved but so is the public demand for a lower speed limit. The mini-roundabout is a possible solution to the two most pressing highway issues in the Romsey Town division, so much so, that I offered a contribution from my Councillor’s Devolved Budget towards the scheme. The County has responded saying it would rather see a phased traffic light scheme funded by the Abbotswood developers.

There is no doubt that ‘intelligent’ traffic lights will work at this junction but the consequence is a significant urbanisation of what is currently a suburban environment; traffic lights also have limited traffic calming capability especially when they are set to green!

Residents have complained of high vehicle speeds in parts of Mill Lane. Speed monitoring was undertaken but some safety issues remain to be resolved.

Trucks continue to hit the Greatbridge railway bridge and my invitation to the Environment Portfolio holder to come and see the situation for himself remains open. At least we now have confirmation that the A3057 is not a preferred lorry route. The task of keeping large wagons out of Alma Road and the A3057 corridor remains a very strong target of mine. However, it is good to see some of the necessary road surface repair work being done. On the whole the quality of the work is high and it is good to see that the contractors have retained and cleaned the stone kerbs and gutters in Church Street. The smooth tarmac here and in Winchester Road is proving popular with cyclists.

Periods of heavy rainfall have exposed drainage problems that have been reported to me by constituents. These include surface water flooding of a property in Richmond Lane, standing water near the Viney Avenue junction and blocked drains causing flooding on the town side of the Mainstone Bridge. All have been satisfactorily resolved by County Council contractors.

The condition of footpaths and pavements is a common complaint but resolving such issues takes a long time. It took many months before the Alma Road railings were repaired whilst I find it easier to deal with overgrown vegetation myself rather than keeping on at County officers to resolve the matter, the corner of Cupernham Lane and Winchester Road being a case in point.

After meetings between local Councillors, officers and the Great Woodley Residents’ Association, Environmental Improvements to the land, footpaths and some of the garage courts on the Great Woodley estate has got underway this year. The estate is getting on for 40 years old and the replacement of tilted slabs etc has been generally welcomed but much work needs to be done. An unfortunate consequence of the environmental improvements has been damage to the very shallow cabling for the street-lights and it took several weeks of badgering of the contractors by residents, Councillors and officers before all the faulty lamps were working again. Lighting has proved to be a controversial issue at Fishlake Meadows where the County Council trialed differing lighting arrangements ahead of the Countywide PFI contract to replace Hampshire’s street-lighting. Three aspects were controversial; the fact that residents were not told about the trials; that some of the lamps were unduly bright and in some parts of the estate were switched off altogether between 12.20 and 5am. National press publicity heightened the sense of vulnerability of residents in the switch-off zone and so I felt justified in requiring the lights be left switched on. The officers met me half way by restoring the lamps at the end of streets but the situation will remain unsatisfactory until there is public consent to whichever lighting regime is eventually chosen.

Public transport often provides contentious issues and this year has been no exception with the loss of the X66 Rail Link Bus. The campaign organised by users is a case-study in community politics. But it is an almost impossible task to run a coordinated public transport system which bus companies remain deregulated; it is something that national legislation needs to resolved the green agenda is to be taken seriously.

School matters in the last year have focused on Romsey Primary School’s re-development which should be complete in the early part of the summer term. It has been a difficult year for RPS as all the Junior children had to transfer into temporary classrooms on the infant school site. I have agreed to be an RPS Governor to assist them through the transition.

Parking problems at the entrance to Cupernham Junior and Infant Schools has been a recurrent issue and residents’ dissatisfaction with parent parking in Halterworth Lane and associated side-roads remains acute. I hope such issues will work their way to a resolution in the coming year.

A welcome new initiative from the Leader of the County Council has been the Councillor’s Devolved Budget Scheme. This gives County Councillors access to £10,000 of grant aid for capital projects in their divisions that would not normally be grant aided from other sources. I have grant aided:-
1)The XLP Research Trust, £450;
2) The Romsey Disability Forum £500;
3) The Woodley Pre-School Group £750;
4) Cupernham Infants PTA £112;
5) Romsey Town Council Royal Visit £5,000;
6) Montfort Hall Community Association £2,000;
7) Better Bags for Romsey £300;
8) Romsey Rural East Brownies and Guides £399.50.
The Devolved Budget scheme is to be continued next year.