|
Annual Report 2007
ROMSEY EXTRA PARISH COUNCIL ANNUAL REPORT 2007 Contents: Introduction Council Members and Officers 2.1 Members 2.2 Officers Councillor Activities 3.1 Council Meetings Attended 3.2 Internal Duties 3.3 Representation on External Committees 3.4 Representation on External Bodies Work of the Council during Year 4.1. Planning 4.2. Projects 4.3. Grants 4.4. Council Administration 4.5. Footpaths and Roads 4.6. Parish Amenities 5. Finance 5.1 Accounts for 2006/7 5.2 Grants for 2006/7 5.3 Precept and Budget for 2007/8 ANNUAL REPORT 2007 1. Introduction The Annual Report seeks to provide you with the information you need to understand something about our activities during the year. If there is other information that you would like to see in future reports do please let us know. Council Members and Officers 2.1 Members Chairman Rod A. Simpson Tanglewood, Sandy Lane, Romsey: Tel: 01794 368009 SO51 0PD E-mail rodsal_81@talk21.com Vice Chairman Jeanette Kell Moorcourt West, Ridge Lane Romsey Tel: 07801 277963 SO51 6AB E-mail: Jeanette@moorcourtwest.freeserve.co.uk Members: Julian N. Gee Laurel Bank, Sandy Lane Romsey Tel: 01794 368705 SO51 0PD E-mail: julianngee@aol.com Teresa A. Hibberd 2 Church Cottages Lee, Romsey Tel: 02380 732247 SO51 9LG E-mail Hibberd67@aol.com Alison M. Johnston Lee Manor, Lee Lane, Lee, Romsey Tel: 02380 740179 SO51 9LH E-mail: ali.m.johnstone@btinternet.com Sally F. Leach Troy House, Salisbury Road, Shootash Romsey Tel: 01794 522156 SO51 6FB E-mail: sf_leach@hotmail.com John S. Parker Cornerways Highwood Lane Romsey Tel: 01794 515257 SO51 9AF E-mail: parkerjsxx@aol.com 2.2 Officers Parish Clerk Carol A. McFarland Cowesfield Lodge, Romsey Road Whiteparish Tel: 01794 884826 SP5 2QY E-mail: carol_mcfarland@hotmail.com Carol has again put in an excellent year of work for us. In additional to her normal work of dealing with the administration of council matters for the parish, this year she took on the task of preparing the voluminous application for Quality Parish Status. After several months of work, the application was submitted in October 2006. The standard of her work was reflected in the outcome of the application. We will report on this later. Hon. Tree Warden John Chambers 1 Hilltop Cottages Manor Farm Lane Michelmersh Romsey Tel: 01794 368771 SO51 0NP John is an honorary officer of the council. His function is to advise us on the tree planning applications that come before us. His advice is much valued. 3. Councillor Activities 3.1 Council Meetings Attended We met as a council for our normal 12 monthly meetings. Councillor attendance at these meetings is summarised below: | | | No. of Meetings | % Attendance | Held during Year | 12 | | Members | Rod Simpson | 12 | 100 | | | Jeanette Kell | 7 | 58 | | | Julian Gee | 10 | 83 | | | Teresa Hibberd | 12 | 100 | | | Alison Johnston | 10 | 83 | | | Sally Leach | 7 | 58 | | | John Parker | 9 | 75 |
3.2 Internal Duties Public Transport - Alison Johnston Internal Audit Panel - Rod Simpson, Alison Johnston, Jeanette Kell & John Parker Website Administration - Rod Simpson Website Editor - Clerk Newsletter Editor - Clerk Grant Co-Ordination - Teresa Hibberd & John Parker TVBC Planning User Group - Rod Simpson & John Parker 3.3 Representation on External Committees R&DS Footpaths Committee (when operational) - Teresa Hibberd & Jeanette Kell Woodley Village Hall Management Committee - Rod Simpson & Julian Gee Montfort Hall Community Association - Teresa Hibberd STVVTS Management Committee (Dial-a-Ride) - Jeanette Kell Romsey Town Allotments Committee - Teresa Hibberd & Alison Johnson New Forest Consultative Committee - Jeanette Kell Squabb Wood Liaison Panel - Sally Leach Romsey Youth Council - Rod Simpson 3.4 Representation on External Bodies Test Valley Association of Parish Councils - (TVAPC) - Rod Simpson, Jeanette Kell & Clerk TVAPC Representative on the Test Valley Borough Council Standards Committee - Jeanette Kell Romsey Forum - Rod Simpson & Julian Gee 4. Work of the Council during Year 4.1. Planning 4.1.1 Planning Applications Our role in relation to planning applications is as a statutory consultee. In the year we have considered 69 applications. When one considers that last year's figure was also 69, it does show some consistency in planning activity over the two years. The only major application we have had to consider is the one for putting 3 detached dwellings on the plot at 16 Peel Close. Despite our earlier reservations about the outline application for development, this was approved by the planning authority which meant that we had no justification for objection when we looked at the detailed application this month. There were resubmissions for the very large property at Golden Hill, Belbins but these did not change the original application in principle. An application was also resubmitted for the new teaching unit at Stroud School. We did not object to any of these applications. We did, however, object to an application for a very large storage building on land at Green Lane, Ampfield as unwarranted building in the countryside. 4.1.2 The South East Plan The South East Plan when it is finally adopted by Government will provide a framework for development across the South East to 2026. The recommendations made last year to the Regional Assembly on the draft Plan by PUSH (Partnership for Urban South Hampshire), of whom HCC is a member, included a figure for the part of Test Valley within Southern Hampshire of 3,910 new homes. Romsey Extra is one of six parishes in that part of Test Valley falling within the area categorized in the Plan as South Hampshire. Some of these 3,910 new homes would be taken up by building on brownfield sites. For the remaining 2,500 new houses, greenfield sites would have to be found. The 2,500 total includes the 800 within the Borough Local Plan on the Abbotswood site, which currently is included in the ‘Reserve Housing List'. This means other sites for a further 1,700 new homes on greenfield sites in the six parishes would have to be found. Romsey Extra will inevitably be the main candidate for this allocation. In July of last year we submitted to The South East Regional Offices our comments on the draft of the Plan. Our conclusions were: The level of development proposed for southern Test Valley within the arbitrary boundary chosen for South Hampshire would in our view seriously prejudice the quality of life in the area and is unacceptable to us. A level of development within a District should only be proposed after thorough testing, consultation and agreement. Any growth must be accompanied by guaranteed funding on infrastructure improvements. A strategic gap should be defined between Southampton and Romsey. The inclusion of a provision within Policy H3 for Parish Plans and local housing assessments to have a key role in decisions on housing needs in villages is welcomed. We see it as vital that the general setting of Romsey as a thriving market town is safeguarded. Later in the year we joined forces with SHUV (South Hampshire's Unheard Voices). They are a group set up to prepare a consolidated response to the SE Plan and present this to the Inspectors at the Examination in Public of the Plan. In September we supported SHUV's evidence and resolved: "We share SHUV's concern about the whole basis on which the development in South Hampshire has been planned particularly the reliance on economic growth assumptions and that these are the best parameters alone of quality of life. Like SHUV we consider the country needs an even spread of economic activity. The SHUV submission includes requested additions to the listed locations of strategic gaps in Policy SH3. Within our own submission, we identified the need for a strategic gap between Southampton and Romsey and we consider this should also be added to SH3." Following the Examination in Public, which is a type of public inquiry, the Plan is expected to be issued by Government in the Spring of 2008. We will certainly seek every opportunity to discuss the details of the Plan and their implications for us as widely as possible. It has to be accepted that we as a parish will have little affect on the government's drive to significantly increase the rate of house building across the South East. Our role must be to voice our opinions as strongly as possible on the distribution of that house building and its impact on Romsey as a whole. 4.1.3 Look at Romsey In last year's Annual Report we explained our role in the work on the ‘Look at Romsey' project which was fronted by Phoebe Merrick, and the design statements covering Woodley & Ganger and Crampmoor & Highwood. In November we endorsed the design recommendations of these two design statements . One specific point made was about the footpath at the corners of Braishfield Road/ Winchester Road and School Road/ Winchester Road where pedestrians are cutting across the verge areas. The suggestion was that these tracks should be properly surfaced. Having looked at the two locations closely, we decided to ask the Highways Department to put down a gravel footpath at the corner of Braishfield Road and Winchester Road but not to do this for the School Road junction as there was not the same evidence of use. The Highway Department have agreed to put in the Braishfield Road corner path and we are now waiting for this to be carried out. 4.1.4 Other Planning Issues Ashfield Tyre Dump In last year's Annual Report we again mentioned our concern about the tyre dump at Ashfield. The matter is still unresolved and despite all the pressure that we have put on through representations and newspaper articles, a viable planning application has still to be submitted. Earlier in the year an application was made to the Borough Council in the name of ‘Afropa' but this was then referred to Hampshire County Council as the Minerals and Waste Planning Authority and subsequently withdrawn. This original application included the high and obtrusive security fencing that has been erected around the site. We now understand that a strategy for dealing with the tyres has been submitted to the County Council and a planning application is expected by 23rd May 2007. The concern is that this strategy involves only a phased reduction in the numbers of tyres over the next 7 years or more and leaves an ongoing storage of about 16,500 tyres. We will continue to urge that a solution be found as soon as possible to remove what we see as an environmental hazard and a visual intrusion in the countryside. Romsey Waste Recycling Centre In September, an officer of Hampshire County Council made a presentation to Romsey Forum on a proposal for re-location of the existing Bunny Lane waste recycling centre to a site on the corner of Botley Road and Highwood lane. This presentation gave rise to a groundswell of opposition and in October we formally objected to the proposal ourselves. The main point at issue is that the Highwood Lane site is located relatively close to residential development both in Romsey Extra and in the Whitenap area of Romsey Town. Such a facility would have been bound to carry nuisance value in so many different ways. A further aspect was the profound consequences there would be to the traffic movements along Highwood Lane. The road already suffers from unsuitably high traffic flows and will stand do so even more when the development at Abbotswood comes on stream. Traffic using the new recycling centre would only have made this situation even worse. We are glad to report that this proposal was not taken forward by Hampshire County Council. 4.2. Projects 4.2.1 Woodley Village Hall Work here is largely one of routine maintenance. This has included replacement planting where this has been found to be necessary. We did arrange for the sections of the front hedge in front of the hall to be laid and it is great to see these old agricultural practices in use. 4.2.2 Footpath Highwood Lane As we said last year, a project that we would still very much like to see proceeding is the construction of a footpath along the verge of Highwood Lane from the kissing gate on the end of FP 15 to the bend near Stroud School. We can now only report that we have had no further reaction from the County Council on this but we will certainly continue to raise it whenever we get an appropriate opportunity. 4.2.3 Corner of Sandy Lane/ Cupernham Lane We have considered whether it might be possible to put some planting into this area. It is an area that has at times been occupied by travellers and planting would deter this as well as break up quite a large area. The problem here, however, is the presence of underground services. Following receipt of details of where these services are located we did look at the places where planting might be possible. Unfortunately, we had to conclude that we could not plant in meaningful positions that would achieve our objective of deterring travellers. The reverse would have happened and we would have created screening for them. 4.2.4 New Parish Seating An issue that appears quite difficult for is the provision of new bench seats in open areas around the parish. Locations which attract support from residents are hard to find. The seats along the canal towpath seem to be well liked but other suitable sites have evaded us. We did investigate a site within the Mountbatten School grounds near to the Lantern Theatre but received no positive responses to this suggestion. Further seating in the grounds of and close to Woodley Village Hall was another thought but this will have to await the outcome of the current initiative to significantly refurbish the hall which will change its external appearance if the current plans are taken forward. 4.3. Grants The Parish Council gives grants to organisations, groups or individuals in the Parish for a fairly wide range of purposes which are generally in the interests of the parish and the parishioners. We do ask anybody who feels that they or their group could benefit from a grant for the coming year to let us know. All we need is a written request with a statement of accounts so that we can look at the cause and the financial background of the request. Details of the grants we gave this year are in Section 5.2 of this report. 4.4. Council Administration 4.4.1 Newsletter This year we have distributed four editions of ‘Extra News' and it is our intention to continue to do this. If you have any comments about the newsletter we would very much like to hear them. Early in the year we entered our newsletter for an award in a newsletter competition organised by the Hampshire Association of Town and Parish Councils. We never believed that our entry to a competition such as this would achieve a result. To our great joy the Romsey Extra Council newsletter won the Local Council Publication award. We were presented with our award early in November. 4.4.2 Website We use the facilities of "The Local Channel" as our website. This means we, as well as any other local not for profit organisation, group or individual, can directly input content on issues, news and events in the parish. The web address is: www.thelocalchannel.co.uk/romseyextra Here you will find news items and also the content of our newsletters. Topics under ‘Local Council' include ‘Councillors', ‘Minutes', ‘Agendas' and ‘Planning Applications'. So you can look at the past minutes of our meetings, the agendas and a list with details of the planning applications we will be considering at our next meeting. If there is more you would like to know about the website do ask a question about it later or talk to me after the formal session. 4.4.3 Quality Parish Council Scheme Last year our Clerk gained her Certificate in Local Government Administration (CiLCA). This opened the door for us to move towards the achievement of Quality Status. To achieve this recognition our procedures had to be judged against a very strict set of criteria. The application preparation was a lengthy process but this was very ably carried out by our Clerk, Carol. There were a number of requirements that we had to meet and these all had to be evidenced. The submission was made in October of last year and in November we were told we had been warded Quality Parish Status. Our certificate was handed to us at an awards ceremony organised by the Hampshire Association of Town and Parish Councils at Jermyn's House on Tuesday of last week, the 17th April. 4.5. Footpaths and Roads 4.5.1 School Road/ Braishfield Road Junction In February the Borough Council raised the question of the use being made of School Road and more particularly the closure of the School Road/ Braishfield Road junction. Borough officers were considering the effects that the development of Abbotswood in the Borough Local Plan will have and the junction improvements that will be necessary. We decided to carry out a consultation exercise. A questionnaire was delivered individually to addresses in School Rd and also made available to the users of Woodley Village Hall. Additionally responses were invited from other users of School Rd through an article in the Romsey Advertiser. We received 43 responses, 21 of these were in favour of the closure and 22 against. It is evident that there is an overriding view that something needs to done to control the use made by traffic of School Road given its nature and configuration. From the survey the suggestion of closing the junction with Braishfield Rd meets with a mixed reception. The main concern is the effect it would have on delays at the Braishfield Rd/ Winchester Rd junction. A number of alternatives to closure were suggested including traffic calming and either making School Road "No Entry" from Braishfield Road or Braishfield Road "No Entry" from School Road. Of these closure options making School Road "No Entry" from Braishfield Road seemed worthy of further investigation. We prepared a detailed report on the consultation, a copy of which can be made available to anyone who asks to see it. 4.5.2 Speed Restrictions We have continued to urge that certain changes are made to speed restrictions on roads in the parish. Among these are a 40 mph limit in Gardeners Lane and 30 mph limits on School Road and the lower part of Braishfield Road. We are also concerned about the speed of traffic along Belbins. No action have been taken on any of these although a mobile flashing speed sign did make a short appearance in Braishfield Road. It has been promised that this unit will be stationed for a period in Belbins. The County Council recently decided to follow new government guidance on 30 mph limits in villages and offered the opportunity to councils to nominate their suggestions under the ‘Village 30 Programme'. Two locations in the parish that concern us matched the required numbers of houses per 100 metres and, whilst they are perhaps not the normal concept of a ‘village', we decided to put School Road and Belbins forward. We will certainly not lose any possible opportunity there is to make our case about speed limits on a number of roads in the parish. 4.5.3 Resolved Concerns The concerns we have on footpaths and roads are always a strong feature of our meetings. These concerns are all brought to the attention of Hampshire Highways and at intervals we do meet with the Assistant Chief Engineer covering Test Valley, Andrew Milne. These meetings are always productive in the acceptance we receive for our concerns. It is getting promised changes actually underway that does normally take us some time and effort. There have been a number of items that have been dealt with over the year. The two biggest of these are: Overgrown hedgerow which obscures visibility when making a right turn at the junction of Halterworth Lane with Highwood Lane - Following a meeting with Andrew Milne on site this problem was accepted and Hampshire Highways did cut the hedge back to the highway boundary. Highway drainage feeding into property driveways in Sandy Lane. - A number of properties along Sandy Lane suffered from highway drainage run off feeding into their driveways. In did take two attempts to successfully solve the problem but eventually the driveway entrances were properly resurfaced so that road surface water drains along the road and not into the driveways. North Close road drainage. - Heavy rains last winter were causing a significant area of flooding at the end of North Close. Following a complaint from us the gully drain was cleared and the flooding has not re-occurred. 4.5.4 Outstanding Concerns We still do have a number of outstanding concerns and some have been so for a long time. We are totally realistic about the financial restraints on the highway authority and have presented our list of concerns in a priority order with the hope that over time at least we could achieve some progress on our major concerns. The current position on the four items which head our list is: Safety barriers on the approaches to the A27 railway bridge at Ashfield - Seen, by the structures section of Hampshire Highways, as being low on their priority list for such situations. Repair and maintenance work on the parapets of the A3057 bridges over the River Test. - Currently no prospect of painting work on these parapets. Short Hill Salt Bin - Before last winter it was agreed that we would fund the provision of a salt bin on Short Hill. This has still not been provided and it appears that difficulties in land ownership for the bin location are delaying the siting of the bin. Woodley Village Hall Car Park Entrance - An agreement was reached with Hampshire Highways in January that work would be done to lengthen the section of dropped kerb in front of the car park entrance to the Village Hall but this work has still not been carried out. We will to continue to discuss with Hampshire Highways other items of outstanding concern. 4.6. Parish Amenities 4.6.1 Play Areas We mentioned in our last report that the Woodley Close play area was due to be refurbished in this financial year. The latest information we have from our Borough Councillors is that the target date for start of construction work on this play area is September 2007. The consultation on the plans should be starting next month. 5. Finance 5.1 Provisional Accounts for 2006/7 See Appendix 1 (note these are not approved until June) 5.2 Grants given in 2006/7 Organisation | Details | Cost | Homestart | To help with running costs | 150.00 | Hampshire County Youth Band Association | To help purchase new instruments | 100.00 | STVVTS | To help with running costs | 500.00 | Romsey Arts Festival | Further assistance to promote venues in Romsey Extra | 250.00 | Woodley & Crampmoor Friendship Club | To help with Xmas festivities | 150.00 | Montfort Community Hall | To help refurbish the kitchen | 500.00 | Romsey Twinning | To help with hire costs of WVH to host visit from Battenburg | 50.00 | Youth in Romsey | To help with running costs | 250.00 | Total | | 1,950.00 |
5.3 Precept and Budget for 2007/8 | | | 2006-2007 Outturn - £ | 2007-2008 Budget - £ | Carried Forward at start | 12,616.04 | 12,448.66 | Precept | 22,000.00 | 22,000.00 | Rest | 820.23 | - | VAT | 715.72 | - | Total | 23,535.95 | 22,000.00 | Administration | 17,625.69 | 19,260.86 | Running | 3,052.95 | 3,290.00 | Projects | 356.00 | 2,000.00 | Grants | 1,950.00 | 2,000.00 | VAT | 718.69 | - | Total | 23,703.33 | 26,550.86 | Income less Expenditure | -167.38 | -4,550.86 | Carried Forward | 12,448.66 | 7,897.80 |
The new budget figure for 2007/8 is £26,550.86. This compares with £23,479.75 for 2006/7. The difference is almost entirely due to an increase in administration expenditure of £3,011.11. The elements of this increase are: Election cost May 07 £1,700.00 Employment costs £ 806.11 New costs from TVBC for meeting room £ 396.00 Rest £ 109.00 As can be seen this increase in cost arises primarily from the cost of the election for this year plus normal increases in employment cost and charges now imposed on us by TVBC for attendance during the time we hold our meetings. The precept is the element within the Council Tax that is paid to Parish Councils. Since there is a reasonable balance in the parish account, we have decided that a precept figure lower than the budget spend will again be workable and therefore have not seen it as being necessary to increase our precept above the figure of £22,000 for the last financial year. We obviously do have to bring the budget spend and precept into balance. Over the next few years, it is planned to do this by keeping a tight control on the budget. Any increases in the precept that we do have to apply can then be kept to a minimum.
|