Agenda item

Public Participation

To receive and note questions asked and statements made from members of the public and the Residents Association on general matters of interest and/or matters relating to the work of the Forum.


The Chairperson welcomed approximately 30 local residents to the meeting. A number of residents addressed the Forum at the relevant point in the agenda. For the purposes of the minutes, the key issues were collated here as follows:


Regarding the overall purpose of the Forum a member of the public suggested that existing Council House residents may benefit from a Forum in a similar way that Kings Barton residents do. In response, the Chairperson explained that this Forum dealt with much more than housing and it was crucial in bringing together all the relevant parties as the development progressed.    


A representative of the Kings Barton Residents Association addressed the Forum regarding report KBF22, Kings Barton Community Development Worker. He made a number of points in support of the post and of the involvement of St Barnabas Church who he felt would make a suitable employer. The Forum was also asked if preference could be given to local residents in the appointment of the post.


In response, officers advised that St Barnabas Church had asked to be considered as a potential employer for the community development worker and a number of meetings had been held with Reverend Ed Dines. Whilst this option had its merits, it was not proposed at this stage. However it was understood that the community development worker would need to work closely with the Church and others to ensure a joined-up approach and a complementary delivery of services. The Forum was informed that no special preference could be given to local residents but that the Residents Association would be advised of when the vacancy notice was to be circulated.


Regarding report KBF23, Kings Barton Implementation Report; prior to the meeting, the Kings Barton Residents Association had notified officers of the questions they intended to ask under this item. Officers had in turn been able to consult with colleagues at Winchester City Council, Hampshire County Council and CALA to provide initial responses to those questions. The key issues raised related to the:


Pedestrian walkways/cycle routes:

a)    Footpath resurfacing, East side of Andover Road.

b)    Speed limits along Andover Road past Manley Road

c)    Toucan crossing on the Courtney Road

d)    Proposed Worthy Down shared route

e)    Useable sealed surface on the new Worthy Down route

f)     Maintenance schedule of footpaths

g)    Footpath running parallel to the northern border of Henry Beaufort school


Kings Barton Infrastructure:

a)    Delivery of the Phase 1B playpark.

b)    Speeding issues on Winchester Avenue.

c)    Issues of Shared space areas being used inappropriately

d)    An update on Park and Ride and bus services in general

e)    Maintenance of amenity space.

f)     Problems with street lighting.

g)    Completion date for Phase 1B

h)   Installation of dog waste bins.


Responses to the questions were provided by officers and by Mr Westwood, CALA Homes' Project Director. In addition, it was proposed that a number of the issues raised by the Residents Association could be properly dealt with by a meeting between CALA and the Residents Association. This could also be combined with a site tour of the areas referred to. Further, it was suggested that as a number of the issues raised related to VIVID that they should be invited to attend a future meeting of the Forum. Concerning a specific issue regarding dog waste bins, it was proposed that officers, CALA and the Parish Council meet to discuss in order to take this issue forward.


Regarding agenda item 9, Winchester City Council Movement Strategy, several members of the public spoke following the presentation by officers.

The following points were raised:


  • that keeping Andover Road open was important to many residents.
  • could maintenance schedules of footpaths be reviewed?
  • were the results of the Movement Strategy available on line?
  • did the Movement Strategy fully consider the current uses of Andover Road including the issues with Children walking to school


Officers explained that in relation to Andover Road, that the planning permission confirms the position and that the developer was required to implement that permission. In terms of the presentation, officers advised that the Movement Strategy sought to reduce the overall level of traffic using Andover Road. Regarding Movement Strategy results, the high level findings and results were available online via the Winchester City Council website.



m - Public Participation{sidenav}{content}