Join Inform Fareham button
  Council offices 10 Thousand houses Road signs M27 Traffic queue 20 Thousand cars Warsash



Fareham Town Centre




Plans to buy site before Lidl takeover

23-01-2018

Link to an article in The News.

A group of business owners at the Apex Centre in Fareham are clubbing together to buy the site in a bid to save their jobs after planning permission for a Lidl store was granted at the end of last year.

It seems a shame that Caroline Dinenage is more concerned about our local SMEs than our own MP, I haven't heard much from Suella about this, probably climbing the greasy pole has suddenly become much more important. I notice that there is no comment from our Executive Leader - that could have been a good photo opportunity for him.

⇧Top⇧



Now Argos bites the dust

23-01-2018

Link to an article in The News.

"ARGOS has announced it is moving out of middle of Fareham.

Leader of Fareham Borough Council Sean Woodward said: "It is disappointing to see Argos move out of the town centre but good that they will remain very close by and that they are retaining their superstore at Park Gate.""


Wonder if this will turn into another 'windfall' housing site?

⇧Top⇧



BHS to become B&M

31-10-2017

At last the BHS store has been re-let to B&M. Is it a good fit in the precinct? Presumably B&M have decided that it is. Let us hope that it can manage without free parking and being so far from the public car park. Whilst there is a car park at that end of the Centre, the majority of shoppers tend to use the multi-storey. Still that decision will soon be removed when they demolish the multi-storey. As B&M tend to sell quite large items you would have thought that their existing store in Newgate Lane would be better. Nothing so far has been said about the future of that site. If they want to close it how about Lidl buying the site to expand and leave the small businesses that they intend to close to prosper.

I know that the preference of many of Fareham residents would have been for a Primark, whether Roubaix didn't want them or whether Primark didn't want Fareham I guess we will never know.

The News icon Link to The News article.

By the way the picture shown on the Inform Fareham Facebook is of two members of Fareham Men's Shed working on the bus for the homeless in Portsmouth that has been refurbished in the Asda car park and has absolutely nothing to do with this story.

⇧Top⇧



Lidl or small businesses?

13-10-2017

Well it could help fill the Daedalus Business Park, that would be a big hit with our EL.

"Fourteen businesses at the Apex Centre at Speedfields Retail Park in Fareham are under threat after it was revealed that Lidl planned to demolish units 10 to 23 of the centre to make way for a new store to replace their old one in Newgate Lane..."

“If planning consent is granted, we would be happy to help them move to a new location.”


And that should help traffic flow on Newgate Lane

Link to the Daily Echo article

⇧Top⇧



20-06-2017 - Ferneham Hall CAT report

05-07-2017

This meeting followed the pattern of recent CAT meetings and so did a vast majority of the dialogue: So I refer you to videos and written accounts previously published on the Inform Fareham Focus Group website.

Police report

On this occasion, however, the police representation was given by Sgt Lamper of the Neighbourhood Team. Worryingly, like Sgt Morgan before him, he also remarked about the cutbacks in the number of resources available to him. Being that the borough is literally growing weekly – and thousands of new homes are planned for the coming decades – then this should surely concern residents greatly; as should any cutbacks generally, particularly in health provisions. I think this was reflected in a number of questions posed from the floor which flowed around lawlessness. Indeed, one resident went on at some length about ‘law and order’. Judging by his demeanour it is probably the party he votes for that are causing many of the problems he spoke of and not Sgt Morgan/Sgt Lamper and his merry band of warriors - who are obviously operating under considerable pressure, restraint and difficulty. That said, much of what was asked didn’t actually concern the Neighbourhood Police Team but was really a matter for other bodies such as FBC itself and HCC. The current police station was discussed. Plainly Cllr. Woodward wants to get his hands on the site when it closes (in the next couple of years or so) to turn it into housing or a new multi storey car park. Time will tell.

Cllr. Woodward

A number of dates were revealed concerning several appeals regarding developments in the Warsash area (from September onwards). The Cranleigh Road appeal result should be known by next month. The IFA2 detailed application should be received on July 19th. Being there is a special meeting with specific reference to the IFA2 at Stubbington on Monday July 24th I will not dwell on this subject.

Daedelus

Cllr Woodward said that 3500 jobs should be created at the Faraday and Swordfish industrial sites at the airfield. However, as remarked upon before, FBC are offering firms a 5 year sabbatical on business rates at Daedelus so it would hardly be surprising if firms are moving there or just relocating there without actually creating ‘new’ jobs to speak of. Speaking of development, FBC have jumped on the jingoistic bandwagon with the proposed redevelopment of Fareham town centre: So now we have the Station Quarter, the Western Quarter, the Georgian Quarter, the Civic Quarter and Market Quay. It all sounds rather pretentious to me. I personally fear for the future of our lovely old market town with these grandiose schemes. Big is not always beautiful. Anyway, a recent survey about the redevelopment of the town centre attracted 700 responses. With a habitat embracing more than 100,000 residents that’s pretty representative isn’t it! Bearing in mind my remarks about policing above one does wonder just who will be policing the expanded town centre if and when it happens – especially if some sort of nightlife transpires. I have seen some of the woes police have to endure late at night in other towns when revellers imbibe in drink. It was described as a ‘ghost town’ after 9pm. Perhaps the local constabulary may be wishing it stays that way!!

Welborne

A few interesting revelations here. Two runners are in the frame for the Benge land apparently but no news yet of who they are. However, judging by the noises heard, one does wonder if FBC is one of them. Cllr Woodward disclosed that FBC have already been buying up some of the real estate themselves. The bottom lines is that the 1000 acres needed for Welborne is still far from being under one ownership as far as I can see and Buckland will still have a big say unless FBC have/or get them onboard. The cost of J10 is now quoted as between £35 and £40 million. According to what I heard Highways England will be turning the M27 section - between J4 and J11 I think - into a Smart Motorway starting next year. The new J10 will have to be incorporated into this new set-up. Bearing in mind how things have gone so far one might feel that this timescale is a tad ambitious. Overall one gets the impression that there is still much to do with regards to Welborne which may not bode well for all of those appeals pending!!

Other news

FBC hope to get their hands on the old Magistrate’s Court to turn it into more homes probably. The number of properties in the town centre seems to have been reduced from approx 900 down to 600: Still an awful lot of new houses and an awful lot of traffic – not to mention parking. Cllr. Woodward will be meeting with the owners of the shopping centre shortly – Perhaps FBC wish to add this too their property portfolio.

⇧Top⇧



Final Regeneration Vision

05-07-2017

 Report to the Executive for Decision 10 July 2017

The report briefly outlines the public consultation undertaken as part of the Council’s Draft Regeneration Vision for Fareham Town Centre. This Report sets out the key changes to the Draft Vision which have emerged from this public consultation. The Final Vision therefore sets out the Council’s ambitions for regenerating Fareham Town Centre to meet the existing and future needs of the Borough and takes on board the views and issues expressed by the local community and how working with landowners and key partners we can improve the town centre.


 Fareham Town Vision - Final Draft

The town centre must change to meet the needs of the Borough’s growing population and changes in shopping habits and the way we use our leisure time. These changes won’t happen overnight and there will be challenges in developing land identified in this Vision. Places where we have greater control such as parts of the Civic Quarter and Lysses Car Park, are likely to be developed first. Others will take longer. We will continue to work with the community, landowners, developers and our partners, like Hampshire County Council, to create the best possible town centre. Any future developments will involve full engagement with the community.


 Consultation Summary

The consultation on the draft vision for the regeneration of Fareham Town Centre ran between 20 February and 26 March 2017. The questionnaire was promoted on the Council website, by press release, via Community Engagement events at Fareham Market and Ferneham Hall, a Static Display in Fareham Shopping Centre as well as social media channels and the E-panel.

⇧Top⇧



Business breakfast starts overhaul of Town Centre

27-02-2017

"About 50 people, representing a wide range of businesses, attended the event at Ferneham Hall on Thursday to learn about the plans and have their say.

Fareham Borough Council is hoping to carry out a multimillion pound scheme over the next 25 years that will rejuvenate the town centre, create a thriving arts hub and provide more housing."


But will having a building site in and around the town centre for the next 25 years help at all?

The News icon Link to The News article.

⇧Top⇧



New arts centre could replace Ferneham Hall

08-02-2017

It would appear that Ferneham Hall might stay but 'something' is likely to happen to the Ashcroft.

Quote from The News article below "Ferneham Hall would not be demolished, but redeveloped in the potential scheme, which includes homes and more commercial space for Fareham Shopping Centre.

The new facility’s exact location has not been determined but the proposals also involve demolishing the Osborn Road multi-storey car park and moving the facilities at the Ashcroft Arts Centre into a bigger cultural and arts hub."


Is it just me or do these two sentences contradict each other? They aren't going to move Ferneham Hall but at the same time they don't know where they will move it to - is that bad reporting or muddled thinking?

The News Icon Link to The News article

⇧Top⇧



Fareham Town's future

31-01-2017

Fareham Town Centre future

900 new houses FBC Icon Appendix A - Fareham Town Centre Regeneration Vision for Consultation
Mobile and limited download members beware, the file is 68MB in size so you will need to be very patient.

Fareham Council's consultative document on the future of our town centre - Note the getout clause on page 2
"Change is needed but it won’t happen overnight. As a Council we have some, but not overall, control over all of the possible improvements that could be made. We want to work with the community, landowners, developers and our partners, like Hampshire County Council, to create the best possible town centre."

FBC Icon Draft Regeneration Vision for Fareham Town Centre: Consultation

The News icon Link to The News article

⇧Top⇧






Funtley




Of course Funtley doesn't flood.

16-01-2018

Land to the South of Funtley Road (Fareham) P/17/1539/EA


So a screening Opinion for an application for planning was submitted to FBC on the 3rd of Jan 2018 for the development of up to 55 dwellings, Community Building and Country Park including landscaping. The same company (Reside Developments) also has an Application for 27 dwellings (P/17/1135/OA) Funtley North

I would like to bring to your attention dated Application Form 03/01/18 paragraph heading "FLOOD RISK AND DRAINAGE" below is a copy and paste to save time:

Flood Risk and Drainage

According to the Environment Agency Planning Flood Map, the site is located within Flood Zone 1 where there is a low risk of flooding.

A sustainable surface water drainage strategy is proposed that will restrict run off from the site to existing greenfield or less and provide on-site attenuation for excess flows up to 1 in 100 years plus an allowance for climate change. This is likely to be achieved through provision of an open attenuation pond and potential underground storage (crates). This will be designed to suit the final development layout and site topography.

As such, the development is unlikely to create or be at risk from a significant likelihood of flooding, either locally or within the surrounding area. Nor will the proposed development have a significant impact on drainage or surface water runoff.

A Flood Risk Assessment and Foul Drainage Strategy will be submitted with the planning application.

PLEASE NOTE "1 in 100 years" then see photos and video links below taken in the last two years..........

VIDEO'S TAKEN 2016 & PHOTO'S TAKEN LAST WEEK !!!

CASE CLOSED !!!!!!
River Lane flood 2 River Lane flood 3 River Lane flood 2 River Lane flood 2 River Lane flood 2 River Lane flood 2 River Lane flood 2
Click any image to enlarge


River Lane Flood video River Lane Flood video

I was wondering if this poor guy really intended going for a run a swim or a shower links to click either picture for the video.

⇧Top⇧



Now the applications start.

03-10-2017

The first of the new bunch of planning applications star with this one and if the new plan is stuck to the people of Funtley, indeed the people of Fareham, will have no input at all.

Funtley North development

 Link to planning application

⇧Top⇧





Portchester




26-07-2017 - Portchester CAT Report

26-07-2017

The meeting was attended by about 47 residents with appearances being made by all Portchester councillors. As with all of these CAT meetings the normal format was followed. The Executive Leader's report offered exactly the same comments as in all of the previous meetings, the video list contains an extra short Executive Leader's clip as it was pretty specific about the Portchester regeneration.


Police report

I can't help but feel sorry for the poor souls that have to give the Police report, in this meeting Sgt. Lamper was forced to try and explain the lack of response from the 101 service which, let us be honest, he has absolutely no responsibility for nor does he have any control or influence over it.


Cllr. Woodward

One most original question was asked about 'what has gone wrong over the last year rather than what has gone right'. That caused a short moment of thought but the answers were more or less as you would expect. He was asked about the Asda exit at Speedfields Park and to be honest I couldn't make up my mind as to whether he knew what was being planned because he seems to think that the extra exit will be straight into Newgate Lane, not into the service road that then leads into Newgate Lane.


Portchester regeneration

Various questions were asked about this project, most of them concerning car parking as one would expect.


AOB

Other than that there was very little new to be added.

⇧Top⇧



Final Regeneration Vision

05-07-2017

 Report to the Executive for Decision 10 July 2017

The Report briefly outlines the public consultation undertaken as part of the Council’s Draft Regeneration Vision for Portchester Village Centre. This report sets out key changes to the Draft Vision which have emerged from this public consultation. The Final Vision therefore sets out the Council’s ambitions for regenerating the village centre of Portchester which takes on board the views and issues expressed by the local community, and how, working with key partners, the Authority and key parties we are able to improve the village centre.


 Vision document

At the start of 2017, we asked residents, local businesses and landowners for feedback on our draft Vision. The draft proposals were generally very well supported. Through listening to your views we have made positive changes to our proposals such as how the Council’s free public car park can be improved. By doing this, we can be confident that the final Vision reflects the needs of the whole community.


 Consultation summary

  • 465 people completed the online survey.
  • 35 attended the business breakfast.
  • 450 came to one of the three consultation events (two at the Wednesday Market and one in Portchester Community Centre).
  • 7,549 people were given information about the draft vision on the Council’s Facebook account, 24 of which made comments.


⇧Top⇧






Stubbington




Will this be one of the next appeals?

04-09-2017

Councillors are opposed to more planning proposals after letters were sent round Hill Head and Stubbington from Bargate Homes inviting locals to a public exhibition regarding a proposed development of up to 180 houses on land west of Old Street.

We did try and tell our Council that their reliance on the ill-prepared Welborne plan was going to cause exactly this problem. However they insisted on ploughing their own furrow and it looks as if we have now reached the edge of the cliff. Every councillor and their dog insisted that Cranleigh Road should be rejected, it was, but it made absolutley no difference, I wonder if it will this time around if Bargate Homes decide to take them on.

Let us really hope that this time it may be different but somehow I doubt it

 Link the The News article

⇧Top⇧



Another 180?

25-08-2017

Taken from  The Request for Screening received on 18th August 2017 by Fareham Borough Council.

Proposed Marsh Lane, Hill Head development
Whilst this request asks Fareham Borough Council to assess the likely environmental effects of a development up to 180 dwellings, this site has historically been promoted for up to 150 dwellings. Whilst it is anticipated that the proposed development will yield closer to 150 dwellings, testing the environmental effects of 180 dwellings ensures a higher level of rigour and allows for some flexibility in the masterplanning process, should for instance the local need be for a higher number of small dwellings.

⇧Top⇧



Will the Council listen this time?

22-08-2017

"Up to 420 residents of Stubbington near Fareham have signed the petition in a bid to stop Fareham borough council turning Stroud Green recreation ground into allotments.

Land near Gosport Road was previously put forward however residents were told the site was no longer suitable because of the construction of the Stubbington Bypass."


 Link to article in The Daily Echo

⇧Top⇧



20-06-2017 - Stubbington CAT report

20-06-2017

The Executive's briefing additional video contains items more specific to Stubbington - Stroud Green allotments and Daedalus site modifications. The last part of this video about Welborne is the same as that on the Summer Executive briefing but with one very important bit that Cllr. Woodward added to this presentation.

Resume

Much of the first hour was no more than a reiteration on what has been said by Cllr Woodward many times over, but there were a few things to add.


Welborne

Cllr Woodward said that he was meeting the new owners of the disputed Benge land today (Wednesday June 21st.) to tell them what he was expecting of them. Hopefully some more details will emerge in the fullness of time because he gave little away on this night. He also repeated the mantra that Welborne will help stop further developments within the borough – and then went on at another point in the proceedings to say how he was going to develop the town centre with new housing – 900 units has been one quoted figure. With 12,000 houses planned for the future I find it difficult to understand just how he can keep justifying this statement. He again repeated that the Fareham & Gosport CCG will be responsible for Welborne. So, unless they and the West Hampshire CCG have changed their positions we know this not to be true. He made no more mention of the meeting he was demanding with the CCGs so I assume they are not dancing to his tune. However, the Secretary of State for Health, Jeremy Hunt, is going to sort it all out!!! That’s what he promised if he got re-elected. So let us see. Absolutely no mention was made with regards to any other issues surrounding Welborne especially the mounting concerns and objections from various powerful bodies. The cost of Junction 10 is now set at £40million. It must be reasonable to assume that as each year passes these associated costs will keep rising.


The Stubbington bypass

Sadly, just as many residents do not understand the full implications of Welborne, I feel that many Stubbington residents do not understand the full implications of the bypass. I can see why they are in favour, absolutely, but I do see a disaster ahead. Many of us truly believe that the bypass will facilitate further development along its route with a real possibility that Newlands will get built eventually.


IFA2.

FBC are expecting a detailed planning application in two weeks or so. Nonetheless, Cllr Woodward said that the footprint of the IFA2 has been reduced as has been the height. He made no mention at this juncture of the concerns about this site: Noise and electrical interference etc.


Stroud Green Lane allotments

I really know very little about this matter other than it seems to be a very big subject for many residents. I think much of the angst is centred on the fact that the residents feel much needed recreational land is being taken over to build some extra allotments. It was obviously a very passionate subject for many. It seems that this will rumble on for a little while yet. I wasn’t surprised to learn that many residents where complaining of the lack of consultation and when they do say something it is ignored. I think many of us have been there.

As is often the case at CAT meetings, these days, the evening seemed to be more about what was NOT said rather than what was. I don’t think I’m alone feeling that much is going on behind closed doors in many respects, which we are certainly not aware of. I guess transparency is not a strong suite of political intrigue.

⇧Top⇧



Titchfield






Titchfield Haven under threat

29-01-2018

Titchfield HavenSparrowhawk at Titchfield HavenGulls at Titchfield Haven

Quote from an article in the Daily Echo

Councillor Sean Woodward, leader of Fareham Borough Council, added: "The site is not in the existing local plan or the draft local plan.

It is also in the strategic countryside gap."


But will that make any difference? What was it the chair of the Planning Committee said in January's meeting -

Link to video quote - "If these go to appeal - we cannot win them - it's impossible"

What a mess our council have got us into.

⇧Top⇧



Posbrook Lane.

20-06-2017

Development map Development map


Well that's Funtley, Portchester and now Titchfield all in the same boat. Unwanted, highly intrusive and, for the size of the villages, enormous developments

This is a copy of the Titchfield Village Trust's objections to the development:

The Titchfield Village Trust would like to object in the strongest possible terms to this application from Foreman Homes. Initially the plans were for up to 150 houses and a ‘community garden’ (This we believe is likely to result in a field, which oddly enough is what is there already !) They have now included a Scout Hut in a blatant attempt to blackmail the village into accepting their extremely unacceptable proposal.

Our reasons for objecting are numerous :

  • Fareham is already well on the way to fulfilling its housing needs responsibility with the creation of Welborne, with 6,000 units planned along with the proposed scheme (in its early days we know) for the centre of the town, perhaps adding a further 600. Linked to this is the fact that your own policy was to build Welborne and thus prevent the type and size of application Foreman homes are proposing
  • Titchfield has certainly contributed to the Fareham housing quota with the 82 units currently under constructed in the development off Cartwright Drive. For a village with few areas left to infill we feel this is enough.
  • Titchfield is a village, and with a large proportion of it designated a conservation area with some buildings going back to the 15th century, the addition of this extra housing will seek to destroy that image.
  • In addition it would go against your own planning policy, CS22 ‘Development in Strategic Gaps’, and would certainly contribute towards the coalescence of settlements which this policy seeks to avoid.
  • Another part of that policy includes ‘Visual Separation’ something your own Titchfield ‘Conservation Area Appraisal and Management Strategy’ commented on: “The open character of the valley is important to the setting of Titchfield Village…..The rural character of the landscape has been protected from inappropriate development through conservation area, countryside and strategic gap designation” This development will destroy the views, and as a result that character, across the lower Meon Valley and the ancient Canal.
  • The addition of 150 houses will also cause problems in 3 areas the community already have concerns over:
    • Traffic. The centre of the village is a 20mph limited area (something we are in the process of trying to extend) This is because of the restrictions caused by a village road system that was created to cope with horse drawn traffic and not the car. 150 extra houses will create even more of a problem.
    • School: The School is only some 8 pupils short of its maximum. It is a single form entry primary school and as an ex Chair of Governors I can assure you there is no more space available in the 1930’s buildings.
    • Doctors Surgery: Although they are not able to turn patients away the surgery is almost at maximum capacity. Once it goes beyond that extra facilities have to be found. Having spoken to the Surgery they have no space to extend situated as they are right in the middle of the conservation area.
  • The site itself is situated in a very sensitive environmental corridor. The ancient canal, built in 1611, is linked to the river Meon recently seeded with water voles, a protected species. Dormice were discovered across the A27 during environmental surveys carried out prior to work on the development off Cartwright Drive. Newts are known to live in both the river and the canal. The upper reaches of the Titchfield Haven National Nature Reserve run along the other side of the canal. The developers say they will create a ‘Community Garden’ right to the edge of the water. This may seem like a barrier but I’m afraid protected species aren’t that good at observing boundaries created by developers.

Over all this is a poorly conceived plan which takes no consideration of situation, consequences or your own planning policies. It is a scheme to make money, that is all, and should be rejected out of hand. The Titchfield Village Trust is resolutely opposed to it and would urge you to follow your own guidelines and refuse it.

 Link to FBC Case Tracker for further information.

⇧Top⇧



01-06-2017 Titchfield Cat Report.

01-06-2017

CAT Meeting, Titchfield Community Centre Thursday June 1st 2017.

TITCHFIELD NEIGHBOURHOOD FORUM:

This Forum, set up with the backing of Tory Cllr. Evans and with the approval of FBC, encourages residents to have a say in what gets built locally (The Neighbourhood Plan) and where. If approved by FBC the Neighbourhood Plan can be incorporated within the FBC Local Plan. It looks good on paper but is probably a Tory dominated group of 17 people encouraged by the Tory dominated FBC to show maybe that they are listening and working with local communities. Okay let’s roll it out across the borough then. My problem here is that a similar proposal by the Village of Funtley was shot down by Cllr. Woodward and FBC on the premise that not enough people were interested – a statement refuted by the Funtley Village Society. Recently a Funtley Governance Review FBC refused to allow Funtley to become a Parish Council. What is the difference between Funtley and Titchfield you may ask? I guess it’s a matter of who your friends are.

FBC LOCAL PLAN:

The LP is being reviewed in the light that an additional 2000 homes are now needed for Fareham – this is over and above Welborne. What Cllr. Woodward consistently fails to mention is the total figure of 12,000 new homes that are needed to fulfil the commitment he has made for Fareham to accept this figure up to 2036 wearing his PUSH hat. To do this FBC has asked for residents/developers to identify sites around the borough that can be built on. Obviously the question will be asked then, why are developers being refused permission to build at Cranleigh Road/Brook Lane etc. Well, to be fair, brownfield sites must be used first and if these sites are deemed to be greenfield sites and if they are not in conformity with the local plan then planning permission will be refused. This doesn’t stop appeals though. However, with the borough committed to building so many new homes one wonders what will happen when the number of suitable sites DOES run out! In this context he mentioned the regeneration of Fareham Town Centre where FBC envisage building up to 900 new homes. He also spoke about bringing together the Ashcroft Centre and Ferneham Hall and knocking down the Osborn Road multi-storey car park. He also spoke about the new 85 bed hotel envisaged for the town centre (A Premier Inn?) This 5-storey hotel will be built at the expense of FBC (us) above Waterstones. Woodward thinks this will make FBC lots of money and will keep council tax down. I can’t help but thinking this will end up as something of a pigs ear, for our sakes I hope not. In that context a questioner asked about parking for the hotel guests. "Well, they can stay in the muilti-storey car park overnight", he retorted – the one he is going to knock down you may recall. During the meeting the issue of Newlands was raised. Cllr. Woodward’s answer to this was that Hallam Land Management has made no further progress. Many take the view that HLM are sitting on their hands waiting to pounce. We have also heard a worrying development that Suella Fernandes has quietly admitted that the Stubbington bypass WILL facilitate the Newlands development. Watch this space. On that matter Cllr. Woodward claimed that the bypass is fully funded and building should start in two years time. He spoke about £1.2 billion government funding being available to build affordable homes. He didn’t say these would be built at Welborne even if FBC do get their hands on some money, these can be sold to buyers at a 20% discount. However, that is a 20% discount on local prices. So, if that property would be sold at an average cost locally of say £250,000 then it would STILL cost £200,000 to buy. A price out of the reach of many local young couples I would suspect. What Cllr. Woodward doesn’t make clear is that the £1.2 billion pot is not just available for Fareham. The developers of any site similar to Welborne, say, can bid for a slice of that money. I think there are 15 or so similar ‘garden village’ sites in the pipeline, so it is actually not such a big deal.

WELBORNE:

Much of what Cllr. Woodward said about Welborne we already know. He also repeated his views about Buckland and the CCGs. The for-sale date for the Benge land passed on June 1st: So who has made a bid for it? Cllr. Woodward is adamant that the CCGs MUST build a health centre and implied that it will be illegal if they don’t because Mr Hogger said they should – or words to that affect. I personally don’t buy into that - although I’m no legal expert by a country mile. Anyway he wove the S.O.S for Health into his spiel and said that Jeremy Hunt M.P. would be putting in a good word on the subject. I assume he thinks the Tories will sweep to power with a massive majority next Thursday and he will force his colleagues in the treasury to stump up the money that the CCGs are so lacking. Anyway, once again, the connotations of that utterance are interesting. Apparently there have now been 51 expressions of interest to build Welborne. FBC are going to sift through the list on Monday June 5th. One can’t see Buckland sitting back taking that lying down if someone else is chosen!! Why would they? If a new partner was chosen then a new OPA would have to be drawn up I guess because I assume that Buckland would withdraw theirs?? A CPO would be very much a last resort he said. In answers to a question about a railway halt being built at Welborne he said that Network Rail were doing a feasibility study to see if it would be worth while. Even Woodward admitted that carrying out such work would be very, very expensive. He admitted that such a station would be very much in the future. In answer to a question about who will fund the infrastructure at Welborne – which is quite considerable - he replied the developers. Well, they will need to recoup that expenditure – which is growing exponentially each year as Welborne gets delayed – so one might assume that not many low-cost houses here then!! At no point in his spiel did he mention any other of the setbacks facing Welborne - the gas pipeline, etc. - and the many other third party objections we know of so far. However, he did venture a start date: July 2019. So what happened to his statement that the diggers will move in by Christmas? Perhaps he didn’t mean this year.

ROAD IMPROVEMENTS:

Cllr. Woodward spoke about the many road improvements going on around the borough: Apparently the cost of these ‘improvements’ amounts to about £100 million. He noted that some of the cost for the Stubbington bypass will be borne by the businesses at Daedelus. I think we have mentioned it before those businesses wishing to go to Daedelus have been offered a rate free period (two years?). Well does that stack up financially? Anyway, Cllr. Woodward implied that when all of the extensive roadworks are finished in a year or two all of the traffic problems will be solved. I think there were people at the CAT meeting who took a different view and certainly many people I have spoken to remain extremely sceptical. Bearing Daedelus in mind Cllr. Woodward said the visitors lounge had been opened there. I must pay that a visit. He also went on to say that 3000 highly skilled jobs would be created and that 1000 were already in post. That would be a very good thing apart from the fact that this figure may not stand up to a great deal of scrutiny. A number of the jobs do not appear to be ‘new’ openings but firms relocating to Daedelus.

IFA2:

In answer to a question about IFA2 Woodward said that no detailed plans had been received yet. However, he said that it appears the height of the building was being reduced. He also added that National Grid have been asked to provide evidence about the safety aspects and of any affect on aircraft in real terms and not theoretical notions and figures. I did get the impression that FBC are starting to take the matter more seriously with regard to how it might affect the local environment. The forthcoming Stubbington CAT meeting may reveal more.

A SUMMARY OF THE REST OF THE NEWS:

The regeneration of Portchester shopping centre: Cllr. Woodward laid the blame of its demise at the door of the new Lidl store. Well, FBC were against it from the start but I doubt that this is really true.
Fareham in Bloom: I can’t speak for other areas but I know where I live a small band of residents are going to a great deal of trouble to make our Close look very colourful and attractive – mainly at their own expense I might add. However, it would be fair to say FBC do help in many ways too. Cllr. Woodward spoke about the FBC publications. These are now available online but hard copies can still be had.
Public space Protection Orders: Listening to Cllr. Woodward one would think that this Order has cleared the street of the homeless and down and outs. He obviously doesn’t spend a lot of time in Fareham town centre. Cutting mental health services certainly didn’t help. Although one can’t blame FBC directly for that.
Westbury Manor Museum: FBC has contributed £450,000 toward this renewal project. I look forward to seeing the new museum although I assume the Tourist Information Centre will remain defunct.
Daedelus 100: This commemoration day will take place on September 16th of this year. This could be an interesting day.
FBC Investments (£26 million now): Going well according to Cllr. Woodward and saving the taxpayer lots of money.
Civic Office space renting: A grumpy Cllr. Woodward related that the proposed movement of local community policing moving into the Civic offices has not yet taken place and tritely announced that if they didn’t soon move in then he’d get someone else to rent the space. I will resist saying ‘I told you so’. Cllr. Woodward just doesn’t get it. He may control the Tower of Power and all who sails in it but he doesn’t control bodies such as the police and the CCGs etc.

Well that just about sums it up. There will be a further four CAT meeting throughout the borough over the coming weeks. You can find the dates in the diary.

E&OE.

⇧Top⇧






Warsash




13-07-2017 Warsash CAT Report.

13-07-2017

CAT Meeting, Victory Hall, Warsash Thursday July 13th 2017.

This was a well attended meeting with over 100 souls occupying the floor. The meeting kicked off with a presentation by Sgt Nick Morgan of the neighbourhood/community beat team. His talk followed more or less the same pattern as the previous CAT meeting at Stubbington so I will refer you to that which is posted on the Inform Fareham web page. The only addition to that I can recall was that Sgt Morgan said that the numbers of bodies available to him currently had decreased but he was hoping to get them back up again. He received so many questions from the floor that a halt had to be called after approximately 20 minutes. These were mainly about parking; traffic violations; hate crimes; and dodgy phone calls. Hayley Hallett from One Community then spoke and once again I refer you to the previous CAT meeting at Stubbington.

Cllr Woodward then took centre stage. This too was mainly a rehash of what we had heard before. He said that a detailed plan of IFA2 should be received from the National Grid in the next few days. Being that the meeting was being held in a western ward he obviously spoke about the number of building applications that had been received (and refused) for the Brook Lane area. Several appeals are pending (don’t forget Cranleigh Road too) and litigation could get very expensive for FBC – i.e. us. It is fairly obvious that the pressure is growing from developers to build in the Warsash area. CAN it all be resisted? He also mentioned Welborne again. Despite an earlier insertion that he would be meeting the prospective new owners in the morning (following the Stubbington CAT meeting that is) he now stated that the new owner of the 385 acres that had been up for sale would be known in the next few weeks! He gave no clues away about who they may be (perhaps he doesn’t even know). However, it might be prudent to say at this point that in answer to a question from the floor about water supplies for Welborne (on the back of the recent news that water companies would be restricted to how much water they can take from rivers) he stated that if the water companies said they could not supply Welborne then full planning permission would have to be refused! This is interesting because in answer to a question about the IFA2 - with regard to problems concerning French suppliers - Cllr Woodward said that planning permission could not be retrospectively refused. Some clarification required there methinks. Other than this he did not dwell too much on Welborne. He did say that since asking for development sites to be put forward FBC had received 1000s of offers!! And I kid you not.

Questions from the floor were interesting. One resident asked when FBC will say enough is enough on numbers of new houses to be built in the borough. Cllr Woodward gave a very long and convoluted answer during which he virtually blamed the elderly and divorced or separating couples for the number of new builds required. Well, most of us know this is complete nonsense. I don’t think a number of residents were convinced either. There were many comments about the roadworks around the borough and how much longer it would all go on. Again I don’t think some residents were convinced about his answer or WHY it was all necessary. Finally: Apparently, following a suggestion from Cllr Woodward (he says), the community/neighbourhood police teams will NOT now be moving into the civic offices in Fareham but into the police station at Park Gate. I don’t know how much sway Cllr Woodward has with the PCC (Michael Lane) but wouldn’t that be convenient for the police in question to be all based in the western wards. The so-called community hospital is already there so what else will be flowing westwards? The western wards get the services and no developments and we get Welborne, a bypass encouraging Newlands, the IFA2 and a run-down shopping centre (plus hundreds of new homes planned for there too). No small wonder the western wards keep the Tories in power in Fareham! Just to answer a query posted on this site in the past: The new Premier Inn Hotel will belong to FBC and added to their property portfolio: An interesting conundrum in view of its proposed location.

E&OE.

⇧Top⇧



Index to Archived documents


Fareham Funtley Portchester Stubbington Titchfield Warsash

⇧Top⇧



Inform Fareham Focus Group   

Follow Inform Fareham on Facebookacebook Join Inform Fareham now Watch videos about local governance

Sitemap & Page Revisions.   Terms of Use.   Privacy