News: Gravel Hill comes out top in consultation
At the Parish Council meeting last night, it was revealed that in the recent village consultation, the proposal for a community-led development of up to 20 homes at Gravel Hill has come out as a clear leader, with 77.6% of residents choosing it as their preferred first or second option
Consultation results
The results were presented by Anna Miles and Claire Morgan on behalf of independent charity Action Hampshire.
They said that there had been 818 eligible electors, from whom there had been 503 responses. 16 responses were deemed void, mainly because they were duplicates - voting both online and on the paper ballot. The 487 valid responses represented a 59.5% turnout, which they described as “amazing”.
Results
The consultation aimed to uncover residents’ preferences for development within the Village.
The results were calculated using a weighted ranking system that allocates points based on preference order, known as a Borda score.
| Rank | Option | Description | Borda Score |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1st | 3 | Gravel Hill - approx. 20 homes (Community-led) | 3.12 |
| 2nd | 2 | Drove Road - approx. 20 homes (Community-led) | 2.90 |
| 3rd | 4 | No Community-led Development at all | 2.58 |
| 4th | 1 | Drove Road - 75 homes (Developer-led) | 1.39 |
This represents a clear win for the Gravel Hill option: a score of 4.00 would be equivalent to every elector selecting Gravel Hill as their first option. The runner-up was the alternative community-led development of 20 homes at Drove Road.
The individual scores reveal more detail on residents’ preferences:
| Option | 1st choice | 2nd choice | 3rd choice | 4th choice |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Option 1: Drove Road - 75 homes (Developer-led) | 5.3% (26) | 5.7% (28) | 12% (58) | 77% (375) |
| Option 2: Drove Road - approx. 20 homes (Community-led) | 23.6% (115) | 43.4% (211) | 32.8% (160) | 0.2% (1) |
| Option 3: Gravel Hill - approx. 20 homes (Community-led) | 43.1% (210) | 34.5% (168) | 13.5% (66) | 8.9% (43) |
| Option 4: No Community-led Development at all | 27.9% (136) | 16.4% (80) | 41.7% (203) | 14% (68) |
The key points that emerge are:
- There was strong support for community-led development - 77.6% of residents who voted chose Gravel Hill as their preferred first or second option, and 66.9% chose Drove Road as their first or second option
- Only 27.9% of people selected no community-led development as their first option
- The proposed 75-home development was selected as first option by only 5.3% and as the least desirable option by 77% of the 487 respondents, confounding the assertion by some residents that there was “a silent majority in the Village” who are in favour of it.
There is more detail in the full Action Hampshire report.
Public discussion
Some thirty Village residents attended the presentation. After some discussion between Councillors, the floor was opened to public questions.
A member of the public asked about the risk of going ahead with a 20-home community development only to find that the 75-home proposal is approved. David Hall, Chair of the Parish Council said “we are not going to have two developments in the Village.”
If approval were granted for 75 homes, work on the 20-home plan would be stopped, and the Parish Council would approach James Painter with a view to working together.
Two members of the public asked whether there was a risk that English Rural, CPC’s partner in the Gravel Hill plan could go it alone, potentially with more than 20 homes.
Cllr Hall said that the owners of the land at Gravel Hill had themselves approached CPC, through their selected partner - English Rural. Together they had developed a concept.
If they did act unilaterally, then they would face the problem of developing outside the settlement boundary. Without community leadership under the new National Planning Policy Framework, it would be much more difficult to gain permission.
He also pointed to the development that English Rural had produced in Longstock -“they are good at what they do,” he said.
A member of the public asked whether the results of the consultation would be evidence against the 75-home proposal. Cllr Hall said that what counted in order to object are planning grounds, rather than weight of public opinion. Nonetheless, Cllr Neil Connor said that he was considering an objection citing the consultation.
Next steps: Housing needs and CNDP
Cllr Hall said that he and Peter Collis had met with Test Valley Borough Council officers. They have been following developments in Chilbolton, and said that they were keen to support the Parish Council in determining housing needs.
They are willing to pay for, and conduct, a new housing needs survey in the Village, focusing on affordable homes.
Cllr Hall added that Chilbolton would be a “guinea pig” for a new format of housing needs survey. The results would feed into the next iteration of the Neighbourhood Development Plan.
He pointed out that the NDP has to be put to a referendum of Village residents.
Cllr Martin Watson said that the NDP was currently undergoing minor changes. A completed rewrite would come next year. It would include the number of homes and the site to be used.
Thanks
Cllr Hall thanked all who had taken part in the consultation, saying “this will get the housing the Village really wants.”
Cllr Connor thanked the three venues which hosted the ballot boxes - the Abbots Mitre, the Village Shop and the Village Hall. Cllr Becky Williams thanked the volunteers who had delivered the Parish Council’s leaflets explaining the consultation.
Other business
Toddler group funding
Cllr Becky Williams reported on a proposal to establish a toddler group based at Chilbolton Village Hall. Run by Bev Barclay it would provide a toddler and carer session of around 1½ to 2 hours, with play, story time, music and painting.
Drink refreshments would be provided for the carers and a healthy snack and drink for the toddlers. It would run during term times only.
The day on which it would run has yet to be decided, but with “a little jiggling within the village hall diary,” Ms Barclay hoped to start the group in January 2027.
Cllr Williams asked for a grant of £500 to fund Hall hire for eleven sessions, initial refreshments and music downloads. She said that participants would make a contribution to cost, but there would also be an affordable rate.
Cllr Tony Ewer welcomed the proposal, but suggested that CPC approach TVBC for funding.
Parish Council approved funding in principal, with Cllr Williams working on the details.
Odours from Tunnel Tech
Cllr Hall reported on the discussion he had had with two residents about smells coming from the Tunnel Tech facility producing mushroom growing compost, located to the South West of the Observatory site.
He had responded to the residents and planned to write to Tunnel Tech. He emphasised the importance of villagers recording when the smells arose. Terry Gilmour, who was in the audience, said that he had recorded these details over a period of fourteen years.
One of the residents who had spoken to Cllr Hall said that he had been in contact with TVBC about the matter. He had been given a copy of the the Tunnel Tech permit, which he said “lacked teeth”. He had also been given an email address at Tunnel Tech which could be used to make them aware when odours arise.
Cllr Ewer suggested that when residents email Tunnel Tech to alert them to smells, they should copy Terry Gilmour.
Remembrance Day commemoration
Cllr Tony Ewer reminded the Parish Council that the annual commemoration of Remembrance Day would take place at the Memorial Playing Field.
Villagers gather each year at 11am on 11 November to lay a wreath and observe a silence in memory of those who fought in the World Wars.