News: Village meeting discusses trust and infrastructure

A meeting, ostensibly to discuss a 25 to 50-year vision for Chilbolton, turned into a debate on how we handle inadequate infrastructure. However it opened with a surprise.

Andrew Kent stood and welcomed the 80-strong audience. “Good evening,” he said “I am chair of the Strategy Working Group for the moment”. Asked what had led to this new appointment, he explained that Cllr Tony Ewer, the former chair, had thought it best to hand over the reins as the SWG was in the process of being wound up.

The meeting then, was a free-flowing discussion led by Alisdair Campbell of the SWG. A main theme was succinctly put by a villager who said “The Parish Council is starting from a negative base of trust”. Others followed with observations such as “Who really wants a gymnasium?” and “People are annoyed that the plans contain a new shop and a new playing field. They want the existing ones improved”.

That only 175 questionnaires had determined “what was needed in Chilbolton” was challenged. Calls were made for a re-run of the survey. And once again a referendum on the proposed development was demanded. A resident commented that “This talk of developers coming in to the village is ‘Project Fear’”.

“We want to protect what we’ve got, not grow into a town”, one person said. Another revealed “I moved to the village because I wanted to raise my children in a village”. Cllr Julian Hudson responded by suggesting that the “vision” should actually be “We are a Village”.

The bulk of the discussion though, focused on Chilbolton’s ailing infrastructure - particularly sewerage and electricity. Several people observed that the planning process should present solutions to those issues before the building of new homes. Notably, SWG members found themselves agreeing with this point of view.

Alisdair Campbell said “Test Valley Borough Council planners don’t have direct control over utility providers. They ask providers ‘Can you provide supporting infrastructure for this project?’ and the suppliers say they can, and that is the end of the story”.

Most in the room agreed that work on the infrastructure should be given priority and how to resolve those issues should be ascertained before new homes are built. They also believed that the Parish Council should engage with the water and electricity companies and secure a place for Chilbolton in their capital programs.

Turning to the issue of vehicle access to the planned development site, Cllr Hudson said of opposition to using upper Drove - “we have heard and we are listening”. It was also unclear, he noted, whether the road was even adopted. The alternative route would be from the Mayfly end of the village.

He had prepared estimates of some 700 vehicle movements over the life of the 25-home development. When challenged that this seemed a small number, he explained that this assumed the build used a modular system in which larger components means fewer truck-loads.

The meeting was conducted in a similar way to the one which paused the planning pre-application: it was a respectful discussion in which views were exchanged and considered. Importantly, common ground was established over prioritising infrastructure issues.

The next meeting will be the Parish Council on 7 Apr 2025 at which the revised planning pre-application will be discussed and approved. When asked whether villagers would be able to see the pre-app before the meeting, Cllr Hudson suggested that they should, and agreed that it could be circulated with the agenda pack. These can be viewed by everyone on the Parish Council web page.