Last Thursday the Mayor of Chichester hosted a public meeting to discuss housing provision in the City. Well over a hundred people attended.

The Mayor kicked off the the discussion by speaking to a briefing note he had prepared and circulated to everyone. The points he invited people to consider were: affordability, the road network, waste water treatment works, demand and the City’s character. All this in the context of the Government’s indication that in future housing numbers will be determined by local planning authorities not at a regional level.

Members of the audience then each made their points in three minute slots. In all seventeen people made contributions from the floor.

The Mayor’s introduction meant the meeting didn’t degenerate into a NIMBY (not in my back yard) rally - although the largest applause was reserved for someone who did declare himself to be a NIMBY.

A number of speakers spoke up for the need for local people to have a chance to get their foot on the property ladder and not be forced away from the city of theie birth.

Almost inevitably there was criticism of the District Council as the local planning authority. This is as unfair and it is ill-informed. The District Council is just one of hundreds of local planning authorities across the country that has been unable to progress the local development framework process (what a huge policy failure the change in the planning system that was by the last government). The Highways and Environment Agencies left it very late it in the day to say that the inadequate infrastructure of the A27 and wastewater treatment works would/could not be addressed.

Next Wednesday the City Council meets and will forward its comments on housing issues, reflecting the sentiments expressed at the meeting.

Assuming the District Council does indeed have responsibility for determining housing numbers what is the correct figure? Will it be very different from the regional plans? How can any figure be justified? Whatever the figure it will be an amalgam of demand and need tempered by infrastructure constraints and market conditions. The housing market is a complex one - price is not determined simply by supply and demand. There is a need to retain and attract younger people in the District and to counter the slide towards an increasingly elderly and exclusive mix.

There is £30,000 available from a developer of a housing site for highways improvements in Tangmere. Sounds a tidy sum to undertake a number of projects to help access around the vilage. But what does £30,000 buy these days? Not a lot at WSCC Highways prices. Take a look.

Pelican crossings or similar
allow about £50,000 for a 30mph limit, £65,000 for a 40+ mph limit, and for a crossing with centre island allow about £85,000. Pelican Crossings are not appropriate where the speed limit is in excess of 50mph.

Limitations: In order to simplify the criteria above, speed limits have been used as the cut off point where different pieces of kit should be used. - This is a generalisation for the purposes of using this ready reckoner. - the actual criteria would be based on measured speeds.

Zebra crossing
allow about £35,000
It should be noted that Zebra Crossings are not considered to be good practice due to the disability discrimination act; some partially sighted users have particular problems with this type of crossing. - (Guide dogs don’t know how to react to them)

Footpath/Cycleways
rural footpath/cycleway - allow about £150 per m length
Urban Footpath/Cycleway - allow about £230 per m length
Lighting of urban paths - allow £60 per m length assuming that a suitable power source is available

Limitations: Reckoner assumes that the route is basically level, tree root protection is not necessary, with good access to the site for machinery, and favourable ground conditions. (excavation depth assumed to be about 300mm).

Signs
for non illuminated signs up to 750mm diameter
New sign on new post: allow £200 per sign
New sign on existing post or street light £120

Limitations:
Some signs need to be illuminated. The cost of illumination equipment is not covered by this ready reckoner.

New Bus shelterAllow £10,000 for an urban shelter or £5,000 for a rural one
Passenger Realtime information
Allow £7,500 assuming an electrical supply is nearby and site has adequate mobile phone signal

Cycle Parking
Allow £200 per Sheffield Stand Installed (Inverted U shape)
or £30 if insalled by others

VAS signs
Allow £15,000 assuming an electrical supply is nearby

Perhaps I should set up in the highways improvements business.

The effect is that even significant developments in villages that generate traffic that, perhaps, is the straw that breaks the camel’s back as far traffic impact is concerned don’t generate enough developer contributions to provide sufficient compensatory infrastructure to make a real difference.

There is a need to find out why some items seem so expensive.

It’s fashionable to judge governments on their first 100 days. That milestone has passed for the government - and already the doom merchants are giving their verdict.
Read the rest of this entry.

The Government recently published a White Paper on the future of policing and management of the police.

The justification for some of the changes is that according to previous official surveys only just over half the public have confidence that the police are doing a good job. Yet such was the value the Government placed on this survey it was abolished a few weeks ago!

I’m not convinced that an election of a Police Commissioner for Sussex - the cost of which will be about a million pounds - will provide a better altnerative to the existing Police Authority. The Commissioner will appoint their own staff to support their work, hire and fire the Chief Constable, set the budget and Council Tax Precept.

The Government says it values the operational independence of the Chief Constable yet thinks an individual backed by several hundred thousand votes won’t be able to resist telling the Chief Constable what to do!

The White Paper also proposes a Police and Crime Panel to oversee the Commissioner. This Panel will be made up of councillors and indpendent members - just like the existing Police Authority. Will this new body also require a secretariat to do its work? What of the Commissioner is ill for any length of time? How much will the Commissioner be paid? (I’ve heard it suggested c£65,000 pa). Will members of the Police and Crime Panel be paid? Existing members of the Police Authority are - reflecting a significant commitment of time to do the job properly.

The Government appears to have decided to have directly elected Commissioners and worked backwards from there. There is a real danger of a tremendous loss of experience and ability from existing Police Authority members and officers if these proposals go through unamended.

The County Council’s draft transport plan has been published. The County Council is seeking the public’s views on it.

One noticeable omission is any amibiton to de-clutter the roads of unnecessary signage.

Last week’s Police Authority meeting had an update from the Chief Constable on the progress the Force was making in its Medium Term Financial Strategy that requires it to find £50m of savings over the next four years.

Initial indications are that the Force is making good progress at identifying areas of potential saving. There is a huge amount of work to be done but the focus is on finding genuine efficiency savings by working closely with other Forces to achieve economies of scale, strictly controlling overtime, reviewing the vehicle fleet, back office functions and much more.

Sussex Police are concerned that the Government proposals to create a National Crime Agency that would include Border Police would mean Sussex Police lose control of policing in Gatwick.

The County Council’s review of Controlled Parking Zones will take place in the autumn - slightly later than originally planned.

Consultation with residents and businesses will be widespread.

At the meeting of the West Sussex Pension Panel and employers the scheme actuary gave an appraisal of the funding of the pension scheme and speculated on possible changes to the scheme rules by the Government.

In 1980 a 65 year old male could expect 14 years in retirement. By 2010 this figure had risen to 19.6 years and by 2040 it was expected that a 65 year old male would live for another 25.6 years. The cost of each £1 of pension saw a corresponding increase.

In 2007 the West Sussex Pension Fund was 88% funded. In March 2009 this had fallen to just 55% (largely on account of stock market falls) but in March 2010 was estimated to be 75% funded. The recent Government announcement to use CPI rather than RPI when calculating pensions would effectively reduced the deficit by 4%. A public sector pay freeze would reduce the deficit by a furhter 4% - ie making the fund 83% funded.

Precise contribution rates for employers to close the gap of 17% over a twenty year period would be announced in November when the actuary had completed the valuation.

The Government had set up the Hutton review into pensions. Although the Government had said it would protect accrued rights this was hard to define if, say, normal pension age was increased.

The actuary warned against “pension envy” - reducing the value of public pensions to match the private sector if this simply meant all pensioners were poor. This would not reduce the burden on the State because it would lead to increase in benefit claims.

He predicted a change in the definition of final salary to use a career average, a lower accrual rate and a defined contribution top up.

This would meet the Government’s objective of having a pension system that was afforable, sustainable, fair, acknowledged longer working lives and helped protect those on low incomes.

Two weeks ago (London)Derry was announced as the UK City of Culture 2013.

Here’s Derry’s bid. It’s hard to see how in cultural terms this outshines Chichester.

The UK City of Culture should really be renamed UK City of Potential Cultural Development.

The County Council’s Pension Panel meets next week to review the latest investment position and a draft report for the 2009/10 financial year.In the afternoon the scheme actuary will be present to update the major employers (the County Council, Districts, Boroughs, Sussex Police Authority, Martlet Homes, for example) on the 2010 actuarial valuation.

As previously reported the impressive 2009/10 returns did little more than recover losses over the prior year. Stock markets have continued to be volatile since 31st March and remain below their levels at the time of the last actuarial valuation in 2007.

The only question is by how much will employers contribution rates have to rise.