A CITY councillor is pressing for the planned diversion of Andover Road to be scrapped.

Cllr Patrick Cunningham said the proposal to divert the main road through the Kings Barton estate would be an act of “supreme folly”.

He said a survey of 800 local residents earlier this year showed 92 per cent against the move which was approved by Hampshire County Council in 2011.

Cllr Cunningham, the Conservative member for Wonston and Micheldever, said the area had proposals for further development.

READ MORE HERE: Winchester Local Plan - where will new housing go?

In a question at full Council, he said: “The continuing industrialisation of Three Maids Hill Roundabout/A272/A34 area – specifically two inert waste recycling plants, one solar farm – another proposed, and a proposed anaerobic digester, progresses at pace. Now add the new major development area (MDA) of 900 dwellings and Park-And-Ride at Sir John Moore Barracks, increased traffic flows, and the emerging M3 Junction 9 works to the mix.

“Can the Cabinet Member acknowledge that these multiple developments have profoundly changed the dynamics of the Andover Road North corridor since the original decision was made over a decade ago.

"Across the country residents and local authorities continually fight to build bypasses to divert traffic flows away from densely populated areas, but here in Winchester you still seek to divert a bypass into a housing estate of 2,000 dwellings and through a neighbourhood centre – 92% of over 800 Winchester residents have called for this insanity to be stopped.

SEE MORE HERE: Slow progress on city centre schemes, including revamp of St Giles Hill and St Maurice's Covert

“As local planning chiefs, you could have led discussions with the developer on the future of the Andover Road. It is not too late…Will you do so now?”

Council leader Martin Tod, Lib Dem, pointed out that the decision to divert was made by the highways authority, the Conservative-controlled county council, which publicly committed to the diversion as recently as February.

“The obvious time for the city council, as planning authority, to have sought to get Hampshire County Council and Cala homes to revisit this realignment was before construction started and both housing and the road system started to be laid down.

“For reasons that are now unclear, between October 2012 – when the Secretary of State signed off the design of the Kings Barton development – and May 2019 when construction was well underway, houses being occupied, and the changes highlighted in Cllr Cunningham’s question in process, I have been unable to find any evidence of any political leadership being shown or discussions led by the city council to resolve this issue during that period.

READ ALSO: Latest on dispute over diversion of Andover Road

“Since then matters have progressed. On May 24 2022 Hampshire County Council signed a S106 Deed of Variation with Cala Homes (kings BArton developer) reconfirming its role as the body responsible for authorising the road scheme for Kings Barton. Under this deed, Hampshire is legally responsible for agreeing a “Highways Agreement” with Cala Homes for every section of the road design. Under the deed signed by the County Council, any change to the junctions and “New Andover Road” works must be agreed in writing with the County Council. Although responsibility is now clearly assigned, this reconfirmation of Hampshire’s responsibility for the Kings Barton road system has not yet led to the direction we could expect form Hampshire in its role as Highways Authority to work with Cala to authorise and deliver a coherent road system for the north of Winchester – addressing resident concerns about Andover Road, Winchester Avenue, Priors Dean Road and Worthy Road."

Cllr Tod added: "To this end, I have written to the responsible Executive Member at Hampshire County Council restating residents’ concerns with the current road network, highlighting the main stakeholders I believe they need to engage, and offering to work with them and Cala to resolve the issues raised. To date, I have not received a response.”