Agenda, decisions and minutes

To record the names of apologies given.

Apologies were received as noted above.

To give consideration to the approval of alternative arrangements for appointments to bodies set up by Cabinet or external bodies, or the making or terminating of such appointments.

            RECOMMENDED:

            That the following changes to Cabinet appointed bodies be agreed for the remainder of the 2022/23 municipal year:

a)   Members’ Equality, Diversity and Inclusion Forum – Councillor Brook to replace Councillor Cook

b)   Winchester Sport & Leisure Park Advisory Board – Councillor Kurn to replace Councillor Cook

c)   North Whiteley Development Forum – Councillor Kurn to replace Councillor McLean

d)   West of Waterlooville Forum – Councillor Achwal to replace Councillor Clear and Councillor Cutler to be appointed chairperson.

e)   Cabinet Committee: Housing – Councillor Kurn to replace Councillor Scott and Councillor Cutler to replace Councillor Clear  as non-voting invited councillors

At the invitation of the Leader, Councillor Read addressed Cabinet as summarised briefly below.

Councillor Read sought clarification of the membership of West of Waterlooville forum and raised that no planning meeting had been held despite development continuing.

The Leader responded that the governance arrangements and terms of reference for all three of the development forum had been reviewed previously by Cabinet and did not include any such membership restrictions.  However, he suggested that the terms of reference be re-examined as part of the upcoming constitution review.  In addition, the membership of the forum would be considered at the May Cabinet as part of the annual appointments report.

RESOLVED:

          That the following changes to Cabinet appointed bodies be agreed for the remainder of the 2022/23 municipal year:

a)            Members’ Equality, Diversity and Inclusion Forum – Councillor Brook to replace Councillor Cook

b)            Winchester Sport & Leisure Park Advisory Board – Councillor Kurn to replace Councillor Cook

c)            North Whiteley Development Forum – Councillor Kurn to replace Councillor McLean

d)            West of Waterlooville Forum – Councillor Achwal to replace Councillor Clear and Councillor Cutler to be appointed chairperson.

e)            Cabinet Committee: Housing – Councillor Kurn to replace Councillor Scott and Councillor Cutler to replace Councillor Clear  as non-voting invited councillors

To receive any disclosure of interests from Members and Officers in matters to be discussed.

Note: Councillors are reminded of their obligations to declare disclosable pecuniary interests, personal and/or prejudicial interests in accordance with legislation and the Council’s Code of Conduct.

Councillor Tod declared personal (but not prejudicial) interests in respect of report CAB3371 due to his role as a County Councillor.

– to note the names of members of the public wishing to speak on general matters affecting the District or on agenda items (in the case of the latter, representations will normally be received at the time of the agenda item, after the Cabinet Member’s introduction and any questions from Cabinet Members).

NB members of the public are required to register with Democratic Services three clear working days before the meeting (contact: democracy@winchester.gov.uk or 01962 848 264). 

Ian Tait spoke regarding report CAB3371 and his comments are summarised under the relevant minute below.

RESOLVED

          That the minutes of the previous meeting held on 9 February 2023 be agreed as a correct record.

Councillor Thompson announced the success of the Jobs and Opportunities Fair which was held 24 February 2023 at Winchester Sport and Leisure Park for local businesses and job seekers.  The event had been very well attended by prospective employers and employees and it was hoped that future events could be held.

Councillor Power announced that the Council’s 2021/22 accounts had been signed off by the external auditors with an unqualified opinion.  The Council was the first local authority in Hampshire to have their 2021/22 accounts signed off.

Councillor Power also announced that the council had received over £1 million in government funding to support residents with fuel bill prices and work was underway to distribute funding as required.

Councillor Ferguson announced six new Passivhaus homes were to be built by the council in Micheldever.

Councillor Becker announced that the council was supporting a fundraising fayre for Not for Profit organisations on 17 March 2023

Councillor Learney announced that new covered bike stands had been installed at Middle Brook Street car park, Winchester with the aim for additional stands to be provided elsewhere in the town centre and in the district’s market towns.

1.      That issues raised by the Scrutiny Committee at its meeting on 27 February 2023 be noted.

2.      That it be noted that the procurement process was conducted in accordance with the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, leading to the recommended selection of a Development Partner, as set out in section 12 and 13 of report CAB3371.

3.      That the recommended Development Partner’s response to the Central Winchester Regeneration Development Brief, which is summarised in section 14 of report CAB3371 and set out in more detail in Appendix B of the report be noted.

4.      That the Business Case for proceeding with the appointment of the recommended Development Partner, which is summarised in section 15 of the report CAB3371 and set out in more detail in Appendix C of the report be noted, in addition to the following:

                i.      Appendix Ci - Selection Questionnaire Evaluation Questions and Scoring Criteria

               ii.      Appendix Cii - Final Tender Evaluation Questions and Scoring Criteria

              iii.      Exempt Appendix Ciii - Moderated Scoring from Selection Questionnaire

             iv.      Exempt Appendix Civ - Moderated Scoring from Final Tender

5.      That the Development Agreement Summary, referred to in section 16 of report CAB3371 and set out in more detail in Appendix D and Exempt Appendix Di - recommended Development Partner’s commercial position, be noted.

6.      That the Equalities Impact Assessment set out in Appendix E and the Risk Register in Appendix F of the report be both noted and had regard to.

7.      That the redacted draft Development Agreement in Appendix G and the unredacted draft Development Agreement in Exempt Appendix H of the report be noted.

8.      That being satisfied about the matters set out in points (1) to (7) above, the appointment of Bidder E as the recommended Development Partner for the Central Winchester Regeneration Project be approved, on the basis that they were the highest scoring tenderer following conclusion of the competitive dialogue process and final tender evaluation.

9.      That the Strategic Director with responsibility for the Central Winchester Regeneration project be authorised, in consultation with the Leader and Cabinet Member for Asset Management and the Service Lead – Legal, to incorporate the recommended Development Partner’s tender submission into the Development Agreement, finalise the content of the Development Agreement and any necessary ancillary documents, and arrange for the Development Agreement and any necessary ancillary documents to be entered into on behalf of the council in accordance with Part 2, Article 14, of the council’s constitution.

Councillor Tod introduced the report which proposed the appointment of a development partner following careful consideration of various matters contained in the report and appendices (as set out in recommendations 1 to 7).  In addition, the report had been considered at the Scrutiny Committee on 27 February 2023 and points raised there would be responded to at this meeting.

In addition to officers from the council’s management and project team, Councillor Tod welcomed the following external advisors to the meeting – Jennifer Newsham (JLL), Stephen Matthew (Browne Jacobson) and Nick Walford (31 Ten).

The Head of Programme gave a presentation outlining the following areas CWR vision, the journey so far and project milestones, the procurement process and bidder scores, quality evaluation and the development agreement.  The presentation is available on the council’s website here.

Ian Tait spoke during public participation as summarised briefly below.

Mr Tait expressed frustration about the delays in regenerating the central Winchester area and asked for firm commitments about when development would commence.  He believed although a great deal of useful detail was contained in the presentation, it did not contain any new information. 

At the invitation of the Leader, Councillor Horrill addressed Cabinet as summarised briefly below.

Councillor Horrill welcomed the opportunity given at Scrutiny Committee on 27 February 2023 for thorough consideration of the report.  She also commended the process undertaken by the council in selecting a development partner. She advocated the principle of developing the area without unnecessary delay, highlighting the significant land acquisitions that had taken place to enable this. However, she remained concerned that the council had not learned lessons from previous development projects. In particular, she had significant concerns regarding thedeal structure being proposed in the development agreement, the proposed finance model and the financial risk to the council.

In response to comments made during public participation, the Head of Programme provided further details regarding anticipated timings, emphasising that a delivery plan would have to be agreed within six months of appointment of the development partner which would include a future timetable of key dates.  This included a requirement that a planning application was submitted within 24 months of the delivery plan agreement.

Nick Walford responded to comments relating to the process for calculating land values.  He explained the use of the residual land value methodology and how, for CWR, this would reflect  the aspirations set out in the supplementary planning document (SPD) and therefore  land values achieved would reflect the mix of uses and the quality of design and public realm.  Jennifer Newsham provided further details regarding the recommended development partner’s proposals regarding retaining a long term interest in the site, through business partnering; resulted in the preferred bidder’s income generation ideas being the strongest.  The Head of Programme confirmed that it would not be possible to secure both maximum capital receipt for the council’s assets  and an ongoing revenue stream; that a mixture of the two was likely.  The Corporate Head of Finance confirmed that the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

To consider whether in all the circumstances of the case the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.

(i)            To pass a resolution that the public be excluded from the meeting during the consideration of the following items of business because it is likely that, if members of the public were present, there would be disclosure to them of ‘exempt information’ as defined by Section 100 (I) and Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972.

RESOLVED:

1.       That in all the circumstances, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.

2.       That the public be excluded from the meeting during the consideration of the following items of business because it is likely that, if members of the public were present, there would be disclosure to them of ‘exempt information’ as defined by Section 100 and Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972.

</AI8>

<AI9>

(restricted circulation)

The Council’s external advisors listed above remained in the room during the exempt session in order to respond to members’ questions.  In addition, at the invitation of the Leader, Councillor Horrill remained in the room throughout.

Cabinet considered the above exempt appendices which contained the moderate scoring and feedback from final tender, the recommended development partner’s commercial position and the unredacted draft development agreement.