Agenda, decisions and minutes

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.

There were no changes to memberships of Cabinet bodies to be made.

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.

Councillors Tod and Porter declared personal (but not prejudicial) interests in respect of various agenda items due to their roles as County Councillors.

Councillor Porter also declared a personal (but not prejudicial) interest with regard to report CAB3267 as a trustee of a charity promoting the restoration of a railway line to the north of Winchester.

resolved:

That the minutes of the previous meeting held on 16 September 2020 and the additional meeting held on 29 September 2020 be agreed as a correct record.

– to note the names of members of the public wishing to speak on general matters affecting the District or on agenda items

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). 

Six members of the public spoke during public participation as summarised briefly below.

Chris Corcoran (Twyford Parish Council)

Spoke regarding report CAB3257 and highlighted the impact on the parish of the decision to not award a grant for the flood application scheme.  Following discussions with the Corporate Head of Regulatory about a way forward, he requested that the Parish Council be permitted to vire the £65,000 allocated for car park works to the flood mitigation scheme.  He also asked that the Parish Council meet with the County Council, the City Council and the South Downs National Park to discuss further.

The following five speakers spoke regarding report CAB3268.

Charles Radcliffe

On the general subject of Central Winchester regeneration, welcomed the various projects now coming forward such as at Kings Walk and Coitbury House.

Regarding CAB3268, highlighted that local residents had been informed that development of the Bar End depot would only take place following consultation, which had not taken place. Drew attention to a proposal for the community development trust to be established to develop the site.  If the Council did agree to sell to a developer, requested that it be at best consideration and the interests of local residents be put first.

Kim Gottlieb

Believed there had been a lack of public consultation regarding the future of the Bar End site and that if sold to a developer, the Council would effectively lose control over what was developed.  The preferred solution would be for the Council to develop the site itself, but if not possible, the next best proposal was for the site to be sold to a community development trust.  He requested that the Council give adequate time to the local community to create such a trust.

Janet Berry (Highcliffe Community Forum for Action)

Highlighted that the previous John Thompson planning report had labelled the depot a “nuisance neighbour” and it was essential that future proposals provided a development of benefit to the local community by providing facilities for local residents.  Concurred with previous comments about consultation not being undertaken prior to the decision to sell, despite residents previously been given this assurance.

Chris Allen

As a Highcliffe resident and member of the former Bar End Forum, highlighted the opportunity for the redevelopment of the depot site to provide much needed community facilities.  Emphasised that consultation with local residents on the future of the depot site had not been carried out to date and was specifically excluded from engagement on the new leisure centre.  Noted that the meetings of the Depot Insight Group were not held in public.  Considered that if consultation was left until under the planning application process this was too late for meaningful discussion.  Expressed concern that price alone would be the primary factor in the council’s decisions for the site future.

Geoff Wright

As a resident of Quarry Road and member of the former Bar End Forum, agreed with previous speakers regarding the lack of consultation, despite statements in the report to the contrary.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

The Leader and Cabinet members made a number of announcements as summarised briefly below.

Councillor Thompson

Welcomed the letting to HM Courts and Tribunals for the use of the Winchester Guildhall as a Nightingale Court for a temporary period of nine months starting in November 2020.

Councillor Porter

Reported with regret the recent fire at Newlands play area and urged anyone with any information to come forward.  The Council would undertake work to restore the equipment as soon as possible.

Ground work on installation of electric vehicle charging points had begun with work hoped to be completed before Christmas.

At the invitation of the Leader, as a ward member Councillor Brook provided an update on the situation regarding the Newlands play area and Councillor Porter suggested further discussions take place outside of the Cabinet meeting.

Councillor Tod

Announced that the additional charge to customers wishing to pay for parking by mobile phone was being discontinued.  One parking app would apply across all the car parks within Winchester town centre.

1.     That the marketing of the Bar End Depot site for disposal at best consideration be approved.

2.     That the planning guidance note for the site be approved.

3.     That authority be delegated to the Strategic Director of Place, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Housing and Asset Management to take all appropriate action to initiate and complete the marketing of the Bar End Depot site with appropriate draft contractual terms, to evaluate the bids received, and to make recommendation for final disposal to a future cabinet for decision.

4.     That a budget of £20,000 for associated marketing, site survey and S123 valuation expenses be approved.

5.     That a budget of £10,000 for development appraisal valuations to better inform potential site value and the target market of developers be approved.

The Leader drew Members’ attention to the feedback from the Depot Insight Group which had been circulated as a supplementary agenda.

Councillor Learney introduced the report and emphasised that the intention was to gather information regarding the general market position.  Councillor Learney responded to a number of comments made during public participation, including emphasising that the preparatory work required would mean that the site would not be marketed for at least six months which would offer opportunities to engage with local residents on the site’s future.  In addition, the planning constraints of the site would be clearly defined in the marketing.  The Council had a legal obligation to sell land at best consideration, but this could have regard to the promotion or improvement of economic, social or environmental wellbeing of an area.  She welcomed the proposal to establish a community development trust and looked forward to a full proposal being submitted by Mr Gottlieb or others.

At the invitation of the Leader, Councillors Hutchison, Laming and Lumby addressed Cabinet as summarised briefly below.

Councillor Hutchison

Welcomed the comments made by the public above and the reassurances given by Councillor Learney in her response.  Requested that a workshop be set up to consider future options for the site, noting its importance both to local residents and more widely, as situated on an entrance route to the city.

Councillor Laming

Believed that the future of the depot site must be considered alongside the new leisure centre.  Considered it would be preferable for the council to develop the site itself or for a community development trust to be established.

Councillor Lumby

Welcomed the opportunity to be a member of the Depot Insight Group (DIG) but believed that the group had not had access to all the information required and that the feedback from the group circulated with the supplementary agenda had not been a consensus view.  Considered the proposals were for a rushed sale and advice on different values for different uses of the land should be acquired first.  Whilst noting the importance of the site to the local community, considered it was an asset of value to the whole district.  If the decision was made to sell, consideration should be given to what protections could be given to the local community regarding restrictions on future use, design etc.

Councillor Learney responded to comments made, including confirming that she had considered the wider comments from the DIG members.  The Strategic Director: Place also confirmed that there would be opportunities for consultation on the detailed schemes emerging from the marketing process. 

Cabinet agreed the following for the reasons set out above and outlined in the report.

RESOLVED:

1.            That the marketing of the Bar End Depot site for disposal at best consideration be approved.

2.            That the planning guidance note for the site be approved.

3.            That authority be delegated to the Strategic Director of Place, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Housing and Asset Management to take all appropriate action to initiate  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

1.     That the Council’s response and submission to the Government White Paper ‘Planning for the Future’ consultation issued by the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government be approved, as set out in Appendix 1 of report CAB3262.

2.     That the City Council explore in principle working as a pilot authority with central government to develop a new-style local plan for Winchester City Council.

3.        That the City Council seek a meeting with the Ministry of Housing Communities and Local Government with a view to seeking clarification about how the City Council can progress a local plan bearing in mind the significant increase in housing numbers that are proposed in the government’s consultation document.

4.     That delegated authority be awarded to the Strategic Planning Manager in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Built Environment and Wellbeing to make minor and typographical updates to the consultation response in Appendix 1.

Councillor Porter introduced the report and thanked officers for their work, together with the input from other councillors.  The proposals had been considered at a meeting of the Local Plan Advisory Group which had also supported the proposal to seek to become a pilot authority.

At the invitation of the Leader, Councillors Hutchison and Horrill addressed Cabinet as summarised briefly below.

Councillor Hutchison

Supported the council’s response as set out in the appendix to the report.  The Winchester Town Forum had also prepared a response which she considered complemented the Council’s response.  Highlighted that work on preparing the Vision for Winchester document was underway.

Councillor Horrill

Generally supported the proposed response whilst raising a number of detailed points seeking to change the emphasis slightly.  For example, the importance of employment should be emphasised more.  Supported the possibility of the Council becoming a pilot authority.

Councillor Porter thanked the Councillors for their support and responded to a number of points raised.

Cabinet agreed the following for the reasons set out above and outlined in the report.

RESOLVED:

1.            That the Council’s response and submission to the Government White Paper ‘Planning for the Future’ consultation issued by the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government be approved, as set out in Appendix 1 of report CAB3262.

2.            That the City Council explore in principle working as a pilot authority with central government to develop a new-style local plan for Winchester City Council.

3.            That the City Council seek a meeting with the Ministry of Housing Communities and Local Government with a view to seeking clarification about how the City Council can progress a local plan bearing in mind the significant increase in housing numbers that are proposed in the government’s consultation document.

4.            That delegated authority be awarded to the Strategic Planning Manager in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Built Environment and Wellbeing to make minor and typographical updates to the consultation response in Appendix 1.

1.     That the updated three year rolling CIL spending programme be approved as set out in Appendix A to report CAB3257.

2.     That the allocation of £365,000 from Winchester City Council CIL income receipts be approved as set out in Section 12 of report CAB3257 and approve it’s expenditure under Financial Procedure Rule 7.4. This includes the allocation of funding for the eight community led projects recommended by the Informal Panel, subject to any conditions stipulated and included in Appendix A to the report. This includes the following specific projects:

2.1  Badger Farm Community Centre – Kitchen upgrade

2.2  Colden Common, St Vigor Way Playground – Outdoor gym equipment

2.3  Colden Common Recreation Ground – Pavilion upgrade

2.4  Denmead, George V Playing Fields – Multi use games area

2.5  Headbourne Worthy St Swithun’s Church – New car park

2.6  New Alresford – West Street pedestrian improvements

2.7  Wonston, Gratton Close – Pavilion extension

2.8  Shawford Railway Station – Community hub café and meeting rooms

3.     That an additional £49,000 be allocted from the Winchester City Council CIL income receipts to bring the total 2020/21 community budget to £414,000.

4.     That a capital budget and expenditure of £50,000 be approved to be funded from the Winchester City Council CIL receipts for the provision of the Wayfinding signs recommended by the Informal Panel and included in Appendix A to report CAB3257.

5.     That the capital budget and expenditure of £50,000 from the Winchester City Council CIL receipts be approved for the provision of footpath and cycle link in association with development at Bishops Waltham, previously considered by Cabinet on 17^th September 2017 (CAB2962)

6.     That an additional budget of £250,000 funded from unallocated CIL receipts be approved to allow the Community Bidding process to continue for a further year and to support a third tranche of bids in 2021.

7.     That a report be brought to Cabinet early in 2021 reviewing options for the allocation of currently unallocated CIL funds. These may be used potentially to carry out Council infrastructure improvements relating to implementation of the Council Plan and other strategies, projects and opportunity to support the response to the Covid 19 public health emergency in relation to enhanced facilities. Also how this money could support public realm investment as part of the Central Winchester Regeneration project, City of Winchester Movement Strategy as well as wider infrastructure investment in the city and across the district in the coming years.

8.     That the Corporate Head of Regulatory writes to Hampshire County Council seeking clarity regarding the timing of delivery for the highway schemes at Durley, Otterbourne, Twyford and Upham which are included in the CIL Spending programme as set out in Appendix A of report CAB3257.

Councillor Porter introduced the report and highlighted that the programme enabled the Council to work in partnership with parish councils and community groups to deliver various projects that would otherwise not be possible.  The CIL Board had undertaken a review of projects allocated funds in the previous year and most were complete or well underway, with the exception of projects led by the County Council and as a consequence action was proposed as set out in recommendation 8 of the report.

At the invitation of the Leader, Councillor Brook addressed Cabinet as summarised briefly below:

Generally welcomed the report and thanked all involved for their work.  Queried whether the Council would contact projects which had funds previously allocated but not yet commenced to offer assistance?  With regard to the comments made by Twyford Parish Council during public participation, asked how the situation would be addressed.

Councillor Porter and the Corporate Head of Regulatory responded to comments made and confirmed that dialogue was ongoing with Mr Corcoran with the aim to seek a possible solution, with the involvement of the County Council and South Downs National Park Authority. 

Cabinet agreed the following for the reasons set out above and outlined in the report.

RESOLVED:

1.            That the updated three year rolling CIL spending programme be approved as set out in Appendix A to report CAB3257.

2.            That the allocation of £365,000 from Winchester City Council CIL income receipts be approved as set out in Section 12 of report CAB3257 and approve it’s expenditure under Financial Procedure Rule 7.4. This includes the allocation of funding for the eight community led projects recommended by the Informal Panel, subject to any conditions stipulated and included in Appendix A to the report. This includes the following specific projects:

a.     Badger Farm Community Centre – Kitchen upgrade

b.     Colden Common, St Vigor Way Playground – Outdoor gym equipment

c.     Colden Common Recreation Ground – Pavilion upgrade

d.     Denmead, George V Playing Fields – Multi use games area

e.     Headbourne Worthy St Swithun’s Church – New car park

f.      New Alresford – West Street pedestrian improvements

g.     Wonston, Gratton Close – Pavilion extension

h.     Shawford Railway Station – Community hub café and meeting rooms

3.            That an additional £49,000 be allocted from the Winchester City Council CIL income receipts to bring the total 2020/21 community budget to £414,000.

4.            That a capital budget and expenditure of £50,000 be approved to be funded from the Winchester City Council CIL receipts for the provision of the Wayfinding signs recommended by the Informal Panel and included in Appendix A to report CAB3257.

5.            That the capital budget and expenditure of £50,000 from the Winchester City Council CIL receipts be approved for the provision of footpath and cycle link in association with development at Bishops Waltham, previously considered by Cabinet on 17^th September 2017 (CAB2962)

6.            That an additional budget of £250,000 funded from unallocated CIL receipts be approved to allow the Community Bidding process to continue for a further  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

1.     That capital expenditure as set out in Exempt Appendix 2 of report CAB3263 be approved.

2.     That a supplementary estimate of up to £153,000, funded by prudential borrowing be approved, to enable installation of a green wall if feasible and practical to install at the car park.

3.     That Willmott Dixon be appointed to progress the construction of the decked car park based on the Feasibility Study through the preconstruction and construction stages to completion.

4.     That authority be delegated to the Strategic Director Place and Service Lead Legal to negotiate and enter into preconstruction services and delivery agreements with Willmott Dixon which include a requirement for Willmott Dixon to appoint the Principal Designer; and to enter into any associated agreements such as leases, wayleaves, grant agreement as required to progress the decked car park.

5.     That Willmott Dixon submit a full planning application and undertake consultation supported by Council officers prior to such submission in accordance with statutory requirements and the parameters set out in  report CAB3263 at paragraphs 6.1 and 6.2. 

Councillor Tod introduced the report which outlined the next steps necessary for the delivery of the park and ride car park, highlighting that the provisions of the LEP funding required completion by January 2022.  An additional budget was proposed to enable aspects of design to be improved to mitigate the impact of the car park in its setting.

At the invitation of the Leader, Councillors Miller and Lumby addressed Cabinet as summarised briefly below.

Councillor Miller

Welcomed the report and thanked the officers involved for their work.

Councillor Lumby

Questioned why the information contained in the appendix was exempt?  Questioned what was included within the construction costs, including whether it included contingency costs?

Councillor Tod responded to comments made and confirmed that costs had been fully considered and further details on the information contained in the exempt appendices could be made available as the project moved forward.

In response to questions from Cabinet Members, Councillor Tod confirmed that the intention was to engage with residents of Domum Road prior to any formal planning application.

Cabinet agreed the following for the reasons set out above and outlined in the report.

RESOLVED:

1.            That capital expenditure as set out in Exempt Appendix 2 of report CAB3263 be approved.

2.            That a supplementary estimate of up to £153,000, funded by prudential borrowing be approved, to enable installation of a green wall if feasible and practical to install at the car park.

3.            That Willmott Dixon be appointed to progress the construction of the decked car park based on the Feasibility Study through the preconstruction and construction stages to completion.

4.            That authority be delegated to the Strategic Director Place and Service Lead Legal to negotiate and enter into preconstruction services and delivery agreements with Willmott Dixon which include a requirement for Willmott Dixon to appoint the Principal Designer; and to enter into any associated agreements such as leases, wayleaves, grant agreement as required to progress the decked car park.

5.            That Willmott Dixon submit a full planning application and undertake consultation supported by Council officers prior to such submission in accordance with statutory requirements and the parameters set out in  report CAB3263 at paragraphs 6.1 and 6.2. 

1.     That the principle of retention of the Former Goods Shed site as a Council asset be agreed.

2.     That the site be redeveloped for small business and employment use subject to final decision following development appraisal. 

3.     That a budget of £20,000 be approved, funded by the property reserve, to commission architectural drawings, a priced building specification and a detailed development appraisal as a precursor to submitting a detailed planning application.

4.     That a future Cabinet meeting consider the outcome of the proposed detailed development appraisal and a business case supporting the Council’s direct development of this site. 

Councillor Learney introduced the report which proposed the redevelopment of the site for small business and employment use whilst retaining the former Goods Shed which was part of the old railway line.  The possibility of housing had been considered but employment had been assessed to be the most appropriate use.

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

Supported the proposals and thanked the Estates team for their work.

In response to Cabinet Member comments, Councillor Learney confirmed the possibility of rehoming the Winchester boxing club at the site was being investigated.

Cabinet agreed the following for the reasons set out above and outlined in the report.

RESOLVED:

1.            That the principle of retention of the Former Goods Shed site as a Council asset be agreed.

2.            That the site be redeveloped for small business and employment use subject to final decision following development appraisal. 

3.            That a budget of £20,000 be approved, funded by the property reserve, to commission architectural drawings, a priced building specification and a detailed development appraisal as a precursor to submitting a detailed planning application.

4.            That a future Cabinet meeting consider the outcome of the proposed detailed development appraisal and a business case supporting the Council’s direct development of this site. 

1.     That an allocation of £45,000 be made from the Climate Emergency Programme budget to cover the cost of the consultancy appointment.

2.     That authority be delegated to the Corporate Head of Engagement to procure, select and award a contract to a suitable consultant in collaboration with the Cabinet Member for Local Economy and in compliance with the city council’s contract procedure rules.

3.     That authority be delegated to the Service Lead legal to negotiate, prepare and enter into a consultancy contract with the successful consultant.

Councillor Ferguson introduced the report, emphasising that it proposed a new approach to developing a 10 year strategy which was crucial to meet the target of being carbon neutral by 2030 and also to respond to the challenges relating to the Covid pandemic.  It was essential that the Council worked in partnership with key stakeholders to achieve this.

At the invitation of the Leader, Councillors Lumby and Pearson addressed Cabinet as summarised briefly below.

Councillor Lumby

Believed there had been undue delays in reaching this point in the preparation of the Strategy and queried the cost-effectiveness of employing a consultant to produce.  Highlighted that once produced, the Strategy would require further Member consultation and input from stakeholders, delaying its introduction further.

Councillor Pearson

Concurred with points made regarding length of time to produce and cost of employing consultants.  Queried why database information from Partnership for South Hampshire was not included.  Noted that carbon emissions from transport were included but asked why emissions from housing were not?

Councillor Ferguson responded to comments made including highlighting the great deal of work that had been carried out to date by the Local Economy team in response to the Covid pandemic.  It was proposed consultants would be employed for a three month period because there were not sufficient resources of expertise in-house.

Cabinet agreed the following for the reasons set out above and outlined in the report.

RESOLVED:

1.               That an allocation of £45,000 be made from the Climate Emergency Programme budget to cover the cost of the consultancy appointment.

2.               That authority be delegated to the Corporate Head of Engagement to procure, select and award a contract to a suitable consultant in collaboration with the Cabinet Member for Local Economy and in compliance with the city council’s contract procedure rules.

3.      That authority be delegated to the Service Lead legal to negotiate, prepare and enter into a consultancy contract with the successful consultant.

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

Queried why the November forward plan included so few items and sought assurances that work on key projects was ongoing.  Suggested that a three month forward plan be produced to give more notice of forthcoming decisions.

The Leader responded to comments made and advised that the November Cabinet was an additional meeting, scheduled specifically to progress the Central Winchester regeneration project.

RESOLVED:

            That the list of future items, as set out in the Forward Plan for November 2020, be noted.

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 100I and Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972.

Cabinet agreed to the following for the reasons outlined in the report.

RESOLVED:

            That the information contained in the exempt appendices to the report be noted.