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 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.

Councillor Tod declared a personal (but not prejudicial) interest in relation to agenda items which may relate to Hampshire County Council matters due to his role as a County Councillor.

Cabinet noted that the minutes were included with the supplementary agenda after the statutory deadline.  The Leader agreed to accept the minutes onto the agenda as an urgent matter for consideration to enable them to be approved as this was the last Cabinet meeting of the municipal year.

RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the previous meeting held on 17 February 2022 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 (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 during public participation regarding report CAB3342 as summarised under the relevant minute below.

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

Councillor Learney

The drop in consultation day on the proposals for the Bar End depot had been well attended.  Cabinet would receive an update report once the questionnaire responses had been analysed.

Councillor Clear

A further £25,000 had been secured for enhancing actions to tackle fly tipping.

Councillor Gordon-Smith

The process of discussing further the allocation of housing numbers with parish councillors and ward councillors as part of the development of the Local Plan had begun with a recent meeting with Otterbourne Parish Council.

Councillor Tod

The new Vaultex park and ride car park (Barfield 2) would be opened on 11 March 2022.

The last payment of the winter support payment had been made to local businesses to help overcome the difficulties caused by the Covid pandemic bringing the total of payments made to approximately £1.35m.

A)   Pause the River Park Leisure Centre proposal from the University of Southampton and conduct a six-month public consultation for other ideas.

We the undersigned petition the council to pause the River Park Leisure Centre proposal from the University of Southampton and conduct a six-month public consultation for other ideas.

Winchester City Council have decided to give the University of Southampton five-years to conduct a public consultation to explore what they should do with the River Park Leisure Centre site but never gave local residents the opportunity to formally submit our ideas.

With this in mind, we urge the city council to pause the proposal from the university and first conduct a well advertised six-month public consultation to gather other ideas from the community. After that, a short list of proposals (including the University of Southampton one) could be created based on positive social and economic impact. Local residents could then vote on which proposal would be best for Winchester.

This democratic decision process would ensure strong local support for whichever proposal was chosen as well as creating long-lasting trust between the community and city council.

On reaching 10 signatures Ordinary Petition

This ePetition ran from 19/11/2021 to 11/02/2022 and has now finished.

207 people signed this ePetition.

B)   In accordance with Council Procedure Rule 16, a petition was submitted by ‘Save Our Skatepark in Winchester River Park’ with 2, 265 signatures to Council on 23 February 2022.  At that Council meeting, it was agreed that the petition be referred to the Cabinet meeting where the decision in respect of the land disposal was being decided.  The decision being made is an executive decision.

(a)         a petition was submitted by Mr Sam Feltham regarding ‘pause the River Park Leisure Centre proposal ’ which received 207 signatures.  The details of the petition are set out on the agenda.

Mr Feltham introduced his petition and in summary, raised the following matters:

·         The importance of proper consultation with local residents, which he considered had not taken place with this proposal.

·         Suggested an alternative use of the area as a “campus for the citizens of Winchester” which could include a lido.

·         The Environment Agency’s flood risk classification rated use of land for water based activities as lower risk than for educational purposes.

·         Believed that a lido could be an economically viable alternative.

·         Reiterated the request that the proposal be paused for six months to allow all options to be properly explored.

The Leader responded to the matters in the petition and in Mr Feltham’s presentation and in summary, raised the following points:

·         Cabinet would consider the contents of the petition in consideration of report CAB3342 which was the next item on the agenda.

·         There would be future opportunities for public consultation on the proposal both in response to the proposed appropriation of the site and any future planning application by the university.

·         There was no statutory duty on the council to consult before taking a decision to dispose of a leasehold.

·         Emphasised the importance of taking into consideration the wider economic and social benefits of the proposal for Winchester.

RESOLVED:

            That the petitioner be thanked for bringing the matter forward and that the contents of the petition be considered further as part of Cabinet’s consideration of report CAB3342, elsewhere on the agenda.

(b)         a petition was submitted by Mr Steven Kan regarding ‘save the skate park’ which received 2265 signatures.  The details of the petition are set out on the agenda and had previously been considered at meeting of full Council in 23 February 2022 where it was agreed that the petition be referred to Cabinet. 

Mr Kan introduced his petition and in summary, raised the following matters:

·         In principle, welcomed the proposal in report CAB3342 to amend the heads of terms to ensure that the skate park was leased back to the council but had some concern about the lack of detail.

·         Requested further details about whether this meant that the skate park would be retained in its current form and location.

·         Suggested that lessons be learned about the need to consult with residents even where there was no statutory duty to do so and particularly with younger people, in the future.

The Cabinet Member for Housing and Asset Management responded to Mr Kan and in summary raised the following points:

·         Thanked Mr Kan for his petition and the support for the skate park.

·         Confirmed that although the skate park was never at risk, the proposed changes to the heads of terms demonstrated both the council and the university’s commitment to its retention further.

·         The leaseback would ensure that the council had full control of the skate  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

1.    That having considered the objections received as a result of the public notice under s123(2A) of the Local Government Act 1972, approval is given to enter into an agreement to dispose of the land known as River Park Leisure Centre, Gordon Road, Winchester, as identified by the red line on the plan at Appendix A (“the Site”) of CAB3342, to the University of Southampton on a 150 year lease. 

2.    That the Heads of Terms are agreed as set out in Appendix B of CAB3342, subject to an amendment in order to ensure that the skatepark is leased back to the council.  The Heads of Terms include a five year ‘longstop date’ during which period the University of Southampton will investigate and apply for planning consent, with the usual public notices, for their proposed development. 

3.    That authority be delegated to the Corporate Head of Asset Management to enter into an Agreement for Lease with the University of Southampton in keeping with the Heads of Terms and the above amendment in respect of the skate park, including authority to agree the purchase price with The University of Southampton on terms that satisfy S123(2) of the Local Government Act 1972.

4.    That subject to further decisions by the council as to the grant of planning permission for the University of Southampton’s proposed campus scheme and as to the appropriation of those parts of the Site required for the scheme, authority be delegated to the Corporate Head of Asset Management to enter into a lease of the Site with The University of Southampton in accordance with the above-mentioned Agreement for Lease.

5.    That authority be delegated to the Service Lead Legal the drafting of the Agreement for Lease and the lease, and any relevant ancillary agreements as are necessary to implement the recommendations above. 

The Leader welcomed to the meeting Professor Larry Lynch and Mr Jon Walsh from the University of Southampton and also Mr Matthew Hutchings QC who was advising the council.

Councillor Learney introduced the report and in summary, raised the following points:

·         confirmed that its contents took account of the objections received in response to the advertisement for the disposal of open space. 

·         highlighted a correction to the report to clarify that parking at North Walls car park was chargeable. 

·         Proposals for the North Walls park area were agreed at the Winchester Town Forum on 10 November 2021 (report WTF303 refers) and the proposal in this report did not impact on the public aspirations for the park area. 

·         There was no statutory requirement on the council to consult on the disposal of a leasehold and nor has the council made a clear commitment to formal public consultation prior to any disposal of the Site

·         A considerable amount of related consultation had been undertaken by the council over previous years (for example, in relation to the Vision for Winchester and the Local Plan) and the current proposal supported many of the outcomes of previous consultations.

·         Future consultation would be undertaken by the university both in developing their master plan for the campus and as part of the planning application process.

·         The public will not lose a large proportion of the recreation ground

·         The proposal was that the site be used for tertiary education for 35 years which had no bearing on the accessibility of the site.

At the invitation of Councillor Learney, Mr Hutchings QC confirmed that contrary to statements made by the Friends of River Park group (FoRP) in their objections to the notice, the advertisements were legally correct (paragraph 4.5 of the report refers).  In addition, even if the notices were defective, any defect would be cured by further advertisements prior to a decision to appropriate (paragraph 4.6 refers).  Mr Hutchings QC also responded to an observation document submitted by FoRP and advised that FoRP were incorrect in their statement that the University of Southampton will have an absolute right to a lease when they obtain planning permission.  The council has committed to appropriation as a condition and he referred members to paragraphs 4.14 and 4.16 of the report.

At the invitation of Councillor Learney, Professor Lynch confirmed that the university was a charity registered with the Charity Commission and as such is a public research university sealed by Royal Charter.  The university is not a commercial entity, although it operated some commercial activities to fund its charitable purposes.

Councillor Learney summarised that the objections had been carefully considered and included in an appendix of the report.  Taking all objections into account Cabinet needed to consider if this is the right thing to do for the city and district.    She summed up the opportunity to replace the leisure centre building with a high quality and accessible building.  Taking all representations into account Councillor Learney recommended that Cabinet progress with this  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

1.  That capital expenditure of up to £2,190,000 (bringing the total expenditure approved to £2.3m) be approved for the construction of the new KGV Pavilion, subject to successful funding applications set out in Table 2 Project funding. 

2.  That the Corporate Head of Economy & Community submit an application for grant funding to the District Wide Community Infrastructure Levy for the sum of £450,000.

3.  That £450,000 of District Wide CIL funding be agreed, subject to the due diligence assessment and support of the application in April by the council’s CIL Informal Panel.  

4.  That subject to the securing of all required funding, the Corporate Head of Asset Management be authorised to invite and evaluate tenders and to award a design and build contract to the preferred bidder in accordance with the Public Contract Regulations 2015 and Councils Contract Procedure Rules for the construction of the KGV Pavilion.

Councillor Learney introduced the report and welcomed the proposals, which were also supported by the Football Association.  A steering group comprising of relevant sports and community groups, together with councillors and officers, would be established to advise on future management of the pavilion.

At the invitation of the Leader, Councillor Cook addressed the meeting as summarised briefly below.

Highlighted the additional costs of the project and queried whether local community were in full support.  Queried the status of the grant application to the Football Foundation.  Also requested an update on the “Allegra’s ambition” proposals and the proposals for a new pavilion at North Walls.

Councillor Learney and the Corporate Property Manager responded to the points raised, including clarifying that the additional project costs were due to improvements to the building design as well as rising construction and building material costs.

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

RESOLVED:

1.                That capital expenditure of up to £2,190,000 (bringing the total expenditure approved to £2.3m) be approved for the construction of the new KGV Pavilion, subject to successful funding applications set out in Table 2 Project funding. 

2.                That the Corporate Head of Economy & Community submit an application for grant funding to the District Wide Community Infrastructure Levy for the sum of £450,000.

3.                That £450,000 of District Wide CIL funding be agreed, subject to the due diligence assessment and support of the application in April by the council’s CIL Informal Panel.  

4.                That subject to the securing of all required funding, that the Corporate Head of Asset Management be authorised to invite and evaluate tenders and to award a design and build contract to the preferred bidder in accordance with the Public Contract Regulations 2015 and Councils Contract Procedure Rules for the construction of the KGV Pavilion.

1.  That the public consultation responses as set out in Appendix A of report CAB3337 be noted.

2.  That the proposed Landscape Character Assessment Supplementary Planning Document be adopted, as set out within Appendix B of CAB3337, subject to necessary minor amendments.

3.  That authority be delegated to Strategic Director Place, in consultation with Cabinet Member Built Environment, to make final minor amendments to the Supplementary Planning Document prior to adoption.

Councillor Gordon-Smith introduced the report and stated that appendix A of the report listed the responses to the consultation.

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

RESOLVED:

1.                That the public consultation responses as set out in Appendix A of report CAB3337 be noted.

2.                That the proposed Landscape Character Assessment Supplementary Planning Document be adopted, as set out within Appendix B of CAB3337, subject to necessary minor amendments.

3.                That authority be delegated to Strategic Director Place, in consultation with Cabinet Member Built Environment, to make final minor amendments to the Supplementary Planning Document prior to adoption.

1.     That changes to the parking tariff in Winchester Town (in addition to the previously agreed changes to City Centre Parking outlined in the 2022/23 Fees and Charges Paper (CAB3326)) as set out in paragraph 12.4 and appendix 1 of report CAB3330, with the exception of the river park leisure centre (RPLC) car park which should be £15.50 for over 4 hours Monday to Friday, be advertised and implemented in October 2022.  

2.     That a consultation is undertaken in the summer (for a 6 week period and will report back to Cabinet in the autumn) for a scheme to charge vehicles based on vehicle emissions.

3.     That the Head of Programme and Head of Legal Services be authorised to enter into a new parking management agreement with New Alresford Town Council for Arlebury Park car park, New Alresford.

Councillor Tod introduced the report and summarised the key proposals contained within.  This included removing the free half hour parking in central Winchester in order to improve air quality and introducing a free hour ticket in “park and walk” car parks.

At the invitation of the Leader, Councillor Kurn addressed the meeting as summarised briefly below.

Recognised the importance of reducing carbon emissions but queried whether the necessary technology and infrastructure was in place and whether the measures proposed were therefore too premature and unfair to car drivers.  Queried the appropriateness of the timing of the decision to remove the free half hour parking when businesses were still recovering from the impact of the Covid pandemic.  Highlighted the impact on residents of charging for Sunday parking.

Cabinet members responded to the comments made, including emphasising the urgency of measures to improve the air quality in the central Winchester area.

Councillor Tod referred to a concern raised with him by Monica Gill (TACT) who had been unable to remain to raise her point at the meeting.  The concern related to residential parking permits on Sundays and was therefore outside the scope of the report, but would be examined separately.

Councillor Tod and the Head of Programme drew members’ attention to a correction in the first recommendation of the report to refer to paragraph 12.4 (rather than 11.4 as stated).  In addition, it was proposed to retain the all-day parking rate for the river park leisure centre car park Monday to Fridays to discourage all day commuter parking.  Cabinet agreed to amend the wording of the first resolution to reflect these changes (amended resolution as set out below).

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

RESOLVED:

1.                That changes to the parking tariff in Winchester Town (in addition to the previously agreed changes to City Centre Parking outlined in the 2022/23 Fees and Charges Paper (CAB3326)) as set out in paragraph 12.4 and appendix 1 of report CAB3330, with the exception of the river park leisure centre (RPLC) car park which should be £15.50 for over 4 hours Monday to Friday, be advertised and implemented in October 2022.  

2.                That a consultation is undertaken in the summer (for a 6 week period and will report back to Cabinet in the autumn) for a scheme to charge vehicles based on vehicle emissions.

3.                That the Head of Programme and Head of Legal Services be authorised to enter into a new parking management agreement with New Alresford Town Council for Arlebury Park car park, New Alresford.

1.     That an additional budget of £70,000 (total £100,000) be approved for the upgrade of pay machines in order to roll out contactless payments and to support the potential introduction of a differential charging scheme based on vehicle emissions across the central Air Quality Management Area.

2.     That expenditure of £590,000 for the car park major works programme 2022/23 be approved, as outlined in appendix A of CAB3329.

3.     That it be noted that the indicative programme for 2023/24 is yet to be fully defined subject to condition surveys and further evaluation work being completed.

4.     That a change in relation to The Dean Car Park at Alresford from 47 to 42 spaces and expenditure of £1,005,000 be approved (as outlined in paragraph 13.2 of the report).

5.     That authority be delegated to the Head of Programme in consultation with the Corporate Head of Asset Management and Cabinet Member for Economic Recovery, to procure and to make minor adjustments to the programme in order to meet maintenance and operational needs of the car park service throughout the year, as required.

Councillor Tod introduced the report and summarised the key proposals contained within. 

At the invitation of the Leader, Councillor Kurn addressed the meeting as summarised briefly below.

Welcomed the proposed enhancements to CCTV, Wi-Fi and other improved facilities.  With regard to The Dean car park at Alresford noted that following the related question at Council on 23 February 2022, the resident remained unhappy with the response provided.

Cabinet members responded to comments made, including clarifying the situation regarding The Dean car park.

Cabinet noted a correction to recommendation 4 of the report to refer to paragraph 13.2 (and not paragraph 14.2 as stated).

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

RESOLVED:

1.                That an additional budget of £70,000 (total £100,000) be approved for the upgrade of pay machines in order to roll out contactless payments and to support the potential introduction of a differential charging scheme based on vehicle emissions across the central Air Quality Management Area.

2.                That expenditure of £590,000 for the car park major works programme 2022/23 be approved, as outlined in appendix A of CAB3329.

3.                That it be noted that the indicative programme for 2023/24 is yet to be fully defined subject to condition surveys and further evaluation work being completed.

4.                That a change in relation to The Dean Car Park at Alresford from 47 to 42 spaces and expenditure of £1,005,000 be approved (as outlined in paragraph 13.2 of the report).

5.                That authority be delegated to the Head of Programme in consultation with the Corporate Head of Asset Management and Cabinet Member for Economic Recovery, to procure and to make minor adjustments to the programme in order to meet maintenance and operational needs of the car park service throughout the year, as required.

That the Risk Management Policy for 2022/23, its Risk Appetite Statement for 2022/23 and the appended Corporate Risk Register be approved.

Councillor Cutler introduced the report and stated that its contents had been broadly supported by Audit and Governance Committee on 7 March 2022. 

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

RESOLVED:

That the Risk Management Policy for 2022/23, its Risk Appetite Statement for 2022/23 and the appended Corporate Risk Register be approved.

resolved:

That the list of future items, as set out in the Forward Plan for April 2022, 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.

RESOLVED:

            That the contents of the exempt appendix be noted.