Agenda and minutes

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.

There were no disclosures of interests from Members of the Committee.

Councillor Gottlieb declared a personal and pecuniary interest in matters relating to the St Clements Surgery and also that he was a member of the Winchester Deserves Better campaign group.

Following conferring with the Corporate Head of Resources over his declaration of interest, Councillor Gottlieb left the meeting and did not address the Committee.

Councillor Hutchison stated that her comments made under Minute 3 – Council Procedure Rule 35, had not been reflected fully in the Minute.  She reiterated her concerns that the spirit of cooperation present under the Informal Policy Group had been lost and that the Urban Delivery Report had not been discussed.  She added that the Advisory Panels had not been developed as was wanted.

RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the previous meeting of the Committee held on 10 July 2018 be approved and adopted.

– to receive and note questions asked and statements made from members of the public on issues relating to the responsibility of this Committee (see note overleaf).

Richard Baker, speaking on behalf of the City of Winchester Trust, stated that for the Outline Delivery Strategy the appointment of the Strategic Advisor would be key to its success.  Those appointed to be the Strategic Advisor would require sensitivity, understanding and importantly have experience with regeneration ‘in the heart’ of historic cities, in order to brief and commission the Master Plan.  The Master Plan would consider land uses in the Supplementary Planning Document (SPD), including pedestrian access, car parking, cultural, retail and a bus hub.  The masterplan should consider the Winchester Movement Strategy and the wider integration of the scheme into the town.  The masterplan should also involve public consultation for its adoption in 2020, with planning applications received by 2021.

Tim Fell, in summary, spoke of the need to seek public engagement and to harness the expertise and talents of local people and external advisors.  The standing Advisory Panels should be appointed at the earliest opportunity and would reassure the public, considering subjects such as archaeology and town planning.  Of benefit would be the commencing of major public realm projects, for example a pocket park at Riverside, city walks, a piazza at the Antiques Market and improving the appearance of the former Friarsgate Surgery.  The provision of small retail units at affordable rents should also be sought and also to integrate Woolstaplers Hall into the proposals.

Patrick Davies, in summary, mentioned meanwhile uses, for example tidying up the former Friarsgate Surgery and use of the land behind the bus station, whilst not losing sight of long term expectations.  He also asked about the situation with the introduction of car parking charges in the Marks and Spencer Car park in St Clement Street.

Arthur Morgan, in summary, commented that it was open to interpretation on the skills required and in identifying who would lead the project; would it be led by the Council and/or a developer?  Winchester Deserves Better had produced their own scheme based on the Central Winchester Regeneration (CWR) Supplementary Planning Document (SPD), they were not the developer but wished to show this to take the scheme forward.  The scheme needed to be civic minded rather than commercial with a lot of public realm, museums, and performance space, residential and to open up the brooks.  Archaeology also needed to be resolved.  It was an opportunity not to be missed.  A key was architecture.  The project should be controlled to be financially viable, but not to ‘sweat the asset’, as the scheme radiated into the whole city and also provided an opportunity to revitalise it.

The Chairman replied to the points raised, in particular to Mr Davies by saying that the car park in question was leased to Marks and Spencer and therefore the monetary collection was in their domain.

The Chairman thanked the public speakers for their contributions.

The Committee received an introduction from Councillor Horrill which provided an update on the Central Winchester Regeneration Project, including the establishment of the Advisory Panels which would help inform the project streams.  Councillor Horrill stated that the three month period for legal challenge for the SPD had now expired and no challenges had been received, and that this was a material consideration moving forward.

The Head of Programme outlined the work streams to the meeting, as set out in the Report.  These were to develop a strategy to deliver the vision and aspirations outlined in the SPD; the establishment of advisory panels; the refurbishment and re-letting of Coitbury House; implementing a meanwhile use strategy for the vacant space in the bus station (a mural had now been displayed); the drive to let vacant property on a short-term basis within the regeneration area; deliver the repaving of lower High Street and revisit plans for Broadway; identify and deliver short term improvements to the public realm in the Central Winchester Regeneration area and to agree and deliver the archaeology event (on 11 December 2018).

In summary, the following matters were raised by Members and the Chairman and Head of Programme responded as set out below:

The Advisory Panels would help to inform projects and would include a wide range of participants, including the public and interested groups.  The Chairman added that there might be other Advisory Panels appointed as the project moved forward.

The SPD assisted in defining the short, medium and long-term options.  For example, as the area was contained, the Broadway gateway could be improved by landscaping, including providing wider pavements and removing car parking by the King Alfred statue.  The repaving of the lower part of the High Street and Middle Brook Street were longer term objectives and it was noted that issues such as the re-opening up of water ways and the archaeology would need to be addressed before the Lower High Street and Middle Brook Street were repaved.

There was also parallel work to be undertaken in balancing strategic direction with short-term uses.  Some of the short-term uses could then be judged on their success as to whether they became long-term features within the regeneration scheme.

The Meanwhile Use Advisory Panel would consider the provision of pop up shops.

The Committee agreed to the following for the reasons set out above and outlined in the Report.

RESOLVED:

That the Terms of Reference and membership for the Advisory Panels as outlined in the Report be approved.

The meeting commenced at 4:30pm and concluded at 5:50pm