Agenda and draft minutes

To note the names of apologies given and deputy members who are attending the meeting in place of appointed members.

Apologies for the meeting were noted as above.

To receive any disclosure of interests from Councillors or Officers in matters to be discussed.

Note: Councillors are reminded of their obligations to declare disclosable pecuniary interests (DPIs), other registerable interests (ORIs) and non-registerable interests (NRIs) in accordance with the Council’s Code of Conduct.

If you require advice, please contact the appropriate Democratic Services Officer, prior to the meeting.

Councillor Batho and Councillor Clear declared a disclosable pecuniary interest due to their roles as Hampshire County Councillors. However, as there was no material conflict of interest, they remained in the room and spoke under the dispensation granted by the Monitoring Officer.

The Chairperson advised that the previously proposed agenda item relating to River Park Leisure Centre disposal had been rescheduled to the 7^th September 2026 meeting of the committee.

That the minutes of the meeting be signed as a correct record.

RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the previous meeting held on 26 May 2026 be approved and adopted.

Note. Councillor Pett had previously asked if officers could follow up on the actions agreed at the meeting of the committee on the 4^th of March 2026 regarding the Community Safety Update.

To receive and note questions asked and statements made from members of the public on matters which fall within the remit of the Committee.

Members of the public and visiting councillors may speak at the committee, provided they have registered to speak three working days in advance.  Please complete this form (https://forms.office.com/r/Y87tufaV6G ) by 5pm on 13 August 2026 or call (01962) 848 264 to register to speak and for further details.

Ian Tait, Lin Mellish, Councillor Stephen Godfrey, and Councillor Danny Lee addressed the committee regarding the agenda item - St. Peter's Car Park: Proposed affordable housing scheme. A summary of their contributions were captured within the agenda items below.

Ian Tait, Councillor Stephen Godfrey, and Councillor Danny Lee addressed the committee regarding the agenda item - Central Winchester Regeneration (CWR) - Updated Business Case. A summary of their contributions were captured within the agenda items below.

RECOMMENDATION:

It is recommended that Scrutiny Committee comment on the proposals within the attached cabinet report, ref CAB3565, which is to be considered by Cabinet at its meeting on 25 August 2026.

NOTE

This report contains an exempt appendix (Appendix 1), if members wish to discuss any part of this exempt appendix, then the procedure under agenda item 6a (below) applies.

The Chairperson invited the members of the public and visiting councillors to address the committee, and a summary of their comments were as follows.

1. Ian Tait addressed the committee. He supported the proposals but questioned the provision of limited parking, suggesting that city centre residents could live without cars. He noted local opposition and emphasised the need for community and ward councillor support, referencing past failed schemes and questioned whether the council should manage the project or seek alternative delivery routes.

2. Lin Mellish addressed the committee. She expressed a preference for council housing with social rents rather than affordable housing, noting that the original intention was for council homes. She stated that the lack of parking would make the homes difficult to let due to unreliable public transport and suggested that displaced vehicles would increase traffic, concluding that whilst she wants homes, we need car parks and this the car park should remain.

3. Councillor Stephen Godfrey addressed the committee. He highlighted three risks: the potential for cost overruns on the design budget making the homes unaffordable, the displacement of current car park users and the lack of alternative spaces, and the risk of flooding on the site, noting a previous failure to build a school there for that reason.

4. Councillor Danny Lee addressed the committee. He supported the use of the brownfield site for affordable housing but questioned the financial assumptions, asking for quantified evidence regarding displaced parking revenue. He sought clarification on the uncommitted balance of Section 106 affordable housing funds, the actual available and eligible funds, whether the expenditure would be released in stages, the value for money of the design and build contract, and the risk of abortive expenditure given Local Government Reorganisation and suggested to accelerate the project or provide an additional gateway decision point in order to minimise this risk.

Councillor Mark Reach, Cabinet Member for Good Homes introduced the report, ref CAB3565, which set out proposals regarding expenditure for professional fees to develop the scheme. The introduction included the following points:

1. The report sought a capital expenditure of £480,000 for professional fees to develop the scheme, which contributed to the target of 1,000 affordable homes by 2032.
2. The site was included in the Local Plan for housing, and the current proposal aimed to deliver approximately 44 homes, consisting of one and two-bedroom flats and three-bedroom townhouses.
3. The site was sustainable, though groundwater and flood risks required assessment during the pre-planning stage.
4. The reduction of city centre parking aligned with council strategy, and alternative parking provision was available nearby and at park and ride sites.
5. The tenure type was yet to be finalised, but he believed that there was an opportunity to deliver social housing and shared ownership units.

The Chairperson suggested that the Committee consider the following points during discussion on the item:

1. That the principle of residential development on the site was established through the adopted Local Plan.
2. That the committee was not being asked to approve construction, but rather to scrutinise the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

RECOMMENDATION:

It is recommended that Scrutiny Committee comment on the proposals within the attached cabinet report, ref CAB3570 which is to be considered by Cabinet at its meeting on 25 August 2026.

NOTE. This report contains an exempt appendix (Appendix B), if members wish to discuss any part of this exempt appendix, then the procedure under agenda item 7a (below) applies.

The Chairperson invited the members of the public and visiting councillors to address the committee, a summary of their comments were as follows.

1. Ian Tait addressed the committee. He raised concerns regarding the lack of affordable housing on the site and the deteriorating commercial viability of the scheme. He questioned the definition of "Winchesterness" and expressed doubts about meeting the planning longstop dates and suggested that the council should consider aborting the development agreement and selling the site outright.

2. Councillor Stephen Godfrey addressed the committee. He challenged the assertion that there were no other options worth considering and highlighted that the business case ignored £25 million in sunk costs and a £650,000 annual loss in rental income. He raised concerns about the scheme's marginal viability, its vulnerability to construction cost increases, and the lack of affordable housing, use of CIL, a hotel, and community space, passages that lead nowhere, no new jobs.  He urged the committee to ensure the whole district benefited from the investment.

3. Councillor Danny Lee addressed the committee. He asked what sensitivity tests had been undertaken to recover some affordable housing and questioned the council's total financial exposure, including St Clements Surgery and proposed car park acquisitions. He also sought clarification on the benefit to cost ratio, including the assumption of a 5% footfall increase despite the loss of the hotel, and asked when energy and climate resilience commitments would become measurable specifications.  He raised implications around the very recent National Planning Policy Framework (17.08.26).

Councillor Martin Tod, Leader and Cabinet Member for Asset Management, introduced the report, ref CAB3570, which included the following points:

1.    Cabinet would be asked to approve the submission of the planning application as outlined in Appendix D. A separate decision, outside of the business case, concerned the lease and access of the Marks & Spencer car park to enable necessary bus infrastructure.

2.    The project had experienced a lengthy progression dating back to the 1990s, including a previous scheme between 2005 and 2016 that had focused on financial returns and was discontinued due to lack of public and member support.

3.    The Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) made deliberate policy choices prioritising community and resident needs over profit maximization; and that internal viability assessments in 2018 had established that recovering land assembly costs alongside delivering affordable housing was not feasible under those constraints.

4.    The council had set ambitious environmental standards exceeding national requirements and had made commitments, such as opening up waterways which carried financial implications.

5.    Unforeseen global and national economic pressures, including conflicts affecting fuel and energy prices, had caused construction inflation to outpace development values fivefold since 2021.

6.    Winchester faced greater difficulty accessing central government funding compared to past assumptions but whilst development projects across the country were being delayed or halted, Winchester was notable in continuing to progress its scheme.

7.    The financial position was not final, and the council continued to explore avenues to improve viability, including potential government grants for regeneration and social housing.

8.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

The latest version of the committee work programme can be found here: https://democracy.winchester.gov.uk/mgPlansHome.aspx?bcr=1

The Chairperson reported on a number of issues regarding the work programme as summarised below.

The September meeting would include:

a)    River Park Leisure Centre disposal

b)    Housing Revenue Account and General Fund outturn

c)    Q1 Finance and Performance monitoring. This item is expected to focus on the Greener Faster programme, excluding recycling, waste and nutrient mitigation due to separate or previous scrutiny activity.

Other Items.

a)    Abbey House and Guildhall. This was planned for discussion at the Economy and Housing Policy Committee in September 2026.

b)    Planning enforcement follow-up. A separate update would be provided to clarify arrangements.

c)    Emerging Local Plan. Officers had advised of limited scrutiny scope this municipal year due to the prescribed process. An all-member briefing is being considered initially.

d)    Proposed Leisure Contract Review. A working group was proposed to review contract performance, including performance against the business case, and accessibility/ease of use amongst other matters. The Chairperson agreed to discuss the best review mechanism with officers.

RESOLVED:

That the latest version of the work programme (which can be found here https://democracy.winchester.gov.uk/mgPlansHome.aspx?bcr=1 ) be noted.

RESOLVED

That the latest Forward Plan of Key Decisions be noted.