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.      

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

Councillors Hiscock and Tod both declared a personal (but not prejudicial) interest in relation to Report SC009 due to their role as County Councillors.

Minutes of the meeting held on 4 July 2019.

            RESOLVED:

                        That the minutes of the meeting held on 4 July 2019, be                    approved and adopted.

Reference was made to the previous discussion at Committee as to health being an area to review.  The Chairperson agreed to take a lead on this item and circulate proposals for review to the Committee. .

RESOLVED:

That the Scrutiny Work Programme for 2019/20 be noted.

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

Four members of the public/representatives of local groups spoke regarding Report SC009 and their comments are summarised under the relevant minute below.

(Report SC009 refers)

Four members of the public/representations of local groups addressed the Committee as summarised below.

John Hearn (City of Winchester Trust)

·         All car parking spaces should be removed from the proposed development;

·         The proposed office development was too tall, too large and too block like.  Removing the podium and basement car parking would enable office development to be lowered into the ground.  The proposed 2m height reduction was insufficient. 

·         The design of the public space at the front of the station was unresolved – the carriageway was too prominent and should be redesigned as a uniform pedestrian priority space.

Rose Burns

·         Winchester was not a premier business location and its attraction was for its history and heritage rather than for Grade A office space.

·         Concerned about viability – build costs were equivalent to London, but in her opinion the rents achievable in the regional market were less therefore should instead be locating grade A office space at areas such as Chilcomb Park, or in Winnall (with reference to the Winnall Development Framework).

Patrick Davies

·         Endorsed comments made by Mr Hearn and Ms Burns above;

·         Concern that some aspects of the Report were classed as exempt which he considered was not permissible in relation to a planning application.

Ian Tait

·         Gave examples of employers who had previously relocated from Winchester due to a shortage of office accommodation of the necessary size and quality;

·         Due to sustainable location, all car parking should be removed (particularly with reference to the recent declaration by the Council of a climate emergency);

·         On a general point, the Council should also hold a meeting to provide an update on the new Leisure Centre.

At the invitation of the Chairperson, Councillor Miller addressed the Committee and in summary welcomed the report, particularly with the review of car parking provision and proposed reduction in height of development.  He emphasised the support of the Winchester BID and Chamber of Commerce.  The scheme would create additional employment and potentially increase the wellbeing of Winchester residents by removing the requirement to commute to work.

The Cabinet Member for Housing and Asset Management introduced the Report and welcomed the opportunity for scrutiny of the proposed decision as a means of reducing the potential risks to the Council.  She introduced two representatives from JLL who act as the council strategic placemaking consultants: Mr D Roberts and Ms N Pang who were present to respond to Members’ questions as appropriate.

Members raised a number of detailed questions and sought clarification in a number of areas which were responded to by the Cabinet Member for Housing and Asset Management together with the Strategic Director: Place, the Strategic Director: Resources, the Chief Executive and the two JLL consultants, as summarised below:

Exempt classification

·         The Chief Executive advised that the Report considered the property implications of the scheme for the Council as landowner, not planning development control matters which would be dealt with separately by the Planning Committee.  She confirmed therefore that the exemptions had been  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

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.

(Report SC009 Appendix 4A refers)

The Committee considered the content of exempt appendix 4a (detail in exempt minute).  Mr Roberts and Ms Pang (JLL) remained during the exempt session to respond to Members’ questions.

The Committee then moved back into open session to agree the report’s recommendations (as set out above).

The Committee noted that the above item was not notified for inclusion on the agenda within the statutory deadline because it was additional information requested by a Member of the Committee after the report was dispatched.  The Chairman agreed to accept the item on the agenda as a matter requiring urgent consideration in order for its contents to be considered alongside Report SC009.

The Committee considered the additional information requested and officers and representatives from JLL responded to questions thereon (detail in exempt minute).