Agenda and minutes

To record the names of apologies given.

There were no apologies for absence

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 Porter declared a personal (but not prejudicial) interest due to her role as a County Councillor.

Note: Councillors wishing to speak about a particular agenda item are required to register with Democratic Services three clear working days before the meeting (contact democracy@winchester.gov.uk or 01962 848 264).  Councillors will normally be invited by the Chairperson to speak immediately prior to the appropriate item.

The requests from Councillors to make representations were considered under the respective agenda items.

RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the previous meeting held on 23 November 2020 be agreed as a correct record.

– to receive and note questions asked and statements made from members of the public on issues relating to the responsibility of this Advisory Group.

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)

Patrick Davies addressed the meeting as summarised briefly below.

Mr Davies commented on the draft strategic issues and priorities document.  He stated that there should be clarity on the exercise involved, including on the carbon neutrality objective which may conflict with national policy, such as the issues covered by building regulations referred to on page 21.  He asked whether such a substantial part of the document should cover just this topic, as worthy as it was.  The sustainable public transport objective should also refer to buses and trains in addition to walking and cycling as their use should be encouraged.  On pages 28 to 31 green belt issues were raised and there should be more emphasis on the rarity of green belts in this part of England, their real purpose and the meaning of exceptional circumstances in order not to raise expectations. On page 35 onwards there should be clarity on the relationship between developers’ aspirations and the SHEELA, the Government Planning White Paper and its fluctuating demand on housing numbers and that they be up to date so as not to cause public confusion.  In appendix 1 there was a list of many pieces of work undertaken pre Covid and he asked whether they now relevant and not out of date.

Robert Shields, Bishops Waltham Parish Council, addressed the meeting on the draft strategic issues and priorities document as summarised briefly below.

Although Bishops Waltham Parish Council did not know how many new dwellings were proposed, it would be unlikely to challenge the number, provided the local rural character was preserved and it was commensurate with the limited infrastructure available and close working between the City Council and residents was encouraged.

Two strategic proposals were put forward.  Bishop’s Waltham town was long and thin.  To retain the character of a market town, with an easily accessible town centre, it needed to be rounded, which required high level planning.  The current SHEELA was merely the summation of land offered for development by landowners. Instead, a proper “town plan” should be formulated, with landowners then being approached as needed.

Secondly, about half the current Settlement Boundary of Bishop’s Waltham was bounded by the South Downs National Park Authority (SDNPA), which constrained all new developments to one direction only.  There were some suitable sites for development to the north of the town but the South Downs Authority had no priority in their own plans for developments in this area, further unbalancing the geographical layout of the town.  A Statement of Common Ground, or other similar agreement with the SDNPA, was requested to share the number of new developments for the sustainability of Bishop’s Waltham.

Regarding the draft Consultation Document, in summary, the existing vision for the Market Towns was fine, as was the sustainable development objectives; achieving carbon neutrality was important, but parish councils would have limited ability to participate in the opportunity mapping or analysing carbon emissions at parish level; to protect the rural characteristics of the market towns, and villages,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

The Principal Planning Officer gave a verbal update on the Local Plan Website and Branding and referred to the presentation that had been published as a supplemental paper to the meeting.

The Strategic Planning Manager and Corporate Head of Regulatory responded to Members’ questions on the following:

·         How the Local Plan website would be advertised.

·         Would all consultation be online and would alternative channels be used.

·         That engagement should take place with all groups from within the community, for example learning from work on engagement carried out by the Housing Department.

·         Engagement with varying age groups, including young people by means of a virtual briefing, for example to University students.

·         When looking at the level of the public’s interaction with the website, what action would be taken if it was found that there was bias, for example a geographical bias from areas that are more able to interact and those that could not due to their limited internet access and connectivity.  If this was found to be the case would alternative methods be considered, such as written material and posters?

·         That the lessons learnt from consultation exercise undertaken for central Winchester should be built upon, that a telephone number should be available for the public to contact and the role of City Councillors was important in advertising the consultation.

·         The effect of the proposals in the Government’s White Paper on the affordable housing threshold and information on the setting of the level for the proposed levy on the contribution for affordable housing from developers as set out on page 68 of the document.

·         There should be a vision for the entire District as well as the soon to be published Vision for Winchester to 2030, to avoid misunderstanding between the two documents.

·         The document lists all available current sites and is up to date, including brownfield sites (using the NPPF definition).

·         The potential risks associated with the Statement of Common Ground which the Council had committed to with the Partnership for South  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.