Agenda item

That the reasons for the project overspend are noted, along with the points that Cabinet was asked to consider by the Scrutiny Committee, and that procurement and management of future projects seeks to learn from this pilot scheme.

Councillor Reach introduced the report which had been brought to Cabinet as required by the Council’s constitution and also offered the opportunity for lessons to be learned.  The report had been considered at The Scrutiny Committee on 13 November 2025 and the minutes of that meeting had been circulated to all those present at Cabinet.  Specifically, Cabinet had been asked to consider the following points:

a)      That future projects should include a clear assessment of the council's risk appetite to determine the most appropriate method of delivery and form of contract.

b)      That upon completion of the Woodman Close project, the effectiveness of the lessons learned from Hobbs View should be evaluated.

c)      That the lessons learned should include the views of residents, the Parish Council, and ward members.

d)      That future lessons learned reports provide a broader evaluation of the entire project, including all objectives, risks, and stakeholder engagement, rather than solely focusing on the constitutional requirement related to budget overspend.

e)      That a comparison of the ongoing running costs for Hobbs View and Woodman Close properties be undertaken.

Councillor Reach confirmed that since The Scrutiny Committee, the views of the parish council had been sought (but not yet received) so they could be incorporated into the lessons learned.  

Ian Tait spoke during public participation as summarised briefly below.

He expressed concern about the high cost of the scheme overall, making comparisons with a nearby housing scheme developed by the Winchester Housing Trust in 2012.  He queried whether lessons had been learned highlighting the recent decision to proceed with a new homes development at Woodman Close, Sparsholt which was also anticipated to have high costs.

At the invitation of the Leader, Councillors Lee and Horrill addressed Cabinet as summarised briefly below.

Councillor Lee

Councillor Lee welcomed the Passivhaus Plus pilot at Hobbs View as directly supporting the council's "Greener Faster" priority, the nature emergency declaration, and the carbon neutrality action plan, whilst also offering benefits for tenants in terms of comfort and lower running costs.  He acknowledged the project's significant cost overrun but noted the employment of a Clerk of Works had been a positive step and that the council had gained valuable experience for future Passivhaus projects. He objected to any consideration of removing the Passivhaus certification for future schemes, emphasising that it helped future-proof the housing stock against the impact of the climate and nature emergencies.

Councillor Horrill

Councillor Horrill supported the conducting of project reviews to ensure lessons were learned, but believed that the report lacked full facts, specifically relating to experience of the Parish Council.  She highlighted the challenges caused by the limited availability of compliant Passivhaus components and the rigorous certification process, which resulted in significant time delays and necessitated rectification work that led to a loss of accommodation for tenants and loss of rental income. She stressed the importance of identifying suppliers and appropriate contractors if the council pursues high-specification projects in future. Finally, she urged the council to utilise land which landowners had already indicated could be used for affordable housing to continue delivering smaller schemes in rural areas.

Councillors Reach and Tod responded to the comments made, together with the points forwarded by the Scrutiny Committee for consideration by Cabinet.  The Chief Executive confirmed that in the future, any lessons learned reports would provide a broader evaluation of the entire project, highlighting that this information was already routinely provided by officers as part of the council’s internal review process.

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

RESOLVED:

That the reasons for the project overspend are noted, along with the points that Cabinet was asked to consider by the Scrutiny Committee, and that procurement and management of future projects seeks to learn from this pilot scheme.