Agenda item

Draft Strategic Issues and Priorities document

Minutes:

The Strategic Planning Manager introduced the draft strategic issues and priorities document.

 

Councillor Bell addressed the meeting as summarised briefly below.

 

It was hoped that when the document came to consultation there would be certainty on housing numbers required to provide a more measured and sensible approach to strategic planning for housing.  The approach proposed in the document was supported.  The special characteristics of the land south of Winchester and the need to protect these characteristics should be highlighted.  The carbon neutrality and sustainability targets were supported.  Areas such as Hursley still fitted within a rural areas brief as articulated within MTRA3 and 4 and were under additional pressure and should have more specific attention within the Local Plan.  The local parish councils were fundamentally opposed to the out of scale development proposed for ‘Royal Down’.  However, Hursley Parish council were actively looking for small scale development in their parish area.  This were positive actions to provide local housing for local residents and the parish would work on this basis with the Strategic Planners.

 

Councillor Hutchison addressed the meeting as summarised briefly below.

 

The document was welcomed.  The focus relating to climate emergency and other priorities and elements of the work on the Vision for Winchester and in particular the concept of the15 minute City were supported.  The Winchester Town Forum, through its work on the Vision, had identified the need for a map of the Town to be embedded in the Local Plan.  The Vision also included the parishes that surrounded the Town area and looked at the built up areas.  There was a need to promote mixed use development in relation to the concept of 15 minute City or neighbourhood; reference needed to be made to spatial plans in knowing where to locate development; to recognise the role of regeneration in providing homes and improving the built form; reference to land and sites owned by the City and County Councils and the Hospital and the Prison and the Barracks; reference to new council housing and council led housing developments, and to promote active travel, including walking and cycling and working with the County Council on this issue.

 

The Chairperson thanked Councillors Bell and Hutchison for their representations.

 

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

 

·         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 Hampshire and the proposed removal of the duty to cooperate.  The view was expressed that there was a need to ensure that Winchester did not become a net provider of homes for the broader area and that it remained in control of this.

·         Additional employment sites be included, including added reference to Whiteley.  There should be emphasis on building houses close to employment sites so that they were sustainable.

·         The logging of documents and how progress on them could be accessed, including the green/blue infrastructure framework and other pieces of evidence gathering.

·         The committee asked how the revision of settlement gaps would be undertaken.

·         The committee discussed the hierarchy of settlements and their significance and how information on this could be accessed.

·         How information on sites in the current local plan that had not come to fruition during the last plan period, including for example Bushfield Camp, would be conveyed to Members.

·         Mention of the Winchester Movement Strategy and how it related to the wider district.

·         The inclusion of a glossary.

·         A Member requested that the Administration should be flexible to listen and to respond to changes in direction that may result from consultation feedback.

·         That when housing was allocated in the Local Plan there should be support and encouragement to developers so that it was completed to be meet annual targets. It was noted that the City Council had replied on this point in its consultation response to the White Paper.

·         The consideration of economic allocations and the use of pre pandemic data and to seek the public’s input on this due to the changes in the economy over the last 12 months.  It was noted that a new economic study was being commissioned.

·         Park and ride and having places to cycle to in order to catch public transport.

·         Encouraging people to come forward with sites for renewable energy as mentioned on page 67 of the document.

·         Ways to prevent confusing questions on carbon neutrality in the public consultation were discussed.

·         The Vision for Winchester to be explained in the context of the whole District

·         That the layout of the document be revised to shorten columns that contain blank areas to make it easier to read.

·         To check the accuracy on page 38 of the naming of the site as Newlands in the context of the West of Waterlooville.

·         The consideration of planning development policies and particularly MTRA4 which raised questions on its interpretation, as set out on page 29.

·         The committee asked if the questions at the end of the document to be placed on the new website during the consultation and what would be done with the answers, for example would they form part of the evidence base?

·         That employment sites be located preferably where the council and local communities wished them to be located in easily accessible and sustainable locations rather than via landowners offering sites.

·         That the need for digital connectivity and other infrastructure issues including water and sewerage provision be acknowledged.

·         Reassurance was sought that engagement would continue with the respective neighbouring authorities on the development of employment land at West of Waterlooville and Whiteley.

·         That the language and definitions in the document be reviewed to make to it easier to understand for the public.

 

 

 

Supporting documents:

 

m - Draft Strategic Issues and Priorities document{sidenav}{content}