Winchester City Borough Council Cabinet Committee: Regeneration Meeting

Apologies were received as noted above.

Councillors Tod and Porter declared personal (but not prejudicial) interests due to their roles as County Councillors.

John Beveridge (City of Winchester Trust) spoke regarding the Central Winchester regeneration (CWR) update and his comments are summarised under the relevant minute below.

RESOLVED:

          That the minutes of the previous meeting held on 7 June 2023 be agreed as a correct record.

Councillor Tod had no announcements to make.

John Beveridge (City of Winchester Trust) spoke during public participation as summarised briefly below.

He referenced the “movement” section of the presentation and welcomed the good intentions included regarding reducing the use of cars and making “connections beyond the red line.”  However, the Trust had concerns regarding the apparent lack of progress since the Winchester Movement Strategy was adopted.  In particular, he highlighted the 2020 Atkins report that had suggested four alternative options regarding how traffic could be routed through the city but no firm proposals had yet been forthcoming.  He queried the impact the current progress and piecemeal approach would have on Jigsaw’s ability to plan for movement both within and through the development. 

At the invitation of the Leader, Councillor Lee addressed the committee as summarised briefly below.

He highlighted that his comments related both to the CWR and Station Approach development proposals.  He suggested that an overarching master plan and master risk register should be developed encompassing all of the council’s regeneration projects.  He also requested that the masterplans include the risk of climate change, whole life carbon emissions and natural environment impacts.  He suggested that the council’s new build housing programme be added to the regeneration projects and requested an overarching master plan.  He queried whether the County Council Regeneration Board (of which the City Council was a member) had its own risk register for major projects in a similar style.  Finally, he queried the impact of the breakdown of the Pan-Hampshire County deal.

The Leader thanked both for their contributions which would be taken into account during discussion of the presentation.

The Director of Regeneration together with Matt Woolgar and Warwick Smither (Jigsaw) gave a presentation providing an update on the CWR project.  The presentation was available on the council’s website here.

Mr Woolgar and Mr Smither (Jigsaw), the Director of Regeneration and the Strategic Director responded to members’ questions in relation to the following (also having regard to the comments made during public participation and by Councillor Lee above):

a)    Archaeological finds to date – it was agreed that a short update presentation be provided to the next Committee meeting.

b)    The operation of the workshop process to date and how consultation and engagement would be developed in the future, including the use of “Youth and Future” groups.

c)    Ensuring the inclusion of those with reduced mobility within the development.

d)    The potential to consider the use of water source heat pumps.

e)    Further detail regarding assessing possible future options for “connections beyond the red line” (i.e. utilising the CWR to improve connections between the outskirts of the city and through the core area).

f)      Confirmation that Jigsaw was a stakeholder and fully involved with the County Council and City Council regarding Winchester Movement Strategy discussions.

g)    The methodology of proposing an incremental approach to development and reasons for not proposing an overarching masterplan over a long period of time.

h)    The council’s use of a framework for project planning to ensure consistency and the various internal monitoring stages in place.

i)      The purpose of the Council’s Local Plan in terms of district-wide long term planning.

j)      The different levels of risk register within the council, noting that the corporate risk register was reported to the Audit and Governance Committee.

k)    The current situation regarding the County Council’s Local Transport Plan (LTP4).

l)      When decisions on the viability of the project would be made.

m)  Progress on final approval of the development agreement.

n)    It was noted that the project’s risk register had been considered at the previous meeting on 7 June 2023 and would be submitted to the next meeting on 31 January 2024.

The Leader thanked the Director of Regeneration and the representatives from Jigsaw for their update.

RESOLVED:

          That the contents of the presentation be noted.

The Project Lead gave a presentation providing an update on the Station Approach project.  The presentation was available on the council’s website here.  The Project Lead advised that evaluation of the 16 submissions received in response to procurement of a concept masterplan team was underway and it was anticipated that the team would be established by November 2023.  An update would be provided to the 31 January 2024 Committee meeting.

The Project Lead, Director of Regeneration and Strategic Director responded to members’ questions in relation to the following:

a)    The importance and value of the concept masterplan.

b)    The rationale behind the current presentation of data within the risk register and the possibility for improvements to be made.

c)    The internal mechanism within the council for regular reporting on progress on the project.

d)    The importance of continuing to assess the viability of the project.

The Leader thanked officers for their update.

RESOLVED:

          That the contents of the presentation and risk register review be noted.