Winchester City Borough Council Local Plan Advisory Group Meeting

There were no apologies.

Councillor Porter declared a non-pecuniary interest concerning items on the agenda that may be related to her role as a County Councillor.

Councillor Tod declared a non-pecuniary interest concerning items on the agenda that may be related to his role as a County Councillor and that he was a council-nominated member of the Partnership for South Hampshire (PfSH) Joint Committee.

No requests had been received although the Chairperson noted that correspondence had been received from Lichfields, the planning consultants acting for the O’Flynn Group, and the promoters of the land at Micheldever Station, which would be discussed as part of the main agenda item.

It was agreed following the meeting that the correspondence be appended to these minutes.

No requests had been received.

RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the previous meeting held on 9 March 2022 be approved and adopted.

Adrian Fox, Strategic Planning Manager, provided members with a presentation that had been made available in advance of the meeting and was available here. He began by thanking everyone who had contributed to the Regulation 18 Local Plan consultation, particularly parish and town councils, council members, local groups, and organisations.

The presentation provided an overview of the progress made, including stakeholder engagement, and potential development sites, it addressed the known challenges such as affordable housing, economic growth, and environmental protection. The presentation included maps and diagrams showing development sites and growth distribution and it outlined the timeline and next steps, including public consultation and the Local Plan examination.

The committee proceeded to ask questions and debate the presentation, and in summary, the following matters were raised.

1. Concerns were raised regarding the alignment with neighbouring authorities' plans, for example at West of Waterlooville with Havant Borough Council.
2. Officers were asked to clarify housing numbers and whether the Lichfield letter made current assumptions unsound.
3. Whether a backup plan existed for the Regulation 19 timetable if the PfSH deadline was not met.
4. Clarification was requested on consultation areas selected and suggestions for future event areas.
5. A progress update was requested on the allocation of 500 homes in the South Down National Park.
6. The council's approach to phosphates and nitrates in the local plan process was questioned.
7. Further clarification was requested on phasing, including the "Brownfield site first" approach.
8. An update was requested on consultation with young people in the district.
9. Reassurance was requested regarding the progress on Sir John Moore Barracks and the fulfilment of housing assumptions.
10. The Chairperson and officers were asked to consider keeping LPAG members informed of developments.

These questions were responded to by Councillor Porter, Cabinet Member for Place and Local Plan, Councillor Tod, Leader and Cabinet Member for Asset Management, Adrian Fox, Strategic Planning Manager, and Dawn Adey, Strategic Director.

Following questions and responses, Adrian Fox summarised the next steps as follows.

1. The council would be reviewing, responding to, and processing all representations.
2. The council would be updating its evidence base, including its employment and retail study.
3. Officers were working with Hampshire County Council to examine the cumulative impact of site allocations on the highway network.
4. The council was in communication with universities regarding student numbers.
5. The statement of community involvement and SHELAA would be reviewed.
6. The Regulation 19 Local Plan required approval from both Cabinet and Full Council before submission to the local plan examiner.