Issue - meetings

The Council is recommended to make the resolution set out in the report at agenda item 10.

Portfolio Holder for Finance, Assets and Property together with Portfolio Holder for Planning & Regeneration and Economic Development; and Co Portfolio Holder for Housing (Delivery). 

113.1   The Mayor advised that paper copies of the updated report were available on member desks. Cllr Merryweather introduced the report advising that the item flows well from the previous discussion on the Economic Development Strategy. He advised the project was allocated for mixed use development in local plan part two. He explained that the Fairground site was currently used as an informal car park and was popular because parking was free but it was neither a fair or sustainable use of a valuable Council asset.

113.2   Cllr Merryweather was pleased to recommend advancement to the next stage of the project following officers considerable work on viable options. The report presented a case for five options recommending pursuing a mixed use development of a new community hub, retail space, 32 residential homes with a Waverley rent mix of 65% of market rent. The retail element would generate valuable revenue income. Other options included the sale of the residential element to a private developer but this would mean losing control of the design and potentially the affordable housing. He emphasised that the report was the transition from feasibility to design and was not seeking approval to start construction.

113.3   Cllr Fairclough seconded the proposal thanking the team for putting the proposal together. He emphasised this was an exciting and ambitious proposal reflecting many of the council’s stated objectives.

113.4   Cllr Weldon highlighted that the report stated the ward affected was Haslemere West and asked that Haslemere East also be included as, although the Fairground site itself  was in Haslemere West, the other two parts affected were in Haslemere East. He agreed with Cllr Merryweather that the status quo on the site of leaving it as a unmade free parking was not acceptable.

113.5   Cllr Atkins advised that she was in favour of providing affordable housing and was passionate about improving economic development in the area but she questioned the merits of the investment and development projects because of significant cost overruns, overpaying for sites and unevolved business cases. She felt there was a lack of vision in maximizing valuable asset bases and asked how we could be considering spending £280,000 let alone committing £21 million when we were not even at the point of procuring a development partner. She had raised a number of questions during the Fairground briefing which she advised had not yet been answered. These questions included “How a proposed scheme, that costs more than it's worth, even before the inclusion of a development partner, who's clearly not going to do this for free, meets our strategic objectives and can be deemed financially viable?”, “How can we attribute just £6,500 value to an important development site?” and “How we can pre-empt a supermarket scheme with historic data and no economic master plan?”. She highlighted that the Economic Development Strategy had suggested that we lack highly flexible lower cost business space and that we knew we were losing businesses and jobs. She suggested some of the reasons for this  ...  view the full minutes text for item 113

The Executive are recommended to make the resolutions set out in the report at agenda item 10.

Portfolio Holder for Finance, Assets and Property together with Portfolio Holder for Planning & Regeneration and Economic Development; and Co Portfolio Holder for Housing (Delivery)

The Executive RESOLVED to:

       I.          Proceed with option A of the Business case for the Fairground Development Project.

     II.          Progress a competitive dialogue process for the purpose of procuring a development partner for the project.

   III.          Procure the relevant consultancy services for the project.

  IV.          Delegate authority to the Strategic Director - Place in consultation with the Executive Director of Legal Services and Democratic Support and the relevant portfolio holder to approve all procurement documents.

    V.          Delegate authority to the Strategic Director - Place, in consultation with the Strategic Director, Legal & Democratic Service and Portfolio Holder for Finance & Assets to approve and award of consultancy services contracts.

  VI.          Receive a report and recommendations once the procurement process has been completed.

That the Executive RECOMMENDED that Full Council approves:

1.     A Budget estimate of £21,408,334 for the capital works to complete the project including an allocation of £280,410 for the procurement of the required services for the next stage of the project.

Councillor Mark Merryweather, Portfolio Holder for Finance, Assets and Property introduced the report which sought approval to proceed with the Fairground Development Project. Councillor Merryweather summarised the background to the project including the allocation of the site in Local Plan Part 2, together with the housing ambitions set out in the Corporate Strategy. Five options had been assessed and a mixed use development of retail space and 32 residential homes at Waverley rent was proposed. The recommended scheme would be self-funding with the retail element generating revenue income for the general fund, and the residential homes would be operated within the Council’s estate of 5,000 homes.

The report set out the agreed objectives and parameters on which to procure a development partner and instruct independent professional experts to proceed with design work.  Concerns and competing priorities would be addressed through the design stage and then consultation, prior to any planning application. Councillor Merryweather emphasised that progress would require further Executive, and Council approval. Officers were thanked for bring forward deliverable and sustainable options aligned to the Local Plan and Corporate Strategy.

The Leader invited non-voting visiting Members of the Council in attendance as observers to speak. Councillors Robini and Weldon spoke or had provided written commentary, as Haslemere ward councillors and queried:

·       Where the displaced cars would park?

·       How traffic congestion would be mitigated?

·       Whether the housing allocation would be retained for local people?

·       When public consultation would start?

The Leader invited comments from Haslemere Town Councillors Bayliss and Matthes, in attendance as observers, who queried whether it was felt that the consultation would have a meaningful impact as the report was specific about both the number of properties and that a supermarket would be provided, rather than seeking to consult on the broad aspirations for the site.

Councillor Merryweather, The Leader and Officers in attendance responded accordingly:

·       A complete parking assessment of the broader area would be undertaken as part of the next phase and would be articulated through the brief to secure a development partner

·       Traffic congestion was a matter for Surrey County Council about which WBC would continue to engage with Haslemere Town Council and Surrey County Council

·       The houses would be retained by the Council and would be subject to Waverley’s allocation policy

·       The Council had to strike a balance to ensure that enough information would be available for the consultation to be meaningful

·       The Council was committed to engaging as openly and transparently as possible and had considered professional advice on a range of options, of which 5 were set out in the report; and

·       The Local Plan had already been the product of many years of consultation, and the Council was now progressing the delivery of its Corporate Strategy commitments, which included financial sustainability.

Executive Members’ statements in support of the recommendations included:

·       The site presented an opportunity for the Council to deliver its own housing development on a brownfield site, which would when completed provide jobs for local people

·       Residents and community groups  ...  view the full minutes text for item 160

The Overview & Scrutiny Committee – Resources is asked to consider the report and make any recommendations they deem appropriate to the Executive.

The recommendations to Executive and Council set out in Section 2 of the report.

85.1     The Executive Head of Regeneration and Planning Policy gave a presentation on the Fairground and Weydown Development Projects, with contributions from officers and John Percy of Montagu Evans.

85.2     The Chair highlighted the capital implications referred to in the recommendations to the Executive and Council, reproduced at paragraph 2 of the report.

85.3     Cllr Atkins asked whether massing studies had been carried out for the site and requested to see it if so. Officers confirmed that a massing study has been completed, that they want to maximise the opportunities offered by the site, and that 20 units is the minimum mandated by the Local Plan Part 2 allocations, though 32 has been profiled.

85.4     Cllr Atkins raised concern about the risk of being able to let the 20,000 square-foot unit on the ground floor and whether a client could likely still be confirmed. John Percy confirmed that building works would only commence after the occupier was signed up to the scheme and to the development arrangement with the development partner.

85.5     The Chair queried whether the plan to have housing above the supermarket unit is attractive to a supermarket client. John Percy confirmed that all arrangements are conditional on client sign-up to the scheme, and that regular engagement demonstrated that the site is a desirable one.

85.6     Cllr Atkins asked if a massing exercise document and explanation of the rationale for choosing this form of development could come before Council. John Percy clarified that the planning application would be undertaken by the development partner and that the contract papers would give attention to maximising value, with much of the risk for this passed to the market.

85.7     Cllr Atkins asked for clarity on what the nature of the third-party development partner would be. It was clarified that this would be specified by the competition material, but would likely be a developer, could also be the ultimate occupier, and that any partner would need to demonstrate that they could meet the necessary requirements.

85.8     Cllr Weldon asked if an option with no commercial component was investigated, and whether a study into impact of the area’s existing retail would be. Officers clarified that a mixed-use development was allocated by the Local Plan, and that no survey work has yet been undertaken into the impact on local retail, though officers are very mindful of this and that they would seek assurance that parking on the site could be used by local businesses to prevent adverse impact.

85.9     Cllr Nicholson noted the advantage of offering parking space to commuters, local workers and shoppers, and how the proposal would aid in achieving the aims of the Local Plan.

85.10   Cllr Merryweather reiterated that the Local Plan Part 2 determined that this be a mixed-use scheme, and that its delivery will allow the development of a youth campus, another allocated site within the plan. He added that thought was given to car parking provision, and that the project is still at an early stage.

85.11  ...  view the full minutes text for item 85