Delivery Board papers March 2011 by East Hampshire District Council

Delivery Board Meeting to be held on Tuesday 15th March 2011 from 2:30pm until 5:00pm Phoenix Theatre, Station Road, Bordon

A G E N D A

Welcome and introductions â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Chairperson (verbal) (5 mins)

Minutes of previous meeting and matters arising (attached) (page 3-14) (5 mins)

Public Questions â&#x20AC;&#x201C; to respond to any questions received in writing from the public (15 mins)

Verbal update from Ministry of Defence (MoD) in the light of the Defence Training Review (DTR) (5 mins)

Outcomes of the first meetings of the Specialist Groups (attached) (page 15-28) (20 mins)

Arrangements for recruiting the permanent chairman of the Delivery Board (paper attached) (page 29-38) (15 mins)

Transport Model and Rail Feasibility Study (paper attached) (page 39-57) (20 mins)

Economic Development and Employment Strategy Consultation – feedback required from Board members (document previously circulated) (10 mins)

Update from Landowners’ group (paper attached) (page 58-61) (10 mins)

10.

Project progress report - Paper from Eco-town Project Manager (attached) (page 62-75) (15 mins)

11.

Forward Programme - Dates of future Delivery Board meetings Wednesday 15th June – evening – time and venue tbc Tuesday 13th September – morning – time and venue tbc Thursday 15th December – 2:30pm – venue tbc - Items for future meetings To discuss items for future meetings (attached) (page 76) (5 mins) total time – 2hours 10

Exempt Items 12. To discuss a more detailed financial and project update report (to be circulated to Delivery Board members) 13.

Risk Register report (previously circulated to Delivery Board members)

Agenda item 2

Whitehill Bordon Delivery Board Meeting 7th December 2010 10:00 – Transition Room, Mill Chase school, Bordon Present: John Walker Cllr Andrew Joy Ian Parker

(JW) (AJ) (IP)

Daphne Gardner

(DG)

Kevin Bourner Cllr Adam Carew Richard Nelson Cllr Dr William Wain

(KB) (AC) (RN) (BW)

Interim Chairman Portfolio Holder EHDC Hampshire County Council (HCC) on behalf of Councillor Melville Kendal East Hampshire District Council (EHDC) (Project Director) Home and Communities Agency (HCA) Whitehill Town Council (WTC) MoD Defence Estates Whitehill Town Partnership

Also: Wendy Shillam Lydia Forbes-Manson Caroline Sayers Kate Hillerby Malcolm Perrins Simon Beach

(WS) (LFM) (CS) (KH) (MPe) (SJB)

EHDC EHDC EHDC EHDC EHDC EHDC

Item

Notes

Welcome and Introductions - Chairman

(Project Manager) (Communications & Marketing Officer) (Project Officer – Governance) (Funding Manager) (Theme Lead - Economic Development) (Project Coordinator)

Action

All members of the Delivery Board introduced themselves. For the benefit of the members of the public, the Chairman introduced the role and purpose of the Delivery Board. He explained that the Board’s focus would be on delivery of the vision for the project. The Board would have a focused and coordinated approach, would advise partners on the actions which the Board considered to be necessary, and would listen to the views of the community, and these will be channelled through the Specialist Groups and the Standing Conference.

Public Questions Questions were received from four members of the public. The questions were read out and answers given. As a result of two of the questions, a request was made to clarify points regarding Hogmoor Inclosure and Budds Lane. The questions and (revised) answers are appended to these notes.

Verbal update from Ministry of Defence MoD has confirmed that St Athan remains the preferred option for the relocation of the training carried out at Bordon Garrison. Richard Nelson told the meeting that MoD still wishes to consolidate training on one site. The most recent letter from MoD was read out. This letter is attached to these notes. A ministerial confirmation is due in the New Year. The Delivery Board requested as early a decision as possible, along with a timetable for the work/ move to St Athan.

Governance structure

4.1

Responding to comments on proposed Governance Structure

The Project Director introduced a report. This report summarises the main issues received during the feedback process. This feedback was then used to inform the proposed structure and how it works, along with three recommendations for the Delivery Board to consider. These are: 1- To ensure a close link between the Specialist Groups and Delivery Board, a Delivery Board representative will sit on each of the Specialist Groups as either the Chair or Vice Chair. 2- That the proposed structure with the current nominations remains for now. This structure will be reviewed in nine months. 3- To ensure that local and district councillors are involved, AJ is willing to convene a liaison group. Some members of the Board felt strongly that there must also be a local County Council representative and a local District Council representative, both from the Bordon area, on the Delivery Board. Others felt there were ample opportunities for local involvement in the new structure, through the Standing Conference and Specialist Groups, and that it was important to keep the Board small and focussed. The Chairman reminded members that the focus of the Delivery Board is the delivery of the project. Board Members need to be in a position to drive this delivery forward in the organisations which have nominated them to the Board. He said he was comfortable with the make-up of the Delivery Board as there are extensive opportunities for local and community involvement throughout the structure. He acknowledged however that local support for the delivery structure was important and for this reason the District and County Councils should be asked whether they felt that an additional representative on the Board would be useful. It was agreed that: (i) The Chairman on behalf of the Delivery Board would write to the District and County Council Leaders with a request that they consider additional local representation on the Board.

(ii) The Specialist Groups elect their own Chairman annually with a representative from the Delivery Board attending each Group. The Delivery Board member should be either Chairman or Vice Chairman.

All

(iii) The Delivery Board notes the offer of the District Council’s portfolio holder to convene a liaison group of local district councillors to facilitate their input to the project, but that this should be held over until the outcome of the request to the Councils regarding additional membership was clear.

Launch of the Governance Structure

4.2

The Project Director introduced her report outlining the suggested roles, terms of reference, membership and operation for the Delivery Board, Specialist Groups and Standing Conference. With reference to paragraph 2.1 and 2.3 of the report, it was confirmed that the Board has no legal standing and the only decision-making powers it has are in relation to its own workload and priorities. With reference to 5.3 of the report, membership of the Standing Conference, it was suggested that representatives from outside should not exceed representation from the town. One member felt there should be increased representation from the Town Council to address this balance. It was proposed that the launch of the governance structure will take place in the New Year. It is important to establish the Specialist Groups and develop a programme of work. This needs to be underway before the next Delivery Board meeting. It was proposed that the Specialist Groups should convene in February with the Standing Conference meeting taking place early March, prior to the next Delivery Board meeting. A suggestion was made that those recommendations that the previous PAGs had made to the old Executive Group need to be reviewed and updated at the first meeting of the new Specialist Groups. It was agreed: (i) That the role, membership and operation of the • Delivery Board • Specialist Groups • Standing Conference as set out in the report was agreed as a basis for the initial terms of reference for these groups.

Communications strategy The Communications and marketing officer gave a brief summary of the purpose of the report. It is important to take the team’s work into the community rather than expect the community to come to us.

Eco-coordinator

The community needs to be listened to. The Delivery Board needs to ensure that they take on board what councillors and the previous PAG groups say that the community wants. It was agreed: That the ‘Ecommunication’ document is approved and implemented to ensure that localism is at the very heart of regenerating Whitehill Bordon Eco-town.

LFM

Funding strategy The Funding Manager introduced her proposed draft Funding Strategy, which dealt with short term funding priorities. In due course, the strategy also needs to identify the viability gap the project is trying to close. From this, we can see what funding is required. The issue of developers’ contributions will also need to be addressed to show what part developers’ contributions may play in funding Eco-town projects. A suggestion was also made for an update and presentation to a future Board meeting on new sources of funding such as the New Homes Bonus. Some projects have started, others are getting underway – e.g. demonstration and community projects. Development will come once there is clarity of MoD’s position. Bordon is expecting large change when MoD goes – re-use of buildings etc. The funding strategy should tie into this work. It was suggested it would be useful to show how current government Ecotown money is being spent. It was agreed: That the Delivery Board adopts the Funding Strategy and calls for further updates at appropriate times.

Economic Development and Employment Strategy The Economic Development Theme Lead introduced his report and gave a brief summary of the purpose of the report which sets out proposals for developing an economic development and employment strategy. Planning for economic development is essential, and this has to happen along with infrastructure development and the development of housing in a coordinated way. It was noted that in 2.3.2 of report, there is mention of the need to create demand for houses, services and facilities. There is already a demand for new housing from the existing community.

The report did not detail key issues including training and education. It was confirmed this will be an integral part of the new strategy. The purpose of the report was to outline the suggested timetable and approach for approval by the Delivery Board. There is also an option for marketing the town using the Eco-town status and being a gateway to South Downs National Park. It was agreed that a marketing strategy is also needed, aligned with economic development priorities. It was agreed: The development of a draft Economic Development and Employment Strategy along the lines set out in the report was approved.

MPe

Landowners update report Richard Nelson introduced his report and gave a brief summary of it. Supply of land and funding for this work is fundamental to the success of the Eco-town. The landowners are keen to agree principles for sharing costs and revenues in an equitable way. The principal landowners will invite other landowners onto the Landowners’ Group. The Chairman was pleased that the landowners are already working together and stressed how useful an agreement could be to the successful delivery of the high standards required for the Eco-town. A Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) is in final draft and should be ready to present at the next Delivery Board meeting. A brief explanation of a Land Equalisation Agreement was given. It seeks to allow everyone to pool land and take a share of any returns, with the planning process dictating what goes where, rather than the landowners. The Board noted, welcomed and agreed the work of the Landowners’ group.

Project update report The Project Manager introduced her report and gave a brief summary of the purpose of the report. A request for neighbourhood consultation for the Whitehill Club and the Working Mens’ Club was made.

It was confirmed that for the Eco-station, tender documents were in preparation and it was hoped that the documents could go out to tender before Christmas. The first phase can open in the spring. Architects are in the process of being appointed for phase two.

For the Youth Drop In Centre, three sites have been proposed on a rotating basis. No date is set yet for when the centre will be open.

SJB

Transport studies are to be discussed at the March meeting.

10.

Verbal update on Department for Communities and Local Government Year 2 funding The Project Director confirmed the project received the year one funding from Department for Communities and Local Government (CLG) earlier this year. This was in the region of ÂŁ10 million. Year two funding will be a reduced amount. The Civil Servant concerned has been in discussion with the Project Director and has asked for an update on the project so that he can use this information to brief the minister. We have not been asked to put in a specific bid. The Project Director confirmed we need further funding for community projects and public transport; therefore we have repeated the need for this and are lobbying hard for money. We are hoping for a decision by the end of December. The Delivery Board will need to prioritise which projects to take forward.

11.

JW/ DG

Forward programme Dates for future Delivery Board meetings were noted. A paper which identified items that will need to be considered during future Delivery Board meetings was presented and discussed. The Project Officer will maintain a rolling forward programme of items for future meetings.

Exempt items 12.

Financial report The Board members reviewed up to date programme and budget information. The Board members then discussed and agreed the level of detail and content of information they would like to receive at future Board meetings in relation to project programming and budgeting information.

Appendix 1: Public Questions

Public Questions Liz Simes Question 1. Please could it be explained, how an ecotown or even the 'green town vision' can be deemed to be 'eco' where the masterplan proposes to build over the existing green spaces within the town.

2. The playing fields are being built on in the town. This recreation space is proposed to be replaced on the outskirts of the town at Standford Grange Farm. What evidence is there that this will not result in the greater use of motor vehicles travelling to SGF, given the distance from the new dwellings to the proposed facilities? 3. The Government are backing campaigns that increase our self sufficiency for reducing food miles. Why is the farm being included in the masterplan against the wishes of the community, the National Trust and Headley Parish Council.

4. Why was Headley Parish Councilâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s objection to the inclusion of Standford Grange Farm not communicated to Councillors?

5. Will the delivery board agree that the attendees of the new community groups, which will replace the PAGs, will be able to approve the minutes of the meetings that they attend? 6. Will the delivery board agree to meet outside of normal working hours which will enable more members of the public to attend?

Answer An Eco-town has to balance social, economic and environmental concerns. The intention is to develop the brownfield MoD land. Existing public open space within the town is not proposed for development under the masterplan. The proposals provide a further 127ha of new green space. Inevitably some space like private MoD playing fields may become school playing fields. All parts of the masterplan are open to future detailed consultation. The masterplan proposals show an increase in public playing fields. Our transport team are working on new proposals which will include providing non-car methods of getting to all public facilities wherever they are located. The evidence of traffic flows will be available in detail soon, when the multi-modal transport model is published. The masterplan supports and makes a provision for allotments. We recognise the local appreciation of the farm. The current masterplan proposals for Standford Grange Farm is it to be included under the Green Loop network as a publicly accessible open space. The brief for the Green Infrastructure Strategy includes consideration of maintenance of Standford Grange Farm as a farm. All objections have been given to officers who are dealing with them in the normal way. Council members have received a prĂŠcis of these objections and as you can see from the answer to 3. above further work is already responding to those comments. Action notes will be prepared to record the actions agreed by the new specialist groups; these will be agreed with the chairman of the group. It is the intention to hold Delivery Board meetings at different times of the day, including evenings, to suit as many people as possible.

Public Questions Alan Metcalfe Question 1. It having been confirmed that, inter alia, the creation of the green corridors, green spaces and, most importantly, employment opportunities must be in place before any development, what immediate "early win" steps do the Board propose in these respects?

2. Bearing in mind that a Habitat Regulation Assessment will be required of the final definitive proposals following completion of, at least, the currently awaited : - Economic and Employment Report. - Rail Feasibility Study. - Transport Study Report - Air Quality Report. - Viking Park Feasibility Study - Water, sewage treatment Reports - Renewable energy solutions report before any development can take place, what progress does the Board envisage in the next 12 months towards the initial steps for the delivery of an eco-town?

Answer Early wins already agreed with the old Executive Board and our funders, the Department of Communities and Local Government are listed in the Project Update which is a regular report to this committee. They are briefly grouped under the headings of creation of green corridors and green spaces, employment and economic development, community projects, infrastructure and masterplanning. 'Early wins' projects include a variety of biodiversity projects, the recruitment of a countryside ranger and a community worker which work within the boundary of the Ecotown. In addition we are committed to produce a Green Infrastructure Strategy and 2nd edition of the Local Biodiversity Action Plan (Wildlife of Whitehill) by May 2011. The delivery of further early projects will be guided by the priorities in each document in partnership with stakeholders. The Specialist Groups will be a key part of this process. Key progress expected within the next 12 months will be: Early wins projects as outlined above Completion of key reports Update of Habitats regulations Assessment Further Public Consultation Announcement from MoD â&#x20AC;&#x201C; anticipated in the New Year Publication of EHDC Core Strategy Agreement between Landowners Business plan for delivery Evidence from studies associated with the Masterplan will continue to inform the Habitats Regulations Assessment over the next 12 months. The following studies will be completed by May 2011: Water Cycle Study Energy Feasibility Study Transportation studies Biodiversity and Green Infrastructure Strategy Economic Development and Employment Strategy In addition the Green Infrastructure Strategy and 2nd Edition of Wildlife of Whitehill will be completed by May 2011.

The identification of additional work will be dependent on the completion of these documents and ongoing consultation with stakeholders. The Whitehill Bordon Masterplan also requires that an accompanying and fully aligned Economic Development and Employment Strategy is produced. It is envisaged that such a draft strategy will be produced for consideration by the Delivery Board at their 15th March 2011 meeting. A consultation draft of the strategy will be widely available during Spring 2011 and at least one event held to encourage active input from local businesses, training providers, business intermediaries, land holders and key infrastructure providers to ensure their full input into the Strategy’s development. The strategy will provide a framework for action plans that will: - assist the town’s employment base to further develop through both indigenous growth from existing assets, - improve its capability to attract additional local, regional, national and international companies by building on the town’s ‘green credentials’ and attractive setting, - assist to re-dress the current balance of outcommuting for employment, - encourage the development of a high quality and skilled local workforce, - encourage the supply and development of appropriate commercial land and employment locations.

3 As the proposed Specialist Groups are to have no power to make decisions, merely to make recommendations and suggestions to the Standing Conference, the Standing Conference is to have no power to make decisions, merely

The strategy development will be accompanied by specific actions including the opening of the Eco-station during 2011 that will provide a focus for exhibitions and events that will stimulate interest by the existing and investing businesses in developing sectors including lowcarbon energy and sustainable construction. During 2011 an Eco-grant scheme will be developed and launched to encourage existing employers to enhance their viability and improve their overall sustainability, for example; improved energy or resource efficiency. The governance structure aims to involve as many people as possible, to ensure that there is a strong focus on delivery and to influence all the partners and statutory agencies, not just EHDC.

to make recommendations and suggestions to the Delivery Board and the Delivery Board is to have no power to make decisions, merely to make recommendations and suggestions to East Hampshire District Council who will make any decisions, what is the purpose of the Delivery Board and the Standing Conference and would it not save considerable "bureaucracy" for the Specialist Groups to report direct to EHDC?

The power to make decisions still rests in the partner organisations who have statutory duties and resources to deliver. For example EHDC is the planning authority. The partnership â&#x20AC;&#x201C; represented by the Delivery Board â&#x20AC;&#x201C; is the arena where individual partners can come together to agree their collective strategies. The Delivery Board will take advice from the Standing Conference and the Specialist Groups, as well as from partners and their officers. It will be for the delivery board to agree strategic issues by consensus between the partners. This is a new structure. The systems are not cast in stone and will be reviewed and can be changed if better options come forward.

Public Questions Marilyn Metcalfe Question I have been a member of the Environment PAG since it was formed. I now read that part of the new structure is to be Sub Groups that would work in a similar way to the PAGs. Can you confirm that the Delivery Board will take notice of information the Sub Groups give to them, or will it be the same as with the PAG groups where nineteen pages of recommendations were made to the Executive Board, and nothing happened! Between April and September 2009 there were 23 meetings of PAGs, all of whom had made recommendations to the Executive Board and nothing came back. (EHDC Overview and Scrutiny Committee (Place) Minutes Wednesday 28th July 2010 page 6).

Suggested Answer Yes, Sub-Group (now to be called Specialist Groups) recommendations will come forward to the Delivery Board for their review and consideration. The Board will be commissioning work from the Specialist Groups and will be asking for their views, input and feedback. The Board wants to hear their expertise.

Public Questions Steve Parsons Question - The initial transport survey work on the A325 concluded that it would be overloaded by 46% during the peak evening rush hour as a result of the proposed development. It was a matter of considerable concern to me that an officer of Hampshire County Council who was introduced to us at a PAG, as the co-ordinator of the

Answer In order to provide a robust and credible transport evidence base against which the impact of the Eco-town proposals can be assessed a Transport Model is being created, based upon recent traffic and travel surveys, which will quantify the impact of the proposed development scenarios on the transport

transport plan, was unaware of this report or its findings. What evidence is there that demonstrates that the town and the surrounding minor, local roads will not become overwhelmed by traffic arising from the proposed development. If the answer to this question is that you don't know and are awaiting the results of further studies, would you agree that the decision on the eco-town should be delayed until these reports are available and you know how people will be affected by the development?

network, including both the local and strategic road networks. The Transport Model will inform the ongoing Transport Assessment work which will report in early 2011. This work will assess the likely impact of the proposals on the transport network and develop appropriate mitigation measures where necessary. No 'decision' is currently being made on the Eco-town. Any future decisions will be subject to the MoD decision on the availability of the land.

Appendix 2: MoD letter

David Olney MBA IET C.Eng Deputy Chief Executive Daphne Gardner, East Hampshire District Council, Penns Place, Petersfield, GU31 4EX

Ref: DE/CE 189/2010

Defence Estates 1st Floor St Georges Court 2 - 12 Bloomsbury Way London WC1A 2SH Telephone (MOD): Military: Mobile: Facsimile (MOD): E-mail:

+44 (0)20 305 3984 (9)6305 2984 +44 (0)7775 625097 +44 (0)20 305 4175 david.olney@de.mod.uk

November 2010

Dear Daphne FUTURE OF MOD LAND AT BORDON Following my previous letter sent on 27 October I thought I would take this opportunity to provide you with an update on MOD’s plans for its land at Bordon and the future proposals for the rationalisation of Defence Training. Firstly I would like to reiterate that the decision made regarding the termination of the Defence Training Review Package 1 (DTR P1) Project, taken back in October, does not automatically mean that the site will be retained. Moreover the termination of DTR P1 in its current guise does not necessarily mean there will be significant changes to the anticipated programme for the vacation of MOD Land at Bordon and therefore its availability for disposal. As mentioned in my previous letter the concept and aspirations of the DTR Project remain the same, it is the means of achieving this that are changing. Since the announcements in October we have been working hard to devise a new strategy and to create a new approach to the project. This ongoing work is a priority for the Department and accordingly it is anticipated that we should be a position to confirm MOD’s position regarding land at Bordon in the New Year. Hopefully this letter goes someway to reassuring you of our commitment to clarifying the Department’s position regarding land at Bordon and to confirm the intention to make it available for redevelopment. Should you wish to discuss the matter further I would be happy to do so or alternatively please feel free to contact Richard Nelson who is leading the work at Bordon on behalf of the Department. Yours sincerely,

David Olney Deputy Chief Executive

Agenda item 3

Whitehill Bordon Opportunity Delivery Board ______________________________________________________________ Date of meeting:

15th March 2011

Title of report:

Outcomes of the first meetings of the Specialist Groups

Author:

Eco Co-ordinator, Whitehill Town Council

Reference no: WBPD02-2011 ______________________________________________________________ Executive Summary: (Not more than 2 small paragraphs) This report sets out the proposals on work plan/priorities from the first meetings of the Specialist Groups. In addition the Specialist Groups reviewed the 2010 Policy Advisory Group recommendations to the former Whitehill & Bordon Opportunity Executive. This report also includes the Standing Conference comments.

Date: 3 March 2011 Version: 2

Status of Report: Public

K:\Corporate Shared Folders\Whitehill Bordon\011 Meetings\Delivery Board\2011 Meetings\110315-Meeting Partners: EAST HAMPSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL, HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN PARTNERSHIP, MINISTRY of DEFENCE, HOMES & COMMUNITIES AGENCY

Purpose of report: To inform the Board of the outcomes of the first meetings of the five Specialist Groups. Recommendations requiring Board considerations: 1. That the Delivery Board considers, agrees or amends the work plans/priorities of each of the Specialist Group, taking in consideration the Standing Conference comments 2. That the Delivery Board considers the comments of the Specialist Groups with regard to the review of the 2010 Policy Advisory Groupâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s recommendations, taking into account the Standing Conference comments 3. That the Delivery Board provides feedback on the above issues to the Specialist Groups. Consultation and comments received: Comments received from the Standing Conference

Community engagement proposals: These proposals have come from the community as all Specialist Groups are open to any member of the community to participate.

1 Background (reason for report) 1.1 The Governance structure was agreed at the Boardâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s meeting on 7 December 2010. This included the formation of the five Specialist Groups. All five of the Specialist Groups met for the first time in February 2011 and these are made up of former members of the Policy Advisory Groups, interested members of the community and specialists/professionals. 1.2 The Eco Co-ordinator sent information out to all Policy Advisory Group members asking if they wished to join any of the 5 groups and the Lead Officers of each group provided details of specialists who could be involved in the groups work. In addition, promotion took place in the local media to encourage residents to join the groups.

1.3 This report provides the Board with the outcomes of the meetings and requires that the Board considers the proposed work plans/ priorities and the review of the former Policy Advisory Groups 2010 recommendations. 2 Outcome of the Specialist Groups 2.1 The Chairman, Vice Chairman of the groups, membership, attendances and dates of arranged meetings are shown below.

Chairman

Community Facilities & Amenities

Infrastructure Sustainable Economic Housing & Transport Environment Development

Cllr Adam Carew Nigel Welch

Cllr Philip Drury Cllr Mel Kendal 58

Vice Chairman Current 43 Membership Attendance 26 at first meetings Dates of Tuesdays at meetings 7pm 10 May 5 July 1 November & 24 January 2012

Cllr Dr Bill Wain Cllr Dr Chris Wain 65

Derek Seale Cllr Andrew Joy 66

Stephen Miles Kevin Bourner 50

All meetings at 2pm 21 April Further day & dates to be determined

Tuesdays at 7pm 5 April 12 July 11 October & 17 January 2012

Tuesdays at 4pm 12 April 19 July 18 October & 31 January 2012

Thursdays at 7pm 14 April 14 July 27 October & 9 February 2012

2.2 The proposed work plans/ priorities of the five groups and the outcome of the review of the 2010 Policy Advisory Group recommendations are shown in Appendix 1. This includes a proposed name change for the Infrastructure & Transport Group to reflect the importance of Education. 2.3 The review of the 2010 Policy Advisory Groups recommendations to the Whitehill Bordon Opportunity Executive is shown in Appendix 2. 2.4 Issues for the Board to consider regarding the work plan/ priorities of the groups are: • •

How are cross cutting topics that cover several Groups e.g. green infrastructure, leisure hub/playing pitches, education site, skills centre, housing numbers etc to be handled? Prioritising the priorities e.g. which topics have the top priority (for those that have not set a timetable of work)?

•

Does the Board support the work plan/ priorities of the Specialist Groups?

2.5 The Standing Conference considered these issues on 2 March 2011 and raised the following points: • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Cross cutting issues - Retention of Budds Lane playing pitches if numbers of houses are reduced. Cross cutting issues – Green Infrastructure/Sites for Alternative Natural Green Space/Walking & Cycling/Playing Pitches. These cover several group responsibilities. Cross cutting issues – Energy efficiency and housing retrofitting. The Chairman & Vice Chairman should get the notes of all the Specialist Group meetings and discuss issues with the Lead Officers. Chairman of all Specialist Groups should meet, say once a quarter. Parameters of the project should be set to deal with the vast amount of detail and determine what areas need to be considered and their timetable. Concern expressed at sacrificial area for motor sports and this should be considered at the Sustainable Environment Group. The arrangement for setting up and managing sub groups/ working parties/ focus groups should be discussed. The need to know as a certainty that the MoD will leave the area. Don’t reinvent the wheel where there are existing organisations e.g. Community Transport. Extend membership of the Community Facilities & Amenities to include health representatives. Will the groups receive funding for their priorities. All existing homes should be retrofitted and funding should be sought for this. No priorities have been set for people with disabilities Inconsistency between Priorities and Policy Advisory group recommendations. Annington Homes is an overhang issue on if and when this land is developed. Children and young people should be a priority and this is not reflected in the groups work and it is important to engage with young people.

2.6 An essential ingredient of the governance structure is communication between the different governance layers, so it is important that the Delivery Board gives feedback to all the five Specialist Groups on their deliberations on the Specialist Groups proposed priorities and the review of the 2010 recommendations of the Policy Advisory Groups. 3 Risk assessment K:\Corporate Shared Folders\Whitehill Bordon\011 Meetings\Delivery Board\2011 Meetings\110315-Meeting Partners: EAST HAMPSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL, HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN PARTNERSHIP, MINISTRY of DEFENCE, HOMES & COMMUNITIES AGENCY

3.1 This demonstrates that the priorities are being developed by the community. 4 Contributions to Delivery Board Priorities 4.1 The main priority is to successfully regenerate Whitehill Bordon with engagement and involvement of the community. 5 Resource implications 5.1 The management of any topic/ sub groups/ working parties. 6 Cost implications 6.1 7 Conclusion 7.1 It is important to have the Specialist Groups at the heart of the Whitehill Bordon regeneration and the agreement of the work plan/ priorities is the first step in this process. 7.2 Once the work plan/priorities have been agreed, it is vital that there is a two way flow of information between the Delivery Board and the Specialist groups. 8 Appendix Appendix 1: Proposed Work Plan/ Priorities Appendix 2: Review of 2010 Policy Advisory Group Recommendations

APPENDIX 1: SUSTAINABLE ENVIRONMENT WORK PLAN/PRIORITIES

Priorities Monitoring

Education

Promotion

Efficiency

Low Carbon Living

Water

THEMES Green Infrastructure

Monitoring quality and treatment of water within the town as development takes place

Monitor pressure on Sites of Interest to Nature Conservation (SINC), for example restricted access to heath land from industrial areas kike Viking Park

Biodiversity

Energy

Waste & Minerals

Monitor the impact of rising fuel costs and affordability of alternative energy solutions on communities in fuel poverty Involvement with schools/education on all above topics Re-education required â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Green Champions, Countryside watch, pride in our town, arson awareness etc. Leading to a comprehensive approach on educating all communities on sustainability issues Further incentives needed for retro fitting.

The need for comprehensive surveys and monitoring throughout the development of Whitehill Bordon

Provision and management of sustainable wood supply to support alternative energy sources. Installation of energy efficiency

Installation of water efficiency

Promote more recycling activities

and conservation measures in existing town to reduce water demand Design & Management

measures to raise communities out of fuel poverty

Management â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Requires appropriate management/structure during early phases of development Restricted access routes to heath land to conserve conservation interest Connectivity Bus and access routes through the network should be green throughout Buffer zones for SINCs as well as Suitable Alternative Natural Green Spaces (SANGs) To design SANGs to meet standards and to determine the suitability of designs for different locations. New areas for SANGs

Revisit HRA with respect to housing numbers and density due to changes in government regulations

Design of anaerobic digester would be critical to secure community support within the planning process

Food

Encourage high level stewardship (HLS) schemes to minimise food miles

and SANGs for all users. What do people want from SANGs? Off road facilities required for Motor vehicles to prevent damage on sensitive sites Need appropriate sites for allotments across Whitehill Bordon

SINCs â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation SANGs â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Suitable Alternative Natural Green Space/ Suitable Accessible Natural Greenspace HLS High Level Stewardship

COMMUNITY FACILITY & AMENITIES WORK PLAN/PRIORITIES Leisure & Sports

Arts & Culture

Health

Sports Strategy & responding to needs for requirement for playing pitches/leisure/sports centre

Enhancement of Theatre/Art Centre as a hub for the community

Interconnected bridleways/footpath/open spaces/cycling Audit of existing facilities Recreational/leisure use of heathland access Funding a marketing strategy to secure private sector support to gym/leisure facilities Umbrella for community facilities so they do not compete Green Infrastructure – a sacrificial area for motor sports etc

Audit of existing facilities

Concerns about under use of Chase Hospital with expansion of Town Health needs survey

Arts Strategy Museum display for heritage Heritage Society study

Public art/street furniture/gateway feature

Generic priorities • Land ownership issues – Securing Bordon Oakhanger Sports Club and Phoenix Centre • Involvement/engagement of youth • Funding for quick win projects and ongoing support/lifecycle costs • Shared use of MoD sites • Co-location of facilities • Affordable & accessible facilities for existing residents • Grouping facilities together

Emergency Services

+ The need for a plan B if the MoD does not move Set up 4 sub groups and identify volunteers to work on priorities. INFRASTRUCTURE & TRANSPORT WORK PLAN/PRIORITIES Transport Work Work Area Walking and Cycling Strategy to include promoting access to appropriate land Parking Strategy Emerging Transport Strategy Freight Strategy Traffic Management Strategy to include a mitigation strategy for heavy traffic Sub-Regional Bus Links A325 / IRR / Urban Design Smarter Choices / PJP Monitoring Strategy

Programmed date May 2011 May 2011 May 2011 September 2011 September 2011 December 2011 December 2011 March 2012 March 2012

Education work Work Area Proposal for school sites â&#x20AC;&#x201C;to include the need to have a 0-19 strategy

Programmed date Autumn 2100 Other issues

Patient transport arrangements â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Joint meeting with Community Facilities & Community Specialist Group? Lessons to be learnt from other schemes on transport schemes

Ideas and outcomes from 3 other Eco Towns Impact on Special Protection Areas on increased traffic Inner relief road and layout – to be considered in urban design work Sub regional bus link and internal bus routes Brief reports required as to where the studies are Sub Groups are created to deal with above themes/topics That this Group should include Education in its title so it is: Infrastructure, Transport & Education Specialist Group ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT WORK PLAN/PRIORITIES • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Green Business Parks Public Sector Centre Centre for Alternative Technology Define 5/6 products for a marketing campaign and hold a Unique Selling Point workshop Working from home Re-use of redundant buildings Supporting Local Businesses Early regeneration – High visibility gateways on A325 Best practice Concessions/incentives for business Voice of young people/engage with them Form Working parties to develop priorities Skills Centre and apprenticeship schemes HOUSING WORK PLAN/PRIORITIES

• •

Four sub groups to be set up a) Retrofitting existing homes; b) New Housing (where, when and what); c) Types of residential development; d) Design of new houses Priority 1 – Housing Numbers to include infrastructure, wildlife damage, density v location, type of housing, redress the current imbalance, existing community retrofitting, attraction of business, to give priority to house local people first, range of housing (rented/social/private/lease/shared ownership/equity loan

• •

Priority 2 – Housing stock management, choice based lettings policy to allow people to move on and priority for local people, social mix, not to be a dumping ground Priority 3 – Issues regarding rented houses and impact on district landlords/restrictions/market mechanisms/type of houses, Impact of larger rented section landlords (Annington Homes)

APPENDIX 2: SPECIALIST GROUPS REVIEW OF 2010 POLICY ADVISORY GROUPS RECOMMENDATIONS The Groups recommend that the following are reiterated to the Delivery Board SUSTAINABLE ENVIRONMENT • • • • • • •

To organise a presentation by Graham Bryant on Dark Skies to a larger forum and a wider audience to include all Specialist Group members, EHDC planners and Members and Delivery Board members Use dimming technology in lighting of the Eco Town and explore LED lighting Include lighting policies and good practice in the design codes for the Eco Town Specify due consideration with regard to night environment That The Croft is surveyed To provide adequate and appropriate SANGS/Green Infrastructure before quick win houses are built To consider ways to co fund and pool resources to provide additional wardens/rangers and to learn from other locations where this works COMMUNITY FACILITIES & AMENITIES

• • • •

Retro fitting of community centres A list of quick wins and allocation of monies That Sports England are continually engaged in the provision of facilities That in the second tranche of quick wins, the following is implemented: £80,000 for The Pitch in the Woods, £150,000 for the Coniston play site, £285,000 for the Whitehill Club and £180,000 towards the costs of BOSC refurbishment project. INFRASTRUCTURE & TRANSPORT

• • • •

The requirement for a Skills Centre (but to broaden the ages it is for) and this group should consider this topic as well as the Economic Development Specialist Group An update needed on the Chase Children’s Centre The concern at the Budd’s Lane playing pitches if the new school is sited there The concerns of the number of potential crossing points of the new road

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

To endorse the need for a skills centre/Learning & Innovation Campus that needs to meet the needs of a wide age range HOUSING

To safeguard the current planning policy on Viking Park, if the Eco Town fails and to seek clarification on the planned number of houses for Viking Park That this PAG is involved in the development of the Town Design Statement That this PAG is consulted on the feasibility study of the Viking Park quick win and that the consultant appointed should attend this PAG Would like the Executive to note that the project at Bedzed was not entirely successful and we do not want to replicate those elements here that were less than successful. That the Housing Eco Town Theme Lead develops a local lettings plan in consultation with this PAG (or its successor) to ensure local people come first and for those that have a green ethos. It was further suggested that this should concentrate on intermediate rents for people wiling to purchase in the future. The letters of response received from the District Council, answering to the comments by the Policy Advisory Groups on the draft framework master plan, should be considered at the Specialist Groups meeting

Agenda item 6

Whitehill Bordon Opportunity Delivery Board ______________________________________________________________ Date of meeting:

15th March 2011

Title of report:

RECRUITING A CHAIRMAN FOR THE DELIVERY BOARD

Author:

Project Director

Reference no: WBPD03-2011 ______________________________________________________________ Executive Summary: The Delivery Board is currently chaired by an interim chairman, John Walker, whilst arrangements are put in place to recruit a more permanent chairman of the Board. This paper sets out a suggested process for recruiting and selecting a new chairman and suggests a draft job description and person specification.

Date: 4th March 2011 Version: 2

Status of Report: Public (Exempt or Public)

Purpose of report: To suggest to Delivery Board members a proposed timescale and process for the recruitment and selection of a more â&#x20AC;&#x153;permanentâ&#x20AC;? chairman of the Delivery Board.

Recommendations requiring Board consideration: That the Delivery Board:i) ii) iii)

Agrees the job description and person specification for the chairman of the Delivery Board as appended to this report. Agrees the suggested process for recruitment and selection of the new Chairman as set out in para 2.7 of this report. Considers whether to engage consultants to facilitate this process.

Consultation and comments received: The Standing Conference commented as follows: The Chairman should have recent hands-on experience of major regeneration in the UK; ideally should have knowledge of the local issues pertaining to Whitehill Bordon and should most probably be from the private sector. Community engagement proposals: Not appropriate

1 Background 1.1 The current chairman of the Board, John Walker, is an interim chairman pending the recruitment and selection of a more permanent chairman. Johnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s contract runs to the end of August so it is timely for the Board to agree the process and timescale for recruitment of his successor. 1.2 This report summarises the role and responsibilities of the chairman, suggests the type of person we should be looking to recruit and proposes a suggested process. 2 Subject of report / options and considerations 2.1 Having reviewed the way other similar groups/ boards/ committees have selected their chairmen, I suggest that the Board goes through a similar, objective process. Clearly we need to find a chairman who has the right skills, relevant experience, confidence and commitment to drive the delivery of the Eco-town project and chair the Delivery Board and Standing Conference meetings. i)

Role of the Chairman

2.2 I have tried to reflect the role of the Chairman in the job description attached as Appendix 1. 2.3 The job description draws on the role of the Delivery Board, the roles of its members, and the skills required of Board Members, as set out in the role and Terms of Reference agreed at the December meeting of the Board. 2.4 In addition to chairing the Delivery Board, the job also entails chairing the Standing Conference; liaising with key partners; representing and lobbying for the project at appropriate levels; providing advice, guidance and expertise on taking this major project forward; networking with relevant individuals, organisations and agencies. ii)

Person Required

2.5 I have attempted to reflect the skills, experience and knowledge required in the person specification attached as Appendix 2. 2.6 It is important that the Board is comfortable with the person specification as this specification will form the key part of the selection process.

iii)

Process for Recruitment and Selection

2.7 If Delivery Board Members agree, I suggest the following process for the recruitment and selection of the new chairman: •

Delivery Board confirm job description, person specification, timescale/process

•

Compile job pack and advertisement etc

•

Advertise in local papers, Hantsjobs and other appropriate media and promote amongst contacts

•

Closing date for applications (3-4 weeks after advert)

•

Shortlisting (2-3 weeks after closing date)

•

Agree shortlist with Delivery Board

•

Interviews

•

Confirm appointment at next Delivery Board

2.8 I suggest that the shortlisting of applicants is done initially against the person specification. This could be done by the chairman, project director and a member of human resources. The draft shortlist of those to be invited for interview would then be agreed with all the Board members prior to inviting candidates for interview. 2.9 I suggest the interview panel comprises all the Board members and that candidates are asked to make a presentation on a pre-agreed relevant topic to the interview panel, as well as answer interview questions. 2.10 Delivery Board members may wish to consider the use of consultants to facilitate the selection and recruitment process. The District Council, and other partner organisations, do from time-to-time, use consultants to ensure a robust, objective and fair process. Consultants generally charge £750-£1,000 a day for this work and it could take 3-5 days depending on what we asked the consultants to do. iv)

Timescale for Recruitment and Selection

2.11 John Walker’s current contract for his role as interim Chairman of the Board ends in August 2011. However, I am aware that because of delays in the Defence Training Review announcement, Board members feel it would be helpful if John could extend his contract with us. John K:\Corporate Shared Folders\Whitehill Bordon\011 Meetings\Delivery Board\2011 Meetings\110315-Meeting Partners: EAST HAMPSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL, HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN PARTNERSHIP, MINISTRY of DEFENCE, HOMES & COMMUNITIES AGENCY

has indicated he would be willing to do this. This will obviously impact on when the Board needs to recruit a new chairman. 2.12 At the time of drafting this report I am investigating this matter and will update Board members at the meeting. v) Remuneration of Chairman 2.13 It seems to be fairly common practice to pay a remuneration to someone who holds a position such as this. John Walker will confirm that the role involves a considerable amount of background work, reading, holding meetings etc in addition to the work directly associated with the Delivery Board and Standing Conference meetings. John estimates he typically undertakes approximately one day’s work a week in his role as interim chairman. This is not untypical. 2.14 I have reviewed the remuneration made to others undertaking similar types of roles and these vary tremendously from under £10,000 to £100,000! 2.15 I suggest that Delivery Board Members agree the remuneration for the new chairman when we have determined the timescale for recruitment. This will enable the “going rate” at the time. vi) Length of Contract 2.16 This can also be agreed with Board members at the time of recruitment when we have full information on the release of the MoD land. 3 Risk assessment 3.1 The risks of not appointing a highly competent and effective Chairman are profound. The effective operation of the Delivery Board (and Standing Conference) is crucial to the success of this project and the delivery of the Eco-town. 3.2 I believe the proposals outlined in this report will minimise these risks. 4 Contributions to Eco-town objectives 4.1 The chairman of the Board will play a pivotal role in ensuring Eco-town objectives are met. 5 Resource implications 5.1 The resources required to achieve the selection and appointment of a chairman are the time of the Delivery Board members, human resources staff and the project director. 6 Cost implications K:\Corporate Shared Folders\Whitehill Bordon\011 Meetings\Delivery Board\2011 Meetings\110315-Meeting Partners: EAST HAMPSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL, HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN PARTNERSHIP, MINISTRY of DEFENCE, HOMES & COMMUNITIES AGENCY

6.1 The cost of recruiting to this post and the remuneration paid to the chairman can be met from the existing Eco-town budget for the next two years. 7 Appendix Appendix 1: Job Description Appendix 2: Person Specification

APPENDIX 1 to Report WBPD03/2001

JOB DESCRIPTION DELIVERY BOARD CHAIRMAN JOB TITLE:

Chairman, Whitehill Bordon Eco-town Delivery Board

POST NUMBER: JOB PURPOSE:

To chair the Delivery Board which has been established to oversee delivery of the Whitehill Bordon Eco-town project, which will generate investment of well over £1bn over the next 10/15 years; to chair the Standing Conference which provides community input to and comments on the work of the Board and the Specialist Group. The Delivery Board and Standing Conference are key elements of the governance arrangements for this project. The role, terms of reference, membership and operation of the Board, the Standing Conference and the Specialist Groups are attached to this job description.

DIMENSIONS: • • • • • • •

Quarterly public meetings of the Delivery Board. Quarterly public meetings of the Standing Conference. Regular informal meetings with Board members. Occasional meetings with key partner organisations. Monthly meetings with Project Director. Weekly telephone conference calls with Project Director. Approx one day of reading a week.

ORGANISATIONAL STRUCTURE: The governance structure is set out in the attached structure chart. PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTABILITIES 1. Provide effective leadership by promoting a delivery culture for the Board and motivating Board members to deliver the partnership’s objectives through their organisations. 2. Chair the quarterly meetings of the Delivery Board and Standing Conference ensuring strong leadership is given to meetings and that they are run effectively and efficiently.

3. Ensure the Board operates strategically and effectively in delivering the vision through its members, and ensure that stakeholders, the public and advisory group views are properly represented. 4. Agree the work programme for the Board, agree agendas and minutes; comment on draft papers being submitted to meetings. 5. Convene meetings with key partners to facilitate the delivery of the Eco-town project and the smooth operation of the Board. 6. Contribute relevant ideas, expertise and experience to facilitate this major regeneration project. Advise the Project Director and Board members on actions needed to deliver the project. 7. Work with the Project Director to develop a Business Plan and work programme to guide the Boardâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s work. 8. Ensure the highest levels of probity and governance in matters considered by the Board.

APPENDIX 2

to Report WBPD03/2001

PERSON SPECIFICATION JOB TITLE: Chairman, Whitehill Bordon Eco-town Delivery Board EDUCATIONAL/PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS AND KNOWLEDGE Essential:

Knowledge of the issues involved in delivering a major regeneration project.

Desirable:

Knowledge of best practice in the delivery of such projects.

EXPERIENCE Essential:

Experience of chairing meetings of boards or committees comprising representatives with differing aspirations.

Desirable:

Extensive experience in leading/managing the delivery of a major regeneration project. Experience of evolving governance arrangements for major regeneration projects, especially different models of delivery vehicle.

SKILLS AND ABILITIES Essential:

Ability to deal with issues with objectivity and impartiality. Diplomatic and tactful. Strong interpersonal skills. Capacity for clear thinking, objectivity and impartiality. Ability, where appropriate, to take an independent view which may vary from other members of the Board.

Desirable:

PERSONAL QUALITIES/ATTRIBUTES/APTITUDES Essential:

Must be of good standing in the community. Be a person of high integrity. Not actively involved with a political party or an elected member of a Council. Resilient and hardworking. Committed to the principles of Eco-towns.

A capable networker. Desirable:

OTHER REQUIREMENTS (e.g. driving licence or transport; ability to lift heavy loads; attendance at evening meetings; political awareness etc. - donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t forget to remove this italicised text in your final drafted JD - it is only intended to give you an idea of what might be appropriate to include in this section depending upon the nature of the job) Essential:

Available to attend meetings in Bordon and elsewhere during the daytime and evening. Available to provide advice and guidance to the Project Director and Members of the Delivery Board.

Desirable: Date:

March 2011

Review Date: Prepared by:

Daphne Gardner

Agenda item 7

Whitehill Bordon Opportunity Delivery Board ______________________________________________________________ Date of meeting:

15 March 2011

Title of report:

Transport model and rail feasibility study

Author:

Transport Theme Lead

Reference no: WBPD05-2011 ______________________________________________________________ Executive Summary: (Not more than 2 small paragraphs) The Whitehill Bordon Rail Study Option Selection Report (Grip 2) has now been completed and its findings are reported here to the Delivery Board. The Study rules out all but one of the considered options for heavy rail connection, and rules out all light rail / Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) alternatives to heavy rail. None of these options generate sufficient value for money for them to be considered further. The Study does find a sufficiently positive business case at this stage for the Heavy Rail through service from Whitehill Bordon to Bentley for this route option to be considered to Grip 3 Development stage. This option provides the least environmental impact, the best economic and financial case and would be deliverable in engineering and operational terms, subject to availability of funding. No funding is currently available for this scheme. The Transport Evidence Base is being developed to consider the potential transport impacts of the Whitehill Bordon Eco-town. Work is progressing, comprising the development of a Transport Model and the completion of a Transport Assessment. Current progress on this work and next steps are reported here to the Delivery Board.

Date: 03/03/2011 Version: 2

Status of Report: (Exempt or Public)

Public

Purpose of report:

This report is provided to update the Delivery Board on two major studies which are being carried out to inform the evidence base supporting the Ecotown proposal and to inform the emerging Transport Strategy. Rail Feasibility Study â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Assessment of the socio-economic business case for direct rail connection to the town. Transport Evidence Base â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Development of a Transport Model and Transport Assessment to assess the potential impact of development on the local highway network, surrounding communities and environment. The report seeks to increase the understanding of the Delivery Board on these two studies, provide the latest information on current progress and to set out the next steps to be carried out. Recommendations requiring Board considerations:

1. That the Delivery Board Note the content of the Whitehill Bordon Ecotown Rail Study Option Selection Report (Grip 2) 2. That the Delivery Board support the continuation of the Study to Grip 3 Development for the preferred option of a Heavy rail link from Whitehill Bordon to Bentley on receipt of the additional funding required to complete the work from DCLG 3. That the Delivery Board note the work undertaken on the transport evidence base and the next steps proposed Consultation and comments received: Presentations of the rail study and current work on the transport evidence base were given to the Standing Conference on 2 March 2011. This work will be considered in further detail during the future Infrastructure and Transport Specialist Groups.

Community engagement: Rail Study The Whitehill Bordon Eco-town Rail Study Option Selection Report (Grip 2) did not include significant community engagement as this is a technical study. K:\Corporate Shared Folders\Whitehill Bordon\011 Meetings\Delivery Board\2011 Meetings\110315-Meeting Partners: EAST HAMPSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL, HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN PARTNERSHIP, MINISTRY of DEFENCE, HOMES & COMMUNITIES AGENCY

Key Stakeholders including Network Rail and the current local train operating company, South West Trains, have been involved throughout the study and formed part of the project group. The Grip 3 Development Study will include greater community engagement and involvement as the detail of the preferred routing option is considered in greater detail. Full proposals for community engagement will be agreed with the consultants during study inception. Transport Evidence Base The Transport Evidence Base is a technical study which uses quantitative survey data and industry standard modelling techniques to estimate future travel movement patterns and to provide a quantitative assessment of any impacts. No community engagement was specifically undertaken as part of this work, but the survey results capture local movements. Progress on the work has been reported regularly to the Specialist Group and previously the PAG. The transport assessment will identify proposals which will form part of the transport strategy for the Eco-town. Consultation on the transport assessment and modelling findings will be undertaken in due course and when the work is complete. Both of these studies result from community consultation which re-iterated the need for transport to be closely considered. When completed, both of these studies will be publicly available from the Whitehill Bordon Web-site. 1 Background (reason for report) 1.1

This report provides the findings of the Whitehill Bordon Eco-town Rail Study Option Selection Report (Grip 2) in advance of proceeding with work to Grip 3 Development.

1.2

This report is provided to update the Delivery Board on the current work ongoing to provide a sound and robust Transport Evidence Base for the proposed Eco-town development.

2 Transport Studies Updates 2.1

Grip 2 Rail Study Option Selection Report

2.1.1 The emerging Transport Strategy for the Whitehill Bordon Eco-town provides the strategic vision for future transport where the Eco-town will; â&#x20AC;&#x153;Achieve sustainable growth in the long term by delivering an integrated low carbon transport system that will be at the forefront of innovative thinking, providing high-quality, affordable and deliverable K:\Corporate Shared Folders\Whitehill Bordon\011 Meetings\Delivery Board\2011 Meetings\110315-Meeting Partners: EAST HAMPSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL, HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN PARTNERSHIP, MINISTRY of DEFENCE, HOMES & COMMUNITIES AGENCY

alternatives to the private car, managing transport demand and maximising the use of existing assets to become an example for modern day sustainable living” 2.1.2 The emerging transport strategy sets out its key objectives to deliver this vision, seeking to; • • • • • •

Support exemplar sustainable economic regeneration and town growth. Improve the environment by reducing congestion and pollution. Enable sustainable movement by developing high quality public transport, walking and cycling alternatives to the private car. Balance the needs for people to travel against the importance of protecting the environment. Reduce journey length and the need to travel outside of the town. Manage car demand within, through and outside of the town maximising the use of existing assets.

2.1.3 With the current levels of public transport provision in the town, the planned increases in population, and consequently travel demand, would be unsustainable, would go against the principles of Eco-towns, and could create significant traffic impacts on the local and regional roads. 2.1.4 In order to deliver these objectives and the Vision, and to minimise the impacts of development, consideration into significant improvements to public transport alternatives to the private car are necessary. The County Council undertook a Rail Pre-Feasibility Study in 2010 which provided a high-level desk-top assessment of potential rail routings to connect to the town. 2.1.5 Following the findings of this work, and on receipt of Eco-town grant funding from DCLG for the progression of the rail study, the County Council commissioned specialist consultants to appraise the socioeconomic business case for direct rail connection to the town in accordance with industry standards and government guidelines. The work follows the Network Rail Grip processes and on completion will provide stages 2 and 3 of the 6 stage Grip process. 2.1.6 The Whitehill Bordon Rail Study Option Selection Report (Grip 2) has now been completed and its findings are reported here. Study Approach 2.1.7 The Grip 2 Study considered a range of sustainable transport solutions for the town, and considered heavy rail, tram / light rail and Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) systems in order to appraise the business case for each and to identify the most cost-effective solution. K:\Corporate Shared Folders\Whitehill Bordon\011 Meetings\Delivery Board\2011 Meetings\110315-Meeting Partners: EAST HAMPSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL, HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN PARTNERSHIP, MINISTRY of DEFENCE, HOMES & COMMUNITIES AGENCY

2.1.8 The Study considered the following routing options for heavy rail; -

Route ML1 – Whitehill Bordon to Bentley heavy rail Route ML2 & ML2a – Whitehill Bordon to Liss Route ML4 – Whitehill Bordon to Liphook heavy rail Route ML5 – Whitehill Bordon to Alton heavy rail

2.1.9 The Study also considered a combination of heavy rail route options, so the connected routes from Bentley to Liphook and Liss via Whitehill Bordon, and for Alton to Liphook and Liss via Whitehill Bordon. 2.1.10 The Study considered these route options both in terms of ‘throughservices’, and as ‘shuttle services’ to each station which would then require making a connection to existing mainline services. 2.1.11 The Study Considered the following routing options for light rail / BRT options; -

Route LR1 – Whitehill Bordon to Bentley light rail / BRT Route LR2 & LR2a – Whitehill Bordon to Liss light rail / BRT Route LR3 – Whitehill Bordon to Liphook light rail / BRT Route LR4 – Whitehill Bordon to Alton light rail / BRT Route LR6 & LR6a - Whitehill Bordon to Farnham light rail / BRT

2.1.12 The study was carried out in accordance with Network Rail’s investment guidelines (the Grip process) and the Department for Transport’s (DfT) appraisal guidance. The object of using these guidelines is to filter out solutions that would not achieve the required value for money criteria specified by Government for public funding, should funding become available for this project at some stage in the future. 2.1.13 Specifically, the Study considered the following areas in detail; -

Policy Integration of delivering the options. Operational issues associated with connecting to existing rail lines. Environmental planning considerations of each route option. Engineering constraints in delivering the route options. Cost estimation of each route option. Demand forecasting for each route option. Economic appraisal of each route option.

Study Findings 2.1.14 Bearing in mind all factors considered, the study shows that the preferred option at this stage is the heavy rail through-route to Bentley which, once the Eco-town is built out, could potentially generate up to 1 million trips per annum with through services to London Waterloo. With a capital construction cost of £130 million, this generates a Benefit to Cost ratio of 2.14, which suggests the scheme would provide ‘High’ K:\Corporate Shared Folders\Whitehill Bordon\011 Meetings\Delivery Board\2011 Meetings\110315-Meeting Partners: EAST HAMPSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL, HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN PARTNERSHIP, MINISTRY of DEFENCE, HOMES & COMMUNITIES AGENCY

value for money when considered against the DfT criteria. This option provides the least environmental impact, the best economic and financial case and would be deliverable in engineering and operational terms, subject to availability of funding. 2.1.15 Whilst the capital cost of construction is in the region of £130 million, the total cost (including land purchase, Transport and Works Act, public enquiries, legal costs etc.) is estimated to be in the order of £169 million at this stage. The Benefit to Cost ratio of 2.14 is based on this higher total cost figure. 2.1.16 The routes to Liphook and Liss are significantly less attractive due to the lower levels of daytime off-peak service frequency at these stations added to the increased environmental constraints to the south east of Whitehill Bordon. 2.1.17 Alton may well be the most viable in terms of railway operations (creating the least impact on existing services) but the costs of delivering a rail line to Alton due to the topography are almost double that of connecting to the mainline railway at either Bentley, Liphook or Liss. This route would require construction of a tunnel of some 2.5km. 2.1.18 None of the potential light rail or BRT options exhibit a sufficiently positive Benefit to Cost Ratio due to longer journey times, relatively high infrastructure costs in relation to demand, and in the case of the light rail, the need to acquire and maintain a fleet of bespoke vehicles. Key Considerations 2.1.19 In respect of delivering a rail service to Whitehill Bordon at some time in the future, there is currently no funding identified. As part of the Grip 3 study, the consultants will be required to investigate potential funding streams, both public and private, and to consider possible mechanisms for implementing the scheme. 2.1.20 The study work relies upon a number of assumptions made regarding land use, quantum of development, wider economic benefits, phasing of infrastructure provision and fare level increases. Sensitivity work was undertaken as part of the study which considered different land use numbers and phasing and demonstrates that in order to provide ‘High’ value for money, the demonstrates that should the Eco-town development comprise lower than the maximum 5,300 dwellings, then the value for money reduces below a level of 2:0. This will need to be considered in greater detail during the Grip 3 development work. 2.1.21 Conversely, in considering the option for links to Bentley the Study recognises that should single track be acceptable from an operational point of view, costs significantly reduce and value for money increases. This will need to be studied further on Grip 3 Development. K:\Corporate Shared Folders\Whitehill Bordon\011 Meetings\Delivery Board\2011 Meetings\110315-Meeting Partners: EAST HAMPSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL, HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN PARTNERSHIP, MINISTRY of DEFENCE, HOMES & COMMUNITIES AGENCY

Next Steps 2.1.22 The report recommends that only the Whitehill Bordon to Bentley heavy rail link is taken forward for further consideration as part of the Grip 3 Development Study. It is proposed that on receipt of the second tranche of grant funding that the Grip 3 Development Study is progressed. 2.2

Transport Evidence Base

2.2.1 The County Council have commissioned the preparation of a Transport Assessment (TA), which together with a transport model, forms a key part of a robust and credible evidence base to support proposals for the potential re-development and regeneration of Whitehill Bordon as an Eco-town. 2.2.2 The TA forms part of the evidence base that will support the future allocation of Whitehill Bordon as an Eco-town and major development in the area within the East Hampshire District Council (EHDC) Local Development Framework (LDF) Core Strategy, and will support future planning applications for major development in the town. 2.2.3 A Steering Group has been established to guide this work which comprises Hampshire County Council (HCC), EHDC, the Highways Agency and Surrey County Council. The Highways Agency is responsible for Trunk Roads, which includes in this case the A3, whilst Surrey County Council is the adjacent highway authority responsible for the management of roads in Surrey. Model development 2.2.4 A Saturn Highway Model has been developed in accordance with DfT requirements. The model utilises recent travel survey data collected specifically for this work and carried out in late 2009. 2.2.5 The model replicates existing traffic conditions and has been validated and calibrated against industry standards, particularly Webtag guidelines. The baseline model meets all necessary standards and validates well. This can therefore be considered sound to undertake future year testing. 2.2.6 A Public Transport Model has been developed and integrates with the Saturn Highway Model. Collectively, these represent the Transport Model. 2.2.7 The Transport Model estimates future travel demand using the National Trip End Model which is an accepted form of future travel estimation. This calculates the level of total person trips that will be generated by the proposed development across all modes, so by car, walking, cycling and public transport. K:\Corporate Shared Folders\Whitehill Bordon\011 Meetings\Delivery Board\2011 Meetings\110315-Meeting Partners: EAST HAMPSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL, HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN PARTNERSHIP, MINISTRY of DEFENCE, HOMES & COMMUNITIES AGENCY

2.2.8 The Transport Model then uses the patterns of travel surveyed in late 2009 and other information collected to estimate future travel patterns and distribution. The model assigns this distributed traffic, by mode, to particular routes within the network based upon the generalised costs of the available network links (so the speed and distance of a link for example) 2.2.9 The model has been integrated with the model prepared for the Hindhead tunnel and as such all work considers the network which is adjusted for the impacts of the Hindhead tunnel opening. 2.2.10 The model includes future year growth factors to account for trends in car ownership and usage, and includes estimations of future development growth locally. The future years for the model are 2026 and 2036 in line with the LDF and masterplan. Model Scope 2.2.11 The Transport Model has an extensive scope that has been agreed with the key stakeholders. The model includes Whitehill Bordon itself, but also the surrounding transport networks (including the A31 at Alton and Farnham, the A3, the A287 and the A325). In addition, the model includes within its scope local roads to ensure that the potential impact on local communities can be properly assessed. 2.2.12 The Transport Model is therefore able to quantify the potential impact of development at a wide number of local communities including Selborne, Alton, Kingsley, Worldham, Oakhanger, Lindford, Churt, Headley, Headley Down, Greatham, Liphook, Liss, Standford, Passfield, Hindhead, Grayshott, Blackmoor, and further a field at Wrecclesham, Farnham, Rowledge. 2.2.13 The Model also takes into account the location of environmentally protected sites locally, including both Special Protection Areas and Special Areas of Conservation. The results of the Transport Modelling work are being fed directly into the ongoing work on the Habitats Regulations Assessment which will consider the potential impact of traffic flow changes on these European Designation Sites. 2.2.14 The scope of the model network is shown below;

Development Scenarios 2.2.15 In accordance with the masterplan, the Transport Evidence Base work has considered a number of different development scenarios in order to understand the impact of development and to provide a comparative assessment. The scenarios are; • Baseline - do nothing scenario for comparative purposes incorporating general traffic growth and committed developments. • Option 1 (Masterplan) – 4,000 residential dwellings & employment to support 5,500 jobs • Option 2 (Upper Masterplan) – 5,300 residential dwellings & employment to support 6,800 jobs • Option 3 (Phase 1 Masterplan) – 1,700 residential dwellings & employment to support 3,200 jobs • Option 4 – (Fall-back Scenario) – based upon the potential re-use of existing MoD buildings for non-MoD uses. The estimated land uses reflect those currently in use by the MoD or are permitted changes in accordance with the Use Classes Order.

2.2.16 In addition to the above, a number of mode share and trip containment targets and proposals for the existing A325 in the town centre have been established through the master planning process. These have been combined with the proposed development options above to establish a number of scenario iterations to be tested within the Whitehill Bordon transport model to assess the transport impacts of a range of potential development outcomes. 2.2.17 The modelling will be considering three car mode share targets of 25%, 50% and 75%. 75% is broadly the level of car mode-share attained in the town at present, 50% correlates with the Eco-towns PPS and the 25% represents the higher low carbon ambition of the project. The work is also considering two targets for trip containment at 30% and 50%. Trip containment is the proportion of travel demand that is retained within Whitehill and Bordon. 2.2.18 In addition to the mode share and containment targets, the model is testing three options for the A325; •

Do Nothing – This scenario assumes that the A325 remains as it currently is, but that the inner relief road provides an alternative routing option.

•

A325 Traffic Management – This option applies traffic management measures within the A325 at the town centre to create a slow speed shared space environment. This reduces the convenience of the link to motorists.

•

A325 Public Transport Only – This option assumes the A325 is physically restricted in the town centre to public transport and non-car modes. In this option through traffic would therefore be re-distributed to alternative routes.

Modelling Approach 2.2.19 The proposed traffic impact assessment methodology comprises a high-level assessment of the four alternative proposed development scenario options for both 2026 and 2036 forecast years. The high-level assessments will consist of traffic flow, link capacity and delay outputs from the Whitehill Bordon Transport Model, compared with outputs from appropriate baseline scenarios. 2.2.20 Further high-level assessments will be undertaken to assess the impacts of the various mode share, trip containment and A325 treatment iterations for development scenario Option 1 in the future year 2026. The outputs of these further high-level assessments will again consist of traffic flow, link capacity and delay outputs from the Whitehill Bordon Transport Model compared with outputs from the 2026 baseline scenario. K:\Corporate Shared Folders\Whitehill Bordon\011 Meetings\Delivery Board\2011 Meetings\110315-Meeting Partners: EAST HAMPSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL, HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN PARTNERSHIP, MINISTRY of DEFENCE, HOMES & COMMUNITIES AGENCY

2.2.21 Detailed junction assessments of a number of identified key junctions will then be undertaken for the development scenario Option 1 ‘worst case’ scenario iteration for the future year 2026, which includes 75% car mode-share and 30% containment. The junction assessment results will be compared with results of junction assessments for the 2026 baseline scenario. The sensitivity of these junction assessments to changes in mode-share and containment will be considered. Transport Assessment 2.2.22 The Transport Assessment is being undertaken in accordance with Best Practice including particularly the DfT 2007 ‘Guidance for Transport Assessment’. The Transport Assessment (TA) utilises the quantitative results provided by the Transport Model to provide a comparative assessment of potential transport impact of the Eco-town. The TA will; • Consider the development proposals with regard to national and local planning and transport planning policies. • Provides a description of the existing conditions, transport infrastructure and movement patterns within the Whitehill Bordon area. • Set out the various proposed development scenarios which will be assessed within the TA, including the identified targets for mode share, trip containment and options to divert traffic from the A325 within the town centre. • Set out the range of measures which could potentially be implemented in Whitehill Bordon to meet the target mode share and trip containment targets for the town. • Provide a summary of the methodology used to determine the generation and distribution of person trips as a result of the various proposed development scenarios onto the highway and public transport networks. Also taking into account the background growth of traffic and other significant developments in the surrounding area. • Assess and present the impacts of the proposed development scenarios in terms of traffic flow on particular links adjacent to European Special Protection Areas, junction capacity analysis at identified key junctions and area wide network performance. High Level Traffic Assessment – Initial Findings 2.2.23 Initial test runs have been carried out using the Transport Model to consider the impact of the different development scenarios outlined in K:\Corporate Shared Folders\Whitehill Bordon\011 Meetings\Delivery Board\2011 Meetings\110315-Meeting Partners: EAST HAMPSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL, HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN PARTNERSHIP, MINISTRY of DEFENCE, HOMES & COMMUNITIES AGENCY

Paragraphs 2.2.15 – 2.2.18. The results are currently being considered by the Project Group before sign-off and release for wider consideration. This includes the Highways Agency and Surrey County Council as adjacent Highway Authority. 2.2.24 These results of the high-level testing will be summarised within a ‘Key Findings Report’ and within the detailed TA and will be made available in due course. Initial findings of the work are presented here; •

The results of the initial high-level assessments follow an expected pattern whereby the traffic flow through the key junctions increases or decreases in proportion to the difference in size of the development proposals within each scenario. For example, the greatest traffic impacts would be observed if development Option 2 (upper masterplan option - 5,300 dwellings) were implemented as this represents the largest quantum of development.

•

The most significant impacts in terms of increase in traffic flow as a result of the development scenarios would occur on the junctions on the A325 to the north and south of the proposed inner relief road as this route would remain as the principal route for north/south traffic connecting to the strategic road network and surrounding settlements.

•

The most significant impacts in terms of decrease in traffic flow as a result of the development scenarios would occur on the junctions on the A325 within Whitehill Bordon town centre as a result of the implementation of the proposed inner relief road.

•

The traffic impact of the various development scenarios lessens the further from the development a particular junction is located as greater choice and opportunities for alternative routes are provided to motorists.

•

The results of the assessments indicate that the traffic impact of the development scenario iterations generally decreases as the level of non-car mode share and trip containment increases across all of the A325 treatment iterations, as would be expected.

•

The difference in traffic impact at the key junctions between the alternative A325 treatments would generally only be moderate. The ‘A325 Public Transport only’ option would result in the lowest traffic flows along the A325 in the town centre although would cause congestion issues at B3004/Oakhanger Road junction as a result. The ‘A325 Do Nothing’ option would result in a more even split of traffic between the A325 and proposed inner relief road. The ‘A325 Traffic Management’ treatment would represent a ‘middle-ground’ option whereby a greater split of traffic would be encouraged to use the proposed inner relief road providing a low trafficked town centre without as significant impacts on surrounding junctions.

2.2.25 In order to provide further assessment of the traffic impact of each of the potential development scenarios on the surrounding highway network further outputs have been derived from the Whitehill Bordon Transport Model. Each of the scenario tests were compared with baseline conditions to compare changes in traffic flow, journey time, and traffic volume over capacity on key links within the study area. The further outputs of the transport model indicate the following: •

The most significant impacts in terms of increased traffic flow and congestion on the modelled highway network would occur within the development scenarios which contain a car mode share iteration of 75%, as would be expected, particularly within the scenarios which also contain a trip containment iteration of 30%.

•

The traffic impacts of the development generally lessen as the level of non-car mode share and trip containment increases.

•

The most significant traffic impacts of the development proposals would occur on links along the existing A325 to the north and south of Whitehill Bordon and the proposed relief road link within the town centre would experience a significant increase in traffic within each peak period.

•

Moderate increases in traffic flow would be experienced on the surrounding road network, particularly on the A31, A3, B3002, B3004 and B3006 links. Within all of the development scenarios and all peak highway periods, the A325 within Whitehill Bordon town centre would experience varying levels of decreased traffic flow as a result of the proposed relief road providing an alternative to this route.

•

The greatest impacts in terms of link capacity in forecast year 2026 would occur within Development Option 1 - 75% car mode share/30% trip containment/A325 Do Nothing. Within this scenario four northbound links on the A325 to the north of Whitehill Bordon would operate over full capacity during the AM peak period and significant queuing and delay would be observed.

2.2.26 The full findings of this work will be presented shortly within both the ‘Key Findings Report’ and the ‘Transport Assessment’. Detailed Traffic Assessment – Initial Findings 2.2.27 In addition to the high-level appraisal carried out as described above, detailed junction testing is also being carried out. This is focussing on those junctions which are expected to experience significant flow changes post-development and at junctions known locally to be sensitive to traffic operation. The results of these detailed tests are currently being considered by the Project Group and will be reported within the ‘Transport Assessment’ in due course, but the initial findings are suggesting that; 2.2.28 Of the 20 key junctions assessed, seven junctions would operate over capacity during future year peak periods, even if the Whitehill Bordon Eco-town development is not implemented. This is as a result of general background traffic growth and committed development within the surrounding area. 2.2.29 Of these seven junctions, six would also operate over or near to full capacity if the proposed development scenario Option 1 is also implemented and any of the mode share and trip containment iterations were achieved. 2.2.30 These six junctions may require some level of appropriate mitigation to increase capacity to accommodate future traffic levels irrespective of whether the proposed development is implemented or not. These six junctions are: -

A31/B3001 Hickleys Corner A31/A325 Coxbridge roundabout A325/School Hill mini-roundabout B3004/Paper Mill Lane junction A325/Tesco Access/Woolmer Way junction A3/B3006 roundabout

2.2.31 In addition to the six junctions listed above which are predicted to operate over capacity with development, a further four junctions would also operate over or near to full capacity in either or both peak highway periods in 2026 if the proposed development scenario Option 1 is implemented. These four junctions, which would not operate over capacity within the 2026 baseline scenario, may require appropriate mitigation to increase capacity to accommodate the additional traffic generated by the development proposals if the Whitehill Bordon Ecotown development is implemented. These four junctions are: -

A325/B3004 junction A325/Liphook Road/Firgrove Road roundabout A325/Petersfield Road roundabout A325/A3 (Eastbound) slips

2.2.32 Of the remaining ten junctions, which would potentially operate within capacity in 2026 if the proposed development scenario Option 1 is implemented; seven of the ten junctions would operate within capacity even if the worst case mode share and trip containment iterations were achieved; and would therefore operate within capacity if any of the mode share and trip containment iterations were achieved. No mitigation is likely to be required to these junctions. These seven junctions are: -

A31/Weydon Lane junction A325/B3384 junction B3004/B3002 junction A325/B3002 Budds Lane junction A325/Chalet Hill junction A325/Conde Way/Woolmer Way junction A3 (Westbound) slips/B2171

2.2.33 The remaining three junctions, which would potentially operate within capacity in 2026 if the proposed development scenario Option 1 were implemented, would require a minimum of the 50% car mode share and 50% trip containment scenario iteration to be achieved for the junctions to operate within capacity. If the Whitehill Bordon Eco-town development was implemented and these mode share and trip containment targets were not achieved, the junctions may require a level of appropriate mitigation to increase capacity to accommodate additional traffic generated by the development. These three junctions are: -

B3004/Oakhanger Road junction A325/B3002 Station Road junction B3006 Petersfield Road

2.2.34 Also of particular note when summarising the operation of the identified key junctions in 2026 are the A325/B3002 Station Road junction and the A325 Chalet Hill junction, which would both operate over or near to full capacity within the 2026 baseline scenario yet would potentially operate within capacity in 2026 if the proposed development scenario Option 1 were implemented. This is due to the impact of the proposed inner relief road. Smarter Choices and Mode Share interventions 2.2.35 The TA has built upon a ‘Smarter Choices’ strategy, developed by Atkins on behalf of the DfT, to provide an indication as to the ability of a range of hard and soft measures and educational/ promotional strategies to achieve the target car mode shares incorporated within the proposed development scenarios. The results of this work are currently being considered and the findings will be reported within the ‘Transport Assessment’. Next Steps 2.2.36 Significant work has already been undertaken in order to provide the project with a credible, sound and robust evidence base to determine and plan for the potential impacts of the development of Whitehill Bordon as an Eco-town. This work is ongoing. 2.2.37 The initial work on this Evidence Base is expected to be completed during March 2011. This will identify through its recommendations a number of further steps required to be undertaken in order to develop a Transport Strategy to promote development at the Eco-town and mitigate any impacts that have been identified. 2.2.38 Future work will be prioritised against the future LDF timescales, particularly to consider what tasks will need to be completed before the LDF Preferred Approach Core Strategy is submitted, currently programmed for May 2011. 2.2.39 It is likely therefore that, in addition to responding to comments on the soundness of the work from the Highways Agency and Surrey County Council, immediate attention will be given to developing possible mitigation measures and interventions to mitigate the impact of development highlighted in the assessment. This will include work to develop strategies and interventions to promote alternatives to car use and also in developing feasibility designs of possible highway solutions where necessary. 3 Risk assessment 3.1

This report provides an update on current study work and itself carries no significant risks. There are however risks associated with the studies being reported. K:\Corporate Shared Folders\Whitehill Bordon\011 Meetings\Delivery Board\2011 Meetings\110315-Meeting Partners: EAST HAMPSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL, HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN PARTNERSHIP, MINISTRY of DEFENCE, HOMES & COMMUNITIES AGENCY

3.2

There are significant environmental designations surrounding the town and any future rail scheme would need to ensure that it did not significantly impact on the local environment. The Completed Option Selection Report has considered these constraints and risks for all rail routings. The Grip 3 Development Study will consider these environmental risks further and in more detail for the Whitehill Bordon to Bentley heavy rail link option.

3.3

The Grip 3 Development Study will also consider possible funding sources of providing a heavy rail link to the town, should the scheme remain viable through Grip 3. There is a significant risk that funding for the project will not be available bearing in mind the current availability of public sector funding.

3.4

There is a significant risk in not carrying out the essential Transport Evidence Base work. This assessment provides the necessary, sound and robust evidence base required to develop the Transport Strategy for the Eco-town and to support the allocation of Whitehill Bordon Ecotown through the EHDC LDF Processes. In the absence of this work there is a significant risk that a Core Strategy including an allocation for Whitehill Bordon would be found â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;unsoundâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; and that the potential environmental, social and financial impacts of the proposal would not be properly understood and mitigated.

4 Contributions to Delivery Board Priorities 4.1

The completion of the Grip 3 Development Rail Study will provide a contribution to informing the emerging Transport Strategy for the Ecotown. Should a link remain viable, and funding be secured, the creation of a direct rail link to Whitehill Bordon would contribute towards reducing carbon emissions and in creating sustainable transport opportunities for travel to the town.

4.2

The Completion of the Transport Evidence Base will contribute towards the Delivery Board priorities by providing essential evidence to support the future allocation of the town through the LDF, without which development could not proceed. The work will also inform the emerging Transport Strategy and Habitats Regulation Assessment and seek to meet the sustainability objectives of the Eco-town.

5 Resource implications 5.1

Both studies are being managed by HCC as part of the Eco-town Team and HCC has sufficient resources to carry out the management of these studies until their completion. Both studies have been let to external consultants using the IESE Highways Framework, and both appointed Consultancies have sufficient resources available to fulfil the awarded work packages. K:\Corporate Shared Folders\Whitehill Bordon\011 Meetings\Delivery Board\2011 Meetings\110315-Meeting Partners: EAST HAMPSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL, HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN PARTNERSHIP, MINISTRY of DEFENCE, HOMES & COMMUNITIES AGENCY

6 Cost implications 6.1

The Rail Study was let as a single fixed price contract encompassing both the Grip 2 Option Selection Report and the Grip 3 Development Report. The Grip 2 Stage of the work has been completed at a fixed price cost of £91,139. The Grip 3 Stage Study is a fixed cost of £108,137. Funding for the Grip 2 Study has been received by HCC from DCLG, but the second tranche of funding is awaited. Until this is received, the County Council will not instruct the Consultants to progress the work to the Grip 3 Study.

6.2

The Grip 3 Development Study will include consideration of future funding and delivery mechanisms from both the public and private sectors.

6.3

The Transport Evidence Base was let under the IESE Highways Framework on a ‘Time Charge’ funding mechanism. The original budget for the development of the Transport Model and the preparation of the Transport Assessment was £250,000. This funding is available to this study from the first year Eco-town grant from DCLG. Spend under this contract as of January 2011 was £152,547. It is expected that the work will be completed within the original budget set out. There are no further cost implications.

7 Conclusion Rail Study 7.1

The Whitehill Bordon Rail Study Option Selection Report (Grip 2) has now been completed and its findings are reported here to the Delivery Board. The Study rules out all but one of the considered options for heavy rail connection, and rules out both light rail and BRT alternatives to heavy rail. None of these options generate sufficient value for money for them to be considered further.

7.2

The study does find a sufficiently positive business case at this stage for the heavy tail through service from Whitehill Bordon to Bentley for this route option to be considered to Grip 3 Development stage. Once the Eco-town is built out, this route could potentially generate up to 1 million trips per annum with through services to London Waterloo. The capital construction cost would be around £130 million, and the Benefit to Cost ratio of 2.14 has been achieved, which suggests the scheme would provide ‘High’ value for money when considered against the DfT criteria. This option provides the least environmental impact, the best economic and financial case and would be deliverable in engineering and operational terms, subject to availability of funding. There is currently no funding available for this scheme.

Transport Evidence Base K:\Corporate Shared Folders\Whitehill Bordon\011 Meetings\Delivery Board\2011 Meetings\110315-Meeting Partners: EAST HAMPSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL, HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN PARTNERSHIP, MINISTRY of DEFENCE, HOMES & COMMUNITIES AGENCY

7.3

Work on the Transport Evidence Base is progressing. A base model has been developed, validated and calibrated and is operating well.

7.4

Initial future year testing of the development scenarios has been carried out, along with testing of the sensitivity of mode-share and containment targets and the potential treatments of the A325. The work is currently being reviewed by the Project Group in advance of the finalisation of the Transport Assessment.

7.5

Initial findings have highlighted areas of the transport network which require further consideration. Future work will be directed to finalising the Transport Assessment for release and in developing potential solutions to mitigate the impact of development.

8 Appendix Grip 2 Rail Study Option Selection Report is now available on www.whitehillbordon.com

Agenda item 9 Whitehill Bordon Opportunity Delivery Board ______________________________________________________________ Date of meeting:

15 March 2011

Title of report:

Landowners’ update

Author:

MoD Defence Estates

Reference no: WBPD05-2011 ______________________________________________________________ Executive Summary:

The adequate availability of land (on suitable terms) is crucial to the successful regeneration of Whitehill Bordon. This report has been produced to update the Delivery Board on early discussions undertaken by some of the principal landowners affected by the Eco-town, i.e. those likely to be selling their landholdings for development and redevelopment in and around the “Bordon Eco-town Boundary”. The principal landowners have discussed a range of issues, including the objectives and role of the Landowners’ Forum. They have also identified further work which needs to be done, commencing with a Memorandum of Understanding.

Date: 24th February 2011 Version: One

Status of Report: Public

Purpose of report:

To provide the Delivery Board with an update on the work of the principal landowners to date, and identify further work to be undertaken.

Recommendations requiring Board considerations:

That the Delivery Board notes the work being undertaken.

Consultation and comments received:

Not applicable

Community engagement proposals:

Not applicable

1 Background (reason for report) 1.1 To provide the Delivery Board with an update on the purpose of and the actions of the Landowners’ Forum since the last Delivery Board meeting on 7 December 2010. 2 Subject of report / options and considerations 2.1 The principal landowners, i.e. those likely to be selling their landholdings for development and redevelopment in and around the “Whitehill Bordon Eco-town Boundary”, have continued to meet informally since the last Delivery Board meeting on the 7 December 2010. 2.2 The core attendees at these meetings have been: • Ministry of Defence (MoD) - Richard Nelson • Hampshire County Council (HCC) - Ian Parker • East Hampshire District Council (EHDC) – Chris Fairhead / Jo Barden Hernandez - Appointment to be confirmed 2.3 Other attendees, by invitation have included: K:\Corporate Shared Folders\Whitehill Bordon\011 Meetings\Delivery Board\2011 Meetings\110315-Meeting Partners: EAST HAMPSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL, HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN PARTNERSHIP, MINISTRY of DEFENCE, HOMES & COMMUNITIES AGENCY

• Janet Green representing Annington Property Ltd; • Daphne Gardner the Director of the Eco-town Project; • Chris Youngs representing Whitehill Town Council; • Chris Murray from EHDC Planning Team 2.4 Other landowners in the vicinity of the Eco-town development will also have to opportunity to attend the formal Landowners meetings by invitation. These include representatives from: • Viking Park Industrial Estate 2.5 Those present at the meetings have discussed a number of issues. • • • • • • • • • • •

The creation of a formal Landowners’ Forum Membership of that Forum Chairmanship of the Forum The role and objectives of the Landowners’ Forum Terms of Reference (ToR) – these are being worked on Data Collection and information management Viability work which will need to be done The need for Land Value Equalisation Agreements The need for disposal processes and programmes The need for a Development Partner Funding and Resources required

2.6 The MoD, HCC, Annington Property Ltd and EHDC have all agreed and signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) 2.7 The MoU is an agreement between all parties mentioned above to establish and enter into a Landowners Collaboration Agreement in order to progress the Eco-town Project in Whitehill Bordon. A Landowners Collaboration Agreement would formalise the relationships between all participating parties setting out the rights and obligations of each of them. 2.8 In order to achieve the goal of implementing a Landowners Collaboration Agreement, as set out by the MoU, the parties have agreed to: • •

•

Establish liaison procedures to enable sufficient communication between all parties as demonstrated by the informal landowners meetings. Seek to develop an appropriate governance structure in the form of a Delivery Board. A Delivery Board has been established and this is the second time the board have formally met. Agree with the Department for Local Communities and Local Government and Homes and Communities Agency their respective roles in developing and delivering the Eco-town project.

• •

Prepare and finalise a program for the implementation of the project. If all parties cannot agree to a collaboration agreement then the MoU can and will be terminated at the request of any one party as long as sufficient notice is given.

2.9 What we are intending to do going forward • •

The first formal meeting of the Landowners Forum will take place later in the year. Invites to join the forum to other landowners to be issued in advance of the first formal meeting.

3 Risk assessment (must include consideration of the environmental, financial, health and safety and equalities impact assessment) 3.1 The principal landowners have identified the risk of potential serious financial loss if they cannot agree how to work together to achieve the Eco-town objectives. The Landowners’ Forum will seek to minimise the risk by developing clear Terms of Reference, a Memorandum of Understanding between partners and land equalisation agreements as appropriate. If the landowners are unable to agree, the delivery of the Eco-town could be at serious risk. 4 Contributions to Delivery Board Priorities 4.1 The availability of land is crucial to the regeneration of Whitehill-Bordon. The way that land assets are dealt with are critical to achievement of the Eco-town, and hence the Delivery Board’s objectives. 5 Resource implications 5.1 Resource implications at present only involve staff time. A programme of activities is being drafted against which resource implications will be assessed. 6 Cost implications 6.1 The cost implications of the work identified by landowners will be further investigated and evaluated. 7 Conclusion 7.1 This report identifies work to be undertaken by the Landowners’ Forum which will be crucial to the successful delivery of the Eco-town.

Agenda item 10

Whitehill Bordon Opportunity Delivery Board ______________________________________________________________ Date of meeting:

15th March 2011

Title of report:

Project Progress Report

Author:

Project Manager

Reference no: WBPD01-2011 ______________________________________________________________ Executive Summary: This report provides a periodic update for the Delivery Board. It outlines progress since the last meeting. In the last three months projects have proceeded well: • Consultation on the current masterplan is now complete and the outcome published. • Community projects have started to reach construction phases and the youth drop-in service project is being finalised. • Demonstration project teams have been appointed, planning permissions achieved and work will start on the Eco-station imminently. • The first stage of public consultation has been completed for Viking Park. • Transport studies are well advanced and will be reported separately in this meeting. • Consultants have been appointed for the other environmental and energy studies, which are all now underway. • A draft economic and employment strategy has been completed and is now out for consultation. • The dedicated community development worker, countryside ranger and eco-fit officer continue to work with groups and individuals within the town. A successful eco-grotto was manned by the team at the Whitehill Bordon Christmas Festival, Apple Day, Wood Day and at other events. • Retrofitting schemes have proved very popular.

Date: 3rd March 2011 Version: 2

Status of Report: Public

Purpose of report: This report provides a periodic update for the Delivery Board. It is produced for each Delivery Board meeting. The report has now been updated to take into account observations of the Standing Conference. Recommendations requiring Board considerations: For information only. Consultation and comments received: Project Director Theme Leads East Hampshire District Council (EHDC) Finance Standing Conference Requested more information about certain issues which are enclosed below. Masterplan next steps • Consultation on the current iteration of the masterplan is now complete and comments have been published. • We expect all key evidence base studies to be completed by May 2011. • We made a commitment to undertake a further stage of neighbourhood consultation once the results of the studies were published, which would look at specific sites and local issues in more detail; this is planned for the Autumn. • The masterplan will then be revised taking into account all consultation comments and the outcome of the evidence base studies. Archaeology A detailed desk study and non invasive survey was carried out by GVA Grimley’s sub consultants WSP as part of the baseline study. This information is available on line. We have assessed the risk to the project of lack of information on ground conditions, including archaeology, as low. Our mitigation measures in order to further reduce that risk are as follows: 1.) Project Manager to develop land survey strategy plan by April 2011. 2.) List of required surveys for each piece of land prior to planning applications to be maintained for each site or group of sites. 3.) Maintain a register of all surveys already undertaken including all the findings and liaise with EHDC building control who already keep copious records. Minerals Hampshire County Council has published a Draft Minerals and Waste Plan (February 2011) for consultation. This document is available via the Hampshire County Council website. This strategy specifically addresses the Whitehill Bordon Eco-town. The project team will be providing comments K:\Corporate Shared Folders\Whitehill Bordon\011 Meetings\Delivery Board\2011 Meetings\110315-Meeting Partners: EAST HAMPSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL, HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN PARTNERSHIP, MINISTRY of DEFENCE, HOMES & COMMUNITIES AGENCY

through East Hampshire District Council Planning Policy Team on the aspects which affect the Whitehill Bordon Eco-town proposals. Community engagement proposals: These are in accordance with the overall Communications and Engagement Strategy which was approved by the Delivery Board December 2011.

Background

1.1. This report outlines progress of projects since the last Delivery Board meeting. At the last meeting it was requested that an outline cost was identified for the each section of the projects. This has been done for each section. 1.2. There is no overspend to report in any section of the project. 2.

Report

2.1. Defence Training Review and Defence Funding 2.1.1. We continue to work effectively with MoD (Defence Estates) to plan for the withdrawal from Bordon Garrison. We await the ministerial announcement to confirm the programme of withdrawal. 2.2. Governance 2.2.1. The first Delivery Board Meeting was held in December 2010. The first Standing Conference was held on 2nd March 2011. Once received comments from that meeting will be appended in the appropriate box at the head of this report. 2.2.2. Specialist Group Meetings All meetings of the five new groups have now been held and each one has submitted a report to the Delivery Board, via the Standing Conference. A list of meeting dates is appended to this report. Appendix 1. 2.2.3. Risk Assessment A detailed risk assessment for Phase 1 and further phases of the delivery of the Eco-town project has now been issued to the Delivery Board and is the subject of a separate report. 2.3. Community Projects 2.3.1. Community Development Worker An eco Santaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s grotto was made for the Whitehill Bordon Christmas festival. A supply of energy monitors is being delivered to some residents and events have been arranged for climate change week. 2.3.2. Further work will include:

Promote and provide information to residents and organisations regarding Viking Park consultation. Working with community building committee to promote an energy survey. Working with partners East Hampshire Environment Network and Deadwater Valley Trust on future events and information.

Planning and developing the next phase of energy monitoring scheme. Continuing community networking.

2.3.3. Community WiFi Specifications have been received from two WiFi providers, who would provide free WiFi for the Forest Community Centre and areas around the Forest Centre. This would be the first stage of providing free WiFi for the whole town (which requires further funding). The project manager has now taken up a new role and a new project manager is being appointed. 2.3.4. Youth Drop In Centre This scheme will employ a youth worker to run the Youth Drop In scheme and deliver other projects with the young people of the area. 2.3.5. The agreement has been signed with Community First to administer the project which will commence immediately. 2.3.6. Allotments The proposal, by Whitehill Town Council, is for 16 new allotments on Savile Crescent. Financial and planning issues have delayed this project, but these have been overcome and the project has been reprogrammed. 2.3.7. Biomass Woodfuel Studies These studies, being managed by the Forestry Commission at Alice Holt are underway. Results from the first study are available and stakeholder consultation will take place soon. 2.3.8. Schools Projects Refurbishment of the schools by Hampshire County Council is progressing well. The work includes new biomass boilers and photovoltaic panels as well as other improvements. 2.4. Demonstration Projects Fire Station 2.4.1. Eco-station Refurbishment This is a project to provide a base for Eco-town activities, meeting space for the community as well as exhibitions of natural and local history. 2.4.2. A successful design and sustainability review agreed further details of the brief for this building. The first phase, providing exhibition space as a focal point of the Eco-town activities is scheduled to open soon. Architects have finalised designs for the remaining parts of the building to provide flexible accommodation which will be available early in 2012. 2.4.3. Eco-station Exhibitions The project covers the management and running of the buildings once K:\Corporate Shared Folders\Whitehill Bordon\011 Meetings\Delivery Board\2011 Meetings\110315-Meeting Partners: EAST HAMPSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL, HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN PARTNERSHIP, MINISTRY of DEFENCE, HOMES & COMMUNITIES AGENCY

complete. Management strategies are being considered to ensure a cost neutral ongoing running of the buildings. In the interim we are considering topics for the first five exhibitions which will commence as soon as the Phase 1 works are complete. It is proposed that each theme lead runs one exhibition around the topics: • • • • •

masterplan economic development housing and retrofitting transport environmental sustainability

2.4.4. Exhibition House This project builds an exhibition house which will test some of the latest technologies and allow people to see what low carbon living might be like. There have been some technical delays in signing contracts with the design team, however now BBM Sustainable Design Ltd, have been appointed as technical architects to work with Riches Hawley Mikhail who are the executive architects. They have issued a new programme which indicates a start on site in July 2011. 2.4.5. Four Houses Radian Competition This will be an international design competition for eco-housing. At a meeting with preferred partners it was agreed that Radian Group be considered as preferred partner for this architectural competition. A report will go to the March Cabinet of EHDC, who are the landowners, proposing the outline terms of the arrangement. Detailed negotiations with Radian Group, who have indicated that they are willing to construct the winning designs, will commence shortly. 2.5. Demonstration Projects Viking Park Feasibility Study 2.5.1. A feasibility study is underway to establish the best long and short term use for this important site. First stage consultation is now complete. In response to this the consultants are looking at a number of design options and analysing the viability. Further consultation of options will continue once the viability has been established. Current programme for next consultation is late March or early April. (Exact date TBA) 2.6. Studies and Masterplan 2.6.1. Masterplan The masterplan work is ongoing. We anticipate a number of iterations of the framework throughout the 20-30 year life of the project. Eventually the framework masterplan will be augmented by planning policy documents. All plans for development will go through more detailed site specific masterplanning by developers and then they will submit full planning applications in the normal way. K:\Corporate Shared Folders\Whitehill Bordon\011 Meetings\Delivery Board\2011 Meetings\110315-Meeting Partners: EAST HAMPSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL, HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN PARTNERSHIP, MINISTRY of DEFENCE, HOMES & COMMUNITIES AGENCY

2.6.2. The masterplan consultation comments and responses were published in January 2011. Letters or emails have gone to all individual respondents and stakeholders. We are currently preparing the scope for the next stage of neighbourhood consultation. It is planned for July 2011 onwards, once the findings of the evidence base studies are available. 2.6.3. Design Awareness Training A design awareness training event will be held on 9th March. This will be open to East Hampshire District Council North Planning Committee and Whitehill Town Council members as well as Delivery Board and Standing Conference members. 2.7. Economic Development 2.7.1. The Economic Development and Employment Strategy is currently the focus of activity. The eight week consultation period on the draft document concludes on the 28th March. The strategy will be finalised and presented for endorsement to the Delivery Board, East Hampshire District Council Cabinet and partner organisations in June 2011. 2.8. Environmental Studies 2.8.1. The environmental studies to support the development of the Whitehill Bordon masterplan are progressing well. Consultants have been appointed to complete: • • • • •

a Green Infrastructure Strategy, an Appropriate Assessment to comply with Habitats Regulations, a Water Cycle Study, an Energy Feasibility Study, and a One Planet Living project.

This work will help shape proposals in the draft masterplan and provide stakeholders and the community with opportunities to play their part. Key stakeholder meetings have taken place in February 2011 to collect data and explore opportunities for the environment in Whitehill Bordon. These have been well attended and form part of a series of workshops to May 2011 when the studies will be completed. 2.9. Transport studies and infrastructure 2.9.1. Rail Study This study will establish the viability of a rail link to Whitehill Bordon. We are expecting the first stage of the study imminently and reports will go to the Standing Conference and Delivery Board. Arrangements are being made with the Department of Communities and Local Government to release the second tranche of the funding so that work on the next stage of the study can commence. K:\Corporate Shared Folders\Whitehill Bordon\011 Meetings\Delivery Board\2011 Meetings\110315-Meeting Partners: EAST HAMPSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL, HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN PARTNERSHIP, MINISTRY of DEFENCE, HOMES & COMMUNITIES AGENCY

2.9.2. Transport Model This study will evaluate the effects of different masterplan phases upon the road network of the area, including on surrounding towns and villages. The first modelling runs have now been completed and will be reported to the Standing Conference and Delivery Board. Details will be available on the Whitehill Bordon website very soon. 2.9.3. Town Transport Manager This person will be able to assist the community in reducing their car use and help us plan future improvements in public transport, related to the needs of the community. Funding is in place for this appointment which will be recruited soon. 2.9.4. Transport Website The interactive map which will form the focus of the transport pages of the website is almost complete. These pages will go live any day now. 2.10. Retrofitting 2.10.1. Insulation project. The first homes have been insulated. There are over 270 expressions of interest so far and more marketing is envisaged. USEA are managing surveys and installs as quickly as possible. We anticipate that the project will be complete towards the end of the summer, with an estimated 1000 residents homes improved within the Eco-town zone. 2.10.2. The Low Carbon Communities Challenge This project is now coming to a close and all monies are now committed to about 35 households for loans of up to ÂŁ10,000. The majority of homeowners have chosen photovoltaic panels, double glazing and/or new boilers. Residents whose installs are now complete are already reporting reduced fuel bills and satisfaction with their new installations. 3.

Risk assessment

3.1. See separate report regarding risk issues for the project. This report does not identify any further risk issues. 4.

Contributions to Delivery Board Priorities

4.1. These projects all contribute to Eco-town priorities. 5.

Resource implications

5.1. All the projects are funded from the Communities and Local Government funding received March 2010. There is no change to resource implications or requirements. K:\Corporate Shared Folders\Whitehill Bordon\011 Meetings\Delivery Board\2011 Meetings\110315-Meeting Partners: EAST HAMPSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL, HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN PARTNERSHIP, MINISTRY of DEFENCE, HOMES & COMMUNITIES AGENCY

Funding Update

6.1. Funding Applications We are exploring with partners five or six current sources of funding. Full details are appended to this report. Appendix 2 7.

Expenditure

7.1. The table below provides an outline of the expected expenditure for each area of the overall project. It does not cover all the management costs incurred by each of the partners in running their own offices and providing support services to the team. Though the bulk of the grant is from the Department of Communities and Local Government (DCLG), there are smaller funds from the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC), capital funds from Hampshire County Council, (HCC) and the Homes and Communities Agency (HCA), who also supply technical support. 7.2. We anticipate that the funding will be spent over three years. 7.3. A full schedule of figures in included as an appendix to this report, Appendix 3.

APPENDIX 1 Specialist Group Meeting Dates

WHITEHILL BORDON OPPORTUNITY Dates of 2011/12 Specialist Groups Meetings Community Facilities & Amenities Tuesday at 7pm 10 May 2011

5 July 2011

1 November 2011 24 January 2012

Infrastructure & Transport at 2pm

Sustainable Environment Tuesdays at 7pm

Economic Development Tuesdays at 4pm

Housing Thursdays at 7pm

Days & Dates to be determined Days & Dates to be determined Days & Dates to be determined Days & Dates to be determined

5 April 2011

12 April 2011

Dates to be determined

12 July 2011

19 July 2011

Dates to be determined

11 October 2011

18 October 2011

Dates to be determined

17 January 2012

31 January 2012

Dates to be determined

APPENDIX 2 Current Sources of Funding 1.

UK Energy Research Council (UKERC) Research Fund – Third Call for Proposals The funds are worth up to £0.5m and at a rate of 80% of cost. These bids are university led as the funds are for research but this research will support the work we are proposing around energy. We are named partners in the two consortia which have submitted expressions of interest: a) Collaboration with University of Surrey, University of Sussex and London Business School to investigate investment and business models for energy efficiency in households. This work would be developing scenarios for setting up ESCOs. (Energy service companies) b) Collaboration with the Policy Studies Institute, Brunel University, Cardiff University, Westminster University, Nottingham University and Exeter University on smart building management systems and smart grids.

Low Carbon Network Fund An Ofgem fund of £500million in total running from 2010-2015 for projects which help all DNOs (Distribution Network Operators) understand what they need to do to provide security of supply at value for money as Great Britain moves to a low carbon economy. We have had a useful meeting with Scottish and Southern about future projects for this call and will be having further meetings over next couple of months.

Local Sustainable Transport Strategy Fund Applications must be submitted by the local transport authority. Hampshire County Council are investigating the possibility of a joint Eco-towns bid for up to £5million. The fund would cover innovative transport initiatives and supports partnership working.

Technology and Innovation Centres Technology Strategy Board is establishing six to eight world leading technology and innovation centres which will need to attract considerable private sector investment, but will receive core funding of £5m-£10m p.a. over the first five years. We are in the process of discussing with local private sector and university partners whether Whitehill Bordon would be a viable site.

Regional Growth Fund K:\Corporate Shared Folders\Whitehill Bordon\011 Meetings\Delivery Board\2011 Meetings\110315-Meeting Partners: EAST HAMPSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL, HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN PARTNERSHIP, MINISTRY of DEFENCE, HOMES & COMMUNITIES AGENCY

We are keeping abreast of local developments around the Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEP). We are particularly interested in developments around the proposed M3 corridor LEP, which has been approved following resubmission. 6.

Retrofitting Community Buildings We have been given permission by Department of Energy and Climate Change to use some of the surplus from the amount allocated to household surveys to survey the Forest Community Centre. Once we have accurate information about the best measures for each building we will be in a position to seek funding to retrofit these buildings.

Appendix 3 Budget

Item

Funding Prior Yr1 Budget source (2009/10) (2010/11)

Governance

CLG

Yr2 Budget and beyond

25,000

225,000

8,000 12,000 3000 26,500

0 0 3000 24,500

6,000 100,000 25,000 25,000 38,000 30,000

6,000 0 0 25,000 0 0

6,000 279,500

0 58,500

40,000 0 0 10,000 0 10,000

46,086 0 0 20,000 45,000 90,000

26,500 0 26,500 60,000

423,440 312,354 936,880

50,000 100,000 0 0

818,300 325,000 150,000 360,000

374,700

150,000

2,028,000

Community Projects Eco information packs Wi-Fi Biomass supply â&#x20AC;&#x201C; case studies Community development worker Brash pelletisation potential Biodiversity projects Green rangers Allotments Timber fitness trail Drop in centre for young people Sports and recreation study Community Projects TOTAL

CLG HCC

Studies and masterplan Viking Park Quebec Barracks Chalet Hill Initial design briefing Publicity and advertising Eco Grants & One Planet Living Eco-studies and evidence Future studies and support Studies and masterplan TOTAL

CLG HCA

Demonstration Projects Fire station site purchase Fire station refurbishment Exhibition house Radian competition Fire station south site (landscaping and biomass) Fire station exhibitions and running costs Demonstration Projects

582,000

CLG

TOTALS Retrofitting Library and Primary Schools

CLG HCC*

1,275,000 35,000

Rail study*

CLG

150,000

Transport Infrastructure and evidence base

CLG

775,000

521,000

200,000 370,000

200,000

387,295

2,098,993

3,733,295

6,068,373

DfT Retrofitting

CLG DECC

Essential Staffing and oncosts TOTALS

CLG 71,669 653,669

NOTES *Funds direct from HCC ** Further funding expected â&#x20AC;&#x201C; this will go direct to HCC Money passed to HCC is accounted for in the first year only. Though some of their spend may be in the second year. Excludes any funding that CLG may provide as part of a second year grant.

Agenda item 11

Items for future Delivery Board meetings

Project Progress report (standing item) to include: - Viking Park - Eco-station and Exhibition house update - Green Infrastructure Strategy - Habitats Regulations Assessment - Water Cycle Study - Energy Feasibility Study with specific questions for the Green Infrastructure work Draft programme of work for the Specialist groups Arrangements for recruiting the permanent chairman of the Board Risk register Transport Model and Rail Feasibility Study (Combine into one report) Draft Economic Development & Employment Strategy (for DB input) The Board's Business Plan Proposals for the Long term management and maintenance of Community Assets Procurement of a development partner Infrastructure & Viability Study Proposals for the neighbourhood consultation Findings of the neighbourhood consultation Recommendations on the amendments to the Draft Framework Masterplan

15th March 2011 √

15th June 2011 √

13th September 2011 √

15th December 2011 √

√ √

√ (DB input)

√ (formal adoption) √ √

√ √ √ √ √