December 2011 Delivery Board papers by East Hampshire District Council

Delivery Board Meeting to be held on Thursday 15th December 2011 from 2:30pm to 5:00pm Main Hall, Forest Community Centre, Bordon

A G E N D A

Welcome and introductions – Chairman (verbal) (5 mins)

Minutes of previous meeting and matters arising (attached) (5 mins)

Public Questions – 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 Minister’s Defence Technical Training Change Programme (DTTCP) Richard Nelson, MoD Defence Infrastructure Organisation (5 mins)

Commercial strategy advice from PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (PwC) (interim report given in form of presentation) Ray Mills, PwC (15 mins)

Transition Group update (verbal update) (notes of first meeting attached) Richard Nelson, MoD Defence Infrastructure Organisation (5 mins)

1 A111215

page 4 21

page 22 24

Landownersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; update (paper attached) Richard Nelson, MoD Defence Infrastructure Organisation (5 mins)

page 25 29

Development brief for demonstration scheme at Quebec Barracks Susan Robbins, Economic Development Theme Lead (paper attached) (10 mins)

page 30 52

Proposed neighbourhood charter Sarah Allan, Eco-Housing and Retrofitting Theme Lead (paper attached) (10 mins)

page 53 60

10.

Sponsorship Policy Kate Hillerby, Funding Manager (paper for information attached) (5 mins)

page 61 75

11.

Outcomes from Specialist Groups and Chairman/ Vice Chairman/ Lead Officers meetings Chris Youngs, Eco Coordinator, Whitehill Town Council (paper attached) (15 mins)

page 76 80

Proposals for the long term management and maintenance of community assets (workshop feedback) Bruce Collinson, Environmental Sustainability Theme Lead (paper attached) (10 mins)

page 81 92

12.

Project progress report Daphne Gardner, Project Director, on behalf of Wendy Shillam, Project Manager (paper attached) (10 mins)

page 93 102

13.

Overall project programme report to include high level project plan

page 103 114

2 A111215

Simon Beach, Project Coordinator (paper attached) (10 mins) 14.

Forward Programme - Dates of future Standing Conference meetings (At least two weeks prior to the Delivery Board meetings) Thursday 1st March 6:30 pm – 9:00pm Bordon Junior School Thursday 31st May 10:00am – 12:30pm Main Hall, Forest Community Centre Thursday 30th August 2:30pm – 5:00pm Venue TBC Thursday 29th November 6:30 pm – 9:00pm Venue TBC - Dates of future Delivery Board meetings Thursday 15th December – 2:30pm – 5:pm Main Hall, Forest Community Centre Thursday 15th March - 6:30 pm – 9:00pm Bordon Junior School Thursday 14th June - 10:00am – 12:30pm Main Hall, Forest Community Centre Thursday 13th September 2:30pm – 5:00pm Venue TBC Thursday 13th December 6:30 pm – 9:00pm Venue TBC - Items for future meetings To discuss items for future meetings (attached) (5 mins)

page 115

Total time – 2 hours 5 mins Exempt Items 1. Risk Register report Caroline Sayers, Project Officer (Governance) and Risk Manager (previously circulated to Delivery Board members) 2.

Planning application for Asda supermarket To consider Delivery Board comments on this application 3

A111215

Agenda item 2

Whitehill Bordon Delivery Board Meeting 14th September 2011 10:00am – Main Hall, Forest Community Centre, Bordon Present: John Walker Cllr Andrew Joy

(JW) (AJ)

Daphne Gardner

(DG)

Cllr Adam Carew Richard Nelson

(AC) (RN)

Dr William Wain Cllr Glynis Watts

(BW) (GW)

James Rowley

(JR)

Apologies: Kevin Bourner

(KB)

Cllr Philip Drury Cllr Melville Kendal

(PD) (MK)

Also: Wendy Shillam Caroline Sayers Mandar Puranik

(WS) (CS) (MP)

Bruce Collinson

(BC)

Sarah Allan

(SA)

Susan Robbins Ian Parker Chris Youngs

(SR) (IP) (CY)

Chairman Hampshire County Council (HCC) on behalf of Cllr Melville Kendal East Hampshire District Council (EHDC) Project Director Whitehill Town Council (WTC) MoD Defence Infrastructure Organisation (DIO) Whitehill Bordon Town Partnership (WTP) EHDC Portfolio Holder for Regeneration & Tourism Home and Communities Agency (HCA) Area Manager North Hampshire on behalf of Kevin Bourner

Home and Communities Agency (HCA) Head of Area EHDC Councillor representing Whitehill Bordon HCC Executive Member for the Environment

EHDC (Project Manager) EHDC (Project Officer – Governance) EHDC (Theme Lead – Planning and Urban Design) EHDC (Theme Lead – Environmental Sustainability) EHDC (Theme Lead – Eco-Housing and Retrofitting) EHDC (Theme Lead – Economic Development) HCC (Head of County Development Taskforce) WTC (Eco-coordinator)

Item

Notes

Action

Welcome and introductions - Chairman For the benefit of the members of the public, the Chairman introduced the role and purpose of the Delivery Board. Now that the Ministry of Defence (MoD) have made their announcement, the focus of this project is even more important and has a greater degree of urgency.

Minutes of previous meeting and matters arising

-4-

Minutes of the previous Delivery Board meeting were approved as accurate. Further updates from the previous meeting are: Viking Park (minute no. 15, page 12): The briefing meeting with Delivery Board members has happened, and this item will be touched upon later. Neighbourhood engagement programme (minute no. 5, page 6): A request was made for ward councillors to be invited to these events.

Public Questions Questions were received from three members of the public. The Chairman read out the questions and answers. The questions and answers are appended to these notes. (Appendix 1.)

Verbal update from Ministry of Defence (MoD) The Secretary of State made his announcement on 18th July and has confirmed the withdrawal of the Garrison from Bordon.

Whitehill Bordon updated viability assessment. Ian Parker introduced his report. The landowners group has used the same consultants - GVA Grimley (GVA) - who carried out the previous assessment 18 months ago. GVA reran the cash flow approach looking at expenditure and income. The results are encouraging. There should be an overall positive return from the project. It was highlighted that the previous housing policy advisory group identified a need for 70:30 affordable housing need to address the imbalance. A recommendation on housing needs went forward in the core strategy for 65:35 after lengthy consideration by the East Hampshire District Council (EHDC) planning policy team. Clarity was sought regarding level of house construction. The report uses a base level of houses being built to level Code 3. There is no intention to build at this level. Code 4 is the national minimum level of house construction allowed as standard. By the time construction starts within the town, the national level required may be Code 6, although the additional costs of reaching this level should have reduced. This report is looking at the viability, making best possible assumptions about future costs. The same comment applies to rates of housing construction:- sensible assumptions have been made which should not be read as targets. The underlying message of this report is that the project is viable. This is what the investors are interested in. Section 3.1, page 21 of the report has four bullet points, the last three of which highlight areas that will need alternative sources of funding. Therefore, the Delivery Board have agreed the recommendations made

-5-

in the report with an additional recommendation that the project needs to take all possible steps to identify funding sources for those items for which funding has not yet been identified.

Transport Assessment Tranche 2 – Junction Mitigation Options Report – final draft Ian Parker introduced this report on behalf of the team leader for highways development planning. He has confirmed that mitigation work has been prepared. The District Statement for East Hampshire (page 25) will provide more certainty. Hampshire County Council (HCC) will advice if future issues arise. It was advised that HCC much keep an eye on the timescales to ensure delivery for the Eco-town. In relation to environment assessment work and air quality issues, a request was made for the Habitat Regulations Assessment (HRA) and the work on air quality must be linked. The air pollution report has projected a fall in emissions. Over the last 10 years, there has been a drop in pollution as a result of work that has been done on emissions. European Union (EU) and government work has ensured that future car manufacture must improve. Therefore a reduction in pollution will occur independently of electric cars. A concern regarding “rat-running” was raised and whether there will be a separate report to show how this will be addressed. This issue will be referred back to the team leader for highways development planning. A request was made for development contributions to be used to sort out local junction issues before using these contributions in other areas. There will need to be contributions made outside of the town and villages requiring negotiations with Surrey County Council. The intention is to achieve the best improvements for the town despite the work outside of the area. All mitigation work shown in this report should not be interpreted as improvements but to show the current situation. Extra funding for improvements will be required. Ian Parker noted that some further checking of the data underling the report was still in progress. The Delivery Board noted and agreed the recommendations made in this report.

Revisiting the Eco-town vision The project director introduced her report and gave a brief summary. The original Green Town Vision was first developed in 2004-2005. When revisiting the targets, it was recognised that these needed to be refreshed and made more comprehensive. The vision has been updated as a result of the workshop that took place at the Standing Conference. The proposed Eco-town vision can be found on page 41 of the report, and it is this that Delivery Board members are being asked to approve and to authorize the project director to amend the vision and targets to reflect the comments of the Standing Conference and the Board.

-6-

Comments received include: - maintaining the title â&#x20AC;&#x153;Eco-townâ&#x20AC;? is a helpful label as it helps to put us on the international map; - the supporting targets need to be more specific and include more detail where this is available; reference to the need for larger homes and greater residential variety should be included; - climate change needs to be retained as the driver for this project, but the idea of one planet living to incorporate local food and grow your own is very important element of this. The supporting targets are interrelated and all are important. The wording has been enhanced from the original to strengthen them. In recognition that all the supporting targets are as important as each other, the targets have been ordered alphabetically.

Appointment of Commercial Advice Richard Nelson introduced his report. He explained that in the Delivery Board workshop that took place back in April, MoD was asked to facilitate acquisition of commercial advice. He then arranged for three organisations to draft written proposals and present these to Delivery Board members and advisors to the project. These three organisations were KPMG LLP, Deloitte and PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (PWC). The Chairman highlighted that because of the rigorous procurement process used; all three organisations are very capable to do the job. Therefore, this process was to decide which organisation we feel more comfortable to work with and more capable of mapping out the route the commercial strategy needs to take. The commercial strategy is an urgent piece of work and the Delivery Board need advice by the next Delivery Board meeting. Using the HCA scoring matrix, the scoring process was clear providing a result with a clear order of merit. Through this method, it was obvious that PWC is to be appointed and asked to report back to the next meeting in December. Therefore, on behalf of the Delivery Board, the Landowners will appoint PWC.

Landownersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; update Richard Nelson introduced his report and gave a brief summary of it. A number of meetings have been held since the last Delivery Board meeting. Details of these meetings are found in the report. Activities include: - land assembly; - land equalisation agreement; - preparation for a planning application. A question regarding timing for the move was raised. The Secretary of State for Defence, Liam Fox has confirmed that the MoD will be joining Garrisons together and the accommodation at Lyneham is already there. The detailed work to work out the phasing of the move is underway.

-7-

The indicative phasing will be known by December, so will be able to report back to the next Delivery Board meeting. A meeting has already been scheduled with Colonel Ansell at the end of this month.

10.

Quebec Barracks high level objectives The economic development theme lead introduced her report. Quebec Barracks is an early MoD site ready for release and is incorporated in the masterplan. With the MoD announcement, work on this site is now pressing. Appendix 1 of the report shows the high level objectives and includes the additional comments received at the recent Standing Conference workshop. The high level objectives show a link to the Eco-town vision and the Delivery Board were asked to approve them. A concern was raised that local stakeholders were not consulted. During the recent Standing conference workshop, members of the local community were making their feelings clear that as this is a pilot project, it must have a high impact on the town. Therefore large homes and luxury flats rather than social housing should go on this site. The Delivery Board recognise that this development is important. The high level objectives are set out well, but the timetable of delivery needs to be clearer.

A concern was raised regarding the proposed skills centre to be located on Quebec Barracks according to the masterplan developed by AECOM. The Delivery Board agreed the high level objectives and supported moving forward with this project and asked to see a brief at the December Delivery Board meeting.

11.

Proposals for the long term management and maintenance of community assets The environmental sustainability theme lead introduced his report. There is a need for the Delivery Board to consider the long term management and maintenance of community assets as an early priority. This is subject to further discussions through the Specialist Groups to get local views and locally led management. As suggested at the recent Standing Conference, Chris Baines has been invited to attend the October Specialist Group workshop. The Delivery Board recognised that long term management is the key and needs to be included. It was also recognised that a range of management services was needed. Existing land holdings must be integrated into management rather than just considering new spaces. Existing spaces are already being considered under the green stepping stones project. The Chairman highlighted the importance of getting on with this piece of work urgently.

-8-

SR/ IP

The Delivery Board requested that a paper is presented back to them at the next Delivery Board meeting to show how new and existing spaces were being incorporated into the town approach as part of the Green Infrastructure Strategy. Clarification was sought regarding the local trust model found on page 67 of the report. The Milton Keynes Park Trust was funded out of developers’ contributions and was able to create a strong revenue stream. Therefore the Eco-town income streams need to be considered. A request was made for the environmental sustainability theme lead to speak to the Town Council.

The Delivery Board supported the recommendations and looks forward to the report which will come back to the December meeting.

12.

Outcomes from Specialist Groups and Chairman/ Vice Chairman/ Lead Officers meetings The eco-coordinator introduced his report. Most of the outcomes of the Specialist Groups are in control of the Specialist Groups themselves. It was pointed out that the Delivery board needs to be more proactive in its guidance. It follows that as the project progresses, the Delivery board will be generating more work for the Specialist Groups. The high level project plan was presented at the last Delivery Board meeting in June and this will play a large part in driving the work of the Specialist Groups. The Specialist Groups are not entirely driven by the Delivery Board. The project director has suggested that she will attend the next meeting of the Chairman and Vice Chairman of the Specialist Groups to look at the high level project plan to help keep on top of things in an integrated way. The recent Standing conference raised that education and skills needs to have a stronger focus (page 73 of report). Education and skills centre and training cover the work of two Specialist Groups – infrastructure, education and transport, and economic development. The theme leads for these Specialist Groups have already had discussions which will be taken back to the Chairs of these groups to ensure work is done between the two groups. To ensure that the topics of skills provision and education are coordinated, a request was made that there should be a brief report brought back to the Delivery Board at the December meeting.

13.

Project progress report The project manager introduced her report. Additions and updates since the Standing Conference include: - 2.3.4 Community Wi-Fi (page 77) – the Wi-Fi is now installed. The password is “GUEST”. - 2.8.2 MoD job losses (page 79) – the facts are not known yet, but the

-9-

DG/ CY

SR/ IP

economic development theme lead is working closely with the MoD. - 2.8.2 Economic Development and Employment Strategy (page 79) – The Standing Conference has stressed that they wish that education and training be given a high priority. The project manager confirmed that within the strategy they are both given a very high priority. Clarification was sought regarding other sections of the report. These are: - 2.11.7 Small Rural Towns Programme (page 83) – the area from the High Street, Chalet Hill down Petersfield Road has been chosen as it is the most visible part of the town and will have the greatest impact. - 2.11.2 Enterprise Zone (page 82) – many of the benefits that an enterprise zone can bring are open to us anyway. A further report, by the economic development theme lead will come to the delivery board at the next meeting. - The role of the town transport manager (page 77) - this person’s role is to encourage the use of the facilities available now and those improvements which HCC are working on at the moment. These facilities include existing and new bus services, car share, walking and cycling. - 2.4.7 Eco-station South Site (page 78) – it was confirmed that the consultations will be starting on 24th September and will be continuing until 16th October. - 2.9.9 Sports facilities (page 81) – it was confirmed that the sports facilities report, along with all other reports can now be made available. All reports will be published on the Whitehill Bordon website and sent to individuals on request. Paper copies of all studies are available at the Firestation. These reports are also circulated to other departments within EHDC.

Home and Communities Agency (HCA) have found this report useful and referred to a site where a scheme for 20 homes to Code 4+ could be delivered. This site is adjacent to Wilkinson. Discussions are taking place between Radian, WTC and EHDC, but concerns have been raised regarding what will happen to the Georgian building in this location. It was noted that there had been a recent visit made to the town by representatives from other Eco-towns. Representatives from the other Eco-towns complimented the team on the consultation processes and project management. The visit was organised by Town and Country Planning Association (TCPA). TCPA facilitates the Eco-town development group which is predominantly for the benefit of technical officers with many of the meetings being held in London. It is recognised that far more needs to be done to liaise with local members and this has already been raised with TCPA with a request for councillor forums. Further requests will be made for future visits to include councillors and Board members.

14.

Forward Programme The forward programme was reviewed. Any requests that Delivery Board members have for items to come forwards to future meetings should be forwarded to the project officer for governance.

All/ CS

Dates for future meetings were reviewed. It was requested that the dates are checked with HCC as this is a day when various meetings are

- 10 -

held.

Exempt items

15.

Audit and review summary The Board members reviewed the quarterly audit and review summary report.

16.

Risk register report The Board members reviewed the risk register report. It is recognised that the risk register is a work in progress and is a working document.

17.

Whitehill Bordon Core Strategy This is an additional item. As an additional step in the development of planning policies, Delivery Board members have been asked to comment on the draft Whitehill Bordon chapter of the Core Strategy. This document will go before EHDC Development Policy Panel at the end of September.

18.

Viking Park This is an additional item. The project team received the final draft of the Viking Park design and feasibility study which was presented to the Delivery Board members. Delivery Board members have recommended that this report should go out for public consultation. This will be incorporated into the neighbourhood engagement schedule.

- 11 -

Appendix 1: Public Questions Ian Georgii (Secretary to WBTP) Background WBTP had a meeting on the 6th September and have decided that as we now have the go-ahead for the eco-town to become a reality, we felt that a name change might help sell the town and remove any negative impressions due to the transient nature of the military personnel and families. Question Does the Delivery Board support the initiative of the Whitehill and Bordon Town Partnership (WBTP) to change the name of the whole town? The Town Partnership's nomination is 'Woolmer Forest'. This would, of course, incorporate all the communities of Whitehill, Bordon, Deadwater, Hollywater Pinewood and Hogmoor.

A change of name for the town is a question for the whole community and might include discussion with elected members, representatives of interested groups and residents of all the towns, parishes and wards within the Eco-town boundary. The Delivery Board would be very happy to support a change of name for the town if the community supports it and that we would encourage the Town Partnership to consult the community. Also, any change of name should be made sooner rather than later so as not to devalue and negate forthcoming attempts to raise the profile and attract much needed employment and investment into the area. It should be noted that the Eco-townâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s process has given the name Whitehill Bordon some national (and international) profile as an Eco-town. Any proposal to change the name would have to be accompanied by a new marketing process in order to ensure that the name and its associated new values become quickly recognised. The Delivery Board Chairmanâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s personal view is that if this is to take place, speed is of the essence and must take place as soon as possible as the project needs to attract investment. Comments from other members of the Board is that this needs more structure and consultation with members first.

- 12 -

Public question - IA Johnstone Question 1. The prime document, the Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA), is currently incompatible with area of other studies such as Transport, Housing and Infrastructure. What action is being taken to ensure that those studies meet the requirements of the HRA?

It is misleading to say that other studies need to meet the requirements of the HRA. This is because the HRA forms part of the evidence base to support the delivery of the Eco-town Project by guiding the nature of development in the town alongside recommendations that flow from the other studies, such as transport and infrastructure. This evidence base is currently helping to revise the draft masterplan and influence the Core Strategy. It is for the organisations that constitute the Delivery Board and Eco-town Team to collate recommendations from all the studies and make decisions on how the Eco-town project is delivered.

Question 2. In answer to a question, the previous Defence Minister stated that all money derived from the sale of the MoD land at Bordon Garrison would be retained for use in the Defence Budget. Does this remain the case under the current administration?

The proposed disposal of Bordon is driven by the need to consolidate operations and reduce the size of the department's estate. Receipts generated from its disposal will be reinvested into the Defence Budget. However the redevelopment of the site will be subject to the usual application of planning conditions and charges to contribute towards the infrastructure and facilities needed in the area. The viability report which follows incorporates this assumption. Moreover the siteâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s disposal is consistent with MOD policy which seeks to arrive at an estate that is of right size and quality to support 21st Century Defence needs.

Question 3. Will the MoD apply the usual claw-back conditions to the sale of the land?

In line with Departmental Policy sites suitable for redevelopment are commonly sold with the benefit of planning permission and with claw back/ overage provisions in order to optimise receipts for the benefit of the taxpayer.

Question 4. In reply to a Ministerial Question, the Defence Minister has stated that any surplus land released by the Strategic Defence Review 'will be sold on the open market in order to optimise the sale receipt in a fair and open way'.

Since the Ministerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s speech the land owners have come together to agree a memorandum of understanding over how land should be divested and the expectation is that all lands will be part of a landownersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; equalisation agreement.

How will such land be sold on the open market in Whitehill Bordon?

The method of disposal of future land is subject to further discussion between the various landowning parties.

- 13 -

The Fire Station was not sold on the open market and the associated land was apparently sold for £1.

The Fire Station site was transferred to East Hampshire District Council for £550,000. (Reported inaccurately as £575,000 in the oral presentation of the answers.) This figure agreed with valuers’, including the District valuer, on all sides as representing a fair amount of money.

Question 5. The development of the Masterplan is supposed to be an iterative process. Many criticisms and suggestions were made after the last consultation almost a year ago. Why has there been no revised draft of the Masterplan circulated prior to the start of the next consultation in October? How can people make informed comments on the basis of a few meetings and presentations only?

The purpose of the neighbourhood consultation is to • •

•

explain the findings of the Evidence Base studies and how these studies will impact on the masterplan; summarise key changes to the masterplan based on the previous consultation responses and the Evidence Base Studies; identify neighbourhood priorities on specific issues by involving local residents and stakeholders.

Since the last public consultation on the masterplan, the team commissioned a number of technical studies to support the Evidence Base. The Studies are now complete and provide us the required baseline information, assessments. These require amendments to be made to the masterplan. We are proposing to involve residents and stakeholders prior to making these amendments. A summary leaflet is being produced and will be available for the residents prior to the meetings. The masterplan process is running in parallel with the Council’s Core Strategy. The pre-submission version is due for publication by the end of the year. We want to ensure that any further revision to the masterplan take into account strategic allocation made by the Core Strategy and are not in conflict with the District priorities. The masterplan will be revised in the early 2012 after the neighbourhood engagement in October- November 2011. This will give us an opportunity to respond to the public consultation comments, Evidence Base studies and pre-submission version of the Core Strategy.

- 14 -

Public questions – Graham Clague I am a resident of the parish of Binsted and coordinate a Residents Group covering a number of residents in Binsted, Blacknest and Isington. On behalf of the Group, I wish to raise a question about the possible reopening of the rail line between Bordon and Bentley as recommended by the consultants Halcrow. We are totally opposed to this recommendation and, while not disagreeing with the idea of linking Bordon to the nation rail network, we believe that opting for this particular will result in it being seriously underused, if indeed it were to be built at all. A line to Bentley would only give access north towards London whereas linking Bordon to Liss or Liphook would give access both north towards London and also south towards Portsmouth. From my attendance at the Transportation Specialist group meetings, I have leant that there are a significant number of existing Bordon residents who commute to work south in the direction of Portsmouth. I believe that the consultants have said that there are capacity issues if more passengers joined the Waterloo to Portsmouth line at Liphook. However with the clear advantages of this option over the other routes, we feel that more attention should be given to exploring this alleged capacity problem. I am sure that the Delivery Board would agree that, to justify the significant cost of reopening a rail line from Bordon, it is vital that the option chosen should be the one which generates the highest demand. I am aware that there are various protected areas surrounding Bordon and these may pose some difficulties for building a rail line. However it is vital that this huge investment is made for the right route. I would ask for this matter to be raised at the next meeting and would welcome some feedback so I can pass this on to the next meeting of my residents group.

- 15 -

Summary In summary, the Heavy Rail ‘Through’ Route to Bentley is the only option assessed that demonstrates a positive business case, and that warrants further investigation at this stage. In all other options the ‘costs’ exceed the ‘benefits’ and there is not a sufficiently positive business case for these to be considered further at this time. The lack of peak time operational capacity on the Portsmouth mainline, coupled with the significant environmental constraints for all routeing options to connect to the Portsmouth Mainline, mean that these routeing options are not likely to be deliverable or fundable. Environmental concerns will be addressed in the studies that follow, long before any final decision can be reached. Additionally, such options, for the reasons set out, will not receive the support of the rail authorities Network Rail, Department for Transport Rail or the local train operators. The more detailed response is shown below.

Public questions – Graham Clague – detailed response: Response to Delivery Board Question from Mr Clague The Rail Feasibility Study has sought to provide a credible appraisal of the socioeconomic business case for rail connection to the town. In order to achieve this, the Study has followed the Network Rail’s protocol for rail investment projects (GRIP Process), and the Department for Transport’s Appraisal processes. The Study has adopted standard assessment and forecasting methodologies. In relation to the transport planning merits of linking to the Portsmouth Mainline, so offering a north and south connection, this is not disputed. In a similar manner, a connection that provided links to the Alton Rail Line as well as the Portsmouth Mainline would be ultimately desirable, and would provide the optimum connectivity for the town to local, sub-regional and regional destinations. Notwithstanding this, in order to establish a scheme that would be deliverable and fundable, the business case for each route must be considered, which estimates the costs and benefits of each route. Where a positive business case is established which offers ‘good’ value for money, so where the monetised benefits are greater than the costs, there is more likelihood of funding being achieved than a routeing which exhibited a negative business case, or offered ‘poor’ value for money. This is particularly the case if public funding opportunities are to be considered in the future. In order to establish the business case, the Study considered; • • • •

High Level Environmental Considerations Cost Estimation Operational Considerations Demand Forecasting

Demand Forecasting In terms of demand forecasting, the Study uses established industry standard techniques set out in the ‘Passenger Demand Forecasting Handbook’ and considered possible journeys to each destination on each of the lines. The Study considers trips to local destinations and considers both ‘London’ and Non-London’ destinations. This is set out in Section 9.1 of the Study. In terms of generating the highest demand, the link to Bentley, which provides a ‘through route’ service to London, clearly exhibits the highest potential patronage, generating nearly 1 million trips per annum (of which 75% are connected with travel to London, and the remaining 25% with trips to other local destinations. In terms of the patronage demand generated by the Portsmouth Mainline connections (Liss and Liphook serving connections north and south), demand is significantly lower, with a ‘through route’ connection to Liss generating some 500,000 trips per annum, and the routeing option to Liphook generating some 600,000 trips per annum. This is primarily due to the interchange penalty which would be imposed southbound due to the need to change at Liss or Liphook. Due to the capacity on the Portsmouth mainline, ‘through-running’ is unlikely to be achievable which would result in a shuttle service. Patronage estimations for a shuttle service are significantly lower, with Liss generating some 380,000 trips per annum and Liphook some 430,000 trips per annum. This is set out in the below table, repeated from the Study.

- 16 -

Operational Capacity In relation to the operational capacity issues identified on the Portsmouth Mainline, this has been investigated as part of the GRIP 2 study work in association with Network Rail and the Train Operating Company, who formed part of the Steering Group for the work. Sections 6.2 and 6.3 provide a full assessment of the potential issues with connection to both the Alton line, and the Portsmouth Mainline. In relation to connections to the Alton line (at either Alton or Bentley) there are realistic opportunities to provide peak hour through services. This would require splitting trains at Aldershot or Farnham. In terms of the connection to the Portsmouth Mainline, there is inadequate peak capacity available to enable peak through-running at either station due to the frequency and pattern of trains and available train-paths. The introduction of new services from Bordon along this line would be unacceptable to both South West Trains and Network Rail because of the negative impact on existing rail passengers on the Portsmouth line. It is highly unlikely that either Network rail, South West Trains or the Department for Transport would accept any addition to the rail network that would impact significantly and negatively on existing passengers. Environmental Constraints Whilst patronage forecasts and operational capacity are two key components of the Study and of establishing the potential for a routeing option, these cannot be considered in isolation of the work undertaken to establish the environmental constraints associated with each option, which is particularly significant for all routings identified to the south of the town. The Study, at Section 7, identifies a number of key and significant local environmental constraints which affect the deliverability of a southbound link, irrespective of whether in

- 17 -

patronage and transport planning terms it made sense. The plan below identifies these constraints.

The southbound route to Liphook passes through seven areas with statutory designations, and has a direct land take impact on a number of SSSI’s, Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) and Special Protection Areas (SPAs), the later two being afforded European Protection. This routeing also presents potential access issues to two areas of Common Land, The southbound route to Liss would similarly require direct land take from the European and nationally designated sites, passing through or adjacent to SSSI’s, an SAC and SPA, as well as adjacent to a scheduled ancient monument. The Bentley Alignment presents least number of constraints. It passes through the South Downs National Park (as do all options) but does not require direct land take from any statutory designated areas. Any options which passes through Special Areas of Conservation or Special Protection Areas or requires direct land take from these areas, should be avoided as it would be required to demonstrate that there are no adverse impacts on these sites and there are no other feasible alternatives. This would present a significant to the delivery of any potential routeing south to Liss or Liphook. It is the County Council’s view that this would prove to be a virtually insurmountable barrier. Summary In summary, the Heavy Rail ‘Through’ Route to Bentley is the only option assessed that demonstrates a positive business case, and that warrants further investigation at this stage. In all other options the ‘costs’ exceed the ‘benefits’ and there is not a sufficiently positive business case for these to be considered further at this time.

- 18 -

The lack of peak time operational capacity on the Portsmouth mainline, coupled with the significant environmental constraints for all routeing options to connect to the Portsmouth Mainline, mean that these routeing options are not likely to be deliverable or fundable. Environmental concerns will be addressed in the studies that follow, long before any final decision can be reached. Additionally, such options, for the reasons set out, will not receive the support of the rail authorities Network Rail, Department for Transport Rail or the local train operators. Option

Via Bentley

Via Liss

Capital Cost

£130M

Highest Demand

1 million trips per annum

Environmental Constraints

No land take Significant as from Statutory requires land designations. take from Statutory designations Options Only options identified for identified for peak and off off peak peak through through running running

Operational Feasibility

Highest BCR Recommendation

2.14 Progress to GRIP3

Via Liphook

Via Alton

£134M £155M £284M £167M 512k trips per 592k trips per 558k trips per annum annum annum

0.41 Do Not Progress to GRIP3

- 19 -

Significant as requires land take from Statutory designations Only options identified for off peak through running

Significant as requires land take from Statutory designations Options identified for peak and off peak through running

0.45

0.22

Do Not Progress to GRIP3

Agenda item 2 Delivery Board 15 December 2011: Matters Arising Reports Minutes of 14 September 2011 Item 12: Outcomes from Specialist Groups and Chairman/ Vice Chairman/ Lead Officers meetings The recent Standing conference raised that education and skills needs to have a stronger focus (page 73 of report). Education and skills centre and training cover the work of two Specialist Groups â&#x20AC;&#x201C; infrastructure, education and transport, and economic development. The theme leads for these Specialist Groups have already had discussions which will be taken back to the Chairs of these groups to ensure work is done between the two groups. To ensure that the topics of skills provision and education are coordinated, a request was made that there should be a brief report brought back to the Delivery Board at the December meeting.

Co-ordination of Skills Provision and Education Following the recognition at the September Delivery Board that the topic of skills and education was covered by two Specialist Groups a joint meeting of the infrastructure, education and transport and economic development groups has been held to debate the subject. The meeting was attended by a wide range of members from both groups, including the Town Partnership and Town Council, Hampshire County Council, Mill Chase School, Alton College, Job Centreplus, East Hampshire Community Partnership and Community First East Hants. Each representative at the meeting was asked what they understood the issues and needs to be for education and skills in the town. Responses ranged from the need for a long term comprehensive learning vision, to a desire to create a skills centre in the short term to support local unemployed people. The debate demonstrated a need and willingness for a coherent and co-ordinated approach to education and skills, as it showed many things are already being delivered by individual organisations which if brought together and promoted could effectively meet some of the short term needs. The issue of funding and how to attract investment in skills and education was discussed and it was agreed for long term investment a strong, robust and comprehensive business case needs to be developed, and for the shorter term provision existing programmes such as apprenticeship could be made better use of. In conclusion the meeting agreed there were two areas of work that required further development in order to progress the issue of skills and education into action and delivery. The outcome was the creation of two work-streams with representatives at the meeting agreeing to participate in further work on the creation of a long term vision and to explore how shorter term improvements in skills training may be achieved for the town. Initial work for these two work-streams include an audit of what is being delivered currently and promoting this on the eco-town website, identifying the gaps in support and training which a skills centre could meet and sources of funding, and a strategy for future provision of education and skills for Whitehill Bordon across all age ranges.

- 20 -

Item 13: Project progress report - 2.11.2 Enterprise Zone (page 82) – many of the benefits that an enterprise zone can bring are open to us anyway. A further report, by the economic development theme lead will come to the delivery board at the next meeting.

Enterprise Zones The Government’s criteria for the creation of enterprise zones was that they must: Be 50-150 hectares in size Support genuinely additional growth – create new jobs and new businesses by 2015 Be based most likely on “clean sites” with few or no existing occupiers Avoid local competition Focus on target sectors The MoD sites in Whitehill Bordon to be used as employment areas for the Eco-town were included in the wider local enterprise partnership (LEP) bid for Enterprise M3, along with sites in Basingstoke and Farnborough. The rationale being that the sites individually were not of the scale or potential to meet the criteria for a bid. On 17 August 2011 the Department of Communities and Local Government (DCLG) announced the award of its second round of Enterprise Zones for 11 LEP bids. The Enterprise M3 bid was not successful. The benefits of being awarded the Enterprise Zone status are: Business rate discounts – 100% reduction worth up to £275,000 per business over a five year period – funded by Government Retention of all Business Rate growth within the zone – for 25 years Simplified planning controls – through a Local Development Order Broadband provision – possibly public sector funded

The aim of Enterprise Zones is to stimulate economic growth and job creation by providing a competitively attractive and investment friendly area in which to establish a business. Many of the benefits conferred by Enterprise Zone status are, or soon will be, available to councils to implement at their discretion and cost. East Hampshire District Council will have to agree its policy toward offering these forms of local incentives. The Eco-town can still pursue measures to make the employment areas competitive and enhance their ability to generate economic growth. This includes: publishing development / design briefs for employment sites to provide clarity, certainty and confidence to the market securing next generation broadband infrastructure by working with Hampshire County Council and private sector providers working with Enterprise M3 so that Eco-town opportunities are not seen in isolation and that the wider benefits of the surrounding areas are maximised understanding the needs and potential of target sectors

- 21 -

Agenda item 6 MINUTES FOR A WORKING GROUP MEETING - 30 SEPTEMBER 2011

Attendees

Initials

Organisation

Col. Ansell

Col.A

Garrison

Lt.Col. Colin MetCalfe

Richard Nelson

Samantha Tarling

Jon Rose

AMEC

John Walker

Project team

Ian Parker

Sue Robbins

Item

DIO / GVA

Subject

Follow-up / Actions

Overall programme and implications for release of land RN outlined the need for the Whitehill Bordon Delivery Board to liaise and work with the MoD during the transition period. This would include discussing practical matters such as the release and handover of buildings. A quarterly meeting of this group was proposed and agreed, supported by a monthly (or as needs be) meeting of a working team to take forward the various pieces of work relating to the move of the MoD. RN also suggested that the group needs to develop some timelines for the work and to fit it into the overall project governance. Terms of reference and how this team would fit with the Whitehill Bordon project governance to be drafted.

DIO/GVA

Jon Rose from AMEC joined the meeting and explained his role in advising the DTTCP (Defence Technical Team Change Programme). The team is looking at all the work needed for relocation from existing premises to the new facilities, including technical training, operations and contract arrangements, i.e. not just estate issues.

JW expressed the need for the Delivery Board to express what it wants and when, in order to negotiate and influence the MoD Programme.

Project team

ST will circulate the programme for outline planning application when available.

DIO/GVA

Degree of uncertainty and flexibility in programme â&#x20AC;&#x201C; particularly relating to land on which the new town centre may be developed. Col.A explained there are two possible options for the move which is being planned for 2015; wholesale move; or slow transition over the

- 22 -

Item

Subject

Follow-up / Actions

two year training programme by reducing the pipeline of students, moving and then rebuilding the pipeline. The Technical Training Area and Prince Philip Barracks are linked operations and will be in use until the move. Louisburg Barracks is likely to be vacant within the next 24 months. IP outlined that it would be useful to gain access to the land in order to put in infrastructure in advance of development. There could be some flexibility to allow access if it does not impact or affect training and operations. And some single buildings may become vacant. JW proposed that the project team needs to map out when and what access for infrastructure is needed.

Project team

JR agreed that there needs to be a map of uses, infrastructure needs and current site uses, to start to create a programme of development. 3

Implications for business and civilian employment in Bordon opportunities for training/retraining. IP recognised there is a mismatch between people’s expectation of the timing move and the interest and investment that will occur – it is a lot longer timetable than people think. Even if people don’t move there is a perception that the town is closing which may stifle investment or cause de-investment. Col.A outlined the support for the area, events and facilities the Garrison already offers. A number of these organisations are in leased premises from the Garrison (see below extract from Bordon Garrison brochure). The impact of the loss of these also needs to be accounted for as well as the loss of personnel and businesses. Alan Johnson (Major retired) is the contact for more information on community engagement.

Project team

Royal Electrical and Mechanical Engineers (REME) has a newsletter that could be used a channel to promote and brief about the project. An economic impact study has been completed for Hampshire (and Oxfordshire) by Segal, Quince and Wicksteed (SQW) – the final report is being prepared and will be available soon. The Hampshire Economic Military Partnership is a group looking at these issues – SR is a member.

Project team

JW outlined the four impacts facing the town: Direct jobs, indirect jobs, facilities and events. JR explained that there would a socio-economic impact study written to support any future planning application. GVA and AMEC are to start this piece of work soon. 4

Quebec Barracks - possibility of using some of receipt for ongoing

- 23 -

AMEC

Item

Subject

Follow-up / Actions

development management The topic was not covered at the meeting. 5

Assessment of the withdrawal of personnel – serving / civilians This topic was covered in item 3

Any other business None

Date of next meeting

DIO/GVA

To be arranged

Community Support Extract from Bordon Garrison brochure

Pre-school & Creche – employs 23 staff with approximately 84 military and 56 civilian children using the facility

Bordon & Oakhanger Sports Club (BOSC) – occupies buildings on land leased from MoD

Phoenix Theatre – occupies a building leased from MoD

Bordon Scouts – occupies a building as an encroachment from Bordon Garrison

Garrison Church – used by many of the civilian community

Garrison Cemetery – not envisaged that this would be relocated

Service families accommodation – all owned by Annington Property Ltd. As well accommodating Bordon Garrison it is increasingly used to accommodate overspill from RAF Odiham, Thorney Island and Aldershot.

- 24 -

Agenda item 7

Whitehill Bordon Opportunity Delivery Board ______________________________________________________________ Date of meeting:

15 December 2011

Title of report:

Landowners’ update

Author:

Richard Nelson MoD Defence Infrastructure Organisation

Reference no: WBPD035-2011 ______________________________________________________________ Executive Summary:

This report has been produced to update the Delivery Board on the ongoing 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 “Whitehill Bordon Eco-town boundary”. On 18 July Secretary of State for Defence, Dr. Liam Fox, announced ‘RAF Lyneham is the preferred location for future Defence Technical Training. This confirms that the Department will withdraw from Arborfield, in Berkshire and Bordon, in Hampshire, releasing the sites for sale by 2014-15 at the latest.’ This reconfirmation of the release of land at Bordon Garrison generates land to enable the desired development to proceed. The principal landowners have discussed a range of issues, including the objectives and role of the Landowners’ Forum. More recent discussions have included an update on the Defence Technical Training Change Programme (DTTCP), and the appointment of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (PwC) to provide commercial strategy for development. Furthermore the appointment of GVA and Amec and funding and resource matters the proposed demonstration project outlined by Department of Communities and Local Government (DCLG) and the initial high level objectives and vision for the project, a strategy to deliver the development and the need for a Landowners’ Equalisation Agreement and the appointment of a planning consultant.

Date: 25 November 2011 Version: One

Status of Report: Public

K:\Corporate Shared Folders\Whitehill Bordon\011 Meetings\Delivery Board Partners: EAST HAMPSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL, HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN PARTNERSHIP, MINISTRY of DEFENCE, HOMES & COMMUNITIES AGENCY - 25 -

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 15 September 2011. 2 Subject of report / options and considerations 2.1 The landowners, i.e. those likely to be selling their landholdings for development and redevelopment in and around the “Whitehill Bordon Eco-town boundary”, and those likely to be directly affected by the development have continued to meet informally since the last Delivery Board meeting on the 15 September 2011. 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) –Jo Barden Hernandez

Other intendees, by invitation have included: 

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



Mandar Puranik from EHDC Eco-town team

Other landowners in the vicinity of the Eco-town development will also have the opportunity to attend the formal landowners’ meetings by invitation. These include representatives from: 

Viking Park Industrial Estate - Mike Christmas, of Earl Estates who represents Viking Properties, attended a meeting on 8 September 2011.

2.3 Those present at the meetings have discussed a number of issues. 

Land availability and release of land.



The creation of a formal Landowners’ Forum, including membership and chairmanship of said forum as well as the roles and objectives of that group.



Data collection and information management.



The appointment of a property/ planning consultant.



The need for a Land Value Equalisation Agreement.



The need for disposal processes and programmes.



The need for a strategy to deliver the development.



The appointment of a Development Partner.



Funding and resources required.



The development of a demonstration project as requested by DCLG.



The work undertaken by the Land Trust.

Quebec Barracks 2.4 Members of the Landowners’ Group are assisting the Quebec Barracks project team to work up a strategic project plan to build out a further demonstration development as requested by Department of Communities and Local Government (DCLG). This would involve part of the proposed development land coming forward earlier than initially planned. Following the announcement from the Secretary of State reconfirming the vacation and subsequent disposal of the garrison, MoD has been approached regarding the early release of Quebec Barracks. K:\Corporate Shared Folders\Whitehill Bordon\011 Meetings\Delivery Board Partners: EAST HAMPSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL, HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN PARTNERSHIP, MINISTRY of DEFENCE, HOMES & COMMUNITIES AGENCY - 27 -

An initial vision statement incorporating high level objectives has been agreed by the Board. It is anticipated that these objectives will be incorporated into the demonstration project. Project team meetings have been scheduled in order to discuss a project plan and a development brief. A few sites have been highlighted as possibilities. Discussions are ongoing and all those involved are working collaboratively. 2.5 As Chairman of the Landowners’ Group Richard Nelson was asked by the Delivery Board to assist the Delivery Board to procure an appropriate commercial advisor. Deloitte, KPMG and PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (PwC) were invited to submit proposals. Following individual briefing meetings each organisation submitted a draft proposal. They then presented their proposals to the Delivery Board members. The Project Director on behalf of the Delivery Board is finalising the appointment of PwC. 2.6 The Landowners’ Group received a useful presentation from the Land Trust on 24 November 2011. Following this presentation, the Landowners’ Group (core) can see the merit in organisations such as the Land Trust being useful in the delivery of the project going forward. The Landowners’ Group urges the relevant Specialist Groups to give the management and maintenance of open space and community assets their early attention. 2.7 What we are intending to do going forward:  To hold monthly meetings with the core attendees. 

Hold quarterly meetings with the wider Landowners Group and issue invites to join the forum to other landowners.



The core landowners have commissioned GVA and Amec to undertake the work to support submission of an outline planning application for the whole site. Proposed timescales of 18 – 24 months.



Develop a Land Equalisation Agreement. Draft Heads of Terms will be circulated to the Core Landowners by end of the month.

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. K:\Corporate Shared Folders\Whitehill Bordon\011 Meetings\Delivery Board Partners: EAST HAMPSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL, HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN PARTNERSHIP, MINISTRY of DEFENCE, HOMES & COMMUNITIES AGENCY - 28 -

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 is critical to the achievement of the Eco-town, and hence the Delivery Board’s objectives. 4.2 The work being undertaken by the Landowners’ Group is inline with the Whitehill Bordon Eco-town vision. 5 Resource implications 5.1 The resource implications are currently being assessed and reviewed. 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 8

Whitehill Bordon Opportunity Delivery Board ______________________________________________________________ Date of meeting:

15th December 2011

Title of report:

Quebec Barracks Development Principles

Author:

Susan Robbins, Economic Development Theme Lead

Reference no: WBDP036-2011 ______________________________________________________________ Executive Summary: (Not more than 2 small paragraphs) At the Delivery Board meeting in September the high level objectives for the development of the early demonstration site at Quebec Barracks were endorsed. At that time the Board requested a set of development principles, translating the objectives into scheme deliverables to be presented at this meeting. The development principles have been drafted in consultation with the Quebec Barracks project team, East Hampshire District Council planning services and the Eco-town project team. They have also been the subject of a workshop at the Standing Conference meeting in December, to gain wider community input and comment.

Date: 2nd December 2011 Version: 2

Status of Report: Public (Exempt or Public)

Purpose of report:

The purpose of this report is to present to the Delivery Board the draft Development Principles for the early demonstration site on Quebec Barracks, given in Appendix 1. Recommendations requiring Board considerations:

The Board is asked to endorse the draft Development Principles, subject to incorporation of the priority features and design approaches identified in the Standing Conference workshop. Consultation and comments received:

The draft Development Principles have been drafted in consultation with the Quebec Barracks project team, East Hampshire District Council planning services and the Eco-town project team. They have also been the subject of a workshop at the Standing Conference meeting in December, to gain wider community input and comment. The feedback from this workshop is given in Appendix 2. Community engagement proposals:

The draft Development Principles will be subject to further public consultation. The involvement and input of the local community, including the town council, will be sought through a number of engagements including meetings, presentations, workshops and consultations.

1 Background (reason for report) 1.1 A project team has been set up to coordinate and facilitate the work needed to support the Defence Infrastructure Organisation bringing the Quebec Barracks site forward as an early Eco-town demonstration scheme. A set of high level objectives have been endorsed by the Delivery Board and now these have been translated into Development Principles which give greater detail about the nature and type of development being sought.

1.2 The Delivery Board requested at its last meeting that the Development Principles be brought to this meeting for their consideration and endorsement. 2 Subject of report / options and considerations 2.1 The draft Development Principles provide information on the planning policy framework under which any future application would be considered, the Eco-town vision and the supporting targets that the scheme would need to positively contribute towards and specific site requirements. The Principles also propose the Eco-town demonstration features that should be considered for the development, such as a green route and green links, sustainable energy system, water neutrality and sustainable drainage system. 3 Risk assessment (must include consideration of the environmental, financial, health and safety and equalities impact assessment) 3.1 Without the Eco-town project stating the nature and type of development it wishes to see for the early demonstration scheme on Quebec Barracks, there is a risk that it will not deliver an exemplar scheme. This will mean that the community will not have the development it is expecting, environmental measures will not be include to achieve carbon and water neutrality etc., impacts will not be mitigated against and a viable scheme will not be achieved. 3.2 The draft Development Principles help to provide a framework under which planning applications will be assessed, and therefore they remove a degree of uncertainty and risk for future developers. 4 Contributions to Delivery Board Priorities 4.1 The Quebec Barracks scheme is to be an early demonstration exemplar that will contribute to the achievement of the Eco-town vision and supporting targets. 5 Resource implications 5.1 The Quebec Barracks project team is coordinating the drafting of the draft Development Principles but has drawn on the resources of the district council planning officers for advice and guidance. It is likely that the need for this resource will continue in the short term to medium. 5.2 Resources are also being sought from the Eco-town project team theme leads to support, and in some cases lead, a number of work-streams needed to achieve a successful exemplar scheme, for example releasing Bordon Inclosure and the demonstration features. K:\Corporate Shared Folders\Whitehill Bordon\011 Meetings\Delivery Board Partners: EAST HAMPSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL, HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN PARTNERSHIP, MINISTRY of DEFENCE, HOMES & COMMUNITIES AGENCY - 32 -

6 Cost implications 6.1 The delivery of an early demonstration scheme for the Eco-town attracted ÂŁ2m of additional capital project funding for Whitehill Bordon. Work is being developed and progressed on two demonstration features that would have cost implications; a whole site, smart approach to energy generation and management and the release of Bordon Inclosure as a suitable alternative natural greenspace (SANG). 6.2 The project team itself does not have a cost implication, however it will coordinate work that does, and this will be funded by individual partners, or it may commission work for which it will seek or request funds for these specific activities. 7 Conclusion 7.1 In order to ensure the development of the Quebec Barracks site meets the high level objectives already established, a set of Development Principles have been drafted. These provide the details of site requirements, standards to be met and Eco-town demonstration features to be incorporated in the scheme. 8 Appendix Appendix 1 Quebec Barracks Draft Development Principles Appendix 2 Standing Conference Workshop Notes

Appendix 1: Quebec Barracks Draft Development Principles Quebec Barracks, Whitehill Bordon Eco-town Development Principles

DRAFT

Quebec Barracks Development Site Whitehill Bordon Eco-town Development Principles

Draft â&#x20AC;&#x201C; December 2011 Version 4: For consideration by the Eco-town Delivery Board

December 2011 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Version 4

-1-

Quebec Barracks, Whitehill Bordon Eco-town Development Principles

DRAFT

Introduction Whitehill Bordon was awarded Eco-town status in July 2009 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; along with three other towns. It is on the doorstep on the new South Downs National Park and surrounded by beautiful countryside, including the protected European habitats of Woolmer Forest, Shortheath Common, Kingsley Common and Broxhead Common. The Ministry of Defence has announced that it will be leaving Whitehill Bordon and relocating its training to RAF Lyneham, in Wiltshire. This provides the town with a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for regeneration. The regeneration of the town will ensure that the environment is protected and enhanced. Objective of the Development Principles The Ministry of Defence confirmed in July 2011 that Bordon Garrison and School of Electrical & Mechanical Engineering (SEME) will withdrawal for its base in Bordon no later than 2014/2015. This statement of development principles will inform the MoD as landowner and local communities and stakeholders as to the development potential of the Quebec Barracks site. The Site The Quebec Barracks site is in MoD ownership but has been surplus to requirements for some time. The site is therefore being disposed of as an early demonstration scheme that will set the benchmark for future Eco-town development. It is a high profile site located on the A325, identified in the Eco-town draft framework masterplan as a mixed use site for housing and employment. It is anticipated the site will come to market April 2012. The 3.26ha (8 acre) site is a located on the eastern side of Camp Road (the A325) in Bordon. It has a road frontage to the west, housing to the north and south and Bordon Inclosure a 22ha (54 acre) mixed woodland site to the east. The neighbouring housing is owned by Annington Property Limited and is used for army accommodation. The site gently slopes south to north and has a green corridor running along the boundary with Camp Road which should the retained and enhanced. Access to the site is directly off Camp Road. A site plan is given in Appendix 1. The site has a number of existing buildings and structures including barrack blocks, temporary porta-cabins and various communal/social buildings for use by army personnel, a sub-station, sealed air raid shelters and a public underpass. Whilst none of these buildings are listed, consideration should be given as to whether there is potential to re-use one or some of the buildings in order to retain the character and visual heritage of the army and to adhere to Eco-town principles. There are a range of facilities in the immediate area including a convenience store, post office, village hall, community centre and play areas to which the development needs to ensure easy access.

December 2011 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Version 4

-2-

Quebec Barracks, Whitehill Bordon Eco-town Development Principles

DRAFT

Opportunities The site provides an opportunity for the regeneration of an unused site in a high profile location of the town. It is the first chance to demonstrate to the local community, and potential new residents and investors, the quality and nature of development that will be sought in the wider Eco-town. It allows the site to become integrated with the neighbouring communities, rebalance the local housing mix, commence the creation of a green corridor and an improved pedestrian link to local community facilities. It will build market confidence in the development and investment potential of the Eco-town by through a commitment to delivery and the quality of development.

Planning Policy East Hampshire District Local Plan: Part 1 - Joint Core Strategy Whitehill Bordon chapter (draft Sept 2011) The East Hampshire Joint Core Strategy Whitehill Bordon chapter is currently going through its adoption process with approval scheduled for December 2012. Further guidance on the design and character of the development will be provided in the town’s Neighbourhood Quality Charters, due in March 2012. The Joint Core Strategy Whitehill Bordon Chapter states that proposals for new development must include sustainable development principles and sustainable construction methods and is supported by 18 core objectives. Whitehill Bordon Draft Framework Masterplan Whitehill Bordon’s draft masterplan has been accepted as an overall framework for how development should take place in the town. It safeguards the town from piecemeal development and ensures that residents get the best possible facilities and infrastructure to support the overall regeneration of the town. It will be taken into consideration when planning applications are decided. The draft masterplan proposes:  a new mixed-use town centre with around 30,000 square metres of retail area  up to three new primary schools, early years centres and a new children’s centre  improved and larger facilities for the secondary school  skills training and further education facilities  sites for commercial leisure facilities  around 4,000 new homes on the MoD land  a public sports hub with a leisure centre and pitches  local healthcare and emergency services  around 70,000 square metres of eco-business park floorpsace and opportunities for the creation of around 5,500 jobs

December 2011 – Version 4

-3-

Quebec Barracks, Whitehill Bordon Eco-town Development Principles   

DRAFT

around 127 hectares of new publicly accessible greenspace a central public transport hub and modern public transport system retrofitting of existing homes and businesses to improve energy and water efficiency and reduce utility bills

The Whitehill Bordon Eco-town draft masterplan (June 2011) sets out three development phases; now until 2015 when the garrison withdraws; 2015 to 2019 and 2020 to 2028.

Eco-town Vision and Targets Eco-Town Delivery Board Policy The delivery of the Eco-town is managed by a Delivery Board which is a partnership between the landowners, stakeholders and the local community. All development within the Eco-town, sponsored by the Delivery Board, must adhere to the Eco-town Vision and Targets to which all members have signed up. The latest version was approved by the Board at its meeting in September 2011 (see Appendix 2). This means that planning applications must show how development schemes will achieve these targets as well as those set out in the Core Strategy and other documents, especially the One Planet Living strategy (see Appendix 3) and other masterplan evidence base studies. A full list of studies is given in Appendix 4. Eco-town Vision The Whitehill Bordon Eco-town vision puts the outstanding natural environment at the heart of the regeneration. New facilities, leisure opportunities, jobs, education, infrastructure and housing will be provided to enhance this unique area and create a model sustainable community that is recognised locally, nationally and internationally. The vision is to create a town where regeneration is designed with people and nature as a priority and the built environment in the town is improved so that it complements the superb surrounding landscape and in a way that encourages and enable people to live and work in ways that does not damage the natural resources upon which society and the economy depends. Regeneration should use innovative, modern, environmentally-friendly design, incorporating eco homes and modern methods of construction. Eco-town targets The vision is supported by a range of targets which development must make a positive contribution towards achieving. These are:  a net increase in biodiversity;  creating a low carbon community, securing carbon neutrality where the whole town including new development will not exceed the current carbon footprint;  increasing local employment by creating at least one job per new household and replacing 1,500 jobs lost by the withdrawal of the army;  improving the facilities available and access to them from within the town and the wider community;

December 2011 – Version 4

-4-

Quebec Barracks, Whitehill Bordon Eco-town Development Principles  



DRAFT

good quality, well-designed, low carbon homes within walking distance of shops and facilities; improving public transport and better opportunities for walking and cycling, and reducing car use within the town to not more than 50% of journeys to be undertaken by car reducing water demand and wastage so that the whole of the town including new development achieves water neutrality

High Level Objectives for the Site The Delivery Board at it September 2011 meeting, as well as agreeing the Eco-town vision and targets, agreed a set of high level objectives for the Quebec Barracks scheme. These will ensure the development       

Create a statement development with high visual impact that demonstrates the Eco-town vision Deliver exceptionally good design and set the standard for further Eco-town development in line with the neighbourhood quality charter Meet exemplar Eco-town aspirations in one or more areas of biodiversity, carbon neutrality, employment, facilities, homes, transport, or water neutrality Deliver a mixed use scheme of housing with some employment Commence the creation of the Green Corridor along the A325 Link into, and integrate with, the existing and future town and work with the rest of the masterplan Make a proportionate and appropriate contribution to the wider infrastructure requirement of the Eco-town

Specific Requirements for the Site -

All homes to be built to Code for Sustainable Homes level 5 Provision of one job per dwelling Broadband supply for all homes to facilitate home working Provision of a green corridor along the A325 and a green link route through the site from the Bordon Inclosure Release of Bordon Inclosure to provide Suitable Alternative Natural Greenspace to avoid visitor impact on the European Protected Sites Net gain in biodiversity with native species planting within the development site that respects the landscape character Improved/new crossing of the A325 to link site to community facilities opposite Affordable housing requirement of 35%

A planning application should be supported by documents covering the following principles to explain how the development would meet the objectives outlined above.

December 2011 – Version 4

-5-

Quebec Barracks, Whitehill Bordon Eco-town Development Principles

DRAFT

Biodiversity and landscaping - Mitigate against negative impacts on Bordon Inclosure’s biodiversity, which could include garden run-off, fly-tipping, uncontrolled disturbance from domestic pets, unmanaged access, light pollution and nutrient enrichment. - Types of species to be used in planting – this should comprise native species in keeping with the area; - How the development would provide for increased biodiversity. Carbon Neutrality and building design - Details of how the buildings are designed to be sustainable and as carbon neutral as possible; - Details of measures to be implemented to encourage a greener lifestyle for residents; - Details of renewable technologies and sustainable energy systems to be used Employment - Details of the types and amount of employment to be provided and how this would meet the one job per dwelling objective. Facilities - How the site will integrate with neighbouring communities and improve access to local facilities, amenities and green space Access and transport - Site access and layout - Parking provision and layout; - Public transport provision and links to existing, and measures to be implemented to encourage the use of alternative transport to the private car. Water Neutrality - Details of water efficiency measures to reduce the demand for water, including water capture and recycling - The design of a sustainable urban drainage system for the site

Site Requirements – Further Details Biodiversity and Landscaping Mitigate against negative impacts on Bordon Inclosure’s biodiversity, which could include garden run-off, fly-tipping, uncontrolled disturbance from domestic pets, unmanaged access, light pollution and nutrient enrichment. Use native species in keeping with the area for the planting of trees and hedges to soften landscaping around development to enhance local habitats. Commence the creation of the green corridor along the A325 frontage, provide a green link route through the site from Bordon Inclosure, across the A325 and onto the Bordon camp green space and provide amenity open/play space on site.

December 2011 – Version 4

-6-

Quebec Barracks, Whitehill Bordon Eco-town Development Principles

DRAFT

The scheme needs to provide for increased biodiversity in the design of landscaping within the site, which means preserving trees and improving the natural landscape. Designs should consider other features like reduction of tarmac, lower curb heights and preference for greenspaces and permeable surfaces, reduction in carriageway widths, improvement in private garden size and the potential to use gardens or allotment areas for vegetables growing. In addition elements like green roofs can reduce run off as well as contributing to an increase in biodiversity. The flora and fauna of Whitehill Bordon is an important part of its uniqueness. Most of the development site is underlain by very permeable sand and gravels. The water table is high. This wet and dry heathland habitat can be recreated in landscape schemes using native and local planting which is well adapted to the extremes of drought and dampness. In addition native species should be sourced from local reputable suppliers where the stock has been able to adapt to the local conditions over many years. A reduction in hard surfaces and an increase in planted, green areas, green roofs and trees will have the effect of reducing the urban heat island effect and increasing air quality through evapotranspiration and photosynthesis. Carbon Neutrality The target is for carbon neutrality throughout the town. This means that new developments will have to show how they are constructed sustainably and how their running will be as carbon neutral as possible, but also how residents of the development can be encouraged to live a greener lifestyle. Issues like private car use, recycling, access to local jobs and local food sources all promote a greener lifestyle. The suggestion is that this development becomes an exemplar for local energy generation, management and storage to reduce stress on the wider electrical transmission network. This is linked to a town-wide aspiration for smarter electrical use. The Eco-town project team have been offered the opportunity to bid for project funding through OfGen from Tier 1 Low Carbon Network Fund (LCNF) in partnership with Scottish and Southern Energy (Distribution Network Operator) which would: 1. Provide the kit for onsite energy storage and smart grid management 2. Offer advice for heating passively designed eco-houses with high levels of insulation and low levels of ventilation and seepage. 3. Offer advice to the development partnership on renewable and low carbon technologies and equipment, which compliments the local transmission network 4. Provides the technology to link these efficiently to the local transmission network and take advantage of more bespoke energy tariffs for homeowners and businesses on the site to deliver a higher level of energy security for the development and reduce the potential for consumers falling into fuel poverty.

December 2011 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Version 4

-7-

Quebec Barracks, Whitehill Bordon Eco-town Development Principles

DRAFT

This implies designing houses which are well insulated, well sealed and where a large proportion of major windows, winter-gardens and roofs face south. Employment The overriding planning requirement for development with the Eco-town is a minimum of one job per house. For this site the appropriate type of job creation should be to: Create a business centre for small entrepreneurial enterprises with access to shared facilities – either on site or linked to a near-by provision off site Design all housing so that residents can work from home, with between 10-25% of housing units designed to accommodate home working in a specific ground floor room with direct access from the public realm. Ensure broadband supply to facilitate home working in knowledge based activities with low impact on the residential community Facilities Communal facilities may include:  Allotments and edible planting  Community gardens with BBQ or other shared facilities  Natural play space  Natural landscaping  Recycling and composting Homes Provide low carbon homes that have been sustainably constructed and meet Code level 5 standards. The preference for this scheme is for houses not flats and for family homes with private gardens. Connect to existing streets and open spaces, with greater consideration given to accessing community facilities and employment uses. The intention is to create permeable neighbourhoods with easy walking and cycling routes between neighbourhoods. The new development needs to integrate with neighbouring communities on Trenchard Park and Saint Lucia Park, making practical use of the verges that currently lie outside the wire fence. Gardens backing these surrounding streets will not be acceptable. It is important that the scheme consider the surrounding housing and consider how design of housing and facilities within the site will contribute to the streetscape of Trenchard and St Lucia Park and will mitigate against some of the drawbacks of those schemes. Traffic and transport The vehicular access to the site should be taken from the existing access on A325 Camp Road and an application will need to demonstrate that this access can accommodate the development in both safety and operation terms. This scheme provides an opportunity to consider innovative, efficient and exemplar ways of providing parking on the site. These will need to be in line with the Car

December 2011 – Version 4

-8-

Quebec Barracks, Whitehill Bordon Eco-town Development Principles

DRAFT

Parking Strategy for the town (which will be available from March 2012). Ecodevelopment works best when access to cycling or public transport is easier than access to the car. The layout of the site therefore should use best practice and innovative approaches to create a truly permeable site which is accessible to all modes of transport. Manual for Streets should be used and the concepts of shared space/ home-zone concepts considered. Good, direct links to the bus stops on both sides of the A325 need to be created. Options for promoting green transport initiatives should be covered in a Travel Plan for the scheme this could include on site care share scheme, electric car charging points, electric bike hire, smart points in homes and personalised journey planning and provision of quality travel information. A new at grade crossing of the A325 to link site to the community facilities opposite and fill in the old underpass needs to be provided. Water Neutrality Houses should be designed to allow low water use with efficient fittings and community buildings should provide water capture and recycling on any communal facilities. The water run-off should be designed on sustainable urban drainage systems (SUDS) principals. In particular this means a reduction on non-permeable surfaces, the channelling of surface water into swales and basins and ponds. In addition large areas of grass or soft surface can be designed to reduce peak surface water flows as a result of heavy rainfall events.

Principles of Design The Eco-town vision expects excellent quality of design, this implies the use of qualified, well respected firms of architects who have experience in designing ecodevelopments and who have a reputation for ecologically sensitive, modern design. Building for Life provides an umbrella for many urban design and housing standards as well as the Neighbourhood Quality Charter

Specific documents required to support a planning application The following investigations and reports will be required to inform the preparation of an application for outline planning consent:      

Environmental Impact Assessment Ground Condition Survey and Contamination Assessment Topographical Survey Sustainability Appraisal Ecological Survey Air Quality

December 2011 – Version 4

-9-

Quebec Barracks, Whitehill Bordon Eco-town Development Principles            

DRAFT

Biodiversity Action Plan Arboricultural Survey Landscape Assessment and Visual Impact Archaeological Assessment Employment Transport Assessment Travel Plan (based on the Eco-town Draft Framework Travel Plan) Highway Access Survey Drainage Survey Flood Risk Assessment Sustainable Urban Drainage Strategy Affordable Housing Strategy

December 2011 – Version 4

- 10 -

Quebec Barracks, Whitehill Bordon Eco-town Development Principles

Quebec Barracks Site Plans

DRAFT

Appendix 1

Masterplan Site Location

Site Boundary

December 2011 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Version 4

- 11 -

Quebec Barracks, Whitehill Bordon Eco-town Development Principles

Eco-town Vision and Targets

DRAFT

Appendix 2

Our vision for Whitehill Bordon Eco-town will put the outstanding natural environment at the heart of the regeneration. The 'Eco-town Vision' means that new facilities, leisure opportunities, jobs, education, infrastructure and housing will be provided to enhance this unique area and create a model sustainable community that is recognised locally, regionally and nationally. Our Vision is as follows:  We will create an attractive town where people want to live, work, shop and play with excellent facilities, leisure opportunities, jobs, training opportunities and a balanced mix of housing.  We will regenerate and improve the built environment in the town so that it complements the superb surrounding landscape.  We will use innovative, modern, environmentally-friendly design, incorporating eco homes and modern methods of construction.  We will ensure that the town is regenerated in a way that encourages and enable us to live and work in ways that does not damage the natural resources upon which our society and economy depends.  We will create a town centre that is pedestrian friendly and is well connected to residential, employment and leisure areas  We will ensure there is accessible green space and attractive town squares  We will encourage investment by businesses and industries, and will particularly seek out those that share our vision of a sustainable, prosperous, environmentally-friendly community.  We will enhance and promote public transport so that it is easier to travel around the town and to other towns and cities  We will create a town where regeneration and ongoing management is designed with people and nature as our priority

Supporting Targets Biodiversity We aim to achieve a net increase in biodiversity and to safeguard protected sites. We will provide natural “green” spaces and corridors throughout the town for people and wildlife. Carbon Neutrality We will create a low carbon community. We will work with others to clarify and strengthen the definition and understanding of this concept. We will monitor and reduce the carbon footprint of the whole town by encouraging environmentally sustainable design and living. If possible, we will aim for the whole town to be “carbon neutral” by 2036. This will mean that the whole of the town, including the new development, will not exceed the current carbon footprint.

December 2011 – Version 4

- 12 -

Quebec Barracks, Whitehill Bordon Eco-town Development Principles

DRAFT

Employment and Jobs We will increase local jobs and encourage new and existing businesses and industries; in particular those which share our vision of a sustainable and environmentally-friendly community. We will create at least one new job per new household and will provide an additional 1,500 jobs to replace those lost by the withdrawal of the army from Whitehill Bordon. We will provide training opportunities for residents to maximise their employment prospects with the new businesses. Facilities We will seek to improve the facilities available in the town, including: Providing a new attractive and thriving town centre with a mix of uses (including community facilities);  New higher education and training facilities and schools;  New leisure facilities;  New and enhanced community facilities;  Health facilities; We will also improve access to these facilities from within the town and the wider community. Homes We will encourage a range of good quality, well-designed, low carbon homes built to the highest standards in well-planned neighbourhoods where people want to live. The new homes will be of different sizes, types and tenures to meet the needs of local people, and will be in walking distance of shops and facilities. Traffic and Transport We aim to improve public transport and provide better opportunities for walking and cycling, both within the town, and the surrounding area. We aim to reduce the use of the car within the town. Our target is for not more than 50% of journeys within the town to be undertaken by car. In the long-term we hope to achieve the highest levels of “sustainable” travel (eg by train, bicycle or foot) through a variety of transport measures. We will seek to restore a rail link for the town. Water Neutrality By using the existing water supply carefully and by reducing demand and wastage, we plan for the town to be “water neutral”. This means that the water used in the whole of the town, including new development, will not exceed current levels of water use.

December 2011 – Version 4

- 13 -

Quebec Barracks, Whitehill Bordon Eco-town Development Principles

One Planet Living Strategy – Ten Principles

DRAFT

Appendix 3

The One Planet Living strategy sets out a comprehensive approach and proposes actions needed to achieve the vision. It has been drafted with community involvement and is part of the Eco-town masterplan evidence base. The actions are grouped under ten guiding principles as per the One Plane Living framework. The following are actions identified for new building and development in particular: Zero Carbon -

new buildings need to have significantly reduced energy demands; high thermal performance will reduce the need for heating and cooling, energy efficient appliances will be provided or recommended and homes need to make effective use of natural lighting

Zero waste

new buildings need to provide suitable facilities for storage and segregation of recycling. Composting facilities will enable households to generate material from green waste for use on the garden or allotments. waste in construction target is for 95% of waste by weight generated by construction and demolition will be reclaimed or recycled – the approach to waste should include the application of reuse – deconstruct – demolish

Transport

reduce the need to travel and encourage low carbon modes of transport through the provision of local jobs, amenity and facilities as much as possible within walking and cycling distance new development should incorporate innovative street design to the latest design guidance to ensure streets are multi-functional spaces safe and accessible for all modes car parking should include innovative approaches to residential parking to maximise efficiency and minimise land requirements

Materials

low impact, durable, local, reclaimed and embodied carbon materials should be considered in the design and construction of new buildings

Local Food

new developments should provide space for local food growing; communal areas could have edible planting and fruit trees, town gardens and allotments

Water

water recycling and treatment such as rain water harvesting and grey water systems should be incorporated in new developments along with fitting water efficiency devices including innovative metering programmes sustainable urban drainage system (SUDS) is required to help control water run-off and manage ground water, systems could include green roofs, natural drainage paths and porous paving

December 2011 – Version 4

- 14 -

Quebec Barracks, Whitehill Bordon Eco-town Development Principles

DRAFT

Wildlife

new habitats are to be support through the complimentary selection of trees, shrubs and hedgerows; the provision of bird boxes and bat boxes will support nesting

Culture &

to support well designed homes and neighbourhoods new buildings will use the principles contained in the Building for Life standard

Equity & Economy

provision of sufficient space to meet the needs of local growing businesses and those seeking to start up, including business incubator units

Health & Happiness

design of neighbourhoods need to maximise opportunities for social exchange for example green space, allotments, wide pavements there should community involvement in decision making and project delivery

Heritage

December 2011 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Version 4

- 15 -

Quebec Barracks, Whitehill Bordon Eco-town Development Principles

Masterplan Evidence Base Studies               

DRAFT

Appendix 4

Economic Development and Employment Strategy Retail Impact and sequential analysis Energy Feasibility Study Energy Infrastructure and Service Delivery Study Water Cycle Study (WCS) Green Infrastructure Strategy Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA) and Land Management Report Playing pitches, built sports facilities and open spaces needs study for Whitehill Bordon Emerging Transport Strategy Rail Study Transport Model Car Parking Strategy (due March 2012) High Level Viability Study Viking Park Design and Feasibility Study One Planet Living Strategy

December 2011 – Version 4

- 16 -

Quebec Barracks, Whitehill Bordon Eco-town Development Principles

DRAFT

Distribution and Version Control Distribution List Name

Role

Action

Response

Sign-off / Feedback / For Info

Daphne Gardner

Project Director

Feedback

Wendy Shillam

Eco-town – Project Manager

Feedback

Bruce Collinson

Eco-town – Sustainability

Feedback

Mandar Puranik

Eco-town – Masterplan

Feedback

Sarah Allen

Eco-town – Housing

Feedback

Tim Wall

HCC – Transport

Feedback

Rebecca Altman Tony Whitty

EHDC – Planning EHDC – Planning

Feedback

Richard Nelson

DIO

Feedback

Samantha Tarling

GVA / DIO

Feedback

John Taylor

DIO – Estates Surveyor

Feedback

Gillian Griggs

GVA - Director

Feedback

Laura Smith

GVA - Planner

Feedback

Jon Rose

AMEC

Feedback

Rowena Broomfield

AMEC

Feedback

Ian Parker

Hampshire County Council

Feedback

Ian White

HCA Atlas

Feedback

Version Control Issue Date No.

Author

Reason for Amendment

10 Nov 2011

Susan Robbins

17 Nov 2011

Susan Robbins

Comments from Planning and Project Manager

18 Nov 2011

Susan Robbins

Comments from Sustainability Lead

2 Dec 2011

Susan Robbins

Comments from Project Director and Transport Lead

December 2011 – Version 4

- 17 -

WBDP036-2011 Appendix 2 Standing Conference Workshop Notes Whitehill Bordon Standing Conference 1 December 2011: Workshop Report A. Quebec Barracks draft Development Principles Summary The workshop was attended by 15 local stakeholders including representatives from parish, town, district and county councils, Specialist Groups, the garrison and the Ministry of Defence, Defence Infrastructure Organisation (MoD DIO). The group was given a summary of the high level objectives, the local views and scheme features identified at the previous Standing Conference workshop in September, and how these had been translated into draft development principles. The principles cover the site requirements and a range of site features that would contribute to the Eco-town vision and targets. A discussion then focused on the priority features the group felt should be considered in the site development. Design approaches were also highlighted. A summary of these are given below. Priority Features Two new priorities were strongly proposed by the group:

The subway under the A325 should be retained as either an underpass or the future developer could propose suitable, creative alternative uses.

The site is within a large housing area with few local opportunities for people to meet and socialise. A community facility, such as cafĂŠ or social club, is needed as central place for people to meet and to build community spirit. This could be accommodated within a business centre building.

A number of proposed site requirements and features in the draft Development Principles were supported:

The provision of some form of employment space which could also contain space for business training (and a cafĂŠ - see point above).

Broadband provision should be next generation super-fast broadband.

The green corridor should be clearly defined as the strip between the boundary with the A325 Camp Road and the inner service road.

Play space needs to be provided on site.

Footpaths and links to neighbouring facilities and communities are important and could link to the nearby green spaces. K:\Corporate Shared Folders\Whitehill Bordon\011 Meetings\Delivery Board Partners: EAST HAMPSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL, HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN PARTNERSHIP, MINISTRY of DEFENCE, HOMES & COMMUNITIES AGENCY - 51 -

Design Approaches As well as site requirements and features the discussion also touched on the design of the development. It was noted that this level of detail would be developed in future work including linking to the Neighbourhood Quality Charter and a possible workshop. The building design on the development needs to be visually pleasant and creative. Other design points to be considered included the mix of housing tenure and size and the treatment of the site access and junction with the A325. Additional Points It was felt that the name Quebec should be retained as it is an important link to the town’s history with the MoD. The possible need for a medical centre was raised and could be a potential use on the site. Allotments have been proposed as a feature for the new development however whether these would be permissible needs to be checked against the site’s contamination report. Conclusions The group stressed that this first site is crucial in making a statement about the town’s future and will need to be desirable and attractive to encourage people to move here. This will mean ensuring the right features are provided on the development. It will not be possible to accommodate every use and feature on this site and it should not be used to redress all the imbalances and meet all the needs which should fall to the wider Eco-town, therefore it needs to be seen in the context of a demonstrator site. In the workshop the group did identify and agree two priorities; the retention of the subway under the A325 and the need to provide a café / social meeting place on site. Many of the additional points and design approaches which the group discussed will be subject to further detailed work as the plans for the scheme are developed and refined.

Recommendations As a result of the workshop it is recommended that:

The draft development brief is amended to include: o The retention of the subway under the A325. o A café / social club as a community facility on the site possibly as part of a business centre.

A design workshop is organised to link the site to the Neighbourhood Quality Charter.

The name Quebec is retained in the name of the new development. K:\Corporate Shared Folders\Whitehill Bordon\011 Meetings\Delivery Board Partners: EAST HAMPSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL, HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN PARTNERSHIP, MINISTRY of DEFENCE, HOMES & COMMUNITIES AGENCY - 52 -

Agenda item 9

Whitehill Bordon Opportunity Delivery Board ______________________________________________________________ Date of meeting:

15th December 2011

Title of report:

Neighbourhood Quality Charter â&#x20AC;&#x201C; developing principles

Author:

Sarah Allan, Eco-housing and Retrofitting Theme Lead

Reference no: WBPD037-2011 ______________________________________________________________ Executive Summary: (Not more than 2 small paragraphs) This report describes what the Neighbourhood Quality Charter is, the work that has been carried out by the Housing Specialist Group to date, and sets out some early principles that will form the basis of the Charter. The draft principles in the appendix of this report were proposed by the Housing Specialist Group on October 27th 2011. A small group at the Standing Conference reviewed 3 principles. A further review of all the principles needs to be carried out by member of the Housing Specialist Group.

Date: 2nd December 2011 Version: v3

Status of Report: Public (Exempt or Public)

Purpose of report: The Housing Specialist Group agreed to prepare a Neighbourhood Quality Charter for Whitehill Bordon. The Charter will be a short document, owned by the group, with input from the wider community through the Standing Conference, and used to influence the development of the infrastructure and facilities designed to serve new homes and guide planning application decisions on their design. The Charter will set out core beliefs, principles and actions with the aim of expressing what well-designed and eco-friendly homes and neighbourhoods in the town must consider. The Charter is written into the Whitehill Bordon chapter of the draft joint Core Strategy. Building for Life has been a useful tool to help the group identify the elements that create a well designed neighbourhood. It is the national standard for well designed homes and neighbourhoods and has been tried and tested on newly built schemes and planning applications across the country. The Building for Life criteria are a series of 20 questions which are used to evaluate the quality of housing developments. The 20 questions are structured under four chapters: Environment and Community; Character; Streets Parking and Pedestrianisation; Design and Construction. Whilst Building for Life is an umbrella for other standards such as Lifetime Homes and Secured by Design, the Housing Specialist Group have discussed the need to also cover issues of integrating facilities for wildlife within developments. The Charter principles need to draw from other relevant guidance such as Biodiversity by Design. The 20 Building for Life criteria can be found in the appendix of this report. More information on Building for Life can also be found at www.buildingforlife.org. Recommendations requiring Board considerations: The Neighbourhood Quality Charter will be an important document that can influence and shape development briefs, provide the basis for developing design codes and contribute to clear and consistent decision making for future planning applications in the town. ď&#x201A;ˇ

Does the Delivery Board support the development of the Neighbourhood Quality Charter and will all representatives of the Delivery Board sign-up to the Charter when it is completed?

ď&#x201A;ˇ

Does the Delivery Board have any suggestions to help ensure the Charter is properly supported and used to influence the quality of future development and planning decisions?

Consultation and comments received: The Housing Specialist Group have contributed to each stage of the K:\Corporate Shared Folders\Whitehill Bordon\011 Meetings\Delivery Board Partners: EAST HAMPSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL, HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN PARTNERSHIP, MINISTRY of DEFENCE, HOMES & COMMUNITIES AGENCY - 54 -

development of the charter, including site visits in the town and to other developments as well as the first draft Charter principles. However, the Housing Specialist Group remains receptive to other standards, other ideas and new technologies and remains ready to incorporate any future suggestions. A small group at the Standing Conference reviewed 3 principles. A further review of all the principles needs to be carried out by members of the Housing Specialist Group. See section 2 for Housing Specialist Group contribution to first draft Charter principles. Community engagement proposals: The community have been engaged through the Housing Specialist Group and the Standing Conference. Information about the development of the Charter was included as part of the consultation information for the neighbourhood masterplan consultation events. Further workshops are being planned for the New Year, to allow the Specialist Group to focus on particularly challenging areas such as car parking.

1 Background (reason for report) What have we done so far? 1.1 7 neighbourhood reviews Over the last six months, members of the Housing Specialist Group have been looking at a sample of neighbourhoods in Whitehill Bordon, gathering visual evidence about how places in the town work. Residents visited seven different neighbourhoods. They used the 20 Building for Life criteria to help them consistently identify the things that are less successful in each neighbourhood and to document what is important, or distinctive. This information will start to inform some principles for the Charter. Neighbourhoods 1. Hendon Road, Ducklands 2. Monument Chase and Montrose Close, South Hurst 3. Champney Close, Sutton Field 4. Bolley Avenue 5. Pinewood Estate, Coniston Road 6. Royal Drive 7. Lower Chalet Hill â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Meadow View, Saville Crescent

Dates 23 May 2011 13 July 27 July 10 August 24 August 7 September 21 September

Learning from elsewhere 1.2 It is important to visit other places and look at neighbourhoods that work well. Leading up to Christmas, members of the Housing Specialist Group will be visiting other developments to learn from them and to understand why they are successful. So far the group have visited Graylingwell Park in Chichester and Chapel in Southampton. Other visits being planned are to housing developments in Basingstoke and Redhill. After Christmas, we hope to travel further afield. The information gathered from the neighbourhood reviews in Whitehill Bordon and the site visits to other places will inform the principles of the Neighbourhood Quality Charter. Workshops to develop principles 1.3 The Housing Specialist Group looked at the evidence that had been gathered from the neighbourhood reviews and commented on evidence that they felt was missing. In four groups, split thematically according to the four Building for Life chapters, the members then discussed and agreed three priority principles for each theme that they considered play an important part in the design of new neighbourhoods and homes. 1.4 Parking is recognised as a particularly difficult issue and a special crosscutting workshop with the Infrastructure Specialist Group is being discussed to look at the issues in a more focused way. 2 Subject of report / options and considerations First draft Charter Principles 2.1 The principles that will be agreed and included in the Neighbourhood Quality Charter are fundamental assumptions and core beliefs about the qualities that a neighbourhood in the Eco-town should address. The principles will not dictate quantities; they will articulate qualities and characteristics that new development needs to consider. 2.2 The priority principles below were some of those discussed in the facilitator led workshop at the last Housing Specialist Group on 27th October. These are not the final principles - some may change, others may be added over the months ahead. The principles have been organised under the 4 chapters used to structure the Building for Life criteria to ensure the principles cover issues at different scales – this structure is a basis to start from and it will evolve. Environment and Community   

Provide communal outdoor spaces to grow food Ensure sports facilities and sports fields are in good locations Eliminate light pollution to ensure ecological and biological benefits

The following points have also been discussed by the Housing Specialist Group over the last few months and are considered by some to be essential K:\Corporate Shared Folders\Whitehill Bordon\011 Meetings\Delivery Board Partners: EAST HAMPSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL, HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN PARTNERSHIP, MINISTRY of DEFENCE, HOMES & COMMUNITIES AGENCY - 56 -

considerations in an Eco-town situated on heathland and surrounded by areas of high biodiversity. These subjects need much further discussion to agree how such issues can be addressed in the Charter. ▪

No housing will be built on land scheduled as a Site of Interest to Nature Conservation (SINC) as this would be an immediate biodiversity loss.

▪

The ownership of cats came up in the discussions. The type of households that own cats will need to be considered and their placement needs to be situated away from the edge of areas like Hogmoor Inclosure and Oxney. Within any tenant's agreements or property covenants it should be forbidden to own these pets when a house is situated next to a wildlife area.

Following the Housing Specialist Group meeting in February, the group will have been briefed on the principles concerning the mix of housing/ tenure mix. The Specialist Group will discuss the distribution of the tenure mix, where they might best be distributed considering the facilities and environment of the area. For example, it is no good placing homes for old people in areas next to woodland where they may feel in danger of attack and a long way from bus stops. Character   

Consider the role of the existing mature trees and hedgerows to the landscape character of new neighbourhoods Create neighbourhoods with distinctive character, like smaller urban villages with their own sense of place Characteristics (not style) of the Edwardian terrace house-type that exist(ed) in some neighbourhoods might create a good model for future housing

Streets, Parking, Pedestrianisation   

Parking near houses so people feel that their vehicles are safe and secure Use of different materials so not so dominated by tarmac Ensure parking per dwelling is realistic for the property size and visitor provision

Parking has stimulated energetic debate in the Specialist Group. Some further work and discussion needs to take place to clarify principles and agree a way forward that focuses on place-making rather than on the quantum of parking alone. Design and Construction   

Good design of open space is as important as house design Need for wild spaces and diverse planting Mix of street scenes and different house designs K:\Corporate Shared Folders\Whitehill Bordon\011 Meetings\Delivery Board Partners: EAST HAMPSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL, HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN PARTNERSHIP, MINISTRY of DEFENCE, HOMES & COMMUNITIES AGENCY - 57 -

3 Risk assessment (must include consideration of the environmental, financial, health and safety and equalities impact assessment) 3.1 Without the Charter, there is a risk that residents views do not influence the quality of future development early enough, creating a risk of a lack of clarity early on about what is expected from developers, which could cause delays during planning. 3.2 The Charter can encapsulate a shared understanding about the principles for what a well designed and sustainable neighbourhood in the town might be like. There is nothing below the broad vision and targets of the masterplan that does this, and therefore, there is a risk that no body quite shares the same views about what a well designed, sustainable neighbourhood is. 4 Contributions to Delivery Board Priorities 4.1 Ensuring Eco-town objectives are met and to help the implementation of the Board’s future work. 5 Resource implications 5.1 Eco-town team staff providing the majority of the resource to deliver the Charter. Currently looking at the potential for appropriate external expertise to deliver a design workshop to test the Charter principles working on a particular site – Quebec Barracks, for example. 6 Cost implications 6.1 Allocation of up to £7,000 from Eco-town money to cover the cost of developing and delivering topic focused workshops to take forward the principles of the Charter, costs of travel and refreshment for future site visits, and to cover the cost of future speakers. 7 Conclusion 7.1 If residents are to influence the quality of new neighbourhoods developed as part of the Eco-town, early on and with clarity, then the Charter is the tool that will enable them to have this pro-active role. If it successfully captures a set of principles that are agreed by the community and stakeholders (through the Housing Specialist Group, Standing Conference and the Delivery Board), then it will be a crucial document to assist the Delivery Board in its work. 8 Appendix Appendix 1: 20 Building for Life criteria K:\Corporate Shared Folders\Whitehill Bordon\011 Meetings\Delivery Board Partners: EAST HAMPSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL, HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN PARTNERSHIP, MINISTRY of DEFENCE, HOMES & COMMUNITIES AGENCY - 58 -

Appendix 1: 20 Building for Life criteria Criteria 2, 3, 18 and 20 were not possible to assess during the neighbourhood reviews. The issues covered by these criteria will be covered in Housing Specialist Group meetings. ENVIRONMENT AND COMMUNITY 1. Does the development provide (or is it close to) community facilities, such as schools, parks, play areas, shops, pubs or cafes? 2. Is there an accommodation mix that reflects the needs and aspirations of the local community? 3. Is there a tenure mix that reflects the needs of the local community? 4. Does the development have easy access to public transport? 5. Does the development have any features that reduce its environmental impact?

CHARACTER 6. Is the design specific to the scheme? 7. Does the scheme exploit existing buildings, landscape or topography? 8. Does the scheme feel like a place with distinctive character? 9. Do the buildings and layout make it easy to find your way around? 10. Are streets defined by a well structured building layout?

STREETS, PARKING AND PEDESTRIANISATION 11. Does the building layout take priority over the streets and car parking, so that the highways do not dominate? 12. Is the car parking well integrated and situated so it supports the street scene? 13. Are the streets pedestrian, cycle and vehicle friendly? 14. Does the scheme integrate with existing streets, paths and surrounding development? 15. Are public spaces and pedestrian routes overlooked and do they feel safe?

DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION 16. Is public space well designed and does it have suitable management arrangements in place? 17. Do the buildings exhibit architectural quality? 18. Do internal spaces and layout allow for adaptation, conversion or extension? 19. Has the scheme made use of advances in construction or technology that enhance its performance quality and attractiveness? 20. Do buildings or spaces outperform statutory minima, such as building regulations?

Agenda item 10

Whitehill Bordon Opportunity Delivery Board ______________________________________________________________ Date of meeting:

15th December 2011

Title of report:

Whitehill Bordon Eco-town Sponsorship Policy

Author:

Kate Hillerby, Funding Manager

Reference no: WBPD043-2011 ______________________________________________________________ Executive Summary: (Not more than 2 small paragraphs) The current economic climate has reduced the number of UK funding streams. Most relevant opportunities now are European calls. Competition for this funding is fierce and the process is very onerous, generally requiring European partners. We need to seek other opportunities to fund Eco-town projects. The Whitehill Bordon Eco-town brand will be attractive to many companies seeking to improve their corporate image through sponsorship. This will raise the profile of the Eco-town and bring additional resources to Eco-town projects and activities. The Whitehill Bordon Eco-town Sponsorship Policy sets out guidelines for how council officers will seek sponsorship for Eco-town projects whilst maintaining the levels of transparency and integrity appropriate to a local authority. The policy is an internal document. A leaflet explaining the benefits of sponsorship will be developed for businesses interested in sponsorship opportunities.

Date: 17th November 2011 Version: 1

Status of Report: Public (Exempt or Public)

Purpose of report:

To inform the Delivery Board of how sponsorship will be sought for Eco-town projects whilst maintaining the levels of transparency and integrity appropriate to a local authority. Recommendations requiring Board considerations: This Sponsorship Policy has been adopted by the Joint Management Team of East Hampshire District Council and Havant Borough Council. This report is for information purposes. Consultation and comments received: In setting out the procedure for seeking sponsorship for Eco-town activities we have consulted with the following officers from East Hampshire District Council (EHDC): Liam Byott – Legal Services, EHDC Bob Coleman – Community Services, EHDC Sheila Boden – Finance Services, EHDC Rob Chambers – Policy, EHDC Dawn Coates – Marketing and Customer Relations, EHDC Richard Wells - Communications Team, EHDC Lydia Forbes-Manson – Whitehill Bordon Eco-town team Daphne Gardner – Project Director, Eco-town Team Tom Horwood – Executive Director, EHDC We have also studied other local authorities’ policies including Hampshire County Council, Portsmouth City Council and East Sussex County Council. We have looked at the Cabinet Office’s Guidance on Sponsorship, chapter 8 of the sixth report of the Committee on Standards in Public Life which refers to sponsorship, and guidance from the Institute of Fundraising. Community engagement proposals: We will produce a leaflet for businesses explaining the benefits of sponsoring the Eco-town and advertising sponsorship opportunities. This leaflet will be made available to local businesses and opportunities will be advertised on www.whitehillbordon.com as well as on websites such as the Southern Business Portal and www.uksponsorship.com.

1 Background (reason for report) 1.1 In the current economic climate there are fewer funding opportunities and competition for this funding is extremely fierce. Most relevant calls tend to be from Europe and are extremely onerous, often requiring partners in at least three European Union (EU) countries. 1.2 Whitehill Bordon Eco-town has a brand that, as the Eco-town develops, will be attractive to many companies seeking to improve their corporate responsibility, particularly in the field of sustainability. By funding Ecotown activities in return for marketing benefits, companies will associate themselves with innovative and sustainable development, transport and energy efficient projects as well as biodiversity and economic development projects. As well as bringing a wider recognition of their brand, this raises the profile of the Eco-town and brings additional resources to Eco-town projects and activities. 1.3 In realising the financial value of the Eco-town brand, we must act within the limits of the Council’s constitution, procurement policy and statutory obligations. 1.4 Neither East Hampshire District Council nor Havant Borough Council currently has a sponsorship policy although some sponsorship activities have taken place in the past. 1.5 It was felt that in order for officers of the Council to seek sponsorship for the Eco-town whilst acting within the constraints of being a local authority, a sponsorship policy should be developed so that both officers and potential sponsors understand what is possible. 1.6 The sponsorship policy has been approved by the joint management team of both Councils. We are now presenting it to the Delivery board for information purposes. 2 Subject of report / options and considerations 2.1 See appendix 1, Whitehill Bordon Eco-town Sponsorship Policy 2.2 The policy sets out the terms on which sponsorship will be sought and accepted including: • • • • • • •

What type of project should be funded by sponsorship When sponsorship should be sought How potential sponsors will be assessed How we will deal with proactive approaches from organisations How communication material will be managed Contracts, termination and exit strategy Outline of process for selecting sponsors K:\Corporate Shared Folders\Whitehill Bordon\011 Meetings\Delivery Board

Partners: EAST HAMPSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL, HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN PARTNERSHIP, MINISTRY of DEFENCE, HOMES & COMMUNITIES AGENCY - 63 -

•

Indicative sponsorship packages

2.3 The Whitehill Bordon Eco-town Sponsorship Policy will enable officers to seek sponsorship in a fair and legally robust way. We will have a criteria and procedure for selecting potential sponsors that ensures that we do not associate the Eco-town or the Council with an organisation whose ethics do not align with the Council’s priorities and the Eco-town’s high level objectives or whose financial or legal status mean that it is unlikely that they would fulfil their part of a contract. 3 Risk assessment (must include consideration of the environmental, financial, health and safety and equalities impact assessment) 3.1 An Integrated Impact Assessment has been carried out for this policy. This shows that the policy is neutral in terms of environmental, health & safety and customer access impact. These risks will have to be assessed for each project for which sponsorship is sought. 4 Contributions to Delivery Board Priorities 4.1 Sponsorship will be sought for projects which contribute to the achievement of the Delivery Board’s high level targets around biodiversity, carbon neutrality, employment, facilities, homes, traffic and transport and water. 4.2 Sponsorship will also be sought for projects within the Eco-town programme which are for the benefit of the community or which are standalone demonstration projects that directly contribute to the achievement of our high level targets. This aligns with the vision of creating a town where regeneration and ongoing management is designed with people and nature as the priority. 5 Resource implications 5.1 The Sponsorship Policy will be implemented by the Eco-town Funding Manager as part of her normal duties. Until we start implementing the policy we cannot ascertain how much additional funding it could bring to the Eco-town project. Early forays into sponsorship have shown that big multi-nationals will be interested in sponsoring us once the project is at a more advanced stage. The Eco-station construction project included a sponsorship clause in the tender documents which has already yielded sponsorship offers. 6 Cost implications 6.1 There will be a small cost in producing the leaflets informing businesses of the benefits of sponsorship. K:\Corporate Shared Folders\Whitehill Bordon\011 Meetings\Delivery Board Partners: EAST HAMPSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL, HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN PARTNERSHIP, MINISTRY of DEFENCE, HOMES & COMMUNITIES AGENCY - 64 -

7 Conclusion 7.1 The Whitehill Bordon Eco-town sponsorship policy will be used as a framework for seeking sponsorship for Eco-town projects. It will be reviewed periodically to ensure that sponsorship continues to be sought in a fair and transparent manner whilst not hindering businesses from taking up sponsorship opportunities. 8 Appendix Appendix 1 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Whitehill Bordon Eco-town Sponsorship Policy

Appendix 1: Whitehill Bordon Eco-town Sponsorship Policy

Sponsorship Policy Last modified 20th October 2011

Overview of the Whitehill Bordon EcoEco-town The Whitehill Bordon Eco-town programme is currently overseen by a delivery board comprising representatives from Whitehill Town Council, East Hampshire District Council, Hampshire County Council, Whitehill and Bordon Town Partnership, the Homes and Communities Agency and the Ministry of Defence. The Eco-town team which is delivering the Eco-town programme is employed by East Hampshire District Council. A special purpose vehicle will be established and an investment partner will be sought through normal public sector procurement procedures to help deliver the Eco-town. Alongside the special purpose vehicle a not for profit organisation may be established which could hold sponsorship revenues either for specific projects or as a general fund that could be used for the benefit of the community and standalone demonstration projects that contribute to the achievement of our high level objectives. Prior to the special purpose vehicle and not for profit organisation being established, responsibility for this policy lies with the officers of East Hampshire District Council. Contractual agreements for sponsorship will be between East Hampshire District Council and the

2 Sponsorship Policy 67

sponsoring organisation. Whitehill Bordon Eco-town in this document refers to the officers of the Eco-town team at East Hampshire District Council.

2. What is sponsorship sponsorship? ponsorship? 2.1. Sponsorship is the payment of fees or the provision of goods or services in lieu of payment for the right to be associated with an activity. 2.2. Sponsorship will be sought for projects within the Eco-town programme which are for the benefit of the community or which are standalone demonstration projects that directly contribute to the achievement of our high level vision and objectives. 2.3. Whitehill Bordon Eco-town will seek opportunities to work with local and national organisations by identifying sponsorship opportunities of mutual benefit which are in keeping with our strategic priorities and core values. 3. Financial management of sponsorship revenue Any revenues from sponsorship agreements will be managed by East Hampshire District Council and will be ringfenced for the purposes outlined in the sponsorship agreement. 4. Benefits Benefits for external organisations

4.1. As corporate social responsibility moves up the agenda, private sector companies can enhance their profile by associating themselves with goodwill and ‘Eco’ activities. 4.2. Organisations undertake partnership or sponsorship activities for sound business reasons. It is important to address these when seeking external support. Reasons could include correlation with their marketing objectives, adding value to their customer proposition, improved health/welfare for their staff and alignment with their corporate social responsibility agenda.

This policy sets out the terms on which sponsorship will be both sought and accepted.

5. When seeking sponsorship we will act with integrity, honesty, objectivity and impartiality. We will also take into account the recommendations of the sixth report of the Committee on Standards in Public Life which relate to sponsorship. We will consider whether seeking sponsorship is the best method for achieving the aims of a particular project.

The following factors should be considered:

6. Initial considerations: 6.1. Will sponsorship enhance the Eco-town’s message? 6.2. Sponsorship should be used to enhance activities / projects not to create them. 6.3. Could there be any justifiable cause for complaint – from either the public or the media – if the sponsorship goes ahead? 6.4. The Eco-town must not, and must not appear to, endorse the sponsoring company or its products, and a sponsor must not use an Eco-town project or campaign as a direct sales channel for its products or services. 7. Selecting a sponsor 7.1. We will assess potential sponsors against the following criteria to assess whether they are appropriate organisations to be sponsoring the Eco-town. East Hampshire District Council’s Legal and Finance teams will assist us in assessing a potential sponsor’s suitability according to; 7.1.1.

the relevance of the sector for the specific project

3 Sponsorship Policy 68

7.1.2.

the organisation’s ethics

7.1.3.

the financial record of the organisation

7.1.4.

the organisation’s relationship to the Ecotown (is it involved in any significant commercial negotiations with the Eco-town team)

7.1.5.

public opinion towards the potential sponsor

7.1.6.

an integrated impact assessment of the proposed project.

7.2. We retain the right to decline sponsorship from any organisation which we, in our sole discretion, consider inappropriate. 7.3. The benefits for the potential sponsor must be clearly defined. We will explore the marketing objectives of a potential sponsor to create a robust proposal that reflects these objectives when seeking support. 7.4. Without a coherent benefits package it will be difficult to obtain support. We are developing off the shelf graded packages of benefits that can be offered for a variety of projects at differing levels of support as well be able to offer bespoke packages to meet sponsor’s marketing requirements. 7.5. Benefits may include:

4 Sponsorship Policy 69

7.5.1.

The inclusion of the sponsor’s logo on particular communication materials.

7.5.2.

The ‘halo effect’ of partnering a high profile programme which champions sustainable development and bio-diversity.

7.5.3.

Joint PR activity

7.5.4.

Reciprocal weblinks.

7.6. When sponsorship is offered, we will check with other services at East Hampshire District Council whether the organisation is working on any other Council projects so that any crossover is effectively managed and duplication avoided. 7.7. Sponsorship will be sought in an open and evenhanded way. A sponsor’s competitors should not be able to say that they were not given a fair chance to be involved. We will therefore advertise that we welcome offers of sponsorship on our website, and regularly place a generic advert on the Southern Business Portal and in other appropriate media. From time to time more specific opportunities may be advertised. As well as advertising for sponsorship in an open and fair manner, we will proactively approach companies who we think are a good fit to our objectives to see if they would like to sponsor us.

7.8. The relationship between East Hampshire District Council / Whitehill Bordon Eco-town Delivery Board and the sponsoring organisation should be appropriate. No obligation will be placed on the delivery board or any employee or representative of East Hampshire District Council. 7.9. No suggestion of exclusivity will be offered to partners. 7.10. Where more companies offer sponsorship for an activity than are required, and the companiesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; offers are identical in terms of both monetary value and sustainability/ ethical profile, then the sponsorship offer which we received first will be selected. 7.11. Ultimate responsibility for approving offers of sponsorship lies with the project director. 8. Dealing with proactive proactive approaches If an organisation approaches the Eco-town team with an offer of support, we will ensure that other relevant competing organisations are also given the chance to be involved. This may be by writing to other relevant companies inviting their support or placing an advert on the Southern Business Portal or in other appropriate media making it clear that we are seeking sponsorship. 9. Contracts

9.1. All sponsorship agreements will be in writing. For financial activities or where in-kind benefits are given, a full contract will be drawn up and legal advice sought prior to money or benefits exchanging hands. 9.2. Any contract for sponsoring an Eco-town project applies solely to Eco-town publicity material and not to East Hampshire District Council publications. 10. Communications 10.1. East Hampshire District Council asserts its rights as owner of the Whitehill Bordon Eco-town logo and brand. Use of the Whitehill Bordon Ecotown brand as set out in our branding guidelines (available on request) may only be used subject to written agreement with the Eco-town communications and marketing officer. 10.2. Brand guidelines and guidance from the communications and marketing officer must be adhered to when describing the relationship between the Eco-town and the sponsor. This is to ensure that it does not appear that the Council is endorsing a product or organisation. 10.3. As part of the sponsorship contract, sponsors will agree to a form of words being used in all instances to make it clear that the Eco-town is sponsored by the company (and, in some

5 Sponsorship Policy 70

instances, that the company is a supplier to the Eco-town)but that the Eco-town does not endorse the company’s products where: 10.3.1. a company’s name or product appears in an Eco-town publication or website 10.3.2. a company’s publicity material is either displayed in an Eco-town premises or on a link from www.whitehillbordon.com 10.3.3. Where the Eco-town logo is used in a company’s marketing material. 10.4. East Hampshire District Council owns campaign materials featuring partner logos when they are funded by the Eco-town. Sponsoring organisations own any materials they create. The Eco-town Communications officer must approve any publicity featuring the Ecotown logo. 10.5. If the sponsorship package of benefits includes the sponsor’s logo or name appearing on eco-town publicity, the contract must specify exactly where the logo will appear (e.g. on Website home page, noticeboard, front of leaflet, every page of leaflet etc). 10.6. If linking to a sponsor’s website, a new browser window needs to be generated so that the user can return to the Eco-town website easily. Links to commercial sites should open on a

6 Sponsorship Policy 71

page relevant to the Eco-town and never link to a sales page. 10.7. Any messages given by the sponsor in connection with the Eco-town should be in line with Eco-town policy, and wherever possible should include signposting to the Eco-town website. 10.8. Sponsorship packages will, where possible, include the opportunity to leverage additional marketing and publicity opportunities for the Eco-town, e.g. on the sponsor’s websites, press releases etc. 10.9. The Eco-town communications officer must sign off any collateral communication or promotional activity which relates to Whitehill Bordon Eco-town. This would include (but is not limited to) use of logo, press releases etc. 11. Campaign prizes 11.1. If sponsors donate prizes or incentives (e.g. for One Planet living campaign) they should be recognised in campaign materials. Any complaints about prize quality must be directed to the sponsor. 11.2. If prizes are purchased from Eco-town funds, no brand recognition is given.

11.3. The value of a prize should be commensurate with the overall spend on a particular project or campaign. 11.4. Any campaigns, competitions or draws involving prizes will be carried out with regard to the Gambling Act 2005. 11.5. There must be no suggestion of endorsement of products.

12. Exit Strategy 12.1. The length of time a sponsorship agreement will run for will be clearly stated in the contract. 12.2. Where desirable we will offer the sponsoring organisation the opportunity to extend the agreement or negotiate a new agreement. 12.3. If the Eco-town branding or name is likely to change we must consider the impact on any existing sponsorship agreements. We should then decide whether the ongoing presence of an outdated logo on publicity materials belonging to the sponsor will be damaging to the brand. If this is the case then we can ask the sponsoring organisation to withdraw these materials but should realise that this may not always be possible and that the Council may incur a cost.

12.4. East Hampshire District Council will seek to include provisions in all sponsorship contracts at its discretion. Circumstances under which this may happen could include, but are not limited to, missed payments or evidence arising that the company has been involved in activities which might bring the Council into disrepute. 13. Evaluation of Sponsorship Agreement 13.1. It is important that the success of the sponsorship for the sponsoring organisations should be measured and reported back to us. This will help the Eco-town to realise the brand value in future sponsorship negotiations. 13.2. Evaluation methods and tracking or monitoring must be agreed with sponsors in advance of sponsorship starting. 13.3. Financial sponsorship will be measured by looking at â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;opportunities to seeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; (the equivalent cost of media generated featuring the name of the sponsor).

14. Summary of key steps in selecting sponsors 14.1. Identify activity for which sponsorship is required (theme leads, project manager, funding manager).

7 Sponsorship Policy 72

14.2. Decide whether we need a single or multiple sponsors (theme leads, project manager, funding manager). 14.3. Decide whether we need to advertise the opportunity or whether the generic advert on our website and those which appear from time to time in other media is sufficient (funding manager, legal team). 14.4. We may then have a number of potential sponsors who have contacted us as a result of specific advertising for this opportunity or who are ‘on hold’ having responded to a generic advert. 14.5. Assess potential sponsors against suitability conditions set out in this policy (funding manager, legal and finance teams). 14.6. Ensure that potential sponsor’s competitors have had a fair chance to be involved. 14.7. Discuss benefits package with potential sponsors (funding manager, communications officer, relevant theme lead, legal team). 14.8. Select sponsor who adds best value to the project and to the Eco-town programme. When all other things are equal, the sponsor who approached us first will be selected (funding manager, theme lead, project director).

8 Sponsorship Policy 73

14.9.

Contract drawn up by legal team.

14.10. Once sponsorship money received, activity can start (theme lead). 14.11. At end of contract consider whether to offer an extension (communications officer, funding manager, project manager). 15. Indicative sponsorship packages: 15.1.

Bronze sponsor (up to £1000)

15.1.1. Company name on signage/ banner/ publicity material related to activity for duration of activity (where activity is a construction project for a period of two years). 15.1.2. Company name on list of sponsors on the website www.whitehilbordon.com 15.1.3. Limited use of Whitehill Bordon Eco-town logo in company’s marketing literature subject to agreement with Whitehill Bordon Eco-town’s marketing and communications officer. 15.2.

Silver sponsor (between £1,001 and £4999)

15.2.1. Company name and where relevant product name on signage/ banner/ publicity material related to activity for duration of activity (where activity is a

construction project for a period of two years). 15.2.2. Company name and product name (where relevant) on list of sponsors on the website www.whitehilbordon.com 15.2.3. A link to company literature on the website. 15.2.4. An opportunity to hold one seminar or sales meeting at the eco-station. Limited use of Whitehill Bordon Eco-town logo in company’s marketing literature subject to agreement with Whitehill Bordon Eco-town’s Marketing and communications officer. 15.3.

Gold Sponsor (between £5000 and £9,999)

15.3.1. Company name and where relevant product name on signage/ banner/ publicity material related to activity for duration of activity (where activity is a construction project for a period of two years). 15.3.2. Company name and product name (where relevant) on list of sponsors on the website www.whitehilbordon.com

15.3.4. An opportunity to hold two seminars or sales meetings at the Eco-station. 15.3.5. Inclusion of corporate brochures and/or information about the products within the exhibition space and / or within the ecohouse. 15.3.6. Limited use of Whitehill Bordon Eco-town logo in company’s marketing literature subject to agreement with Whitehill Bordon Eco-town marketing and communications officer. 15.4.

Platinum Sponsor (£10,000 and above)

15.4.1. A bespoke benefits package will can be created to meet the sponsor’s marketing objectives. This would include all of the above and enhanced use of Eco-town branding in corporate literature as well as further negotiated benefits. 15.5. These packages are indicative only, based on the packages that have been put together when seeking sponsorship for the Demonstration House. They may change as the value of the ‘Eco-town brand’ is realised.

15.3.3. A link to company literature on the website.

9 Sponsorship Policy 74

www.whitehillbordon.com

Produced on behalf of Whitehill Bordon Eco-town East Hampshire District Council Penns Place Petersfield Hampshire GU31 4EX

01730 234 329

10 Sponsorship Policy 75

Agenda item 11a

Whitehill Bordon Opportunity Delivery Board ______________________________________________________________ Date of meeting:

15 December 2011

Title of report:

Outcomes from Specialist Groups and Chairman/ Vice Chairman/ Lead Officers meetings

Author:

Chris Youngs, Eco Coordinator, Whitehill Town Council

Reference no: WBPD038-2011 ______________________________________________________________ Executive Summary: All the Specialist Groups have met for the fourth time and this report provides information on the outcomes of those meetings. In addition the third meeting of the Chairman/ Vice Chairman & Lead Officers took place and the outcomes of that meeting are also included in this report, together with comments from the Standing Conference.

Date: 5th December 2011 Version: V3

Status of Report: (Public)

Purpose of report: To provide information on the outcomes of the Specialist Groups/ Chairman/ Vice Chairman/ Lead Officers meetings and any comments from the Standing Conference. Recommendations requiring Board considerations:

To note the progress of the work of the Specialist Groups To consider the recommendation shown in this report of the Community Facilities & Amenities Group (paragraph 2.4 & 2.5) To consider the recommendations and comments of the Specialist Groups/ Chairman/ Vice Chairman and Lead Officers meeting (paragraph 2.13) To consider the comments from the Standing Conference (paragraph 2.14 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2.18), particularly the concern expressed regarding the Whitehill Bordon Open Space, Playing Pitch and Built Sports Facilities Assessment

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 1.1 This report provides the Delivery Board on the outcomes and recommendations of the meetings of the Specialist Groups, the Chairman/ Vice Chairman and Lead Officers meeting together with the comments of the Standing Conference and requires that the Delivery Board to consider the recommendations shown in the report. 2 Subject of report / options and considerations Outcomes of the Specialist Groups 2.1 All the meetings took place in October and November and the main outcomes/ recommendations are shown below. Community Facilities & Amenities 2.2 Members received information on the Whitehill Bordon Open Space, Playing Pitch and Built Sports Facilities Assessment.

2.3 Members considered the Viking Park Design and Feasibility Study Consultation Report. Following a discussion, the meeting commented on the three options as follows: 1. Mixed use and some housing – nobody supported. 2. Leisure, employment & retail – three members supported. 3. Employment & leisure – three members supported. 2.4 The members considered the work plan priorities for 2012 and agreed the following: a) To fund a community facilities strategy and obtain an evidence base. b) Discuss the future management options of community facilities. c) Carry on with the work on the Heritage Strategy. d) Carry on with the work of the Arts Strategy. e) Consider developer contributions for the Eco town. f) The planning of public paved open space/ squares. 2.5 It is recommended to the Delivery Board: To endorse the work plan for 2012 and provide resources to enable this to happen. Endorse the implementation of projects to satisfy the needs shown in the Whitehill Bordon Open Space, Playing Pitch and Built Sports Facilities Assessment. This should include the requirement for a multi sports centre and to open up MoD playing pitches to the public in order to cater for different outdoor sports. Infrastructure, Education & Transport 2.6 Members were advised that the work on the Education strategy was ongoing and meetings with appropriate organisations were being held to develop this. Information was also provided on the Transport Evidence base and Traffic Management Strategy. Sustainable Environment 2.7 The main item was a workshop on the management and maintenance of community assets. The outcomes of which are included in a separate report to this Delivery Board’s meeting. Housing 2.8 There was a workshop on the development of the Neighbourhood Quality Charter and outcomes of this together with outcomes of the local neighbourhood reviews contributes to an interim report that is included on this Delivery Board’s agenda. 2.9 A discussion took place on a retrofit strategy for the town and a sub group is to be convened to develop this which will meet in January 2012. Economic Development 2.10 The provision of a skills centre was discussed and a meeting to discuss this single item was arranged with invitations going to the members of K:\Corporate Shared Folders\Whitehill Bordon\011 Meetings\Delivery Board Partners: EAST HAMPSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL, HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN PARTNERSHIP, MINISTRY of DEFENCE, HOMES & COMMUNITIES AGENCY - 78 -

this group and the Infrastructure, Education & Transport Group. Sue Robbins gave an update to the Standing Conference which is also provided in the matters arising reports of the Delivery Boards meeting of 14 September. 2.11 The gateway feature project was also considered and it was agreed that: Consideration is given to applying to the Armed Forces Community Covenant grant scheme administered by Hampshire County Council. Sue Robbins finds the previous designs for the gateway feature. Derek Seale will take this to the Town Partnership to reaffirm their support to the project; and Gerry Thorne agreed to approach the artist regarding her potential involvement. 2.12 In addition to the five meetings of the Specialist Group, an additional joint meeting was convened when Richard Simmons, visiting professor of City Design and Regeneration at the University of Greenwich, and former Chief Executive of the Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment (CABE), gave his thoughts on how the residents of Whitehill Bordon can influence the quality of development in the new Eco-town. It included some insights on housing density and how developers think. Comments made by the meeting of Chairmen/ Vice Chairmen and Lead Officers 2.13 A meeting took place on 9 November. Daphne Gardner who chaired this meeting informed the Standing Conference that: The participants reviewed their first year’s performance and how the operation of the groups could work better. It is recommended that the Delivery Board gives a greater steer on Specialist Groups’ priorities to meet the Board’s objectives. It is recommended that the groups should sign up to one work plan. Daphne Gardner reported that Bruce Collinson was willing to coordinate this. Cross cutting issues had been agreed and joint meetings should be decided by the Chairmen and Vice Chairmen. The format of the meetings should not be prescribed but should be up to each group. A joint meeting of all the groups should be held to discuss the development of the masterplan. Comments made by Members of the Standing Conference 2.14 Concern was expressed on the Whitehill Bordon Open Space, Playing Pitch and Built Sports Facilities Assessment that there were conflicts of land use in the document and the potential that land with protected designation could be destroyed. It was agreed that this aspect of the document should be reviewed and clarity sought and brought back to K:\Corporate Shared Folders\Whitehill Bordon\011 Meetings\Delivery Board Partners: EAST HAMPSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL, HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN PARTNERSHIP, MINISTRY of DEFENCE, HOMES & COMMUNITIES AGENCY - 79 -

this meeting of the Delivery Board. Cllr A Carew agreed to follow this up. 2.15 A view was expressed on east west road network. 2.16 The importance of infrastructure being put in place in advance of development was highlighted and this topic should be considered by the Specialist Groups. 2.17 Support was given by the Standing Conference on the recommendations of the Community Facilities & Amenities Specialist Group; but it was suggested that there is a need to identify what funding is required and help would be needed to estimate costs. In addition the projects within the Whitehill Bordon Open Space, Playing Pitch and Built Sports Facilities Assessment need to be more clearly spelled out. 2.18 It was considered that in terms of developerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s contribution and community infrastructure levy, it is important to consider what people want. 3 Risk assessment 3.1 This demonstrates that actions are being prioritised and developed by the community. 4 Contributions to Delivery Board Priorities 4.1 The work plans of the Specialist Groups have been supported by the Delivery Board. 5 Resource implications 5.1 The recommendations of the Community Facilities & Amenities Specialist Group may not be available within the Eco-town resources. 6 Cost implications 6.1 Any costs regarding the Community Facilities & Amenities Specialist Group recommendations may not be available within the Eco-town funding. 7 Conclusion 7.1 Please note for information

Agenda item 11b

Whitehill Bordon Opportunity Delivery Board ______________________________________________________________ Date of meeting:

15th December 2011

Title of report:

Proposals for long-term management and maintenance of community assets (workshop feedback)

Author:

Bruce Collinson – Environmental Sustainability Theme Lead

Reference no: WBPD039-2011 ______________________________________________________________ Executive Summary: (Not more than 2 small paragraphs) This report follows on from a previous paper that went to the Delivery Board in September, highlighting the need to explore the issues and opportunities around the management and maintenance of community assets within Whitehill Bordon. The report has done this by summarising feedback from the workshop and providing a steer on next steps for the Delivery Board to consider, which includes: • Establish a steering group, which includes current community asset managers to influence these early stages of work. • Explore the current role of Deadwater Valley Trust (DVT) against the early phases of land release. • Provide members of Specialist Groups with a factsheet to address questions raised about the Land Trust at the October workshop.

Date: 2nd December 2011 Version: Final

Status of Report: Public

Purpose of report: The purpose of this report is to provide the Delivery Board with feedback from the Sustainable Environment Specialist Group Workshop in October and recommend next steps for the Delivery Board to consider. Recommendations requiring Board considerations: (i)

That the Delivery Board notes feedback from the workshop.

(ii)

That the Delivery Board continues to support an inclusive approach to this work by not dividing community assets into their typologies and examining them separately until it has had the chance to review the PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (PwC) report and transition plan in March 2012.

(iii)

That the Delivery Board agrees next steps: • Establish a steering group, which includes current community asset managers to influence these early stages of work. • Explore the current role of Deadwater Valley Trust (DVT) against the early phases of land release. • Provide members of Specialist Groups with a factsheet to address questions raised about the Land Trust at the October workshop.

Consultation and comments received: Members of the Standing Conference on 1st December 2011 reviewed the paper and asked the Delivery Board for clarity on whether it intends to continue an inclusive approach to exploring the management and maintenance of community assets? This paper has been revised to include a response to that question for the Delivery Board to agree. In addition the feedback from the Specialist Group workshop was taken to a Whitehill Town Council meeting in November for further discussion. Town Councillors’ comments reflected those at the workshop and agreed that a hybrid management solution for the town’s community assets would probably be the most appropriate solution in partnership with the public and community/ voluntary sectors. Community engagement proposals: This paper proposes that community engagement will continue through the existing governance structure, which includes work with all the Specialist Groups, particularly the Sustainable Environment and Community Facilities and Amenities Specialist Groups. K:\Corporate Shared Folders\Whitehill Bordon\011 Meetings\Delivery Board Partners: EAST HAMPSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL, HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN PARTNERSHIP, MINISTRY of DEFENCE, HOMES & COMMUNITIES AGENCY - 82 -

1 Background 1.1 This report follows on from a previous paper that went to the Delivery Board in September, highlighting the need to explore the issues and opportunities around the management and maintenance of community assets within Whitehill Bordon. The definition of community assets for the purposes of the previous paper and prompt for the workshop includes buildings and greenspaces used by the community covering a range of uses. Although future discussions at the Delivery Board may disaggregate the management and maintenance buildings and greenspaces for the moment the overriding principle is to ensure that new and existing assets are safeguarded and improved as a result of the Eco-town. 1.2 The Delivery Board agreed the following at the September meeting: • This issue was an early priority for the Eco-town Project to ensure the appropriate funding and management arrangements were secured as part of the early phases of delivery. • The Land Trust option should be explored at the October Sustainable Environment Specialist Group meeting. • The Land Trust should be invited to the October Sustainable Environment Specialist Group meeting. • That Chris Baines (Biodiversity Advisor to Government on the Ecotown Programme) should be invited to attend the workshop. 1.3 Members of the Sustainable Environment and Community Facilities and Amenities Specialist Groups were invited to participate in a workshop, which aimed to do the following: • Provided an overview of the management and maintenance options. • Provided an introduction to the Land Trust. • Provide an opportunity for the Deadwater Valley Trust (DVT) to talk about the Bordon Inclosure Management Plan. • Provided an opportunity to capture the issues and opportunities associated with the management and maintenance of new and existing community assets. Each group was asked to identify their top priorities with coloured dots. • Prioritise the key messages and actions for the Delivery Board to consider at the December Delivery Board meeting. 2 Subject of report 2.1 This report provides feedback from the workshop and outlines next steps for the Delivery Board to consider alongside the Eco-towns overall delivery programme to ensure future work is co-ordinated with other project work.

2.2 Twenty eight people attended the workshop, which included representation from councillors, local community and a number of organisations involved in the management and maintenance of community assets locally. 2.3 The workshop was broken down into a number of different elements, which are outlined in paragraph 1.3 above. The outputs from the workshop are summarised below, however appendix 1 provides a list of all the issues and opportunities raised in each of the four breakout groups. 2.4 The information summarised below provides an overview of the categories of issues and opportunities associated with the management and maintenance of community assets. This isn’t an exhaustive list, but captures the main essence of feedback from the workshop. Top issues User issues and misuse – This included potential conflicts between user groups and their impact on the asset management and maintenance regimes. The idea of promoting the more responsible use of community assets was also raised, but directed as a whole town approach rather than on an individual basis. Enforcement – The nature and level of enforcement is not consistent across organisations who manage community assets, due mainly to resource constraints and lack of clear mandate. Community involvement and ownership – People’s understanding and attitude towards the management and maintenance of community assets is critical to the long term success of any facilities and greenspaces. Resources – Securing long-term resources is a challenge for the management and maintenance of any community assets, which should be central to the development and delivery of the Eco-town. Long term guarantees – A need to ensure community assets were safeguarded in perpetuity. Existing roles and responsibilities – The feeling that existing roles and responsibilities should not be adversely affected as a result of any new management arrangements, however attendees recognised that existing management commitments were not been met in all cases, due to pressure on resources. Suitable Alternative Natural Greenspaces (SANGs) – The management and maintenance of SANGs in perpetuity was a critical issue for the group. Issues were also raised around the potential conflicts between users and the existing value of proposed sites. The majority of these issues are captured in the Habitats Regulations Assessment and Green Infrastructure Strategy published in July 2011, but there is an important link between the establishment of the proposed SANGs and the management and maintenance of community assets.

Top opportunities Enhanced role for Deadwater Valley Trust (DVT) – The development and delivery of the Eco-town presented a good opportunity for the trust to evolve into a body, which could potentially take on more land and receive more resources. Local ownership of local land – The importance of engaging the new and existing community in the management and maintenance of community assets was highlighted both in ‘emotional’ and ‘real’ terms. The group recognised that external support was needed to help address all the practical elements of management, including technical issues, liability and managing risk. Value of local community capacity building – This included the potential benefits of volunteering. Interpretation material important for users – To reduce conflicts between different user groups the provision of consistent information and branding around all community assets was an opportunity not to be missed. Partnership working with South Downs National Park – The establishment of the national park and its close proximity to Whitehill Bordon means opportunities for joint working should be taken. Sharing resources – With the multitude of local landowners and managers in and around the town the opportunity to pool resources and share community facilities, such as a ranger base was an important aspect of developing a co-ordinated response to the management and maintenance of community assets. Management options & the Land Trust 2.5 Members of the workshop were given the opportunity to consider the presentation from the Land Trust and the four management options proposed in the September Delivery Board paper. Overall, people were nervous about making a decision too quickly on which route to take and felt that more time and information was needed to consider the options available to them. A number of questions were raised about the accountability of the Land Trust, where they invested capital, staffing structure and their approach to land ownership. This arose from the misconception that the Trust was being ‘pushed’ on to the group as something of a ‘fait accompli’ rather than an invitation to the Trust from the Delivery Board to help add value and expert knowledge to the debate. 2.6 Chris Baines concluded by capturing feedback from the workshop and provided some immediate observations for the group to consider: • Ultimately who owns the land at this stage is not critical, it is more about sharing resources and maximising the benefits for people and wildlife during the development and delivery of the Eco-town. • It would be difficult to shoe-horn the management and maintenance of community assets in Whitehill Bordon into one management K:\Corporate Shared Folders\Whitehill Bordon\011 Meetings\Delivery Board Partners: EAST HAMPSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL, HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN PARTNERSHIP, MINISTRY of DEFENCE, HOMES & COMMUNITIES AGENCY - 85 -

• • • • •

model. It is more likely to be a hybrid solution, which responds to the development timetable. DVT is currently not ‘fit for purpose’ to manage all sites within the town, but its future role should be explored. The Land Trust should have a role in providing technical support and expertise at this stage of the project to support local delivery and management of community assets. General feeling from those people that attended, that this should be more about managing people on sites (users), rather than the asset itself. Whitehill Bordon is not alone in experiencing these issues and opportunities, but it should be in the vanguard as an Eco-town. Whatever arrangements are put in place to manage and maintain community assets, the importance of effective monitoring should not be under estimated.

3 Risk Assessment 3.1 The amount of time available to consider the management and maintenance options of community assets is limited, as such it is important to progress this matter inline with the wider Eco-town Project Programme. The Delivery Board should consider the conclusions in this paper and agree proposed next steps. 4 Contributions to Delivery Board Priorities 4.1 This paper contributes to the Delivery Boards priorities by prompting early discussion on approach to the long-term management of community assets within Whitehill Bordon alongside the delivery of the Eco-town. 4.2 Discussions at this stage in the delivery of the Eco-town will ensure longterm management issues are included as governance structures evolve. This includes informing the recently commissioned PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (PwC) work which is examining future delivery arrangements for the Eco-town project. 4.3 This work will also influence the revision of the Draft Framework Masterplan by ensuring the inclusion of a section on how existing and new community assets will be managed during the development period and beyond. 5 Resource implications 5.1 If the Delivery Board agrees to the recommendations in this paper additional resources would be required to procure external expertise on a formal basis to provide technical support on building the correct management and maintenance model. A Project Initiation Document would be signed off by the Eco-town Project Director in January 2012, K:\Corporate Shared Folders\Whitehill Bordon\011 Meetings\Delivery Board Partners: EAST HAMPSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL, HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN PARTNERSHIP, MINISTRY of DEFENCE, HOMES & COMMUNITIES AGENCY - 86 -

which would include input from the Planning and Urban Design Theme Lead and the Chairs and Vice Chairs of the Sustainable Environment and Community Facilities and Amenities Specialist Groups. 5.2 A steering group would be established, which will include volunteers from the Specialist Groups with a particular knowledge in managing and maintaining community assets in and around Whitehill Bordon. 6 Cost implications 6.1 If the Delivery Board agrees to the recommendations in this paper funding would be required to meet the resource implications outlined in section 5. The approximate level of funding required to complete this early phase of work would be £6k to March 2012, covering approximately 10 days of technical support, a stakeholder workshop and report. This funding is available from the Environmental Sustainability Theme Lead’s budget line. 7 Conclusion 7.1 Overall the workshop was a useful opportunity for people to discuss the issues and opportunities associated with the management and maintenance of community assets. It also introduced the concept of different management models that might be relevant to the Eco-town. 7.2 The definition of what a community asset is and how it should be considered at this stage of the planning process for the Eco-town is an important one. The September 2011 Delivery Board Paper and the October 2011 workshop supported an inclusive approach to this matter rather than dividing community assets into their typologies (sport, leisure, arts, recreation, heritage, ecology etc). This approach can continue to be justified as the Delivery Board are awaiting the PwC report, transition plan and the revised framework masterplan. The Delivery Board should commit to review this position in April 2012, when greater clarity will exist on the governance structure for the Eco-town, the timetable for land release and the management arrangements for existing community assets. 7.3 To summarise the main actions are: • Establish a steering group to progress this work and procure external expertise to provide technical support. • Explore the current role of DVT against the early phases of land release and development to determine how the trust could evolve and be resourced. This element of work echoes peoples views that the provision of locally-led management was important. • Provide members of the Sustainable Environment and Community Facilities and Amenities Specialist Group with a fact sheet about the Land Trust to address questions raised at the workshop. K:\Corporate Shared Folders\Whitehill Bordon\011 Meetings\Delivery Board Partners: EAST HAMPSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL, HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN PARTNERSHIP, MINISTRY of DEFENCE, HOMES & COMMUNITIES AGENCY - 87 -

â&#x20AC;˘

Provide some time at the next Sustainable Environment Specialist Group meeting in January 2012 to hear from other organisations that manage community assets locally. Those organisations could include a local authority, charity, private company and Landmarc (a management company for the MoD).

8 Appendix Appendix 1: Tables to show a list of all the issues and opportunities raised in each of the four breakout groups

APPENDIX 1: Tables to show a list of all the issues and opportunities raised in each of the four breakout groups

TABLE 1 TOP issues in bold Category Issues Organisations and individuals keen to remove trees from the street scene Lack of respect and responsibility for community assets Communities lack of interest in greenspaces How do you get people to be enthusiastic about this subject? Awareness of what DVT too? Inconsistent bylaws and enforcement Trusting the Land Trust Land Trust's approach is too urban Who is the Land Trust democratically accountable to? Percentage of funds directed towards admin and wages rather than maintenance What does the Land Trust invest their capital in? Not enough information about the Land Trust What does the Land Trust cost? The Land Trust is community based, how does that fit with managing sensitive sites? What is the Land Trust governance structure? Do Land Trust staff benefit from bonuses? Where does the Land Trust invest their money? What are the Land Trust's management fees? Current landowners use and management of community assets is not always positive Dog walking areas needed Accessible audit of all community assets Are there other organisations who could deliver management and maintenance in Whitehill Bordon?

GROUP 1

GROUP 2

GROUP 3

Attitude

DVT Enforcement

The Land Trust

GROUP 4

One management model may not fit all community assets Will community assets have long term protection? Who will provide management and maintenance of community assets after development takes place? Potential for different management arrangements across the town What happens in the transitional period between the MoD vacation and development taking place? Do management companies conduct site visits before planning begins? Need for a consistent approach to community assets Transfer of assets and transfer of risks What about the management and maintenance of buildings? Can Bordon Inclosure be a SANG as it is already well used How can you manage a SINC within a SANG? SANGs are a particular sort of greenspace Can a SINC be a SANG? Management in perpetuity, what does that mean? Promotion of community assets once they are provided. Will the community use them? What does take land into ownership mean? Stimulating community ownership Lack of local control Current landowners being commitment to maintenance Where will the volunteers come from? Who will own the community assets Lack of joined up thinking between MoD, DVT and other land managers Need to consider all land collectively Conflicting messages to community asset users Lack of ranger presence and local

Management

Marketing

Ownership

Partnership

Resources

responsibility Lack of resources, money, staff equipment Funding requirements Disturbance from dogs and cat predation Motorbikes, scramblers and quad bikes Dog fouling and associated health risks Arson - heath and woodland fires Vandalism Fly-tipping, garden waste and rubbish Tension between different users Motorbikes

Urban Edge Effects

TABLE 2 Top opportunities in bold Category Opportunities Enhanced bridleway network Guided walks Education activities around wildlife Educating people - responsible behaviour Interpretation material for users important Supporting better opportunities for schools and recreation Career structure Employment opportunities Improve community health through improved community assets indoors and outdoors Positive use of design as a management tool Creating a sense of place Enhanced role for DVT Management and maintenance regimes to benefit energy generation DVT has a good brand Joint website Consistency of branding Excitement of the unknown

GROUP 1

GROUP 2

GROUP 3

GROUP 4

Access Activity

Education

Employment Health

Management

Marketing

Improved ownership by the community and use of community assets Community involvement Getting more volunteers Gaining local support from residents neighbouring community assets Local ownership of local land Established more joined up thinking and joint working Joined up thinking Partnership working with SDNP Shared visitor centre and ranger base Shared resources - HCC, SDNP, DVT etc

Ownership

Partnership

Resources

TABLE 3 Messages to the Delivery Board Explore expanded role of DVT Felt a lack of local accountability for the Land Trust Managing the risks associated with the Land Trust More information on the Land Trust Keep it local Local Trust is needed Good proactive management essential Need to be fully informed about all four options Group felt steered towards one option Group to evaluate all the options Need to establish what local authorities can do? A combination of management options should be explored More time to consider the options needed for Whitehill Bordon

Category

GROUP 1

GROUP 2

GROUP 3

DVT

Land Trust

Local management Management approach

Option appraisal

GROUP 4

Agenda item 12

Whitehill Bordon Opportunity Delivery Board _______________________________________________________________ Date of meeting:

15th December 2011

Title of report:

Project Progress Report

Author:

Wendy Shillam, Project Manager

Reference no: WBPD040-2011 _______________________________________________________________ Executive Summary: This report provides a periodic update for the Delivery Board. It outlines progress since the last meeting. The project is progressing well. Key features of the past three months include: The following early win projects complete • Wi-Fi • Local Biomass Supply Case Studies • Eco Pack • Alexandra and Jubilee Park ecological improvements •

All studies complete and on the website

•

Neighbourhood consultation complete

•

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (PwC) appointed to advise on a commercial strategy

Date: 2nd December Version: 2

Status of Report: Public

k:\corporate shared folders\whitehill bordon\011 meetings\delivery board Partners: EAST HAMPSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL, HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN PARTNERSHIP, MINISTRY of DEFENCE, HOMES & COMMUNITIES AGENCY - 93 -

Purpose of report: This report provides a periodic update for the Delivery Board. It is produced for each Delivery Board meeting. Recommendations requiring Board considerations: For information only. Consultation and comments received: The Standing Conference noted progress and also noted Wendy Shillamâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s departure. A request was made that the transport work should look at improvements to the east-west travel. Community engagement proposals: Each project has its own consultation, which is in accordance with the overall Communications and Engagement Strategy which was approved by the Delivery Board December 2010.

1 Background 1.1 This report outlines progress of projects since the last Delivery Board meeting. 1.2 There is no overspend to report in any section of the project. 2 Report MoD announcement and overall programme 2.1 Since the MoD announcement in July we have asked for further information regarding the VACATION of the Garrison. The new Economic Development Theme Lead is working closely with MoD and the other business support organisations to identify how best to support those people who wish to take advantage of re-training opportunities. 2.2 The Board agreed a draft overall delivery programme for the project which is being refined and improved. We have established lead officers for each sector of the work. 2.3 Quebec Barracks has been confirmed as available. A separate report identifies the draft development brief for this project. 2.4 Proposals for procuring a development partner for the whole project are being led by MoD. (Reported in more detail in a separate report). Governance 2.5 The governance system is moving well. Since the last meeting each Specialist Group has met and a separate report identifies their work and conclusions. Community Projects 2.6 Community projects are now mostly complete or at delivery stages. The following projects have now been completed: • Allotments • Biodiversity projects, with exception of boardwalk and green stepping stones. • Wi-Fi installed • The youth worker is now running a series of projects. • Countryside Ranger actively delivering projects • Eco Pack produced 2.7 Transport projects underway include: • Liftshare project completed and being launched • Town Transport Manager - position advertised and interviewed • The new bus services and shelter proposals developed. Stakeholder consultation ongoing and public consultation as part of the current consultation process

2.8 Neighbourhood consultation The neighbourhood engagement and consultation period ends on 6th December. In total, ten workshops were held at various locations and qualitative comments, priorities were recorded during the workshop discussion. In addition, drop- in events were held at the Bordon library, Forest Shopping Centre and Tesco. The masterplan exhibition at the Fire Station was open until the end of October. The stakeholder workshop was held on 16th November at the Forest Community Centre and was attended by 56 stakeholders. A record of all engagement events, summary comments and independent facilitators report will be incorporated in the consultation report. It will be published early 2012. 2.9 Community Wi-Fi This project will provide free Wi-Fi in and around the Forest Centre. It is running smoothly and a formal launch took place on 21st November 2011. 2.10 Youth Drop In Centre A number of sessions have been held and attendance has been low but is beginning to improve. The project worker is currently working to attract more young people to attend. 2.11 Schools and Library Projects The first phase of the programme of works to reduce energy consumption in five schools and Bordon Library has been successfully completed by Hampshire County Council. Phase 2 is now underway with works to the remaining four schools. The work includes a new biomass boiler, photovoltaic panels and interactive metering of energy consumption to involve students in the monitoring and management of the buildingsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; energy systems as part of their coursework. Demonstration Projects Fire Station 2.12 Eco Station Refurbishment This is a project to provide a base for Eco-town activities, meeting space for the community as well as exhibitions. Phase I of this project is now complete. Phase II works will have started on site. The building will be closed to the public until July 2012. 2.13 Eco Station Exhibitions The project covers the programme of exhibition and events to be held after Phase 2 of the refurbishment works is complete. 2.14 Exhibition House (Eco-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. It has been decided to combine the building works for this and Phase II of the Fire Station. In response to approaches from manufacturers we have prepared sponsorship documents that were issued to contractors with the k:\corporate shared folders\whitehill bordon\011 meetings\delivery board Partners: EAST HAMPSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL, HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN PARTNERSHIP, MINISTRY of DEFENCE, HOMES & COMMUNITIES AGENCY - 96 -

tender package, so that firms can showcase their products in both locations. This work has now started on site. 2.15 Eco-town terrace competition This is an international design competition for a terrace of three zero carbon homes. Stage 1 of the competition is now complete and we received 54 responses to the Stage 1 brief. Five shortlisted teams were selected by the Jury. The five design teams will be issued with the Stage 2 brief to produce a concept proposal. The winning team will receive the commission from our partner Radian Housing Group to build the scheme. 2.16 Eco-station South Site A public consultation inviting comments on the initial conceptual design was held. The landscape architects are preparing the revised design in response to comments and incorporating preferred ideas for improving the open space. Other Demonstration Projects 2.17 Work is now progressing. The MoD, on behalf of the Landownersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Group, have appointed consultants, GVA and AMEC, to undertake an outline planning application for the entire site and an outline planning application for Quebec Barracks. 2.18 There will be detailed applications for the re-use of buildings. 2.19 The team is working closely with these consultants to understand their brief and to ensure that the Eco-town vision and masterplan continues to be influential. 2.20 The overall delivery programme for the project is now well underway, we have established lead officers for each sector of the work and the programmes are summarised in this report. 2.21 Quebec Barracks has been confirmed as available and we expect Louisburg to be confirmed in January 2012. A separate report to the Delivery Board outlines the development principles for this important demonstration scheme. Studies 2.22 PwC has been appointed to undertake a study looking at options for procurement of investment and development partners. They will present an interim report at this meeting. 2.23 Part of the consultation process has been a stakeholder meeting to ensure that our stakeholder partners continue to be involved in the process and outcome of the studies. Masterplan and Core Strategy 2.24 Masterplan Consultations for an updated masterplan are now complete. k:\corporate shared folders\whitehill bordon\011 meetings\delivery board Partners: EAST HAMPSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL, HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN PARTNERSHIP, MINISTRY of DEFENCE, HOMES & COMMUNITIES AGENCY - 97 -

2.25 Core Strategy The final Core Strategy will go to the Full Council meeting and Cabinet in December. Economic Development 2.26 Since the economic development theme lead has started work she has: • Been involved in a new transition panel with the Garrison whose task is to work together to ensure a smooth transition and will be used to establish the scale, timing and impact of job losses • Continued working with Enterprise M3 local enterprise partnership to support and capitalise on the inward investment activities, to take opportunities to promote the Eco-town, and to develop links to other successful business centres, including Farnborough and the Blackwater Valley. • Has started the project management of the Quebec Barracks project for the partnership and in particular to co-ordinate planning, transport, environmental and economic development. • Responded to the Standing Conference request to prioritise education and training, by setting up a joint Specialist Group meeting. Ongoing Studies 2.27 While most of the studies are complete, their completion has triggered a further round of work. 2.28 Energy Feasibility Study This work will help shape proposals for managing energy within the town and looks at innovative ideas. Key stakeholder meetings have already taken place; the study is now complete and is published on the website. The work has been brought forward to be included in the Energy Service Delivery and Management Study, which is now complete and on the website. 2.29 The One Planet Living Project looks at opportunities to promote more sustainable living within Whitehill Bordon, to support the work of the Countryside Ranger and Community Development Worker. BioRegional, a sustainability charity, has been appointed to help develop this work and invite views from stakeholders. The consultants have now had the opportunity to dovetail their work with the Economic Development Strategy. A grant system for local businesses will be announced shortly. 2.30 Rail Study This study will establish the viability of a rail link for Whitehill Bordon. Further funding has now been provided from the Department of Communities and Local Government (DCLG) and the next stage of the study (Grip 3) has commenced. The consultants are working closely with the rail operators and Network Rail. The study is expected to be concluded in early 2012. k:\corporate shared folders\whitehill bordon\011 meetings\delivery board Partners: EAST HAMPSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL, HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN PARTNERSHIP, MINISTRY of DEFENCE, HOMES & COMMUNITIES AGENCY - 98 -

2.31 Transport evidence base. This study evaluates the effects of different masterplan phases upon the road network of the area, including on surrounding towns and villages. The report is complete and has been published and discussed by the Specialist Group. 2.32 Walking and Cycling Study This study will consider and develop a strategy for promoting walking and cycling in the existing town and the new development areas. The study will consider options for physical improvements to infrastructure as well as options for promoting walking and cycling. It will also provide a prioritised strategy for implementation. The work stream will consider alternative modes of travel including horse riding. This work has now started. 2.33 Parking Strategy This study will consider the provision of car parking within the Eco-town, at home, workplaces and in the town centre. The work will draw on best practice and European examples to consider the level of parking to be provided, the way in which it will be delivered and any requirement for management. This study is now proceeding. 2.34 Traffic Management Strategy This study will consider potential mitigation and management measures on local roads and villages designed to reduce the impact of potential development on local communities and the environment. This work is now proceeding. Retrofitting 2.35 Insulation project Insulation has now been installed for 715 households. A further 384 households are underway. 2.36 The Low Carbon Communities Challenge. This project is now closed. 35 households received loans of up to £10,000 and are making monthly interest-free repayments that will establish a revolving fund. 2.37 We are now formulating a strategy for retrofitting all existing homes and businesses throughout the development process. The project manager for this project has discussed the options with the environmental sustainability theme lead. Funding Funding success: 2.38 Small Rural Towns Programme – Hampshire Market Towns Project – we have been allocated £7,000 from this South East England Development Agency (SEEDA) funding stream for grants for Small Medium Enterprises (SME) retailers on the Petersfield Road from Chalet Hill to Whitehill for business advice and shop front improvements. k:\corporate shared folders\whitehill bordon\011 meetings\delivery board Partners: EAST HAMPSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL, HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN PARTNERSHIP, MINISTRY of DEFENCE, HOMES & COMMUNITIES AGENCY - 99 -

Current applications: 2.39 Growing Places Fund – Enterprise M3 LEP has a provisional allocation of £14.4m. We have identified four projects which fit with DCLG’s criteria of local infrastructure projects that the fund should be used for which unlock housing and economic growth. We are working with the LEP and other teams within EHDC to progress the proposals. They are: • Sustainable Drainage System Phase 1 – connection over the River Wey adequately sized to accommodate proposed new development. • Bordon Inclosure management – explore procedures and management arrangements for Bordon Inclosure as a proposed SANGS. • Louisburg Barracks – bring access and utilities to site so site can be developed. • Railway project – an investment into the project to cover some of the up-front costs as well as provide the public sector with a long term stake in the project. 2.40 Sponsorship – The Whitehill Bordon Eco-town sponsorship policy has been approved by EHDC’s joint management team. 2.41 Life + Following engagement with key stakeholders, this project will focus on educating the public about the importance of the heathlands in the area and across the South Downs National Park and responsible use of these precious habitats. 2.42 Low Carbon Network Fund – We are developing our plans with Scottish and Southern to provide innovative energy infrastructure for development on Quebec Barracks. 3 Risk assessment 3.1 Now that third party applicants are anticipated in the process it is important to ensure that design and sustainability standards are maintained. 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 Department of Communities and Local Government funding received in March 2010 and March 2011. There is no change to resource implications or requirements. 6 Expenditure k:\corporate shared folders\whitehill bordon\011 meetings\delivery board Partners: EAST HAMPSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL, HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN PARTNERSHIP, MINISTRY of DEFENCE, HOMES & COMMUNITIES AGENCY - 100 -

6.1 The table in Appendix 1 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. 6.2 We anticipate that the funding will be spent over three years. 7 Appendix Appendix 1: Budget summary

Appendix 1: Budget summary

East Hampshire District Council Summary for Whitehill Bordon as at 31st October 2011 Account 5505PR 5506PR 5507PR 5508PR 5509PR 5510PR 5511PR 5512PR 5513PR 5514PR 5515PR 5516PR 5517PR

C C C C C C C C C C C C C

5518PR 5519PR 5520PR 5521PR 5522PR 5523PR 5524PR 5525PR 5526PR 5527PR 5528PR 5529PR 5530PR

C C C C C C C C C C C C C

5531PR 5532PR 5533PR 5534PR 5535PR 5536PR 5537PR

R C C C R R C

5538PR 5539PR

R C R R R R

Demonstration Projects Fire Station - Purchase and Surveys Firestation - Refurbishment Fire Station - Exhibition House Fire Station - Radian Competition Fire Station - Site Fire Station - Exhibitions Working Mens Club Morelands Viking Park Quebec Barracks Chalet Hill Initial Design Briefs Publicity and Advertising Early Wins Retrofitting homes Eco-fit Whitehill Bordon (LCCC) Retrofitting Library & Primary Schools Eco Information Packs Wi-Fi Bio Mass Supply Case Studies Community Development Workers Brash Pelletisation Potential Kick Start habitat improvement/ Biodiversity projects Green Rangers Allotments Timber Fitness Trail Drop in centre for young people Studies and Evidence Sports and recreation study Rail Study Transport Studies SPV/Governance studies Eco-studies and evidence One Planet Living funding Eco-grant Other Costs Project Management Consultancy* Whitehill Bordon - Travel - Transport Evidence Base Salaries Other Costs Unallocated Revenue Costs** Total for the Whitehill / Bordon

2009/10 Actual

2010/11 Actual

FY Budget

YTD Budget

YTD Actuals Committed

YTD Remaining Variance Budget

Q2Forecast

582,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

38,450 150,491 23,558 850 0 0 0 0 43,984 0 0 49,332

0 527,129 294,766 62,400 29,336 62,000 0 0 45,979 45,000 0 20,000 25,000

0 307,492 171,947 36,400 17,113 36,167 0 0 26,821 26,250 0 11,667 14,583

0 139,751 26,639 1,750 6,059 7,990 0 0 13,764 0 0 8,500 376

0 51,747 61,987 0 3,117 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 115,994 83,321 34,650 7,937 28,177 0 0 13,057 26,250 0 3,167 14,207

0 335,631 206,140 60,650 20,160 54,010 0 0 32,215 45,000 0 11,500 24,624

0 527,129 294,766 62,400 29,336 62,000 0 0 45,979 45,000 0 20,000 25,000

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 306,994 1,275,000 0 0 96 24,448 0 76,452 12,500 25,000 38,000 15,000

300,000 0 0 6,613 12,000 3,000 24,448 6,000 11,000 25,000 0 0 15,000

175,000 0 0 3,858 7,000 1,750 14,261 3,500 6,417 14,583 0 0 8,750

153,303 3,889 0 0 10 3,000 0 0 11,000 25,000 0 0 0

19,732 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12,500 0 0 15,000

1,965 -3,889 0 3,858 6,990 -1,250 14,261 3,500 -4,583 -22,917 0 0 -6,250

126,965 -3,889 0 6,613 11,990 0 24,448 6,000 0 -12,500 0 0 0

175,000 0 0 6,613 12,000 3,000 24,448 6,000 11,000 25,000 0 0 15,000

0 0 0 0 0 0 0

9,000 0 0 21,024 86,123 20

0 0 91,000 225,000 300,000 69,980 50,000

0 0 53,083 131,250 175,000 40,822 29,167

0 0 0 36,423 194,489 34,670 1,000

0 0 80,000 472 6,203 13,780 0

0 0 -26,917 94,355 -25,692 -7,628 28,167

0 0 11,000 188,105 99,308 21,530 49,000

0 0 91,000 225,000 300,000 69,980 50,000

0 0 0 0 0 71,669 653,669

56,493 775,000 673,341 0 0 130,462 3,831,617

0 0 134,744 78,601 605,724 353,339 0 0 0 0 280,295 163,505 3,271,414 1,908,325

0 2,157 332,524 0 0 134,306 1,136,600

0 0 0 0 0 90 264,628

0 76,444 20,815 0 0 29,109 507,097

0 132,587 273,200 0 0 145,899 1,870,186

0 134,744 605,724 0 0 280,295 3,146,414

* - funded from separate grants ** - funded from EHDC 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 Total funding needed

653,669 3,831,617 3,146,414 5,117,296 12,748,996

CLG Grant CLG Grant April 2011 EHDC funding HCA Funding DECC funding Funding Received

102

9,870,687 2,025,000 482,426 60,000 310,883 12,748,996

2012/2013 onwards

230,053 169,076 185,750 310,000

2,025,000

2,197,417 5,117,296

Agenda item 13

Whitehill Bordon Opportunity Delivery Board ______________________________________________________________ Date of meeting:

15th December 2011

Title of report:

Whitehill Bordon Overall Project Programme

Author:

Simon Beach, Project Coordinator

Reference no: WBPD041-2011 ______________________________________________________________ Executive Summary: (Not more than 2 small paragraphs) Overall Project Programme The report presented to the Delivery Board is the Eco-town overall Project Programme. The programme is one component of the Eco-town project management system and has been developed to give high level delivery information.

Date: 17th November 2011 Version: 1

Status of Report: Public (Exempt or Public)

Purpose of report: To report the overall programme to the Standing Conference and Delivery Board

Recommendations requiring Board considerations: None â&#x20AC;&#x201C; for information purposes only

Consultation and comments received: N/A

Community engagement proposals: N/A

1 Background (reason for report) 1.1 The report is presented to the Delivery Board for process information purposes. The overall programme plan outlines the work required to deliver key aspects of the project into the future. 1.2 The Flag and Theme documents are monthly reports which highlight the status of individual projects from the previous month, achievements and items to be reviewed for exception. The flag report gives an indication of progress against Project Initiation Document baselined milestones. 2 Subject of report / options and considerations 2.1 The programme details each element of the project from starting with the MoD vacation from sites in the town to outline planning submission. 2.2 The timings of each element are as accurate as possible at present, but are likely to change in line with project demands and requirements over a number of years. 2.3 At present, work is underway to refine the outline planning element of the programme. GVA Grimley and Amec are working with the Eco-town K:\Corporate Shared Folders\Whitehill Bordon\011 Meetings\Delivery Board Partners: EAST HAMPSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL, HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN PARTNERSHIP, MINISTRY of DEFENCE, HOMES & COMMUNITIES AGENCY - 104 -

partnership to develop a programme of work to achieve an outline planning proposal for the whole site. 2.4 PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (PwC) are also contracted to investigate delivery options for the project and the outcomes of their work will be programmed in March 2012. 2.5 The dates associated with GVA Grimley, Amec and PwC are all in review and are subject to further work. The outcome of GVAâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s work will be presented to the Delivery Board in December 2011. 3 Risk assessment (must include consideration of the environmental, financial, health and safety and equalities impact assessment) 3.1

As part of the ongoing risk management strategy, the overall programme risks are included as part of the monthly review of risks.

4 Contributions to Delivery Board Priorities 4.1 The Programme will help to achieve Delivery Board priorities by defining key short term and long term milestones to be achieved. Each element of the programme is defined at a high level. Individual project programmes will also be developed to achieve the overall programme objective. 5 Resource implications 5.1 Recourse implications are defined in each of the Project Initiation Documents which form the workstreams associated with the overall project plan. 6 Cost implications 6.1 Costs implications are defined in the projected financial forecast document and are also forecast in the Project Initiation Documents which form the workstreams associated with the overall project plan. 7 Conclusion 7.1 Currently, the overall project programme is running to time, cost and quality. Workstreams requiring further development include the outline planning project and the development partner project. The Delivery Board are working towards a conclusion to be able to take both projects forward. 8 Appendix Appendix 1: Overall project programme Appendix 2: Monthly flag report Appendix 3: Monthly theme report K:\Corporate Shared Folders\Whitehill Bordon\011 Meetings\Delivery Board Partners: EAST HAMPSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL, HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN COUNCIL, WHITEHILL TOWN PARTNERSHIP, MINISTRY of DEFENCE, HOMES & COMMUNITIES AGENCY - 105 -

Appendix 1: Overall project programme ID

Task Name

Duration

Whitehill Bordon DRAFT Eco-town Programme

1171 days?

Mon 04/07/11

Mon 28/12/15

MoD Vacations 1174 days? Withdrawal from occupied sites 1 day? Withdrawal from unoccupied sites TBA 1 day? Operational Transition (Dates TBA) 1 day? Transition Plan 1 day? EHDC Support Services Plan 1 day? Community Engagement & Vision 263 days? 259 days? Engage with Community & update Masterplan 120 days 175 days? Neighbourhood consultation 65 days? Communications and Marketing 259 days? Marketing to potential investors 129 days? Launch of partnering opportunity 0 days Core Strategy and Masterplan 391 days? Completion of studies 216 days? Re-state vision 45 days? Public Consultation on Masterplan 87 days? Update masterplan 65 days? Publish Masterplan 0 days Core Strategy Pre submission Published 31 days Core Strategy Submission 5 days Core Strategy EIP 10 days Core Strategy Adopted 21 days Adoption of Masterplan as SPD 213 days? Evidence gathering / refresh the masterplan evidence 64 days? Prepare draft SPD 43 days? Statutory Consultation 31 days? Representations and finalise SPD 22 days SPD Adoption (Final date to be confirmed) 0 days Masterplan Studies 220 days? Completion of Current Studies (Phase 1) 0 days 0 days Completion of Rail GRIP 3 Study 138 days 138 days? Evidence for Core Strategy Studies Dates TBA 109 days HRA Refresh Dates TBA 109 days? Walking and Cycling Strategy Dates TBA 109 days? Parking Strategy Dates TBA 109 days? Additional Transport Work Dates TBA 109 days? Commercial Strategy Advice (tasks in review by PWC) 130 days? Commercial Advisor procurement 1 day? Develop strategy/PID/PQQ (To be provided by PWC) 129 days? Draft Report to December Delivery Board 0 days Approval of SPV strategy (To be provided by PWC) 0 days Commence set-up (To be provided by PWC) 1 day? Launch SPV 0 days Development Partner procurement (OJEU restricted) 474 days Dates in Review 2 days? Delivery Board June meeting 0 days 1 day Procure/establish Masterplan project team 40 days 1 day? Develop Brief (PID) 90 days 1 day? Develop PQQ 90 days 1 day? Develop PQQ Evaluation model 90 days 1 day? DB approve Brief at December Board meeting 0 days 1 day Develop SPV Terms 120 days 1 day? Publish OJEU Notice 0 days 1 day Issue PQQ to interested parties 0 days 0 days Interested parties compile PQQ responses 50 days 1 day? Receive & Evaluate PQQs 20 days 1 day? DB agree shortlist 20 days 1 day? Issue invitation to participate in Competitive Dialogue 0 days 0 days Dialogue Phase 120 days 1 day? Develop Tender evaluation model 90 days 1 day? Request Tenders 0 days 0 days Receive Final tenders 30 days 1 day? Evaluate & Select Preferred Bidder 20 days 1 day? Agree Contract Terms 30 days 1 day? Board Approval & Confirm Preferred Partner 10 days 1 day? 10 Day Standstill 1 day? Sign Contract with Development Partner (DP) 0 days 1 day Outline Planning Application (Dates in Review) 490 days? DP start-up/initiation process 20 days 20 days? Information gathering, data validation, planning strategy 30 days 30 days? Programme development, stakeholders, Risk etc 30 days 30 days? Review Masterplan, Phasing & Viability 120 days 120 days? Revisit SPD and other Planning documents 120 days 120 days? Community Engagement 150 days 150 days? Compile Outline Planning Application 180 days 180 days? Affordable Housing discussions 110 days 110 days? S38, S106, & S278 discussions 110 days 110 days? Submit Outline (hybrid) Planning Application 0 days 0 days Planning Application Determined (assume no Public Enquiry) 130 days 130 days? Pre-start conditions discharged 130 days 130 days? Earliest Start of Infrastructure works 0 days 261 days? Landowners Issues 1 day? Land Equalisation Agreement TBA 1 day? Quebec Barracks (Dates in Review) 825 days? Develop strategy/PID/PQQ/Legal pre-agreements 65 days? Agree procurement process 0 days Procurement of Development Partner 174 days? Sign contract with Development Partner 0 days Preparation of detailed planning application 131 days? Planning application 0 days Planning period 129 days? Planning decision 0 days Construction period 305 days? Completion 0 days Community Engagement 1171 days Delivery Board Meetings 325 days Delivery Board Meeting 0 days Delivery Board Meeting 0 days Delivery Board Meeting 0 days Delivery Board Meeting 0 days Delivery Board Meeting 0 days Delivery Board Meeting 0 days Specialist Group Meetings 87 days Community Facilities & Amenities 0 days Infrastructure and Transport 0 days Sustainable Environment 0 days Economic Development 0 days Housing 0 days Community Facilities & Amenities 0 days Infrastructure and Transport 0 days Sustainable Environment 0 days Economic Development 0 days Housing 0 days Demonstration Projects 653 days? Completion of Community & Demonstrator Projects (Ph2) 132 days 132 days? Completion of Community & Demonstrator Projects (Ph3) 263 days 263 days?

Mon 04/07/11 Thu 31/12/15 Mon 04/07/11 Mon 04/07/11 Mon 04/07/11 Mon 04/07/11 Tue 05/07/11 Mon 01/08/11 Mon 03/10/11 Tue 05/07/11 Tue 05/07/11 Fri 29/06/12 Mon 04/07/11 Mon 04/07/11 Mon 01/08/11 Thu 01/09/11 Mon 02/01/12 Mon 30/04/12 Fri 03/02/12 Mon 28/05/12 Mon 06/08/12 Mon 03/12/12 Tue 04/09/12 Tue 04/09/12 Thu 01/11/12 Fri 15/02/13 Mon 01/04/13 Fri 28/06/13 Mon 30/05/11 Mon 30/05/11 Wed 01/06/11 Tue 01/11/11 Tue 01/11/11 Tue 01/11/11 Tue 01/11/11 Tue 01/11/11 Mon 04/07/11 Mon 04/07/11 Tue 05/07/11 Thu 15/12/11 Fri 30/12/11 Tue 15/11/11 Tue 15/11/11 Tue 15/11/11 Tue 15/11/11 Tue 15/11/11 Tue 15/11/11 Tue 15/11/11 Tue 15/11/11 Wed 16/11/11 Tue 15/11/11 Tue 15/11/11 Tue 15/11/11 Tue 15/11/11 Tue 15/11/11 Tue 15/11/11 Tue 15/11/11 Tue 15/11/11 Tue 15/11/11 Tue 15/11/11 Tue 15/11/11 Tue 15/11/11 Tue 15/11/11 Tue 15/11/11 Tue 15/11/11 Tue 15/11/11 Tue 09/04/13 Tue 09/04/13 Tue 07/05/13 Tue 07/05/13 Tue 18/06/13 Tue 18/06/13 Tue 07/05/13 Tue 18/06/13 Tue 24/09/13 Tue 24/09/13 Mon 24/02/14 Tue 25/02/14 Tue 26/08/14 Mon 24/02/14 Mon 04/07/11 Mon 04/07/11 Mon 04/07/11 Mon 04/07/11 Fri 30/09/11 Tue 01/11/11 Fri 29/06/12 Mon 02/07/12 Mon 31/12/12 Tue 01/01/13 Fri 28/06/13 Mon 01/07/13 Fri 29/08/14 Wed 06/07/11 Thu 15/09/11 Thu 15/09/11 Thu 15/12/11 Thu 15/03/12 Thu 14/06/12 Thu 13/09/12 Thu 13/12/12 Tue 11/10/11 Tue 01/11/11 Thu 13/10/11 Tue 11/10/11 Tue 18/10/11 Thu 27/10/11 Tue 24/01/12 Thu 02/02/12 Tue 17/01/12 Tue 31/01/12 Thu 09/02/12 Thu 30/06/11 Mon 04/07/11 Mon 04/07/11

Thu 31/12/15 Richard Nelson Thu 31/12/15 Mon 04/07/11 Mon 04/07/11 Mon 04/07/11 Mon 04/07/11 Fri 29/06/12 Fri 30/03/12 Fri 30/12/11 Fri 29/06/12 Lydia F Manson Fri 30/12/11 Fri 29/06/12 Mon 31/12/12 Mandar Puranik Mon 30/04/12 Fri 30/09/11 Fri 30/12/11 Fri 30/03/12 Mon 30/04/12 Fri 16/03/12 Fri 01/06/12 Fri 17/08/12 Mon 31/12/12 Fri 28/06/13 Fri 30/11/12 Mon 31/12/12 Fri 29/03/13 Tue 30/04/13 Fri 28/06/13 Fri 30/03/12 Thu 28/07/11 Fri 09/12/11 Fri 30/03/12 Fri 30/03/12 Fri 30/03/12 Fri 30/03/12 Fri 30/03/12 Fri 30/12/11 W.Shillam D.Gardner Mon 04/07/11 Fri 30/12/11 Thu 15/12/11 Fri 30/12/11 Tue 15/11/11 Tue 15/11/11 Wed 16/11/11 Richard Nelson Tue 15/11/11 Tue 15/11/11 Tue 15/11/11 Tue 15/11/11 Tue 15/11/11 Wed 16/11/11 Tue 15/11/11 Tue 15/11/11 Tue 15/11/11 Tue 15/11/11 Tue 15/11/11 Tue 15/11/11 Tue 15/11/11 Tue 15/11/11 Tue 15/11/11 Tue 15/11/11 Tue 15/11/11 Tue 15/11/11 Tue 15/11/11 Tue 15/11/11 Tue 15/11/11 Tue 15/11/11 Mon 23/02/15 Richard Nelson Mon 06/05/13 Mon 17/06/13 Mon 17/06/13 Mon 02/12/13 Mon 02/12/13 Mon 02/12/13 Mon 24/02/14 Mon 24/02/14 Mon 24/02/14 Mon 24/02/14 Mon 25/08/14 Mon 23/02/15 Mon 23/02/15 Mon 04/07/11 Mon 04/07/11 Fri 29/08/14 Sue Robbins Fri 30/09/11 Fri 30/09/11 Fri 29/06/12 Fri 29/06/12 Mon 31/12/12 Mon 31/12/12 Fri 28/06/13 Fri 28/06/13 Fri 29/08/14 Fri 29/08/14 Wed 30/12/15 Thu 13/12/12 Thu 15/09/11 Thu 15/12/11 Thu 15/03/12 Thu 14/06/12 Thu 13/09/12 Thu 13/12/12 Thu 09/02/12 Tue 01/11/11 Thu 13/10/11 Tue 11/10/11 Tue 18/10/11 Thu 27/10/11 Tue 24/01/12 Thu 02/02/12 Tue 17/01/12 Tue 31/01/12 Thu 09/02/12 Tue 31/12/13 Tue 03/01/12 Wed 04/07/12

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 387 388

Project: 110604 Overall Programme D Date: Fri 02/12/11

Task

Progress

Start

Finish

Project Manager

Milestone

Qtr 2, 2011 Apr May

Jun

Qtr 3, 2011 Jul Aug

Sep

Qtr 4, 2011 Oct Nov

Dec

Qtr 1, 2012 Jan Feb

Mar

Qtr 2, 2012 Apr May

Jun

Qtr 3, 2012 Jul Aug

Sep

Qtr 4, 2012 Oct Nov

Dec

Qtr 1, 2013 Jan Feb

Mar

Qtr 2, 2013 Apr May

Jun

Qtr 3, 2013 Jul Aug

Sep

Qtr 4, 2013 Oct Nov

Dec

Qtr 1, 2014 Jan Feb

Qtr 2, 2014 Apr May

Mar

Jun

Qtr 3, 2014 Jul Aug

Sep

Qtr 4, 2014 Oct Nov

Dec

Qtr 1, 2015 Jan Feb

Mar

29/06

30/04

28/06 30/05

15/12 30/12 15/11

15/11

24/02

30/09 29/06 31/12 28/06 29/08

15/09 15/12 15/03 14/06 13/09 13/12 01/11 13/10 11/10 18/10 27/10 24/01 02/02 17/01 31/01 09/02

Summary

Rolled Up Task

Rolled Up Milestone

Rolled Up Progress Page 1

106

Split

External Tasks

Project Summary

Group By Summary

Deadline

Qtr 2, 2015 Apr May

Jun

Qtr 3, 2015 Jul Aug

Sep

Qtr 4, 2015 Oct Nov

Dec

Qtr 1, 2 Jan

Appendix 2: Monthly flag report [Date] [Description]

15/11/2011

Status

Project Title

Outstanding baseline milestones from 2010 01/11/10 Allocate plots to residents

Green

[Date] [Description]

Agreed Baseline / Milestone

Mar

Apr

May

[Date] [Description]

Jun

[Date] [Description]

Revised Forecast

Jul

Aug

2011/2012 Sep

Complete

[Date] [Description]

Oct

Nov

Dec

06/11 Completion of landscaping

31/12/10 Official Opening

Allotments 5528PR 31/10/10 Completion of landscaping

31/12/10 Allotments occupied

16/5/11 Allocate plots to residents

11/6/11 Allotments occupied

29/7/11 Official opening

8/3/11 Contractors final invoice received and paid

Green

Amphibian Pond 5526PR

11/10/11 Final Management plan

31/3/11 EHDC agree MoD lease

Amber

10/11 Construct Boardwalk

Bordon Inclosure Boardwalk 5526PR

9/6/11 EHDC agree and sign MoD lease

30/1/11 Information/ consultation with residents

Amber

21/7/11 Draft Management plan

Green Network Enhancement - Existing 5526PR

12/2011 Outline work and cost for each plot

7/6/11 Information/ consultation with residents 28/3/11 Start clearing path for footpath and install ramp

08/11 Footpath final invoice and payment

Alexandra Park & Jubilee Park Ecological 5526PR 11/07/11 Define entrances to path with dragons teeth and limit access along river path

8/3/11 Rifle wall pond contractors final invoice received and paid

Green

Countryside Ranger 5526PR

Project to recruit a Countryside Ranger completed in 2010. Ongoing taregts are listed.

Green

Community Development Worker & Storyteller 5524PR

Community Development worker employed in 2010. See Theme report for ongoing achievements.

23/3/11 Design Focus Group

Green

9/3/11 Design workshop

15/8/11 Complete work

9/5/11 Consider recommendations from the Energy Feasibility Study

30/4/11 Complete work

14/4/11 2nd stakeholder workshop

13/5/11 First draft of Green Infrstructure Strategy completed

4/5/11 First draft of LBAP and survey framework

Biodiversity & Green Infrastructure 5535PR 28/2/11 First draft of Green Infrstructure Strategy completed

28/2/11 Draft feasibility study complete

Green

15/4/11 Monitoring Focus Group

Habitat Regulation Assessment 5535PR

31/3/2011 Consider recommendations from the Energy Feasibility Study

Green

31/10/2011 Install Piers

08/2011 Draw exact plots/plans on each map

31/3/11 Draw exact plots/plans on each map

28/2/11 Outline work and cost for each plot

Amber

09/2011 Clear vegetation

31/3/11 First draft of LBAP and survey framework completed

14/4/11 2nd stakeholder workshop

30/5/11 Feasibility study & action plan completed

31/3/11 1st stakeholder workshop

15/8/11 Green Infrastructure Strategy, LBAP and survey framework completed

30/5/11 Green Infrastructure Strategy, LBAP and survey framework completed 10/6/11 Draft MUSCO study

15/8/11 Feasibility study & action plan completed

30/9/11 MUSCO study complete

12/5/11 2nd stakeholder workshop

Energy/Utility Strategy 5535PR

31/3/11 1st stakeholder workshop

31/4/11 Draft MUSCO study

12/5/11 2nd stakeholder workshop

9/5/11 Draft feasibility study complete

107

Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

2012/13 May

June

Status

Project Title

Mar

Outstanding baseline milestones from 2010

Apr

Green

31/3/11 Commence project evaluation, publicity and commence dissemination of early results 31/3/1 Project completed, report details to DECC

LCCC Eco Fit 5519PR

22/3/11 All land registry charges put on properties

Jul

Aug

2011/2012 Sep

29/3/11 Handover meeting with Ecofit surveyor

25/4/11 Meeting to establish revolving fund 12/4/11 Contact residents to check works are satisfactory

24/05/11 Review meeting with USEA

24/05/11 Marketing briefing to stakeholders

03/08/11 2nd quarterly tranche of management fees and capital costs (depending on number of installs) paid to USEA.

23/06/11 USEA to provide results from installation surveys

16/5/11 USEA to investifate why 114 households have withdrawn from scheme

25/4/11 Contact residents to check works are satisfactory

10/5/11 Review meeting with USEA

14/6/11 Marketing briefing document for Community worker to talk to stakeholders

20/7/11 Review meeting with USEA to discuss remaining items 07/2011 Final report

Local Sports & Recreation Facilities Strategy

Timber Fitness Trail & Recreation Ground 5529PR (project complete)

Project completed in 2010

11/2010 Tender for three quotations on the technical specification established from previous

05/2011 Public tender for 3 quotations on the technical specification established

06/2011 Shortlist and score 3 quotations

Community WiFi - Phase 1

09/2011 WiFi installed

06/2011 Appoint provider 15/3/11 Conduct interviews

Green

1/5/11 Conduct advertising campaign to raise awareness of drop-in with youth and volunteers. Recruit volunteers.

15/7/11 Conservation volunteer opportunities & eco-art workshops in place

Spring 2011 Prepare urban veg plots & begin planting crops for later harvesting

15/4/11 Staff in post

15/5/11 Consult young people on projects they wish to be involved with

1/5/11 Doors open; get to know young people

15/6/11 Cycling proficiency & cycle maintenance in place. Swap shop & recycling point

20/7/11 Doors open, get to know young people

Summer 2011 Bushcraft: learning woodland skills with assistance from DVT

Local Biomass Supply Case Studies 5523PR

15/11/10 Identify areas for harvesting

Amber

4/4/11 Youth worker in post

Youth Drop In Centre

23/3/11 Conduct interviews

Amber

Dec

Jan

Feb

Mar

31/3/12 Issue and obtain return of further customer satisfaction forms to ascertain actual benefits arising from projects based on 12 months data from energy bills

1/4/11 Meeting to establish revolving fund

08/11/10 Final Report

Green

Nov

30/4/11 First draft of Water Cycle Study

Retrofitting Homes 5518PR

02/01/2010 Second quarterly tranche of management fees and capital costs (depending on number of installs) paid to USEA

Green

Oct

11/7/11 Complete Water Cycle Study

29/3/11 Handover meeting with Eco-fit surveyor

15/3/11 Review meeting with USEA

Amber

Jun

Water Cycle Study 5535PR

1/3/11 Stakeholder workshop

Green

May 30/5/11 Complete Water Cycle Study

31/3/11 First draft of Water Cycle Study

Brash Pelletising 5525PR

31/01/11 Prepare report outlining the potential business models available

30/09/10 Organise workshop to outline potential benefits to heathland owners

30/06/10 Tender for suitable subcontractor

15/11/10 cost harvesting & delivery to heatland biomass to central point

15/12/10 Review costs of pelletisation of this resource

108

Apr

2012/13 May

June

Status

Project Title

Mar

Outstanding baseline milestones from 2010

Apr

May

Jun

03/2011 Start second phase of eco pack

Green

29/4/11 Presentation of options to project steering group / members / management group

20/5/11 Presentation of options to project steering group / members / management group

2011/2012 Sep 09/2011 Consultation Eco pack published

Oct

Nov

Dec

Jan

12/2011 Receive draft Stage 2 study

01/2012 Present draft Stage 2 findings to Delivery Board

Feb

Mar

Apr

2012/13 May

June

10/2011 Consultation Eco pack distributed

10/6/11 Stage F report

30/6/11 Stage F report

1/7/11 Final design & Feasibility report

10/11 Public exhibition of the final option completed & consultation report received by EHDC

Viking Park Design & Feasibility study 5513PR 24/6/11 Public exhibition of the final option completed & consultation report received by EHDC

25/3/11 Stage C report 4/2011 Commission Stage 2 (Grip 3) study

Green

Aug

Eco Pack 5521PR

29/3/11 Stage C report

Green

Jul 07/2011 Design Eco pack for consultation

31/10/11 Project closure & handover 30/7/11 Final design & Feasibility report

15/7/11 Project closure & handover

05/2011 Inception meeting and agree study approach

03/2012 Complete Feasibility Study (Grip 3)

01/2012 Consultation on draft Stage 2 study

Rail Feasibility Study 5533PR 12/2010 Complete feasibility study (grip 3) 07/2010 Achieve authority to recruit and finalise employment details

Green

Town Transport Manager 5539PR

09/2010 Advertise post

05/2011 Achieve authority to recruit and finalise employment details

06/2011 Advertise post

07/2011 Appoint sucessful candidate

11/2010 Undertake interviews

10/2010 Review applications and shortlist

01/2011 Town Transport Manager starts

11/2010 Appoint successful candidate

09/2011 Successful candidate starts

07/2011 Undertake interviews

07/2011 Review applications and shortlist

05/2011 Annual progress review

12/2010 Liftshare pages for Whitehill Bordon goes live

Green

Liftshare 5539PR

08/2011 Liftshare pages for Whitehill Bordon go live 09/2010 09/2010 Consultation with Agree draft stakeholders specification for consultation

Amber

Bus Improvements 5539PR

11/2010 Tender contract 10/2010 public consultation on service specification

Green

11/2010 Agree finalised service spec

02/2011 Achieve authorisation to award contact to preferred supplier

04/2011 Route registration with local authority

09/2011 Agree draft service specification for consultation

04/2011 Service begins (with marketing)

07/2011 Agree draft specification for consultation

11/2011 public consultation on service specification

12/2011 Tender Contract

02/2012 Achieve authorisation to award contract to preferred supplier

06/2012 Service begins (with marketing)

Transport Website 5548PR

11/2010 Go live with web pages 12/2010 Complete phase 2 transport assessment and gain approval for publication

Green

09/2011 Consultation with stakeholders

04/2012 Route registration with Local Authority (70 days)

11/2011 Agree finalised service specification

06/2011 Receive draft pages 4/2011 Scope tranche 2 work

09/2011 Go live with web pages 07/2011 Complete tranche 2 work and gain approval for publication

Transport Evidence Base 5533PR

4/2011 Commission tranche 2 work

05/2011 Prepare draft report for tranche 2

07/2011 Consult with stakeholders on tranche 2 funding 08/2011 Recruitment of permanent Delivery Board Chairman

Green

Governance Proposals 5534PR

Governance structure has been set up

02/2011 Phase 1 complete

11/4/11 Start on site Phase 1

13/5/2011 Phase 1 complete

08/2011 Phase 2 complete

14/11/11 Start on site Phase 2

10/8/2011 Phase 1 occupation

Amber

Fire Station Refurb 5506PR

06/01/2011 Cabinet approval to accept phase 2

08/2011 Comissioning and exhibitioning

109

07/2012 Phase 2 complete

Status

Project Title

Mar

Outstanding baseline milestones from 2010

Apr

Amber

May

Jun

Jul

2011/2012 Sep

Aug

03/2011 Promotion and media campaign launched

Dec

09/2011 Appoint judges

08/2011 Consult with community on public open space

Four House Competition 5508PR

10/2010 Start on site

09/2011 Complete drafting of stage 1 and 2 competition documents

09/2011 Advertise competition

08/2011 Complete drafting of stage 1 and 2 competition documents

11/2011 Shortlist stage 1 competitors

02/2012 Sign land transfer agreement

09/2011 Appoint judges 14/11/2011 Start on site

03/2011 Define procurement & application requirements

03/2011 Consultation & stakeholder engagement

03/2011 Advisory panel & evaluation board established

03/2011 Define approval process & evaluation method

Summer 2011 First grant approved

12/2010 Scheme launch

12/2011 Performance review of scheme

Summer 2011 Scheme Launch 10/2011 Weyford Infants & Junior performance monitoring

03/2011 On site Woodlea Primary 08/2011 The Holme Primary design/procurement

04/2011 Bordon Library completion 03/2011 Bordon Infants complete

Retrofitting of Public Buildings E1655 03/2011 Completion of: Bordon Junior Bordon Infants Bordon Library Woodlea

01/2011 Aim to achieve higher ecostandards

08/2011 The Holme Primary site works

04/2011 Procure works identified in second phase scoping

06/2011 Procure works identified in second phase scoping

07/2011 Second phase works on site

31/10/2011 Woodlea completion

08/2011 St Matthews Primary site works 08/2011 Hollywater School

Bordon Working Mens Club 5511PR - project on hold 02/2011 * Or scheme for 14 private units submitted for planning

30/4/11 First draft of OPL Strategy

30/4/11 First draft of OPL strategy

30/4/11 First draft of monitoring framework

One Planet Living 5536PR

28/2/11 Issue draft design brief outlining design principles

Fire Station South site: Design & Development brief

12/2011 Homes completed

03/2011 Start on site

08/3/11 Scoping meeting

Green

08/2011 St Matthews Primary design/procurement

03/2011 Completion of Weyford Infants & Junior

08/2011 Mill Chase Secondary School works

04/2011 Additional funding considered

08/3/11 Scoping meeting

Green

June

23/3/11 Initial stage 1 consultation

30/4/11 First draft of campaign advice 7/4/11 Prepare sketch design options and test their financial viability

4/5/11 1st stakeholder meeting 18/5/11 Low Carbon 11/5/11 Campaign Monitoring workshop 11/5/11 framework First draft of meeting monitoring framework

04/5/11 1st stakeholder meeting

11/5/11 Monitoring framework meeting 26/5/11 Business tools meeting

18/5/11 Low Carbon campaign workshop

1/6/11 First draft of campaign advice

31/7/11 Project complete

9/6/11 Business Development meeting

16/6/11 2nd stakeholder meeting

30/9/11 Project complete 16/11/11 Prepare a draft design and development brief

15/7/11 The final development brief completed with the recommendations

2/5/11 Complete public consultation on viable options

30/11/11 Final development brief completed with the recommendations

15/3/11 Issue draft design brief outlining design principles

21/3/11 Initial stage 1 consultation

11/4/11 Prepare sketch design options and test their financial viability

23/5/11 Select a prepared option and present it to the key stakeholders

16/10/11 Complete public consultation on viable options

13/6/11 Prepare a draft design and development brief

110

02/11/11 Select a prepared option and present it to the key stakeholders

03/2012 Architects commence design development

09/2012 Planning approval 07/2012 Completion

Eco-Grants 5537PR

01/2011 * Either Scheme for 29 units proceeds

2012/13 May

08/2012 Building regulations application submitted

Exhibition House 5507PR

01/2011 First grant approved

Red

Apr

06/2012 Planning application submitted

27/09/11 Advertise competition

18/8/11 Full planning application

10/2010 Define approval process and evaluation method

Mar

02/2012 Select winning design team

06/2011 Completion

Amber

Feb

11/4/11 Draft first year programme of events and exhibitions produced

08/2011 Begin approvals process with MoD and Council internal processes

Green

Jan

03/2012 performance and evaluation review

08/2011 Draft Heads of terms Radian & EHDC

Amber

Nov

04/2011 First event / exhibition held

Exhibition Venue 5510PR 01/2011 Draft first year programme of events and exhibitions produced

Green

Oct

11/4/11 Start on site of Phase 1 refurbishment

02/2011 Branding guidelines for firestation and related exhibitions adopted

Appendix 3: Monthly Theme Report project complete

Oct-11

Achievement This Reporting Period

Update Date

Project Budget

Spend to date

On Target (Yes/No)

Sc op e

Next Milestone

st on es

Project Manager

al s

Summary Status

ile

Project Title

Comments on Underperforming Areas

Project Ref No.

Community / Demonstration Projects Amber

Fi na nc i

Theme: Status:

Solution / Positive Comments

1st Priority Risk and Owner upcoming issues

Community Projects

5528PR

Allotments

Green

Chris Youngs

Project complete

Ongoing minor landscaping work and monitoring of site and grass cutting

N/A

£25,000

yes

Green

5526PR

Amphibian Pond

Green

Tori Mehluish

Project complete

N/A

£9,000.00

£13,000.00

yes

Green

5526PR

Bordon Inclosure Boardwalk

Amber

Boardwalk construction Contractor to complete complete application of grip strips PR photo shoot took Tori Mehluish to boardwalk place for use when the boardwalk is ready to open

15/11/2011

£45,200.00

£44,652.00

yes

Green

Amber

Green

Bill and Chris Wain spoke with Bruce to help further this project. Bruce has made contact with another person in 15/11/2011 Contracts/Environmental Services who is able to look through the maps and assess what work may be possible

£10,000.00

£9,770.00

yes

Green

Amber

Green

Email Lydia for PR on project

Work has been carried out on the footpath surface to make it more even across the gradient

£14,000.00

£12,252.00

yes

Green

Milestones completed, Tori Mehluish ongoing activities

Continuing after school clubs Carried out tree surveys through Deadwater Valley Local Nature Reserve Met with Weyford School to agree what works can be carried out in the school gorunds for the after school club Weyford Rangers conservation area project Preparing material from after school clubs and Christmas Fairs

5526PR

Green Network Enhancement- Existing Town

Amber

Keep in contact with new EHDC person who is overseeing the maps Tori Mehluish Set meeting with EHDC to discuss and agree proposed work on each plot

5526PR

Alexandra Park and Jubilee Park ecological improvements

Green

Tori Mehluish

5527PR

5524PR

Countryside Ranger

Community Development Worker project complete updates still received

Green

Mike O'Mahony

N/A

15/11/2011

Another person from EHDC (Planning or street Awaiting meeting with EHDC contracts to agree what works Environmental contractor) not able to services has been can be done. A suitable person who could meet and discuss meet to discuss feasibility identified who can go each plot from EHDC needs to be found of each plot through the maps

Numerous attempts have been made to contact Garrison Estates, HCC Estates Manager and EHDC Estates Manager with no response received. These managers need to be and are involved through Bruce Collinson and the wider biodiversity plan, projects and concerns

Serious accident

Green

Poor response to LCCC and other initiatives for residents and community groups

Green

Low Uptake of initiative resulting in funds not being spent

15/11/2011

£50,000.00

£37,500.00

yes

Green

Researching resources for Eco Santa's grotto Helping at neighbourhood engagement events with team Session at Eco Station with 15/11/2011 Adult Services community group Encouraging young people to work on HCC bus consultation

£60,000.00

£24,448.00

yes

Green

£400,000.00

£153,303.00

yes

Green

715 installations of insulation for households. A further 384 households are Hold meeting with ongoing under the USEA to discuss scheme marketing plan and free £40,000 has been 16/11/2011 transferred to USEA this insulation offer by energy companies month to keep up with the installation rate USEA have drafted a marketing plan for the way forward

Contractor started Work clearance as soon as he could on 23/8/11 prevented/delayed due and construction on to wildlife or weather 20/9/11

Milestones were delayed due to lease agreement

5518PR

Retrofitting homes Insulation

Green

Stephanie Beggs

5531PR

Local sports & Recreation facilities strategy

Amber

Mike O'Mahony

Project complete

N/A

£6,000.00

£9,000.00

yes

Green

Amber

Green

5529PR

Timber fitness trail & recreation ground (Complete)

Green

Christopher Youngs

N/A Project complete

Complete maintenance and vandalism checks

N/A

£38,000.00

yes

Green

MO'M

Flooding in winter

111

WTC

st on es

al s

Solution / Positive Comments

Next Milestone

Achievement This Reporting Period

Update Date

Project Budget

Spend to date

On Target (Yes/No)

Green

Simon Beach

Project complete

Launch event arranged for 21st November

16/11/2011

£12,000.00

£2,795.50

yes

Green

Martin Dobson

More volunteers to be recruited

Met with Hampshire County Youth Service and in process of doing some joint work to ensure there is adequate provision for young people Secured Mill Chase Youth Centre as a venue for Friday night drop-in. Doors open 14/10/11

13/10/2011

£30,000.00

£15,000.00

yes

Green

Amber

Green

Met with Habitats Regulation Assessment (HRA) group to seek endorsement to support/proceed with project which was gained

20/09/2011

£6,000.00

No spend this period

N/A

£3,000.00

yes

Green

15/11/2011

£8,000.00

£6,018.40

yes

Green

Depends on other projects and their possible delays

LFM

Sc op e

Project Manager

ile

Summary Status

Comments on Underperforming Areas

Project Title

Fi na nc i

Project Ref No.

1st Priority Risk and Owner upcoming issues

Community Projects

5522PR

5530PR

Community WIFI Phase 1

Youth Drop In Centre

Amber

5525PR

Brash Pelletising

Amber

Matthew Woodcock

Revise PID to reflect the steer from HRA group and recent developments

5523PR

Local Biomass Supply Case studies

Green

Matthew Woodcock

Project completed

5521PR

Eco Pack

Green

Lydia Forbes Manson

Investigate possibility of third eco pack

Project completed

Second Eco-pack (consultation flyer designed, writtedn, printed & distributed)

SJB

Have one volunteer doing a regular slot. Two other volunteers have gone through the recruitment process including CRB checks but unable to commit to any slot as yet

Lindford drop-in numbers have continued to increase

Youth worker cannot recruit volunteers

Martin Dobson

Matthew Woodcock

Project was previously on hold

Matthew Woodcock

Studies

5535PR

Habitats Regulations Assessment

Green

Bruce Collinson

Project complete

N/A

£50,000.00

£47,157.50

yes

Green

Additional costs associated with new work generated by this project

5535PR

Biodiversity & Green Infrastructure

Green

Bruce Collinson

Project complete

N/A

£55,000.00

£52,851.00

yes

Green

Additional costs associated with new work generated by this project

5535PR

Energy/Utility Strategy

Green

Bruce Collinson

Project complete

N/A

£110,000.00

£93,575.00

yes

Green

Delay in overall Masterplan could potentially make the current studies and surveys invalid

5535PR

Water Cycle Study

Green

Bruce Collinson

Project complete

N/A

£40,000.00

£37,940.00

yes

Green

Defence Estates do not allow access to their land at the appropriate time

5536PR

One Planet Living

Green

Bruce Collinson

Project complete

N/A

£50,000.00

£34,690.00

yes

Green

Additional costs associated with new work generated by this project

Project is not yet initiated

Project is not yet

18/10/11

£250,000.00

yes

Green

Agreement of stakeholders

Study work ongoing

18/10/11

£250,000.00

£91,139.00

yes

Green

No positive business case identified in interim report

Andrew Wilson

Project is not initiated Project is not initiated Project is not initiated Project is not initiated

Project is not yet initiated Project is not yet initiated Project is not yet initiated Project is not yet initiated

Project is not yet Project is not yet Project is not yet Project is not yet

Transport Smarter Choices study

Tim Wall

5539PR

Transport Evidence Base Development

Green

Tim Wall

5533PR

Transport Rail Feasibility study

Green

Tim Wall

Transport Walking & Cycling Strategy

Tim Wall

Transport Parking Strategy

Tim Wall

Transport Freight Strategy

Tim Wall

Traffic Management Strategy

Tim Wall

Final draft reports published Complete draft tranche Presentation of findings 2 work and gain at IET Specialist Group approval for publication Scheduled meetings with HA and SCC

Receive draft Stage 2 study

Project is not initiated Project is not initiated Project is not initiated Project is not initiated

yet yet yet yet

Project is not yet initiated

Project is not yet initiated Project is not yet initiated Project is not yet initiated Project is not yet initiated

112

Update Date

Project Budget

Spend to date

On Target (Yes/No)

Sc op e

Achievement This Reporting Period

st on es

Next Milestone

al s

Project Manager

ile

Summary Status

Comments on Underperforming Areas

Project Title

Fi na nc i

Project Ref No.

Solution / Positive Comments

1st Priority Risk and Owner upcoming issues

Community Projects Demonstration Projects

WB-024

HCC Schools and Library Improvements

Amber

Ian Parker

Mill Chase School lighting replacement tendered

5519PR

LCCC Ecofit

Green

Stephanie Beggs

Project complete. Next steps are to establish a process for re-loaning funds from loan repayments

EHDC

Project is not yet initiated

High Street Chalet Hill

5513PR

Viking Park

5514PR

Quebec Barracks

Amber

Mandar Puranik

Amber

Paul Ciniglio

5506PR

Firestation Refurb

Green

Sarah Allan

Phase 2 completion

5510PR

Firestation Exhibition Venue

Amber

Stephanie Beggs

Revised PID being written

5508PR

Eco-town terraced house competition

Green

Sarah Allan

Invite 5 shortlisted applcants to submit detailed design for terraced houses

5507PR

Exhibition House

Green

Sarah Allan

House completion

Green

5512PR

Moorlands

Green

Amber

Green

£310,883.00

yes

Green

Project is not yet initiated

£90,000.00

£57,748.00

yes

Green

Amber

Green

Subject to 2nd Year Funding

Project is not yet initiated

£1.275m

Project complete

N/A

£370,000.00

Project is not yet initiated

16/11/2011

Movement in programme to make use of school breaks for the on site works

Delays continue in design and additional resource has been identified.

Final report expected end of September

Project in development stage prior to initiation

5511PR Bordon Working Mens Club

Fire Station South Site

yes

16/11/2011

Consultation report published in first week of October in advance of planning application on site and neighbourhood Prepare a lessons learnt engagement meetings report Report copies were made available at all public meetings and summary included in the exhibition boards and presentations

EHDC

5509PR

Woodlea complete Lighting replacement design underway for Mill Chase School

On site monitoring HCC £ Design/producti on C - H Capital HCC £2k On Site K – M + monitoring Capital DCLG £10k On Site K – M + monitoring. Capital HCC £

Unable to create a comercially viable solution that meets sustainable ambitions (e.g. BREEAM excellent)

Unable to achieve higher code standards due to higher costs

Delay with a complex consultant team

Delay in project commencement

Project is not yet initiated Planning appeal unsuccesful, awaiting details of revised development propsals and deposit of new planning application

Offer Eco-town staff support and encouragement

Building handover and contractors on site 14/11/11

15/11/2011

£868,300.00

£290,242.00

yes

Green

Revised PID being written

15/11/2011

£374,700.00

£7,990.00

yes

Green

Amber

Green

54 submissions received Jury panel met 15th & 15/11/2011 16th November to shortlist 5 applicants

£250,000.00

£2,600.00

yes

Green

Planning

Contractors on site 14/11/11

£425,000.00

£50,197.00

yes

Green

Vandalism and security

£29,336

£6,059.00

yes

Green

Project programme overlaps with the Fire Station & Exhibition House will cause delay in design development

Unable to achieve higher code standards due to higher costs

Website becomes inactive/crashes

Ben Clifton

15/11/2011

Two day consultation event held at the old Fire Station on a Friday and Saturday A number of people Select a preferred option and visited the exhibition at Mandar present it to the key 16/11/2011 the old Fire Station Puranik stakeholders until 16th October and 18 feedback forms were received A presentation was made to Whitehill Town Council Once planning decision resolved, hold further Project On Project On Hold Paul Ciniglio meeting with Kebbel Hold homes (to include their eco-design expert)

Project On Hold Project On Hold

Developing ideas and plan to ensure exhibitions have a purpose.

Project On Hold

Awaiting outcome of planning decision

New programme will be issued

Further Transport Projects

5548PR

Whitehill Bordon Travel Website

Green

Tim Wall

Make minor ammendments to complete the interactive map

Web pages are live

18/10/2011

£15,000

£3,070.00

yes

Green

113

st on es

al s

Next Milestone

Achievement This Reporting Period

Update Date

Project Budget

Spend to date

On Target (Yes/No)

Tim Wall

Project is not yet initiated

Sc op e

Project Manager

ile

Summary Status

Comments on Underperforming Areas

Project Title

Fi na nc i

Project Ref No.

Solution / Positive Comments

1st Priority Risk and Owner upcoming issues

Community Projects Personalised Journey Planning Project

5539PR

Whitehill Bordon Eco-Car Club

Tim Wall

Project is not yet initiated

Eco Cycle Hire Schemes

Tim Wall

Project is not yet initiated

Tim Wall

Continue promotion and marketing

Liftshare is live

18/10/2011

£10,000

£9,120.00

yes

Project is not yet initiated Project is not yet

Project is not yet initiated

Project is not yet initiated Project is not

Project is not yet initiatedis Project

16/11/2011

£500,000.00

No spend this period

yes

Project is not yet initiated

Liftshare

Green

Walking and Cycling improvements Stage 1 Marketing and Promotion

5539PR Bus Service Improvements

5539PR

Tim Wall Tim Wall

Amber

Tim Wall

Electric Charging Points

Tim Wall

Bus Stop Improvements

Tim Wall

Town Transport Manager

Amber

Tim Wall

Walking and Cycling improvements Stage 2

Tim Wall

Transport Hub Phase 1

Tim Wall

Transport Improved Cycle Parking

Tim Wall

Agree finalised service Public consultation on specification service specification

Project is not yet initiated

£175,000.00

Re-advertise post

Agreed wider circulation for advert Liaised with EHDC HR 18/10/2011 regarding advertsing of post

Project is not yet initiated No spend this period

£200,000.00

No spend this period

Project is not yet initiated

Green

Limited numbers sign up to Liftshare

Ben Clifton

Delay in project delivery due to public consultation

Andrew Wilson

Failure to recruit suitable candidate

We may not be able to appoint an independent Chairman

Delay in project commencement

Project is not yet initiated Project is not yet initiated

Green

Amber

Green

Delay in agreeing service options and achieving authority to release options caused a delay in milestones

Project is not yet

Authority to release options was agreed

Project is not yet initiated

yes

Green

Amber

Green

Project is not yet initiated Project is not yet initiated

Project is not yet initiated

Recruitment of permanent Delivery Board Chairman

A series of 1-1 workshops have taken place between PwC & Delivery Board members, landowners and team members to assist PwC to understand each person's objectives A series of workshops to carry out a qualitative evaluation of potential delivery options and generate a short list have been conducted. PwC facilitated these workshops

15/11/2011

£250,000.00

£57,447.00

yes

Green

£50,000.00

£1,000.00

yes

Green

Amber

Green

Interviews were undertaken - no successful candidate found Advertise more widely

Project is not yet Project is not yet Project is not yet initiated

Project is not yet initiated Project is not yet initiated Project is not yet initiated

Other Projects

5534PR

Governance

Green

5537PR

Eco-Grants

Amber

Daphne Gardner

Project subject to delay Project subject to delay

Project likely to be slightly delayed due to recruitment of new Economic Development Theme Lead

114

Agenda item 14

Items for future Delivery Board meetings

Project update 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 - Green Infrastructure work - The Board’s Programme of work Outcomes from Specialist Groups and Chairman/ Vice Chairman/ Lead Officers meetings (standing item) Overall project programme report to include high level project plan (standing item) Landowners update report (standing item) Education skills, skills centre and training Proposals for the Long term management and maintenance of Community Assets Commercial strategy advice from PWC advice

Development brief for demonstration scheme at Quebec Barracks Proposed neighbourhood charter Arrangements for recruiting the permanent chairman of the Board Risk register (standing item) Findings of the neighbourhood consultation

Amended Framework Masterplan

15th December 2011 √

March 2012

June 2012

September 2012

√

√ √ (options explored) √ (interim report given in form of presentation) √ (briefing)

√ Final

√ √ √

√

√ (update to be included in project progress report)

√