Developer Henderson submits new Silver Hill planning application

Developer Henderson submits new Silver Hill planning application

Looking north from the High Street outside M&S north up Middle Brook Street

Developer Henderson submits new Silver Hill planning application

Looking south from the bus station area towards the Guildhall. Woolstaplers' Hall is on the right

Friarsgate looking east with the relocated Sainsbury store on the site where Iceland currently stands

First published in News Basingstoke Gazette: Photograph of the Author by

A LONDON developer has submitted its controversial planning application for the Silver Hill scheme in Winchester.

Henderson wants to change the £150m scheme, granted planning permission in 2009.

It proposes more shops and fewer homes and, most contentiously, no affordable housing, bus station, offices or live-work units.

Henderson said the changes reflect the decision of Stagecoach, who say they no longer need a station.

It says it is a “high-quality scheme that is an asset to Winchester,” as well as being commercially deliverable.

Henderson told the council that forcing it to build 100 affordable homes would have made the scheme unviable as it would have been unable to secure funding.

The new proposals give special consideration to public feedback about variations in height and frontage, the choice of local materials, facilities for public transport users and the quality of the public realm.

The developer believes that the changes to the scheme, undertaken by Allies and Morrison architects, improves on the existing consent and will re-energise the rundown Broadway-Friarsgate area.

A further static public exhibition will be open soon with details to be announced.

Initial work has commenced to investigate ground conditions, with specific attention paid to understanding the archaeology.

This preliminary work is being carried out by experts, RPS, who have been appointed in liaison with the city council.

Martin Perry, director of development at Henderson, said in a statement: “The design team has worked hard, with a critical eye, to ensure that the final scheme is one that we can all be proud of. The proposed refinements have responded to the key issues addressed by all stakeholders, while ensuring that the scheme is the best and most sustainable option for today’s environment.

“Meanwhile, the initiation of site investigation and archaeology demonstrates our commitment to proceeding with the development as soon as we can.”

Paul Appleton, partner at Allies and Morrison architects, said: “Winchester is a distinguished historic city. It has been a privilege to have the opportunity to work on this project for 10 years. We are proud of how the scheme repairs the damaged fabric and historic street pattern of this important site at the heart of the city.”

The Chronicle revealed last week a confidential city council report into Silver Hill. The scheme is forecast to make a £15 million profit, a return on cost of some 10 per cent.

Mr Perry declined to answer questions including how he told a public inquiry into the CPO in 2012 that Henderson has multiple alternative funding sources but now cannot afford to build affordable housing.

Comments (3)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

2:50pm Mon 18 Aug 14

NickDavisGB says...

What happened to WCC's "cast iron guarantee" that the developer would have to follow the Housing Plan ?
This is about making profit not rejuvenating the area, if they can't afford to build with social housing as part of the development, then sell the land to someone who can.
If they get away with forcing the Council to let them build - will the developer of St Pauls sue WCC over it's insistence of social housing in their development ?
Then of course that opens the way for the Barton Farm developer to ignore the housing plan as well.
What happened to WCC's "cast iron guarantee" that the developer would have to follow the Housing Plan ? This is about making profit not rejuvenating the area, if they can't afford to build with social housing as part of the development, then sell the land to someone who can. If they get away with forcing the Council to let them build - will the developer of St Pauls sue WCC over it's insistence of social housing in their development ? Then of course that opens the way for the Barton Farm developer to ignore the housing plan as well. NickDavisGB
  • Score: 9

8:57pm Mon 18 Aug 14

Belgarum says...

Walking round the Brooks Centre on Saturday, and looking at the number of empty units, makes me wonder why on earth anybody would propose building even more shops in Winchester.

Especially when trends have moved (and will continue to move) towards on-line shopping, making city centre shops obsolete.
Walking round the Brooks Centre on Saturday, and looking at the number of empty units, makes me wonder why on earth anybody would propose building even more shops in Winchester. Especially when trends have moved (and will continue to move) towards on-line shopping, making city centre shops obsolete. Belgarum
  • Score: 11

3:30pm Fri 22 Aug 14

adav1672 says...

The problem with any Planning matter for the centre of Winchester is that the way Local Government has been set up in Hampshire means that the City is woefully under-represented.

The Cabinet is made up of 1 Member from "Winchester Town" and 6 others representing Wards from Wonston down to Bishops Waltham, including 2 representing Compton and Otterbourne. They certainly can never be accused on nimbyism.

The Planning Committee has 1 Member from "Winchester Town" and 9 others representing Wards from Kings Worthy down to Wickham.

Until there is a Local Government re-organization that benefits the City then perceived "outsiders" will always have the upper hand on such issues
The problem with any Planning matter for the centre of Winchester is that the way Local Government has been set up in Hampshire means that the City is woefully under-represented. The Cabinet is made up of 1 Member from "Winchester Town" and 6 others representing Wards from Wonston down to Bishops Waltham, including 2 representing Compton and Otterbourne. They certainly can never be accused on nimbyism. The Planning Committee has 1 Member from "Winchester Town" and 9 others representing Wards from Kings Worthy down to Wickham. Until there is a Local Government re-organization that benefits the City then perceived "outsiders" will always have the upper hand on such issues adav1672
  • Score: 1

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree