Silver Hill scheme could be delayed (From Hampshire Chronicle)

Silver Hill scheme could be delayed

10:23am Friday 6th April 2007 in Silver Hill By Warwick Payne

AMBITIOUS plans to develop Winchester city centre could be delayed on two fronts, it has emerged.

The Government is being asked to call in' the £100m Silver Hill scheme and order a public inquiry.

Another stumbling block to work starting is that some of the land required will need a compulsory purchase order.

Thornfield Properties was last week given the go-ahead by planners for the regeneration of a chunk of land between Friarsgate and The Broadway.

The company wants to build 264 homes, some 35 shops, as well as a new bus station, youth centre and doctors' surgery.

The city council said it hoped building work could start within 18 months on the building project, arguably the biggest in the city's history.

However, the city residents' association has asked the Government to hold a public inquiry which would be unlikely to be held this year. Alan Weeks, of the Winchester City Residents' Association, said the scheme was bedevilled by an "absence of transparency".

Mr Weeks also said the development breached the council's own transport policies by having copious car parking spaces, breaching its long-established policy.

There was also an "absence of transparency" in the consultation process, he added.

"With these concerns in mind, the association has written to the Government Office for the South East asking that the application be called in," said Mr Weeks.

A rival landowner, London and Henley, has also called for a public inquiry. It owns a large chunk of the site and says it will oppose a compulsory purchase order.

It has submitted its own scheme for 133 homes and has appealed on the grounds of non-determination by the city council.

The council argues that an inquiry is unnecessary because the Silver Hill scheme complies with planning policies.

A spokesman said: "We're not expecting it to be called in, because as far as we can see it there's no reason."

London and Henley said it was "optimistic" to start the scheme in 18 months' time.

A company spokesman added that the situation might not have arisen if the council had taken its plans for the site onboard.

"If we'd been allowed to join the party' - seeing as we're a major landowner - that would have overcome these problems," he said.

The council's spokeswoman responded that it did expect some setbacks in the process.

"It's not like we think it will go through perfectly smoothly, we are building in some contingency," she said.

She added that more delays might occur once building work begins, such as a major archaeological discovery at the site.

"We really have no idea what could be there, and an important find would cause delays," the spokeswoman added.