Wichelstowe development to be joint venture with council and private partner (From Swindon Advertiser)
Get involved! Send photos, video, news & views. Text SWINDON NEWS to 80360 or email us
Wichelstowe development to be joint venture with council and private partner
8:30pm Thursday 7th February 2013 in News By David Wiles
An aerial view of Wichelstowe
SWINDON Council is seeking a private partner to speed up the development of Wichelstowe.
Wichelstowe, which suffered setbacks in construction due to the decline in the housing market, has outline planning consent for between 3,800 and 4,500 homes, and 12.6 hectares of employment or commercial uses.
East Wichel, the first of three communities planned there, has been implemented by Taylor Wimpey and other developers working with Swindon Council, which owns most of the land at the overall site.
To speed up the scheme, the cabinet agreed on Wednesday to seek to create a joint venture partnership with a private organisation.
The partner could be a developer, a pension fund or whoever else is deemed appropriate.
The council would transfer into a new jointly-owned company its land, assets, loans and section 106 obligations relating to Wichelstowe, while the partner would invest money and bring expertise. The profits and risks would be shared by the partners equally.
Developing Wichelstowe quickly is vital for Swindon Council, as it borrowed £45m to fund some of area’s key infrastructure.
To deal with the interest, the council holds a compensation fund, which was a severance payment from Taylor Wimpey in exchange for the council letting it out of a building contract.
However, this fund is expected to run out in about four years, meaning the budget for everyday services will be hit if nothing is done.
Hitesh Patel, the council’s board director for transformation and strategic projects, recommended the joint venture partnership after looking into a range of options to develop the site.
His basis was that the council wanted to retain the right level of influence.
He said: “The objectives are to deliver a high quality development at Wichelstowe, to develop the whole of the scheme.
“That means not just the housing but the jobs and the community facilities also delivered during the lifetime of the project – and the project leaves the council on a safe or sound commercial footing.
“A number of options were considered, from selling the land to building the whole development ourselves, to partnering with somebody else to do that.
“The recommended option is the council seeks a joint venture partner which brings expertise, funding, will take risk and share some of the reward with the council.
“This is the best way forward.”
Cabinet has asked officers to commission specialist external advisors to support the evaluation, tender and set-up of a joint venture vehicle, funded through Wichelstowe compensation reserves.
The costs for the initial stages of the procurement exercise are estimated at £150,000 but the cabinet has been warned the cost to complete the procurement and set up a joint venture will be significantly more. A report will be brought to cabinet within six months on the procurement process to select a suitable partner.
Comments(44)
JeanSaunders
says...
6:37am Fri 8 Feb 13
house on the hill
says...
7:12am Fri 8 Feb 13
peatmoor pirate
says...
7:58am Fri 8 Feb 13
JeanSaunders wrote:Swindon is just a dumping ground for new houses and ill thought out developments. Even on the odd occasion when our local Councils don't want to build houses they get built anyway (Ridgeway Farm) because they are overruled by central govt. It's not just the current lot either, the last Govt used Swindon as a dumping ground for regional housing too.
Even the Northern Development isn't finished yet! How will building more houses and offices at Tadpole Farm, Coate, East Swindon, Kingsdown, West Swindon and every green space in the town help the situation? Surely the sensible thing to do would be to finish what has been started before concreting over more countryside and green space.
Swindon still has lots of green compared to many places and we pretty much all live in houses built on what was once green land so I wont be hypocritical and say all development is bad, it isn't. I just don't see who is buying all these houses and where they are going to be working? Certainly not my kids' generation who are all priced out of the housing market unless they have parents with ever deepening pockets. When Swindon was growing fast in the 1960s and 1970s is was because firms were mving to Swindon; that just isn't happening now.
LordAshOfTheBrake
says...
8:10am Fri 8 Feb 13
Witchelstowe like much of the Northern developments is a mess of bad planning with small houses, minimal gardens and very little parking.
itsamess3
says...
8:15am Fri 8 Feb 13
umpcah
says...
8:40am Fri 8 Feb 13
peatmoor pirate wrote:"where they are going to be working?" Building more houses ? Like rolling a snowball in the snow !
JeanSaunders wrote:Swindon is just a dumping ground for new houses and ill thought out developments. Even on the odd occasion when our local Councils don't want to build houses they get built anyway (Ridgeway Farm) because they are overruled by central govt. It's not just the current lot either, the last Govt used Swindon as a dumping ground for regional housing too.
Even the Northern Development isn't finished yet! How will building more houses and offices at Tadpole Farm, Coate, East Swindon, Kingsdown, West Swindon and every green space in the town help the situation? Surely the sensible thing to do would be to finish what has been started before concreting over more countryside and green space.
Swindon still has lots of green compared to many places and we pretty much all live in houses built on what was once green land so I wont be hypocritical and say all development is bad, it isn't. I just don't see who is buying all these houses and where they are going to be working? Certainly not my kids' generation who are all priced out of the housing market unless they have parents with ever deepening pockets. When Swindon was growing fast in the 1960s and 1970s is was because firms were mving to Swindon; that just isn't happening now.
Davey Gravey
says...
9:11am Fri 8 Feb 13
JeanSaunders wrote:Well said. The council should be answering this.
Even the Northern Development isn't finished yet! How will building more houses and offices at Tadpole Farm, Coate, East Swindon, Kingsdown, West Swindon and every green space in the town help the situation? Surely the sensible thing to do would be to finish what has been started before concreting over more countryside and green space.
StillPav
says...
9:38am Fri 8 Feb 13
JeanSaunders wrote:What parts of the Northern Development aren't finished yet?
Even the Northern Development isn't finished yet! How will building more houses and offices at Tadpole Farm, Coate, East Swindon, Kingsdown, West Swindon and every green space in the town help the situation? Surely the sensible thing to do would be to finish what has been started before concreting over more countryside and green space.
Futura
says...
9:44am Fri 8 Feb 13
LordAshOfTheBrake wrote:Have you been to Wichelstowe? Every house has at least one dedicated parking space with 80% having two spaces and there visitor spaces on each parcel. The gardens are quite generous except in the case of shared buildings i.e. flats.
I agree with Pirate. until underlying issues such as jobs and infrastructure are properly thought out, this constant building for the sake of building is ridiculous.
Witchelstowe like much of the Northern developments is a mess of bad planning with small houses, minimal gardens and very little parking.
LordAshOfTheBrake
says...
9:46am Fri 8 Feb 13
LordAshOfTheBrake
says...
9:49am Fri 8 Feb 13
Davey Gravey
says...
9:58am Fri 8 Feb 13
Futura wrote:Generous gardens? The picture above shows the gardens are tiny or missing. A cramped estate in my opinion.
LordAshOfTheBrake wrote:Have you been to Wichelstowe? Every house has at least one dedicated parking space with 80% having two spaces and there visitor spaces on each parcel. The gardens are quite generous except in the case of shared buildings i.e. flats.
I agree with Pirate. until underlying issues such as jobs and infrastructure are properly thought out, this constant building for the sake of building is ridiculous.
Witchelstowe like much of the Northern developments is a mess of bad planning with small houses, minimal gardens and very little parking.
RichardR1
says...
9:58am Fri 8 Feb 13
daswilts
says...
9:59am Fri 8 Feb 13
The Artist formally known as Grumpy Old Man
says...
10:01am Fri 8 Feb 13
itsamess3
says...
10:06am Fri 8 Feb 13
RichardR1 wrote:That-as you know is nothing to do with housing.
So what happened to the deal with Waitrose.
JeanSaunders
says...
10:11am Fri 8 Feb 13
StillPav wrote:According to the draft Swindon Borough Local Plan 2026, published in December 2012, it provides for 589 more houses to be built in the NDA (table 1 on p.35). Some of these may be completed now but there is still a target in place to build 132 new dwellings for 2013/14 in the housing trajectory (Appendix 6).
JeanSaunders wrote:What parts of the Northern Development aren't finished yet?
Even the Northern Development isn't finished yet! How will building more houses and offices at Tadpole Farm, Coate, East Swindon, Kingsdown, West Swindon and every green space in the town help the situation? Surely the sensible thing to do would be to finish what has been started before concreting over more countryside and green space.
purplerose
says...
10:50am Fri 8 Feb 13
I think the council should finish what they started instead of going off and doing another build or wanting to start another build these ppl have brought a house there and now they have just been dumped there and told to get on with it they have no doc,s one school and a pub
JohnsyG
says...
10:58am Fri 8 Feb 13
In answer to the question "what happened to the Waitrose deal?" the planning committee meet on 12 Feb to decide on the development of the Wichelstowe district centre, which includes a supermarket, yet to be confirmed as Waitrose. Look on the Swindon Borough Planning Portal application S/COND/12/1706 for more details.
RichardR1
says...
11:30am Fri 8 Feb 13
As you well know, but once again you are simply trying to start another I said he said moment. Well forget it stalker.
LordAshOfTheBrake
says...
11:38am Fri 8 Feb 13
Futura wrote:Actually yes I have.
LordAshOfTheBrake wrote:Have you been to Wichelstowe? Every house has at least one dedicated parking space with 80% having two spaces and there visitor spaces on each parcel. The gardens are quite generous except in the case of shared buildings i.e. flats.
I agree with Pirate. until underlying issues such as jobs and infrastructure are properly thought out, this constant building for the sake of building is ridiculous.
Witchelstowe like much of the Northern developments is a mess of bad planning with small houses, minimal gardens and very little parking.
The picture also suggests that the gardens are not generous and parking is at a premium.
Davey Gravey
says...
11:54am Fri 8 Feb 13
itsamess3 wrote:Always looking to put one over Bob eh Messy. How is your court case against him going? Do you still have cameras set up to monitor him?
RichardR1 wrote:That-as you know is nothing to do with housing.
So what happened to the deal with Waitrose.
Tim Newroman
says...
12:32pm Fri 8 Feb 13
On the other hand, if a private partner can get things back on track and avoid the council losing even more money through interest payments, all well and good.
Better that somebody who can make it work comes in and gets things moving than the council just let things rot even further and cost us all even more money.
peatmoor pirate
says...
1:39pm Fri 8 Feb 13
umpcah wrote:Yep and we all know what happens when the thaw comes.
peatmoor pirate wrote:"where they are going to be working?" Building more houses ? Like rolling a snowball in the snow !
JeanSaunders wrote:Swindon is just a dumping ground for new houses and ill thought out developments. Even on the odd occasion when our local Councils don't want to build houses they get built anyway (Ridgeway Farm) because they are overruled by central govt. It's not just the current lot either, the last Govt used Swindon as a dumping ground for regional housing too.
Even the Northern Development isn't finished yet! How will building more houses and offices at Tadpole Farm, Coate, East Swindon, Kingsdown, West Swindon and every green space in the town help the situation? Surely the sensible thing to do would be to finish what has been started before concreting over more countryside and green space.
Swindon still has lots of green compared to many places and we pretty much all live in houses built on what was once green land so I wont be hypocritical and say all development is bad, it isn't. I just don't see who is buying all these houses and where they are going to be working? Certainly not my kids' generation who are all priced out of the housing market unless they have parents with ever deepening pockets. When Swindon was growing fast in the 1960s and 1970s is was because firms were mving to Swindon; that just isn't happening now.
twasadawf
says...
3:26pm Fri 8 Feb 13
n/ on an on
Futura
says...
4:36pm Fri 8 Feb 13
LordAshOfTheBrake wrote:Of course...look at all that on-street parking. Why I'd say it's almost as bad as Old Town. I can tell you with certainty that there are more dedicated parking spaces there than any other area in Swindon. The last I heard was that once building had finished and the council have adopted the roads there will be no on-street parking.
Futura wrote:Actually yes I have.
LordAshOfTheBrake wrote:Have you been to Wichelstowe? Every house has at least one dedicated parking space with 80% having two spaces and there visitor spaces on each parcel. The gardens are quite generous except in the case of shared buildings i.e. flats.
I agree with Pirate. until underlying issues such as jobs and infrastructure are properly thought out, this constant building for the sake of building is ridiculous.
Witchelstowe like much of the Northern developments is a mess of bad planning with small houses, minimal gardens and very little parking.
The picture also suggests that the gardens are not generous and parking is at a premium.
LordAshOfTheBrake
says...
5:50pm Fri 8 Feb 13
Futura wrote:What you mean is there "should" be no on street parking just like many other areas in Swindon. However the reality is that people will park on the streets and no one will enforce the parking just like North Swindon.
LordAshOfTheBrake wrote:Of course...look at all that on-street parking. Why I'd say it's almost as bad as Old Town. I can tell you with certainty that there are more dedicated parking spaces there than any other area in Swindon. The last I heard was that once building had finished and the council have adopted the roads there will be no on-street parking.
Futura wrote:Actually yes I have.
LordAshOfTheBrake wrote:Have you been to Wichelstowe? Every house has at least one dedicated parking space with 80% having two spaces and there visitor spaces on each parcel. The gardens are quite generous except in the case of shared buildings i.e. flats.
I agree with Pirate. until underlying issues such as jobs and infrastructure are properly thought out, this constant building for the sake of building is ridiculous.
Witchelstowe like much of the Northern developments is a mess of bad planning with small houses, minimal gardens and very little parking.
The picture also suggests that the gardens are not generous and parking is at a premium.
When I look at the picture, I see a line of parked cars on the street on both roads going top to bottom. Are those designated car parking spaces then?
So do you know all the areas of Swindon and their parking arrangements then since you "claim with certainty"?
itsamess3
says...
6:20pm Fri 8 Feb 13
Davey Gravey wrote:You really do need to get your facts correct in your feeble attempts to disrupt an interesting article. Had you not noticed i had addressed that recently-namely that an appeal against a conviction in the 80s had been listed at the CCA. My involvement was merely to provide evidence. The camera incident has been widely misinterpreted and the images posted on you tube and flickr for a limited period and withdrawn when the matter became sub-judice.
itsamess3 wrote:Always looking to put one over Bob eh Messy. How is your court case against him going? Do you still have cameras set up to monitor him?
RichardR1 wrote:That-as you know is nothing to do with housing.
So what happened to the deal with Waitrose.
As for getting one over on bob-no-just a reminder that he made a fool of himself on the waitrose thread and as that is a retail development of the district centre for wichelstowe.
The issue here being the article is about restarting the housing building there--which could generate jobs.
This debate has thrown up some interesting points and i suggest you take up any you disagee with rather than attempt disrupting the thread.
Empty Car Park
says...
11:31pm Fri 8 Feb 13
12:32pm Fri 8 Feb 13
On the other hand, if a private partner can get things back on track and avoid the council losing even more money through interest payments, all well and good.
No. not good at all.
SBC will continue to learn nothing from their arrogant blunderings
house on the hill
says...
9:05am Sat 9 Feb 13
Davey Gravey
says...
9:22am Sat 9 Feb 13
itsamess3 wrote:Selective memory I think old chap.
Davey Gravey wrote:You really do need to get your facts correct in your feeble attempts to disrupt an interesting article. Had you not noticed i had addressed that recently-namely that an appeal against a conviction in the 80s had been listed at the CCA. My involvement was merely to provide evidence. The camera incident has been widely misinterpreted and the images posted on you tube and flickr for a limited period and withdrawn when the matter became sub-judice.
itsamess3 wrote:Always looking to put one over Bob eh Messy. How is your court case against him going? Do you still have cameras set up to monitor him?
RichardR1 wrote:That-as you know is nothing to do with housing.
So what happened to the deal with Waitrose.
As for getting one over on bob-no-just a reminder that he made a fool of himself on the waitrose thread and as that is a retail development of the district centre for wichelstowe.
The issue here being the article is about restarting the housing building there--which could generate jobs.
This debate has thrown up some interesting points and i suggest you take up any you disagee with rather than attempt disrupting the thread.
MrAngry
says...
9:37am Sat 9 Feb 13
JeanSaunders wrote:New houses being built at Ocotal Way too.
Even the Northern Development isn't finished yet! How will building more houses and offices at Tadpole Farm, Coate, East Swindon, Kingsdown, West Swindon and every green space in the town help the situation? Surely the sensible thing to do would be to finish what has been started before concreting over more countryside and green space.
Tim Newroman
says...
10:09am Sat 9 Feb 13
Empty Car Park wrote:Oh dear.
Tim Neuroman says...
12:32pm Fri 8 Feb 13
On the other hand, if a private partner can get things back on track and avoid the council losing even more money through interest payments, all well and good.
No. not good at all.
SBC will continue to learn nothing from their arrogant blunderings
So, what's your bright idea then? Leave it wholly under council control, they continue not to do what's necessary and then the town's left bankrupt in a few years time?
We know you have a pathological hatred of both the council and developers, but the reality is that Wichelstowe is there. It's happened. I fully agree it's been a disaster, but when faced with a disaster it is right and sensible to attempt to mitigate the fallout and correct things to as greater degree as you can.
Simply putting your head in the sand and waiting for everything to complete cave in around you might be your preferred option, but it's not the one that remotely sensible people would opt for.
The irony here is that you'd be the very first to be moaning about the council having done nothing if they took your advice and, well, did nothing.
If frontline services were to be hit in four years time, you'd moan. If the council try and make the best of a bad situation, you moan. In fact, there's nothing the council could do that means you wouldn't moan. Please remember that it was only 9 months ago that the town had an all-out local election and the people made their choices.
I know it pains you that your Labour friends didn't take control, but that, unfortunately for you, is democracy.
LordAshOfTheBrake
says...
10:26am Sat 9 Feb 13
If the Witchelstowe development is a shambles, what hope for all the other large developments that have planning and not been built....!
Unfortunately deciding on how best to proceed requires full disclosure and our council have a track record in not doing that.
Phantom Poster
says...
6:07pm Sat 9 Feb 13
itsamess3 wrote:Would you like me to look out your posts regarding the cameras?
Davey Gravey wrote:You really do need to get your facts correct in your feeble attempts to disrupt an interesting article. Had you not noticed i had addressed that recently-namely that an appeal against a conviction in the 80s had been listed at the CCA. My involvement was merely to provide evidence. The camera incident has been widely misinterpreted and the images posted on you tube and flickr for a limited period and withdrawn when the matter became sub-judice.
itsamess3 wrote:Always looking to put one over Bob eh Messy. How is your court case against him going? Do you still have cameras set up to monitor him?
RichardR1 wrote:That-as you know is nothing to do with housing.
So what happened to the deal with Waitrose.
As for getting one over on bob-no-just a reminder that he made a fool of himself on the waitrose thread and as that is a retail development of the district centre for wichelstowe.
The issue here being the article is about restarting the housing building there--which could generate jobs.
This debate has thrown up some interesting points and i suggest you take up any you disagee with rather than attempt disrupting the thread.
I can post a link and then we can all see how "widely misinterpreted" you have been :-)
Davey Gravey
says...
7:14pm Sat 9 Feb 13
Phantom Poster wrote:The lengths he goes to,to try and win an arguement on a local newspapers website said it all. A sad empty life trawling a bog standard towns rags website.
itsamess3 wrote:Would you like me to look out your posts regarding the cameras?
Davey Gravey wrote:You really do need to get your facts correct in your feeble attempts to disrupt an interesting article. Had you not noticed i had addressed that recently-namely that an appeal against a conviction in the 80s had been listed at the CCA. My involvement was merely to provide evidence. The camera incident has been widely misinterpreted and the images posted on you tube and flickr for a limited period and withdrawn when the matter became sub-judice.
itsamess3 wrote:Always looking to put one over Bob eh Messy. How is your court case against him going? Do you still have cameras set up to monitor him?
RichardR1 wrote:That-as you know is nothing to do with housing.
So what happened to the deal with Waitrose.
As for getting one over on bob-no-just a reminder that he made a fool of himself on the waitrose thread and as that is a retail development of the district centre for wichelstowe.
The issue here being the article is about restarting the housing building there--which could generate jobs.
This debate has thrown up some interesting points and i suggest you take up any you disagee with rather than attempt disrupting the thread.
I can post a link and then we can all see how "widely misinterpreted" you have been :-)
itsamess3
says...
10:52pm Sat 9 Feb 13
RichardR1 wrote:Unfortunately your capability to understand that Waitrose are only interested in purchasing the land to build their store and deliver the district centre--much in the same way local residents have called for the promised leisure and play areas promised before the next phase of building took place.
It was part of a larger project including housing, 'aWAITROSE is set to sign a multi-million pound deal to deliver the planned Wichel-stowe District Centre and kick-start the next phase of home-building'. (First paragragh of original article)
As you well know, but once again you are simply trying to start another I said he said moment. Well forget it stalker.
Unlike you i am a born and bred swindonian and as such remember the birth of the idea to develop the front garden which came after the compulsory purchase of land for a school behind w/bassett rd--the land was then turned into housing--further land then purchased (compulsory) which was farmland right the way up to the motorway and finally the front garden.
Recently a massive project which is nearing completion to link whichelstowe sewerage and water systems to the barnfield site via underground boring.
Common sense decrees this was vital for tackling the flood risks in that whole area.
The home building is not reliant on the district centre being built and nothing to do with waitrose-more reliant on the council to find a private partner capable of taking on what has been the biggest shambles in our history--and the costliest. So much so a private company can dictate the terms of any agreement.
As yet we have not seen any plans for leisure facilities etc as the emphasis has been on housing.
Considering also housing is planned for n/e/s and west and little to no jobs for all these residents.
Why do we not have a major manufacturer of solar panels here as we have so many large factories empty.
In my opinion it would have been wiser to build a new motorway junction into the front garden with some quality factories and business space which would prevent the massive congestion in our town.
Phantom Poster
says...
2:17pm Sun 10 Feb 13
Phantom Poster
says...
3:22pm Sun 10 Feb 13
itsamess3 wrote:What massive congestion? Swindon is a normal town with normal traffic congestion for its size.
RichardR1 wrote:Unfortunately your capability to understand that Waitrose are only interested in purchasing the land to build their store and deliver the district centre--much in the same way local residents have called for the promised leisure and play areas promised before the next phase of building took place.
It was part of a larger project including housing, 'aWAITROSE is set to sign a multi-million pound deal to deliver the planned Wichel-stowe District Centre and kick-start the next phase of home-building'. (First paragragh of original article)
As you well know, but once again you are simply trying to start another I said he said moment. Well forget it stalker.
Unlike you i am a born and bred swindonian and as such remember the birth of the idea to develop the front garden which came after the compulsory purchase of land for a school behind w/bassett rd--the land was then turned into housing--further land then purchased (compulsory) which was farmland right the way up to the motorway and finally the front garden.
Recently a massive project which is nearing completion to link whichelstowe sewerage and water systems to the barnfield site via underground boring.
Common sense decrees this was vital for tackling the flood risks in that whole area.
The home building is not reliant on the district centre being built and nothing to do with waitrose-more reliant on the council to find a private partner capable of taking on what has been the biggest shambles in our history--and the costliest. So much so a private company can dictate the terms of any agreement.
As yet we have not seen any plans for leisure facilities etc as the emphasis has been on housing.
Considering also housing is planned for n/e/s and west and little to no jobs for all these residents.
Why do we not have a major manufacturer of solar panels here as we have so many large factories empty.
In my opinion it would have been wiser to build a new motorway junction into the front garden with some quality factories and business space which would prevent the massive congestion in our town.
itsamess3
says...
3:33pm Sun 10 Feb 13
Subsidies inspire greed and despite all the claims panels have improved greatly and can be produced quite cheaply. As the main suppliers of nuclear have pulled out of new contracts we can expect the chinese to be the big bidders.
Perhaps all new builds should include a mixture of the latest technologies.
Phantom Poster
says...
3:57pm Sun 10 Feb 13
itsamess3 wrote:If economically viable, without subsidies then yes.
P.P
Subsidies inspire greed and despite all the claims panels have improved greatly and can be produced quite cheaply. As the main suppliers of nuclear have pulled out of new contracts we can expect the chinese to be the big bidders.
Perhaps all new builds should include a mixture of the latest technologies.
itsamess3
says...
4:04pm Sun 10 Feb 13
Agreed
Phantom Poster
says...
4:08pm Sun 10 Feb 13
LocalBob80 says...
9:15pm Thu 7 Feb 13