Message from the Chairman - TrustNews Summer 1994
I have written a somewhat longer message than usual, in order to cover in greater detail two subjects which in their own way are of great importance to the Trust.
In particular, the Peninsula Barracks. Measured in hours of work done voluntarily by members of the Trust over the last six years, it has probably been the most time-consuming single project ever undertaken by the Trust, involving studying plans, the politics, the conflicting pressures, and negotiating and reasoning out the eventual Trust line.
I am most grateful to those members who have devoted so much time and expertise to this work.
The Peninsula Barracks
One of the Trust's major concerns reached a climax on 24 May 1994 when the owners of the Barracks site, the Crown Commissioners and the Ministry of Defence, announced that the winner of the bids for developing the site is Arundel Estates. Arundel will develop the Conservation Scheme originally conceived by the Winchester architect Huw Thomas, and sponsored by SAVE Britain's Heritage. This is the scheme supported by the Trust.
Of the known options for developing the site, the Trust has always considered that the Conservation Scheme would be in the best interests of Winchester. Primarily, the scheme treats the whole site as a single unit; it involves the minimum of demolition and new-build, it preserves the historical integrity of the site and it gives to the City the greatest amount of public open space.
To put this situation into context, you may recall that the Trust has been closely involved with the Barracks site since 1988, when we were first faced with a high-density housing proposal for the Lower Barracks. In early 1993 we became aware that, not only had the Lower Barracks developer withdrawn for financial reasons, but also that the City Council was proposing the formation of a management trust to operate the Upper Barracks primarily for museums and student facilities, both accommodation and teaching. However, the Trust had some doubts as to whether the funding could be assured, and was under no illusions about the difficulties of creating and operating administrative trusts. Also, the City scheme made no provision for the Lower Barracks.
In September 1993, SAVE held a public meeting to publicise the Conservation Scheme. Although, at that time, the Trust had some doubts as to whether SAVE could get its act together and find a developer, we decided to contribute £2500 towards Huw Thomas' work in developing the outline scheme.
By early March 1994 there still seemed to be no sign of a developer, in fact it appeared that most developers who might be interested in this type of site were of "the green-field" or "demolish-and-start-again" variety - and were not experienced in the rehabilitation of existing buildings. However, all was revealed at a public meeting in the Guildhall on 29 March when SAVE introduced Michael O'Brien, the Chairman of Arundel Estates, a Midhurst-based firm who specialises in the rehabilitation of large country houses.
Even then, the Trust was not absolutely certain that Arundel was the right developer for the job, so we embarked on a mission to find out as much about the company's record as we could by seeking references, visiting Arundel's work-sites and concluding with a face-to-face session in the Heritage Centre.
As a result of this research we became confident that Arundel was competent to develop the Conservation Scheme to a high standard. We therefore wrote a letter of strong support to SAVE, and explained our reasons in the 6 May edition of the Hampshire Chronicle.
So much for the past, where do we go from here? Firstly, I believe it would be difficult for the Trust to exert any pressure on the balance between private housing on the one hand, and museums and student facilities on the other. We believe that the City Council will press for as many museums and student facilities as possible, whereas the developer will want sufficient private housing in order to get a return on his investment. The result will inevitably be a compromise.
However, in addition to the Trust's normal detailed study of the planning application building-by-building, the Trust must be very alert to see that there is no reduction in the amount of public open space. We are fortunate in that we believe that the developer will not want to spend time and money tangling with the archaeologists, and it is the sensitive areas of archaeological interest, including both the upper and lower parade grounds, that will provide the open space, linked by footpaths with trees and landscape features.
Traffic
Some of our members may wonder why the Trust concerns itself with traffic problems. The reason is that, today, traffic plays an important part, not only in influencing the character of the City, but also in ensuring that Winchester operates reasonably efficiently and is a pleasant place in which to live. All these matters lie firmly within the objectives of the Trust.
I do not think it will have escaped the notice of our members that the experimental one-way High Street scheme is causing wives not to speak to husbands, and people to cross over to the other side of the road when they see someone coming who is known to hold opposing views! Under these circumstances, we all become "experts", and if the change in traffic direction causes more traffic to pass our own front doors, then we all become "very great experts" - in fact "right"!
The experimental High Street scheme and the bus-influenced lights at the Upper Brook Street/St George's Street corner are in part a means of speeding up the traffic from City Bridge to the railway station, which will also be the route of the Park and Ride buses due to start operating in the early autumn 1994. Casual observation and the opinions of busdrivers lead one to believe that in this respect it is succeeding, and is also speeding up incoming traffic in Southgate Street - but at what cost?
The permanency of this scheme and a decision on whether there should be a major reorganisation of the traffic, possibly involving the pedestrianisation (except for buses) of the area outside Barclays Bank, will be the responsibility of the recently re-shuffled City Traffic and Engineering Committee under the new Chairman, Councillor Pamela Peskett.
The Trust will continue to monitor progress on traffic by observing the meetings of the County and City Council Committees concerned with traffic, by studying relevant documents, and by informal discussions with councillors and officers.