Draft Local Plan October 2012

Document Section Draft Local Plan October 2012 STRATEGY AT THE LOCAL LEVEL Carterton Sub-Area CORE POLICY 31 - East Carterton Strategic Development Area (SDA) [View all comments on this section]
Comment ID 2062
Respondent Philip Squire [View all comments by this respondent]
Response Date 28 May 2013
Current Status Accepted
Response Type OBJECT
What is the nature of this representation?
  • Object

Exceptional Costs

In your assessment of strategic site options (October 2012) states “there are no exceptional costs” for the East site.  How can you be sure of this when:

1)    The developer does not have a costed solution for sewage treatment.  The cost of a new pumping main to the Ducklington/Witney Treatment works will be significant both in terms of initial capital cost, but also in terms of ongoing operating costs.

2)    The developer has not done any proper flood modelling of the site and its Strategic Flood Risk Assessment has been based predominantly on the EA Indicative Flood Maps.  As they state these are “Indicative” and therefore need to be used in conjunction with “more detailed location specific information”.  This has not been done as there has been no modelling of the “ordinary” watercourses upstream of the twin 900mm pipest below the Brize Norton Airbase.  We know these flood now, if the detailed design shows additional works have to be done to the twin 900mm culverts under the runway, how will you get this done and who will pay?

3)    The developer has published very little traffic modelling data to date.  How can you be sure that there will be no increases in traffic flows south throughStation Roadwhen currently 20-25% of the vehicles leaving Shilton Park each day, go South through Brize Norton.  A new southern link road is not included in any plans and how will it be funded if needs be?

4)    The Developer has not clearly stated in any of his recent submissions the housing density they require to achieve the proposed 700+ dwellings on the site.  Has this changed from the 35 dwellings/hectare stated in the assessment report?  This level of development is at least the same asShiltonPark, where parking and access is documented problem.  How are you going to avoid the problems thatShiltonParkhas in the new development when there is no space?

5)    The density of housing proposed by the developer is not commensurate with a rural development and is greater than is being proposed for REEMA north, which is a town development.  Clearly if the developer needs to put this many dwellings on to a small constrained site to make money, then there must be significant infrastructure costs associated with it and so this cannot be an efficient use of money.  In this time of financial difficulty why are you not looking at more capital efficient sites that are already served with better infrastructure? 

6)    Finally what assurances can you give that if planning goes ahead and the exceptional costs increase, which they will, that developer will not be able to increase the number of dwellings above 700? ShiltonParkstarted at 800 and is now 1500.