THE SHILTON PARISH COUNCIL Chairman Clerk To The Council Alexander Postan Mrs Katherine Robertson Wheelwright’s Cottage 12 West End Shilton, Burford Shilton, Burford Oxfordshire, OX18 4AA Oxfordshire, OX18 4AN Tel: 01993 842740 Tel: 01993 840825 [email protected] [email protected] Paul Slater, Esq. Planning West Oxfordshire District Council Elmfield New Yatt Road Witney OX28 1PB 18 th July 2011. Draft Core Strategy, further response Alvescot Parish Development ‘West Carterton’ West Waddy and Crest Nicholson Dear Mr Slater, The Shilton Parish Council would like to respond to the additional material submitted by and on behalf of the developers. The Shilton Parish Council (SPC) remains opposed to the principle of the expansion of Carterton into neighbouring Parishes, either strategic or piecemeal, where it takes place outside the current boundaries of Carterton. The SPC rejects the notion that 4,300 new homes are needed for the District by 2026 and that to cater for this conjecture, a strategic site is suitable for the community as a whole. Infill, windfall and small development across the District are not considered despite the local advantages that this would produce. The SPC also contends that Carterton is a dormitory town and that the Core Strategy is flawed where seeks to locate 37% of the District’s new housing on a town where there is no true local economy, there is no employment opportunity, there are no rail links and the local roads do not even to extend to an ‘A’ road. Carterton is isolated from the South by the River Thames over which there are only three single lane road bridges, widely separated at Tadpole Bridge near Buckland, Radcot Bridge at Radcot and the bridge at Lechlade. These obstacles are restrictions to commercial communications between Carterton and the South. There is a considerable volume of derelict or unused land inside Carterton that could accommodate significant new housing. Particularly noticeable is the failed industrial estate where all but one of the units have been vacant for many years and the main area of the site is unbuilt. Without major road and rail communications, Carterton is unlikely to miraculously change from its current state as a dormitory town to a place where there is a flourishing local economy. Rather than to damage local rural parishes, The SPC is of the view that this failed commercial land would be a much better location for any new homes that might be needed for the district. The use of this commercial site for residential housing presents a more sustainable location as it is close to the centre of Carterton – and not separated by the Shillbrook Valley across a single entry road bridge. The SPC is disappointed to see that the Core Strategy and the developers’ sole interests are to encourage proposals that are directed at providing perceived benefits for Carterton and the provision of additional housing. None of these propositions enhances the communities of Alvescot, Shilton or Brize Norton. Furthermore, there is the implication that development gain funds would be directed towards Carterton. To develop rural parishes for the benefit of an urban community is unjust and inequitable. Faced with sound criticism to both the fundamental basis and detail to their proposals at Alvescot Downs, West Waddy and Crest Nicholson have submitted further comment to the detail of the submissions to The Core Strategy presented by both Shilton Parish Council and Alvescot Parish Council in March and April 2011. Apart from the developer’s failure to confer any advantages to Alvescot or Shilton, essential difficulties are neither faced nor solved. Flood risk. In its submission of March 2011, The SPC drew attention to the flawed notion that the flood risk could be mitigated by the construction of attenuation ponds for the protection of villages downstream. The developers’ response does not face this nor does it propose any solutions. There are frequent floods in Shilton and these are exacerbated by the lack of flow away from the village across the meadows as The Shillbrook runs to the South. The lack of flow and the absence of any siphon effect cause the water to back up through the centre of Shilton. The construction of ‘SUDS’ and attenuation ponds will increase the flood risk to Shilton . In its earlier submission, The SPC pointed out that a systematic hydrological survey Holwell to Radcot is required to assess the risks and countermeasures needed. West Waddy acknowledges this point (even though a mythical village of Holcot is referred to) but attempts to avoid this by referring to a survey taken from Shilton to Black Bourton that bolsters their assertion that the risks to villages downstream would be helped by attenuation ponds. The Shilton to Black Bourton section of the Shillbrook is only an isolated fragment of the riverine system and as such it is not a reliable foundation for the understanding and planning for flood protection. Until a survey of the entire system has been completed and the results evaluated, any development on Alvescot Downs cannot be contemplated and permission for a strategic site to the West should be refused. Traffic West Waddy has submitted a transport assessment conducted by their paid consultants, Hannah Read, that asserts that for a development of 1,300 homes, in the morning period 952 vehicles are likely to make two way trips from the site on Alvescot Downs. The main thrust of this report is to play down the impact of this enormous development on Carterton Town. By selective arithmetic, Hannah Read expects the residents to believe that this will only represent 2 vehicles per minute at peak times. For a rural village, designated as a conservation area, all additional traffic is intolerable. Significantly, Hannah Read acknowledges that of this proposed site, 79% of the traffic will need to travel outside Carterton for employment purposes. The report contends that the majority of the traffic will join or leave the site via Upavon Way. This road leads to a direct route through Shilton and The Shilton Dip to the North and West to access Burford, Cheltenham, Cirencester, and Bicester. It attempts to play down the impact on the neighbouring Parish of Shilton. The report accepts that “…locations that have experienced a number of accidents along the B4020 Shilton Road…” Their proposed solution is to apply 40 MPH speed limits. The SPC would like to point out that there is an existing 40 MPH limit at this site and that the hazards are present even with the current speed limit. The B4020 is in dire need of improvements as it stands, let alone the introduction of an additional 1,300 homes that will feed traffic into the road. Hannah Read and West Waddy deny the existence of a natural rat-run along the Alvescot lane – the road that connects ‘Carterton West’ to the A361 through Shilton. This is the obvious route for any traveller, guided by Satnav or not, to reach all points to the West and also to Banbury, the M40 and the Midlands. Further through-traffic through the centre of Shilton itself will be generated. With the gridlock that affects the A40 in the mornings and evenings, this access route to the North and West will inevitably draw traffic. The Shilton Dip was historically near the top of the list of County Highways ‘top ten’ list of sites that needed urgent attention. Recent budget cuts have resulted in The Dip being dropped from the most urgent list. Rat-run traffic through Shilton and traffic using the Alvescot Lane will bring further traffic along Hen and Chick Lane towards the A361. The junction at the A361 also serves the busy tourist attraction, The Cotswolds Wildlife Park. This has been the scene of numerous accidents and these include injuries a recent fatality. Improvements are already needed for this junction and additional traffic will make matters worse. Suitable conditions that would mitigate the traffic that development at Kilkenny Farm could generate would be: Transponder controlled bollards at Pye Corner, Shilton to prevent through traffic in Shilton Village Improvements to the crossroads at the junction of the A361 and Hen and Chick Lane at The Wildlife Park A Shilton Dip Bypass to improve safety and to move the traffic away from the village. The “Ecology” Park The developers’ proposals rely on bridges built across the Shillbrook to take pedestrian, cycle and vehicular traffic across the brook. The Shillbrook valley has been identified as a strategic conservation site. In their comments made to answer the objections raised by The SPC in March 2011, the developers suggest that they will attempt to minimise damage to the environment and ecology. Building two bridges with its attendant lighting and disruption can not protect or enhance the conservation or ecology – it can only damage it during construction and once that is complete, the environment and ecology of the valley will be permanently altered. Construction, interference and destruction to the environment of the valley cannot be wished away by calling it an “Ecology Park”! Conservation and protection of the environment requires minimal intrusion and no interference with the existing biodiversity and ecology. The developers’ plans entail the creation of a road bridge, a pedestrian bridge and various man-made features. What is proposed would be better described as a theme park. Visual impact & Light pollution The developers wrongly suggest that planting trees at the North of Alvescot Downs will solve the unnatural introduction of a dense development of over 1,000 homes. They also make an incorrect assertion that low level lighting and modern light design will prevent any light pollution. Furthermore it is laughably suggested that lights on the bridges can be designed to have no light impact.