5.0 Sources of information
The broad indication of development
requirements, set in Section 4, provides a basis for assessing the
impact on infrastructure provision. Evidence has been obtained by
identifying the existing pattern of provision and from
correspondence with infrastructure providers, the Council’s
Geographical Information System (
GIS
) and from the
Partnership for Urban South Hampshire (
PUSH
) team working
on establishing an evidence base. These sources of information
overlap and are therefore to some extent corroborative.
The first letter was sent to a range of public
utility and infrastructure providers before the broad options for
urban and greenfield development were set out in the Core Strategy
Issues and Options Consultation Paper. A second letter was
therefore sent with an extract from this Consultation Paper showing
the three housing development options and a map showing the extent
of the five urban and the nine greenfield areas (Map 1).
The first letter to infrastructure providers asked for the
following information where applicable:
- areas of the Borough where there is surplus
capacity ;
- areas of the Borough where there are capacity
deficits;
- capital works programmes designed to overcome
deficits ;
- infrastructure capacity required to meet a
building programme of 315 dwellings per year;
- physical problems in providing new
infrastructure in those parts of the Borough where it would be
difficult to serve new development;
- whether section 106 contributions will be
sought from developers to assist with the financing of
infrastructure provision;
- site allocations for reserving land for
infrastructure plant.
The second letter asked for the following
information with reference to the map of urban and potential
greenfield areas (Map 1):
- What are (a) the constraints on the provision
of infrastructure in any of the urban and greenfield areas and (b)
can problems be overcome cost effectively before 2026?
- What are the preferred urban and greenfield
areas for development in terms of infrastructure provision?
- Why are these areas preferred?
- What is the order of preference in terms of
the investment required?
- What will be the means, distribution and
timing of infrastructure provision to cope with the development
requirements, identified above, by 2026 to accord with the South
East Plan policy CC 5?
- What do you advise the level of contributions
from developers should be to help with the provision of
infrastructure?
- Have you any other advice or information to
offer which should be taken into account in the preparation of the
Core Strategy?
The South Hampshire Sub-regional Strategy
–Background Document Critical other infrastructure
requirements, a report prepared by
PUSH
in November
2006, complements the information in the letters received from
infrastructure providers and available on the
GIS
.
Due to the high level nature of the Core
Strategy proposals and the uncertainties of the initial
consultation stage the depth and breadth of the information is
variable in this Report. Nevertheless, it raises a number of
significant issues which are of relevance to the Core Strategy and
must be taken into account when creating the preferred distribution
and policy options.
The Report (p.6) points out that for various
reasons “… it has generally not been possible to come to a
comprehensive view as to infrastructure, timing and costs “.
However, it asserts that:
- Housing growth is predicated on adequate
funding from Central Government for the required infrastructure
which cannot rely on developers’ contributions ; and that
- Strategies and plans of infrastructure
providers have shorter timescales than regional and local authority
plans making long term planning and investment difficult.
The following sections in the Background Paper
refer to opportunities for development relating only to types of
infrastructure. There may be other factors – such as good
accessibility to schools or centres or the absence of environmental
constraints – which also need to be taken into account. These
factors may indicate and shape the extent of development potential
or restrict it significantly even if there are no infrastructure
constraints. Issues for the Core Strategy related to the
accessibility to schools, health provision and other facilities are
considered to be outside the scope of this Background Paper.