BaECON
An open letter from Tony Walton - Chairman of BaECON (Bicester against ECO CON).
There has been a lot of press recently regarding the
proposed ECO TOWN at N W BICESTER and to avoid confusion plus help inform the
uninitiated I list below relevant FACTS in bullet point form that are some of
the reasons we comment so vigorously on Bicester’s Eco Con.
-
Eco-houses are unlikely to sell there is no demand for code 5 housing in these volumes, plus they are likely to be they will be expensive as the build costs are higher.(Professional opinion of Estate agents Barton Fleming)
- If being green is the object why is it not striving to achieve Code 6 instead of the cheaper Code 5?
- Cherwell are proposing a very slow rate of development for NW Bicester – less than 100 houses a year. Even that may be too high an estimate of completions. Therefore the whole site of 850 acres could at this build rate take 50 years to build, if it ever got finished.
- Cherwell has already committed £9.2 million to the first phase to fund infrastructure costs and that they hope to recover it from future developers. What happens if there are no further developers? They are gambling public funds on a potential white elephant.
- In any case, NW Bicester is all farmland. Why build there, why not on Brownfield land elsewhere? How can this be sustainable development when food producing land is sacrificed?
- It is also remote from the town centre, schools, health services etc. therefore there will be a heavy reliance on cars. How green is that?
- Bicester’s secondary schools have limited capacity for more students. The Cooper School, the nearest has none. Their kids will have to travel across town to get to school at BCC. How green is that?
- Meanwhile, other land is becoming available, where development is more economic, better located and which can meet Bicester’s housing need for the next 20 years. (The new proposed local plan under consultation reflects this at Graven Hill etc).
- When the initial consultation was drafted everybody, except Cherwell DC objected, most particularly Oxford County Council who were most critical.
- The then and now current Conservative County Councillors for the affected ward are both against it.
- Caversfield and Bucknell parishes were against the whole concept of the ECO TOWN, together with Chesterton and Middleton Stoney.
- The Ministry of Defence objected, plus others.
- The then Chair of Caversfield Parish council was the wife of the first farmer to sell to the developers,
- N W Bicester was offered as an alternative to the Government promoted Weston Otmoor ECO TOWN proposal, but apparently this was a diversionary tactic never expected to happen. (Bucknell Residents were told this at the time by the leader of Cherwell D C).
- The Government at the time called Cherwell’s bluff and Cherwell got caught out.
We think it should be renamed Woods Folly.
This scheme, when proposed, wasn’t contrary to Cherwell DC’s local plan. That is because there isn’t an adopted local plan!!
- Two BaECON members stood as single issue independent candidates in the District Council Elections last May.
- Both finished second in 4 horse races against national political parties. (No logos were allowed to be put against their names on the ballot sheets as we are not a political party).
- At least 3 of the 4 candidates for Caversfield, where the site lies were against the ECO TOWN.
- The winning Tory vote dropped from 76% in 2008 to 43.35% in 2012.
Summary
- So this was an apparent mistake or bad judgement, forced upon the local community with limited chances of success, requiring public subsidy to make get it off the ground and with no guarantees of getting it back.
- It is not wanted by anybody locally, other than by the Tory run Cherwell District Council. It is a poor design in a poor location that will require car use to get people to schools and services.
- It is a criminal waste of Greenfield land.
- All in all it is a potential disaster waiting to happen.
BaECON,
22 Lucerne Ave, BICESTER, OXON. OX26 3ZN
