Didcot Supplementary Planning Document Consultation Statement · its preferred development partner,...

Didcot Supplementary Planning Document Consultation Statement

Didcot Supplementary Planning Document Consultation Statement April 2009

Indigo with URS

Indigo Planning LimitedSwan Court Worple Road London SW19 4JS Tel: 020 8605 9400 Fax: 020 8605 9401 [email protected] indigoplanning.com

Didcot Supplementary Planning Document Consultation Statement

Contents Page

1. Introduction 5The Development Proposals 5

2. Public Consultation Context 7Central Government Guidance 7SODC Policy 7

3. Methodology and Programme 8Evidence Gathering 8Public Consultation on the Draft SPD 8Adoption 8

4. Results of Evidence Gathering and Public Consultation 10

Evidence Gathering Results 10Public Consultation Results 10

5. Response to the Consultation 12Members of the public 13Businesses 29Statutory Bodies 33

Didcot Supplementary Planning Document Consultation Statement Appendices Appendix 1 Full list of the reviewed documents Appendix 2 Full list of stakeholders

Appendix 3 Newspaper advert Appendix 4 Public Exhibition Boards Appendix 5 Public Questionnaire Template Appendix 6 Public exhibition Advertisement and Flyer Appendix 7 Full transcript of general public responses Appendix 8 Full transcripts of business responses Appendix 9 Full transcripts of statutory bodies responses

Page 5

Didcot SPD Consultation Statement 1271001 Indigo on behalf of South Oxfordshire District Council

1. Introduction

1.1. South Oxfordshire District Council (SODC) commissioned Indigo Planning to prepare a Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) for Didcot Town Centre. The SPD sets out SODC’s vision for the town centre and the strategic development principles that will help shape the vision and guide future development proposals for the town centre. The SPD is accompanied by a Sustainability Appraisal (SA) that assesses the social, economic and environmental effects of the SPD to ensure that it contributes to sustainable development.

1.2. Consultation on the Draft SPD and Draft SA was undertaken between 17 March and 17 April 2009. This included two public exhibition days at the Cornerstone Arts Centre, Didcot on 27 and 28 March. Furthermore, the documents and exhibition boards were available throughout the consultation period on the Council’s website, at the Council offices and at local libraries.

1.3. This Consultation Statement outlines the approach adopted by SODC and Indigo Planning to ensure meaningful community involvement in the preparation of the SPD. The Consultation Statement sets out the following:

• the planning policy context for public consultation; • the consultation methodology; • the results of the consultation; • the responses to issues raised in the consultation; and • conclusions and next steps.

The Development Proposals

1.4. This Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) sets out SODC‘s vision for the town centre and the strategic development principles that will help shape this vision and guide future development proposals for the town centre. As part of this process, SODC is working with its preferred development partner, Hammerson Plc, the owners of the Orchard Centre, to deliver the expansion of Didcot town centre.

1.5. The area under consideration includes the existing Orchard Centre, the cinema, arts centre and town square and the area covered by policies DID7 and DID8 in the South Oxfordshire Local Plan. The SPD also addresses the need for linkages with the wider area.

Page 6


Figure 1.1 Local Plan Proposals Map

Page 7


2. Public Consultation Context

Central Government Guidance

2.1. The Town and Country Planning (Local Development) (England) Regulations 2004 set out certain statutory requirements for formal consultation on SPDs. Regulation 17 establishes the requirements for public participation and Regulation 18 establishes how representations must be made.

2.2. Planning Policy Statement 12 (Local Spatial Planning) requires Local Planning Authorities (LPAs) to comply with a number of principles in the preparation of Development Plan Documents, including participation and stakeholders. Community involvement should follow the Government’s principles and be: appropriate to the level of planning; from the outset in order to create a sense of ownership; continuous; transparent and accessible; and planned.

2.3. PPS12 also requires LPAs to undertake timely, effective and conclusive discussion with key stakeholders on the deliverability of options.

SODC Policy

2.4. The SODC Statement of Community Involvement was adopted in July 2006 and outlines the Council’s approach to promoting continuous and meaningful community involvement in preparing, revising and reviewing planning documents and in determining planning applications.

2.5. Figure 3.1 below outlines the consultation process expected for a SPD. In general terms this involves engaging with statutory consultees during the evidence gathering and drafting of the document followed by a wider public consultation on a Draft SPD before comments are reviewed and the document is adopted.

Figure 2.1 The Supplementary Planning Document Process

Source: Statement of Community Involvement (SODC, 2006)

Page 8


3. Methodology and Programme

3.1. In line with the SODC SCI, the consultation process for the SPD involves three main stages. These are: evidence gathering; public consultation; and revision and adoption.

Evidence Gathering

3.2. The evidence gathering stage involved two main elements. Firstly, a literature review was undertaken which included planning policy documents and research reports at a number of spatial scales. A full list of the reviewed documents is provided in Appendix 1. Secondly, individual consultations were held with a number of key stakeholders. These were undertaken during February 2009 and involved a mixture of telephone and face-to-face interviews. The full list of stakeholders is provided in Appendix 2 and was agreed between SODC and Indigo Planning at the outset of the evidence gathering stage.

3.3. The interviews with key stakeholders were important for distilling which elements were central to the future development of Didoct town centre. This process also made the stakeholders aware of the SPD and facilitated their ‘buy in’ at an early stage in the process.

Public Consultation on the Draft SPD

3.4. The Draft SPD and Draft SA were made available for public consultation between 17 March and 17 April 2009. The method for the consultation included the following elements:

• A newspaper advert was placed (see Appendix 3) to notify members of the consultation;

• The Draft SPD and Draft SA were available on the Council website and the Brilliant Didcot website with an associated online questionnaire. This information was also available in hard copy at the Council offices and at local libraries;

• A public exhibition was held on two days at the Cornerstone Arts Centre, Didcot (27 March (1300 – 2000) and 28 March (1000 – 1700)). The exhibition included information boards (see Appendix 4), questionnaires (see Appendix 5) and Council officers and consultants were on hand to answer questions. After the exhibition the information boards were on display at the Council offices. The public exhibition was advertised with a newspaper advert and flyer (see Appendix 6);

• The information boards were made available on the Council website and the Brilliant Didcot website;

Adoption

3.5. At the end of the consultation period (17 April 2009) all comments were collated. This included:

• Hard copy questionnaire responses;

• On-line questionnaire responses;

• E-mails; and

• Letters.

3.6. All comments received have been analysed and taken into account in the production of a revised SPD to be adopted by the Council in May 2009. Sections 4 and 5 outline the

Page 9


comments received and the response to the comments, indicating where a change to the SPD is appropriate.

3.7. Once the SPD and SA are adopted, the Council will monitor the effects and sustainability of the policies through the Annual Monitoring Report.

Page 10


4. Results of Evidence Gathering and Public Consultation

Evidence Gathering Results

4.1. A key evidence base to the SPD is the Didcot town centre master plan. Consultation was undertaken on this document in October 2008 and the results of the consultation, as well as the resulting document, have been analysed as part of the SPD process.

4.2. Discussions with key stakeholders were undertaken throughout January and March 2009 to inform the Draft SPD. This included the utilisation of telephone interviews and wider group discussions. A full list of key stakeholders to contact was initially agreed with the Council and this is provided in Appendix 2.

Public Consultation Results

4.3. A total of approximately 150 attended the public exhibition in the Cornerstone Arts Centre, Didcot. This was split evenly split across the two days

4.4. A total of 56 pieces of feedback were received, comprising:

• 40 hard copy questionnaires;

• 16 web-based questionnaires;

4.5. The full responses to each question of the questionnaire are set out in Section 5 and the headline results are as follows.

Q1 - Does the vision you have seen in the Draft Supplementary Planning Document reflect your view on the future development of Didcot town centre?

Completely 19 39%

Partly 27 55%

Not at all 3 6%

Q3 - How important or unimportant is it to you to have a good mix of shops, cafes/restaurants, leisure facilities and town centre homes in Didcot?

Very important 40 76%

Important 10 20%

Not very important 1 2%

Not important at all 1 2%

Page 11


Q5 - Do you agree or disagree with the proposal to improve shopping in Didcot, possibly including an extension to the Sainsbury’s store, a department store and other shops?

Strongly agree 23 42%

Agree 22 41%

Disagree 6 11%

Strongly disagree 3 6%

Q8 – How important do you think it is that new buildings are ‘green’ i.e. include energy efficiency measures, low water consumption systems, recycled materials etc?

Very important 27 51%

Important 22 42%

Not very important 4 7%

Not important at all 0 0%

Q10 - Do you agree with the proposals for each of the particular areas in the Town Centre?


Agree 30 65%

Disagree 7 15%


Q12 - Do you agree that the SPD will help deliver a vibrant and distinctive town centre for Didcot?


Agree 24 52%

Disagree 7 15%


Page 12


5. Response to the Consultation

5.1. This section presents responses to all the comments received. Responses to issues raised by the SPD are split into three main groups: members of the public; businesses; and statutory bodies. Responses received from members of the public are structured around the questions in the questionnaire. Therefore where comments were received via other forms (e.g. emails or letters) the comment has been related to the relevant question. The comments have been summarised in this section, whilst ensuring that all relevant issues are included, and full transcripts of all comments made by members of the public are in Appendix 7 businesses in Appendix 8 and statutory bodies in Appendix 9.

5.2. The statutory bodies that submitted representations are as follows:

- Highways Agency;

- Crime Prevention Design Advisor to South Oxford and Oxford City;

- Thames Water;

- SODC Contaminated Land Department;

- Didcot Town Council;

- Homes and Communities Agency;

- Oxford County Council;

- Thames Valley Police Authority;

- South Oxfordshire Partnership;

- Natural England;

- Environment Agency;

- South East England Partnership Board;

- Primary Care Trust;

- English Heritage; and

- TRAIN (youth work on Didcot’s streets).

5.3. In addition, the Government Office for the South East made informal comments.

Page 13


Members of the public

Q2 - Does the vision you have seen in the Draft Supplementary Planning Document reflect your view on the future development of Didcot town centre?

Comments Response Change to the SPD

The SPD should consider retail space along the whole of the Broadway. (Ref 2, 52)

The SPD deals specifically with the Local Plan Policy areas DID7 and DID8. The Didcot Area Action Plan (forthcoming) will deal with wider issues.

No change required.

The SPD should consider links to the A4130. (Ref 43) The SPD deals specifically with the Local Plan Policy areas DID7 and DID8. The Didcot Area Action Plan (forthcoming) will deal with wider issues.

No change required.

Didcot requires a better restaurant/bar/café offer. (Ref 3) The SPD recognises the need for an increased vibrancy in the town centre and an evening economy that can be provided by a range of cafes and restaurants (page 34).

No change required.

Better access into and out of the site is required. (Ref 5, 43)

In Section 5.3 the SPD requires that all proposals must consider linkages into the town centre and within the site.

No change required.

Greater emphasis is required on green landscaping and higher quality landscaping. (Ref 10, 12)

Section 5.5 includes commentary on the importance of planting to soften and enhance the streetscape. However more reference to green landscaping could be made in the sub-area sections.

Changes to Section 6.

Didcot requires increased leisure facilities. (Ref 13, 24) Section 5.1 states that commercial leisure uses will be encouraged.

No change required.

High quality apartments in the town centre would be an advantage. (Ref 14, 53)

Noted. No change required.

Page 14


More parking is needed in the town centre. (Ref 14) Parking must be in line with Local Plan parking standards, as outlined in the SPD.

No change required.

Concern that schemes will not be finished. (Ref 20) The SPD shows a willingness by SODC to engage with the future development of this part of the town. The SPD sets out firm aspirations but the realisation will be dependent on planning applications being approved and implemented.

No change required.

The SPD lacks detail. (Ref 21, 41) The SPD sets the development principles and parameters and therefore does not propose specific development proposals. The future planning applications will provide further detail.

No change required.

The town centre requires a department store. (Ref 25) The REAL Masterplan recognises that some of the additional retail floorspace could be provided in a department store. This is referred to in the SPD on page 31.

No change required.

Covered pedestrian areas are required in the town centre. (Ref 27)

Agreed. Reference to the benefits of including some covered areas will be made in Section 5.5 (Public Realm, Open Space and Landscaping).

Concern that small retailers will be lost in the redevelopment. (Ref 28, 40)

The SPD requires new retail floorspace to take a variety of forms and therefore presents the opportunity for existing smaller retailers in the town centre.

No change required.

The town centre should be extended to the west as this is where the future housing growth is planned. (Ref 46, 48)

The SPD is an expression of Local Plan policies DID7 and DID8 where there is an opportunity to extend the town centre.

No change required.

Page 15


A town centre extension is not required. (Ref. 42) The town centre extension is a response to the future housing growth and a detailed evidence base has identified demand.

No change required.

Local people have had no say. (Ref 47) SODC have an adopted Statement of Community Involvement which commits the Council to consultation with a range of stakeholders through a number of methods. The SPD has been open for consultation for one month whereby the Draft document takes account of all comments made.

No change required.

Q4 - How important or unimportant is it to you to have a good mix of shops, cafes/restaurants, leisure facilities and town centre homes in Didcot?


Housing is covered in other planning documents. (Ref 3) The SPD must consider all land-uses including residential as set out in Local Plan Policy DID8.

No change required.

Support for the range of shops provided in Phase 1 of the Orchard Centre. (Ref 18)


A mix of uses in the town centre is important. (Ref 21, 33) The SPD stresses the importance of a mixed-use environment to increase vibrancy.

No change required.

The provision of high quality apartments is vital. (Ref 21) Noted. No change required.

Sheltered pedestrian areas are required. (Ref 21) Agreed This will be described as an option for the public realm in Section 5.5 (Public Realm, Open Space and Landscaping).

Increase leisure uses would be welcomed (ten pin bowling, nightclub). (Ref 25)

Section 5.1 states that commercial leisure uses will be encouraged.

No change required.

Page 16


The library should remain in its existing location. (Ref 28) A library is suggested as a suitable town centre community facility and should be located in an accessible area. Further work would be required to assess the costs and benefits of moving the existing library.

No change required.

A swimming pool is required. (Ref 44) A swimming pool would require to be part of a larger leisure centre. The supply and demand of leisure facilities is being considered by the Council and will form evidence for the Core Strategy and Area Action Plan.

No change required.

The extension is too retail focused and the Didcot economy should not be dependent on a single land-use.

The SPD promotes a mix of uses in the town centre whilst recognising that there is demand for additional retail space.

No change required.

Page 17


Q6 - Do you agree or disagree with the proposal to improve shopping in Didcot, possibly including an extension to the Sainsbury’s store, a department store and other shops?


Sainsbury’s foodstore should not be extended (Ref 1, 4, 5, 8, 16, 21, 40, 44)

It is desirable to have a built form facing the extended Orchard Street and High Street. This is desirable to achieve urban design principles and the extension of the store is one possible way of achieving this. In sequential terms this town centre site is preferable to out-of-centre sites and would therefore be suitable to accommodate the identified demand for convenience and comparison floorspace established in the SPD.

No change required.

Small traders should be retained. (Ref 6, 12, 13, 21, 47) The SPD requires new retail floorspace to take a variety of forms and therefore presents the opportunity for existing smaller retailers in the town centre.

No change required.

Increased retail choice is required (in type and size). (Ref 24, 25, 33, 43)

Section 5.1 makes reference to the qualitative need to improve the range of shops.

No change required.

Page 18


Q7 - Are there any particular features that you think should be included in the main public areas of the town centre?Comments Response Change to the SPD

Seating (Ref 1, 23, 26, 34, 51, 53) A number of these features are considered in Section 5 of the SPD and further consideration will be given at the planning application stage to the appropriateness of these.

No change required.

Water features (Ref 1, 31, 36, 39, 42, 54)

Green landscaping (Ref 1, 9, 18, 22, 23, 34, 35, 36, 37, 43, 44, 54, 55)

Cafes, bars, pubs, restaurants (Ref 1, 3, 8, 14, 23, 32)

Meeting place (Ref 2, 33, 48)

Library (Ref 4)

Post Office (Ref 4)

Market place (Ref 25)

CCTV (Ref 11)

A consideration of the micro-climate (sun facing) (Ref 12, 25)

Children’s play space (Ref 12, 20, 34)

Cycle paths/parking (Ref 2, 9, 24)

Town clock (Ref 29, 41, 54)

Public art (Ref 29, 36, 39)

Street lighting (Ref 24)

Public toilets (Ref 39, 45, 56)

Page 19


Signage/maps/directions (Ref 51, 56)

Skateboard Park (Ref 46)

Litter bins/cleaning (Ref 7, 15, 39, 51)

Page 20


Q9 - Do you have any other comments on sustainability?Comments Response Change to the SPD

Sustainable transport patterns should be promoted – walking, a free shuttle bus from the station and/or Tesco, improved bus services and connections. (Ref 2, 20, 48)

Agreed. Further wording in Section 5.3 to include the encouragement of improved bus connections with the surrounding parts of the town.

Additional parking must be balanced with not promoting increased car journeys which negatively impacts surrounding villages. (Ref 46)

Page 35 mentions the importance of balancing increased parking spaces with the encouragement of sustainable transport patterns.

No change required.

Surface water management is a priority. (Ref 12) Surface water drainage is referred to in Section 5.7 as a key sustainability initiative.

Section 5.0 will include a further sentence on general environmental management.

Low energy LED lights should be used, as with the existing town square. (Ref 13)

Section 5.7 makes reference to energy conservation measures.

No change required.

Sustainable design techniques must be incorporated (photo-voltaics, ground source heat pumps etc). (Ref 13, 27, 28, 42, 43, 47)

The SPD makes reference to how development proposals must employ sustainable design techniques.

No change required.

Disabled access must be considered. Section 5.3 makes reference to promoting equality of access and encouraging independence of people with disabilities.

No change required.

A roof over the shopping area would reduce heat loss. The SPD does not preclude an undercover shopping arcade. This is a possibility as long as it fits in with the development principles regarding urban design and architecture. This is a detail that would become apparent at the planning application stage.

No change required.

Page 21


Q11 - Do you agree with the proposals for each of the particular areas in the Town Centre? Comments Response Change to the SPD

A hospital is required in the town centre. (Ref 4, 47) A hospital is a major land-use and the issue of the relocation or addition of health-care services is a matter for the Primary Care Trust/Strategic Health Authority and currently there are no plans for this.

No change required.

The library should not be moved into the town centre. (Ref 8, 25)

A library is suggested as a suitable town centre community facility and should be located in an accessible area. Further work would be required to assess the costs and benefits of moving the existing library into a new building in the town centre.

No change required.

The High Street should not be extended. (Ref 13) The extension of the High Street is one layout suggested by the REAL Masterplan and recognised in the SPD as the preferred town centre configuration. However, it is the development principles that are most important at this stage.

No change required.

The SPD should include a greater consideration of the western part of the town. (Ref 15)

The SPD deals specifically with the Local Plan Policy areas DID7 and DID8 in the town centre. The Didcot Area Action Plan (forthcoming) will deal with wider issues in the whole town.

No change required.

Access and views between the station and the town centre need to be improved. (Ref 16)

Whilst the station falls outside the study area, the SPD requires improved connections between the station and the town centre. The Didcot Area Action Plan will deal with wider issues of the town.

No change required.

The SPD takes the focus away from the Orchard Centre, The SPD recognises that future development must integrate with the first

No change required.

Page 22


where most shops should be. (Ref 19) phase of the Orchard Centre whilst increasing the level of retail floorspace.

Support for the High Street extension. (Ref 20) Noted. No change required.

The Lower End of Rich’s Sidings should remain an option for small businesses. (Ref 24, 40)

Rich Siding’s is the most appropriate area for the extension of the town centre. Whilst small offices are recognised as a potential land-use in the town centre, industrial and trade counter businesses are more suited to locations outside the town centre.

No change required.

The maintenance of the town centre should be highlighted more in the SPD. (Ref 28)

Section 5.5 and 7.7 make strong reference to the importance of management in the town centre.

No change required.

Disagreement with moving the petrol station. (Ref 28) There is no firm commitment to moving the petrol station in the SPD. However, the petrol station is not a recognised town centre use and its relocation would be desirable in urban design terms.

No change required.

The underpass off Hitchcock Way should be upgraded for one way car access. (Ref 32)

This has not been considered as part of the SPD. Any proposal would need to be discussed with SODC and OCC.

No change required.

A new swimming pool is required. (Ref 37) A swimming pool would form part of a larger leisure centre. The supply and demand of leisure facilities is being considered by the Council and will form evidence for the Core Strategy and Area Action Plan.

No change required.

Where will the facilities be for the extra homes planned for Didcot. (Ref 44)

The SPD focuses on the town centre extension. Strategic planning, including infrastructure and facilities, is covered under the Local Plan and the emerging Core

No change required.

Page 23


Strategy.

The town centre should be for employment, not residential. (Ref 44)

The SPD promotes a mix of uses in the town centre whilst recognising that there is demand for a range of residential and employment space.

No change required.

Development should be more balanced in the town centre. (Ref 46)

The SPD promotes a mix of uses in the town centre whilst recognising that there is demand for additional retail space.

No change required.

The SPD does not provide enough detail. (Ref 46) The SPD sets the development principles and parameters and therefore does not propose specific development proposals. The future planning applications will provide further detail.

No change required.

Page 24


Q13 - Do you agree that the SPD will help deliver a vibrant and distinctive town centre for Didcot? Comments Response Change to the SPD

Strongly dependent on the design. (Ref 1, 12, 35) The SPD encourages high design quality and will be a material consideration when deciding planning applications. The SPD also refers to the importance of consistency with the SODC Design Guide.

No change required.

The plans are not distinctive enough. (Ref 2, 37, 40, 42) The SPD encourages innovative and distinctive design in any development proposals brought forward.

No change required.

Pedestrian/cycle options should be strengthened. (Ref 18) Section 5.1 and 5.3 make reference to the importance of pedestrian/cycle access and movement.

No change required.

An undercover shopping arcade would be more successful. (Ref 25)

The SPD does not preclude an undercover shopping arcade. This is a possibility as long as it fits in with the development principles regarding urban design and architecture. This is a detail that would become apparent at the planning application stage.

No change required.

Concern of the impact of 5 storey development overlooking the Ladygrove Estate. (Ref 47)

The SPD sets development principles and planning applications will need to demonstrate they do not adversely impact on amenity issues in the local area.

No change required.

The SPD fails to provide enough detail. (Ref 21, 24, 41) The SPD sets the development principles and parameters and therefore does not propose specific development proposals. The future planning applications will provide further detail.

Page 25


Concern that people have not been consulted before the developments in Didcot. (Ref 44)

Opportunities to influence the future of Didcot were available at the consultation of the Local Plan and now through consultation on the SPD and the emerging Core Strategy. This consultation is inline with the adopted Statement of Community Involvement.

No change required.

A greater allocation of leisure should be provided. (Ref 47) Section 5.1 states that commercial leisure uses will be encouraged.

No change required.

A concern that the phasing identified in the SPD would bring forward too much retail and not much else. (Ref 47)

The suggested sequence in the elements of the SPD is the most appropriate for creating an extension to the existing Phase 1 development. In addition, the SPD requires a comprehensive planning approach will require a more detailed phasing programme to ensure the development of all elements of the town centre expansion.

No change required.

Previous developments in Didcot town centre have suffered from being piecemeal. (Ref 48)

The SPD requires all applications to show they will compromise comprehensive proposals.

No change required.

Page 26


Q14 - Have we missed anything or do you have any other comments?Comments Response Change to the SPD

The plans must be future-proof. (Ref 2) The SPD takes a long-term view towards the development of the town centre and sets development principles which facilitate this.

No change required.

Didcot must develop its evening economy. (Ref 3) The SPD recognises the need to create a vibrant town centre through the day and into the evening with a mix of land uses that include cafes, restaurants and leisure uses.

No change required.

Extra car parking should be provided, in line with the current system of 2 hours free. This could be through a multi-stroey car park. (Ref 5)

Parking must be in line with Local Plan parking standards, as outlined in the SPD. Due to the town centre location it would be desirable for parking to be met through basement or, more likely, multi-storey parking provision.

No change required.

Greater family entertainment facilities are required. (Ref 8) The SPD recognises the need to create a vibrant town centre through a mix of land uses that include leisure uses.

No change required.

Designs must avoid ‘dark corners’ where there are no eyes on the street. (Ref 9)

Section 5.6 makes strong reference to the importance of safety and security, including a public realm with ‘eyes on the street’. The Crime Prevention Design Officer has been consulted on the SPD and these comments will be taken into account.

No change required.

Distinctive buildings will benefit the environment. (Ref 10) The SPD recognises the need to include distinctive and landmark buildings that contribute to a sense of place.

No change required.

The SPD should cover a larger area of the town centre. (Ref 11)

The SPD deals specifically with the Local Plan Policy areas DID7 and DID8 in the town centre. The Didcot Area Action Plan

No change required.

Page 27


(forthcoming) will deal with wider issues in the whole town.

Covered walkways are required. (Ref 15) Agreed. This will be described as an option for the public realm in Section 5.5 (Public Realm, Open Space and Landscaping).

If a multi-storey car park is provided it must not become a dead space. (Ref 16)

Section 5.6 makes strong reference to the importance of safety and security, including a public realm with ‘eyes on the street’. It also encourages lighting schemes to enhance car parks. The Crime Prevention Design Officer has been consulted on the SPD and these comments will be taken into account.

No change required.

Previous visions have not been carried through. (Ref 19) The SPD strongly reflects the Local Plan policy and the vision established in the REAL Masterplan (commissioned by the Council and the development partner Hammerson)

No change required.

Increase number of cycle stands. (Ref 22) Bicycle parking will be provided in line with Local Plan parking standards.

No change required.

Street furniture must be well designed and easy to use. (Ref 22)

Section 5.5. recognises that street furniture must maintain ease of access.

No change required.

Increased leisure facilities. (Ref 24, 29) The SPD recognises the need to create a vibrant town centre through a mix of land uses that include leisure uses.

No change required.

High Street currently being used as a ‘rat run’ and the Local Authority and Police are not enforcing the current scheme.

The SPD presents the potential for the High Street to be pedestrian/bicycle only, thus

No change required.

Page 28


(Ref 31, 41, 45) avoiding this current problem.

The idea that private finance will fund this is unrealistic. (Ref 46)

The Council have a preferred development partner but will be proactive to help realise the vision.

No change required.

Resident surveys should have formed the evidence base. (Ref 47)

The consultation on the SPD is in line with the Council’s Statement of Community Involvement. A large evidence base has been used to form the Draft SPD.

No change required.

Cycle routes need to be efficiently planned. (Ref 33) The SPD promotes a dedicated cycle network in Section 5.3.

No change required.

Didcot town centre needs to be looked at in a wider geographical sense. (Ref 35, 42, 48)

The SPD deals specifically with the Local Plan Policy areas DID7 and DID8. The Didcot Area Action Plan (forthcoming) will deal with wider issues.

No change required.

Increased parking must be balanced with creating safe walking routes. (Ref 36)

Page 35 mentions the importance of balancing increased parking spaces with the encouragement of sustainable transport patterns.

No change required.

Page 29


Businesses

B1 Dare Warwick (Properties) Ltd


Dare Warwick is a key stakeholder and it is surprising that no contact has been made during the consultation process.

As a key stakeholder, DPDS, representatives of Dare Warwick were contacted directly in writing to notify them of the SPD process.

No change required.

A comprehensive plan for the area will prevent normal commercial activity.

A comprehensive plan is the aspiration for the area and this has been established since the adoption of the Local Plan and the dedicated Policy DID8. The SPD is a further step to realising these aspirations and moving the process forward.

No change required.

B2 Euro Drive


Disagree that Euro Drive is not a town centre land use. The core function of the town centre will be to accommodate retail development and other high trip generating uses. The characteristics of a car/van hire site do not represent an efficient use of town centre land which seeks to maximise opportunities for density and be conducive to a pedestrian environment.

No change required.

Who would pay the costs of a move? SODC will require that these costs are met by the Developer.

No change required.

Page 30


B3 Travis Perkins plc


Objection that the vision does not facilitate a degree of flexibility to include other uses such as trade counter activities.

The core function of the town centre will be to accommodate retail development and other high trip generating uses. The characteristics of a storage/distribution and trade counter use does not represent an efficient use of town centre land which seeks to maximise opportunities for density and be conducive to a pedestrian environment. It was agreed at the previous Masterplan consultation stage that the Travis Perkins site was not appropriate for the vision of Didcot town centre extension.

No change required.

Object to the land uses referred to in Section 5.1 not including trade counter businesses.

See above. No change required.

Request more detail on the sources of funding for the SPD vision to be achieved (e.g. CPO)

The main source of funding for the SPD vision will be the preferred developer. However, some government funding such as from the town’s growth point status may be available.

No change required.

The statement on CPO, stating the Council will ‘facilitate the relocation of those businesses to suitable land’ is ambiguous. All businesses should be facilitated with suitable alternative land.

The Council will assist the developer in relocating all businesses within the town centre that are required to be moved and if there is a need by the business.

Wording in Section 7 to be amended.

Request that Travis Perkins is added to the list of Key Stakeholders in Appendix 3.

This list is for those organisations/bodies contacted as part of the evidence gathering process.

No change required.

Page 31


B4 Sainsbury’s Supermarkets Ltd


Sainsbury’s welcome the overall vision and the primary aim to create a varied and interesting retail offer.

Agreed. No change required.

Sainsbury’s would welcome dialogue with the Council to respond to issues of active frontages and the petrol station.

Discussions between the Council and Sainsbury’s would be welcomed.

No change required.

Welcomes linkages between the existing town centre and the extended town centre.


Concern about any significant reduction in the level of parking.

The re-organisation of the existing car park could allow decking and/or multi-storey car parking to mitigate any loss.

No change required.

B5 First Great Western


Pleased that public transport has been carefully considered and achieves prominence in the stated aims.


Pleased to note the continued support for the railway and good linkages to the station.


Amend company name in Appendix 4. Agreed. Wording to be changed in line with response.

Page 32


B6 Wm Morrison Supermarkets plc


Extending the existing Sainsbury’s supermarket is not necessarily the best option. The Retail Study identifies that Didcot can support a major foodstore of 2,000 sqm or more. It would be more helpful, especially for parking, if this were provided in a new store.

The area next to Sainsbury’s, currently used for car parking is a suitable town centre site to accommodate the identified demand for convenience and comparison floorspace established in the SPD. An extension to Sainsbury’s is only one way of achieving the objectives within the SPD.

No change required.

Page 33


Statutory Bodies

S2 Thames Water


Welcomes the reference in Para 7.5 on utilities but suggests further wording stating that the District Council and developer will work closely with infrastructure providers.

Agreed. Reword 1st Para 2nd sentence to read, ‘SODC and the developer will therefore…’

S3 Crime Prevention Design Advisor for SODC


Page 10 – when stating ‘good accessibility’ this should refer to safe accessibility.

Agreed. Wording to be changed.

Page 10 – consider what PPS6 says about the 24hr economy.


Page 16 – when designing public spaces and active frontages consultation must take place with the local Crime Prevention Design Advisor (also page 22)

Pages 10,16 and 22 outline policy and evidence base and therefore should not be changed to include management issues. CPDA is addressed on Page 38.

Section 5.6 is updated to include early engagement with the CPDA.

Page 16 – if homes are ground level they should be ‘set back’ in order to reduce incidents of anti social behaviour.

The SPD promotes planning applications to engage with the CPDA in order to cover issues such as the ‘set back’ of buildings.

See above.

Page 34


Page 16 – car parking facilities should achieve the Park Mark Safer Parking Award and improve signage.

Agreed. Reference to be made in Section 5.1.

Page 17 – reference to reducing crime should be expanded to state ‘the need to reduce crime and disorder through environmental design’.

Agreed. Reword 3rd bullet point.

Page 19 – national policy should include reference to ‘Safer Places – the Planning System and Crime Prevention’.

Agreed. Policy list to be updated.

Page 22 – unclear over what ‘improving offer’ is. Agreed. Reword to state ‘improving the quantity and quality of facilities for young people…’

Page 31 – include 24hr economy in list of principal uses. The 24hr economy is a by-product of land use not a use in itself. The SPD promotes increased vitality but this does not necessarily represent a ‘24hr economy’.

No change required.

Page 34 – all residential properties should meet the security requirements set out in Secured by Design Part 2.

Noted – this is an issue for the determination of planning applications and is referenced in Section 5.6.

No change required.

Page 37 – the commentary on urban design and architecture should reference ‘Safer Places – the Planning System and Crime Prevention’

Agreed. This will be added to Section 5.4.

Page 38 – street furniture should be designed to avoid inappropriate uses (wheeled sports, rough sleeping).

This will be an issue of the design. The SPD promotes contemporary designs that have ease of access.

No change required as the text promotes multi-functional public spaces.

Page 38 – in the commentary on safety and security engagement with the CPDA should be encouraged.

Noted. This will be added to Section 5.6.

Page 35


S4 SODC Contaminated Land


Contaminated land should be considered at an early stage of design in order to avoid the need for remediation in areas where design could mitigate the risk.

Section 5.0 of the SPD makes clear that contaminated land should be considered by the developer at an early stage when submitting a planning application.

No change required.

S5 Highways Agency


Efforts should be made to maximise the supply of office development. The SPD should specify a requirement for office development in the town centre.

Office provision in South Oxfordshire is characterised by large greenfield office parks. Currently there is not a large market for town centre offices but the SPD does state that smaller offices could prove attractive to the market and are therefore a potential land-use.

No change required.

The HA encourage the Council to maximise the town centre’s residential supply.

The residential element is a key component of the vision to create a more vibrant town centre. Residential uses will be dependent on viability.

No change required.

The HA is supportive of proposals to encourage high quality pedestrian routes.


Concern that the number of town centre parking spaces proposed is too high and not sustainable. Detail and policies should be included in the Core Strategy that would make provision for improved access to the town centre by sustainable travel modes.

The SPD is an expression of Local Plan policy (DID7 and DID8) and therefore must be aligned with Local Plan parking standards. The forthcoming Core Strategy will deal with issues related to sustainable travel modes. How the SPD fits with the

No change required.

Page 36


evolving LDF will be monitored by the Council.

Reccomends an evaluation of transport impacts is prepared.

The SPD establishes the importance of accessibility and movement and proposes that a Transport Impact Assessment (TIA) will be required at the planning application stage.

No change required.

The phasing of large developments should be in line with the delivery of sustainable transport improvements.

The SPD establishes that SODC need to be satisfied that all necessary infrastructure will be in place at each phase of the development.

No change required.

S6 Didcot Town Council


Parking provision should be safe, adequate and well lit. The importance of development proposals having regard to Secured by Design principles is recognised in Section 5.6.

No change required.

Retail should include smaller sized units. The SPD requires new retail floorspace to take a variety of forms and sizes and therefore presents the opportunity for the existing smaller retailers in the town centre.

No change required.

Reference to Ladygrove Brook is incorrect, Agreed. Wording to be changed in line with response.

The public transport system must require all buses to stop at the train station and the Orchard Centre.

The SPD establishes the importance of accessibility and movement. Detailed proposals will be established at the planning application stage.

No change required.

Page 37


Air quality is noted as an issue to be properly monitored. Section 5.0 makes reference to the importance of considering air quality at the planning application stage. This will require proposals for future monitoring.

No change required.

The Cow Lane Tunnel should not be mentioned on page 22 as this is not consistent with the South Central Oxfordshire Transport Strategy (SCOTS).

The redevelopment of the Cow Lane Tunnel is referred to in the SCOTS but any works would not prejudice the strategic development principles of the SPD.

No change required.

Page 25 – Millbrook Housing Development is actually the Fleet Meadow area.

Agreed. Wording to be changed in line with response.

Page 28 – 74 and 76 station road must be retained, not should be retained.

The existing wording is considered sufficient to require the retention of these buildings.

No change required.

Disagreement with the comment on the petrol station. The petrol station is not a recognised town centre use and its relocation would be desirable in urban design terms. However, there is no firm commitment to moving the petrol station at this stage in the SPD.

No change required.

Welcome the provision of a hotel. Noted. No change required.

Welcome the reference to lifetime homes. Noted. No change required.

The reference to linkages between town centre and the countryside is incongruous.

Reference is made to the Didcot Greenspace Network which highlights the possibilities to create linkages between the town centre and the countryside.

No change required.

Welcome the reference to public art. Noted. No change required.

A consideration of daylight/sunlight and the possibility of creating a wind tunnel is important.

The importance of the local micro-climate is covered under Section 5.5 of the SPD and future planning applications must therefore give consideration to these environmental

No change required.

Page 38


effects.

Reference to traffic calming on the Hitchcock Way should be deleted.

Agreed. Traffic calming will be deleted from Section 6.7 (also see Oxford County Council changes below)

S7 Homes and Communities Agency


Support for the creation of a mixed community, the increased provision of new housing and the aspiration to establish urban design principles to guide development.


Would encourage SODC to raise the required levels for Code for Sustainable Homes above Building Regulations.

The SPD refers to the standards established in the SODC Design Guide.

No change required.

Object to the proposed number of car parking spaces for the residential dwellings, more sustainable forms of transport should be promoted.

The SPD refers to the parking standards in the adopted Local Plan. However, planning applications are encouraged to promote sustainable transport modes, including in residential development (e.g. car-free developments).

No change required.

S8 Thames Valley Police Authority


Section 7.7 should provide clarity in respect of the range of police infrastructures towards which developer contributions may be sought.

Agreed. The list of developer contributions will be amended.

Page 39


The SPD should reflect the need to maintain a police presence within the town centre in the event of the relocation of the existing police station.

The importance of town centre management is established in Section 5.5 which will include the involvement of the police.

No change required.

The SPD must elaborate on why it only requires proposals to have regard to Secured by Design principles when the SODC Design Guide states proposals must comply with the Design Guide.


S9 Oxfordshire County Council


Section 5.3 is unclear on how it tackles the current bus only link between Broadway and Hitchcock Way. OCC would not want this road to be either pedestrianised or fully opened up to traffic.

The SPD establishes the importance of accessibility and movement, including good pedestrian links. Consideration will be given to proposals at the planning application stage and the SPD promotes early engagement with the OCC transport department.

No change required.

Keen to retain and improve the current bus stopping facilities.


Unhappy about bus routes being extended via Broadway to Hitchcock Way via the Jubilee Way roundabout.


Consideration needs to be given to quality public transport infrastructure from the beginning of the redevelopment.

The SPD establishes that SODC need to be satisfied that all necessary infrastructure will be in place at each phase of the development.

No change required.

Support for a town centre library in a visible location in an area of high footfall (a number of technical requirements are

The principle of a town centre library is established in the SPD. Further details of the scheme would be investigated at the pre-

No change required.

Page 40


outlined). application stage.

Page 34 should be reworded to account for county council community and social services to be located on sites in the town centre, with the potential for co-location.

Opportunities could be explored for the location of County Council services in the town centre but this will be dependent on a number of issues, such as funding.

Page 34 to include text on opportunities for Council services in the town centre to be explored.

There is a need for housing for adults with physical disabilites and older people to be provided as part of the affordable housing. Recommended wording change for page 35 and addition to Appendix 2.


Appropriate education contributions should be sought from the new residential element of the development.


The SPD should be amended to show a stronger commitment to ensuring SUDS are delivered as an integral part of proposals.

The SPD sets the principles for sustainable design measures. The implementation of this is dependent on planning application schemes.

No change required.

Page 17, text missing from para on Community Safety Strategy.


Rewording of bullet point on Page 16 to match Local Plan regarding vehicular access.


Page 21, insert ‘SCOTS’ on final bullet point and on page 36.

Agreed Wording to be changed in line with response.

Rewording of page 22 on improving road and traffic as a socio economic improvement.

Agreed Wording to be changed in line with response.

OCC require greater information on business relocation. Details of the agreed plan for the relocation of businesses will be required at the planning application stage.

No change required.

Page 41


Fig 5.1 and 5.2 require greater information on who uses the roads (vehicles, buses, pedestrians etc).

The supporting text in Section 6 provides commentary on who would utilise the routes.

No change required.

Page 35, is the 2,000 car parking spaces in addition to existing?

The 2,000 car parking spaces proposed would be additional to the current provision within the existing town centre developed as part of the Orchard Centre Phase One.

No change required.

Figure 5.3 labelling of columns is confusing. Agreed. Table to be changed in line with response.

Section 7.7, contributions will be sought from all development not just residential.


Section 2.2 should make reference to Policy T4 and on page 79.


Section 6.2 should be more explicit for the need for a bus-only facility within the existing town centre.

The SPD establishes the importance of accessibility and movement, and consideration will be given to detailed proposals at the planning application stage.

No change required.

Proposed change to context in page 11. Agreed. Wording to be changed in line with response.

Proposed change to air quality wording in page 22 whereby traffic will accelerate not may accelerate.

The detail of the development/transport proposal would need to be seen before this could be stated.

No change required.

Proposed change to text on sub-area Hitchcock Way, replacement of reference to traffic calming.


OCC requested that SUSTRANS be consulted directly. Is this the case?

SUSTRANS were formally written to and contacted through the Didcot Community Forum.

No change required.

Page 42


Page 22, rewording of SCOTS aims. Agreed. Wording to be changed in line with response.

Why have housing numbers increased from 300 to 450 units?

This is based on capacity studies undertaken as part of the Masterplan process.

No change required.

Additions to developer contributions list (education, libraries, museum resources, social and community infrastructure).


Section 7.7, the ‘delivery of an agreed plan for the relocation of existing service trades’ – should this not be in Section 7.1?

The agreed relocation plan will be delivered following planning permission and this will be secured through a legal agreement.

No change required.

Rewording of Section 5.3 – access & movement to add meeting the aims of the Oxfordshire Rights of Way Improvement Plan.


The SA does not push SUDS clearly enough. Agreed Reference to SuDS now included in Summary, Compatibility of Objectives, Key consideration, Key Indicators of Improvement and Conclusions section of Final SA Report.

Generated traffic does have negative impacts on congestion, noise, severance and pollution and this should be reflected in the SA.

The SA is encouraging access to the town centre and the improved mixed-use facilities appropriate to the role of Didcot by public transport, walking and cycling rather than the private car. These aspects will be considered through the development and implementation of Travel Plans for the various sub areas as development proposals progress. While it is acknowledged that the

Table 4 of the SA has been amended to reflect this and associated text has been added to the Summary, Compatibility of Objectives section and Conclusions.

Page 43


proposed developments could have negative impacts on traffic, it is felt that the impact at this stage is “uncertain” as it is dependent on the level of transport improvements implemented.

The SA should state it is essential that sustainable transport measures are explored – as opposed to current wording of recommended.

The SPD promotes sustainable transport measures which will be further explored at the planning application stage.

No change required.

S10 South Oxfordshire Partnership


Encourage greater emphasis upon providing space for community use.

Agreed. This is covered under Section 5.1 (community facilities).

No change required.

Encourage greater emphasis upon the role of voluntary, community and faith organisations.

Section 5.1 outlines that opportunities will be explored for facilities for the voluntary and community sector.

No change required.

Encourage the provision of a landmark building to deliver a number of objectives.

The principle of including a landmark building is supported in Section 5.4 and attempts to realise this principle will be decided through planning applications.

No change required.

S11 Natural England


No mention of any International or Nationally designated sites within the vicinity of the SPD location. Consideraton should be given to how recreational activities will impact

The study area deals solely with the town centre and particularly the Local Plan policy areas expressed as DID7 and DID8 where

No change required.

Page 44


these areas. there no designated sites. Although links to the surrounding countryside are referred to, it is the role of the forthcoming Area Action Plan to consider the impact on the wider ecological assets.

Failure to make reference to PPS9. The study area is established as including the town centre and it is felt that PPS9 is not appropriate for this focus.

No change required.

A more cohesive approach to green infrastructure should be adopted – reference made to PPG17 study, access to greenspace standards, and the Access to Nature grant scheme.

The SPD is focussed on the town centre and as such large-scale opportunities for green infrastructure are limited. Nonetheless opportunities for green open spaces are encouraged.

No change required.

Reference required to the role of green corridors in linking spaces within the town centre.

The SPD is focussed on the town centre uses and as such opportunities for green corridors are limited. Nonetheless opportunities for green open spaces are encouraged. Although links to the surrounding countryside are referred to, it is the role of the forthcoming Area Action Plan to consider the impact on the wider ecological assets.

No change required.

Page 38 – more information required on green character improvements.

The SPD establishes the principle that planting and biodiversity is important for the town centre extension and that green character is a large part of this. Greater details on the nature of this would be explored at the planning application stage.

No change required.

Reference to green roofs required. Agreed. Wording to be changed in line with response.

Page 45


Council should have regard to the type of planting in the town centre.

The SPD establishes the principle that planting and biodiversity is important for the town centre extension. Greater details on the nature of this would be explored at the planning application stage.

No change required.

S12 Environment Agency


Support for Section 5.7 in seeking sustainable design from new development.


S13 South East England Partnership Board


A representation was received but no comments were made.

n/a n/a

S14 Oxfordshire Primary Care Trust


New developments should provide healthy and sustainable environments that encourage healthy living.

Agreed. The social benefits of healthy living will be included in Section 5.3 and 5.5.

All residents should have access to high quality health and social care facilities.

The SPD establishes that SODC need to be satisfied that all necessary infrastructure will be in place at each phase of the

No change required.

Page 46


development.

Overall the PCT would favour opening up opportunities to provide more services and facilities and developing the possibility for co-location of services across organisations/providers.

The opportunities for co-location and new facilities can be explored at pre-application stages.

No change required.

We would expect any development to be mindful of healthier living , increasing walking and cycling opportunities and conforming to NICE public health guidance - in particular guidance on physical activity and the environment.

Agreed. The social benefits of healthy living will be included in Section 5.3 and 5.5.

There should be adequate play areas and environments for children and young people which are appropriate for all and which meet very differing needs.

Residential planning applications will be determined with reference to the demand they create for certain facilities and how this demand will be met. Play areas may not be suitable for a town centre site and therefore other options may be explored.

No change required.

Developments should be fully inclusive of all sectors of the community; this is expected to deliver high quality open space, access to comprehensive community facilities, employment, both within the site and linkages to other economic centres and education.

The promotion of a comprehensive development plan in the SPD allows a holistic approach to be taken to inclusiveness.

No change required.

In the development of homes the PCT suggests greater reference to homes for life to respond to the demographic of an aging population

Reference is made in Section 5.1 to Local Plan policy requirements for type and quantity of residential accommodation.

No change required.

The PCT would in all probability consider seeking a contribution from the developers towards the cost of expanding existing healthcare facilities and/or creating new buildings should it prove necessary after further, more in depth review, to invest in expansion of existing services or provision of new facilities.


Page 47


S15 – English Heritage


Where significant heritage exists care must be taken to understand the contribution to the local scene and the vulnerability to change.

Section 5.4 of the SPD makes reference to the future development addressing its surroundings in appositive manner and responding to the scale and character of existing development.

No change required.

Due regard is had to impacts on the two conservation areas.

See above – Section 5.4 also makes explicit reference to the conservation areas.

No change required.

The ‘memorable buildings’ highlighted in the sub-area descriptions should not be taken as necessarily conveying particular height.

The reference to ‘memorable buildings’ in the sub-area graphics represent opportunities for distinct design and do not infer building heights.

No change required.

Questions the relevance of the SPD in light of the emerging LDF, in particular the Area Action Plan.

The SPD is an expression of Local Plan policy and how this fits with the evolving LDF will be monitored by the Council.

No change required.

S16 – TRAIN (Youth work on Didcot’s streets)


The specific mention of facilities for young people in Section 5.1 is welcome.


Page 48


The comments received from the Government Office for the South East are of an informal nature and do not constitute official representations.

S1 Government Office for the South East


The SPD requires a clearer timeline for implementation. It is difficult to be clear on the timeline for implementation, especially in the current market. This is strongly dependent on resolution of land ownership issues and market conditions and will be for SODC and the preferred developer to monitor.

No change required.

The objectives require greater detail (e.g. level of floorspace, number of homes, jobs etc).

The SPD provides sufficient detail (e.g. floorspace and housing numbers) whilst retaining flexibility to set development principles and allow the exact mix of uses to be determined by planning applications.

No change required.

The SPD should include greater referencing to the evidence base.

This is noted and more referencing will be provided.

Greater referencing (through footnotes)

Engagement with the Highways Agency is required. The Highways Agency have made comments to the Draft SPD.

See below.

It is unclear what Fig 5.1 & 5.2 are referring to. Agreed. Titles to be made clearer.

Overall the SPD is a bit vague and could be SMARTer. The SPD sets development principles and as such the exact mix of uses and details on quantum will be provided by applications.

No change required.

Page 1


��

��

��

��!��"�� #��

� ��!�� $��

��'�� *�+��#��

��<��=��

��>��X��

��<��* ��

��Y�� Z��[�� \��

��>>��\��+��$��

�� ]�*^��# �� >__!��

`�� * ��

�� *^��#�� { �^�� ^��|��$�� #{|$��

}� |��}�� ^��+� �� >___��

}� |�� X��<��>__��

}� *^��>__'��

}� X��+�^� ��~�� >__Y��

}� "��$��[�� ^�� >__��

* �� ^�� +� ~�� #X��#��

*^��>__'�X�� ^��

��

� ��^�$��>__'�� #^��>__��

��

�Z�#�X��>_��

�Z�#�X��{��

�Z�#�#� ��

}� |��~� �� =�� ^�

}� �� Z��

}� X��^��

�Z�#�X��#� �� {��

�Z�#��

}� {�� =��

�Z�#��

�Z�#��#��"��

�Z�#��#��

�Z�#�#�� >__��}>_��

��^��=� ��X��}�#� �� Z��

��>��^� ��

��

Z ��

{� ��^�� ^�

* �� Z ��

��

��+�� \${X��

��+�� ]��

��+�� ]� ��

��+�� }�� +� ~�

��"��

}� |��>__'�

}� #^��$�� #X��

}� X�� ^�$��$��

}� �� +^��\��

}� #�� ^�$��

}� =�� [�X�� [��^��

��"��`� ��Z��

=��

\��X�� {��

��Y�{�� \��

}� {��

}� #��

{� ��"��

}� =��{� ��{��

}� �� {�`{�`��

�� \��

�� \��~�{��

X��+�� ^��

��^� ��

#��

}� ��\��#{�#^� �� {��[��{ ��!��

}� �� ^�� #{��

Z##�]��^�#�� Z�� ^� ��* �� }�$�� *��^��

�

�

�� ! ��

��|��~�� #^��$��Z�#�

{��\�� Z�#�

��^��#�� #��`�� Z�#��

{�� #��`�� Z�#��

#��#��~�� {��Z�#�

#��^�� {��Z�#�

#��*��=� �� X�� Z�#�

#��\�� =�+�� X�� Z�#�

#��|�� X�� Z�#�

#��X��$�� ^�� Z�#�

#��`� �^� �� ^�� Z�#�

#��`� �� ~��Z�#�

#��`� �� *� �� ~��Z�#�

`� ��^�� =��[��\�� `�� Z�#�

�� ^� �� #��X��Z�� Z�#�

��| �� {� ��Z�� Z�#�

�� `�� Z�#�

=�� ^��`�� #��Z�#�

��`�� $��`�� Z�#�

��^��|��~�� *��^�� `�� Z�#�

"��{ �� X�� `�� Z�#�

�^�� #��*�� `�� Z�#�

��Z�� `�� Z�#�

#�^�� `�� {��Z�� Z�#�

{� �� =��|��#�� Z�#�

� �^��=�+~�� Z�� Z�#�

# ��`�� `�� Z�#�

��|��+�� `�� $�� Z�#��

��X�� Z�#�|�� *��

{�� |�� \�� $��{��X��

�� `�� {��=��* �� ]�Z##�

*��{�� Z�� [�� #��*��}Z##�

��|�� =��

|�� ^�� #��^��~��

�� #�� ~��*�+��#��

��

� ��#��

"�� ~�#�� *^��

*�� "�� `��

"��|� �� ^��=� �� #��

{��~� �� X�� #��Z�#�

`�� ~^�� $�� {��

`�� $��^�� ^��{��

` �� $��^�=� ��^�$��\��|��$��

` �"�|�+�� Z�� ^��^�$��

`�� $$�{��^�$��$��{��[�� [�� +� ~�^��

� ��^�$��\��{��$$\{��

` �� *^�� =��^�{�^� ��=��^��

=��

��^��=� �� #��X��{�^� ��

`��#^� ��|� �� =��^+��{�� [�X��{�^� ��

`��X��#� �� Z�� ^� ��#��#��X��{�^� ��

��`��

Z�� #��#��X��{�^� ��

#��|�� X�� Z##��

#��=� �� ^��Z##��

#��*� �� ^�Z##��

� �� "�* ��

`��#��~� *^�� [��

� *^�� X��

� ��+� ~�\��* ��

� ��^� ��+� ~��

` ��`�� $��$��

��`�� Z�� ^� �� #� ��* ��

#� ��`\*�"� `Z�Z�#��X�� `��Z�� {��`Z{��

"�^� �� |��~��^��^� �� #� ��* ��=��^[��

� Z�� #��#��$��X��{�^� ��

� Z�� |��#��

� �^��#��^��

� *^��* ��

`��X�� *^��

` �� `�� Z##�{��=��* ��

` ��=�� #^�� #^�� #��

=�+�� $�� [�Z�� ^� ��#��#��

��`�� =� +��"��#��

��=�� `$�#�

\��^� ��~� ��^��=��X��

\��^� ��\�+��

�� ^� �� ^��#�� ^��

�

Welcome01

Please give us your views on the future of Didcot Town CentreWelcome to this exhibition, which seeks your views on the Council’s vision for the future of Didcot town centre. This is your opportunity to help shape the development of Didcot.

South Oxfordshire District Council (SODC) has appointed consultants (Indigo Planning) to prepare planning policy guidance to shape the town centre. This guidance follows from the Town Centre Expansion Masterplan which was completed in January 2009. We are currently consulting on the draft of this guidance document. The exhibition is part of this process and sets out the purpose and the content of the document.

With your help, the ‘Supplementary Planning Document’ (SPD) establishes a vision and defines principles to help create a vibrant and dynamic town centre for Didcot.

The Vision

By 2026, the Town Centre will have grown significantly to provide a vibrant, dynamic and living heart at the centre of the town – competing effectively in the sub-region.

Roger Evans Associates Limited provides permission to use the images as supplied in the Didcot Town Centre Expansion Masterplan, on the following terms.

Copyright is retained by Roger Evans Associates Limited. A royalty free non-exclusive licence is granted to use and reproduce drawings/images originated by Roger Evans Associates Limited for the purpose of producing the Didcot Town Centre Expansion Supplementary Planning Document.

Illustration: By Roger Evans Associates.

Where we are in the planning process

02

123

4

Stage 1 – The Local Plan

The South Oxfordshire Local Plan provides policies to guide development in the district, including Didcot town centre. Policy DID6 led to the development of the Orchard Centre, including the Sainsbury’s store; Policy DID7 proposes the regeneration of the Market Place and Broadway and Policy DID8 proposes a mixed-use extension to the east of the existing town centre.

Stage 2 – The Masterplan

To realise Policies DID7 and DID8, SODC commissioned a Masterplan to shape the expansion of Didcot town centre. This shows how the town centre can be improved and extended to provide better facilities, and was consulted upon between September and October 2008.

Stage 3 – The SPD

Based on the Masterplan, a draft SPD has been produced to establish the vision and strategic development principles for the town centre. A Sustainability Appraisal (SA) has also been undertaken to test how the draft SPD meets the Council’s economic, social and environmental objectives. This docu-ment will be finalised in April 2009.

ConsultationAll comments made on the draft SPD and SA will be analysed and taken into account in finalising the SPD.

AdoptionThe final documents will be adopted by the Council and will be monitored and updated regularly.

Stage 4 – Making it happen

Planning applications will be assessed in relation to all relevant policies, of which the SPD will be especially important. Appropriate proposals will be approved, and the planning permissions granted will define the form of development allowed. The development will take place in accordance with the approved details and various measures required as part of the scheme.

ROGER EVANS ASSOCIATES LTD FOR SOUTH OXFORDSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL AND HAMMERSON PLC

DIDCOT TOWN CENTRE EXPANSION MASTERPLAN

The Vision

By 2026, the Town Centre will have grown significantly to provide a vibrant, dynamic and living heart at the centre of the town – competing effectively in the sub-region.

The Council will promote a town centre that will:

• bring together a mix of uses, including retail, residential, leisure, commercial and community, that work together to create an attractive, vital and viable centre throughout the day and into the evening to serve the current and future catchment;

• have a varied and interesting retail and catering offer to meet the needs of the current and future catchment;

• provide new town centre homes for sale and rent, including affordable housing which will incorporate provision for people with disabilities and older people, and key worker housing;

• be a permeable and accessible town centre, with good linkages from the surrounding streets and railway station;

• be accessible for pedestrians and people using cycles and public transport;

• contain attractive, welcoming, safe, inclusive and accessible public and open amenity spaces which facilitate social interaction;

• be distinctive, with a sense of place and of high quality in urban design and architectural terms;

• contribute positively to Didcot’s image, engender civic pride and improve peoples’ quality of life; and

• be a sustainable town centre with regard to energy supply, environmental performance, sustainable access and design.




Cornerstone Arts Centre Image: Copyright by Daniel Hopkinson

The vision in more detail03

Orchard Street

REAL Masterplan, Didcot Town Square

The Cornerstone Arts Centre

Elements of the Development04

Increased retail floorspace will better serve the existing population and meet the shopping needs of future residents of Didcot. New retail provision could include an extension to the existing Sainsbury’s; a department store; other large and small retail units; and, in the longer term, redevelopment of existing buildings on Broadway.

Shops

The town centre expansion is an opportunity for a public library and other community facilities, possibly including provision for young people, the voluntary, community and faith sectors. These should be located in spaces that are highly accessible and visible to attract visitors and bring identity to Didcot.

CommunityFacilities

The existing businesses at Richs Sidings will be relocated outside the town centre. Small offices in the town centre will be available for businesses serving the local market.

BusinessPremises

Town centre housing can bring life to the area during evenings. It can take the form of free-standing blocks of flats, flats above shops and/or townhouses.

A range of cafes and restaurants will facilitate the evening economy. In addition, accommodation for commercial leisure uses, such as a fitness centre or ten-pin bowling, will be encouraged.

LeisureFacilities

Housing

Development in the town centre will need to balance a sufficient level of car parking to attract people to Didcot with avoiding the over-dominance of the car. The levels of car parking provided will be in line with local planning policy.

Vehicle/CycleParking

Land within the town centre should be used more efficiently. The proposals for the town centre provide an opportunity to increase densities, with buildings three, four and five storeys high. In total there is capacity for a significant amount of additional floorspace in a mix of retail, residential and community/leisure uses.

The town centre improvements will overcome the current disjointed nature of routes into and around the town centre. Consideration will be given to a dedicated cycle network; pedestrianisation of the High Street; enhancing the public transport network; and improving highway capacity.

Urban design and architecture will be used to create a distinctive and dense urban character. Landmark buildings will be provided at important nodes and contemporary design will be encouraged throughout the town centre. The Cornerstone Arts Centre has created an important precedent in terms of quality.

Landscaping will be used to define spaces, encourage biodiversity, and enhance and soften the streetscape. The public realm will be attractive, accessible, inclusive, multi-functional and in-keeping with the local character.

Safety and security will be considered at the early stage of scheme design to promote natural surveillance and activity during the day and evening.

Proposals must use resources in an accountable and responsible manner. Sustainable design will be employed to maximise efficiency in the use of energy, water and building materials, and the provision of renewable energy will be required.

Design of the Development05

Public realm and landscaping

Public transport

Sustainable Design




Proposals for particular areas within the town centre

06

Existing town centreThe existing areas should maximise linkages with the extended town centre. The extension of the Sainsbury’s store and possible relocation of the petrol station should be considered.

High St ExtensionThis would create an important north-south spine for a mix of retail, leisure and residential uses.

Orchard St ExtensionThis would be the main retail street and incorporate a key public space at the intersection with the High Street.

Hagbourne Rd ExtensionThe extension would improve the link between the town centre and the residential area to the north.

Hitchcock WayRedevelopment of this key road would improve access to the rail station and the experience of road users.

BroadwayRedevelopment would improve access into and within the town centre.

Didcot Town

ce ised for thent.

This board draws on the design principles set out on previous boards to illustrate the prefered key design and development characteristics of six Sub-Areas within the expanded town centre. The Sub-Areas have been defined by reference to the Masterplan and the existing built form. Similarly, the potential land-use configurations and urban design principles are drawn from the Masterplan, although the development might take a different form whilst respecting the key principles.

Making it happen07

Partners for Delivery

South Oxfordshire District Council (SODC) are taking the lead in bringing about the expansion of Didcot town centre but will rely on a number of key partners. SODC has selected a preferred development partner and this company will play a crucial role in improving key parts of the town centre.

Other landowners will also be important, including owners of existing retail premises, Oxfordshire County Council, other statutory undertakers and service providers.

Land Assembly

The town centre will expand onto land owned by a number of separate individuals. Whilst the development will be undertaken by the private sector, the Council will consider all options to bring it about. This may involve SODC using its compulsory purchase powers to secure control of land.Where appropriate SODC will facilitate the relocation of services and trades that provide a valued community ser-vice to suitable land or premises elsewhere in the Didcot area.

Phasing

Different elements of the development could be: - First element: development of Sainsbury’s car park (part) and extension to the superstore - Second element: extension and associated development of Orchard St and High St - Third element: remaining sites (Hagbourne Rd, Hitchcock Way, Broadway)

Planning Obligations

Developers will be required to provide affordable housing, community facilities, public realm enhancements, and other contributions as part of the improvement of the town centre. Developers will also be required to ensure good quality management and maintenance of the town centre for the long term.

The Cornerstone Arts Centre

Cornerstone Arts Centre Image: Copyright by Daniel Hopkinson

6: Prop

Do you agree with t

Strongly agree Agree

Disagree Strongly disagree

If you have answered ‘Disagree’ or ‘Strongly disagree’ please explain why

below

Q7: Overall

Do you agree that the SPD will help deliver a vibrant and distinctive town centre for

Didcot?

Strongly agree Agree

Disagree Strongly disagree

If you have answered ‘Disagree’ or ‘Strongly disagree’ please explain why in the space

We want to hear your comments on the future of Didcot town centre. All feedback will be analysed and will inform the preparation of the final SPD.

Ways to view the SPD

• This exhibition will be on display at the Cornerstone on Friday 27 March (13.00-20.00) and Saturday 28 March (10.00-17.00). Following the exhibition, the panels can be viewed on weekdays (unstaffed) until 17 April 2009 at the address below

• The SPD exhibition material and draft SPD will be available on the Council website (www.southoxon.go.uk/haveyoursay) and the Brilliant Didcot website (www.brilliantdidcot.co.uk)

• Hard copies of the SPD and SA are available for viewing at all local libraries and the Council offices

Ways to Comment

• Complete a Questionnaire (this can be handed in today)

• Write to the Council c/o Craig Miller at: South Oxfordshire District Council Benson Lane Crowmarsh Gifford Wallingford Oxon OX10 8ED

Your views08

Didcot Town Centre

Draft Supplementary Planning Document

Consultation Questionnaire

Q6: Proposals for particular areas Do you agree with the proposals for each of the particular areas in the Town Centre?

Strongly agree Agree Disagree Strongly disagree

If you have answered ‘Disagree’ or ‘Strongly disagree’ please explain why in the space below

Q7: OverallDo you agree that the SPD will help deliver a vibrant and distinctive town centre for Didcot?



Q8: Have we missed anything or do you have any other comments?

Please provide your name and contact details (optional)

Name: Address:

Post Code: Telephone: Email:

Data Protection StatementYou are providing this information to South Oxfordshire District Council. The information collected will be used for the following purposes: • Feedback for the Didcot Town Centre Draft Supplementary Planning Document (SPD)• If we need to contact you for any matters relating to the SPD The information will only be viewed and held by the council for the purposes above and will not be passed on to any other organisations.

Didcot Town Centre Draft Supplementary Planning Document (SPD)

This SPD has been prepared on behalf of South Oxfordshire District Council by a team led by Indigo Planning.

The SPD sets out the council’s vision for the town centre and the strategic development principles that will help shape this vision and guide future development proposals for the town centre. Recent improvements in the form of the Orchard Centre, Cinema and Cornerstone have made a big difference, but much more is needed to deliver the vibrant and vital town centre that is required to meet the future needs of the area.

The principles set out in the document will be used in assessing future planning applications for town centre development.

We would like to hear your comments on the future of Didcot town centre. All feedback will be analysed and will inform the preparation of the final SPD.

Ways to view the SPDThis exhibition will be on display at Cornerstone on Friday 27 March (1300-2000) and Saturday 28 March 2009 (1000-1700). Following the exhibition, the panels can be viewed on weekdays (unstaffed) until 17 April 2009 at the Council Offices, Benson Lane, Crowmarsh, Gifford, Wallingford, Oxon OX10 8ED.

The SPD exhibition material, the draft SPD and the Sustainability Appraisal (SA) will be available on the Council website www.southoxon.gov.uk and the Brilliant Didcot website www.brilliantdidcot.co.uk

The SPD and SA are available for viewing at local libraries and the council offices.

Ways to CommentPlease complete this questionnaire and return it to South Oxfordshire District Council. You can hand it in here at the exhibition or send it to the Council at the following address:

Freepost Craig Miller South Oxfordshire District Council Benson Lane Crowmarsh Gifford Wallingford Oxon OX10 8ED

You can also complete the questionnaire online – please visit www.southoxon.gov.uk

All responses to the draft SPD must be received by 4.30 pm on Friday 17 April 2009.

Your ViewsWe would like to know what you think about the Didcot Town Centre Draft Supplementary Planning Document (SPD). Please respond to the questions below by using the tick boxes and comments space. Please add any additional comments at the end or write to South Oxfordshire District Council directly if you have more to say.

Q1: VisionDoes the vision you have seen in the SPD document reflect your view on the future development of Didcot town centre?

Completely Partly Not at all

If you have answered ‘Partly’ or ‘Not at all’ please explain why in the space below

Q2: Mix of Uses proposedHow important or unimportant is it to you to have a good mix of shops, cafes/restaurants, leisure facilities and town centre homes in Didcot?

Very important Important Not very important Not important at all

If you have answered ‘Not very important’ or ‘Not important at all’ please give reasons in the space below

Q3: ShoppingDo you agree or disagree with the proposal to improve shopping in Didcot, possibly including an extension to the Sainsbury’s store, a department store and other shops?



Q4: Public Areas of the Town CentreAre there any particular features that you think should be included in the main public areas of the town centre?

Q5: SustainabilityHow important do you think it is that new buildings are ‘green’ i.e. include energy efficiency measures, low water consumption systems, recycled materials, etc?

Very important Important Not very important Not important at all

Do you have any other comments on sustainability?

Representatives from South Oxfordshire District Council as well as the consultants for the SPD, Indigo Planning, will be present to answer any questions at:

Cornerstone Arts Centre, Didcot on

Friday 27 March 2009 1pm – 8pm Saturday 28 March 2009 10am – 5pm

Didcot is changing and further enhancement of the town centre will be at the heart of this. This is your opportunity to have your say on how you would like to see the future of Didcot town centre evolve. Come along and learn more at our exhibition on the Didcot Town Centre Supplementary Planning Document (SPD).

Complete one of our feedback questionnaires to be entered into a free prize draw with a chance of winning two tickets to see The Rats (Three decades later the original Boomtown Rat’s Garry Roberts and Simon Crowe present their new band) at Cornerstone.

Following the exhibition, the panels can be viewed on weekdays (unstaffed) until 17 April 2009 at the Council Offi ces, Benson Lane, Crowmarsh Gifford, Wallingford, Oxon OX10 8ED

The SPD document and a feedback form are available to view on the council’s website www.southoxon.gov.uk/haveyoursay

For further information please contact:Wendy Foster, Community Engagement Offi cer Tel: 01491 823904Email: [email protected]

We need your views

DIDCOT TOWN CENTRE SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING DOCUMENT

Q21

2

The town centre in the adopted local plan extends Westward to the junction of the Broadway and Foxhall Road. The SPG does not address the improvement needed to the west of the Market square. The SPG should consider the continued viability of the existing retail space on the whole of the Broadway. The SPG does not address the challenge of linking the extended Orchard centre with the eastern retail site (Tesco / Focus etc).

3I think there is more scope for making the centre of Didcot a natural place for extending the restuarant/bars/cafes open for people coming to the town for visits in the evening - currently most trade going to Italian bar and cinema. What about a Wetherspoons or similar?

45 We would have liked to see better access by road, instead of just one way in and one way out of the proposed new area.6789

10

I think the landscaping proposals are too limited. ie. A tree lined boulevard. Based on the results of the previous developments, I feel a greater emphasis is needed on "greening up" the town. Whilst the new facilities are a great improvement, the overall appearance of the town has not improved to the same extent. Industrial areas sit next to the new central development. Denser and more extensive planting of trees and the inclusion of underplanting would greatly enhance the town's overall appearance.

11 There should be more commercial property built around the train station. Multi storey car parking at the station could also be included as a sound barrier.12 Landscaping is mentioned but an adequate budget for high quality materials and on-going maintenance needs to be set.13 I don't believe Didcot will become a big town and the number of shops etc are about right. More modern improvements and enlargements including leisure outlets, please!14 More car parking needed (free) - higher quality apartments in the centre would be good.15 An enlargement of the plan would give a better idea.1617181920 Sounds good. I worry that especially now money won't be available and things will get half done - which can be disastrous/21 There was so little detail that it was hard to see what plans there are.222324 Less housing and more leisure. Right life as living above shops not good life.25 Didcot needs a Marks and Spencer or Debenhams.2627 By not very covered the town centre is still weather dependant i.e dead on a wet/windy day, some shelter/windbreaks could be considered.28 I am concerned that some small specialised businesses e.g shoe repairers will be displaced and lost to the town if all the cheap premises are demolished.29 Aspirations and reality are often different!3031323334

35The display does not show: - housing growth - transport/road proposals - proposals for the Broadway or other parts of the town without this info it is not possible to say that the specific part on display is sensible. DID8 does not equal 'Didcot Town Centre'

3637383940 not relevant to the needs of local business and employmant41 All I can see from this is another "clone" town, just the same as eveywhere else we need some individuality.

42Don't think it's necessary. Particularly moving the library. Further restaurants unecessary - we already have pizza/pasta costa coffee and other chains just like every other town in the UK. Existing retail space is unused so why even consider planning more space and for moving exisiting businesses (Rich's Sidings areas).

43This appears to be an exciting and much needed development for Didcot town center. However, I do not feel this document addresses road access in and out of Didcot. Didcot has poor road links and these need improving before Didcot is expanded. These include the A4130 towards Wallingford, the bridges at Culham and Clifton Hampden and the road through West Hagbourne.

44 Hop eyou get sensible planners unlike part car park planners wwho put meters in dangerous places. Cornerstone at last but shame the auditorium is so small.45

46There should be more development also to the west especially since the next main growth area is to the west. There is a lack of detail about what would actually be built. The exhibition mentioned a bowling alley.

47 What say have local people had in whether they want the significant growth or otherwise?

48

I cannot understand why the town centre is being developed to the east of the Orchard Centre when the new major development of houses is going to be to the west, i.e. Great Western Park. This will surely result in huge traffic problems as the people from the new development try to reach the town centre. Also the new health centre and the library are at the western end of Broadway so it would make more sense to move west and do something creative with the awful old Market Place.

49505152 My only concern is for the current 'Broadway' but I understand that this issue will be addressed at a later date.53 Town centre homes are a good idea but if they are rented homes there is a tendency for them to become scruffy and run down looking.545556

Q4123 But housing is catered for in other documents regarding building outside Ladygrove north4567891011121314151617

18Since the redevelopment and the Orchard Centre many of us who used to have to shop elsewhere can get what we need - reducing our car travel and making Didcot a sustainable more pleasant place to live.

1920

21To make Didcot a desirable and pleasant place it is important to include a high quality mix. The provision of some quality apartments as well as sheltered pedestrian areas is vital.

22232425 Ten pin bowling, new nightclub as we need more for family day and night out.2627

28 The library should stay where it is. Moving it will exacerbate to decline of the Broadway as everything gets shelved into the Orchard Centre.2930313233 Mix is important. The traditional population plus the newer higher income.34353637383940 we already have enough4142 Same reasons as above. There is no need to try and make our town a third rate initiation of other towns in our area.4344 Think there are enough cafes/ need another swimming pool and other facility for exercise particularly for young people.4546

47

The proposal is for a retail-led expansion. This will just give Didcot identikit retail; a more leisure-led development would could provide a more compelling advantage. Didcot should not become too dependent on any single use type to provide a more stable local economy. It would be good to see more public sector investement e.g. health and education.

484950515253545556

Q61 Sainsbury's should not be extended234 Don't extend the Sainsbury's but focus on building new shops.

5We don't think Sainsburys needs extending, it seems a good size as it is (we don't go to Tesco at Abingdon because the store there is too big). Would absolutely love to have a Marks & Spencers store in Didcot. Wouldn't have to go to Oxford at all then!

6 Capacity for small, local traders should be retained and improved alongside developemtns for larger chains.7

8Sainsburys does need to be exteneded, they cannot cope with what they have, and they never have enough staff on tills, But we definately need a Marks and Spencers, and a sports shop, and another mens clothes shop like River Island, we currently have 6 womens clothes shop( and men can only buy shirts from Next)

9101112 Also need small easy in - easy out untis for independant shops.

13 I think you're trying to turn Didcot into something it isn't. It will never rival Reading, Oxford or Swindon and it needs to attract and keep local businesses rather than national chains.1415

16Prefer a bigger/more dept stores e.g BHS and M+S rather than extending Sainsbury's. Sainsbury's is big enough already and there is also TESCOS. We also have 'young' and cheap fashion - now we need a BHS and M+S.

17181920 But see Q1. Car delivery and cycle parking very important.21 There is already another supermarket in DIDCOT. Enlarging one would decrease diversity. Please leave room for small local enterprise shops.222324 Need more in demand shops not just big chains.25 Definately need a department store. We have lots of women's shops but you can only buy men's clothes from Next. We need a River Island.2627282930 Why not extend Tesco where there is ample room as was envisaged when they paid for the railyway bridge - where flooding used to occur.313233 The addition of a department store would be good. Sainsbury's has been a disappointment. It's saved commercially by its location.34353637 No thanks!383940 enough already41 Clone Town!42 No need. Would like to see cheaper brand supermarket like Asda/Morrisons in area but not necessarly in town centre.

43

This is a poorly phrase question! I agree that the mix of shops in Didcot should be improved and that a 'quality' department store would be an excellent addition to the town. However I do not believe that the Sainsbury's store should be expanded. In fact whoever wrote this question, should be ashamed of themselves! These two issues (new shops and Sainsburys extension) should be addressed in seperate questions.

44 Do not agree with extn of Sainsbury's. Would depend on quality of Dept store - NOT Primark type place.4546

47Less retail than proposed. Can't see the demand for a department store -seems a dated concept. We need to ensure that existing shops are not squeezed out of the new development just because they are not trendy. Broadway has a distinctive retail offering.

484950515253545556

Q71 Seating, water features, more trees, cafes in public spaces

2 Open area meeting place (like the current amphitheatre outside Sainsburys). Adequate parking (currently Orchard Centre often is full). Public transport interchange.3 Cafes and bars4 library, post office5 If at all possible, some covered walking areas by the shops would be good.

6A proper market area, the Faremrs market is very successful, but is 'squeezed' in outside Sainsburys and should not be entirely separate from the small number of existing regular traders who operate in the market place. A piece of public art.

7 More litter bins8 decent bars, and eating places like the Oracle in Reading or West Quay in Portsmouth.

9

Hitchcock Way needs to be better integrated - at the moment this is a key link from the railway station, Ladygrove and Millbrook to the town centre yet is intimidating for pedestrians and cyclists as crossings are poor and confusing and traffic goes too fast as the road is straight and wide. In the plan trees are planned from Broadway to Station Road - this should be extended to the station and pavement and cycle paths improved to allow better access from this key public transport link.

1011 A restaurant and bar area that is covered by CCTV and near public transport links.12 - Low key children's play - Areas that catch the sun are sheltered. The eating area at Cornerstone is cold and shaded for much of the year.13 These are pretty good already.14 Eating places i.e wine bar, cafes - not pubs/nightclubs15 Street and pavement cleaning.161718 More green space - at the moment there is a lot of concrete and hard landscaping. Continuous cycle paths which don't suddently die out. More cycle parking.1920 Toddler age children's playground.21 Open spaces and some sheltered areas of seating would be good.22 Green areas - planting displays, flowers, shrubs.23 Seating, cafes, a tree or greenery of some sort.24 Better lighting and cycle racks.25 Larger Market Place. Would prefer covered shopping mall away from rain and wind.26 More seating for the elderly.27 Extension to High St - at the moment this is ignored - I believe it should be either 1) enforced but roundabout by bridge enlarged 2) relaxed to allow traffic through

28 Cornerstone is hideous - especially the bilious colour scheme. Please can we have something a bit easier on the eye - the cinema is better. Five storeys is too high.29 Town clock and public art.3031 Water feature.32 There is need for a family pub like the Hungry Horse in Ladygrove whcih caters for children.33 The ability to 'hang out' is important and the facilities differ with age group.34 Open spaces for children to play. Lots of trees! Attractive seating areas. Clubs for teenagers - keep them off streets.35 Soft Areas - i.e not just acres of paving.

36- Large sculpture/water feature/modern art. - Seating Areas. Whilst green areas may not be feasible in the shopping/leisure areas it is important to make 'green' all approach areas and boundaries.

37 More Trees.38 At present Didcot is good about disabled parking places - don't loose sight of this.39 Statue of some sort which is smart and relevant to celebrate Didcot's new shopping centre. Toilets and bins important. A fountain - closed at night?4041 More police/security guards to stop trouble before it starts. A town clock would be nice.42 Less disabled parking spots. Water fountains would be pretty.43 Open green space and trees.44 Green spaces!

45

Public toilet facilities in Didcot are abismal both the new and refurb temporary facility for a town of this size - the temporary building on Edinburgh Drive car park carries a closed notice saying Cornerstone has pulic toilet facilities which I must say are excellent but what do you suggest people should do on Mondays and other times when cornerstone is closed.

46 A bowling alley and skateboard park should be included.47 Let's be proud of the industrial heritage and make a clear reference to this.

48Provision of a decent 'market square' where the old market traders can ply their wares. This has always been a part of the life of Didcot and could be a good focus for street life. People need other alternatives to supermarket shopping and at the moment there are none in Didcot.

495051 Seating, bins, information boards/maps.

52Some sort of faith centre would be an interesting idea. I don't think we need to have amusements i.e bowling alley for teenage children. We now have the arts centre and cinema and don't want the town to be continually patrolled by the police. We need to keep the 'Quality' element.

53 Seating - higher than the existing seating (for us oldies!!).54 Town Clock, Green spaces, Water feature e.g fountain55 Green areas More trees56 More signposting and better quality opf public toilets.

Q91

2

The design should maximise accessibility by foot, giving pedestrian "desire lines" precedence over any traffic. Have a free shuttle to and from the Railway station and the eastern retail park (Tesco etc). Improve bus service from around the expanded Didcot to the new centre - especially as the Great Western Park is beyond walking distance for shopping. Are the proposals future-proof?

3456789

101112 Surface water management is a priority.13 The town and square uses very low energy LED lights - more of the same please. Also there needs to be a full range of green measures. (PV, heat, etc)1415161718 Vital for our future.1920 Need more buses than we have now - and better bus/rail station connections.21222324 Not to be horrible to look at your designs to blend in with old and new buildings.252627 I believe that all new buildings should be green including water, electricity, wind or solar.28 How about ground source heat pumps?2930313233 Do not forget disabled access.3435363738 Cost in these days of recession is most important - sustainability might have to take second place.394041 Daft question really!42 Ccornerstone could have been made completely green - by which I mean photo - voltaics, not energy saving light bulbs.43 The new Didcot should aim to be carbon neutral and an example to new towns everywhere.44 If the shopping area has roof over it this would reduce heat loss from shops.45

46There should be good and fully protected access for bikes but also, sadly, good accommodation for car parking. The present arrangements are very poor on both counts.

47 With the housing densities being proposed sustainability in design and build will be key.

48Energy efficiency should extend to transport planning with low carbon buses and taxis and lots of public transport to reduce car use. Perhaps electric mini buses to carry people from the housing developments to the centre

4950515253545556 I think that the area is doing a job for sustainability and local groups are doing a good job.

Q111234 Didcot will need a proper hospital. It wasn't clear where this was going to go.567

8Yes to most of them, but STRONGLY disagree against the LIBARAY moving to the new town shopping centre!!! I go/and know most people go to shop for clothes/shoes/and then eat, NOT to get a book from a libary!!!

9101112

13Doubtful about the High Street extension. Wwhy mess around with Hitchcock Way? The Hagbourne Raod extension is so close to the Broadway and Hitchcock Way roundabout that it will get obtructed when the traffic is heavy.

1415 But feel more should be done to the West i.e shops etc

16 Critical to link the station with the town centre. Preferably you should be able to see your walk through to the shops when you are out of the station.1718

19Issues about High St and Broadway. Not sure about 'diluting' the focus from the expanded Orchard Centre. Why not get all the shops into the expanded Orchard Centre and create a real centre. The current arrangement suffers from the continued use of the Broadway. The new proposal will continue this problem.

20 High St extension badly needed soon. Broadway might need to become largely residential.21 I still don't know what the proposals are or even which areas you mean.222324 Think that the Lower End Rich Sidings should stay as a option for small businesses close to town centre.25 Do not agree with a library in the town centre it is a waste of prime office space.2627

28Maintenance is important for all of this - aimently the land alongside Hitchcock Way frequently looks overgrown. Can't see the point of moving the petrol station. Need more detail.

29303132 The underpass in Hitchcock Way near Jubily roundabout should be upgraded for one way car access to Ladygrove and pedestrian33 Station Road looks good.3435 See Answer to Q1.3637 new competitive swim pool please.383940 more shops no industry another loss of real jobs to be replaced with minimum wage dead end retail jobs4142 Already answered.43 Completely disagree with the extension of Sainsburys - strongly support the rest.

44Where will the new secondary school be? Other facilities for proposed 10,000 houses? Where will all these people work? Why all the houses here - surely this should be where the work is!

45

46 OK in so far as descrfibed but not specific enough detail to fully comment and also, as mentioned earlier, development could be more balanced.

47I don't believe the retail-led development is a good idea and would prefer to see more leisure. I notice that the Local Plan makes reference to a new health care facility DID6 but this is not in the SPG.

484950515253545556

Q131 Depends whether it's designed well!

2

I feel that nothing distinctive is on offer - just a lot of new standard retail and commercial buildings. I cannot conceive that anyone will finance truly distinctive architecture for the new buildings. Also I am not convinced that any major department store chain will be tempted to a second-tier town which has good links to the first tier centres of Oxford and Reading

3456789101112 High quality design will help with distinctive nature.13 Looks over ambitious and unrealistic. But I'd like to see changes to Lower Broadway and Rich's Sidings.1415 Hopefully.161718 Though think pedestrian/cycle options could be strengthened.19 But see above.2021 Not enough detail to know.222324 Will have to wait for the more detailed plans.

25 It can be a vibrant if its also undercover where things happen more, in a under covered shopping mall like The Oracle and Milton Keynes or Bull Ring.262728293031323334

35The SPD gives an opportunity for redevelopment. To make the town centre distinctive and vibrant will need good design and good vision from those involved in determining what goes where. The mix of shops needs to be individual to Didcot.

3637 No doubt it will be soulless and full of concrete and little green bits.383940 will be like every other shopping centre in the country41 Won't know until more detailed plans are available!

42 Building's don't make a community and the kind of place described in the SPD sounds very dreary and a poor copy of some of the least exciting places in this country.43

44If Govt, O.C.C SODC VWH who really had people who live in Didcot and consulted people before rather than after event. Why more shops so many are empty now. Didcot is an overgrown area where no real planning has ever happened e.g park for station - disabled places by foot bridge for example etc. etc

4546

47

Too much retail focus. I would prefer to see a greater D2 allocation. It would also be worth exploring a night club (sui generis) allocation especially if this could be delivered below street level to reduce noise impact. I am also concerned at the proposal for 5-storey buildings especially any proposal for buildings overlooking the railway line. This could well reduce the amenity of residents in Ladygrove. This is some reference of using the redevelopment of the town centre to improve the links into and better bind Ladygrove into the rest of Didcot but it would benefit from more thought in this area. Finally I'm concerned at the proposed phasing of the development, which would basically look at more retail without not too much else. I would be less concerned were it not obvious from the SPG that the step-wise approach to date had not been effective - the SPG is critical of the Sainsbury's car park and petrol filling station even though both are in the Local Plan.

48

Sadly, I think it is too late for Didcot. This SPD is far too late. All these proposals should have been thought through before the Orchard Centre was built and possibly even before Tesco and the Cow Lane link and new railway bridge were built. The design of Orchard Street and the area in front of Sainsburys is appalling and depressing. It is also hard for disabled people to use. Orchard Street is sloped and a wind tunnel in winter. The architecture is an insult to the profession and the exterior of the Arts Centre is simply embarrassing.The whole thing has the appearance of being done piecemeal with no long term plan which it obviously has.. In the present circumstances it seems unlikely that there will be enough money to do a decent job. Better to do nothing than to extend the eyesores.

4950515253545556

Q141

2Why were the problems with the existing development not seen when it was built recently - e.g. the petrol station in the wrong place the poor quality of Hitchcock Way etc. It seems grossly wasteful to rip out infrastructure and rebuild when it is only a few years into a 30 year plus design life. What thought has been given to future-proof the current proposals?

3 More cafes open evenings,nightlife and bars for the evening please - to prevent leakage of money into Oxford/Reading from potential residents who dont want to go to Cornerstone/cinema but would love an evening out

4 If you do a survey, could you try to put more meaningful questions? The ones on this are rather vague. Also, it would be nice to have a category "I don't know" as one of the options.

5We forgot to check if extra car parking spaces will be provided, which we think is essential, with charges the same as in the present Orchard Centre. The current system (ie 2 hours free parking) is a good encouragement to spend more time in the centre, not just in Sainsburys.

6

7 How to attract new businesses to the town in a time of recession?? Not so many 'Charity Shops' in the town which gives theimpression of a town dying on it's knees!!

8You also need to put something like a ten pin bowling for family's to got to, as I know most people go to Oxford / Newbury for bowling and then for something to eat afterwards. If you want a family day/evening out you can go to the cinema, but bowling would be for everyone, and also the restanrants in the new shopping centre would benefit.

9Care should be taken to avoid dark corners where possible, e.g. currently the ampitheatre between Sainsburys and Robert Dyas is used for drug dealing and antisocial behaviour - without better planning then any plans to improve the evening economy in Didcot will be scuppered by chavs.

10At least some of the buildings, particularly the largest and most prominent, should be attractive, so that they are a real feature rather than a featureless basic box with the typical chain store appearance that makes every highstreet look the same.

11 Plan should include the whole area around the station and up as far as the Fire Station. A complete solution is needed.121314 If Didcot can attract a major Department Store like M+S or Debenhams it could become a major shopping centre for oxon.15 Covered walkways including existing Orchard area.

16A multi storey car park is presumably inevitable. Please disguise it with homes around it etc which will also help it not to be a 'dead' 'no-go' area at night. Please also ensure there is as much surface parking left as possible. Some people just feel claustrophobic in multi storeys and many elderly drivers would not want to/possibly not even be able to use them (lots of very tight turns and close pillars to avoid!!)

17 I think it is good that the town is being re-developed and it would be nice to have more shops would save going further a field to shop. It's great that we now have a Cinema and a Art's Centre.18 Tried to look on the web but found it quite hard to use.

19The problem as always seems to happen in Didcot is that the vision is not carried through. e.g the Wave - unable to use as a competitive venue. Cornerstone - great facility but was initially planned with bigger capacity but was cut back - bookings show that the original vision was correct. The town is expanding so need to plan for the future today.

2021

22Current seats in Orchard Centre are too low. Any street furniture or steel posts need to be clearly visible and not blend into the background. Any steps - the edges need to be clearly defined. Greater provision of cycle stands in the existing and future development. Regarding Q3 I would like to see at least 2 men's clothing shops.

23 Better public transport especially transport serving the hospitals in Oxford24 Would like a ten pin bowling and night club.

25 Would like Cow Lane tunnel re-development and a 2 way passing. The bridge also leaks water. We need a large multi-storey car park. We struggle to park as the Sainsbury's car park is full with food shoppers.26 Yes, a one way traffic system would in my view be very welcome.2728 Didcot people should be fullu involved rather than marginalised. Please don't turn our town into a clone.29 Indoor Bowling (full length) to cater for older citizens. Make sure the proposed 10 pin bowling is of sufficient size. 10 rinks minimum.30

31The management of the present Orchard Centre is inadequate. Problems from Broadway along existing High Street to Hitchcock Way is a 'rat run'. The Local Authority and Police are not helping. Raised bollards would be a good idea to stop traffic.

32

33Cycle routes are important not just for cycles but for prams and disability scooters. These need to be 'real' and not just 'lip service' so that vegetation need cutting back etc or at this planning stage choose easily maintained plants.

34 Please re-open the toilets at Edinburgh Drive Car Park.35 A holistic view of all change proposed for Didcot including increase in houses, roads, schools. Then we can see if this links well with Didcot Town Centre.

36Futre parking must not dominate the new town centre area. Can 'satellite' parking areas be identified at an early stage with safe walking routes? Didcot will attract a large number of shoppers/leisure users from further afield. Traffic management without detering people is essential. Do not forget about the existing Upper Broadway.

37 New competitive pool please.383940

41I live in High Street, what I don't want to see is an increase in traffic along this road it is only a narrow street. Also parking along here is terrible!. More shops - more parked cars, more traffic! There has been several near misses already!

42

I assume this plan is just about the town centre. Very nicely avoiding any planning problems elsewhere in Didcot. Like the power station, proposed incinerator, rubbish dumps that surround us! Also whoever thought that shopping access across Didcot would be a good idea? Unless one parks outside Sainsbury's you might as well not bother going into town and I often don't. Nowhere to 'pop' for groceries etc. It's a major mission to go anywhere now.

43 I would like to add that Sainsburys should not be extended! The town should not be dominated by one retailer that might impace on smaller, and particularly local businesses.

44Try waiting for a bus - finally there are seats - but too low for older people. The awning when raining shoots waste off the edge. Very cold and draughty. Planning for station has anyone displayed latest proposal at the station for public consultation? Or have you got it right this time?

45Also the road system through the centre is severely restricted use but the restrictions are abused and not policed creating a system where seemingly perfectly adequate through routing is availble to those who decide to use it but not to the law abiders

46There is not much detail on how the development will be funded. At the exhibition, it was suggested that there would be no more money from SODC. If this is the case, I think it is very regrettable. the idea that private finance will, by itself, build facilities like bowling alleys is not, I think, realistic.

47I'm concerned at the level of consultation for such a major change to Didcot's town centre. I would, for example, have liked to have seen resident surveys included in the evidence to ensure that this development is supported by current residents.

48There is no mention of considering an approach to Didcot Station from the north. This would avoid those living on the north side of the station(this may increase if the future developments go to the north east)having to travel across town to get to the present entrance to Didcot Parkway.

495051

52

I don't think we need another/alternative library as the one we have is new and fit for purpose. We do need a QUALITY Department store (not more market-type clothes shops). Town Centre housing would have to be thought about carefully - Something smart/contesty/with gardens/for young professionals. Although I understand the need for 'green' issues. There must be enough parking for everyone coming to the town to shop. Presumably the shops in the Lower Broadway would be offered units in the new extended Orchard Centre.

53 I think that it is quite important that the centre is no divided into two by the road (i.e High St).54 We like the idea of sorting out the cycle network around the station.55

56I think SODC are doing an overall good job and have foresight in dealing with issues that people now feel strongly about. I find shopping in Didcot a pleasurable experience and the variety of shops and facilities are exemplary. It gives the option of not going to Reading and Oxford. The bus services (I don't drive) are good and travel to other parts of the country are easily resolved by all the train/bus/coach services available.

Hi I live at 12 Main Road East Hagbourne and was written to recently by Craig Miller as part of the consultation exercise. I am broadly fully supportive of your plans but would wish to make the following observations 1) The plan needs to carefully balance the provision of additional parking that will be necessary, as the existing Orchard Centre car park is at over capacity, with avoiding further spoiling surrounding villages including E Hagbourne who will bear the brunt of the additional car journeys inevitably created by greater town centre activity. 2) East Hagbourne and Main Road in particular (with its wealth of Listed buildings) is used as a "rat run" for cars skirting the South of Didcot due to the absence of a southern perimeter Road. I appreciate plans have been tabled for such a road but no timescales have been given. 3) In order to minimise additional car journeys public transport into the centre, and cycle lanes /cycle parking need dramatic improvement. 4) Rather than adding more remote housing to the West of Didcot which will create additional car use the plan should give priority for high density low cost flats/houses aimed at the young/elderly/key workers in particular within the new development plan area. Development here and in the environs of the station where there is plenty of underutilised land would offer a far more sustainable alternative. I hope the above is helpful Regards ps please alert whoever is responsible for flood risk that the storm drain protecting the Orchard Centre from flash flooding has a dangerous amount of junk in it including currently two shopping trolleys! If we need it I would suggest that its performance would be improved by being cleared on a regular basis

>>> >>> Many thanks for the consultation document. My only comment is that I feel every effort should be made to improve the area immediately outside the station and link this to the town. Concentrating development to the East of the current town centre will move the centre of the CBD further East and further from the station. Could policy be introduced to support higher density mixed use schemes including retail, office and residential in the area between the station and the centre. Regards

I have already completed the online questionnaire but this email is more to comment on the exhibition at Cornerstone which I attended rather than the draft SPD document. Quite in contrast to the document (all 84 pages of it), the exhibition had very little information or content requiring about five minutes to absorb all the material on the posters. I thus did not feel that it gave any visitors much information on the plans for the development of Didcot. In my discussion with Craig Miller I was disappointed to learn that it was unlikely that further SODC funds would be available and that it was hoped that private finance would provide the monies for developing the town, for example for building a bowling alley or a skating rink. The one concern of many residents in the Didcot area is that the current developments to the town centre (including Cornerstone) now provide facilities for the current size of Didcot but far more will be needed if the projected expansion in population goes ahead. It was not clear from the exhibition that either the vision or the resources would be present to provide an infrastructure and centre for the proposed far larger town. I also noted in my response to the questionnaire that the main developments are moving eastwards when the next major housing development is to the west making one think that the development is driven by current land availability rather than a coordinated and coherent development plan. I certainly applaud any efforts to improve the centre of Didcot and think that a lot has been done, including the cinema and Cornerstone, but feel that the exhibition was fairly devoid of constructive plans for the future and that the draft document was only slightly better and still lacking in specific proposals. Yours sincerely

�� !��"��#��"��$��"��$��%��"��&��#�'()*+,+-��"��,.��"�� /�0%)�1

��'��'"�'�2

��

Development & Residential Consulting

Emma Andrews Director Atisreal 90 Chancery Lane London WC2A 1EU

Didcot Project Manager South Oxfordshire District Council Benson Lane Crowmarsh Gifford Wallingford Oxon OX10 8QX

Tel: Fax: E-mail:

020 7338 4462 020 7404 2028 [email protected]

Our ref: EJF/APD/074691/E/001 17 April 2009

Dear Sir/Madam

REPRESENTATIONS TO THE DIDCOT TOWN CENTRE FINAL DRAFT FOR CONSULTATION SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING DOCUMENT (MARCH 2009)

We write on behalf of our client, Travis Perkins plc, to submit representations to the above Document, which sets out South Oxfordshire District Council’s vision for Didcot Town Centre and the strategic development principles that will help shape that vision and guide future development proposals for the Town Centre. We first provide some background information on Travis Perkins and their site at Lower Broadway. We then set out our representations to the Document.

Background to Travis Perkins

Travis Perkins is the UK's leading builders merchant, with over 600 branches nationwide. Travis Perkins also trade under the names of Wickes, Keyline, City Plumbing Supplies, Benchmarx, Tile Giant and CCF, in over 1,200 branches in total. They supply more than 100,000 product lines to trade professionals including:

� building materials;� plumbing;� heating;� landscaping materials;� timber and sheet materials;� painting and decorating;� dry lining and insulation;� tool and equipment hire;� doors and joinery;� bathrooms;� kitchens; and� hand and power tools.

Travis Perkins also provides a wide range of services including the trade-dedicated website, Trademate.

Travis Perkins has been voted National Builders' Merchant of the Year seven times and has also been elected a Business Superbrand; the first company in the merchanting market and still the highest ranked merchant to be honoured.

2

Under the Travis Perkins banner, the company has traded in Didcot town centre for many years and considers itself to be a vital part of the town’s business community.

Background to the site at Lower Broadway

Following the redevelopment of Didcot Town Centre in 2002, our client was subject to a Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO) and was relocated from Station Road to a brand new purpose built premises on Lower Broadway (App Ref: P01/W0742) covering 0.49 hectares (ha). This site was identified at the time as a gateway to Didcot.

As builders’ merchants, Travis Perkins depots are ‘sui generis’. As they do not fall within any specific use class, this can give rise to difficulties in identifying and securing suitable alternative sites.

The Travis Perkins site at Lower Broadway is part of an area covered by Policy DID8 of the South Oxfordshire Local Plan (adopted January 2006), which proposes mixed-use redevelopment for key town centre uses subject to a number of requirements being met. These requirements are:

(i) the existence of sufficient retail capacity in the Didcot area to support the amount of retail floorspace proposed;

(ii) sufficient land and premises being made available elsewhere in Didcot to enable businesses to relocate from their existing premises on the land;

(iii) provision of vehicular accesses from DMH2 (via the access road serving the development proposed in Policy DID6) and from Lower Broadway; and

(iv) the access requirements of pedestrians, cyclists and public transport being accommodated including good footway linkage with the development proposed in Policy DID6 and Broadway.

Our Representations

We set out below our client’s representations to the Didcot Town Centre Supplementary Planning Document Final Draft for Consultation.

1 The Vision, and Aims and Objectives

We do not object in principle to the vision and its aspiration to “…provide a vibrant, dynamic and living heart at the centre of the town”. We note the Council’s aim to promote a mix of uses that work together to create an attractive, vital and viable centre. Under 1.2 Aims and Objectives it is stated that a key objective for the town centre extensions will be a mix of uses – “to bring together a mix of uses, including retail, residential, leisure, commercial and community, to create a vibrant and living centre…”.

We object that the vision does not facilitate a degree of flexibility to include other uses such as trade counter activities. In support of this, we note that the existing Travis Perkins site was developed as a gateway site. We therefore request that trade counter uses be included within the vision and the key objective on the mix of uses.

2 Section 5.1 – Land Uses

This section refers to the differing land uses that are sought to comprise the Town Centre expansion. The Council seek to promote a number of land uses, but there is no reference to the potential for trade counter businesses as part of the expansion. We object to this omission on the basis it predicates the conclusion that Travis Perkins has to relocate as a result of the proposed Town Centre expansion.

3

This section suggests that the loss of existing employment land can be mitigated through the relocation of the industrial and trade counter businesses, on the basis that these businesses will generally be better suited to locations outside the town centre. We do not accept that, Travis Perkins can be treated in the same manner as other employment uses. Nor do we accept that, in principle, Travis Perkins is better suited to an out of centre location. The Company has particular locational requirements that would have to be met if any relocation site were to be identified.

Having only recently relocated to facilitate the Council’s town centre plans and having provided a building specifically in keeping with the Council’s requirement for the standard of development in this location, we consider that our client’s position should be protected within the new vision, rather than be regarded as part of a problem to be resolved.

3 Section 7.3 – Land Assembly

The Travis Perkins is located in an area identified in the ‘Third Element’ of the phasing programme set out at Section 7.4. To ensure these parcels of land are secured for development, the Council state they will be pro-active in assisting to realise the vision in the SPD as quickly as practicable using, if necessary, their compulsory purchase powers.

As stated above, we object in principle to the need to relocate Travis Perkins. However, in the event that this SPD is adopted, we request more detail on the sources of funding that are available and how the remainder is to be secured. Travis Perkins need to plan for the continued growth and success of their business, which it is hard to do when under the threat of compulsory purchase proceedings.

We note that the Council has acknowledged the impact and consequences that the Town Centre expansion will have on existing businesses. However, the SPD states that, where the Council choose to use their compulsory purchase powers, they will “where appropriate, facilitate the relocation of those businesses to suitable land”. We object to this statement because it is ambiguous. We believe that in the event that a CPO is necessary, all businesses should be facilitated with suitable alternative land. We request that this statement is changed to reflect this and, in general, that reference to the provision of “suitable” land for relocated businesses be replicated throughout the Document.

4 Appendix 3

On review of the list of key stakeholders we note that our client has not been listed. We request that our client be added to this list, so that they are consulted on and informed of, any decisions made. Our client’s site is identified within both Figure 4.1, which is an aerial photograph of the study area, and Figure 4.4, which shows one of the buildings on our client’s site.

Conclusion

Our client does not accept that the relocation of the Travis Perkins Depot at Lower Broadway is essential to meet the aims and objectives set out in the SPD. We believe our client’s site would contribute to the mix of uses that will work together to create an attractive and viable town centre.

Our client will therefore resist any proposals to relocate their store. This is particularly the case since they have already recently been relocated to enable earlier phases of the Town Centre expansion. We therefore question the need to move again and request further information on the funding that the Council has secured to enable a CPO progress. We would welcome an opportunity to meet with the Council to discuss further.

We reserve the right to supplement or amend these representations if necessary.

4

We would be grateful if you would acknowledge receipt of these representations. We trust that the above is clear, but should you require any further information please do not hesitate to contact either Emma Andrews (contact details above) or Andrew Deller (020 7338 4462).

Yours faithfully

Atisreal Ltd

CC Peter Webb, Travis Perkins

25 Savile Row London W1S 2ES

T: 020 7851 4010 F: 020 7851 4020

www.turleyassociates.co.uk

B E L F A S T | B I R M I N G H A M | B R IS T O L | E D I N B U R G H | G L A S G O W | L E E D S | L O N D O N | MA N C H E S TE R | S O U T H A MP T O N

��

17 April 2009

Delivered by Email

South Oxfordshire District Council Benson Lane Crowmarsh Gifford Wallingford Oxfordshire OX10 8ED

FAO: Planning Policy Unit

Dear Sir or Madam

DIDCOT TOWN CENTRE SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING DOCUMENT - FINAL DRAFT FOR CONSULTATION

We act on behalf of Sainsbury’s Supermarkets Limited, which currently operates a store in Didcot town centre anchoring the Orchard Centre and therefore has a great interest in the emerging planning policy proposed for the town centre as set out in the draft Supplementary Planning Document and also through the emerging Core Strategy.

The comments that we wish to make on behalf of our client relate to the draft Didcot Town Centre SPD and specifically how this relates to the existing Sainsbury’s store. We understand that this SPD has been prepared following discussions with key stakeholders including Officers, local Members and Hammerson Plc.

Sainsbury’s welcomes the overall vision for the future of Didcot town centre including the Council’s promotion of a town centre that will bring together a mix of uses, including retail, residential, leisure and community uses working together to create an attractive vital and viable centre. Improvements to permeability and accessibility to be brought to the town centre are also welcomed.

We note that a primary aim of the SPD is to create a varied and interesting retail offer to meet the needs of the current and future catchment. This is particularly welcome in the light the significant planning population growth for Didcot identified in the draft South East Plan and also the Council’s recent Retail and Leisure Needs Assessment, which suggests up of 4,124 sq m of convenience floorspace capacity will be available in Didcot in the period up to 2026.

The SPD identifies that parts of the existing town centre need to be remodelled to contribute more effectively to, and to complement, the extended town centre. Specifically, the SPD highlights that the Sainsbury’s store does not provide active frontages and needs to be better integrated with the core of the town centre and, similarly, that the petrol filling station is not an appropriate town centre use and its relocation would be desirable, although likely to be possible only in the longer term. Sainsbury’s would welcome a dialogue with the Council in terms of how these issues may best be resolved but

Our ref: SAIL1534 E: [email protected]

2

welcomes that linkages between the existing town centre and the extended town centre are to be maximised, in particular through the Broadway and Orchard Street, and that there will be improvements to the streetscape to improve the continuity between the two parts of the town centre.

However, we note that the Council envisages the first element of the comprehensive development of the expanded town centre would be the development of part of Sainsbury’s car park alongside Orchard Street. Sainsbury’s would be concerned about any significant reduction in the level of parking given the important role this car park plays not just for store customers but those using the wider town centre, the car park therefore being a key contributor to the vitality of the town centre.

We shall be submitting representations in relation to the South Oxfordshire Core Strategy Preferred Options Consultation in due course, but trust the above points are helpful in the continuing formulation of planning policy for Didcot town centre. We would ask that the Council adds Sainsbury’s Supermarkets Ltd to the list of stakeholders to be consulted on future policy proposals for Didcot town centre.

Should you have any further queries we will be delighted to discuss these with you. Please contact Christopher Turner or Ben Borthwick in the first instance.

Yours faithfully

Not signed, as sent by email only

Ben Borthwick Senior Planner

>>> Jane Jones <[email protected]> 15/04/2009 20:41 >>> sent on behalf of Richard Rowland FGW4579052 [email protected] Dear Craig Thank you for your invitation to comment on the draft SPD for Didcot Town Centre. I am pleased to see that public transport has been carefully considered and achieves prominence in your stated aims. We are also very pleased to note the continued support for the railway and pleased to see that you aim for “good linkages from the surrounding streets and railway station;” It maybe that there is no need to make further explicit reference to rail options, but I note that there is no mention of the station, or links to the railways in the local transport policies set out in Appendix 4. I would also ask you to note in the list of stakeholders that I represent First Great Western. First Great Western Link being a company that has not existed for several years. Thank you again for the opportunity to comment. Yours sincerely Richard Rowland Acting Route Director London & Thames Valley First Great Western First Greater Western Ltd, registered in England and Wales No. 05113773. Registered office, Milford House, 1 Milford Street, Swindon, Wiltshire SN1 1HL

Wm Morrison Supermarkets plc Wm Morrison Supermarkets plc consider that the proposals for an extension to the existing Sainsburys store is not necessarily the best option for Didcot Town Centre. The existing Sainsburys store is quite new and, at some 6,500 sq m is already a significant size. The Retail Study for South Oxfordshire identifies that Didcot is the only centre in South Oxfordshire where there is sufficient residual convenience expenditure available to support a 'major foodstore' of 2,000 sq m or more. Given this finding, it would be more helpful for Didcot to have a second supermarket, providing choice and competition for the existing town centre store. This would also have the benefit of providing a second 'anchor' store within a new area of development. Furthermore, this would also assist in ensuring that car parking problems are not exacerbated close to the existing Sainsburys store. Providing an option where additional convenience floorspace could be provided in a second large supermarket would be in line with the Retail Study which provides background information for the Area Action Plan, and would also give the proposals more flexibility.

Government Office for the South East >>> "Kevin BOWN" <[email protected]> 25/03/09 11:45 >>> Gill, GOSE doesn't normally look at SPDs unless it covers a priority place or subject. Given the importance of the town centre to Didcot's future growth, I've had a look at the SPD. However, unless you would prefer me to write formally I'm happy for you to bear the following in mind but not report them as such. 1) I wasn't clear what the time frame for implementation was. I'm aware that the credit crunch has had an impact, but the SPD should contain a clear timetable, including milestones, such that all parties know what's meant to happen when and by whom. The timetable could also include contingencies in the event that things don't happen according to the original plan. This should help SODC drive the project and engender confidence in the likes of developers of the urban extensions/ investors in town centre businesses etc. 2) In a similar vein, I felt the objectives were a bit bland. Are you able to add some more detail eg the objective is to deliver x sqm of retail floorspace, y sqm of employment, z dwellings etc. The figures do appear elsewhere in the SPD but if added to the objectives would make everything clearer. 3) I'm always keen that docs include x refs to the evidence base that supports them. I feel the SPD needs to be better connected to the evidence that supports it eg via footnote cross refs. 4) Have you engaged HA in the production of this draft? Given their keen interest in all things Didcot, I hope that they will be able to agree either that the TC dev will not impact on the SRN or that appropriate mitigation etc will be part of the dev such that they won't need to object to the SPD/ later applications based upon it. 5) Figs 5.1 & 5.2 - couldn't see any ref to them in the text and wasn't sure what they are showing. 6) Overall the SPD felt a bit vague, so while I'm pleased SODC want to drive the process, I wasn't sure whether the SPD would help as much as it could if it were all a bit SMARTer. Happy to discuss, and if you want me to convert these scribblings into a formal rep, please let me know. Regards Kevin

Didcot SPD

Thames Water Property Services Limited Clearwater Court Vastern Road Reading RG1 8DB T 0118 373 8093 F 0118 373 8009 I www.thames-water.com Registered in England and Wales No. 2606112, Registered office Clearwater Court, Vastern Road, Reading, RG1 8DB.

Didcot Growth Team Thames Water Property Services

South Oxfordshire District Council Benson Lane Crowmarsh Gifford Wallingford OX10 8QX

Your ref Our ref Name Phone Fax E-Mail

SODC DIDCOT SPD LA9SX/8/SPD/Didcot Carmelle Bell 0118 37 38055 0118 37 38009 [email protected]

07 April 2009 South Oxfordshire Didcot Town Centre SPD March 2009. Final Draft. Dear Sir or Madam Thank you for consulting Thames Water regarding the above. We have the following comments to make regarding the document. INTRODUCTION Thames Water is the statutory water and sewerage undertaker for the South Oxfordshire District and are hence a “specific consultation body” in accordance with the Town & Country Planning (Local Development) Regulations 2004. There are many areas of policy review which impact directly on Thames Water’s ability to plan and invest. These comments, as detailed below, reflect these areas of important interest to Thames Water. Statutory water and sewerage undertakers’ investment programmes are based on a 5-year cycle, known as the Asset Management Plan (AMP) process. We are currently in the AMP4 period, which runs from 1st April 2005 to 31st March 2010. As part of our five year business plan review Thames Water advises OFWAT (our regulator) on the funding required to accommodate growth in our networks and at all our treatment works. As a result we base our investment programmes on development plan allocations, which form the clearest picture of the shape of the community, as mentioned in Planning Policy Statement (PPS) 12. We require a three to five year lead in time for provision of the extra capacity. Where a complete new water or sewage treatment works is required the lead in time can be between five to ten years. New development may therefore need to be phased to allow the prior completion of the necessary infrastructure.

Page 2

South Oxfordshire Didcot Town Centre SPD Final Draft 08 04 09

It is essential to ensure that such infrastructure is in place to avoid unacceptable impacts on the environment such as sewage flooding of residential and commercial property, pollution of land and watercourses, and water shortages with associated low-pressure water supply problems. Water and sewerage undertakers also have limited powers under the Water Industry Act to prevent connection ahead of infrastructure upgrades and therefore rely heavily on the planning system to ensure infrastructure is provided ahead of development, either through phasing or the use of Grampian style planning conditions. It is essential that developers demonstrate that adequate capacity exists both on and off the site to serve the development and that it would not lead to problems for existing users. In some circumstances this may make it necessary for developers to carry out appropriate studies to ascertain whether the proposed development will lead to overloading of existing water and sewerage infrastructure. Where there is a capacity problem and no improvements are programmed by the statutory undertaker, then the developer needs to contact the undertaker to agree what improvements are required and how they will be funded prior to any occupation of the development. It is therefore essential that South Oxfordshire’s Local Development Framework (LDF) makes reference to the provision of adequate water and sewerage infrastructure to service all new development to avoid unacceptable impacts on the environment. SPECIFIC COMMENTS Chapter 7. Delivery and Implementation We welcome the reference in paragraph 7.5 that new development should take account of existing and future pressures on utilities and that new development should be accompanied by the necessary infrastructure. We suggest the paragraph is expanded to acknowledge the need for the District and developers to work closely with infrastructure providers.

Page 3

South Oxfordshire Didcot Town Centre SPD Final Draft 08 04 09

I trust our comments will be considered, but please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions or queries. Yours faithfully Carmelle Bell Administrator Planner Thames Water Property Services

SY9-LAN(4/95)

To Craig Miller South Oxfordshire District Council Offices Crowmarsh Gifford Wallingford Oxfordshire OX10 8NJ Your ref: Didcot Town Centre SPD My ref: SODC/37/09 Dear Mr Miller

Re: Didcot Town Centre SPD Thank you for consulting me with the “Supplementary Planning Document, the final draft for consultation”. I have the following comments to make and hope that you will take these comments into consideration when the document is finalised. Page 10 – Aims and Objectives – Mix of uses – there are references to creating a vibrant and living centre throughout the day and into the evening. You should actively consider that the evening’s activities may well develop into a 24 hour economy similar to that in large town and city locations. Planning Policy Statement 6 is concerned with planning for all different sizes of Town Centres (paragraphs 2.19, 2.22, 2.23, 2.24, 2.25, 2.41, 3.22, 3.31, 3.32 and chapter 4 are the relevant sections of PPS6 when considering crime prevention, community safety and night time economy.) Page 10 – Access and Movement – …”And to ensure good accessibility to pedestrian, cycle and public transport.” The term “good” in the above sentence should mean “safe” Page 16 – “create either a covered civic space or accommodation at street level for key town uses that would present active building frontages to Market Place”

i. Please include in the policy document that consultation must take place with the local Crime Prevention Design Advisor (CPDA) when designing Public open spaces especially when they are accessible 24 hrs a day.

ii. Will the frontages be active 24 hrs a day if they are not then as above consultation with the local CPDA must be encouraged.

Page 16 – Redevelopment of 84(a) to 98 and 114-128 Broadway to provide accommodation. If this redevelopment includes homes that are at ground level it is strongly advised that the front doors are “set back” to provide the resident with defensible space to the public realm. Lack of such defensible space often leads to reports of Anti Social Behaviour such as urinating in doorways and knocking on windows.

��Crime Prevention Design Advisor for South Oxford and Oxford City

Thame Police Station Greyhound Lane Thame OXON OX9 3ZD Tel.01491 821542 Date: 3rd April 2009 For ‘Secured by Design’ standards and application forms, visit www.securedbydesign.com

Page 16 – Car parking facilities should achieve the Park Mark Safer Parking Award, and improve parking signage in the town so that it is clear that parking in the centre may be free but you still have to get a ticket. Page 17 – The need to reduce crime - I would recommend that this is extended to read “The need to reduce crime and disorder through environmental design” (section 17 Crime and Disorder Act 1998 and Safer Places document) Page 19 – National Policy – please also reference “Safer Places – The Planning System and Crime Prevention” (companion to PPS1) Page 22 – Leisure and open space – Please ensure that early consultation takes place with the local Crime prevention Design advisor when designing open public spaces and leisure facilities especially free activities such as play parks and youth shelters. We want to avoid clashes of facilities that may be provided for the immediate community but is used by visitors to the centre as public facilities, when they are not designed for a multi use purpose. Page 22 – Socio-economic details – “potential areas of improvement include improving offer for the young people.” What is “improving offer” Page 31 - Land uses - Principal uses – Please include in this list “24hr economy” Page 31 - Retail – PPS6 please see paragraphs referenced above (comments made for page 10) as these deal with crime and anti social behaviour in the town centres. Page 34 - Residential – Recommend that all properties meet the security requirements set out in Secured by Design Part 2. Page 37 – Urban Design and Architecture – “good urban design and place making……..” Please also include in this section Safer Places – The Planning System and Crime Prevention” This document is a companion to PPS1 and promotes safe, sustainable and attractive environments that meet the full set of planning objectives. The seven attributes being: Access and Movement, Structure, Surveillance, Ownership, Physical protection, Activity, Management and Maintenance Page 38 – Public Realm, Open Space and Landscaping – Street furniture should incorporate design features that reduce opportunities for inappropriate use by wheeled sports, or rough sleeping. Page 38 – Safety and Security – Please include in this that early consultation with the local Crime Prevention Design Advisor is encouraged. Yours sincerely

��Crime Prevention Design Advisor for Oxford City and South Oxfordshire.

“Crime prevention advice is given free without the intention of creating a contract. Neither do the Home Office nor the Police Service take any legal responsibility for the advice given.”

Contaminated Land Officer >>> Darren Detheridge 30/03/2009 11:13 >>> Craig Thank you for consulting me on the SPD for Didcot Town Centre. The area outlined in this SPD has experienced industrial use and land contamination may be a result of this use. Whilst the requirement for the relevant contaminated land planning conditions for developments on former industrial land is well known, the need to consider this matter at an earlier stage is often not. I would therefore advise that contamination is considered at the design stage so that where possible, less sensitive parts of the development could be placed on any land that is contaminated. Considering contamination at an early stage of the design may well help improve the sustainability of the regeneration in this area by avoiding the need for remediation in areas where design could mitigate the risks. Assessing the risk from contamination can be a timely process and I would advise that this matter is addressed at the earliest possible time to avoid future delays in the project. I shall be available to review any contamination reports for this development but would ask that when a developer is selected for any of this development that they contact this department to discuss their contaminated land investigation proposals before any works are undertaken. This would ensure that the proposed works are acceptable and reduce the need for repeating the work. Should you or anyone else need any advice on this matter then please do not hesitate to contact me. Many thanks Darren Detheridge Contaminated Land Officer Environmental Health Health and Housing Direct Phone 01491 823244 Fax 01491 823201 Email: [email protected] Environmental Health Administration Team 01491 823203 Switchboard 01491 823000 South Oxfordshire District Council Benson Lane Crowmarsh Gifford WALLINGFORD Oxon OX10 8NL

1

DIDCOT TOWN COUNCIL RESPONSE TO

DIDCOT TOWN CENTRE – SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING DOCUMENT

General Welcome the plans for further development of the Town Centre and statements of the significance of Didcot’s growth. Concern that the study area includes White Leys Close, a recent area of housing, and the effect that inclusion may have on the residents. Parking provision should be safe, adequate and well lit. Retail should also include the provision of small size units for the local and individual trader. We agree with the Sustainability Appraisal Framework. A reference to “Ladygrove Brook or Ditch located to the east of Orchard Street” is incorrect. Ladygrove Brook is on Ladygrove running from the bottom of Hadden Hill Westward. The water course referred to is unnamed and was created recently as part of the Orchard Centre works. Desire that an integrated public transport system in Didcot must continue to require all buses to stop at Didcot Parkway and the Orchard Centre. There must be a greater sensitivity to the needs of vulnerable users of buses within Didcot and from the rural hinterland. We particularly require that bus shelters with seating are provided as this was omitted in the Orchard Centre planning and took years to amend. We welcome the early recognition that Compulsory Purchase Orders may well be needed.

2

Specific Comments on the Main Document We agree with the vision (p6) We note that the South Central Oxfordshire Transport Strategy is included as part of the Evidence Base (p21) but is still only in draft form and out for consultation. We note the issue of air quality (p22) and ask that proper monitoring takes place as Didcot develops so that any deterioration, particularly for residents on lower Broadway is managed effectively. The reference to Cow Lane Tunnel (p22) should be omitted; it is not mentioned in the South Central Oxfordshire Transport Strategy which is currently out for consultation. The Millbrook Housing Development referred to on p25 does not exist, this is actually the Fleet Meadow area. The historic significance of 74 and 76 Station Road in part of a conservation area requires that they must be retained (to be amended from “should be retained”.) (p28) We do not agree with the petrol filling station comment on p28. Welcome the suggestion (p34) that a hotel is planned and welcome the planned provision of lifetime homes (p35) The reference on p37 to linkages between the town centre and the surrounding countryside is incongruous. We welcome proposals for softening the streetscape (p38) and the provision of public art. We welcome (p43) consideration for daylight and sunlight into the phase 2 proposals. Windy, cold urban canyons are unwelcoming. Sensitivity to the existing Northbourne conservation area is essential. Proposals for traffic calming on Hitchcock Way are at odds with a later paragraph on p46 that stresses the road’s function as an access and relief road. This reflects its essential purpose. We wish to see traffic calming proposals deleted. Dominic Stapleton Town Clerk 9th April 2009

�

Steve Howell – Head of Transport Chris Cousins - Head of Sustainable Development

Speedwell House

Craig Miller Didcot Project Manager South Oxfordshire District Council

Speedwell Street Oxford OX1 1NE Tel: 01865 815700 Fax: 01865 815085 17 April 2009

Direct line: 01865 815046

Please ask for: Miss Tamsin Atley e-mail: [email protected]

Dear Craig, Didcot Town Centre Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) Final Draft for Consultation, March 2009 Thank you for consulting the County Council on this document. We have also welcomed having the opportunity to participate in the Project Board for the town centre. We generally support the proposals in the draft SPD, which will help to provide shopping and other facilities appropriate to the role of Didcot, matching its growth as envisaged by Structure Plan/Regional Spatial Strategy. However, we do have various comments to make some of which are set out below, whilst more detailed and technical comments are in Annex 1 and comments on the Sustainability Appraisal of the SPD are in Annex 2. Public Transport We are concerned that the Access & Movement Section (P36) is not clear on how it would like to see the current bus only link between Broadway and Hitchcock Way developed, which also comprises the bus stopping area for the centre. We do not think we would want either this road to be pedestrianised or fully opened up to traffic, if this is what the SPD is envisaging then we would like to have some discussion about its consequences for public transport first. What is intended then needs to be stated explicitly. We would be keen to retain and improve the current bus stopping facilities in the High Street area of Didcot, we see buses playing an important role in linking nearby towns and villages with Didcot town centre, and that with expansion of Didcot's housing by over 8000 homes and the projected increase in the town centre's popularity following this redevelopment will mean that buses will have an even more important role to play in providing sustainable transport. Didcot has rail links to Oxford & Reading but public

__

__

transport links to Wantage, Abingdon, Wallingford and several smaller surrounding communities are only currently provided by local bus services. All bus routes currently pass through the High Street in one direction or another and the stops are well used because of their convenient location to the shops including the Sainsbury’s supermarket. Relocation away from this area will result in buses being less convenient for these public transport users and less desirable. We are keen to see that buses are not relegated to side streets. We do not feel that even with the predicted increase in bus flows, that the retention of bus stops in this area needs to have a detrimental effect on the appearance or quality of this area. We are also unhappy about bus routes being extended via Broadway to Hitchcock Way via the Jubilee Way roundabout; this is a busy traffic route through Didcot and can be extremely congested at periods. Currently most of the buses are able to avoid the roundabout and traffic queues by using the bus link road to pass from Broadway towards the station. On street bus stops at the Broadway currently exist but do not provide enough capacity for significant future expansion of bus services linked to the Didcot South West development. These facilities are also frequently abused by motorists stopping on bus stops to call into shops on the Broadway, and shared use facilities on Hitchcock Way are also likely to be abused in a similar way. We would like to continue to work with you to ensure that we manage the balance of quality pedestrianised areas, bus routing and stops. Consideration also needs to be made to providing quality public transport infrastructure from the beginning of the redevelopment. The current bus facilities in the High Street are not particularly well designed and make level boarding on buses difficult because buses find it difficult to pull into the kerb at a straight angle. We would wish the developer to provide quality bus stops in this area, together with places to display bus information. The existing stops do not have such facilities and therefore information displays look rather ungainly. We are concerned that without a bus link along a similar alignment to the current arrangement, many buses would simply not serve the Town Centre, and would terminate at the Rail Station. During the morning and afternoon peak periods, buses in the Didcot area are primarily used for journeys to and from work and education, and to connect with trains. At these times, buses from the rail station to the western residential areas, and to Harwell/Milton Park will take the shorter route, avoiding the congested longer route via Hitchcock Way and the Broadway. Currently, all buses in Didcot serve both the Town Centre and the Rail Station. The provision of any new bus stops on the northern side of Hitchcock Way would be perceived as remote from the Town Centre, on the wrong side of a busy road. The existing bus stops in the Broadway serve a different part of the Town Centre, and these should be retained and enhanced, suitably protected from encroaching parking and loading activities. The proposal is likely to result in increased movements into and around the town centre. Therefore, it must ensure that as many of these journeys as possible are by green modes of transport.

We are concerned that the Master Plan and Long Term Plan retain traffic on Station Road between Hitchcock Way and Broadway effectively severing the Orchard Centre from the Development Area for pedestrians. Community Buildings As recognised within the SPD, the County Council needs “an enlarged, enhanced and relocated public library within the retail area, with the possible inclusion of other community facilities”. The library needs to be in a visible location in the new centre, adjacent to retail in a high footfall area. Nearby parking and good public transport links are also important (further requirements for the library are detailed below). As stated previously we would need library floorspace (including backroom space) of 27.5 sqm per 1000 population. We would also need access via a service area and space for daily van deliveries and mobile libraries (garaging and access to the library – please see information in Annex 2). Co-located services will require additional floorspace and may need additional servicing and delivery areas. The uses that it would be beneficial to co-locate in the same building as the library include:

o Adult Learning – a “Shopfront” adult learning centre in shared premises with the library, would have the additional benefit of being easily accessible to passers-by, including those who would be deterred from going onto a school site. Teaching areas, refreshment areas, office space, etc could also be co-located with the library.

o A Safe Place to Be (area for secondary pupils for after school) We would like to explore the provision of a Safe Place to Be area for secondary pupils after school hours, possibly co-located with the library. This is likely to include ICT access, study support / homework opportunity and chill-out zone.

Other County Council social and community services need sites within Didcot (some needing a location in the town centre or civic area). If these can not be provided in an alternative suitable location we may need them to be provided in the new town centre extension and therefore the section on Community & Leisure Facilities on p34 needs to be reworded to allow for this possibility. County Council services that may need sites within Didcot include Registration Service (currently co-located in the existing library building), Learning Disabilities Day Centre and Carers service. There is also a need for housing for adults with physical disabilities and older people to be provided as part of the affordable housing within the extended town centre. The new residential element will generate a need for additional school places. Appropriate contributions will need to be sought as part of any planning applications. The County Council will need to build the requirements arising from residential development into education requirements for Didcot as a whole. We will need to provide you with a picture of the wider needs. Drainage In general, the SPD and accompanying SA do not push SUDS clearly enough, especially since the document talks a lot about Sustainability. As the County is clearly

encouraging SUDS on all developments (whether roads, car parking areas, drives, etc) and the documents could have been more proactive towards SUDS. Please can the SPD be amended to show a stronger commitment to ensuring that SUDS are delivered as an integral part of the proposals for the expanded town centre. I hope these comments are useful, please contact me if you have any queries or require any further information at this stage Yours sincerely Tamsin Atley Planning Officer Strategic Planning Consultations

Annex 2 – Detailed/Technical Comments General p17 some text missing from the paragraph regarding the Community Safety Strategy “engaging and supporting communities and other actions” that was in draft. Library Current library building comprises the library, the registry office, an adult learning office and rented space occupied at present by Homestart, an organisation in receipt of grant funding from OCC. It is thought that the other functions in the building would need to be accommodated on the existing site or elsewhere in the town centre e.g. Connexions service. They could probably form part of the service mix in a new development in the town centre with a new library. Existing library has 956sq m of useable floorspace. Currently 6 staff members (plus staff for other shared uses). The relocated library must be in the new town centre, as it needs the footfall from retail (also benefits for retail from increased footfall of library users). The library needs to have good access for deliveries (heavy items, so need parking close to the building) and the public, parking and public transport. The site itself would need to provide adequate servicing arrangements, in order to accommodate daily deliveries in a way that is not obstructive. Based on the model being developed for Bicester this could mean sharing service space with retail outlets. Ideally require ground floor space and/or space on ground and first floor, but recognise that this is in competition with retail space and therefore would consider first floor space (again as in the model being developed for Bicester or the new High Wycombe Library in a new shopping centre). We would consider shared space with other providers. Depending on the provider this is likely to be a bonus. However, the Library Service would not want to sacrifice location for shared premises, as location and visibility are such significant factors in library use. In terms of building use in this regard they would be looking for a properly integrated interior design and preferably still ground floor space. It should be noted in this context that office space is not necessarily synonymous with library space, as the latter requires significantly greater ceiling heights. Good to have proximity to arts facilities, adult learning, youth facilities and sports facilities e.g. in Banbury model. Mobile Libraries Ideally we would need space to garage two mobile libraries in Didcot, with access to the library. It is possible that they could be accommodated elsewhere in the town, but our experience is that such accommodation is very hard to find. We are assuming that the existing building would be sold, even if it were possible to retain the garages the mobile libraries would still need easy access to the library e.g. via a service area.

Each garage needs separate access via a dedicated roller shutter door, electrically operated. Ideally it should be possible to enter and leave the garage from either end for safety purposes in order to cut out reversing operations completely. Each bay would need to be a minimum of 9 metres long with an absolute minimum opening of 3 metres, leaving a 1 metre minimum gap between the vehicles when parked. There needs to be a double electric socket available to both bays with a 16amp feed in addition if at all possible. An internal cold water supply for a hose is also required. Should the vehicles need to be garaged elsewhere, then similar sized parking areas in the service area would be required along with sufficient space for manoeuvring. Ideally, this area could be used for deliveries to the library also with flat access to the building as first choice or ramp up as a last resort. Registration Service There is currently one Registrar and they would need an additional one to cope with future growth of Didcot. This would require an additional office of approx 20sq M and possibly additional storage space approximately 3.2 sq M Minimum requirements are as existing: 1 large marriage room,. 1 waiting room. 1 office with a walk in safe. Shared kitchen facilities with other services on the same floor. With increased population there would be an increase in storage requirements and strong room size (or additional one?). Registers are kept in Oxford at the moment. Therefore, there would be an impact on Oxford, however this will hopefully be built into the planned refurbishment of the Oxford office or new premises when a decision is made. Although the registration service could operate from within a shopping complex (it has done in the past West Gate) this would not be a popular option, especially for wedding ceremonies. Similarly the registration of births and deaths could take place at a separate location from wedding ceremonies but again this would not be popular or cost effective, as appointments would be lost while Registrars moved from one location to another as well as travel costs. The Registration service could operate from a shared building with the majority of other services providing it has the basic requirements as previously listed. Adult Learning In order to meet the requirements of the Equality & Diversity agenda, it is essential that the centre is accessible to all members of the local community. ‘Shopfront' adult learning centre, in shared premises with the Library, would have the additional benefit of being easily accessible to passers-by, including those who would be deterred from going on a school site. Occupy an office space, 44.6sqm, in Didcot Library, and run a few courses in the Library’s first floor ICT suite area. Other courses are delivered from a variety of hired venues and St Birinus School. The current provision must be improved, it is currently around 240 sqm less than required. There is no dedicated teaching space or a meeting room in which to hold confidential interviews with prospective students.

The service would need provision including: o An ICT training suite/classroom with x14 workstations. o An art & crafts room with sink o Hall (or room with a suspended floor) o Refreshments area o Office space o Interview/meeting room o Storage space o Toilet facilities including disabled. o Possibly some car parking.

Required floorspace = approx 285 sqm. Apart from the office space, all accommodation should ideally be at ground floor level or with good access by lift. Much potential for shared or multi-functional space with the Library Service, including all the teaching areas (ICT/Classroom; Art & Crafts room; Hall), meeting room, refreshments area and toilet facilities. ‘Shopfront' adult learning centre, in shared premises with the Library, would have the additional benefit of being easily accessible to passers-by, including those who would be deterred from going on a school site Carers Services This is currently in a poor location and may benefit from a more central location. Learning Disabilities Day Services The existing provision for learning disabilities day services is a house at Kinneston Road, which is outside the town centre and is not suitable for many clients who also have physical disabilities. The house is owned by the County Council. We would like to replace this with new expanded facilities as part of a joint-use community facility, such as a community centre or library, within the town centre. Taking account of planned future housing growth at Didcot, we would need three group rooms with capacity for 20 people, and one smaller room for up to 10 people, all to have full disabled access. The facility would also need access to a small kitchen and a disabled toilet, dedicated changing area for people with a physical disability, a sensory room and a dedicated kitchen area. There is a need for new expanded facilities, as part of a joint-use community facility, such as a community centre or library, within the town centre. Youth Support Work Youth Support work will be centred on the existing ‘Vibe’ centre and contributions would be required towards further development of this facility. Extra Care Housing The SPD makes reference to the ‘provision of adequate affordable housing for people with disabilities and older people’, but makes no reference to extra care housing (ECH). Please can you add the following wording to the end of the reference to older persons housing: "…including extra care housing to meet the needs of an increasingly ageing population". We estimate that there is a demand in Didcot for 35 ECH places now rising to 60 places required by 2029 (based on 55 ECH places/flats

per 1,000 people aged 75 plus). Our preference would be for a town centre location for the ECH. We would expect the ECH to be massed in a block, normally a 40 flat scheme requires 1 acre sized site which means a block is required. ECH would ideally be mixed tenure and subject to normal affordable housing policy, so likely to have 40% affordable. Please include reference to “A Framework for an Oxfordshire Extra Care Housing Strategy”, January 2008, in Appendix 2, it can be viewed via this link: http://www.oxfordshire.gov.uk/plink/publicsite/aboutyourcouncil/W/Internet/About+your+council/Managers+staff+and+departments/Social+and+Community+Services/AYC+-+MSD+-+SCS+-+extra+care+strategy Housing for people with disabilities On p35 the text states that 40% of homes will be affordable housing and that 10% of homes would meet the lifetime homes standard. However, this does not necessarily ensure adequate affordable housing provision for people with disabilities and older people, which must be provided in addition to lifetime homes. Promoting independence for people with physical disabilities is greatly facilitated by well planned and accessible town centre locations. Adults can access services directly, with minimal support or transport needs eg to leisure services, GP surgeries, community activities and sometimes employment. Parents with disabilities can also access local schools more easily, allowing them to maintain a parenting role. Drainage Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems are:

• Not mentioned in vision • Mentioned slightly in 5.7 • No mention of SUDS in the development side on house parking / driveways • No mention in all new estate roads / pedestrian areas • Mentioned in Policy EP5 on Flood Risk • Mentioned in Policy EP6 Surface Water Protection

Transport P16 – under policy DID8 -3rd bullet point is confusing, please replace the whole bullet point with: “provision of vehicular accesses from DMH2 (via the access road servicing the proposed development in DID6) and from Lower Broadway” (this is taken directly from the Local Plan 2011). P17 – we suggest you explain what stage the Core Strategy is at and when consultations are taking place. P21 – 3.2 – 9th bullet point should say: “Southern Central Oxfordshire Transport Strategy (SCOTS)”.

P22 Socio - economic growth - Potential areas of improvement include "improving roads and traffic", we suggest that this is changed to "improving transport particularly green modes which reduce pressure on local roads" P27/28/29 – the County Council would like further information on displaced businesses and the locations they would be moved to please, as this could impact the network elsewhere. P32 – it is not clear if the extended routes are for pedestrians, bus or all vehicles on these plans. A general comment is the plans should be cleared to show exactly where SDOC envisage pedestrians, cyclists and vehicle (case in point Cow Lane is shown as an existing route – however the northbound route here is only pedestrian/cycle with vehicles moving south, the other link under the railway is only pedestrian/cycles). P35 Parking provision – this documents states that approx. 2,000 car parking spaces are required – is this in total or in addition to provision already there (if in addition, what would the total be)? P35 – Table. The second are third column are confusing. We think that the 2nd column should be residential and the third column should be retail. P36 – 5.3 1st paragraph, please amend to “Southern Central Oxfordshire Transport” Strategy. P51 – 7.7 OCC would seek contributions towards any development (not just residential) that would increase trip rates in the area. The document is not at all clear on the future status of the bus-only link through the Town Centre. Section 2.2 Promotion of a sustainable transport strategy should make some

reference to policies to promote bus services. (South Oxfordshire Local Plan Policy T4)

“Planning permission will be granted for proposals which improve public transport facilities in order to reduce reliance on car-based travel. This will include, where appropriate, the provision of suitable interchange facilities between public transport services and between different modes of transport such as car, bus, rail, taxis, cycling and walking provided that there are no significant adverse effects on the environment or amenities of residents.”

SODC policy T4 should also appear on page 79, in section 8 of the Local Plan Policies. Policy DID6 (xii) on page 80 refers to the requirement for the site to contain a public transport (bus) interchange and bus-only road between the Broadway and the SMH2 link road. The public transport team are concerned as to whether this will remain being implemented without the policy remaining in place. The final paragraph of

page 15 states that this policy no longer forms part of the Local Plan. Section 6.2 refers to the need to re-model parts of the existing town centre, but the continued requirement, and improvement of the bus link is not referred to. It is considered that there should be more explicit reference within the text of section 6.2 to the need for a (re-shaped) bus-only facility within the Town Centre, on an alignment connecting Hitchcock Way and the Broadway, along with passenger waiting facilities appropriate to an expanding Town Centre. With continued population and employment growth in the Didcot area, there will be a requirement for more bus services, and ideally these buses would serve both the railway station and the town centre. Much of existing Didcot is within walking distance of the Town Centre, but expansion to the West (Great Western Park, and possible sites beyond) will require much more bus-based transport. Indeed, the agreed section 106 arrangements for Great Western Park provides for an additional four buses per hour between the residential area and the Town Centre. Similarly, employment growth at Harwell and Milton Park will also generate additional bus journeys. The existing bus-link is poorly designed, with a convoluted layout, dysfunctional passenger facilities (generating many complaints) and harsh traffic calming features. This arrangement could be simplified and improved to fulfill its purpose as the key location for bus users wishing to access the retail core of the Town Centre. Arguably, the rail station fulfils the main ‘interchange’ function in Didcot, and the ‘bus-link’ stops should be re-designed to fulfill the Town Centre function only, on through routes from residential areas, employment areas, villages and other towns to the Rail Station, and vice versa. We would expect the developer to provide improved bus stopping facilities. The bus link should be re-designed to cope with a future bus flow of (say) 20 buses per hour in each direction. It is suggested that two independent bus stops in each direction should be provided, to the standards detailed in the Oxfordshire County Council Bus Stop design guide, without buses blocking each other. Passenger facilities should include generous and effective shelter provision, with some seating and real-time information screens. The detailed design of Town Centre bus facilities (link-road layout, stop layouts, shelters, real-time information) should be agreed with the Public Transport Development team at Oxfordshire County Council (last two paragraphs of section 5.3). Section 1.6 - Context: The text “M40 Junction 7, 13 miles 30 minutes” implies that A329 is a suitable route for M40 bound traffic. Please reword this paragraph as follows: "Didcot historically formed and grew from its strategic location on both the London to Bristol and South Coast to Manchester main line railways. It lies 14 miles south of Oxford and 20 miles north west of Reading. It has excellent road links via A34 only 2 miles to the west and hence to both M4 to the south and M40 to the north."

Under “Socio –economic details of Didcot” on page 22: Potential areas of improvement include "improving roads and traffic" this would be better reworded as "improving transport particularly green modes which reduce pressure on local roads" Under “Air Quality” on page 22 - "Additional development generated traffic will accelerate..." We suggest you add the underlined words and delete "may". 6.7 Hitchcock Way Under the first bullet point, please replace "traffic calming" (which many people will assume to be road humps) and add "better crossing facilities" or similar. I think in the public mind traffic calming = humps and for this street road humps would be totally inappropriate as it is a strategic traffic street. Improved crossing facilities for pedestrians is a potential improvement we could sign up to.

In this paragraph on page 28, please remove all of the first sentence in the paragraph below after "node" and up to "road layout" add "with" to connect to rest of sentence:

P60, please reword the reference to “OCC- Southern Central Oxfordshire Transport Strategy” P63/64 – OCC requested that SUSTRANS be consulted directly – they do not appear on the list of key stakeholders – have they been consulted? Text in green is replacement text that we suggest should be inserted: P22 – Transport in South Oxfordshire – 1st line should read Southern Central Oxfordshire Transport Strategy (SCOTS) Please can the whole section be re-worded to the following:

“The Southern Central Oxfordshire Transport Strategy (SCOTS) seeks to Improve access to key services; Improve the actual and perceived safety of travel; Improve connectivity within the Study and wider area, to enable the efficient and reliable movement of people; To minimise the impact of traffic

related to the housing development on the local and strategic routeing of freight; Reduce the contribution of transport to greenhouse gas emissions; and Consider the impact of transport on the local environment. The vision for Didcot, as set out in the Didcot Integrated Transport Strategy phase 1 (2004), is that Didcot ‘will be an attractive and pleasant place to live and work and an important employment and retail centre’. Regard should be had to the impact of proposed alterations to traffic management arrangements through the Cow Lane Tunnel on the surrounding highway network.”

P34/35 Following previous conversations OCC believe that there would be 300 residential units in Didcot town centre, yet these figures show up to 450 units, is this correct? Developer Funding Team Under Para 7.7 Planning Obligations, please insert the following under further examples:

− Education contributions − Libraries − Museum Resources − Social and Community Infrastructure

We question whether the first item in the list (“Delivery of an agreed plan for the relocation of existing service trades”) should be in this place, or whether it is better suited to Delivery & Implementation say Para 7.1 Rights of Way

1) Support last paragraph of Access & Movement s5.3 (p.37) “Proposals should provide for linkages between the town centre and the surrounding countryside in order to promote healthy living. These should cross-refer to the Didcot Greenspace Network – Feasibility Study.” They could possibly add “and meet the aims of the Oxfordshire Rights of Way Improvement Plan” at the end,.

2) Support Planning Obligations inclusion of rights of way in para 7.7 (p51)

Property Please note that if the library relocates to a new location, the existing site will be available for redevelopment.

Annex 2 – Sustainability Appraisal (SA) Comments Drainage

• Suds only mentioned on page 27 in table 11 under flood risk • Nothing in 5.5 Key Considerations • Nothing in Key Indicators of Improvement • Nothing in 6.0 Conclusion

Lack of mention of SUDS in all areas: Roads, Houses, Public Areas and materials used. Transport We disagree with the following statement in the SA. Generated traffic has negative impacts of congestion, noise, severance and pollution:

We consider that the following section should be stronger. Replace recommended with essential and add “and implemented before each key phase goes live” at the end of that sentence:

We have the same comment on this statement as in Annex 2 for SPD context (Para. 1.6 in the SPD), where the document reads "Didcot has excellent road links via A34 only 2 miles to the west and hence to both M4 to the south and M40 to the north.":

We strongly disagree with Table 4 that more development has positive impacts on travel choice and accessibility for reasons previously outlined. Proposed developments are all strong traffic generators and have negative impacts.

In general, it seems that the document is rather repetitive and could be more concise, which would minimising paper use when it is published.

��

��

SOP is grateful for the opportunity to comment on the draft SPD for Didcot town centre. We welcome the draft document, which supports a number of the priorities and aims in the ‘Your place, your future; the sustainable community strategy for South Oxfordshire’, and particularly the SCS aims for the economy, safer communities and housing. Our specific comments are set out below and we have linked these to the relevant SPD objectives set out on page 12 of the consultation document. Mix of uses

We welcome the proposals to deliver this objective, which support aims across all of the themes within the SCS. Where possible, we would encourage greater emphasis upon providing space for community use, and to support voluntary, community and faith organisations in making their contribution to the vibrancy of the centre. Public realm/building quality/civic pride

We would encourage careful consideration of the provision of a landmark building that would help to deliver these objectives in terms of its high architectural standards, its potential to provide a public and community space and a source of civic pride, and its role in attracting local people and visitors to the town centre. Right Reverend Colin Fletcher, Bishop of Dorchester Chairman,

�

�

�

��RE: Didcot Town Centre Draft Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) and Didcot Town Centre Sustainability Appraisal (SA) �� !� ��"�� #��$$�� #��!��!� �� #� ��!!� ��!��"��Didcot Town Draft SPD %� ��!!� ��& �� !!� ��$�� '�$$�!� ��(� � ��!� ��)'(�*�� # �� $!� �� !� ��"�+�#� ��#��%��!$�� !$�� $�� $�� $��# �� #��$��!�� "��$�� ,$� �� #"�� '�� !� �� - �� '��#�� '(�� "�.��#��#��!��$� ��'��&,��/��&$� �'$��'$�� 0�� '�� 1��2� �� !��#�� '��&,��3�� "�� $!� ��4��!��!�5��6�� !�'$��.��3� �� )'.3*�� '��'$��'�� - ��)'''-*"��

Date: 16th April 2009 Our ref: PP2.2.2 Your ref: DTC-SPD-Stat

Mr Craig Miller Didcot Project Manager South Oxfordshire District Council Benson Lane Crowmarsh Gifford Wallingford OX10 8QX

Block A, Room 107 Coley Park Coley Avenue Reading RG1 6DT T 01189 392398 F 01189 392346

3� �� $�� $�$�� !$� �� #�� !��$��$�� !�� "��# �3� ��#�� !��6��,��# �.��&�� 7��).&�7*"�.��#��#��.&�7�� %� �� !� �� 8�� $�� $�� "��'�� 9��3�� 0��6��.��)30&6*��8�� ,�� $��!� �� .&�7��$�� $��$��.&�7��#�� "�� #��#�� #��$��8�� :��!� �"��.��#�� $!� ��#�� .&�7�� !$�� .&�7��$�� !��!�� $$��$�� $!� �� :�� "��6��!!� ��3�� .&�7�3� �� 7��"�� !� �� (� � ��(��'��!� ��#�� $��$��"4�� (��"��!� ��$��7��%� �� !� �� $� � �� $� � ��$��$�� $� � ��!"��%�� $��6�� 8�� '(�� #��#��!��!�� $$�� "�� #��# �� !$�� !� �� ,�� $� ��$�� !��8�� !� ��!� �� #��$��!�� $�� !� �!� ��$��$�� #��"��- �� !!� ��#� �;�

��!�� '��&,��/��&$� �'$��'$�� 0�� '��#��#�� #��((%�1�� "�6��#��#�� .�%'��'�� 0��0�$��"��9<;�� )��9*�#�� !�= ��#��$�� # �� "��-��!$�� !�� $$�� $!� �� # �� $�� $$�� !$�� !� ��"��>��!��$�� /��!!� �� $� ��'��&,��/��&$� �'$��'$�� 0�� '��!� �"��6��!!� �� $��#�� <��!��)�� !� ��/�#��*��!�?�� #�� !��!�?�� #�� 9�

��!��!�� 9��#�� !��!�"�� $� ��$�� $�� $!� ��$��$��$��"��6�� #�� #��$�� $�� !� �� !$�� $��#��$��$�� $��!��$�� "�

�� $��.�� #�� !��#�� $� ��$��$�� !!� �� "�� #�� =#�� $��$��!�� :�� !� �"��.�� 7-%�5��>� �/��3�� '$��$��!!�� $�� !��#� �� #�� !� �"��.��$��:��!��=8�� !� ��;�

�• +�� $��$�� "�• 0�� #�� $$�� #�� "�• '�� #��$��$�� :��!� �"�� !��#�� !��;=��•� 3�!!� ��#�� $��$�� "�•� �� "�•� 6��!� ��#�=!� �� #��=��$��"��

.��#�� $��:�� !!� �� "��$��#�� $��:��!�� !�� @�� !� ��$�� "�

-��!�� !��$��$�� :��$��#��,�� #�� !� ��A�$��$�� :�� $�� #��$$�� "�� #��$�� $�#�� $�� "�� '��+��6��#�� <��B91�� +��"6��C �� "��"��"��(�� +�� !�� #�� '�� $�� "��.�� !� ��(��<B�A�� #��!�� $$�� !$�� $�� # �3� ��"�+�#� �� #��#��!�� $��#�� # �� #�� # �� $��# �� "�%�� #�� #�� #��$�� !$�� = ��$�� !�� !�� $��"��#�� #��#��!� ��"��

(��0��!�&$� �'$�� 5� ��$� ��(��<��A�� #��!�� !$�� !� ��# �3� ��"�+�#� �� #��#��!��,$� �� $�� #�� !��$�� "��>��,�!$��!�� $�� # �� $!� �� !�� /��7�� .�� (� ��:�� "�� #��#��!��!� �� #��!�� $�� #��# �� /�� $!� �"�3�!�� $�� !�� !�� !� ��!��#��!�� $�� #��$$��"�� !� �� # �� !� �"�%�� !�� !� �� !$�� 8�� #��#��"�- ��!�� $$��!!� ��$� �� #��"�D ��!��!�� #�� !�� !� ��"�+�#� ��#=��#� �� !� ��$��!�� $$�� !��#�=��!� =!��!��8��$�� "�5�#�!�� $�� !�� 7�� /�� $� ��"�

6��#� ��$�� $�� $��!$�� #�� $� "�'�� !�� !� �� $� �� "�(� �� $��#�� $��$��"��#��!�,�!��$�� "�'��$� ��!��!�� " Didcot Town Centre Sustainability Appraisal E��'��(�� $�� !��!� �� !$��!� ��!�� $!� �"�+�#� �� !�� 8�� '(�"��!!� ��#�� !�� $� �� !�� $�� $�� :�� $�� $!� ��$��$��#��!��8�� !�� $� ��$��!!��#��:�� #��!�� !� �"��-��$�� !�� $��"��-�� 8�� $� ��$�� !�"��F��

�� %� �� !� ��!�� !��

Environment Agency Red Kite House, Howberry Park, Oxon, Wallingford, OX10 8BD. Customer services line: 08708 506 506 Email: [email protected] www.environment-agency.gov.uk End

Didcot Growth Team South Oxfordshire District Council Benson Lane Crowmarsh Gifford Wallingford OX10 8QX

Our ref: WA/2006/000324/SD-02/IS1-L01 Your ref: Date: 17 April 2009

Dear Sir/Madam Didcot Town Centre Draft Supplementary Planning Document Thank you for consulting us on this SPD. We support section 5.7 in seeking sustainable design from new development in this central location, and use of sustainable drainage systems. We are satisfied that other environmental matters are covered by national planning policy or will be addressed in the Core Strategy, and therefore do not need repetition here. Yours faithfully Miss Emily Dartnall Planning Liaison Officer Direct dial 01491 828344 Direct fax 01491 828302 Direct e-mail [email protected]

Craig Miller Didcot Project Manager South Oxfordshire District Council Benson Lane Crowmarsh Gifford Wallingford OX10 8QX 15 April 2009 Dear M Miller, SOUTH OXFORDSHIRE DISTRCIT COUNCIL – DIDCOT TOWN CENTRE DRAFT SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING DOCUMENT I write in relation to the above consultation document which was received on 20 March 2009. The South East England Regional Assembly dissolved on 31 March 2009. The regional planning body is now the South East England Partnership Board, which is supported by staff from the former Assembly and from SEEDA. Whilst we work on our new identity, we're continuing to use Assembly stationery. The regional planning body welcomes the opportunity to comment on this Supplementary Planning Document (SPD). However, having reviewed the document we have no comments to make. If you require any further information, please do not hesitate to contact me on 01483 555201 or at [email protected] if you require further clarification on any of the issues raised in this letter. Yours sincerely,

Dominick Veasey Regional Planner

Oxfordshire Primary Care Trust The PCT welcomes a vision for Didcot which will develop a vibrant, distinctive town centre with opportunities for greater community cohesion and healthy living. Oxfordshire Primary Care Trust is grateful to South Oxfordshire District Council for the opportunity to comment on proposals for Didcot Town Centre. The PCTÆs own strategic priorities, are out in the recently published NHS Oxfordshire Strategic Plan 2009-13, which can be viewed at: http://www.oxfordshirepct.nhs.uk/about-us/publications/pct-strategy.aspx Oxfordshire PCT is one of nine PCTs within NHS South Central Strategic Health Authority, whose five aspirations to 2012 are set out at: http://www.southcentral.nhs.uk/page.php?id=235 The PCT suggests the following additional references to healthy living and public realm: Health services New developments should provide healthy and sustainable environments that encourage healthy living. All residents should have access to high quality health and social care f acilities. The proposal makes provision for healthcare within its bid, but details are not specified., which is appropriate at this stage. Co-location Overall the PCT would favour opening up opportunities to provide more services and facilities and developing the possibility for co-location of services across organisations/providers. The PCT would strongly encourage SODC to ensure that development of the Plan continues to take into account the ways in which development can support public health through provision of green space, encouragement of walking, cycling and other physical activity, encouragement of decreased use of cars and creation of opportunities for communities to come together so as to reduce isolation and support mental wellbeing. Healthier living We would expect any development to be mindful of healthier living , increasing walking and cycling opportunities and conforming to NICE public health guidance - in particular guidance on physical activity and the environment. There are national evidence based recommendations on how to improve the physical environment to encourage physical activity which can be found at http://www.nice.org.uk/nicemedia/pdf/PH008PhysicalActivityAndTheEnvironment Play There should be adequate play areas and environments for children and young people which a re appropriate for all and which meet very differing needs for 0-5's 5-12's and 12- 19 for example. These facilities need to promote physical and social development and give maximum opportunities for physical activity to maximise health and well being. They should not just be seen as "small area with some play equipment" but should be environments which offer "play value." They should also promote social inclusion and ensure good access and opportunities for children, parents and carers with disabilities. Innovation and public services New developments should pilot and test new methods of public service delivery in addition to the consideration of overall sustainability and being responsive to the issue of climate change. Currently, there are no details provided on these aspects. Community building and empowerment Developments should be fully inclusive of all sectors of the community; this is expected to deliver high quality open space, access to comprehensive community facilities, employment, both within the site and linkages to other economic centres and education. Future residents will be expected to be fully involved in the development of the community and endowments and trusts should be established to enable these community principles to be delivered. Homes for life In the development of homes sections û the PCT suggests greater reference to homes for life to respond to the demographic of an aging population. PCT views on open space / green infrastructure For any major development the PCT would expect the following examples to be considered and thought through at the early planning stages in order to support sustainable communities and improve the health and well being of the population of Oxfordshire. ò Good/Improved access to local services and facilities e.g. health, education, recreation, cultural, etc ò Protecting the environment/ Reducing energy consumption ò Improving infrastructure (roads etc) ò Reducing car travel / encouraging walking cycling / tackling fuel poverty ò Access to open/green spaces ò Affordable housing / suitable housing, e.g. for an aging population / homelessness ò Increasing diversity in population ò Creating safer communities / reducing fear of crime and polarised communities ò Reducing rural isolation (e.g. improved transport links /access) and social isolation (e.g. community facilities) Overall the PCT would favour opening up opportunities to provide more services and facilities and developing the possibility for co-location of services across organisations/providers. Creating a greener NHS Oxfordshire It was agreed at a meeting on 16 March 2009 that The NHS Oxfordshire Change Board will be overseeing delivery of a system wide approach to creating a greener NHS in Oxfordshire. The PCT will co-ordinate a Change Board

Greener NHS working group comprising representatives of the ORT, NOC, OBMH, Ridgeway Partnership Trust, CHO and OCC. This group will ensure all organisations within the Change Board work together to: ò Co-ordinate production of carbon reduction strategies, so that by the end of the calendar year of 2009 all NHS Organisations will have adopted a carbon reduction strategy ò Establish agreed county wide metrics to measure improvements against a range of ôgreenö Indicators ò Establish a baseline measurement of the NHS carbon footprint in Oxfordshire ( by organisation and collectively) ò Reduce t he impact of staff and patient travel on the county carbon footprint ò Explore new, more environmentally friendly ways, of delivering community and home based services ò Maximise the carbon reduction potential of making collective changes in procurement practice ò Improve the efficiency of buildings ò Encourage their staff to take individual responsibility for reducing their own and their organisationÆs carbon footprints ò Improve partnership working on sustainability issues between the NHS, Social care, local government and the Local strategic Partnerships across the county. In terms of health infrastructure, current GP surgeries in the town or sub area plans are as follows: Didcot Health Centre,Britwell Road,Didcot,Oxon,OX117JN, Woodlands Medical Centre,Woodlands Road,Didcot,Oxon,OX110BB, Oak Tree Health Centre,Tyne Avenue,Didcot,Oxon,OX117GD, Existing practices in the town have expressed to the PCT that they would like the option to expand before any new practice would be commissioned. The PCT has also submitted an outline s106 for a new facility in the major extension of Didcot to the south of the current urban area, when that plan is taken forward. In terms of secondary care, the PCT is involved in the Vale Consortia which is interested in improving local access to diagnostic facilities in the future but there is no specific comment in relation to Didcot currently. The PCT can provide indications of the service expansion that might be required if the population of Didcot were to grow in line with Council plans. The PCT would in a ll probability consider seeking a contribution from the developers towards the cost of expanding existing healthcare facilities and/or creating new buildings û should it prove necessary after further, more in depth review, to invest in expansion of existing services or provision of new facilities.

Mr. C. Milner Didcot Project Manager South Oxfordshire District Council Benson Lane Crowmarsh Gifford WALLINGFORD Oxfordshire OX10 8QX

Direct dial: 01483-252052 Direct fax: 01483-252021 E-mail: steve.williams@english-

heritage.org.uk

Your ref: DTC-SPD-Stat Our ref: HD/P/5355 24 April 2009

Dear Mr. Miller

DIDCOT TOWN CENTRE DRAFT SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING DOCUMENT

We refer to your letter of 18 March 2009 inviting representations on the above and my recent telephone conversations with Scott Riley and Wendy Foster allowing me a short extension to the consultation period. We are grateful to the Council for this concession.

We have read the draft with interest and note the Sustainability Appraisal’s assessment that Didcot is not an historic market town, but has grown in a piecemeal way since the arrival of the Great Western Railway in the late 19th century. The result is, that compared with other settlements of a similar size, it lacks a distinct historic core and overall, the quality of the built environment is relatively poor. That being so, we consider it important that where significant heritage assets exist, whether designated or locally important, care is taken to understand the contribution they make to the local scene and their vulnerability to change.

The New Growth Point status of the town marks a key stage in its development and the proposed redevelopment of the town centre provides the opportunity to create a more distinctive centre that addresses modern requirements, while enhancing civic pride. The draft Core Strategy (Preferred Options) describes this as creating a ‘heart’ for Didcot. In so doing, it will be important that due regard is paid to the potential for impacts upon the two conservation areas in the immediate vicinity of the SPD boundary. The Council’s website indicates that a conservation area character appraisal and management plan has yet to be approved for the Northbourne Conservation Area. Clearly, it is desirable that this be done, given the nature of proposals now coming forward in and around the town centre.

The Sustainability Appraisal recognises the potential impact of bringing together a mix of uses including retail, residential, leisure and commercial on the townscape and in order to protect and enhance the town’s historic environment and maintain it’s scale and character, recommends that the bulk and massing be mitigated by modulation of the skyline and a reduction in height adjacent to any lower buildings of historic value. To avoid impact on the townscape, “landmark” or “tall buildings” should be accommodated in suitable locations, with high quality design. We note that, for example, guidance in the draft SPD at para. 6.6 states that ‘sensitivity to the conservation area will dictate building design and heights’.

With this in mind, we assume that the sub-area illustrations indicating ‘memorable buildings’ should not be taken as necessarily conveying particular height.

Para. 1.3 of the draft SPD states that while based upon the current Local Plan, the guidance will eventually form part of the suite of documents which form the LDF. If one turns to the draft Core Strategy, also out for consultation at the present time, there is reference to the proposed Area Action Plan. Section 6 of the draft SPD refers to the requirement for a comprehensive approach to the planning and delivery of the town centre extension. Map 13.1 in the draft Core Strategy illustrates extensive ‘major development areas’ seemingly beyond the boundary of this SPD and in relation to the Broadway area, clearly extending well into the Northbourne Conservation Area. Given that the Council’s Local Development Scheme indicates that the AAP will be submitted to Government in less than two years, we question the appropriateness of the SPD at this time, particularly as it does not appear to deal with all the key central areas identified in the draft Core Strategy and market conditions have changed considerably in recent months.

We hope that this is of assistance and thank you for consulting English Heritage.

Yours sincerely

Steve Williams Regional Planner

Reg Charity No: 1094601

24 April 2009

Didcot Project Manager South Oxfordshire District Council Benson Lane Crowmarsh Gifford Wallingford OX10 8QX

Vision for the expansion of Didcot Town Centre Consultation response from TRAIN (charity involved in youth work on Didcot’s streets). I am sorry that we have missed the closing date and have not used your questionnaire. I hope you can still consider our response. We would like to say how pleased we are to see that the need for increased community facilities in the town centre has been recognised (page 34). Furthermore, the specific mention of facilities for young people being integrated into the development is most welcome. We are pleased that you recognise the importance of providing a place for young people in the centre of Didcot if it is to be the vibrant and thriving community that we all seek. We have recently moved from an out-of-centre location into the Broadway, from help provided by SODC, and have seen a dramatic increase in the “drop in” work (coming to the office for information, help or just a chat) that we do to support young people, an increase of over 1000%! Since the office that SODC have provided for us will cease to exist in your plans, we are pleased to see that provision for young people is included in the plans and hopefully an office for us. We would be pleased to discuss details in due course. I hope these comments will be helpful and encourage you to continue to think about Didcot’s young people in your planning, Yours faithfully Paul Gander, TRAIN detached youth worker Jane Kinniburgh, TRAIN volunteer project manager

118 Broadway Didcot, Oxon

OX11 8AB

Tel: 01235 519315

Date post:	25-Jul-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	3 times
Download:	0 times