Letter: Lack of Infrastructure Funding Will Constrain Developments

Published on: 9 May, 2016
Updated on: 9 May, 2016

From Bibhas Neogi

If Cllr Paul Spooner (Guildford Borough Council leader) is to be taken seriously, there seems not much point worrying about the large number of houses that are identified to be built under the Local Plan.

In the Surrey Infrastructure Study, Surrey County Council outlines the funding likely to be needed

The study indicates that delivering the necessary infrastructure to support growth planned in Surrey to 2030 is estimated to cost at least £5.37 billion with only £2.17 billion of potential funding identified.

So, a shortage of £3.2 billion would indicate a massive scaling down of the Local Plans.

Should we be worried about more congestion? Probably, a bit more, but then holistic planning is not that common in the UK compared with other European countries. We tend to go for piecemeal developments.

Responses to Letter: Lack of Infrastructure Funding Will Constrain Developments

David Roberts Reply

May 9, 2016 at 5:39 pm

The financial shortfall is even worse than Mr Neogi thinks: the Surrey Infrastructure Study predates the latest version of the revised Guildford Local Plan with its increased new housing target.
John Perkins Reply

May 10, 2016 at 10:22 am

That seems to be the modern way: scare people with excessive demands and then mollify them by agreeing to settle for less. It must work because it’s used so often by so many politicians.
Peta Malthouse Reply

May 10, 2016 at 11:38 am

The EU told the UK, several years back, that they needed to be more thorough in their plan making. I hoped and thought that the Local Plan procedure was intended to do just that.

But I am not happy about the process under this government which, because it is Tory, will always seek to drive forward regional and local planning via business suggestions rather than planning first and then inviting business to contribute.

However, the process has resulted, in theory at least, in an assessment of where we are, what we have and where we supposedly want to be.

It is an opportunity that should not be lost but our representatives, at this stage, still need to keep thinking outside the box. What they envision does not seem to match the desire of the electorate at present.
Bibhas Neogi Reply

May 10, 2016 at 3:16 pm

The document quoted as ‘Surrey Infrastucture Study’ in my letter appears to be no longer available. There is a report published in January this year and its executive summary could be found in,-

http://www.surreycc.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0014/83003/0-Executive-Summary.pdf

It says the infrastructure funding deficit is £3.2bn for Surrey, so apparently no change from the figure I found earlier. Guildford’s deficit is around £550m according to this summary.