Posted by: swinemoor | June 4, 2010

The Sequential Test made easy

A lot has been made in these pages of the importance of the Sequential Test in deflecting an objection from the Environment Agency and the errors contained within it. However, much of this is very involved and technical allowing the PCT room to obfuscate and claim they have used ‘experts’ to draw up their reports.

In order to clarify matters, we felt a few pictures explaining things would help: here goes.

This is an extract from the Sequential Test for the Swinemoor Lane site submitted by the PCT. You will see that it says the site is in Flood Risk Zone 3.

Seq Test Swinemoor extract

It also says that the land did not flood in 2007 – this is disputed.

Here is the site highlighted underlain by the Environment Agency’s Flood Zone 3.

Hospital and FZ3

As you can see most of the site is within the zone with only a small section adjacent to Swinemoor Lane in a lower flood category (Flood Risk Zone 2).

Now let’s take a look at the situation near the ambulance station: here is the extract from the Sequential Test submitted by the PCT:

Seq Test Driff rd extract

Firstly it states that the land is in Flood Zone 3 then afterwards says that some is in Flood Zone 1. It does not say that it did not flood in 2007 – it didn’t!

What do the actual Flood Zones look like? Here they are:

ambulance and FZ3

As you can see very little of the area near the ambulance station is in Flood Risk Zone 3 at all and siting the hospital here would have avoided all the additional costs associated with flood defences and flood alleviation measures on Swinemoor Lane.

Whilst, in this case, the actual scoring was correct (a tick), overall there is a clear attempt to overplay the flood risks near the ambulance station whilst toning them down on the Swinemoor Lane site.

Remember, the PCT may employ experts but they are the client and He who pays the Piper……..


Responses

  1. […] that these organisations were furnished with documents that contained errors of fact, such as the site did not flood on 25th June 2007 or that the hedgerows on the site were […]

  2. […] The writing was on the wall for the Westwood site long ago: it was earmarked for development and it was this that led to the siting of the new hospital on Flood Zone 3 land on the East side of Beverley. There was no reason that the hospital could not have been accommodated on the existing site but, as with everything Westwood-related, dollar-signs won the day – the land was too valuable to build a mere hospital on, better to have housing or even a hotel. Hospitals can be condemned to floodland…. […]


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Categories

%d bloggers like this: