Publication Version
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Site Allocations Plan - Publication Version (October 2016) Schedule of Comments Received Content Consultation Arrangements p.5 Introduction p.8 Policy Context p.13 Evidence Base p.21 Policy SA1: Housing Allocations p.34 Policy SA2: Settlement Boundaries p.55 Policy SA3: Mixed Use Allocations p.62 Policy SA4: Employment Allocations p.65 Policy SA5: Safeguarded Employment Sites p.74 Policy SA6: Retention of Economic Uses p.76 Policy SA7: Local Green Space p.78 Policy SA8: Undesignated Green Space p.85 Policy SA9: Strategic Gaps p.87 Policy SA10: Community Use Allocation p.101 Policy SA12: A370 Corridor into Weston-super-Mare p.106 Schedule 1: Proposed Housing Sites p.108 Weston-super-Mare p.108 Winterstoke Village p.108 Parklands Village p.110 Westacres Caravan Park p.111 Orchard House Ebdon Road p.112 Land to rear of Locking Road p.113 Walliscote Place p.114 Dolphin Square p.116 Land to the west of Winterstoke Road p.117 Land to the north of the A370, Summer Lane p.119 Bridge Farm, Bristol Road p.120 Birnbeck Pier p.121 Gas works, Winterstoke Road p.123 Nightingale Close, Mead Vale p.124 South of Herluin Way, Avoncrest Site p.125 Former Bournville School Site, Selworthy Road p.126 Former Sweat FA site, Winterstoke Road p.127 Page 1 of 570 15 Feb 2017 17:12:00 Station Gateway p.128 Land at Bridgewater Road p.129 Total for Weston-super-Mare p.130 Clevedon p.132 North of Churchill Avenue p.132 Millcross Site p.133 Total for Clevedon p.134 Nailsea p.135 Trendlewood Way p.135 Police Station p.154 West of Engine Lane p.156 Land south of The Uplands p.210 Land at North West Nailsea p.220 Total for Nailsea p.231 Portishead p.241 Severn Paper Mill p.241 South West of Severn Paper Mill p.242 Old Mill Road p.244 Total for Portishead p.332 Service Villages p.333 Land to the east and west of Weberham Lane, Yatton p.333 Oxford Plasma, Yatton p.334 Arnolds Way, Yatton Phase 1 p.335 Yatton Station p.336 Moor Lane, Backwell p.337 Cobthorn Way, Congresbury p.338 Venus Street, Congresbury p.339 Land at North End, Yatton p.340 Arnolds Way, Yatton Phase 2 p.343 Land to the east of Wolvershill Road, Banwell p.344 Moor Road, Yatton p.345 Total for Service Villages p.362 Infill Villages p.363 Bleadon Quarry, Bleadon p.363 Total for Infill Villages p.364 Countryside p.365 Page 2 of 570 15 Feb 2017 17:12:00 Barrow Hospital, Barrow Gurney p.365 Schedule 2: Proposed Employment Sites p.367 Weston-super-Mare p.367 Clevedon p.368 Nailsea p.371 Portishead p.373 Service Villages p.375 Schedule 3: Safeguarded Employment Sites p.376 Clevedon p.376 Nailsea p.381 Portishead p.382 Service Villages p.384 Schedule 4: Local Green Space p.385 Backwell p.385 Congresbury p.390 Nailsea p.391 Weston-super-Mare p.398 Wrington p.399 Yatton p.400 Schedule 5: Proposed sites for Community Use p.405 Primary School p.408 Strategic Open Space p.409 Sustainability Appraisal p.415 Sustainability of Settlement Review p.426 Other Sites Put Forward p.433 Public Comments on Other Sites Put Forward p.546 Page 3 of 570 15 Feb 2017 17:12:00 Section Consultation arrangements Name Organisation Comment Comment Recieved ID Hoddell Hoddell 1055809//1 Associates Associates The consultation documents fail to make clear that, at this stage of the plan-making process, comments should relate to the four tests of 'soundness' as set out in paragraph 182 of the NPPF. Accordingly we question whether the council has given adequate notice to potential respondents of the fact that the plan will be assessed by the Planning Inspectorate in accordance with those requirements. Naigalseye 14647553//1 Consultation arrangements for the people of Nailsea were not well advertised and held in a venue which, though externally accessible, was cramped within. making it difficult to see the display boards and to move round tables and the head of the spiral staircase down to the basement floor. Those in attendance were courteous but unable to add very much detail to what was on display or to answer questions about future plans and next steps. Naigalseye 14647553//2 Consultation arrangements for the people of Nailsea were not well advertised and held in a venue which, though externally accessible, was cramped within. making it difficult to see the display boards and to move round tables and the head of the spiral staircase down to the basement floor. Those in attendance were courteous but unable to add very much detail to what was on display or to answer questions about future plans and next steps. The consultation therefore did not fully meet the tests of soundness. Nailsea Nailsea 14823809//1 Action Action Group In terms of the tests of soundness the preparation of the plan Group was weak in its engagement with the community of Nailsea. The consultation was not well publicised, particularly for a consultation of this level of significance. We understand that North Somerset Council did advertise locally but many Nailsea residents were entirely unaware of the consultation. The website was not straightforward to navigate, and many people could not find where they could object to specific sites. The public consultation was disappointing as the venue was Page 4 of 570 15 Feb 2017 17:12:00 Name Organisation Comment Comment Recieved ID cramped, access to the limited number of displays was poor and advice and the provision of information was courteous but could not be offered in much detail. This current consultation has been publicised in a similar manner and also suffers from both running at the same time as the Joint Spatial Plan and in the lead up to Christmas. Nailsea Nailsea 14823809//13 Action Action Group The current consultation website makes no reference to the Group criteria that the Planning Inspectorate will consider when reviewing the plan and public comments made. It also does not explain that the Planning Inspectorate will not see public comments from the previous consultation. Residents of North Somerset have therefore not been given sufficient information to be able to make comments about the areas that will be of interest to the Planning Inspectorate. As a result we do not consider the consultation arrangements to have given members of the public a fair opportunity to respond appropriately to the plan at this stage of the process. The consultation period should be extended, with suitable public information and notification provided. Nailsea Nailsea 14823809//14 Action Action Group The current consultation website makes no reference to the Group criteria that the Planning Inspectorate will consider when reviewing the plan and public comments made. It also does not explain that the Planning Inspectorate will not see public comments from the previous consultation. Residents of North Somerset have therefore not been given sufficient information to be able to make comments about the areas that will be of interest to the Planning Inspectorate. As a result we do not consider the consultation arrangements to have given members of the public a fair opportunity to respond appropriately to the plan at this stage of the process. The consultation period should be extended, with suitable public information and notification provided. HEllis 14827873//1 The arrangements for both the initial and current consultations for this plan did not publicise the consultations so that affected people were sufficiently informed. Many people are unaware of the plans. For a plan that proposes to add 1,000 houses to a town (Nailsea), more direct publicity shouls occur e.g. letters to each household. Page 5 of 570 15 Feb 2017 17:12:00 Name Organisation Comment Comment Recieved ID I would also like to raise that the consultation information on this website does not explain that the Planning Inspectorate is only concerned with certain aspects of the plan and that he/she will not see comments from the previous consultation. I do not think this is fair to affected people and I think the consultation should be extended, with proper information provided. Page 6 of 570 15 Feb 2017 17:12:00 Section Introduction Name Organisation Comment Comment Recieved ID Long Long Ashton 11197185//1 Ashton Parish Long Ashton Parish Council supports the NSC’s Site Allocations Parish Council Plan as currently presented. Council Viv Congresbury 15569185//1 Tomkinson Residents Para 1.4 acknowledges that the SAP is a transitory plan given Association that the intention is that the Joint Spatial Plan being prepared by Group the West of England authorities should be adopted in 2018. Content of the SAP is therefore to be reviewed through what the Council call the new Local Plan for the period2018 - 2036. Given that this is the Council’s declared position we must question the real value and merit of the SAP. Public funding being spent on production of the SAP including examination by a Planning Inspector leading to possible adoption of the SAP in June 2017 must be questionable given that the SAP will have a lifespan of 12-18 months! North 16130337//1 Somerset The North Somerset Levels Internal Drainage Board have made Internal numerous consultation responses during the plan making process Drainage and although the Board does not object to any of the individual Board site allocations they object to the document as a whole. There (Simon are constraints imposed by the rhyne network in the Board’s Bunn) district that have been identified and provided as part of the local plan consultation process and we are disappointed that this information does not appear to have been taken into consideration or influenced the site allocations and associated policies.