Mr John Sivyer Miss Caroline Leddy STOCKLAND Chairman Secretary PARISH MEETING Wayland Farm Washers Farm Stockland Bristol Near Near Bridgwater TA5 2PY TA5 2PY

Telephone: 01278 653805 Email: [email protected] Web Page: http://www.sedgemoor.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=478

Service Manager – Policy Strategy and Development District Council Bridgwater House King Sqyaure Bridgwater TA6 3AR

18 December 2015

Dear Sir,

STAGE 1 LOCAL PLAN CONSULTATION – STOCKLAND BRISTOL PARISH MEETING COMMENTS

Introduction

On behalf of the Stockland Bristol Parish Meeting, I wish to submit the following comments, based upon my close inspection of the Local Plan Consultation Document as supplied to this Meeting by SDC, and many informal discussions held between myself and those parishioners who have, upon public invite expressed their views and opinions to me. Where I have gained a general consensus of opinion, I report that, and as where this was not forthcoming, I have expressed any divergence of or minority opinion.

Whilst these are challenging times, this Parish also regards them as exciting times that offer opportunities for all and this Parish Meeting would like to be involved in whatever small ways possible, in contributing to the shaping of local plans for the future.

Question 3

The consensus of opinion regarding the Local Plan Objectives for this question, was that this Parish is in broad agreement with all the Objectives and in particular with regard to:

a. Flood Risk (“Approximately half of the Parish is located within Flood Zone 3 and is therefore at high risk of flooding”. Source: Stockland Bristol Planning Advice September 2014, Author: R. Miller, SDC);

b. Assistance to create more Sustainable Communities (this somewhat dispersed settlement, suffering from a lack of essential services or facilities and in this regard fully reliant upon adjacent settlements); and

Stockland Bristol Parish Meeting Comments Page 1

c. The Promotion of Safe and Sustainable Transport Options and Management of Congestion with particular regard to the reliance upon the car and concerns over access into and out of the village onto the C182, especially during the construction of HPC power station, described in the consultation document as, “... at peak ... will be Europe’s largest construction scheme.” (“The sole point of access into Stockland Bristol is via the C182. With the increased number of vehicles passing the sole access to Stockland Bristol the occupants of these dwellings are likely to feel isolated as it will be more difficult to turn right off of the C182 or exit the Parish onto the C182 as the opportunities to cross the carriageway or join it will be less than existing due to an increase of up to 750 HGV movements a day using the C182”. “As the construction of HPC moves forward and with the Development Consent Order allowing for 24 hour construction, this could exasperate the community’s feeling of ‘isolation’ and have a negative effect on quality of life within the village.” Source: Stockland Bristol Planning Advice 2014, Author: R. Miller, SDC.).

Questions 4 and 6

Whilst some, but not all opinion agreed with the analysis that led to Question 4 and the need for a considerable growth in house building in the District, there was a consensus opinion of strong views against the suggestion of Dispersed Development, Option D, which would as the consultation document states, “... see a step change in the scale of development in the more rural settlements in the district” and an “increase reliance on the car given the challenges of improving rural public transport.” Parish opinion also agreed with the consultation document, that the result of Dispersed Development would be “... adverse landscape impacts” and “... still the risk of flooding”, e.g. in this small Parish.

It is a strongly held opinion that to propose housing development in this very small rural settlement, would be quite inappropriate as it lacks essential facilities and services and since the Local Plan Consultation Document specifically makes the case for affordable housing, for starter homes and for specialist housing for the aged (Stockland already has a Care Home in the Old Vicarage) and the disabled; Stockland Bristol would be a quite unsuitable location for all these categories of housing, quite apart from the lack of availability of land upon which to build.

Recognising the problem of flood risk in Bridgwater and the expected growing congestion when parishioners attempt to drive into Bridgwater, this Parish favours Option C, particularly as it might help to sustain the services currently available in the larger village settlements such as nearby Cannington. Stockland’s ranking of Options would thus be:

Option C 1 Option B 2 Option A 3 Option D 4 whilst at the same time looking at other ways to grow a sense of community in the village. Hence the proposed initiative to found a Community Group to undertake projects to improve, enhance and sustain village life; and support for current activities such as the monthly Village Walks, the annual Carol Singing and the regular care and maintenance of roadside verges, drains, ditches and walls and the planting of spring bulbs and other plants in the various public places within the village by individual volunteers.

Questions 7 and 8

Whilst Parish opinion does see the sense of creating a revised settlement hierarchy for the reasons given in the consultation document it is however worried over the lack of development boundaries for Tier 5 settlements. Given that the boundary between any village, hamlet and countryside in Tier 5 settlements is even more indistinct than in other Tier settlements, it seems

Stockland Bristol Parish Meeting Comments Page 2 to us that the case for development boundaries is as important if not even more so in the case of Tier 5 settlements.

With regard to Question 8, the strongly held opinion of the Parishioners of Stockland, without any expressed dissent, is that Stockland Bristol should remain in the category of Countryside, and not be in the Tier 5 category for the following reasons:

a. It lacks any essential services or facilities;

b. It is dispersed along a road that from end to end is approximately 1 mile in length;

c. It is wholly reliant upon adjacent settlements, i.e. and Cannington for all essential services and facilities: e.g. the Parish Meeting has to meet in Hill House Conference Centre, ; the nearest shop, public house, primary school, children’s play area and bus service to Bridgwater is in Combwich; and the nearest GP surgery and other shops are in Cannington.

d. To be classified as a Tier 5 settlement with therefore, no development boundary in place, would possibly make it vulnerable (given the geography of the village), to a form of ‘ribbon development’ and it might prove difficult to oppose plans for inappropriate housing, i.e. affordable homes, for the reasons given in answer to Questions 4 and 6.

e. Stockland Bristol has much more in common to those nearby settlements, though somewhat smaller, described in the consultation document as Countryside, e.g. and .

f. “Stockland Bristol is a small rural Parish that is located in the countryside.” Source: Stockland Bristol Planning Advice 2014, Author: R. Miller, SDC. Question 9

A long-held opinion by many in the village of Stockland Bristol, is that the C182 road is ‘not fit for purpose’ when HPC is constructed; a development referred to in the consultation document as: “... at peak... will be Europe’s largest construction scheme.”

Given that such opinion has not in the past informed planning consent being granted for HPC to be constructed, the Parish Meeting of Stockland Bristol wish to raise concerns (referred to in SDC’s Planning Advice to Stockland document) about the safety and ability for villagers to enter and exit the village from and onto the C182. We draw especial concern regarding the easterly junction into the village (known locally as Biffen’s Corner) and signposted to Steart with regard to the very poor visibility at this junction in respect of the recently generated increased traffic flow turning into and out of the Steart road following the development of the WWT Steart Marshes, which will be made much more hazardous when HPC is under construction with a substantial increase in traffic that this will occasion.

Question 10

The Parish Meting of Stockland Bristol agrees with and supports the Council’s suggested approach, particularly that which states that development should be located where it “minimises the need to travel”, “... promotes greater self containment of settlements “ and “... protects and enhances the quality of the natural, built and historic environment”.

Question 11

Stockland Bristol Parish Meeting Comments Page 3

Many parishioners in the village of Stockland Bristol support what are generally known as ‘green policies’ and thus support the Objectives and hopefully commitments as set out in the existing Core Strategy Approach. These Parishioners would like to see SDC supporting a greater effort to re-cycle waste, especially plastic; to consider the construction of more on-shore wind turbines; a greater encouragement to householders and builders to install solar panels and a stipulation that all new house builds ensure maximum insulation and where possible, ground heat extraction pumps and re-cycling of hot waste water.

Question 12

The unanimous view of those parishioners of Stockland Bristol that have responded to the Meeting’s consultation invitation to comment, is that the village should remain in the category of Countryside for the reasons already detailed in our response to the consultation document (Questions 7 and 8).

One of the reasons for this is the lack of a development boundary for Tier 5 settlements into which it is proposed to categorise this village.

We make no comment on the proposed development boundaries for other settlements, and as a Parish Meeting, we offer no comments to Questions 13, 14, 15, 16 and 17.

Questions 18 and 19

The Parish Meeting broadly supports the Suggested Approaches, 13 and 14.

Question 20

The Parish Meeting certainly agrees with the District Council’s general approach to transport in Bridgwater and many in the village have long argued for a northern bypass, both to ease congestion in Bridgwater but to also much improve journeys by car from the village (and holiday traffic and lorries along the A39) to and from J23 on the M5.

They would also like to see provision for cyclists and pedestrians along the entire length of the C182 and in particular from the village in to Bridgwater. (“Potential mitigation/initiative. Footpath/cycleway enhancement. Improved bus services/community transport. Improved access to Otterhampton/Cannington/Bridgwater. Given the increase in traffic along the C182, there may be an aspiration for an alternative option from driving to be provided. There are plans being developed for a footpath/cycleway from Cannington to Hinkley Point C. The route includes the existing walking and cycling path between Combwich and Stockland Bristol.” Source: Stockland Bristol Planning Advice 2014, Author: R. Miller, SDC.).

She goes on to question if and what the barriers to villagers using this are and we can confirm that they are, as she ponders, accessibility and safety meaning the pathway is not wide enough or marked to thus keep pedestrians and cyclists safely apart, and access onto the path onto Stockland is very poor and unsafe.

Questions 21 to 45

This Parish Meeting makes no comment on these questions.

Question 46

It is not thought appropriate for this Parish Meeting to comment upon the particular proposed siting of houses in Cannington. However, it is in the interests of this village that development to support and retain the facilities in Cannington, necessary to and therefore enjoyed by villagers in Stockland, is seriously considered.

Stockland Bristol Parish Meeting Comments Page 4

Questions 47 to 54

This Parish makes no comment upon these Questions.

Question 55

Our nearest Tier 4 village is Combwich and in discussion with the Chairman of Otterhampton [and Combwich] Parish Council, we are given to understand that our support of the District Council’s Suggested Approach 50 would not be unwelcomed.

Question 56

This Parish, again, from consulting Otterhampton [Combwich] Parish Council supports Suggested Approach 51.

Question 57

With regards to Suggested Approach 52, the unanimous opinion of the Parish is that no new housing is appropriate in Stockland Bristol and especially not affordable housing, for the reasons already given.

For reasons also already given, this Parish Meeting is of the considered and unanimous opinion that Stockland Bristol should remain in the category Countryside. (“These policy plans (Local Development Framework, Economic Master Plan and Green Infrastructure Strategy) indicate that Stockland Bristol is located in the countryside and will have very little development in the future.”. Source: Stockland Bristol Planning Advice 2014, Author: R. Miller, SDC.).

Whilst some of the suggestions in Approach 52 are reasonable, the undefined and unspecified exceptional possibilities re: house building in this village, are wholly unacceptable and therefore, with regard to this Parish, we do not agree with the suggested approach which nevertheless, may be acceptable to other Tier 5 settlements. As already argued in our comments we are of the opinion that there should be development boundaries for Tier 5 settlements for reasons already given.

Question 58

This Parish is broadly in support of the Suggested Approach 53, but whilst it awaits the specific details concerning the ‘Conversion of Agricultural Buildings Guidance’ it reserves its opinion on the redevelopment of former agricultural buildings. The Parish Meeting in support of its opinion that Stockland Bristol should remain in the category of Countryside, and not be classed as a Tier 5 settlement, wishes to point out that the village is not in “... close proximity to a sustainable settlement”, and thus should remain in the category of Countryside.

Questions 59 and 60

Whilst the Existing Core Strategy Approaches and now the Suggested Approaches (i.e. 54 and 55) are fine in principal and intent, in practice, the Parish of Stockland Bristol being one of the nearest settlements to the HPC site has not so far benefitted in any substantial way that might mitigate the expected, considerable impact such a large construction site within such close visible proximity to the village, is certain to suffer.

So in supporting Approaches 54 and 55, we would like to hope that in implementing the sentiments expressed in them, that Stockland Bristol might be assisted to alleviate some of the consequences of such a large Infrastructure Project as HPC, and in particular, village sustainability projects and access into and out of the village onto the C182.

Stockland Bristol Parish Meeting Comments Page 5

Question 61 and 62

Stockland Bristol Parish Meeting agree with the Suggested Approaches 56 and 57.

Question 63

There are many villagers in Stockland Bristol that support the promotion of ‘green energy’ and they are disappointed to read in the consultation document that: “The national approach to sustainable construction and the reduction of carbon emissions in new development has recently changed radically. Government has now removed many of the guidelines and protocols that existed to encourage developers to head towards a zero carbon approach...”.

So in answer to Suggested Approach 58, and on behalf of the Parishioners who support sustainability, low carbon emissions and concerns over global warming, the Parish Meeting would support SDC in its Local Plan to find ways to continue and strengthen, rather than weaken local policies to advance sustainability etc in proposed new developments whilst not unduly inhibiting such developments.

Question 64

Representing the same and growing numbers of people (as referred to in Question 63) who in this village are supporters of energy generation from renewable sources, it has not been possible for the Parish Meeting to discuss in the length of time necessary to rank an order of preference for the many suggestions made in Question 64. However, unranked, many in the village support several of the options. These are:

Anaerobic Digestion; Combined Heat and Power District; heating schemes; the identification of site for small scale on-shore wind farms; Hydro Power; Tidal Lagoons (where feasible); and Singular Wind Turbines where broadly local agreement for a wind turbine can be demonstrated.

Question 65

From the time limited responses gained (the emphasis being on the earlier Questions, i.e. 4, 6, 7 ,8 9 and 12) I think it reasonable to represent the Parish of Stockland Bristol as being in agreement with Suggested Approach 60; that specific sites for new starter homes could be identified; that self-build schemes could be supported in general; and in particular, that “... more detailed and clear policy guidance for residential annexes” be included in the Local Plan as such developments have in the past been contentious in this village.

Question 66

We broadly support the overall support for affordable housing provision, particularly in Bridgwater.

Question 67

We understand that the nearby village of Combwich has identified the need for a few affordable homes within its Parish and we would want to support them in this; so we remain unclear as to how to answer this Question.

Question 69 and 70

This Parish very much supports Suggested Approaches 64 and 65 and in particular, schemes to assist pedestrians, cyclists and users of public transport.

Stockland Bristol Parish Meeting Comments Page 6

Questions 74, 76, 77, 78 and 81

This Parish supports Suggested Approach 69, 71, 72, 73 and 76.

Question 82

On behalf of the Parish Meeting of Stockland Bristol, we commend the thoroughness and detail included in the Local Plan Consultation Document and trust that our answers to Questions in it and more general comments will, in part, shape the final proposals. We especially draw your attention to the unanimous view of this Parish, that Stockland Bristol be categorised in Countryside for the reasons set out earlier in our response document.

In addition, as a local community considering the proposed new Local Plans, we would like to take the opportunity to identify land in the Parish to be designated as a Local Green Space. The land in consideration is within the boundary of the village and is considered demonstrably special to the local community. It holds particular local significance because of its beauty, tranquillity and richness of wildlife. To have this land thus designated would preserve the unique rural setting of arable and farmland and links to the Stockland Marshes. Reference: The National Planning Policy Framework, 2012. Paragraphs 76 to 92.

We would appreciate your advice on how to achieve this aspiration.

Yours faithfully

John Sivyer

John Sivyer Chairman Stockland Bristol Parish Meeting

Stockland Bristol Parish Meeting Comments Page 7