West of Hearing Statement Matter 7.6: Churchill Joint Spatial Plan on behalf of Garden Village SD Examination Burrington Parish Council

Matter 7.6 – Churchill Garden Village SDL

(a) Is the Churchill Garden Village soundly based as a broad location for growth?

It is clear that most local people do not consider the Churchill Garden Village SDL to be soundly based as a ‘broad location for growth’ to be the basis for a detailed allocation in the Local Plan. That is shown by feedback from the Mendip Spring Garden Village Workshop on 14th November 2018. North Council officers’ report is attached as an appendix1.

The report acknowledges the unprecedented opposition from residents in Churchill and the surrounding villages to the proposals in the JSP and Local Plan 2036 for Churchill/Mendip Spring Garden Village and dissatisfaction with the Council for attempting to discuss the proposal in a Local Plan consultation, in advance of its examination as a JSP proposal.

In our representations we commented that the proposed SDLs at Churchill and Banwell are poorly related to major employment centres and public transport services; they would depend on the delivery of a major new road link from the M5 to the A38 for which funding is highly uncertain, as shown by the scheme appraisal in the Strategic Transport Study (especially as is not part of the West of England Devolution Deal); they would depend on the assembly of a large number of sites in multiple ownerships for development of the proposed ‘Garden Villages’ and the M5-A38 Link Road, without clear proposals for a development agency with funding to acquire land and undertake the co-ordination of infrastructure and development; and they would have substantial adverse impacts on the local environment and neighbouring settlements.

In contrast, Ashton Vale, South West of is well-related to South Bristol, the City Centre and South Bristol; is potentially served by existing and planned strategic transport infrastructure including the South Bristol Link Road, a Metro Bus route, improved links to the airport and a new railway station; is a large enough area to

1 The report is also available on the Council’s web site at https://www.n-somerset.gov.uk/my-services/planning- building-control/planningpolicy/local-plan/new-local-plan-2036/about-the-new-local-plan-for-2036/

1 | P a g e

West of England Hearing Statement Matter 7.6: Churchill Joint Spatial Plan on behalf of Garden Village SD Examination Burrington Parish Council

provide a mix of land uses including employment and local centre facilities; and is already assembled under the control of a developer, which would make the planning and implementation of a large-scale, mixed-use development with associated infrastructure a much more feasible proposition.

Development at Ashton Vale should also be considered in the context of the ‘Nailsea Corridor Improvement’ (/M5 to Nailsea, A370, A38 and Bristol, with a new rail crossing west of ). This route could also link with development at Ashton Vale, via the south Bristol Link and A38, and on to the Airport; providing improved access to the Airport from the M5 (northbound and southbound) and at much lower cost (£286m) than the proposed M5-A38 Link (£621m), according to scheme appraisals in the Joint Transport Study.

The proposed new M5 Junction (21A) and link to the A38 at Churchill are far less suitable for improving access to than the Nailsea Corridor Improvement from Clevedon/M5 Junction 20, which would also serve a number of other purposes by improving connectivity with Bristol and helping to unlock growth at Nailsea, as described in the Joint Transport Study.

(b) Are the criteria set out in Policy 7.6 justified and effective? Are the modifications to the policy proposed by the Councils as set out in the Schedule of Proposed Change (doc WED002), necessary for the plan to be sound?

The criteria in Policy 7.6 are definitely not ‘justified and effective’. They are vague and general, lacking in specific local content, and wholly inadequate as principles for planning a new settlement. There should be some reference to the principles of Garden Villages in the Government’s Garden Communities Prospectus of August 20182 and publications on Garden Cities and Villages by the Town & Country Planning Association.3

2https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/734145/Gard en_Communities_Prospectus.pdf 3https://www.tcpa.org.uk/understanding-garden-villages https://www.tcpa.org.uk/guidance-for-delivering-new-garden-cities

2 | P a g e

West of England Hearing Statement Matter 7.6: Churchill Joint Spatial Plan on behalf of Garden Village SD Examination Burrington Parish Council

Modifications proposed by the Councils (WED 002) are neither necessary nor sufficient for the plan to be found sound:

• What is the difference between an ‘area of search’ and a ‘broad location’?

• The deletion of the new M5 junction 21A (PC12) is confusing. It remains a proposal in the JTS.

• The phasing assumption of 2675 dwellings before 2036, and 125 after 2036, is spuriously precise. It reveals a facile approach to development programming.

(c) Is there evidence that the development of the SDL is viable and developable, including in respect of necessary infrastructure provision during the JSP plan period?

This is really a question for the local authorities to answer. We have not found evidence in the JSP documentation that the Churchill SDL is viable or deliverable. No information is currently available on how the Council expects the site of the SDL to be assembled, the funding of infrastructure, the mechanisms for obtaining planning permissions and disposing of sites for development, or the arrangements for securing long-term ownership and management of open space and other community assets.

In November 2017, when consultations began on the JSP Publication and ‘Generating Ideas’ for the Local Plan, North Somerset Council made attempts, through agents Cushman & Wakefield, to acquire development options from landowners within the area of the proposed Churchill SDL. It is not known whether the intention was to vest these options in a Council-owned development company or a Council-led development corporation, or to form a joint venture with developers, or even whether the Council was successful in acquiring options. It would be helpful if the Council could explain their approach at the examination hearings, to inform discussion about the viability and deliverability of the proposed SDL.

3 | P a g e

West of England Hearing Statement Matter 7.6: Churchill Joint Spatial Plan on behalf of Garden Village SD Examination Burrington Parish Council

APPENDIX Local Plan 2036 Issues and Options Consultation Mendip Spring Garden Village Workshop – 14 November 2018 Feedback from discussion sessions The Joint Spatial Plan (JSP) 2018, now submitted for examination, contains proposals for four new communities at Banwell, Churchill, Nailsea and Backwell (known as strategic development locations - SDLs). Last year North Somerset carried out some early consultation aimed at ‘generating ideas’ for these new villages and communities. Work has now commenced on the new Local Plan which will provide more detailed policies. The Local Plan Issues and Options consultation runs from 3 September - 10 December 2018. As part of this consultation process workshops are being held with representatives from the local communities where the strategic development locations are proposed. The workshops are focusing on the key principles and place- making elements for these areas which can then be further considered and refined through the Local Plan. This report sets out the feedback from the discussion at the Mendip Spring Garden Village workshop. The meeting began with an acknowledgement from officers that North Somerset Council is aware of the unprecedented opposition from residents in Churchill and the surrounding villages to the proposals in the JSP and Local Plan 2036 for Churchill/Mendip Spring garden village. There was a strong feeling among participants that discussion of the Local Plan is premature given that the JSP has not been through the examination process. Session 1: Hopes and Fears Hopes: • Create a sense of community - developers tasked to create community. • Better public transport • Significant proportion of affordable housing, including social housing for local young people who have a connection to the villages. • Housing should not just be standard volume house builders’ types • Better, high quality design • Need infrastructure and drainage. Drainage is a real issue. Would like existing problems properly resolved before any more houses can even be considered. • A detailed landscape assessment will be undertaken to inform the development • Want infrastructure to work and enable getting to Bristol easily • That it isn’t developed by volume house builders

4 | P a g e

West of England Hearing Statement Matter 7.6: Churchill Joint Spatial Plan on behalf of Garden Village SD Examination Burrington Parish Council

• That the scheme is not built, or it’s delivered at ‘The Vale’ instead. Houses should be built close to centres of employment i.e. Bristol • That there would be opportunities to take just 2% of the Green Belt around Bristol and relocate it to . • There is more emphasis on existing built up area where there is existing transport infrastructure • That there is a review regarding relocating the Green Belt. • A Green Belt assessment should be carried out in North Somerset. A very small proportion of Green Belt that is strangling Bristol could be reallocated to beside the Mendip Hills AONB • Smaller piecemeal development which does not flood the area with housing • That there’s a better understanding of what is actually deliverable not just what is hoped for.

Fears: • Impacts on local road network especially and Stock Lane - could cause chaos at local junctions • Deliverability of the infrastructure - it is too expensive to be delivered, what if HIF or other funding does not happen? Proposal not achievable given high costs. • Poorly related to transport • Until the road pattern resolved cannot determine the size of development • Should not be building roads in the 21st Century • To concrete over this land in Churchill/Mendip Spring with houses and major new roads, when there is a good alternative location close to the jobs in Bristol, would be a terrible legacy for future generations. • No public transport therefore everyone will be car dependent • Destruction of the green fields • Concern over drainage, risk of flooding existing homes • Will not meet the Government’s Garden Village criteria • NSC hasn’t got the resources to deliver a proper Garden Village it will just be a large housing estate. • Churchill/Mendip Spring is a North Somerset Council proposal that cannot be sustainably delivered. • Housing will be too dense • Lack of local employment opportunities. Thatcher’s is unlikely to grow as it is highly mechanised.

5 | P a g e

West of England Hearing Statement Matter 7.6: Churchill Joint Spatial Plan on behalf of Garden Village SD Examination Burrington Parish Council

• Putting people in dormitory settlements remote from facilities leads to other problems • Alternatives have not been properly considered • Location is unsustainable and it will be a commuter town for Bristol • Housing is for Bristol – Bristol has fastest employment growth in Europe but poor air quality and people commuting will exacerbate this problem. • Housing will not be affordable to the locals because of level of jobs and high cost of infrastructure • By protecting Green Belt, AONB and Flood plain there will be an area in the middle which joins up • When public transport becomes unviable ceases to operate • Commuter housing estates • Problems with drainage due to level, may need to pump - will this be resolved at the JSP? • Developers will ignore aspirations • Will create an overflow for W-S-M • Some volume house building is good, elsewhere the same builder is poor • Concerned that all the land including the ‘alternatives’ will be required.

Session 2: Discussion of scenarios • Flooding – Health and Safety issues around open channels and swales • Lack of viability/local affordability • Need community hub and spirit with sports facilities. Community Hall essential, early on. • ‘A centre’ needs to be achieved early on, where people can meet. Village needs a focus • Walking and cycling should be encouraged. • Community adhesion required with local management not a management company • Need good public transport to reduce reliance on cars • Maintain the Green Infrastructure • Need New Town legislation or developers will take the lead, NSC does not have the power to dictate how the SDL will develop and can’t manage a development like this. • The Council would need to acquire the land so that one body needs to oversee the whole project to ensure that it is properly planned and executed

6 | P a g e

West of England Hearing Statement Matter 7.6: Churchill Joint Spatial Plan on behalf of Garden Village SD Examination Burrington Parish Council

• Needs variety of housing sizes and tenure, need affordable housing for rent, starter homes and homes for the elderly • Need right proportion of social housing • Affordable housing should be for local people and need social renting for young people, concern that viability could reduce affordable housing • Need to keep the young people in the community – need to provide housing for local young people. • Quality of housing important • Need to understand what “high-quality” design means • Concern that the area could be blighted or developed piecemeal • Need a pledge that the road gets delivered first • No plans to improve or roads going north • How do you achieve uniformity in design with multiple developers? Developers win over NSC all the time. NSC should buy the land and let to the developer. • People will drive into Bristol, so the housing should be closer to Bristol • Some of the wettest ground has been allocated for employment • Need to do something with Stock Lane. • Need a direct cycle route to the Strawberry Line • Distance to Weston is not cyclable/sustainable • Without separation Churchill will lose its identity • Proposal needs a landscape strategy as visible from the AONB • Poundbury considered better practice • Mendip Spring is wet • Strawberry line is dark and wet and rhynes make it dangerous to cycle in the dark to or from Yatton Station. • As Weston is employment-led should this be as well? • Windmill Hill is not sustainable as a recreation facility for the proposed amount of housing as it is small and has issues with dog fouling. • Windmill hill will not screen the proposed development from the AONB • Need to improve things for existing settlements -links to shops/post office • Churchill lacks a centre • Need to understand how density affects development

7 | P a g e

West of England Hearing Statement Matter 7.6: Churchill Joint Spatial Plan on behalf of Garden Village SD Examination Burrington Parish Council

Session 3: Discussion of key development priorities and principles – what makes a good place? Major concerns that were expressed about the effect that the proposed SDL will have on the lanes and roads in the surrounding villages. Particularly if the Banwell Bypass is constructed in isolation with the impact of the additional 1,900 houses, that inextricably linked to the project, particularly on villages along the A368, Sandford, Churchill, Upper Langford, Rickford, Burrington, Blagdon and beyond as well as the A369 east of the A38, B3134 and of course the A38. There doesn’t appear to be any evidence of an assessment having been carried out. Detailed traffic modelling needs to be undertaken, of impacts on the surrounding area for the various scenarios at the relevant dates and for the results to be shared with the local communities. In particular, total clarity is need about whether the JSP and the Local Plan will be proposing a new Junction 21A on the M5 and a modified junction on A38/A368 at Churchill Gate – whether or not those and other road improvements are directly related to the proposed SDLs, to existing congestion or to other issues on the network such as the implications of committed and proposed airport expansion. Other comments: • Almost impossible to do Banwell bypass without the Sandford/Churchill bypass • A weight restriction on Stock Lane would help • The best arterial route would be a route to Clevedon, Yatton and the M5 J20 • Congresbury rejected a bypass due to infilling • Windmill Hill is a lovely place used by locals, additional users will spoil it • Loss of wildlife • Retained green space needs to be kept natural • Existing trees need to be kept • You can’t put 3,000 houses on 40% of the space without high density • Bespoke house design not the standard housing types volume builders provide. • Beautiful land between the development and Congresbury will be destroyed - have officers walked the area? • Needs some local shops • SDL should be separate from Langford, but there is concern that any separation will get filled in anyway. • Road to the crossroads should not go through the playing fields • Need a holistic masterplan from the council to comment on, need info on school places, shops and how it will be managed • Development is not sustainable or in the right place • Place-making is not happening – need to establish ground rules then people will engage

8 | P a g e

West of England Hearing Statement Matter 7.6: Churchill Joint Spatial Plan on behalf of Garden Village SD Examination Burrington Parish Council

• Need to attract employers. Employment will have to be highly skilled in order to pay the salaries needed to buy houses here as they will incur abnormal building costs. • Ashton Vale could attract high tech jobs because it would be linked via the to the new Bristol University quarter by Temple Meads. Bristol has a shortage of office space.’ • Proposal is under the airport flight path • Airport development plans only provide 450 jobs, 300 FTEs based on 15 million passengers by 2035. The majority of these will be minimum wage. • Should build houses near jobs not try to attract jobs to houses • Need to be aspirational with jobs - need higher paid jobs or young will not be able to afford to buy houses here. • Need to think about home working and co-working • Land at Mushroom farm but lorries need to use j21a • Concerns were also raised regarding the disappearance of the improvements to the A38 beyond Bristol Airport.

Miscellaneous • Why should other parishes be involved in designing Churchill’s Garden Village? • Lack of information • Why can’t we build in the flood plain, Holland does it • Green Belt is an unnecessary constraint • Expansion of the airport into the Green Belt justifies further use of the Green Belt • A planning vacuum will continue • Confusion over the transport proposals especially the changes to the JSP which appear to delete some proposals • Things have not moved on in the last year • Other Authorities are relaxing the Green Belt around Bristol, Long Ashton area more sensible. • Nailsea and Backwell considering ‘nibbling into the Green Belt’ - contradiction in the Issues and Option Document • Pleased that the review of settlement boundaries will only allow development within the settlement. • Allowing development ‘adjacent’ to settlement boundaries causes sprawl

9 | P a g e

West of England Hearing Statement Matter 7.6: Churchill Joint Spatial Plan on behalf of Garden Village SD Examination Burrington Parish Council

Further comments from the Parish Council: 1. NSC speakers introduced the workshop by recognising the high level of local opposition which exists to the 'Mendip Spring' proposal. This manoeuvre effectively removed much repeat critical comment from the group sessions. 2. Any debate was of limited value with the NSC Facilitator determined to adhere to an optimistic schedule which restricted comment from the floor. Promises to return to contentious issues were not kept even though the Workshop finished marginally early. 3. In principle we do not believe any binding issues regarding the Local Plan can be considered ahead of the Government Inspectors report on the Joint Spatial Study.

10 | P a g e