DOCSLIB.ORG

NORTH SOMERSET LOCAL PLAN 2036: ISSUES and OPTIONS DOCUMENT SEPTEMBER 2018 Comments from Diane Snape My Comments Are Submitted W

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
NORTH SOMERSET LOCAL PLAN 2036: ISSUES and OPTIONS DOCUMENT SEPTEMBER 2018 Comments from Diane Snape My Comments Are Submitted W NORTH SOMERSET LOCAL PLAN 2036: ISSUES AND OPTIONS DOCUMENT SEPTEMBER 2018 Comments from Diane Snape My comments are submitted without prejudice to my objections in principle to strategic development at Nailsea and Backwell and the delivery of significant transport infrastructure within the gap between Nailsea and Backwell. Please refer to my responses to the NSC Generating Ideas consultation and the JSP and JTP consultations. This Issues and Options consultation seems premature given that the JSP has not yet been examined in public. SECTION 2: NORTH SOMERSET WIDE ISSUES Question 3: Nailsea and Backwell (pages 12 - 13). Do you agree with these or are there other challenges or issues which we have not included and how might the Local Plan address these? Key issue 1: “… the Local Plan needs to test the scale of development proposed...” The testing of the scale of development is the role of the JSP not the Local Plan as I understand it. Please add another challenge/issue: “The impact of the proposed strategic road, metrobus and transport hub infrastructure on the quality of life of the many nearby residents, wildlife, the environment and the green belt, and whether this can be effectively mitigated”. Comment: This issue is particularly pertinent to the proposed road and metrobus link between Station Road and the A370 across the green belt, which if constructed would pass very close to many hundreds if not thousands of residents in South & East Nailsea and North Backwell/Backwell Common/Farleigh, with the pollution, noise and visual intrusion being magnified by the terrain, which necessitates the siting of the highway in the bottom of the valley (with incumbent flood risk) and most of the properties sitting above it - see section 8 of this document : transport issues: public health issues “...poor air quality as a result of congested roads…”. Key issue 4: please reword as follows: “… the potential future site and role of the rail station… “. Comment: the purpose of my proposed re-wording is to include consideration of relocating the railway station to a new site further west, closer to the Nailsea and Backwell SDLs, where space is less constricted and it is more feasible to establish a transport hub. (Clearly this is relevant only if the proposal to develop to the South West of Nailsea is upheld.) Key issue 7: The existing Nailsea town centre should remain the focal point. New developments should be located so as to facilitate access to the existing town centre and should not set up new local centres competing with the existing centre. Backwell residents also rely on Nailsea town centre for essential facilities such as supermarkets. Access routes between Nailsea and Backwell must not be impeded by new developments/infrastructure. 1 Key issue 10: Maintaining separation between the settlements of Nailsea and Backwell via green belt and strategic gap is another key issue which is important for quality of life, environment and wildlife. Key issue 10: there is a need to address traffic issues throughout the area, not only on the A370 and not only in Backwell. How the local plan might address these: The local plan must ensure that any infrastructure proposals include a thorough impact assessment and mitigation measures, with full prior consultation with affected residents including disclosure of projected traffic flows, noise modelling, and detailed traffic management plans including speed limits. In relation to infrastructure, most of the proposals in this issues and options document do not appear to include any alternative options. Alternatives should be developed and consulted upon, so that the least damaging/most effective alternatives may be selected. 3. Local Housing Growth How will Neighbourhood Plans fit with the Local Plan? A reference to Town Visions would be appropriate in this section. Question 5 (pages 14 - 15): Do you agree with these or are there other challenges or issues which we have not included and how might the Local Plan address these? Please include consideration of extending the green belt between Backwell and Nailsea to include Backwell Lake and the strategic gap. SECTION 4. GARDEN VILLAGES AND NEW COMMUNITIES (pages 28-61) Nailsea and Backwell Transport Schemes (pages 30 – 31): I strongly object to proposed new highway link between Station Road and the A370 [E3]. This route runs across green belt, sensitive landscape, prime agricultural land, wildlife habitat and very close to nature reserves (Backwell Lake, Backwell Common and Trendlewood Park). it runs right through the strategic gap between Nailsea and Backwell and in close proximity to established residential areas – the impact on local residents would be enormous. The intersection of the route with Station Road would lead to significant incremental congestion and pollution due to standing traffic waiting for right of way. The increased traffic, and the need to negotiate the junction, would substantially increase danger to pedestrians and cyclists, particularly students at Backwell primary and secondary schools and Nailsea commuters using the station. Please see my comments below on the concept diagram for Nailsea and alternative options. I support the removal of the previously proposed routing which passed close to the Tyntesfield estate to join the Long Ashton bypass near Flax Bourton. I believe this would have had a major adverse impact on this heritage site which could not have been adequately mitigated. If despite concerns, the proposal for new highway [E3] is upheld, I believe the proposed timing within the first phase is massively premature. In view of the previously identified 2 challenges associated with [E3], coupled with the fact that the highway link within the Nailsea SDL [W3] is not to be constructed until the fourth phase, I propose that the highway [E3] should be moved to the fourth phase, to coincide with the highway link [W3], which will feed traffic into it. Metrobus services, if required prior to phase four, should use the existing highway via Station Road and the A370 and hence would act as a pilot scheme to test commercial feasibility of and consumer appetite for such a service before embarking on the challenges of constructing a new dedicated busway with all the challenges that this entails. I do not support the development of the existing Nailsea and Backwell station as a transport hub. The current station is very small and basic and there is very limited scope to improve the facilities in its current location. If the proposal to develop to the South West of Nailsea is upheld, I support relocating the railway station to a new site further west, closer to the Nailsea and Backwell SDLs, where space is less constricted and it is more feasible to establish a transport hub, with appropriate walking/cycling and bus connections. This would also facilitate improvement of the rail service by providing longer platforms and lift/disabled access and extended parking. I specifically oppose the development of a multi-storey car park at the existing Nailsea and Backwell station. This would result in unacceptable visual intrusion into the landscape, including light pollution. I do not believe the impact of this could be adequately mitigated. I support the removal of the previously proposed highway link across the SSSI between Nailsea and the M5 at Junction 20, and the previously proposed link from the Nailsea SDL to the A370 west of Backwell. Both of these would have inappropriately funnelled through traffic into the constrainted and sensitive gap between Backwell and Nailsea. In principle I support improvements to the existing highway network to the M5 at junctions 19 and 20 [N1 and W10]. However, improvements to Portbury Lane [N1] will need to be designed carefully so as to avoid adverse impact on the sensitive landscape through which this route passes. Improvements to the T junction between Portbury Lane and the B3128 are already urgently required and the addition of traffic lights would be welcomed. I support the proposal to add a new highway link between Hanham Way and the B3130 [W4]. However, given that the land off Causeway View and the land off Engine Lane are already allocated for development in the plan to 2026, it seems appropriate to bring this link forward from the second to the first phase. The alignment of this route and mitigation measures need careful consideration to avoid adverse impact on Tickenham Church and its setting. I support the proposal to add a new highway link between the B3130 and junction 20 [W5]. This seems a relatively straightforward development which would have an immediate positive impact on traffic flows and local residents, so I would like to see it brought forward to the first or second phase. This should link to the new road which I assume will be required through the development off Causeway View in the site allocations to 2026, emerging either onto Pound Lane or directly onto Clevedon Road near the fire, ambulance and police stations (NB please add 3 this road to the concept diagram) and an onward link from Clevedon Road to the B3130 Nailsea to Wraxall road, which will also serve the industrial estates and improve the routings for fire appliances, ambulances and police vehicles, taking this inappropariate traffic away from Nailsea town centre. I object to the proposed highway link within the Nailsea SDL [W3], particularly the section of the route which is proposed to pass through the gap between Nailsea and Backwell railway station and Backwell Lake. Space in this area is very constrained, so the route
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Metrobus Operation
    Draft response Overall Category Sub category Issue/Question In order to secure operation of MetroBus services the Local Authorities intend to make a Quality Partnership MetroBus Scheme (QPS). A QPS is a statutory arrangement under which the transport authorities provide and maintain MetroBus must be fast, frequent, affordable and reliable. Only if facilities and in return bus operators are permitted to use those facilities if they meet the specific ‘service operation these objectives are guaranteed to be met is the scheme standards’ set out in the QPS. The ‘service standards’ for MetroBus services include minimum frequencies & Objectives worthwhile implementing. If the Council does not operate timings, maximum fares, ticketing requirements and vehicle quality standards (including emission standards). MetroBus and it is operated by a private operator then how can the required level of service be guaranteed? It is planned for the same approach to be employed to secure operation of services on the CPME . In addition, new legislation to be introduced during this parliament will extend the powers that are available to Local Authorities. In order to secure operation of MetroBus services the Local Authorities intend to make a Quality Partnership Scheme (QPS). A QPS is a statutory arrangement under which the transport authorities provide and maintain facilities and in return bus operators are permitted to use those facilities if they meet the specific ‘service standards’ set out in the QPS. The ‘service standards’ for MetroBus services include minimum frequencies & timings, maximum fares, ticketing requirements and vehicle quality standards (including emission standards). No information is available regarding MetroBus vehicle type.
    [Show full text]
  • This Map Shows the Parks, Nature Reserves and Other Green Spaces
    ay Dowsell W Brinsham L e e Fields Park c hp o o l W a 1 y E astf eld D r C iv l e a C y o h i o l l p D e This map shows the parks, nature reserves and r r s i v D e r i R v a e other green spaces across Yate and Chipping n d o Peg Hill l p Millside h Skatepark Sodbury for you to discover and enjoy. A v Open e 2 Brimsham n u Green e Space Peg Hill To Thornbury - School 4 Avon Cycle Way Tyler’s North Road 3 Community Field G Primary o o d s a School e o G R r ill e H W en Gravel e W l l i a ) n y 9 W 05 g ( 4 t B B o ( 4 i c ay n 0 ad x Ro k W fa R n Hali 5 Chipping w ee o 9 r a ) n a G d e ree Sodbury Golf s Wellington G r o se o o R G Go Course Road o 5 Wellington a Chipping Open d Avon Cycle Road Family Space / Sodbury Way Practice B Frome 4 Common 0 6 Valley 0 G Walkway reenways Road ay ong W str C rm G A r a re n e l n e wa i y g s R C h o ad h C u o r c u h r Tyndale t R R o e Primary o a v Tyndale i a d r d School D Park s St Mary’s g n N Play Area o o L r t venue h e A s R lro o e a M The Ridings d Ridge St.
    [Show full text]
  • VISION for NAILSEA Approved at Town Council 27 June 2018 1 Version
    NAILSEA TOWN COUNCIL: VISION FOR NAILSEA North Somerset Council are preparing a new Local Plan for the period 2018- 2036 which will set out detailed policies and allocations to deliver a new planning policy framework. They are encouraging towns and parishes to prepare their own plans with a view to these being incorporated within the Local Plan. Nailsea Town Council has agreed to proceed with the preparation of a Town Plan. The timetable for the Local Plan is to issue a draft in June 2018 for formal consultation in September with a final plan issued in 2019 following the outcome of the JSP examination. The JSP Examination in Public (EIP) is scheduled for October 2018 and the final report published in mid-2019. The JSP and Local Plan may be adopted in early 2020. These timescales are subject to possible delays. This Town Vision is designed to set out the high level aspirations for the period to 2036. Once approved by Town Council it will be publicized for feedback from residents. Following this and consequent upon developments with the JSP and Local Plan, more detail will be added. Summary of Town Vision • Increased and balanced population • Carefully designed housing developments to a masterplan • A town with safe access throughout for pedestrians and cyclists • Effective and responsive public transport throughout the town so as to minimize car use • Efficient and readily accessible public transport for commuters • A thriving town centre where residents will want to live, meet and socialize as well as shop • A range of leisure activities
    [Show full text]
  • Avonrider Bristolrider
    Bus times from 1 September 2019 Day £7 Week £32.50 £5.50 for students with NUS card and under-16s £24.50 for students with NUS card and under-16s • Unlimited travel on virtually all buses in the West of England area Keynsham Town Service » (Bath & North East Somerset, Bristol, North Somerset and South Gloucestershire) via Chandag Road • Buy your ticket on the bus (except MetroBus) www.travelinesw.com 663 • Also available on Travelwest smartcards AvonRider is sold and accepted on bus services operated by Abus, Arleen Coaches, B&NES Passenger Transport, Bath Bus 0871 200 22 33 Company, Bristol Community Transport, Carmel Bristol, Citistar, CT Coaches, Eurotaxis, Faresaver, First West of England, Somerbus and Stagecoach West, except that: Calls cost 12p per minute plus your phone company’s access charge Keynsham » Saltford * AvonRider is not valid on Airport Flyers A1 and A3, South West Falcon, tour buses, express coaches or services for special events. * on service A4 (Bath to Bristol Airport), AvonRider is not valid between Highridge Common and Bristol Airport via Gaston Avenue and Waitrose 664 AvonRider is not valid on any other company’s bus services. AvonRider is also valid to and from Chippenham, Melksham (Bowerhill) and Westbury on direct buses to and from Bath. Day tickets are valid on the day of issue and until 0259 the following morning. Weekly tickets are valid for seven consecutive days. www.travelwest.info/rider Keynsham Town Service » Prices correct at September 2019 but subject to change 665 via Holmoak Road and Broadlands These services are operated by Bristol Community Transport – under contract to Bath & North East Somerset Council.
    [Show full text]
  • Joint Local Transport Plan 3 – Progress Report 2016
    West of England Joint Local Transport Plan 3 Progress Report 2015/16 1. Introduction In the Joint Local Transport Plan 3 (JLTP3) we said that we would produce an annual report on progress made in delivering transport improvements. This report outlines what was delivered in 2015/16 and how we performed against our targets and indicators. 2. Major Schemes In late 2011 the Department for Transport (DfT) agreed to make available £135m towards the cost of five major schemes in the West of England and during 2015/16 we continued to focus our efforts on progressing delivery of these substantial infrastructure projects: Bath Transportation Package The great news is this scheme was substantially complete by the end of March 2016 with the final 17 bus shelters and 12 stops, junction upgrades including Charles Street/Monmouth Street and the Lower Borough Walls and Stall Street pedestrian improvements installed. MetroBus Ashton Vale to Temple Meads Key achievements in 2015/16 include: Permanent guideway works next to the Create Centre and on-highway works on Smeaton Road/Cumberland Road and the busway on Ashton Fields started. Completion of the Redcliffe Hill inbound works and commencement of outbound works. Flood defence wall construction on Cumberland Road. Ashton Avenue Swing Bridge shot-blasting. Qualifying tenders returned for Bathurst Basin Bridge work, and Network Rail over-bridge agreement completed. MetroBus refurbishment works on Ashton Avenue Swing Bridge North Fringe to Hengrove Package Diggers went on site in early August 2015 and works are now well progressed with over a year left to run in the construction programme.
    [Show full text]
  • Annex 15 Stakeholder Analysis Plan
    Annex 15 Stakeholder Analysis Plan North Fringe to Hengrove Package MetroBus - Stakeholder Analysis Plan for full approval Stakeholder Analysis Plan Good communications have formed an important part of the development of the North Fringe to Hengrove Package (NFHP) MetroBus scheme. Public consultation was first carried out in 2005 as part of the Joint Local Transport Plan consultation programme at the concept level. Stakeholder engagement has continued with public consultation consisting of advertised public exhibitions, stakeholder presentations, regular reports to the Joint Transport Executive Committee, preplanning consultation, formal planning consultations, media news releases, meetings with stakeholders and decision makers, social media contact and more. A range of stakeholder contact has been on-going across the network at any one time, as the three schemes have been progressing at different timescales. Information on all the schemes has been made available on the www.travelwest.info/projects site, and a MetroBus twitter hashtag has been followed by many and used by the project to direct people to the website and answer questions. Press releases for the three projects have been issued at regular intervals, either as stand-alone stories, or as part of the regular updates to the Joint Transport Executive Committee of the West of England. There has been considerable local interest in the MetroBus services, providing different news angles to maintain interest in the programme between the higher profile periods of planning application submission, determination and the construction stage. For the MetroBus network the planning permission process for NFHP and South Bristol Link, and the Transport and Works Act for Ashton Vale to Temple Meads route, has required significant public consultation and was preceded by wide public interaction.
    [Show full text]
  • The Complete Guide
    your bus tickets From 21 st July 2019... the complete guide Zone Bath Bristol Zone Weston-super-Mare Zone West of England Zones on yourbuy mobile tickets Welcome to your new fares guide Contents Inside you’ll find tickets that cover our 3 main urban areas – How do I buy a ticket using mTickets? 5 Bath, Bristol and Weston-super-Mare – and our entire West of England area, which means you can travel to a whole host of great places like Wells, Glastonbury and Bradford-on-Avon. Ticket types 6 For less frequent travellers, our single tickets will cover Ticket discounts 7 you for one journey, while our Day ticket means you can travel as many times as you like for one, all-in price. Where to buy tickets 8 If you travel more frequently, why not try a Week ticket? Bath Zone fares & tickets 9 This can save you up to 27% for an adult ticket compared to buying 5 Day tickets for your weekly commute. Bristol Zone fares & tickets 12 Our Month and Year tickets are even better value, and we also do a special version of our month ticket, called Weston-super-Mare Zone fares & tickets 15 Unlimited. This saves 10% on the Month ticket price and is hassle-free, as payment is by direct debit and we West of England Zone fares & tickets 18 send the ticket to your phone every month. Simple. West of England Plus Zone fares & tickets 21 If you are travelling with family or friends, check out our Group tickets. For the same price as two adult Day tickets, a group How are West of England Zone single fares calculated? 22 of up to 5 can travel all day for £4.40 in Weston-super-Mare, £8.80 in Bath or Bristol and £13.20 for West of England.
    [Show full text]
  • Tfgb Bristol Bath Rapid Transit Plan
    A RAPID TRANSIT PLAN FOR BRISTOL AND BATH CONTENTS Executive Summary ........................................................ 2 Introduction: Bristol Deserves Rapid Transit ................... 5 A Phased Programme ..................................................... 10 Main Paper Aims and Constraints ..................................................... 14 1. Transport aims 2. Practicalities 3. Politics Proposed Rapid Transit lines ........................................ 19 Bristol .......................................................................... 19 Bath ............................................................................. 33 Staffing, Organisation and Negotiations ......................... 36 Suggested Programme (Bristol area only) ........................ 36 Appendix:TfGB’s Bristol Rapid Transit Map ..................... 37 tfgb.org v51 17-09-20 Map by Tick Ipate 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY These proposals for a twenty-first century transport system are not from a single- issue lobby group; Transport for Greater Bristol (TfGB) offers a comprehensive package of transport and environment measures which builds on the emerging good practice found across the region such as MetroWest, the City Bus Deal in Bristol and the well-organised bus-rail interchange at Bath Spa. As we emerge from the special circumstances of the Covid crisis we need modern transport planning for active travel, health, opportunity, inclusion, social justice, and action on climate change. It’s also good for business. Mass transit is again being discussed in
    [Show full text]
  • WECA Committee 1 February 2019 Agenda Item 8
    WECA Committee 1 February 2019 Agenda item 8 – Items from the public Statements received 1 David Redgewell Public funding for bus services 2 David Redgewell Light rail / bus issues 3 Alan Morris Funding for walking and cycling improvements 4 Cllr Martin Fodor, BCC Procurement strategy and Social Value 5 Max Langer Bus Franchising for the West of England Statement 1 Submission to WECA Budget Meeting 18th Jan, WECA Scrutiny 23 Jan , WECA Committee & Joint Committee 1 Feb Public Funding for Bus Services We are very concerned over the lack of agreed funding and commissioning of bus services that required by the local communities that are not commercially viable. These lack of services are now severe hardship and isolation. WECA have a duty to provide a bus strategy and then to commission such services. This is a particular issue in rural communities such as the 179 which runs from Bath to Midsummer Norton which have no evening, Saturday or Sunday services. In Bristol the 36 and 96 have no evening or Sunday services. Also there are still gaps in provision that need addressing. Since the creation of the Combined Authority the powers and duties have transferred so we need to see adequate provision of services by the Combined Authority and the budget spent. There are also duties to work closely on cross boundary services especially with North Somerset. We also wish to see a prompt resolution to the MetroBus provision on the South Bristol loop. We welcome the T3 service at Bristol Parkway but the MetroBus infrastructure needs to be built rapidly as the service has started running.
    [Show full text]
  • North Fringe to Hengrove Metrobus Report on Informal Consultation Nov 2014 - Jan 2015
    North Fringe to Hengrove MetroBus Report on informal consultation Nov 2014 - Jan 2015 Index Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…. 3 Consultation methodology……………………………………………………………………………………………….…. 4 Promoting the consultation……………………………………………………………………………………………..…. 5 Website disruption and consultation extension…………………………………………………………….……. 6 Consultation responses………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 7 Summary of all consultation comments and the project’s responses……………………………..…. 10 Equalities information………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 34 Appendix A: Map of consultation zones……………………………………………………………………………. 37 Appendix B: Full list of consultation drawings by zone…………………………………………………..…. 38 Appendix C: Paper plans for libraries……………………………………………………………………………..…. 40 Appendix D: Paper questionnaire…………………………………………………………………………………..…. 41 Appendix E: Promotional postcard……………………………………………………………………………………. 42 Appendix F: MetroBus newsletter……………………………………………………………………………….……. 43 2 1. Introduction North Fringe to Hengrove Package The North Fringe to Hengrove Package (NFHP) MetroBus scheme is one of three interconnected Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) schemes that together form the MetroBus network. The NFHP MetroBus scheme will link areas of housing and economic growth in the North and East Fringes with a major regeneration area in South Bristol via Bristol City Centre. It will provide a fast, frequent and reliable public transport service using bus priority measures and new infrastructure, including a new bus-only junction on
    [Show full text]
  • Cribbs Patchway Metrobus Extension ‐ Design and Access Statement
    Cribbs Patchway MetroBus Extension ‐ Design and Access Statement Prepared for South Gloucestershire Council February 2018 CH2M 1 The Square, Temple Quay Bristol, BS1 6DG Contents Section Page Document History .......................................................................................................................... iii 1. Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Overview of the Scheme ............................................................................................... 1 1.2 Requirement for a Design and Access Statement ........................................................ 1 1.3 Content of this Report .................................................................................................. 2 2. Assessment ........................................................................................................................ 3 2.1 Physical Environment .................................................................................................... 3 2.2 Planning Policy Context ................................................................................................ 4 2.3 Involvement .................................................................................................................. 5 3. Evolution ............................................................................................................................ 6 3.1 Design Development ....................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Annex 1 Value for Money Report
    Annex 1 Value for Money Report North Fringe to Hengrove Package Full Approval - Value for Money Appraisal South Gloucestershire Council and Bristol City Council 14 November 2014 North Fringe to Hengrove Package Full Approval - Value for Money Appraisal Notice This document and its contents have been prepared and are intended solely for South Gloucestershire Council and Bristol City Council’s information and use in relation to the Full Approval submission for the North Fringe to Hengrove Package. Atkins Ltd assumes no responsibility to any other party in respect of or arising out of or in connection with this document and/or its contents. This document has 83 pages including the cover. Document history Job number: 5101742 Document ref: Revision Purpose description Originated Checked Reviewed Authorised Date Rev 1.0 Final Report RT/HB/EN/PC HB RT JF 14/11/14 Client signoff Client South Gloucestershire Council and Bristol City Council Project North Fringe to Hengrove Package Document title Full Approval - Value for Money Appraisal Job no. 5101742 Copy no. Document reference Atkins Full Approval - Value for Money Appraisal | Version 1.0 | 14 November 2014 | 5101742 North Fringe to Hengrove Package Full Approval - Value for Money Appraisal Table of contents Chapter Pages 1. Introduction 1 Background 1 Purpose of the Report 2 Structure of the Report 2 2. Summary of Aspects Included in the Appraisal 5 Introduction 5 Content of the Appraisal 6 3. Modelling and Appraisal Update 9 Introduction 9 Modelling Updates 9 Appraisal Updates 15 4. Revised Economic Appraisal Results 29 Introduction 29 Transport Economic Efficiency (Benefits) 29 Public Accounts (Costs) 30 Benefit-Cost Ratio (BCR) 30 Appendices 33 Appendix A.
    [Show full text]