Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

4-05 Issue | 31 January 2012

This report takes into account the particular instructions and requirements of our client. It is not intended for and should not be relied Ove Arup & Partners Ltd upon by any third party and no responsibility is 63 St Thomas Street undertaken to any third party. Bristol BS1 6JZ United Kingdom www.arup.com Job number 216480

Document Verification

Job title Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Job number 216480 Document title Strategy Refresh File reference

Document ref 4-05 Revision Date Filename SID_Refresh_Report_Draft1_2012 -01 -20.docx Draft 1 18 Jan Description First draft 2012

Prepared by Checked by Approved by Name Rachel Birrell / Tim Tim Durant Wayne Dyer Durant Signature Final 31 Jan Filename SIDS_Refresh_Report_Final_Draft_2012-01-31.docx Draft 2012 Description Final Draft for issue to Sedgemoor DC

Prepared by Checked by Approved by Name Rachel Birrell / Tim Tim Durant Wayne Dyer Durant Signature

Issue 31 Jan Filename SIDS_Refresh_Report_ISSUE_2012-01-31.docx 2012 Description

Prepared by Checked by Approved by Name Rachel Birrell / Tim Tim Durant Wayne Dyer Durant Signature

Filename Description

Prepared by Checked by Approved by Name

Signature

Issue Document Verification with Document

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

Contents

Page

1 Introduction 1 1.1 Purpose and background 1 1.2 Structure of the report 2 1.3 Supplementary study outputs 3

2 Context for the Delivery Strategy 4 2.1 Planning policy, guidance and strategies 4 2.2 Development viability and establishing a Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) 10 2.3 Progress towards consenting of strategic sites 11 2.4 Flood risk management and local action 12 2.5 “Place-making” and regeneration 14 2.6 Neighbourhood Funds and Neighbourhood Plans 15 2.7 Hinkley Point C new nuclear capacity 15 2.8 Sustainable rural communities 16

3 Infrastructure needs and projects by sector 16 3.1 Community and cultural 16 3.2 Education 22 3.3 Emergency services 33 3.4 Energy 38 3.5 Health 42 3.6 Flood management, water & wastewater 47 3.7 Information Technology & Communications (ITC) 51 3.8 Sport, leisure & open space 53 3.9 Transport and public realm 63 3.10 Waste 67

4 Strategic sites and priority infrastructure projects 71 4.1 Cattle Market 72 4.2 Durleigh Road 78 4.3 Wembdon 83 4.4 Willstock Village (South Bridgwater Phase 3) 89 4.5 Somerset Bridge 96 4.6 Northgate 97 4.7 Puriton Energy Park 98 4.8 Burnham-on-Sea Urban Extension 99 4.9 Highbridge Boatyard 104

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012

SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

5 Developer Contributions Policy, the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) and Prioritisation 108 5.1 Planning Obligations and the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) 108 5.2 Developer Contributions Viability Assessment 112 5.3 Categorisation and prioritisation 113

6 Alternative Finance Mechanisms 117 6.1 Grant 117 6.2 Local Taxation and Revenue Sources 118 6.3 Lottery Funding 121

7 Governance and Capacity for Delivery 122 7.1 Governance for Infrastructure Planning 122 7.2 Infrastructure Planning as a ‘Live’ Process 124 7.3 Creating Capacity to Drive Delivery 124

8 Conclusions and Next Steps 125

Tables

Table 1 - Infrastructure categories covered by the study. Table 2 - Core Strategy Housing Allocations and Strategic Sites Table 3 - Existing capacity with primary school catchments Table 4 - Secondary school forecast figures Table 5 - Secondary schools surplus/deficit compared to net capacity at 30th June 2010 Table 6 – Potential for renewable and low carbon energy development in Sedgemoor (results of PPS 1 Supplement Study, October 2010) Table 7 - Somerset's Total Waste Management Capacity in 2010 Table 8 - Number of Waste Facilities in Somerset by Type Table 9 - Somerset Waste Capacity Requirements Table 10 - Developer Contributions Options - the Pros and Cons of the S106, Tariff & CIL approaches. Table 11 - Infrastructure Sectors Hierarchy of Need

Figures

Figure 1 - Chart showing progress on consenting of greenfield and brownfield sites (dwellings) Figure 2 - Properties at Flood Risk: Top Ten by Local Authority Figure 3 - Devon and Somerset Fire and Rescue Service 10 minute response times

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012

SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

Figure 4 - Chart showing indicative infrastructure charges per dwelling Figure 5- Flood Risk Management Levy offset against Insurance Premiums

Appendices

Appendix A Infrastructure Needs Assessment

A1 Libraries

A2 Archives

A3 Community Centres

A4 Early Years Education

A5 Primary Schools

A6 Secondary Schools

A7 Primary Healthcare – Doctors

A8 Primary Healthcare – Dentists

A9 Secondary Healthcare – Acute Beds

A10 Secondary Healthcare – Other Beds

A11 Indoor Sports – Swimming Pools

A12 Indoor Sports – Sports Halls

A13 Playing Pitches

A14 Other Outdoor Sports

A15 Recreational Open Space

A16 Local Accessible Natural Greenspace

Appendix B Sustainable Transport Fund - Preliminary Calculations

B1 Sustainable Transport Fund – Preliminary Calculations

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012

SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

1 Introduction

1.1 Purpose and background The principal objective of the Infrastructure Delivery Strategy has been to assess the transport, utilities, social and green infrastructure that will be required to support housing and employment growth in Sedgemoor to 2027, as set out in the Core Strategy adopted in October 2011. This report provides an update of the original Infrastructure Delivery Strategy (published June 2010) and draft sections were submitted to support the Core Strategy Examination in Public. Moving forward it is expected that the information presented here will form an important element of the evidence base supporting a Sedgemoor Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL). The preparation of an Infrastructure Delivery Strategy has an important role to play in ensuring that the wider vision for Sedgemoor set out in the Sustainable Community Strategy becomes reality. The upgrading of existing facilities and provision of new infrastructure provides a means for promoting inward investment and economic development, improving quality of life for residential communities, and adapting to and mitigating the localised effects of climate change. With respect to promoting economic development, Sedgemoor is a distinctive and attractive district, heavily fashioned by its industrial heritage, strategic location and its natural environment. Underlying structural weaknesses in the economy mean there is an imperative to not just strengthen traditional sectors, such as manufacturing and tourism, but to also develop new employment off the back of strategic opportunities, such as the proposed construction of a Hinkley Point C nuclear power station. Bridgwater, the district’s largest town, provides a natural focus for this activity and the adopted Core Strategy makes provision for significant housing and employment growth at the town. The closure of Innovia in the summer of 2005 marked a turning point for Bridgwater and major commercial investment and transformation of the public realm is now being actively pursued. In past decades the cellophane industry provided the mainstay of a manufacturing based economy, which over time has steadily destabilized with the result that Sedgemoor now has a high proportion of residents living in communities categorised as within the 10% and 20% most deprived nationally. Much progress has been made towards reversing this structural economic weakness and Bridgwater is now becoming well established as a regional logistics and distribution centre benefiting from its location on the strategic highway network. Further priority areas for economic investment include the retail and tourism sectors, education and the energy sector. The Bridgwater Challenge has developed a vision and 50 year programme of transformation, which seeks to bring about a re-vitalised image and facilitate further diversification of the economic base. The movement strategy and public realm enhancements developed in the vision will also have an essential role to play in stitching new and old Bridgwater together, facilitating more sustainable internal trips around the town and ensuring place making investments are prioritised to set the town apart from its contemporaries. Bridgwater Challenge

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 1 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

proposals such as the Meads EcoPark, together with plans for new secondary schools, will benefit existing and future residents alike. During the production of the Core Strategy, communities at Burnham-on-Sea and Highbridge also advocated growth, arguing that positive investment rather than stagnation is what the towns require. The Core Strategy now incorporates an allocation for an urban extension adjacent to the towns, which could help support improvements to social infrastructure. There are also aspirations to enhance the public realm around Highbridge town centre and Burnham seafront, supporting the tourism industry that is the economic mainstay of Sedgemoor’s northern coastline area. Sedgemoor is a community that has a front line role to play in the multi-faceted challenges of accommodating population and housing growth whilst developing resilience to the threats of climate change. Stretching from Cheddar Gorge in the north to the Quantock Hills in the south and across Bridgwater Bay to Burnham- on-Sea, the physical setting of Sedgemoor provides tourism and lifestyle benefits, but also presents threats. Sedgemoor encompasses large parts of the Somerset Levels and Moors, a reclaimed landscape where active management of water levels and flood risk management have been a historic necessity. Climate change and projected sea level rise are expected to exacerbate the risk of flooding further, however the District Council are already taking steps in partnership with the Environment Agency to deliver the Parrett Barrier, a strategic flood risk management solution required beyond the current plan period. Sedgemoor is renowned for its ‘pro commerce’ and ‘can do’ attitude and its ability to respond effectively to investment opportunities. In developing an infrastructure and delivery strategy, it has been important to assimilate and build on the substantial body of on-going work and initiatives, while making recommendations on priority actions that should be pursued as the District Council moves from Core Strategy production into an implementation phase.

1.2 Structure of the report The Infrastructure Delivery Strategy document is intended to encapsulate: an assessment of infrastructure required to support planned growth; a review of projects that are already in the pipeline; and our recommendations on steps the Council could take to facilitate infrastructure delivery. Table 1 sets out the infrastructure sectors that are covered by the study. Table 1 - Infrastructure categories covered by the study. Infrastructure Categories Infrastructure Types Community & Cultural Facilities Libraries and archives; community centres and cultural facilities; and social services. Education Early Years; primary education; secondary education, and further education. Emergency Services Ambulance service; Fire and Rescue service; and police. Energy Electricty generation and distribution; and Gas distribution. Health Primary health care, comprising GPs and dentists; and secondary health care. Flood Management, Water and Flood risk management; water supply and wastewater Wastewater services.

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 2 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

Information Technology and Broadband internet access Communications Sports Facilities, Recreation and Swimming pools; sports halls; playing pitches; other outdoor Open Space sports; parks and gardens; children’s play space; and natural greenspace Transport and Public Realm Highways, public transport, walking and cycling; and public realm improvements Waste Solid waste management

The contents and structure of the Strategy are as follows: • Section 2 sets out important planning policy framework, contextual factors and circumstances for Sedgemoor that could influence the delivery of infrastructure. • Section 3 provides a sector by sector summary of: - organisational responsibilities; - an assessment of the infrastructure required to support planned development; - key projects that are already being progressed; and - whether there is a reasonable prospect of provision taking account of infrastructure funding opportunities and challenges. • Section 4 takes a look at Core Strategy strategic sites, providing an initial view of the infrastructure projects that are required or would be beneficial to support their development. • Section 5 sets out recommendations on the development of a Community Infrastructure Levy and complementary use of S106 Planning Obligations. • Section 6 considers other potential funding sources that could be accessed to help deliver priority infrastructure projects. • Section 7 considers the most appropriate governance arrangements to provide the forum for a collaborative approach to infrastructure planning and suggestions on how organisational capacity for delivering projects could be developed. • Section 8 summarises the key recommendations and actions for the Council and its partner agencies.

1.3 Supplementary study outputs The following two study outputs have been issued alongside the Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Refresh: • Infrastructure Needs Calculator – the calculator spreadsheet utilises national benchmark standards to provide a high level assessment of social infrastructure necessary to support planned growth. The outputs from the calculator are summarised in Section 3 and set out at Appendix A. • Infrastructure Scheme Tracker – the tracker spreadsheet lists infrastructure schemes and provides a means for monitoring progress towards delivery, providing site and funding details and outline programme information.

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 3 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

2 Context for the Delivery Strategy

2.1 Planning policy, guidance and strategies A brief introduction to the planning policy, guidance and related strategies informing the Infrastructure Delivery Strategy is provided below.

2.1.1 National legislation, policy and guidance This Infrastructure Delivery Strategy has been updated to take account of policy changes and strategy updates at the national and local levels. Most notably, these include the changes to planned housing figures in the adopted version of the Core Strategy. Localism Act (November 2011) The Localism Bill became an Act of Parliament on 16th November 2011 after it was granted royal assent by the Queen. The Act represents a key part of the Government’s agenda to shift power away from central government and with it brings about significant changes to the planning system including: • The abolition of Regional Spatial Strategies. • Promotion of neighbourhood planning whereby local community groups will have the power to apply Neighbourhood Development Orders and prepare Neighbourhood Development Plans. • Provides for the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) to be used to provide the initial costs of infrastructure or on an ongoing basis. Local authorities will be required to produce CIL Charging Schedules, which will be subject to independent examination. • Provides for the CIL to contribute towards funding priority projects in the local area being impacted upon by the development. The Act contains provision for a proportion of CIL receipts (Neighbourhood Funds) to be passed to another body, such as a town or parish council, from the charging authority to which it is paid. National Infrastructure Plan (November 2011) The first National Infrastructure Plan was published in October 2010. It sets out the Government’s overall vision for the future of UK economic infrastructure and outlines the major challenges and investment needed to underpin sustainable growth in the UK. The plan was introduced in order to provide clarity on the role of Government in specifying the infrastructure needed and how the Government can remove barriers to providing infrastructure. The Government subsequently published an updated National Infrastructure Plan in November 2011 which provides a cross-sectional analysis of the UK’s infrastructure networks. This includes a series of key infrastructure projects to be delivered in order to ensure that the UK’s infrastructure is maintained and improved over time, and remains competitive in the global context. The plan sets out an approach to coordinating public and private finance, which includes prioritising capital investment in infrastructure that supports growth and encouraging private investment to finance infrastructure.

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 4 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

The key priority projects are set out in the plan, and in the south west this includes the new Hinkley Point C new nuclear power station. Other infrastructure projects that will be funded were not referred to specifically but include those contained within specific funding packages such the Growing Places Fund, which includes £14.2m allocated to the Heart of the South West Local Enterprise Partnership. The Growing Places funding package will fund infrastructure projects in order to unlock development. Planning Policy Statement 12 ‘Local Spatial Planning’ (June 2008) The infrastructure planning process is essential if the Sedgemoor Core Strategy is to provide an integrated spatial plan in accordance with Government guidance. PPS12 advises that spatial planning underpins the wider corporate strategy of the Council and Local Strategic Partnership (LSP) in that it brings together a very wide range of different services (paragraph 2,2). Since most infrastructure and service providers require land and premises to operate, the infrastructure planning process can help support the sustainable delivery of services and coordination amongst organisations. PPS12 sets out the following guidance on what the infrastructure planning process should comprise (paragraph 4.9): “Good infrastructure planning considers the infrastructure required to support development, costs, sources of funding, timescales for delivery and gaps in funding. This allows for the identified infrastructure to be prioritised in discussions with key local partners. This has been a major theme highlighted and considered via HM Treasury’s CSR07 Policy Review on Supporting Housing Growth. The infrastructure planning process should identify, as far as possible: - infrastructure needs and costs; - phasing of development; - funding sources; and - responsibilities for delivery.” Draft National Planning Policy Framework (July 2011) The National Planning Policy Framework was consulted on between July 2011 and October 2011, the Government is currently examining the representations that were made during the consultation and are expected to publish the final NPPF later in 2012. In terms of plan making, the NPPF sets out that local authorities should set out the strategic priorities for the area in the Local Plan and should “plan positively for the development and infrastructure required in the area to meet objectives, principles and policies in this framework”, this includes the provision of infrastructure for transport, minerals, waste, telecoms, health, security, community infrastructure and other local facilities (para 23).

2.1.2 Local Policy, Strategies and Guidance Somerset Future Transport Plan (2011-2026) Somerset’s Future Transport Plan sets out a long term strategy for helping to deliver its transport priorities in a context of reduced funding. This plan sets out

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 5 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

ways to help local people travel more sustainably and actions to tackle climate change, noise, air quality and impacts on landscapes and biodiversity. To facilitate and to improve provision for all modes of transport, Somerset County Council will work to:

• Maintain the network of public rights of way; • Consider how emerging transport technologies and ICT can help the council meet its priorities; • Encourage developers to deliver sustainable developments; • Improve parking to encourage more sustainable means of travel; • Work with hauliers to advise on the most appropriate freight routes; • Work on maintaining the network to ensure best use of resources. Bridgwater, Taunton & Wellington Future Transport Strategy (November 2011) The objectives of the Bridgwater, Taunton and Wellington future transport strategy are designed to reflect local issues that need addressing but also take into account national priorities. The Strategy’s key objectives are: • Supporting the Economy - Reduce use of the strategic network for local trips; reduce car use for short distance journeys; increase flood resilience; reduce rate of growth in journey times; and improve journey time reliability. • Stengthening Communities - Improve accessibility to public transport and walking and cycling opportunities; prioritise access to/from deprived wards; improve levels of physical fitness; and maintain self containment; • Protecting the Environment - Reduce rate of growth of greenhouse gas emissions; reduce rate of growth of noise; reduce levels of NOX and particulates; increase species and habitat diversity; protect archaeological and historic heritage; and improve visual appearance of streetscapes; and • Making Travel Safer - Reduce total number of casualties; reduce child casualties; reduce cycling, pedestrian, motorcycle and public transport casualties; and reduce crime and fear of crime on public transport and in urban spaces. Somerset Waste LDF (October 2011) Somerset County Council has prepared a Waste Core Strategy. Currently it is in its Pre-Submission version and the consultation on this closed in January 2012. Once adopted, it will be used by the County Council to make decisions about planning applications for waste management facilities in Somerset.

The strategy sets out a series of objectives to meet its vision of a ‘culture in which communities participate in waste prevention and in which unavoidable waste is managed as a valuable resource in innovative ways that: • strengthen the economic well-being of Somerset; • protect the county's unique environment and human health; and • reduce carbon emissions from waste management.

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 6 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

The strategy states that by 2016, the facilities should be in place for a step-change in the management of biodegradable waste and for a major shift from landfilling to recovery of residual waste after recycling and reuse. By 2028 the facilities should be in place for Somerset to minimise the amount of waste sent for disposal to landfill to the small fraction of waste that remains after treatment, the materials used for landfill cover and certain hazardous wastes.

Sedgemoor Core Strategy (October 2011) The key elements of the adopted Sedgemoor Core Strategy can be summarised as follows: • The focus for development will be Bridgwater, with approximately 75% of new housing being provided in or adjacent to the town at a new urban extension. Bridgwater will also accommodate the majority of the district’s employment allocation. • Burnham-on-Sea and Highbridge – brownfield housing opportunities within the existing towns are supplemented by a greenfield allocation to help attract investment. Employment growth will be focused on town center office development, with the potential for an extension to Isleport Business Park. • Cheddar – smaller scale growth focused within existing settlement, with the village acting as a potential focus for new tourism development. • Elsewhere in the district – emphasis on limited growth within a small number of identified towns and villages that provide a reasonable level of services and facilities to support the sustainable rural communities. Housing allocations and strategic site allocations which have informed the assessment of infrastructure needs in this study are summarised in the table below. Table 2 - Core Strategy Housing Allocations and Strategic Sites Geography/Site Dwellings Bridgwater 7,455 NE Bridgwater 2,000 Cattle Market 170 Gerber Foods 215 Durleigh Road 500 Wembdon 600 S Bridgwater (Phases 1 & 2) 1,460 S Bridgewater (Phase 3) 450 Bridgwater Brownfield 2,060 Completions & Committments 2,793 Burnham on Sea and Highbridge 1,575 Burnham on Sea Urban Extension 400 Land at Boatyard 120 Burnham on Sea and Highbridge Brownfield 370 Completions & Committments 685

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 7 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

Geography/Site Dwellings Rural Sedgemoor 1,575 Key Rural Settlements 1,260 Other Sustainable Settlements 315

The Vision for Sedgemoor and Sustainable Community Strategy The Core Strategy is one of a number of inter-related policy documents produced by the Council and the infrastructure planning process has an important role in making the links between the objectives and proposals these contain. The Sustainable Community Strategy (3 rd edition draft, October 2009), prepared by the Local Strategic Partnership, sets out a Vision for the place Sedgemoor will be by 2026. This is backed up by a series of six aims, with stated actions and indicators for measuring achievement. Some of the stongest themes within these documents relating to infrastructure are highlighted here: • Energy – community energy, revitalised through increased opportunities, education and cultural events is compared in the Vision with the exciting prospects offered by the energy industry in Sedgemoor. Facilitating investment by the energy industry and moving to the forefront with energy skills education are seen as priorities by Sedgemoor DC. • Transport and Communications – transport and communications are vital for economic development in Bridgwater. Distribution centres based around Junctions 23 and 24 of the M5 motorway provide significant employment. It will be therefore be important to ensure that future housing and commercial development does not compromise the functioning of these junctions and the ability of Sedgemoor to attract further distribution based investment. • Wellbeing and Green Infrastructure – Aim 6 of the Sustainable Community Strategy states that health is about more than just access to good doctors and hospitals. Reference is made to the affect the environment can have on physical and mental health, highlighting the importance of access to open space and projects to enhance the public realm, such as those set out in the Bridgwater Vision. • Community & Safety – Community safety and empowerment are picked up as themes in the Vision and Sustainable Community Strategy aims. The need for community centres to act as focal points for community activities. • Education and Skills – Providing access to education for lifelong learning is a strong theme running through the Sustainable Communities Strategy, Vision and Economic Strategy. A full assessment of planning for Early Years, primary, secondary and further education has been undertaken for this study. Economic Masterplan (July 2009) In July 2009 Sedgemoor published its Economic Development Strategy in the form of an Economic Masterplan. The masterplan sets out the Council’s vision for Sedgemoor to be at the heart of the ‘South West’s “Enterprise Coast” a smart economy, where dynamic places, entrepreneurial businesses, and independent people prosper’. The document sets out the major issues in relation to physical and social infrastructure as follows:

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 8 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

Physical Infrastructure • Maintaining an adequate supply of land to deal with re-investment and inward investment, taking account of constraints on highways infrastructure and the need for sustainable economic development. • Providing solutions to the issue of flood risk which affect many parts of the district. • Maintaining the quality of the outstanding natural environment in both coastal and rural areas, which underpin key economic sectors and contribute to the quality of life of many communities. Social Infrastucture • Increasing the educational attainment levels of all young people, reducing the numbers of those not in education, employment and training, and increasing the numbers going on to higher education. • Addressing the issues of worklessness and low incomes in the most disadvantaged communities in the District, notably those in and around Bridgwater and Burnham on Sea and Highbridge. • Providing support to those affected low incomes and disadvantage in rural areas, much of which is not captured by official statistics. Sedgemoor Green Infrastructure Strategy (May 2011) The Green Infrastructure (GI) Strategy highlights that GI is strategically significant in Sedgemoor for two reasons: • The need to protect and enhance the existing high quality environment and landscape in the district; and • The need to restructure the district’s economic base and transform urban development by enhancing ‘quality of place’, local sustainability and the long term viability of existing settlements, such as Bridgwater. There is increasing evidence that GI has significant potential to contribute to economic regeneration, to provide capital savings and in part replace traditional ‘grey infrastructure’ (e.g. introduction of measures such as swales, rain gardens, and green roofs and the disconnection of downpipes to reduce the volume of storm water entering wastewater drains) as well as create new economic opportunities for training, re-skilling and new business ventures in land management and related careers. The key challenge for Sedgemoor is to focus on a programme of deliverable actions and to prioritise GI interventions according to their potential to unlock social, environmental and economic sustainability outcomes to enhance local well being. This study includes reference to some of the key infrastructure projects identified in the GI Strategy. Other plans, strategies and guidance of relevance to specific infrastructure sectors are identified in section 3 of this report.

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 9 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

2.2 Development viability and establishing a Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) It is important to ensure that the S106 and CIL contributions sought towards infrastructure are balanced with an understanding of development viability, so that investment in the District is not discouraged. The recommendations on planning obligations policy set out in this study are based on the results of viability assessments undertaken by Knight Frank in 2009. It is understood that Sedgemoor DC will seek an updated study of development viability to support the proposed implementation of a CIL. In comparison to many forms of funding, Planning Obligations (also known as S106 agreements) have been utilised by Councils with a relatively high level of flexibility to deliver local infrastructure and service priorities. Many local authorities, including Sedgemoor DC, have already moved towards using existing S106 legislation to implement standard charges or ‘tariffs’ in a bid to improve the speed and consistency of planning obligation negotiations in relation to the key infrastructure projects. The Planning Act 2008 put in place enabling legislation giving local authorities in England and Wales powers to levy a standard charge, the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL), on most types of new development, to fund the infrastructure needed to support development in their area. The proposals to introduce the CIL can be seen as a nationwide policy to formalise the S106 tariff approach, which would be based on a standard charge per unit of floorspace developed. Government Ministers have argued that the current S106 legal agreement approach is often slow and unpredictable, based on ad hoc negotiations conducted in private. Research showed that, as a result, the burden of funding is unfair, falling primarily on major developments. The CIL arrangements are intended to create a simpler, fairer, more transparent and predictable system of standard charges, capable of unlocking additional funding for infrastructure that is required to deliver sustainable local communities. The original Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations came into force on 6 th April 2010. These were amended in April 2011 and further changes are expected that will take account of the enactment of the Localism Act and conclusions of the Government’s ‘Community Infrastructure Levy: Detailed proposals and draft regulations for reform’ consultation undertaken between October and December 2011. This Delivery Strategy and the recommendations it contains have been prepared mindful of the emerging CIL Regulations, the advantages and disadvantages of the S106, Tariff and CIL approaches to securing developer contributions, and wider impacts of the Localism Act. Although the Government’s proposed arrangements for the CIL have changed and evolved over recent years, the requirement for a robust evidence base of infrastructure needs and costs underpinning a charging schedule remains unchanged. This study seeks to provide the evidence base on infrastructure projects required, which will need to be supplemented by a thorough understanding of development viability. An optimal CIL should seek to generate appropriate infrastructure funding, while not acting as a discouragement to development investment.

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 10 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

The years since the UK property market peaked in late 2007 have brought a great deal of uncertainty and macro economic conditions continue to hamper confidence. Rates of mortgage lending remain repressed with the result that there is limited market activity. A relatively small sample size of property transactions makes it more difficult to gauge trends and development viability, however developers are continuing to pursue planning permissions in anticipation of future demand, which means there is an imperative to put a robust CIL in place as soon as possible.

2.3 Progress towards consenting of strategic sites It is important that Planning Obligations policy and a CIL are developed with due consideration of the types of sites that will make up the majority of residential consents in the next 5 years. Sedgemoor has adopted a proactive stance towards development in the district and the preparation and adoption of the Core Strategy has fostered a surge of activity by developers seeking to put planning consents in place, particularly on strategic greenfield allocations. To provide examples, the single largest development at North East Bridgwater development, where proposals include up to 2,000 dwellings and 110,000m² employment uses, gained outline planning consent in advance of Core Strategy adoption. The Sedgemoor Development Management team are now also processing applications or appeals for the Meads and Cokerhurst Farm residential developments. This point is raised to highlight that the majority of greenfield residential developments, which tend to have improved developer viability, may gain planning permission relatively early in the plan period. Figure 1 shows that a large proportion of greenfield housing development at Bridgwater already benefits from consent, suggesting that a future CIL should be orientated towards securing funds from brownfield developments in Bridgwater. This will have implications for the consideration of development viability and setting an appropriate level of charging.

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 11 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

Figure 1 - Chart showing progress on consenting of greenfield and brownfield sites (dwellings)

4000

3500

3000

2500

2000

1500

1000

500

0

Note: The North East Bridgwater site is classed as a greenfield site in this chart, although it does also include an area of brownfield land.

2.4 Flood risk management and local action Sedgemoor DC will have a key role in managing flood risk, working with Somerset County Council who have assumed the role of Lead Local Flood Authority (LLFA). Recent Government guidance points towards a change of focus from nationally-funded projects towards a new approach that gives more power to local people, either at an individual, community or local authority level. Through the publication of the Bridgwater Strategic Flood Defence Supplementary Planning Document and implementation of a tariff, Sedgemoor has already demonstrated leadership on this matter. There is little doubt that flood risk management infrastructure must assume a high priority in Sedgmoor. The Environment Agency (EA) report ‘Investing for the Future: Flood and Coastal Risk Management in England’ (2009) sets the scene stating that climate change, the deterioration of assests, as well as continuing pressure to build in areas at risk of flooding, will contribute to increased flood and coastal erosion risk in England. The report also refers to the EA’s ‘National Flood Risk Assessment’ (2008), which identifies Sedgemoor and neighbouring North Somerset as falling within the top ten local authorities in England in terms of the number of properties at risk of flooding. In this context, is it important to

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 12 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

highlight that recent Government publications and funding initiatives point towards local authorities assuming greater responsibility for the coordination of flood risk management strategies and a willingness to raise a proportion of project capital costs locally.

Figure 2 - Properties at Flood Risk: Top Ten by Local Authority

Taking on board many of the recommendations of the Pitt Review (June 2008), The Flood and Water Management Act 2010 received Royal Assent on 8th April 2010. Somerset County Council are now the Lead Local Flood Authority (LLFA), as defined by the Act. The government state that the LLFA role “…will avoid any delay or confusion about who is responsible, but in no way prevents partnership arrangements to make full use of capabilities and experience locally.” Sedgemoor DC retains their duties under the Land Drainage Act. They are responsible for prevention, mitigation and remedying of flood damage for ordinary watercourses, and for managing flood risks as set out in existing planning laws. In May 2011, the Environment Agency and Defra set out a statutory framework to help local communities, the public sector and other organisations to work together to manage flood and coastal erosion risk. It will support local decision-making and engagement in flood management issues making sure that risks are managed in a co-ordinated way across catchments. This strategy is intended to enable the flood risk management organisations to work together with communities to: • Manage the risk of flooding and coastal erosion to people and their property. Over time, we will be able, where possible, to improve standards of protection.

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 13 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

• Help householders, businesses and communities better understand and manage the flood and coastal erosion risks they face. • Respond better to flood incidents and during recovery, and to coastal erosion. • Move the focus from national government-funded activities towards a new approach that gives more power to local people, either at an individual, community or local authority level. Local innovations and solutions will be encouraged, too. • Invest in actions that benefit communities who face the greatest risk, but who are least able to afford to help themselves. • Put sustainability at the heart of the actions we take, so that we work with nature and benefit the environment, people and the economy.

2.5 “Place-making” and regeneration Consideration of how townscape improvements might be funded, in the context of the broader finance requirements of community, social, utilities and transport infrastructure, is an important element of this study. There is a strong desire within Sedgemoor that the investment that development brings should not be used solely to finance critical infrastructure, but that it should also enable more aspirational and place making projects in support of the underlying vision for the area. The proposed Parrett Barrier flood risk management scheme is an example of ‘critical’ infrastructure, which is necessary to safeguard both existing and proposed development in Bridgwater. Securing the delivery of the barrier would be a considerable and important achievement, but one which in isolation would contribute little to the accomplishment of the regeneration, place making and townscape improvements that underpin the vision set out in the Bridgwater Challenge. Running in tandem with the preparation of the Core Strategy, Sedgemoor DC have been leading the Bridgwater Challenge, a visioning and design exercise that has identified a series of public realm projects for the town. The Implementation and Delivery section of the Bridgwater Vision (July 2009) advises that ‘... funding for streetscape improvements is normally provided by District Councils and although third party support has been available in some cases, for instance through Regional Development Agency (RDA) schemes, there are no obvious sources of funding available at present .’ A similar problem frustrates the delivery of the townscape proposals set out in the Burnham-on-Sea and Highbridge Regeneration Strategy (June 2006) and Civic Pride Initiative. These include public realm and open space enhancements to Burnham High Street and the Promenade. Proposals in Highbridge include shop front improvements and the development of a marina at the boatyard. The South West Regional Development Agency provided important funding to these regeneration initiatives, particularly through the Market and Coastal Towns Network. This programme was funded by the RDA for three years, ending in December 2010. Following the abolition of the RDAs in 2011, it is necessary to identify alternative funding sources if public realm enhancement in Burnham-on- Sea and Highbridge are to be realised.

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 14 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

2.6 Neighbourhood Funds and Neighbourhood Plans Responsibility for a proportion of Community Infrastructure Levy funds could pass to Parish Councils under the Localism Act, providing for the local prioritisation of projects that should receive funding. S115 of the Localism Act 2011 allows ministers to place a duty on charging authorities (through Regulations) to pass a proportion of the funds that they raise through the the CIL to local communities. These Neighbourhood Funds form an important part of the Government’s objective to strengthen the role and financial autonomy of neighbourhoods. This will give neighbourhoods far more ability to determine the shape of their area and to help communities accommodate the impact of new development. Consultation proposals on how this could work in practice were set out in ‘Community Infrastructure Levy – Detailed proposals and draft regulations for reform’ (October 2011). One important question raised by the Government is: what would be a meaningful proportion of funds that should be passed on to local communities. The consultation document proposes that the Government would specify a minimum percentage of receipts levied from development in an area must be passed to the relevant Parish Council. Other matters raised by the consultation include: who should receive the funds; the timing, reporting and monitoring of payments; and the relationship between neighbourhood funds and planning obligations. The outcomes of this consultation are not yet available, but the Government’s conclusions on these matters will clearly be of importance when developing a CIL schedule. The Localism Act also introduced new rights and powers to allow local communities to shape new development by coming together to prepare neighbourhood plans. Neighbourhood Plans could be taken forward by Parish Councils or Neighbourhood Forums and provide a means for evidencing and prioritising the use of CIL Neighbourhood Funds.

2.7 Hinkley Point C new nuclear capacity The construction of Hinkley Point C is expected to bring significant infrastructure investment to Sedgemoor. It is the objective of the Council to align that investment with the broader plans and strategies for the district, so that a legacy of improved infrastructure is achieved beyond the construction phase. Although, the proposals for new nuclear at Hinkley Point could have an important role to play in national energy security, they are not directly linked to the delivery of development allocated in the Sedgemoor Core Strategy. Nevertheless, the construction of the station over a period of around nine years is expected to require infrastructure investment across a range of sectors including transport, flood risk management, education and provision of sports and leisure facilities (to cater for construction workers). The Council will seek to ensure that, wherever possible and appropriate, this investment will align with local plans and strategies so that it contributes to delivery of the Vision for Sedgemoor. It is also expected that not all of the impacts of the intensive construction phase could be fully mitigated, for instance not all visual impacts can be addressed through the provision of screening. Compensatory payments and the

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 15 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

establishment of a fund to be spent on local priority projects is therefore sought by the Council.

2.8 Sustainable rural communities Infrastructure planning and delivery for rural settlements in Sedgemoor presents different challenges to those encountered at growth-orientated urban areas. Planning Obligations and a CIL must be relevant to rural areas, where the development of market housing will be on a much more limited scale. In contrast to urban areas, where additional infrastructure is required to serve growing populations, declining demand for services in some rural areas can threaten the viability of existing infrastructure and reduce the likelihood that new services will be provided. This trend will in some cases be compounded by the very modest rural housing allocations set out in the Core Strategy, which limits the level of investment that might be achieved through developer contributions. Infrastructure requirements for towns, villages and hamlets vary noticeably across Sedgemoor, depending on the existing level of provision. Where a need for a new facility or service corresponds with demand for affordable housing, there may be an opportunity to pursue joint infrastructure and housing grant through the Housing and Communities Agency (HCA) Single Conversation Investment Planning process. 3 Infrastructure needs and projects by sector

This section provides a sector by sector summary of the infrastructure required to support development in the Core Strategy, setting out: • The organisation/s responsible for planning and service delivery. • Assessment of infrastructure needs and costs, referring to existing plans and strategies and/or utilising national benchmark standards. • Key infrastructure projects that will contribute to supporting growth in the Core Strategy. • Conclusions in terms of whether there is ‘reasonable prospect of provision’ in line with the test set out in PPS12 and where the opportunities and challenges lie.

3.1 Community and cultural

3.1.1 Libraries and archives Responsibilities for delivery Somerset CC Heritage & Libraries Service is responsible for the delivery of library and archive facilities in Sedgemoor. The Somerset Heritage & Libraries Service is a member of LibrariesWest, a partnership between Bath & North East Somerset, Bristol, North Somerset, Somerset and South Gloucestershire library services. It is seen as an example of good practice where authorities work together to achieve significant economies of scale and deliver better services for

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 16 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

customers. Under the Public Libraries and Museums Act 1964 there is a statutory requirement to provide a comprehensive and efficient library service for all. There have been changes to support for these facilities at the national level that are noteworthy. Responsibilities for museums and libraries, previously undertaken by the Museums, Libraries and Archives Council (MLA), was transferred to the Arts Council in October 2011 as part of the Coalition Government’s review to reduce the number of arms length agencies. The Arts Council are funded by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport and the National Lottery. While not responsible for direct provision or funding of library services, they are now responsible for supporting and developing the libraries sector. The MLA, previously the strategic advisor for museums, will remain in skeleton form until May 2012 in order to complete the management of existing renaissance contracts and outstanding financial and contractual arrangements. Assessment of infrastructure needs and costs A high level assessment of existing provision and infrastructure needs to support Core Strategy growth has been undertaken using MLA benchmark standards. The MLA provides standards to guide the level of provision of libraries and archive space, as set out below: • Provision of 6m² of Archive space per 1,000 people (estimated capital cost £19.80 per person). • Provision of 30m² of Library space per 1000 people (estimated capital cost £90 per person) 1. Whilst it is noted that the MLA has been abolished, it is considered that the standard requirements set out in MLA publications provide the most up to date evidenced standard for library and archive space. However, delivering this standard in light of the economic climate is considered less achievable. A calculation of the existing provision of library facilities demonstrates that the current level of provision is below the national standards set out above. There are six libraries in Sedgemoor, with a combined floorspace of 2,152sqm 2 , that serve a total population of 112,800 (ONS, 2006). These libraries are listed below: • Bridgwater (891m²); • Burnham-on-sea (667m²); • Cheddar (244m²); • Highbridge (120m²); • Nether Stowey (160m²); and • North Petherton (70m²) Application of the Museums, Libraries and Archives Council standard results in a requirement of 3,384m² of library space, suggesting there is currently an under

1 Museums, Libraries and Archives Council (June 2008) Public Libraries, Archives and New Development: A Standard Charge Approach 2 Public Library Service Points in Somerset (May 1997) [Figures updated for Highbridge and Nether Stowey due to subsequent move (Highbridge) and refurbishment / extension of use (Nether Stowey)].

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 17 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

provision of 1,232 m². The rural areas are, however, covered by two mobile libraries; one is based at Bridgwater and the other at Wincanton Library. The routes ensure that no mobile stop is closer to a static library than 3 miles. In terms of archive provision, Somerset's Heritage Centre at Norton Fitzwarren (on the western edge of Taunton) was opened in September 2010 and the refurbished Museum of Somerset (in the Castle in the centre of Taunton) was opened in September 2011. These buildings are part of the SCC Heritage Service which is part of SCC's Heritage & Libraries Service. In February 2011 the County Council decided to apply a 25% budget reduction to the £5.4m currently managed by the Library Service, amounting to net savings of £1.35million from the Library service budget. Somerset County Council led a major consultation exercise on achieving savings to the Library Service in December 2010 and in February 2011 agreed a number of savings to library services, which included: • Funding was to be withdrawn from 11 libraries by March 2012 - this list included Highbridge, Nether Stowey and North Petherton in Sedgemoor. Under these plans they could have been offered to the local community or would have been lost. • Cutting opening hours by 20% in all Somerset’s funded libraries from 1 st October 2011. • Reducing the number of mobile libraries from 6 to 2. • Increasing the book fund from £200,000 to around £400,000 by 2012/2013. • 23 of the 34 static libraries were to remain funded by the Council, accounting for 94% of current library visits. Subsequently in August 2011 the number of mobile libraries was reduced from six to two and in October opening hours in 23 of the county’s 34 libraries was reduced by 20%. However, following a judicial review in November 2011 the decision on Library Services taken by Somerset County Council was found unlawful. The immediate outcome of this case has meant that Somerset County Council is required to reinstate the cuts that were introduced, including reduced opening hours and the mobile library services. Nonetheless the saving required on the Library Service of £1.35m over three years is still required; therefore a revised plan will be developed by Somerset County Council on achieving the savings to library services. This would result in reduced library provision for existing Sedgemoor residents and highlights that additional funding to meet demand from new development would be justified. An assessment of library and archive space to support new development is summarised in the tables below, with estimated provision per strategic site set out at Appendices A1 & A2.

Libraries (Floor Space M²) Baseline Core Strategy Geography/Site Dwellings Pop'n Demand Supply Demand Capital (M²) (M²) (M²) Cost Sedgemoor 10,605 24392 3384 2152 731.745 £2,195,235 Bridgwater 7,455 17147 2378.85 891 514.40 £1,543,185 BoS & Highbridge 1,575 3623 502.57 787 108.68 £326,025

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 18 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

Libraries (Floor Space M²) Baseline Core Strategy Geography/Site Dwellings Pop'n Demand Supply Demand Capital (M²) (M²) (M²) Cost Rural Sedgemoor 1,575 3623 502.57 474 108.68 £326,025 Per Dwelling 1 2.3 N/A N/A 0.0690 £207 Per Capita N/A 1 N/A N/A 0.0300 £90 Archives (Floor Space M²) Baseline Core Strategy Geography/Site Dwellings Pop'n Demand Supply Demand Capital (M²) (M²) (M²) Cost Sedgemoor 10,605 24392 676.8 2152 146.349 £482,952 Bridgwater 7,455 17147 475.77 891 102.88 £339,501 BoS & Highbridge 1,575 3623 100.51 787 21.74 £71,726 Rural Sedgemoor 1,575 3623 100.51 474 21.74 £71,726 Per Dwelling 1 2.3 N/A N/A 0.0138 £46 Per Capita N/A 1 N/A N/A 0.0060 £19.80 Conclusions Despite the recent judicial review which found the cuts agreed in February 2011 to be unlawful, and thus required the County Council to reinstate the library services which had been cut, there remain plans to save £1.35m over three years. It is therefore unlikely that the standard provision set by the MLA will be met for the existing population and therefore developer contributions to support new development would be beneficial. Following the judicial review, Somerset CC is reassessing plans to deliver the savings of 25%. There is currently no strategy in place setting out how library services will be provided in Somerset taking account of planned development. Planning work should be undertaken by Somerset CC and Sedgemoor DC to investigate options for service provision, which might for instance comprise a centralised facility with mobile library vehicles providing improved access in areas where libraries may be closed. Consideration could also be given to providing library facilities, such as online services, at existing and planned community centres.

3.1.2 Community centres Responsibilities for delivery The provision and maintenance of community and cultural facilities, such as community and village halls, will rely upon a range of public and community sector organisations, although Sedgemoor DC will have an important leadership and coordination role to play. Assessment of infrastructure needs and costs In order to gauge the level of provision that would be appropriate to support Core Strategy growth, and inform a reasonable tariff contribution towards provision, a high level assessment of need has been undertaken. This uses a neighbourhood accessibility standard provided in the publication Shaping Neighbourhoods – A Guide for Health, Sustainability and Vitality (Spon, 2003):

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 19 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

• A community centre per 4,000 population, which equates to a community centre per 1,740 dwellings (based on a district average household size of 2.3). • The Village and Community Halls Design Guidance Note (Sport England, 2001) sets out a number of standard floor plans for different sizes of hall. A two hall design with a plan area of 645m² is considered a reasonable template as it would allows for a range of activities to be undertaken during higher demand periods at evenings and weekends. • In 2011 the cost per square metre for the construction of a community building was £1,307 (based on cost model in Building Magazine, 25 March 2011 – South West locational factor applied), which results in an estimated capital cost of £845,000 for a community centre. This standard results in a tariff contribution of £211 per capita or £486 per dwelling. A high level assessment of community centre provision to support new development is summarised in the tables below, with estimated provision per strategic site set out at Appendix A3.

Community Centres (Floor Space M²) Baseline Core Strategy Geography/Site Dwellings Pop'n Demand Supply Demand Capital (M²) (M²) (M²) Cost Sedgemoor 10,605 24392 - - 6.10 £5,152,704 Bridgwater 7,455 17147 - - 4.29 £3,622,198 BoS & Highbridge 1,575 3623 - - 0.91 £765,253 Rural Sedgemoor 1,575 3623 - - 0.91 £765,253 Per Dwelling 1 2.3 N/A N/A 0.001 £486 Per Capita N/A 1 N/A N/A 0.0003 £211 Taking a pragmatic view, financing the modernisation and maintenance of existing community centres remains a challenge for the Council and the third sector organisations that are increasingly taking on the management of these facilities. For this reason, depending on the location of new development, it is recommended that finance may be channelled towards maintenance and enhancement of existing facilities, rather than provision of new halls. Current projects With respect to current projects and planned provision, the following are noteworthy: • Bridgwater Town Hall Cultural Centre – located at the Town Hall Island site, the Cultural Centre will include a new theatre, auditorium, cinema, recording studios and gallery space. The existing town concert hall has been used for 150 years by the community, but the building is now in poor condition and a renovation programme would provide substantial benefit to many users. Organisations that would use the refurbished facility include The Engine Room, Bridgwater Arts Centre, Black Lamp Independent Cinema and Strummerville. Phase 1 of the project involving external renovations was completed during 2010 (cost of £1.1 million). Phase 2 of the project involving further internal works is expected to cost a further £1.14 million. • Bridgwater YMCA - The completion of the new Bridgwater YMCA during 2010, at a cost of £6.5 million, represents a significant addition to the

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 20 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

provision of social infrastructure. The building at Friarn Avenue, known as the George Williams Centre includes a sports hall, café, meeting rooms, IT suite, chill-out zone, gym and community radio station. The project was funded largely by £3.9 million of Government funding distributed by the Big Lottery under the ‘mypace’ scheme. • Bridgwater Sports and Social Club – Relocation of the Sports and Social Club is required as part of the North East Bridgwater development. The S106 secures a site for a new building, together with a financial contribution of £316,000 towards capital cost. There is an aspiration to obtain further funding to ensure more comparable reprovision. • Sydenham Community Centre, Bridgwater – An existing centre serving the east of Bridgwater, the community centre requires on-going investment in terms of maintenance and enhancement of the building fabric. • Hamp ReCreation Centre, Bridgwater – Serving residential areas in the south of Bridgwater, the ReCreation Centre was opened in 2004 after receiving initial funding from the Government’s Single Regeneration Budget. Hamp Community Association run the centre and require ongoing revenue support. Given the extent of development at South Bridgwater, the Council are considering options for providing additional community facilities, which may be additional to the ReCreation centre that is located on a small site. • Wembdon New Village Hall – The Parish Plan for Wembdon (2008) identifies the potential need for a new village hall, or as an alternative option, making greater use of the existing Parish Centre. The facilities most desired were (in order of preference): a young peoples’ meeting area; a space for indoor sports; a stage; and/or a bar. A local community group have made significant progress in terms of developing a proposal that includes playing fields (estimated cost of £2million). • Burnham-on-Sea Community Facilities – There are a number of community uses maintained by the Town Council and charitable organisations that include the Princess Hall (operated by Burnham Town Council), Burnham Community Centre (operated by Burnham-on-Sea Community Association) and BAY Youth Centre. There have been recent successes in generating revenue funding for these facilities, such as £135,000 secured by Burnham-on- Sea Community Association through the Viridor Landfill Community Fund in 2010 for modernisation of the Community Centre. Nevertheless, enhancement and maintenance of facilities remains a challenge and developer contributions towards capital and revenue costs are considered justified. The BAY Centre has recently launched a “Save the Roof” fundraising appeal. • Highbridge Community Centre – Replacement of the Community Centre is proposed as part of the redevelopment of the Morland Industrial Site. The redevelopment of the Council owned site would comprise a care home, affordable housing and reprovision of the community centre. Conclusions The range of projects presented above demonstrates the support for and continued delivery of community halls and facilities in Sedgemoor. Sedgemoor DC will continue to work with partner organisations to identify sources of funding to maintain, enhance and where required, provide new facilities to support

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 21 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

development. Funding sources could include developer contributions, subject to prioritisation of tariff payments.

3.1.3 Social care services Responsibility for the provision of social care services lies with Somerset CC, although local service teams exist within each district to help coordinate services on the ground. Within the remit of adult social care, there are numerous services which comprise support to individuals, including care in a residential or nursing home, community meals services, support to carers and protection of vulnerable adults. Child social care covers an equally broad spectrum of services and there is overlap with education services, such as Early Years provision. Care is available for children who are at risk of neglect or abuse, those with mental health problems and/or disabilities, those whose parents benefit from support due to illness, disabilities or other reason. Capital projects relate principally to office space and Somerset CC Children and Young Peoples Directorate (CYPD) are currently seeking to restructure the social care services office estate. A CYPD Accommodation Plan has been prepared that seeks to establish a central office hub that will allow for more efficient operation of the service. The option of relocating a number of smaller more costly office spaces to a single hub at Bridgwater House is currently being explored. Phasing is not considered a critical issue and it is anticipated that existing revenue funding for office space would be used to fund any relocation of staff. In addition, the Somerset Children’s Trust ‘Young People and Children’s Plan’ (2011-2012) refers to support for projects in the community and education infrastructure categories. Stated objectives include: • Activity A2: Invest in new schools, ensuring high quality school places and the improved condition of school facilities. • Activity A3: Promote and encourage positive activities for all children and young people – including to engage and support young people living in rural areas in a range of social, economic, educational and recreational opportunities through the Somerset Rural Youth Project (SRYP).

3.2 Education

3.2.1 Early Years education Responsibilities for delivery Early Years education is currently defined as full-time or part-time education from the start of the term following the child’s 3rd birthday and up to compulsory school age, although coverage is broadening in certain circumstances to include two year olds. Early year education places are provided in the maintained, private, voluntary and independent sectors. The Childcare Act 2006 requires Local Authorities to provide universal childcare provision for 3 to 4 year olds to ensure that there is sufficient good quality childcare available for parents who want to work, train for work, or who are already in work. All 3 and 4 year olds are entitled to 15 hours of free education for 38 weeks of the year. This applies until children reach compulsory school age.

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 22 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

This has more recently been extended to include a small number of 2 year olds from the most disadvantaged backgrounds. Responsibility for the forward planning of Early Years education and group childcare (ages 0 – 4 years) lies with Somerset CC. Assessment of infrastructure needs and costs The Childcare Act 2006 formalises the process of gathering information on the planning and development of childcare, and requires local authorities to undertake a thorough ‘sufficiency assessment’ every three years, and to update this information regularly in the interim periods. The latest Childcare Sufficiency Assessment was prepared by Somerset CC Childcare Team and published in March 2011. The assessment sets out details of the current level of provision within the County for early years provision and, more specifically, details of the supply and demand of facilities for Sedgemoor. The following provides an overview of existing provision, as set out in the assessment: • Sedgemoor is served by nine Children’s Centres; • There was demand for 187 childminder places for children aged 0-4 in Sedgemoor and there are sufficient childminder places (+42); • There are insufficient (-329) group-based childcare places for children aged 0- 2 in Sedgemoor. There are sufficient group-based childcare places for children aged 3-4 in Sedgemoor. • In Sedgemoor, the theoretical maximum number of Early Years places available was 2,789 and there is a requirement for 2,096 free early years places over the 2010-2011 academic year. This means there were sufficient early years funded places in Sedgemoor. The Somerset Childcare Sufficiency Assessment estimates that for every 150 new dwellings, there will be on average 21.43 children of pre-school age. These are divided into five year bands – children under 1; children aged 1; children aged 2; children aged 3, and children aged 4. So, there are 4.286 children of each age band for every 150 new dwellings. In order to provide an indicative cost for providing new Children’s Centres to support planning growth, it is possible to use the DCSF Basic Need Cost Multiplier assumption of £7,000 per place. The results of a high level assessment of need based on this benchmark standard and cost suggests that there would be a need for 1,515 Children’s Centre bedspaces in Sedgemoor (at a cost of £10,605,707). Taking account of the recorded baseline demand and supply of places, it could be concluded that that assessed demand of 1,515 places would reduce by 693 places (the baseline surplus) to 822 places. It is possible to refine this assessment further by taking account of the typical take-up of early years places by families. At the national level these are: • 0-2 years age group. 31.84% of children used group-based childcare on 55.3% of weekdays. • 3-4 years age group. 70.99% of children use group-based childcare on 83.8% of weekdays. The results of applying these assumptions are summarised in the tables below, which also summarise the baseline situation for these age groups. For the 0-2

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 23 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

years age group, the assessed of demand for 160 places for the Core Strategy should be pursued mindful that there is an existing deficiency of supply.

Early Years Education (Children's Centres places for 0-2 age group) Baseline Core Strategy Geography/Site Dwellings Pop'n Demand Supply Demand Capital Cost Current insufficient Sedgemoor 10,605 24392 supply (-329 places) 160 £1,120,441 Bridgwater 7,455 17147 0.00 0 253 £1,774,099 BoS & Highbridge 1,575 3623 0.00 0 54 £374,810 Rural Sedgemoor 1,575 3623 0.00 0 54 £374,810 Per Dwelling 1 2.3 N/A N/A 0.03 £238 Per Capita 0 1 N/A N/A 0.01 £103 In addition, from 2009 English Authorities were required to offer 10 hours of funded childcare places to the most disadvantaged two-year olds in the County and only high quality settings (according to Ofsted standards) are eligible to be used. Local authorities used their own criteria to assess eligibility. As part of the Government’ Spending Review, it was announced that the entitlement to 15 hours of free Early Years Education (for 3 – 4 years) would be gradually extended over the next 4 years to every disadvantaged 2 year old. This will increase the number of places required. It has since been announced that legislation will be adopted to ensure that disadvantaged 2 year olds would receive 15 hours of funded early education from 2013. Taking account of these additional factors, Somerset CC have stated that the increased number of 2 year old places required may vary from 276 to 3,637 additional places, depending on how legislation defines “disadvantaged”. There are currently insufficient 0-2 year old places in Somerset based on average national demand, and most of these are occupied by children of working parents. For the 3-4 years age group there is considered to be sufficient current supply at present, suggesting the priority will be to re-allocate and /or create new places to cater for increased demand in the younger age category.

Early Years Education (Children's Centres places for 3-4 age group) Baseline Core Strategy Geography/Site Dwellings Pop'n Demand Supply Demand Capital Cost Sedgemoor 10,605 24392 Sufficient supply 361 £2,523,718 Bridgwater 7,455 17147 0.00 0 253 £1,774,099 BoS & Highbridge 1,575 3623 0.00 0 54 £374,810 Rural Sedgemoor 1,575 3623 0.00 0 54 £374,810 Per Dwelling 1 2.3 N/A N/A 0.03 £238 Per Capita 0 1 N/A N/A 0.01 £103 Taken together, these assessments for each of the age groups result in a total need of 521 places to cater for new demand, at an estimated capital cost of £3,644,159, as summarised in the table below. A breakdown by site is provided at Appendix A4.

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 24 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

Early Years Education (Total Children's Centres places - refined calculation) Baseline Core Strategy Geography/Site Dwellings Pop'n Demand Supply Demand Capital Cost Sedgemoor 10,605 24392 2096 2789 521 £3,644,159 Bridgwater 7,455 17147 0.00 0 507 £3,548,197 BoS & Highbridge 1,575 3623 0.00 0 107 £749,619 Rural Sedgemoor 1,575 3623 0.00 0 107 £749,619 Per Dwelling 1 2.3 N/A N/A 0.07 £476 Per Capita 0 1 N/A N/A 0.03 £207 Current projects The following new nurseries are to be developed in Sedgemoor, which will contribute to meeting the requirement for an additional 521 places as identified above: • South Bridgwater, 1 x 40 place nursery – secured through the S106 Planning Obligation, the nursery is scheduled to open in September 2011. • NE Bridgwater, 2 x 40 place nurseries – secured through the S106 Planning Obligation for NE Bridgwater, these are expected to provided during 2014. These developments will provide an additional 120 early year’s nursery places, suggesting there remains a requirement for around 401 additional places. In theory, the existing surplus of 693 places across Sedgemoor would be sufficient to cater for demand arising during the Core Strategy period, however, Somerset CC highlight the lack of group childcare places for 0-2 year olds and the additional requirement to provide places for this age group in the future. Further work would be required to understand whether sufficient places are available in the right places, where they would be accessible for disadvantaged families. Funding Planning obligations are expected to contribute towards the capital cost of the nurseries/pre-schools. The preferred solution for delivering the new facilities is to co-locate early years nurseries/pre-schools with primary schools and this approach has been adopted for the developments at South Bridgwater and NE Bridgwater. Somerset CC are taking positive steps to negotiate on-site Early Years provision on strategic sites, although it is not yet clear whether sufficient spaces can be provided through this mechanism. Circumstances are anticipated to be more challenging for smaller town centre sites where on-site provision is less likely to be achievable and phasing of provision in relation to demand will be less straightforward to predict. It is recommended that a detailed exercise is undertaken to identify potential sites for nurseries/pre-schools in order that reasonable prospect of provision can be demonstrated. A number of recent changes to the funding framework for early years provision will need to be taken into account when developing a delivery strategy for Sedgemoor. End of Pathfinder Funding

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 25 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

Somerset has been part of the Early Years Funded Entitlement Pathfinder since 2007, when it became one of the first local authorities in England to extend the entitlement from 12.5 hours to 15 hours per week for 38 weeks per year. Providers were also expected to offer parents more flexibility in how they claimed their entitlement, so that they could use their entitlement in hourly blocks, rather than just 2.5hour sessions, as previously. The Early Years Entitlement Pathfinder funding came to an end in the summer term of 2010, which had been important when developing flexibility and extending hours of childcare services. Early Intervention Grant The Early Intervention Grant, announced in December 2010 by the Government, following the Spending Review, sets out that there is enough money to maintain a network of children’s centres so they are accessible to all and support families in greatest need. The Government provided an update on Sure Start centres in June 2011, setting out plans to increase voluntary and community sector involvement with Children’s centres, introducing greater payment for centres that perform best and improving accountability arrangements. Conclusions There is currently reasonable prospect of provision of Early Year’s education and group childcare, taking account of the existing theoretical surplus and provision of new Children’s Centres at South Bridgwater and NE Bridgwater. However, there is a current deficiency in the number of places for 0-2 year olds and it is the Government’s intention to extend fee provision for 2 year olds from the most disadvantaged families. Further work will be required to more accurately assess the number of places required and where new childcare facilities should be located to cater for this additional demand.

3.2.2 Primary education Responsibilities for delivery Responsibility for primary school provision lies with Somerset CC. In January 2011 Somerset CC completed their School Population Forecast and School Organisation Plan, which sets out school census figures for 2010 and thereby provides a breakdown of existing capacity and forecast figures to 2015. Assessment of infrastructure needs and costs The table below provides a breakdown of the current (March 2011) primary school pupil places within the primary schools located in Sedgemoor District. These figures are taken from the Somerset School Organisation Plan Tables (March 2011), which divides the District into separate school catchment areas. Table 3 - Existing capacity with primary school catchments School Catchment Area Net Capacity (places) Surplus / Deficit (March 2011) Capacity (places) Rural East Bridgwater Sub Area 507 +60 Rural South Bridgwater Sub Area 417 +15 Rural West Bridgwater Sub Area 739 +71 Urban East Bridgwater Sub Area 1,572 +152

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 26 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

School Catchment Area Net Capacity (places) Surplus / Deficit (March 2011) Capacity (places) Urban West Bridgwater Sub Area 5,125 +75 Burnham-on-Sea Sub Area 1,718 +58 Cheddar Sub Area 1,341 +121 Total Capacity 8,184 +552

The table shows that the net capacity of primary schools within the District is 8184, and an overall headroom of 552 places currently exists. Whilst there is some surplus capacity within the District, Somerset CC also provide a breakdown of capacity by school that shows that there are a number of primary schools currently operating over-capacity. Primary schools have fairly limited geographical catchment areas, which means it is not feasible to assume that this over demand can be displaced to schools with capacity. Those schools currently running above capacity are listed below: • Cannington CE Primary (-2); • Somerset Bridge Primary (-32); • Wemdon St George’s CE Primary (-6); • Burnham-on-Sea Infants (-15); • Burnham-on-Sea St Andrews CE Junior (-20); • Burnham-on-Sea Josephs Catholic Primary (-4); • Highbridge Churchfield VC Primary (-5); and • Wedmore First School (-7). These figures demonstrate clearly that there is a significant shortfall of primary school placesat Somerset Bridge primary school in the south of Bridgwater and at Burnham-on-Sea’s primary schools (a deficit of 39 spaces). A high level assessment of the need for additional primary school places to support the Core Strategy has been undertaken based on the Somerset CC Service Standard of 30 primary school places required by every 150 additional dwellings. Somerset CC currently utilise the DCSF Basic Need Cost Multipliers (2008-2009) to estimate capital costs, which is £12,257 per primary school pupil place. The table below provides a summary of requirements and a more detailed breakdown is provided at Appendix A5.

Primary Education (Pupil Places) Baseline Core Strategy Geography/Site Dwellings Pop'n Demand Supply Demand Capital Cost Sedgemoor 10,605 24392 7632 8184 2121 £25,997,097 Bridgwater 7,455 17147 0.00 0 1491 £18,275,187 BoS & Highbridge 1,575 3623 0.00 0 315 £3,860,955 Rural Sedgemoor 1,575 3623 0.00 0 315 £3,860,955 Per Dwelling 1 2.3 N/A N/A 0.2 £2,451 Per Capita 0 1 N/A N/A 0.09 £1,066 Current projects

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 27 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

The following projects have been identified that will provide additional primary school capacity over the plan period: • NE Bridgwater Primary School – Provision of the school is secured through a S106 Planning Obligation and will provide a minimum of 420 places once complete. • Somerset Bridge (South Bridgwater) Primary School – The new school opened in September 2010 and provision of a further 4 classrooms is planned, which would help to overcome the current capacity issue in this area by increasing the number of places from 300 to 420. • Burnham-on-Sea Infants – School to be extended with provision of new classrooms (340 places), helping to alleviate the current capacity problems this area. Funding for this work has been secured. • Highbridge Infant and Junior Schools – Amalgamation of these two schools as Churchfield Primary School is planned. The building is due to be completed during the Autumn 2012 and will provide 420 places). It is expected that further primary school projects will need to be identified to support development to the south west of Bridgwater (Durleigh Road and Wemdon) and in central Bridgwater. The provision of additional primary school places may be provided by classroom extensions to existing schools, like that planned for Burnham-on-Sea Infants, are through effective estates management and amalgamation of existing schools to address those with capacity and those which are currently running over their net capacity. Where significant new housing developments are planned, it considered that new primary schools should be developed in line with wider place making and community development objectives. Conclusions Somerset CC have had demonstrable success in negotiating the provision of primary schools on strategic development sites. As for Early Years provision, circumstances are anticipated to be more challenging for town centre sites where on-site provision is less likely to be achievable and phasing of provision in relation to demand will be less straightforward to predict. It is recommended that further strategy work is undertaken working with Somerset CC to identify projects to meet anticipated demand over the plan period in order that reasonable prospect of provision can be demonstrated.

3.2.3 Secondary education Responsibilities for delivery Somerset County Council is the education authority responsible for the provision of secondary education in Sedgemoor. There are seven secondary schools within Sedgemoor, namely: Brymore School in Cannington; Chiltern Trinity College, East Bridgwater Community School, Haygrove School and Robert Blake Science College in Bridgwater; The King Alfred School in Highbride; and The Kings of Wessex Academy at Cheddar.

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 28 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

Futures for Somerset is a long term partnership established with Somerset County Council as part of the Building Schools for the Future (BSF) initiative set up to deliver the new schools in Bridgwater. The Bridgwater Education Trust was formed in 2008 and is comprised of schools in Bridgwater and partner organisations, which include representatives from the secondary schools along with Somerset County Council, Sedgemoor District Council and Bridgwater College. Each of the schools involved is a Foundation school which means they have taken responsibility from Somerset County Council for running their own governing body which employs staff and sets the admission criteria. Assessment of infrastructure needs and costs Somerset CC completed a School Organisation Plan in July 2011 and School Population Forecast in January 2011. The School Organisation Plan sets out school census figures for 2010 and the School Population Forecast goes on to provide a breakdown of existing forecast figures to 2014 for secondary schools in Sedgemoor. Table 4 - Secondary school forecast figures School 2011 2012 2013 2014 Robert Blake Science College 635 635 600 609 Chilton Trinity College 882 973 925 822 Haygrove School 1089 1080 1046 1041 East Bridgwater Community School 756 731 692 688 The Kings of Wessex School 1207 1218 1201 1220 The King Alfred School 1356 1351 1300 1303

Table 5 - Secondary schools surplus/deficit compared to net capacity at 30th June 2010 School 2011 2012 2013 2014 Robert Blake Science College 65 65 100 91 Chilton Trinity College 118 127 175 178 Haygrove School -19 -10 24 29 East Bridgwater Community School 114 139 178 182 Bridgwater sub-total 278 321 477 480 The King Alfred School 24 29 80 77 BoS & Highbridge sub-total 24 29 80 77 Brymore School 156 149 148 148 The Kings of Wessex School 39 28 45 26 Rural Sedgemoor sub-total 195 177 193 174 Total 497 527 750 731

These forecasts indicate that for the early part of the Core Strategy plan period the number of surplus places across Sedgemoor as a whole will increase steadily.

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 29 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

Looking further into the future, the Building Schools for the Future (BSF) Strategy for Change Part 2 (October 2007) prepared by Somerset CC incorporated an assessment of need for secondary school places in Bridgwater. This was based on development proposed in the Draft Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS) to 2026 and also made an allowance for the updates to the Office of National Statistics Regional Housing Forecasts, which suggested that the housing allocation for Bridgwater would increase over that set out in the Draft RSS. With respect to Bridgwater, the BSF Strategy for Change part 2 identified a requirement for 3,593 secondary schools places in Bridgwater in 2006 (which does not allow for the potential for the new Bridgwater schools to draw in parents currently in the catchments for neighbouring schools). Applying the standard of 30 students for each additional 210 new dwellings provided in the town suggested that demand would increase by a further 1,100 places, resulting in an overall requirement for 4,693 secondary school places. This assessment of need has been updated to include the adopted Core Strategy figures for housing development, which has increased to 10,605 dwellings across Sedgemoor and 7,455 at Bridgwater. The results of the assessment are summarised in the table below and a more detailed breakdown by site is provided at Appendix A6.

Secondary Education (School Places) Baseline Core Strategy Geography/Site Dwellings Pop'n Demand Supply Demand Capital Cost Surplus of 731 in Sedgemoor 10,605 24392 2014 1515 £27,980,535 Surplus of 480 in Bridgwater 7,455 17147 2014 1065 £19,669,485 Surplus of 77 in BoS & Highbridge 1,575 3623 2014 225 £4,155,525 Surplus of 174 in Rural Sedgemoor 1,575 3623 2014 225 £4,155,525 Per Dwelling 1 2.3 N/A N/A 0.1 £2,638 Per Capita 0 1 N/A N/A 0.06 £1,147 When these results are compared with the surpluses arising by 2014, it is apparent that there could be capacity within the first part of the plan period to cater for new development. This is most restricted in the case of Burnham-on-Sea and Highbridge, where the demand could relatively quickly outpace supply at the King Alfred School. Current projects Bridgwater has recently benefitted from substantial investment through the BSF programme. The emphasis of the programme has been on substantially modernising and improving the quality of secondary schools by replacing those existing, rather than expanding the number of school places available. Nevertheless, the designs for the new schools do enable additional classrooms to be provided in the future if necessary. Following the part-withdrawal of the BSF Programme by the Coalition Government in 2010, some of the school replacement projects have been put on hold. The following three schools are on schedule for replacement in 2012:

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 30 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

• Chilton Trinity Technology College, Bridgwater – Replacement of school on existing site to provide 1,050 places (school has current roll of 882). The school is due to be opened Autumn 2012. A new leisure centre incorporating a swimming pool will be provided alongside the school and will be available for dual school and community use. • Robert Blake Science College, Bridgwater – Replacement of school on existing site to provide 900 places (school has current roll of 635). The school is due to be opened Autumn 2012. A new leisure centre will be provided alongside the school and will be available for dual school and community use. • Elmwood Type 2 Specialist Provision School, Bridgwater – New school to be co-located with Robert Blake Science College, allowing for shared use of facilities. The school is due to be opened Autumn 2012. The following school projects are on hold, but Somerset CC and Sedgemoor DC will continue to pursue funding for the following school projects: • East Bridgwater Community College, Bridgwater – It is proposed that existing buildings, including the sports hall, would be replaced with a new build school on the existing campus site providing 900 places (school has a current roll of 756). • Haygrove School, Bridgwater – It is proposed that the existing buildings would be replaced with a new build school on a new site at Skimerton Lane (west of Bridgwater) to provide 1,050 places (school has a current roll of 1,089). • Penrose Type 4 Specialist Provision School, Bridgwater – New school to be co-located with Haygrove School at the Skimerton Lane site, allowing for shared use of facilities. With respect to Burnham-on-Sea and Highbridge, Somerset CC have advised that demand for secondary school places in the area is likely to exceed demand during the plan period. The following option has been identified as a scheme option to be investigated: • King Alfred School Expansion, Highbridge - This project has yet to be fully defined with options to expand capacity at the school. King Alfred's School has applied to become an Academy but no conversion date has yet been agreed. Conclusions There are no immediate capacity concerns with Somerset CC forecasts showing surplus places up to 2014, although growth at Burnham-on-Sea and Highbridge could relatively quickly result in the spare capacity at the King Alfred School being used up. As a result, it is recommended that options for expansion of the school and potential use of developer contributions to fund this are discussed with Somerset CC. In the case of Bridgwater, the BSF funded projects will help to provide some additional capacity (particularly at Robert Blake Science College) that will help provide places for children in the South Bridgwater development. Looking further ahead, the identification of funding to take forward the East Bridgwater and Haygrove school projects will become important for improving the quality of

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 31 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

teaching space and potentially providing additional capacity in the latter half of the plan period.

3.2.4 Further education Responsibilities for delivery Responsibility for overseeing the education of 16-19 year olds is shared between the Department for Education, the Young People's Learning Agency and local authorities. The Young People’s Learning Agency (YPLA) was established by the Apprenticeships, Skills, Children and Learning Act 2009 and launched in April 2010. The YPLA is sponsored by the Department for Education and exists to provide support for the delivery of training and education for all 16 – 19 years olds in England, with responsibilities that cover: • funding learning opportunities for 16-19 year olds; • funding and support Academies; and • funding support for young learners. Current providers of further education in Sedgemoor are: • Bridgwater College • Brymore School, Cannington, Bridgwater • The Kings of Wessex School, Cheddar • The King Alfred School, Burnham-on-Sea In December 2011 the Coalition Government launched ‘Positive for Youth’, is a new approach to cross-Government policy for young people aged 13-19. Under this initiative, the Government aims to raise the age which young people must participate in education and training to 17 in 2013 and 18 in 2015 to help prepare them for adult life and employment. Increasing the age for participation could have implications for the number of college places that need to be provided in Sedgemoor, although ‘Positive for Youth’ places increasing emphasis on vocational training that would occur in the workplace, as well as at Colleges. Objectives include: • targeting apprenticeships more on young adults; • transforming vocational education following the Wolf review, to ensure that vocational qualifications are high quality and enable progression to higher education and sustainable employment; • promoting work experience, with a vision that work experience should become an important part of many 16 to 18 year olds’ experience in school or college; and • expanding National Citizen Service to offer 30,000 places to young people in 2012, 60,000 in 2013, and 90,000 in 2014. This study has not been updated to provide an assessment of capacity for 16-19 training, although Sedgemoor DC remains committed to supporting the activities of further education providers. Current projects

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 32 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

Bridgwater College is the largest provider of further education in Sedgemoor and the organisation has recently completed or is in the process of progressing a range of projects: • Energy Skills Centre – officially opened in January 2011, the new centre includes re-location of the National Nuclear Decommissioning Centre from the Cannington Campus to Bridgwater. The centre includes state of the art Science/Engineering facilities and a Realistic Work Environment to meet specific work related training and retraining skills. It hosts the South West Hub of the Nuclear National Skills Academy. • Performing Arts Centre - the Performing Arts Centre at Bridgwater College will operate as a cultural venue as well as teaching facility. Planning permission for this project has been granted. • Construction Skills Centre – this project is directly linked to the training requirements of the Hinkley Point C project. Planning permission for a Construction Skills Centre located to the north of Cannington has been granted. • Management Training Centre – this project is directly linked to the training requirements of the Hinkley Point C project. The College is exploring site options for the development of a Management Training Centre. Sedgemoor DC are liaising with Bridgwater College to ensure that the Town Hall Cultural Centre and Performing Arts Centre projects are complementary. If the financing of these schemes individually proves problematic, there may be an opportunity to discuss joint provision in the short to medium term.

3.3 Emergency services

3.3.1 Ambulance service Responsibilities for Delivery The South West Ambulance Service NHS Foundation Trust (SWAST) is the responsible organisation for Sedgemoor. SWAST duties are to respond to all emergency and urgent calls that are received by the Clinical Hub (control room based in Exeter). Urgent calls would include Doctors and other Health care professionals who wish to have their patients moved. SWAST currently have 3 main targets set by the Government. These are: • A-cat = immediately life threatening and require an 8 minute response time. (Target set is 75% - currently achieving 76.9%) • B-cat = Immediate response but not life threatening and requires a 19 minute response time (target set is 95% - currently achieving 96.4%) • C-cat = requires a response but not an emergency and requires a 60 minute response (target set is 95% - currently achieving 96%) Assessment of infrastructure needs and current projects The Trust serves an estimated population of over 2.9million as well as an estimated 17.5m visitors each year. Across the district, the Trust employs nearly 2,500 staff at 74 sites, which includes 65 ambulance stations as well as three air

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 33 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

bases. Within Sedgemoor SWAST currently operates two stations, at Friarn Street, Bridgwater and Love Lane, Burnham-on-Sea. Ambulance clinicians also work in other settings such as Local Treatment Centres and Minor Injury Units. The Five Year Integrated Business Plan 2009/10 to 2014/15 sets outs five goals, as follows: • Goal 1: High quality and performing - to achieve national ambulance targets by PCT area in a phased way over the period 2009/10 to 2014/15 • Goal 2: Right service right place right time – to implement changing patient pathways in line with national strategies. • Goal 3: Reduce A&E attendance - to continue to contribute to the NHS South West ambition of a 10% reduction in A&E attendances at acute hospitals over five years • Goal 4: To be a credible competitor for urgent care services • Goal 5: To be the obvious choice for Patient Transport Services With respect to future estates requirements the Head of Operations at SWAST has advised that the Trust is investigating options for new facilities at Bridgwater. As a result of the growth of the town the ambulance service needs to expand its capacity, but the Friarn Street site is too constrained to enable this. SWAST have identified two projects that they will pursue subject to the availability of funding: • Bridgwater Ambulance Station – Development of a new ambulance station within or close to central Bridgwater. The ambulance service has strict site criteria in relation to flood risk, which will constrain the number of suitable locations. Co-location with other NHS or emergency services will be explored as an option. • M5 Junction 24 Satellite Ambulance Station – Development of a satellite station in close proximity to Junction 24 of the M5. Conclusions Operating from two bases in Sedgemoor, SWAST is currently outperforming the three main operational targets set by the Government. Looking ahead the Trust will seek to expand its capacity at Bridgwater in response to the planned growth of the town. As their current site is Friarn Street is relatively constrained, the Trust is exploring options for a new central Bridgwater base and a smaller satellite unit at M5 Junction 24.

3.3.2 Fire and Rescue service Responsibilities for Delivery Devon and Somerset Fire & Rescue Service (DSFRS) are the responsible organisation for Sedgemoor. Assessment of infrastructure needs and current projects The Devon and Somerset Fire & Rescue Authority’s Corporate Plan (2009/10 – 2011/12) outlines the broad strategic aims of the authority in order to meet key performance and service criteria. The document does not make specific reference

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 34 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

to the future growth planned across the two counties, but does comment on the standard of service they aim to maintain. General references are made to capital works for the period of the Corporate Plan, although no specific projects that would serve Sedgemoor are identified. Capital works are to include: • smaller projects to improve conditions within existing fire stations; and • replacement programme for fire appliances, vehicles and other operational equipment. The Corporate Plan also sets out the following new response time standard: • a single response time regardless of whether a house is in a city centre or rural village; • the first attendance of a fire appliance in 10 minutes, with all resources arriving within 13 minutes; and • the time should be measured from answering the phone to arrival at the scene. The Devon and Somerset Fire & Rescue Authority’s Draft Corporate Plan (20012/13 – 2014/15) presents the Authority’s proposals for changing and improving the service over the next three years to 2015. The plan sets out a number of commitments and strategic outcomes for the plan period. This relates largely to the strategic standards they wish to maintain, however does include the following capital programme: • Building and refurbishing fire stations to meet the highest affordable environmental standards. During the course of the study the following feedback has been provided in relation to the planned growth set out in the Core Strategy Preferred Option: • A map (Figure 3) has been provided to demonstrate that the urban areas of Bridgwater, Burnham-on-Sea and Highbridge, together with the residential strategic site allocations, all fall within a ten minute response time. This conforms to the response time standard set out in the Devon and Somerset Fire and Rescue Authority’s Corporate Plan (2009/10-2011/12). • The planned housing and commercial growth in Sedgemoor is not considered to necessitate any upgrades to capacity at Bridgwater Fire Station, which is equipped to respond to flooding events in addition to fire and other rescue services. Conclusions It is considered that there is reasonable prospect of provision of services to planned development. DSFRS do not consider that the planned housing and commercial growth necessitates any upgrade to capacity at Bridgewater Fire Station.

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 35 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

Figure 3 - Devon and Somerset Fire and Rescue Service 10 minute response times

Please note that the dwelling numbers at strategic sites have changed since the map was produced.

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 36 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

3.3.3 Police Responsibilities for Delivery Avon and Somerset Constabulary are responsible for policing in Sedgemoor. Assessment of infrastructure needs and current projects Avon and Somerset Constabulary’s Policing Plan 2011-14 outlines the forces commitment in terms of resources and planned projects for the period. Similarly to the plans produced by the other emergency service providers, the document focuses primarily on strategic targets and does not include an explicit assessment of the implications of the development planned for the area. In terms of projects, the Policing Plan identifies the following planned revenue based service improvements: • Information and Communication Systems including mobile computing and network upgrades (£2.7mil); • Southwest One project totalling £2mil – relating to investment in the SAP computer software company, finance and human resources system being delivered as part of the Southwest One transformation; and • A scheme to upgrade vehicles, plant and equipment (£2.9mil). In 2008 the police force also initiated an Accommodation Programme ‘Building for the Future’, which has been amended to respond to the challenges of a 20% reduction in Central Government funding following the Comprehensive Spending Review. The Constabulary’s objective is to provide highly flexible accommodation locations. The overall programme includes the following projects, one of which is located in Sedgemoor: • Somerset Operations Base at Express Park, Bridgwater. • A Custody and Crime Investigation Centre and Police Station at 90 Gloucester Road, Patchway • A Custody and Crime Investigation Centre at Ashmead Road, Keynsham • A Tri-force Indoor Firearms Training Centre for Avon & Somerset, Wiltshire and Gloucestershire at Black Rock Quarry, near Portishead Private Finance Initiative (PFI) was identified as the best way to achieve the ambitions of the Accommodation Programme and provide value for money over traditional procurement methods. The Home Office and Treasury have approved the rationale for the Building for the Future Programme on a number of occasions. Most recently the interim full business case was approved in September 2011. To provide further details of the Constabulary’s plans for Bridgwater: • Somerset Operations Base, Express Park. This development will provide working accommodation for around 550 officers and police staff and associated parking for police operational vehicles, staff vehicles and visitor parking. Outline planning permission for this development has been secured and it is anticipated that construction will be undertaken during 2012 and

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 37 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

2013, with the facility opening in 2014. The development at Express Park will encompass the following - Operations Base – this will provide accommodation for the Criminal Investigation Department, Crime Scene Investigators, Response and Neighbourhood Teams, as well as administrative and support functions. - Custody and Crime Investigation Centre – this will have 36 cells, replacing existing custody at Taunton and Bridgwater. It will also be used by the southern areas of North Somerset. Custody at Minehead will be maintained. It is envisaged that a specialist crime investigation team will also be located here who will assist with the investigation and so enable the police officers to return to their communities quicker. - Specialist Operations Base - this will house specialist functions such as firearms, dogs and road policing units, which are currently based in Taunton and Bournville. Its strategic location close to major transport links will significantly improve the response times of these teams significantly. There will be appropriate garaging and stores facilities. An enquiry office for Bridgwater will be provided on this site. • Bridgwater Neighbourhood Base – development to provide a base for the Neighbourhood Team in central Bridgwater, supplementing the enquiry office at Express Park. In terms of supplementary police funding to respond to pressures new development places on the constabulary, the Avon and Somerset Constabulary have been in the process of trialling the “ACPO Toolkit”. This is a nationally recognised model that can calculate developer contributions toward police infrastructure based on varying scenarios and includes worked examples of commercial, residential and mixed-use schemes. It is intended that this model will provide planners with a fair and reasonable calculation based on nationally agreed principles and the resulting S106 (and potentially CIL) requirement should be less contentious. Conclusions Avon and Somerset Constabulary have a clear and well advanced strategic programme of capital works, with a major Operations Base at Express Park in Bridgwater due to be completed and occupied by 2014. This will be supplemented by a Neighbourhood Base in central Bridgwater to maintain a town centre presence. In terms of securing funding to support policing activity related to new development, use of the ACPO Toolkit to evidence S106/CIL contributions should be investigated.

3.4 Energy

3.4.1 Electricity Responsibilities for Delivery Following the privatisation of the English energy industry in 1990, responsibilities for strategy, business planning and service delivery has been dispersed to numerous private sector infrastructure operators, as described below, with oversight provided by the industry regulator Ofgem. More recently, however, in

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 38 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

response to energy security and climate change drivers, both the national and local tiers of government have become increasingly active in strategy and planning processes and promoting low carbon energy generation. In July 2011 the Government published a series of National Policy Statements that will guide applications for Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects (NSIPs) relating to electricity generation and transmission. NPS EN-6 ‘Nuclear’ identifies specific sites that are potentially suitable for provision of new nuclear generating capacity. The list of sites includes Hinkley Point in neighbouring West Somerset.

3.4.1.1 Electricity generation Assessment of infrastructure needs and current projects A ‘PPS1 Supplement Study: Planning and Climate Change’ undertaken for Somerset CC, Taunton Deane BC and Sedgemoor DC was completed in October 2010. This concluded that there are limited opportunities for standalone renewable energy technologies present in Taunton Deane and Sedgemoor and those opportunities which are present (i.e. wind and waste) are not generally located close to planned new development. It is therefore likely to be difficult for renewable generation opportunities to link either physically or contractually to strategic site developments, although the specific opportunity for either gas-fired CHP or a biomass boiler at the Northgate development site was highlighted. As summarised in the table below, the PPS1 study identified that large scale wind power offers the greatest potential in Sedgemoor, followed at some distance by biomass boilers fed by energy crops. Table 6 – Potential for renewable and low carbon energy development in Sedgemoor (results of PPS 1 Supplement Study, October 2010) Technology Electricity (MW) Heat (MWth) Large Scale Wind 28 - Biomass – Energy Crops 4 - Biomass – Wood Chip 2 2 Energy from Waste 2 3-6 Total 36 5-8

A list of energy generation projects currently being developed or in the pipeline in Sedgemoor show that a wide range of technologies are being deployed at, or directly adjacent to the district: • Hinkley Point C New Nuclear Power – an application for Site Preparation Works was granted by West Somerset Council and the S106 Planning Obligation was finalised in January 2012. A Development Consent Order application has been submitted to the Infrastructure Planning Commission for determination. • Walpole Anaerobic Digestion Waste Management Project - the proposed anaerobic digestion plant will use oxygen and natural bacteria to break down food waste. Methane gas is collected and burned to generate electricty which could be exported to the National Grid. • Black Ditch Wind Turbines - Ecotricity proposes the erection of five 2MW turbines at Black Ditch near West Huntspill.

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 39 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

• Withy Farm Wind Turbines - EDF Energy proposes the erection of nine 2MW wind turbines at Withy Farm near West Huntspill. • Puriton Solar Farm - Development of a solar farm to the east of the Puriton Energy Park strategic site. • Northgate Gas CHP or Biomass Boiler – the PPS1 Supplement Study identified the potential for a Gas CHP or Biomass Boiler to be installed at the Northgate strategic site in central Bridgwater. • Bridgwater Energy from Waste (EfW) Plant – the Somerset Pre- Submission Waste Core Strategy (December 2011) identifies the potential provision of an Energy from Waste plant in a zone around Bridgwater (see Waste section for further details). Security of energy supply is a matter safeguarded at the national level and therefore the delivery of these projects is not considered essential to demonstrate Core Strategy soundness. There are nevertheless compelling reasons for Sedgemoor DC to liase with delivery agencies: • Major energy projects of national significance have the potential to bring high level of investments to the District, but will also place existing infrastructure under additional strain. • The energy sector, and in particular the nuclear and renewables industries are key areas for employment growth and taking forward the Sedgemoor Economic Strategy. • As identified in Section 1.2, Sedgemoor DC has a responsibility to assist with the achievement of UK targets to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases. • Based on the conclusions of the PPS1 Supplement Study, Core Strategy policy D3 advises that payments into a low carbon infrastructure fund may be sought as an “allowable solution” in relation to the achievement of Code for Sustainable Homes ratings. The relationship of this mechanism to and how it might be secured through a S106 or CIL will require further investigation moving forward.

3.4.1.2 Electricty transmission and distribution Responsibilities for Delivery The extra high-voltage transmission grid (275kV and 400kV) in England is owned and operated by National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET). The regional distribution network operator for Sedgemoor is Western Power Distribution, who are responsible for distributing electricity from the national grid to consumers. Assessment of infrastructure needs and current projects Our Electricity Transmission Network: A Vision for 2020 (Electric Networks Strategy Group, July 2008) sets out the reinforcements to the national grid that will be required to meet energy demand and facilitate generation scenarios consistent with the EU target for 15% of the UK’s energy to be produced from renewable sources by 2020. The proposed reinforcements include: • Hinkley Point to Seabank Grid Reinforcement - a new 400kV circuit between Hinkley Point (West Somerset) and Seabank (Avonmouth). The Preferred Route Corridor for the proposed Hinkley Point C Connection has

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 40 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

now been selected by National Grid following consultation that commenced in 2009. Route Corridor 1, Option 1A has been selected for the majority of the connection, with the following exceptions: Corridor 2 will be utilised between: Horsey and Woolavington near Bridgwater, and Tickenham Ridge and Portishead; Corridor 1, Option 1B / Corridor 2 between:Avonmouth substation and Seabank substation. National Grid propose to take down the existing 132kV Western Power Distribution (WPD) overhead line between Bridgwater and Avonmouth substations. • Hinkley Point, Melksham & Bramley Circuit Proposals - Reconductoring of existing circuits between Hinkley Point, Melksham and Bramley will also be required to provide the power generated in this area with stronger electrical connection to the demand centre of London. With respect to the local distribution network, the connection requirements of the strategic residential and employment sites set out in the Core Strategy have been discussed with Western Power Distribution. It was concluded that there are no major obstacles to providing connections, although the following useful points were made: • The scale of residential development proposed is not anticipated to result in major upgrade requirements, although this could depend on the energy choices made by developers. The general assumption is that space heating and cooking in new residential development will be provided using gas. As new solutions for delivering higher Code for Sustainable Homes levels are developed, it is the experience of Western Power Distribution that these assumptions are increasingly being challenged. For instance, electric heating is becoming more common. • Commercial development tends to have a higher electricity demand than residential, meaning that the costs associated with capacity upgrades and new cables can influence the locational decisions made by businesses. For instance, available capacity at Junction 23 of the M5 is limited and the cost of connection may be prohibitive for some types of commercial development. These factors are not considered to threaten the soundness of the Core Strategy, although the potential for a shift from gas to electricity as the predominant heat source for domestic development may warrant further investigation. The connection cost for commercial development is an issue that could be assessed to ensure that there is no disincentive for businesses to invest in Sedgemoor.

3.4.2 Gas distribution Responsibilities for delivery The National Grid Gas (NGG) transmits gas from the production beachhead and import terminals to regional distribution companies or Distribution Operators (DO’s). Wales and West Utilities are the DO for Sedgemoor. Assessment of infrastructure needs and current projects Wales and West Utilities require relatively detailed information on development sites before they can provide formal feedback on network capacities and constraints. This should include the size and shape of sites, number of units and indicative layout and phasing. It is confirmed, however, that Wales and West can

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 41 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

respond to developer connection requests within a short time frame. The organisation adopts a year-to-year approach in order to identify long-term priorities and optimize expenditure. These plans, which may comprise replacement or reinforcement projects, are subject to change as and when the need arises, and especially with regard to safety of the network which takes precedence. Wales and West Utilities do not anticipate any major obstacles in providing connections to the strategic sites identified in the Core Strategy.

3.5 Health

3.5.1 Primary healthcare Responsibilities for delivery Somerset NHS Primary Care Trust (PCT) has overall responsibility for planning health care services in Sedgemoor. Primary health care services which fall under the direct control of PCTs include General Practioners (GPs), nurses, therapists, dentists, optometrists and pharmacists. This study has focussed on the provision of GP and dentist surgeries as key local services. The health of people in Sedgemoor is generally better than the national average, but health inequalities across the District exist. Somerset NHS PCT, Somerset CC and Sedgemoor DC have a responsibility to reduce health inequality and health risk, as reflected in a range of indicators set out in the Somerset Local Area Agreement (LAA). The Government has directed a number of significant changes to the delivery of primary health care, which mean the PCT will be phased out and delivery passed to GPs and practice teams working in consortia. In July 2010 the Government published their plans for the NHS in England in the White Paper ‘Equity and excellence, liberating the NHS.’ The Health and Social Care Bill was subsequently introduced to Parliament on 19 th January 2011 and this is currently at the committee stage in the House of Lords. The key legislative changes contained in the Bill, in terms of the delivery of primary healthcare, include commissioning led directly by clinics, supported by NHS Commissioning Boards.

3.5.1.1 General Practitioners (GPs) Assessment of infrastructure needs and costs A ‘ Strategic Review of Primary Care Infrastructure’ (Somerset NHS PCT, published in Board papers September 2008) sets out a series of projects to provide or extend GP surgeries in Sedgemoor. The document refers to planned growth set out in the RSS and Core Strategy, but does not set out a detailed methodology or modelling approach that has been used to assess capital projects. A high level assessment of need has therefore been undertaken for the purpose of this study, which calculates how many additional GPs would be required to support growth assuming the current average GP list size is to be maintained. The demand for doctors is based on the target of the PCT to reduce the average patient list size to 1,600. The capital cost of delivering surgeries is based on a standard of 130m² per GP, at a cost of £1,750 per m² (benchmark cost standard taken from NHS London Healthy Urban Developments Unit model, with the South West location factor applied). The assessment indicates that residential development in

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 42 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

the Core Strategy would generate a demand for an additional 15 GPs in total. An assessment of requirements for each site is set out at Appendix A7.

Health (No. of Doctors) Baseline Core Strategy Geography/Site Dwellings Pop'n Demand Supply Demand Capital Cost Sedgemoor 10,605 24392 71 - 15 £3,468,166 Bridgwater 7,455 17147 50 - 11 £2,438,018 BoS & Highbridge 1,575 3623 10 - 2 £515,074 Rural Sedgemoor 1,575 3623 10 - 2 £515,074 Per Dwelling 1 2.3 N/A N/A 0.0014 £327 Per Capita 0 1 N/A N/A 0.0006 £142 Current projects The following GP surgery projects were identified in ‘A Strategic Review of Primary Care Infrastructure’ : • Bridgwater, Brent House surgery replacement - completed end of February 2011. • Bridgwater, Redgate Surgery extension - to be delivered via a capital grant (planning permission has been granted and the works are due for completion in February 2012). • Bridgwater, Taunton Road Surgery extension - the practice has a list size of 13,758 and has aspirations to grow this to 20,000. The strategic decision has been taken to allow for expansion for an additional 2,000 patients. Expansion will help to support the expected growth of Bridgwater and an extension was completed in 2012. • North Petherton Surgery replacement - to be delivered by 2012/13. • Puriton/Woolavington Branch new surgery – potential catchment of the surgery would be for around 4000 people from the villages of Puriton, Pawlett, Stretcholt and Woolavington. The branch surgery would be located in Woolavington. • New Burnham-on-Sea branch surgery – this surgery is located at Berrow and was opened in May 2011. • Highbridge Medical Centre extension - extension to be delivered via a capital grant. The extension will not increase the list size of the practice but will increase the range of services available. • Wedmore Surgery replacement - the practice has identified a potential development site and hopes to attract a dental practice and pharmacy to join it on its new site. The practice occupies two sites (Axbridge and Wedmore), with Axbridge recently being expanded. To be delivered by 2012/13. • Quarry Grand, Edington Surgery extension - to be delivered via a capital grant. The size of this expansion is dependent on a review, pending a decision made on the size of the branch practice at Woolavington. It should also be noted that the new sports hall at Chilton Trinity (opened during 2011), incorporates a GP referral centre.

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 43 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

Conclusions While some potential links can be drawn between developments coming forward in Sedgemoor and the GP projects listed above, further work is required to assess capacities required and discuss funding and phasing strategies. The delivery of some of these projects may now be on hold while uncertainty about commissioning arrangements remains. A study that better defines the capital projects required to support growth and the means for financing will be beneficial in demonstrating reasonable prospect of provision of GP surgeries to support development in the Core Strategy.

3.5.1.2 Dentists Assessment of infrastructure needs and costs In order to provide a high level assessment of need for dentists to support growth in the Core Strategy, a Somerset average list size of 2,400 patients per dentist was provided by Somerset PCT. It was assumed that this list size should be maintained in relation to new development. The total capital cost to provide surgeries for 10 dentists is estimated to be around 2.3million. This assumes a similar cost to GP surgeries of 130m² per dentist, at a cost of £1,750 per m² (benchmark cost standard taken from NHS London Healthy Urban Developments Unit model, with the South West location factor applied).

Health (No. of dentists) Baseline Core Strategy Geography/Site Dwellings Pop'n Demand Supply Demand Capital Cost Sedgemoor 10,605 24392 47 0 10.2 £2,312,111 Bridgwater 7,455 17147 33.04 0 7.1 £1,625,345 BoS & Highbridge 1,575 3623 6.98 4 1.5 £343,383 Rural Sedgemoor 1,575 3623 6.98 4 1.5 £343,383 Per Dwelling 1 2.3 N/A N/A 0.001 £218 Per Capita 0 1 N/A N/A 0.0004 £95 Current projects ‘A Strategic Review of Primary Care Infrastructure’ (Somerset NHS PCT, published in Board papers September 2008) identifies two health centre capital projects (as listed above) that are expected to include the provision of dental facilities: • Berrow Branch Surgery, Burnham-on-Sea • Wedmore Surgery replacement - to be delivered 2012/13 Further to this an ‘Oral Health Strategy and Dental Commissioning Plan’ (Published in board papers July 2008 by Somerset PCT) outlines in broad terms additional dental practices that would be tendered for in Bridgwater whilst additional dental units should also be provided in Burnham-on-Sea and Highbridge. Conclusions

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 44 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

As is the case for GPs, it is concluded that further work is required to define the capital projects needed to support growth, the means for financing these, and the phasing of provision, if reasonable prospect of provision is to be demonstrated.

3.5.2 Secondary healthcare Responsibilities for delivery Somerset NHS PCT has overall responsibility for healthcare planning and operates two community hospitals in Sedgemoor; one in Bridgwater and one in Burnham-on-Sea. In relation to acute care services, the majority (around 2/3rds of the districts residents), receive their care outside the district in Taunton (Musgrove Park Hospital) and a third in Weston-super-Mare (Weston General Hospital), which are individually operated by acute care NHS trusts. Some patients also receive specialist treatment from Bristol, Exeter and out-of-area acute trusts. Assessment of infrastructure needs, costs and current projects The Comprehensive Spending Review announced on 20 October 2010 included an increase in the total health budget of £10.6 billion over the period 2011/12 to 2014/15. This comprises a total revenue increase of £11.1 billion and a reduction in capital of £0.5 billion. The Operating Framework for the NHS in England 2011/12 (December 2010) sets out the overall context for capital investment for Primary Care Trusts and NHS Trusts in 2011/12 in the light of the reduced funds available for new capital projects. ‘The Capital Investment Programme for NHS South West in 2011/12’ (September 2011) sets out a series of schemes in construction and schemes to be confirmed. Current projects of relevance to Sedgemoor are: • Bridgwater Community Hospital Redevelopment – Somerset NHS PCT intend to relocate the community hospital to an edge of centre site at Bower Lane, Bridgwater. It is proposed that the new hospital will be based on ‘leading edge’ approaches in the provision of care using the latest technology in diagnostics, IT and communications to maximise the availability of services locally, and reduce the number of patients admitted to acute beds. A capital cost of £33.2million is presented in the Capital Investment Programme for the South West and the project is on the ‘to be confirmed’ list. Timescales for provision are therefore uncertain. • Taunton Musgrove Park Hospital , operated by Taunton and Somerset NHS Foundation Trust, has undergone extensive refurbishment and extension within recent years, such as the completion of the new Beacon Centre that provides radiotherapy and expanded day and outpatient space for the treatment and care of cancer patients. More generally, the trust has proposed an alternative model for delivering community services in Somerset in partnership with other Trusts and Somerset CC, which would enable the delivery of more coordinated and cost effective care, supporting a shift from acute hospitals to community settings and patients’ homes, maximise the flexibility of staffing, and offer greater potential for estates and facilities rationalisation. Further projects identified in the Trust’s Annual Plan (2011/12) are:

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 45 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

• Taunton Musgrove Park Hospital Helipad – a new helipad outside the Accident and Emergency department became operational in May 2010, improving access to A&E from more rural areas. • Taunton Musgrove Park Hospital Surgical Centre Phase 1 – provide new 112 bed ward block. Scaled down from previous plan to build ward and theatre block as one scheme. • Western General Hosipital Paediatric Assessment Unit – Weston General Hospital is a 327 bed hospital with 1,800 staff. The Trust is seeking to develop a Paediatric Assessment unit in conjunction with local PCTs. In the absence of a single long term assessment of acute care service requirements, a high level assessment has been undertaken to inform potential developer contributions. This utilises the average number of acute care beds required per 1,000 people (sourced from Hospital Activity Statistics produced by the Department of Health). The required number of acute beds is1.8 acute hospital beds, 0.9 maternity beds, 0.9 geriatric beds and 0.6 mental health beds generated per 1,000 population. Capital costs have been estimated based on a floorspace standard of 50m² per bed and cost per bed of £2,390/m² (acute beds) or £1,620/m² (other beds). This is based on the NHS London Healthy Urban Development Unit model, with a South West location factor applied. The results of the assessment of secondary healthcare needs for acute and other bed types (maternity, geriatric and mental health) are summarised in the tables below. A breakdown by strategic site is provided at Appendix A9.

Health (Secondary Healthcare – Acute Beds) Baseline Core Strategy Geography/Site Dwellings Pop'n Demand Supply Demand Capital Cost Sedgemoor 10,605 24392 203 - 44 £5,246,612 Bridgwater 7,455 17147 - - 31 £3,688,212 BoS & Highbridge 1,575 3623 - - 7 £779,200 Rural Sedgemoor 1,575 3623 - - 7 £779,200 Per Dwelling 1 2.3 N/A N/A 0.004 £495 Per Capita 0 1 N/A N/A 0.002 £215 Health (Secondary Healthcare - Other Beds) Baseline Core Strategy Geography/Site Dwellings Pop'n Demand Supply Demand Capital Cost Sedgemoor 10,605 24392 271 - 59 £4,741,708 Bridgwater 7,455 17147 - - 41 £3,333,280 BoS & Highbridge 1,575 3623 - - 9 £704,214 Rural Sedgemoor 1,575 3623 - - 9 £704,214 Per Dwelling 1 2.3 N/A N/A 0.006 £447 Per Capita 0 1 N/A N/A 0.002 £194 Conclusions Secondary healthcare provision tends to rely on Government grant funding allowances and the internal funds of NHS Trusts. In order to bring forward the redevelopment of Bridgwater Community Hospital, it may be decided that developer contributions towards capital costs are justified, however this will

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 46 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

depend on prioritisation of infrastructure projects within a CIL and an up to date assessment of need.

3.6 Flood management, water & wastewater

3.6.1 Flood risk management Responsibilities for delivery Responsibilities for flood risk management is shared amongst the Environment Agency, Somerset CC, Sedgemoor DC, Wessex Water and Internal Drainage Boards. The Environment Agency (EA) is responsible for delivering sustainable flood and coastal erosion risk management solutions across England and Wales and for overseeing the delivery of solutions by Local Authorities and Internal Drainage Boards. The EA uses a number of tools to manage flood risk including flood warnings, hard engineering and the construction of washlands. The EA also produces Catchment Flood Management Plans and Shoreline Management Plans, which indicate where land is suitable for flood risk management purposes. Somerset CC is the Lead Local Flood Authority (LLFA, established under the Flood and Water Management Act 2010). As LLFA Somerset CC are required to: • Develop a strategy to tackle flood risks, involving flooding from surface water, ‘ordinary watercourses’, groundwater, canals, lakes and small reservoirs. • Investigate all significant flooding incidents; • Maintain a register of flood defence assets; • Ensure use of sustainable drainage on new development, approve, adopt and maintain; and • Build partnerships and ensure effective working between authorities that have control over flood risk. SCC have set up the Somerset Strategic Flood Management Partnership to enable all authorities that have flood risk responsibilities to work more closely together. The Flood and Water Management Strategic Business Plan 2010/2016 was agreed by the Council’s Cabinet on 21st June 2010. Sedgemoor DC retains their duties under the Land Drainage Act. They are responsible for prevention, mitigation and remedying of flood damage for ordinary watercourses, and for managing flood risks as set out in existing planning laws. The role of Internal Drainage Boards (IDBs), such as the Parrett IDB, is to manage water levels for the protection of people, property and the environment. Assessment of infrastructure needs and costs and current projects Flood risk management was an issue of fundamental importance to Core Strategy soundness, given that large parts of Sedgemoor fall within Flood Zones 2 (medium probability), 3a and 3b (high probability), including existing properties and development sites in Bridgwater, Burnham-on-Sea and Highbridge. Flood

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 47 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

risk planning is well advanced following the completion of Strategic Flood Risk Assessments (Levels 1 and 2) and the Bridgwater Strategic Flood Defence Infrastructure Planning report (BSFD). Key projects identified are as follows: • Parrett Barrier, Bridgwater - The Parrett Barrier is the preferred solution to manage flood risk in Bridgwater. It is predicted that the barrier would not be required until between 2030 and 2050, although detailed feasibility and design work should commence in 2020. The proposed surge barrier would be raised at times of extreme high tide to prevent the greatest threat of tidal surge inundating the town. Planning obligations are expected to contribute around £10million towards the estimated capital cost of £24.6million, with a number of options including Government Grant-in-Aid to be investigated to make up the remainder of the cost. • Parrett Embankment Improvements – construction of the barrier will necessitate improvements to existing embankments downstream, which are estimated to cost in the region of £8m. The Environment Agency has secured funding for this work. • Highbridge Boatyard Flood Defence structure – this will provide defence to existing properties and the strategic boatyard development site. The SFRA Level 2 initially suggested a substantial length of flood bank would be required, but the detailed pre-application investigations now suggest that this over estimated the extent of the works. What is clear is that the necessary flood protection works will substantially be provided through the redevelopment of adjoining land. • Brean Flood Defence Bund - The SFRA Level 2 identified that a bund could be required to prevent overtopping of defences on the River Axe. This would affect much of the tourism area that is dominated by caravan and camping sites. The SFRA Level 2 suggests an estimated cost of between £3.65- 12.18m for the works (including maintenance for 50 years), however, the long term flood defences of this area have been reviewed through the Shoreline Management Plan (2010) (EB26). Whilst at the present time this advocates a “hold the line” approach, in the longer term it is possible that some form of managed retreat may have to be considered. The Core Strategy highlights the need to undertake further technical studies and as an interim approach takes a precautionary approach to further expansion of tourism in this location (Policy P3). • Cannington Flood Alleviation Channel – The Hinkley Point C Development Consent Order proposes a financial contribution towards providing an improved flood channel to the south of Cannington, to help alleviate flood risk from Cannington Brook in the village. • Steart Coastal Management Project - Re-alignment of existing flood defences at Steart, enabling the creation of approximately 350ha of inter-tidal habitat (Environment Agency element - see section 3.8.3 for further details). Securing funding for flood risk management projects will rely largely on a combination of Government grant and developer contributions. The adoption of the Bridgwater Strategic Flood Defence Tariff Supplementary Planning Document (September 2009) means that there is now a mechanism in place to collect developer contributions towards the substantial cost of the Parrett Barrier over a long timeframe. This study also explores the possibility of a local tax or levy with

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 48 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

funds ring-fenced for flood risk management work, which may provide a means for gap funding priority works such as the Parrett Barrier. Defra Resilience Partnership Funding With respect to the availability of grant funding, the ability of Sedgemoor to demonstrate that match funding can be achieved through a tariff/CIL or a local tax could be essential to accessing money for capital schemes from Government. Defra has announced changes to the way funding will be allocated to flood and coastal defence projects, entitled Resilience Partnership Funding. The reforms which were implemented in May 2011 aim to allow more schemes to go ahead and to give each community more of a say in what is done to protect them. Instead of meeting the full costs of just a limited number of schemes, the new partnership approach to funding flood and coastal resilience will mean Government money is potentially available towards the costs of any worthwhile scheme. Funding levels will be based on the numbers of households protected, the damages being prevented, and the other benefits a project would deliver. Overall, more schemes are likely to go ahead than if the previous ‘all or nothing’ approach to funding were to continue. Conclusions Good progress is being made to securing strategic flood defences for Bridgwater and Highbridge through S106 Planning Obligation measures. Continued partnership working with Somerset CC as LLFA and the Environment Agency will be required to ensure that gap funding of the Parrett Barrier in particular is secured. During the plan period it is also anticipated that engagement with tourism business operators in the Brean and Berrow area will be necessary to ensure that appropriate long term flood risk management strategies are agreed.

3.6.1.1 Water and wastewater Responsibilities for delivery Sedgemoor is served by two companies: Bristol Water provides a water supply only service to the northern part of the District covering Burnham-on-Sea to Cheddar. Water supply in the rest of Sedgemoor is provided by Wessex Water, who are also the wasterwater provider for the District. Assessment of infrastructure needs and costs and current projects All water supply companies are required to produce Water Resource Plans covering a period of 25 years, which should demonstrate the predicted demand and supply requirements resulting from population growth. Water and wastewater companies also produce 5 year business plans, known as Asset Management Plans (AMP), which set out their planned infrastructure projects for that period. The following projects have been identified through a review of the AMPs for the 2010-2015 period: • Southern Resilience Scheme (Bristol Water) – This involves the provision of a new large diameter water main between Barrow Treatment Works (TW) and Cheddar TW. • Cheddar Reservoir Pipe Upgrade (Bristol Water) – Replacement of raw water main between Cheddar Reservoir and Barrow.

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 49 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

• New Cheddar Reservoir (Bristol Water) – Preparatory work is needed for a new reservoir to meet longer-term needs in the north of Somerset that will provide a yield of 22Ml/day when complete in 2022. • Works at Ashford Reservoir (Wessex Water) – Improvements to Ashford Reservoir are designed to reduce the flood risk from the reservoir under extreme rainfall events and the potential effects of climate change. The raising of impoundment walls will be completed during 2010. • Water Supply Infrastructure Refurbishment Programme (Wessex Water) – Wessex Water has a £10m investment in water supply works being undertaken from 2010-2013. These involve mains renovation and are related to water quality rather than capacity improvements. • Wastewater Infrastructure Reburbishment Programme (Wessex Water) – This involves a series of leakage, sewer and treatment works refurbishment and enhancement. With respect to providing connections to strategic sites allocated in the Core Strategy, Bristol Water have advised that they do not anticipate any issues with offsite mains capacity or availability of water, but will be able to comment more fully when outline plans for schemes are made available. During a workshop in December 2011 Bristol Water advised that the addition of the urban extension at Burnham-on-Sea was not anticipated to cause problems. Wessex Water provided the following advice: • Existing water resources serving Bridgwater are adequate to serve the NE Bridgwater proposals and no new sources or reservoir storage will be required in the next 5-10 years. It will be necessary to maintain dialogue with Wessex Water in order to investigate options, should provision in the long term prove uncertain. • Recent works have been completed at Chilton Trinity Water Treatment Works (WTWs) in Bridgwater to accommodate some future growth, but Wessex Water will need to work closely with Sedgemoor DC to ensure that the rate of development does not proceed ahead of planned investment. Wessex Water have provided a plan setting out possible future extensions, which should be used to inform a safeguarding designation in the Core Strategy. • Two of the Parrett Barrier site options would potentially create an enclosed body of water into which the effluent from the Chilton Trinity WTWs would discharge, potentially resulting in a requirement for a higher level of treatment. Conclusions Finance for water and wastewater is sourced by ratepayers, with spending regulated by Ofwat through the AMP process. Site connections are generally financed by developers, which can affect viability where long connections, redirections and/or capacity upgrades are triggered by a single development. Nevertheless, on the basis that well established mechanisms are in place for the financing and delivery of water and wastewater infrastructure, it is concluded that there is a reasonable prospect of provision, subject to continued liaison with Wessex Water on the following matters: • the monitoring of water supply demands; and

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 50 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

• engagement over the location and detailed design of the Parrett Barrier, which could have implications for the functioning of the Chilton Trinity Wastewater Treatment Works. There does remain scope for Sedgemoor DC to explore more innovative forms of delivering wastewater services using green infrastructure solutions such as reed beds, which could provide a means for achieving habitat creation and open space objectives in combination with traditional ‘grey infrastructure’ requirements.

3.7 Information Technology & Communications (ITC) Responsibilities for delivery Telecommunications covers a wide range of services including voice, audio visual, mobile telephone and internet. BT have a universal service obligation to provide telephone connections and compete with other private companies to offer telephone and broadband internet services. Somerset CC and Sedgemoor DC advocate improvements to broadband connection speeds to ensure a competitive economy and access to internet services, particularly for rural areas that have a tendency to lag behind in terms of connection speeds. Assessment of infrastructure needs and current projects The provision of ICT infrastructure is unlikely to have a significant impact on Core Strategy soundness, but will have implications for Sedgemoor’s economic competitiveness. This study has focussed on internet access as an important measure, and in particular the provision of high speed broadband connectivity. Due to the fall back position of BT’s universal service obligation there has been no real need to analyse site specific provision as a basic service level will always be met. The Infrastructure Needs Assessment therefore provides an assessment of two key measures for Sedgemoor. Firstly, the range of service provider choice. In Bridgwater and Burnham-on-Sea consumers have a choice of four or more service providers , but elsewhere in Sedgemoor, BT are the sole provider. The second measure relates to the quality and speed of connectivity available across the District. It is concluded that Sedgemoor receives a relatively good service, ranking second of six districts in Somerset in terms of the quantity of average (2- 8Mbps) and high speed (8+Mbps) connections. Planned service improvements identified during the course of the study include: • BT Openreach are in the process of rolling out ADSL2+ (24Mbps) lines. Both Bridgwater and Burnham-on-Sea exchanges have been upgraded. • BT Openreach are planning to spend £1.5billion on a national fibre-optic broadband service, capable of providing speeds up to 40Mbps, with the potential to increase 60Mbps. Bridgwater is expected to receive the fibre to the cabinet (FTTC) technology by 2012. The development of services across Sedgemoor is heavily targeted to existing urban centres and there are no signs that these areas are substantially lagging behind other parts of the UK. In contrast, rural areas of the district suffer from below average connections speeds and lack of competition between service

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 51 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

providers, which could have implications for the competitiveness of rurally based businesses and e-government initiatives. The Government launched the National Broadband Strategy; ‘Britain’s Superfast Broadband Future’ in December 2010. The strategy sets out the Government’s vision for broadband in the UK, which is to ensure the UK has the best superfast broadband network in Europe by 2015 through delivering universal broadband and stimulating private investment. Broadband Delivery UK (BDUK) was created within the Department for Culture, Media and Sport by the Coalition Government as a delivery vehicle for the Government’s policies on broadband. BDUK’s main role is to allocate and distribute £530m of funding to bring superfast broadband to the third of UK homes and businesses which won’t be provided for by the broadband market. BDUK are coordinating Rural Market Testing Pilots which aim to discover what needs to be done to make superfast broadband commercially viable in rural communities as well as urban areas, and to understand the kind of Government support that will be necessary. In response, Connecting Devon and Somerset, which covers Plymouth, Torbay, Devon County Council, Somerset County Council and North Somerset areas, was established as part of a bid for BDUK funding. The ‘Devon and Somerset Broadband Plan’ (June 2011) highlights that currently broadband services across Somerset are poor in terms of speed, reliability and bandwidth. Findings demonstrated that by 2015 only 62% of premises would have access to superfast broadband if development was left to the private sector alone, with rurality, population density and topography representing significant challenges. The authorities were successfully awarded Government funding in May 2011. Somerset, North Somerset and Devon councils are sharing £31m to introduce the pilot programme, as well as £10m from Devon County Council and Somerset County Council. The ‘Devon and Somerset Broadband Plan’ aims to: • deliver 100% broadband coverage by 2015 (reliable, robust and upgradable services above 2Mbps), with a minimum of 85% being superfast broadband (a minimum of 20Mbps) delivered through an open network; • deliver 50% take-up, providing fairly priced services through at least 10 service providers; • deliver superfast broadband for all by 2020 and even higher speeds where needed; • increase our GVA by £0.75 billion per annum by 2020 by improving access to markets, enabling improved productivity, strengthening our rural economy, helping small businesses grow, driving inward investment, supporting action to improve skills, tackling displacement to other areas, supporting key growth sectors including the low carbon economy; • tackle digital exclusion, ensuring rural communities have the same access to services as urban communities; • deliver a transformation in public service provision, providing faster and more reliable access to better resources and services, including education, adult social care, healthcare and law & order; and • secure the delivery of the Big Society, connecting up our communities and giving them real control over their services.

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 52 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

Specific pilot projects within Sedgemoor are yet to be identified.

3.8 Sport, leisure & open space This section covers the provision of a range of sports, leisure and amenity facilities including indoor facilities (swimming pools and sports halls); outdoor playing pitches; informal outdoor open space; childrens’ play space; and natural greenspace.

3.8.1 Indoor sport facilities Responsibilities for delivery Indoor sports facilities in Sedgemoor are provided by a number of independent operators. 1610 (formerly Somerset Leisure Trust, a non-profit making leisure trust) and Bridgwater College manage the majority of the larger facilities, with community organisations providing an important supplementary offer. Assessment of infrastructure needs and costs Sport England have created the Sports Facility Calculator (SFC) to help local planning authorities quantify how much additional demand for key community sports facilities is generated by new development. The SFC covers swimming pools, sports halls and indoor bowling rinks as important indoor facilities (swimming pools and sports halls are considered by this study). Sport England warn that, whilst the SFC can also be used to estimate the overall demand for indoor sports facilities for the existing population of an area, there are dangers in how such figures are subsequently used for strategic gap analysis. For instance, The SFC does not take account of facility location compared to demand, the capacity and availability of facilities or the attractiveness of facilities. These factors have therefore been considered while undertaking this high level assessment. Baseline provision of facilities has been taken from the results of the Western Somerset Leisure Audit (2010).

3.8.1.1 Swimming pools With respect to swimming pool provision, the closure of the Bridgwater Splash leisure pool in 2009 highlighted the challenges faced by councils in securing maintenance and revenue finance for swimming pools, while the level of public protest to the closure demonstrates the high community value attached to these facilities. Utilising the SFC as a benchmark, it is estimated that there should be around five pools (20 lanes) within Sedgemoor to serve the existing population. There are two 25m pools in Sedgemoor, the Burnham-on-Sea Swim & Sports Academy and Kings Fitness & Leisure Pool at Cheddar, plus one 20m pool at the Quantock Lodge near Over Stowey (full gym membership is not required to access the pool). The remaining facilities in the district are small leisure pools provided within caravan parks that have limited access and are not considered to contribute towards the provision of pools suitable for learning or recreational swimming and competition. There is also an outdoor pool at Brymore School, Cannington,

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 53 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

however this is in very poor condition and is not accessible to the public. As such, it is concluded that that the current quantity of provision is below the benchmark and that there is no surplus capacity to cater for new demand. During the Core Strategy period additional demand for one pool (4 lanes) is projected to arise, based on the SFC, focussed primarily at Bridgwater. A breakdown of demand for each strategic site is provided at Appendix A11.

Swimming Pools (Lanes) Baseline Core Strategy Geography/Site Dwellings Pop'n Demand Supply Demand Capital Cost Sedgemoor 10,605 24392 19.68 12 4.3 £2,638,250 Bridgwater 7,455 17147 6.44 0 3.0 £1,854,611 BoS & Highbridge 1,575 3623 - - 0.6 £391,819 Rural Sedgemoor 1,575 3623 - - 0.6 £391,819 Per Dwelling 1 2.3 N/A N/A 0.0004 £249 Per Capita N/A 1 N/A N/A 0.0002 £108 Current projects Projects to address the existing and projected demand for swimming pool provision are: • Chilton Trinity Swimming Pool – Sedgemoor DC is working with Building Schools for the Future (BSF) Somerset to deliver a new pool at Chilton Trinity alongside the new school. The pool is currently being constructed and is due for completion during the spring 2013. • Sedgemoor Pool – There is an aspiration to deliver a further pool within the district. Due to the current absence of public funding, it is anticipated this could be a privately funded facility, potentially linked to a hotel. Sedgemoor DC have taken a positive step towards addressing the key deficiency in swimming pool provision at Bridgwater. If deemed to be a funding priority by the Council, it is considered that contributions towards the pool from new development is justified due to predicted demand arising.

3.8.1.2 Sports halls In comparison to swimming provision, there is a relatively high quantity of sports hall facilities in the district. Using the SFC to provide a benchmark, it is estimated that there should be around 7.5 sports hall providing 30 courts to serve the existing Sedgemoor population (a large sports hall typically provides 4 courts). There are currently 7 large sports halls in the district (5 in Bridgwater, 1 in Highbridge and 1 in Cheddar), all of which are operated alongside education facilities. The recently completed YMCA building provides a further 2 court sports hall, along with separate exercise studio and activity room, providing supplementary provision in the principal town. There are also a number of smaller facilities in rural settlements (e.g. Ashcott Village Hall) that assist in serving the needs of rural communities. Compared with the Sport England benchmark standard, the existing level of sports hall provision in Sedgemoor is viewed as satisfactory in terms of overall quantity of facilities. A more detailed

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 54 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

study of timetables and accessibility would be required to understand whether there are significant gaps in provision.

Sports Halls (Courts) Baseline Core Strategy Geography/Site Dwellings Pop'n Demand Supply Demand Capital Cost Sedgemoor 10,605 24392 29.7 29 6.4 £4,225,413 Bridgwater 7,455 17147 9.7 21 4.5 £2,970,340 BoS & Highbridge 1,575 3623 - 4 1.0 £627,537 Rural Sedgemoor 1,575 3623 - 4 1.0 £627,537 Per Dwelling 1 2.3 N/A N/A 0.0006 £398 Per Capita N/A 1 N/A N/A 0.0003 £173 In terms of the quality of sports hall provision, concerns have been raised regarding the condition of two facilities in particular. The sports hall at East Bridgwater school is in poor condition and was due to be replaced as part of the Building Schools for the Future programme, but this element of the project was halted following a funding review. The Bridgwater College sports hall at Cannington is also in poor condition, restricting use by students and the local community. During the Core Strategy period, additional demand for around 1.5 sports halls (6 courts) is projected to arise (as shown in the table above – a more detailed breakdown by strategic site is provided at Appendix A12). Current projects Rather than seek to provide new facilities at this stage, it is expected that the emphasis would be on renewing and enhancing existing facilities, increasing the overall quality and capacity of provision. This process is already underway. Schemes and projects include: • East Bridgwater School – reprovision and potential enlargement of the sports hall facilities at East Bridgwater School remains an objective for the Council. • Chilton Trinity School, Bridgwater – a new Sports Hall at Chilton Trinity that allows community use (operated by 1610) was opened during 2011, with additional facilities including a free weights room; dance studio; fitness suite and GP referral centre. • Robert Blake and Elmwood School, Bridgwater – a new Sports Hall (4 court) at Robert Blake that is due to open during 2012. Additional facilities will include an activity room (with dance barres and mirrors) and a fitness suite. • Bridgwater Sports & Social Club – Indoor sports facilities at the existing club include 2 squash courts, a 2 lane indoor bowling rink and a skittle alley. The outline planning consent for NE Bridgwater would result in the loss of the existing club building, but the S106 Planning Obligation provide the option of a £316,000 financial contribution towards a new facility. It is the Council’s objective to gain additional funding such that an replacement community and sports centre can be provided as a component of the ‘community heart’ within the new urban extension.

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 55 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

• Cannington Community Centre & Sports Hall – The Cannington Parish Plan (2005) identifies an aspiration for a new community centre incorporating provision for indoor sports (badminton, dancing, table tennis, exercise classes). Bridgwater College also have an aspiration to replace the ageing sports hall in the village. Potential for investment in separate or shared facilities at Cannington is to be explored by Sedgemoor DC. Recent project completions at Bridgwater YMCA and Chilton Trinity Sports Centre demonstrate that improvements to the quality of provision is underway. Nevertheless, securing funding to support smaller community sports facilities at NE Bridgwater, Wembdon and Cannington and the reprovision/enhancement of larger facilities at East Bridgwater, Haygrove and Burnham-on-Sea and Highbridge remains a challenge.

3.8.2 Playing pitches & other outdoor sports Responsibilties for delivery Sedgemoor District Council have retained responsibility for managing some playing pitches (e.g. the football pitch at Mansfield Park), although increasingly the responsibility for delivering and maintaining playing pitches and other outdoor sports facilities is passing to education providers, the 1610 leisure trust and community organisations such the Burnham Association of Sports Clubs (BASC). Assessment of infrastructure needs and costs The Fields in Trust (FIT) Benchmark Standards for All Outdoor Sports, Playing Pitches, Informal Play Space and Children’s Play Space (2008) provide a means for gauging the appropriate level of provision of outdoor amenity space. Fields in Trust (FIT) is the operating name of the National Playing Fields Association, the organisation whose recommendations on planning for and providing outdoor recreational facilities are known as the “Six Acre Standard”. In 2006 FIT commissioned a postal survey of local planning authorities throughout the UK to provide an evidenced-based framework for recommended Benchmark Standards on open space provision, to succeed the Six Acre Standard. The FIT Benchmark Standard differentiates between playing pitches (football, rugby, hockey, cricket) and space for other outdoor sports (e.g. bowling, tennis, athletics) and therefore the same distinction is made in the high level assessment below. Existing provision of playing pitches and space for outdoor sports is based on information contained in the Western Somerset Leisure Audit (2010). Sedgemoor DC are currently participating in the completion of a Somerset-wide Playing Pitch Strategy, which will provide a more detailed assessment of provision and demand once completed. Playing Pitches Application of the FIT Benchmark Standard indicates that in broad terms, the current supply of playing pitches is below the UK median and that additional provision to support new development is justified. The results of the assessment of need are summarised below and a breakdown by strategic site is provided at Appendix A13.

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 56 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

Playing Pitches (Ha) Baseline Core Strategy Geography/Site Dwellings Pop'n Demand Supply Demand Capital Cost Sedgemoor 10,605 24392 135.36 117 29.3 £2,852,066 Bridgwater 7,455 17147 44.27 27 20.6 £2,004,918 BoS & Highbridge 1,575 3623 - - 4.3 £423,574 Rural Sedgemoor 1,575 3623 - - 4.3 £423,574 Per Dwelling 1 2.3 N/A N/A 0.003 £269 Per Capita N/A 1 N/A N/A 0.0012 £117 The conclusions of the previous Sedgemoor Playing Pitch Strategy (2005) and qualitative evidence and experience demonstrates that existing provision is inadequate. The key conclusions of the Playing Pitch Strategy are summarised below: • In 2004 there was an overall surplus of football pitches, cricket pitches and rugby pitches, although with increases in population to 2011 the surplus was predicted to be significantly reduced. Therefore taking account of the population projections to 2011, it was recommended that all existing playing fields are protected and that consideration should only be given to disposal where alternative high quality provision is made available. • There were significant issues with the quality of local playing pitch provision, which can influence its playing capacity. The Sedgemoor Playing Pitch Strategy reported that none of the Council pitches are able to carry more than two games a week. More specifically, water logging has been identified as a potential problem due to the fact that very few pitches were constructed with the necessary drainage. A key priority of the Strategy is to improve the quality of pitches and ancillary facilities: improving pitches and surfaces to increase carrying capacity (the majority of pitches lack drainage); and upgrading and refurbishing changing facilities taking account of the needs of women and people with a disability; and provision of flood-lighting. • The overall figures were considered to mask local issues, including: a shortfall of junior football and junior rugby pitches in Bridgwater; and a shortfall of adult and junior football pitches and cricket in the Quantocks Parish Cluster. Concerns that have been reported to directly to Sedgemoor DC officers include the case of Robert Blake Old Boys football team (Bridgwater), who have difficulty finding pitches where they can train and compete. Current projects to increase and enhance playing pitch provision are: • NE Bridgwater Open Space – the extant consent provides for open space that would be capable of accommodating 2 senior football pitches and two junior pitches, in addition to junior pitches associated with the new primary school. This comprises replacement of Bridgwater Sports & Social Club pitches and additional provision. • Wembdon Village Halls and Playing Fields – the provision of playing fields alongside a new community hall at Wembdon Common is a community-led

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 57 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

project being progressed by the Wembdon Village Hall and Playing Fields Charitable Trust. • Rhode Lane Wanderers – the football club has aspirations to establish a club sports facility at a site on Wills Lane, adjacent to the South Bridgwater Country Park, given the absence of suitable alternative provision to the south of the town. Other Outdoor Sports Application of the FIT Benchmark Standard indicates that in broad terms, the current supply of space for outdoor sports is below the UK median and that additional provision to support new development is justified.

Other Outdoor Sports (Ha) Baseline Core Strategy Geography/Site Dwellings Pop'n Demand Supply Demand Capital Cost Sedgemoor 10,605 24392 45.12 21 9.7566 £8,145,259 Bridgwater 7,455 17147 14.76 5 6.86 £5,725,875 BoS & Highbridge 1,575 3623 - - 1.45 £1,209,692 Rural Sedgemoor 1,575 3623 - - 1.45 £1,209,692 Per Dwelling 1 2.3 N/A N/A 0.0009 £768 Per Capita N/A 1 N/A N/A 0.0004 £334

During the Core Strategy period, further investment to support planned growth will be desirable. Projects already in the pipeline that will deliver specialist facilities for outdoor sport include: • Chilton Trinity School, Bridgwater – outside sports facilities will include 2 x Multi-Use Games Areas (MUGAs) providing for tennis and basketball, as well as a 400m running track. • Robert Blake & Elmwood Schools, Bridgwater – redevelopment plans include a Multi-Use Games Area (MUGA) providing 4 tennis courts, a 200m running track and a basketball zone. • Wembdon Village Hall and Playing Fields – proposed sports provision includes the provision of a MUGA, potentially providing for tennis and basketball to be played in this location. Further consultation with sports and leisure providers and local clubs and associations would be required to understand what the future priorities for outdoor sports provision are.

3.8.3 Recreational open space and accessible natural greenspace Responsibilities for delivery Alongside formal outdoor sports facilities, it is also desirable to provide space for informal recreation. These include play spaces for children and parks and gardens (the majority of which are managed by Sedgemoor DC), as well as areas of accessible natural greenspace such as Local Nature Reserves, that tend to be

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 58 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

managed by landowners and/or a third sector group such as the Somerset Wildlife Trust. Assessment of infrastructure needs and costs Two sets of standards facilitate a high level assessment of open space provision and there is potential for some overlap between the two as in some instances open space is designed to provide both recreation and nature conservation functions. The FIT Benchmark Standards include provision for play with an emphasis on provision for children and young people, but does also include an allowance for ‘Informal Playing Space’ that could cater for a wider range of user groups. The Natural England Accessible Natural Greenspace Standard (ANGSt) seeks to address the variability of access to natural greenspaces by promoting the provision of sites within easy reach of people’s homes. Natural England confirm that, in this context, natural does not necessarily mean the site has to be rare or notable enough to be designated. They go on to describe that users will find nature in wildlife, open landscapes, seasonal changes and places of tranquillity. The table below sets out the FIT and ANGSt standards and indicates where there is potential for open space to contribute to the objectives of both benchmarks.

FIT Benchmark Standards Natural England ANGSt Comment Type Standard Type 3 Standard Designated 0.25Ha per - - FIT set out design guidelines Children’s 1,000 for 4: Playing Space population LAPs - located within 100m; LEAPs – located within Informal 0.55Ha per Local natural Site of min. 400m; and Playing Space 1,000 greenspace 2Ha within NEAPs – located within 1km. population 300m Saved Local Plan Policy Neighbourhood Site of min. RLT2 sets out a standard of natural 20Ha within 20m² per dwelling, which is greenspace 2km consistent with the total FIT Benchmark Standard (playing pitches, other outdoor sports and space for informal recreation). - - Parish Cluster Site of natural 100Ha greenspace within 5km - - District natural Site of greenspace 500Ha within 10km - - Local Nature 1Ha per Reserves 1,000 population

3 Natural England have not provided a title for each standard and therefore the Local, Neighbourhood; Parish and District level site types have been provided to give a sense of scale and distribution. 4 Local Areas for Play (LAP), Local Equipped Areas for Play (LEAP) and Neighbourhood Equipped Areas for Play (NEAP).

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 59 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

3.8.4 Recreational open space and play space Using the combined FIT Benchmark Standard for designated Children’s Playing Space and Informal Playing Space (0.8Ha/1,000 population) it is estimated that demand for around 19.5Ha of open space will arise over the Core Strategy period. To provide an estimated capital cost, a model area of greenspace (total 0.8ha) comprising 0.25Ha equipped children’s play space, 0.25Ha park/garden and 0.3Ha natural greenspace has been costed (Spons Civils costbook, 2010). The results of this assessment of need is summarised in the table below and breakdown by site is provided at Appendix A15.

Recreational Open Space (Ha) - including equipped and informal play space Baseline Core Strategy Geography/Site Dwellings Pop'n Demand Supply Demand Capital Cost Sedgemoor 10,605 24392 90.24 0 19.5 £12,500,278 Bridgwater 7,455 17147 44.27 0 13.7 £8,787,324 BoS & Highbridge 1,575 3623 - - 2.9 £1,856,477 Rural Sedgemoor 1,575 3623 - - 2.9 £1,856,477 Per Dwelling 1 2.3 N/A N/A 0.002 £1,179 Per Capita 0 1 N/A N/A 0.0008 £512 Current projects Current projects to deliver recreational open space range from the Meads EcoPark that will serve Bridgwater as a whole, as well as smaller local facilities: • The Meads EcoPark – located to the south west of Bridgwater, The Meads comprises a corridor of low-lying agricultural land extending from the town centre to open countryside. Core Strategy and Bridgwater Vision proposals are for The Meads to be developed as an Ecological Park drawing on and enhancing its natural qualities and sustainability credentials and promoting the area as a place to relax, contemplate and learn about the natural environment. Unstructured open space would provide opportunities for play and recreation for a broad range of users in association with other active uses such as green gym, high wire trail to promote health and well being. Delivery of the first phase of the project is expected to be linked to new housing development at Durleigh Road. • NE Bridgwater – the outline planning consent S106 planning obligation requires the provision of 3 x LEAPs and a NEAP to support the provision of 2,000 dwellings at the site. • South Bridgwater – outline planning consent S106 planning obligation requires the provision of a country park on land between Stockmoor Village and Willstock Village as well as additional recreational open space and play space to support the provision of 1,400 dwellings (including 4 x Local Equipped Areas of Play and 2 x Neighbourhood Equipped Areas of Play). Further projects will need to be defined to provide recreational open space and play equipment within close proximity to other residential developments. Accessible Natural Greenspace

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 60 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

In order to provide a high level assessment for the provision of accessible natural greenspace two standards are combined here. Firstly, the Natural England ANGSt for the provision of local greenspaces of 2Ha within 300m of new development; and secondly, the objective of providing 1Ha of designated Local Nature Reserves per 1,000 population. Based on an assumption that the occupants of homes within a circular area (300m radius; 30 dwellings/Ha) are able to access a 2Ha site results in a similar standard of 1Ha of Local Nature Reserve per 1,000 population. The conclusion therefore is that accessible natural greenspace, wherever possible, should be designated as a Local Nature Reserve to secure long term protection. As shown in the table below, application of the Local Accessible Natural Greenspace results in an objective for providing around 24.4Ha of new local sites across Sedgemoor during the Core Strategy period. The estimated capital cost is based on the Spons Civils cost book (2010).

Local Accessible Natural Greenspace (Ha) Baseline Core Strategy Geography/Site Dwellings Pop'n Demand Supply Demand Capital Cost Sedgemoor 10,605 24392 112.8 0 24.4 £4,866,104 Bridgwater 7,455 17147 44.3 0 17.1 £3,420,727 BoS & Highbridge 1,575 3623 - - 3.6 £722,689 Rural Sedgemoor 1,575 3623 - - 3.6 £722,689 Per Dwelling 1 2.3 N/A N/A 0.002 £459 Per Capita 0 1 N/A N/A 0.001 £200 It is important to note that in many cases, it may be preferable to incorporate ecological features and ‘wild areas’ into other existing and proposed open spaces. The Sedgemoor Green Infrastructure Strategy (May 2011) sets out a number of proposed projects and potential schemes that are of relevance to meeting Natural England and Sedgemoor DC objectives: • East Bridgwater Local Nature Reserve – A compensatory habitat is proposed in relation to the NE Bridgwater development site, on the east side of the M5. There is an opportunity to extend this area of habitat mitigation, develop and develop a significant open space with biodiversity and recreational value. • Chilton Trinity Local Nature Reserve – A new Local Nature Reserve could be provided west of Chilton Trinity. The nature reserve should be designated and delivered in conjunction with the proposed green lane network. Together with the East Bridgwater Local Nature Reserve, this proposed scheme would help to address an imbalance of provision of accessible natural greenspace between north and south Bridgwater. • The Meads EcoPark – the EcoPark (described above) would be readily accessible from Durleigh and Hamp. • South Bridgwater Country Park – the delivery of the Country Park is already secured through the S106 Planning Obligation for the South Bridgwater residential development. • Bridgwater Community Forest – Creation of a woodland to be located in walking distance from residential neighbourhoods. The woodland could

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 61 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

potentially be located in the Meads, where it could provide a connecting link with the proposed South Bridgwater Country Park. • Burnham & Brean Wetlands – A themed landscape focussed on wetlands and bird watching is a scheme that could be developed in the hinterland of Burnham and Brean. Controlled recreational access for local residents and tourists could include access to walkways and hides. There may be an opportunity to designate a new local nature reserve in this area. These selected projects and schemes are located in close proximity to Bridgwater and Burnham-on-Sea and Highbridge, where the highest levels of growth are planned to occur in the Core Strategy. The Natural England ANGSt also encourages the provision of larger Parish and District level natural greenspaces and the designation of Local Nature Reserves (LNR) amounting to 1Ha per 1,000 population. This level of provision is broadly equivalent to the standard for Local Accessible Natural Greenspace, although Sedgemoor DC may decide that different sites are more appropriate for formal designation as an LNR than those located closest to urban areas. Applying the ANGSt standard suggests that around 24-25Ha of LNR should be designated to support growth in the district, providing statutory protection to accessible natural greenspace. Existing projects and schemes set out in the Sedgemoor Green Infrastructure (GI) Strategy that could assist Sedgemoor DC in achieving this objective include: • Steart Coastal Management Project – Bristol Port and the Environment Agency have submitted proposals for managed realignment of flood barriers at Steart to create wetland habitat as compensation for the Bristol Port Deep Sea Container Terminal and ‘coastal squeeze’ along the Severn Estuary. Together the two projects would create around 500Ha of inter-tidal and freshwater habitat. • Sedgemoor Green Lanes – The GI Strategy sets out a network of key and secondary green lane connections across the district. These are intended to provide walking and cycling routes and ecological corridors, linking GI assets such as nature reserves and local populations. Priority routes identified in the Infrastructure Tracker are those in the west of the District, relating to the realignment of routes as part of the Steart Coastal Management Project and provision of safe routes for walkers and cyclists during the construction of Hinkley Point C. • Mendip Hills Limestone and Neutral Grassland Links Project – Creation of limestone and neutral grassland habitat linking the existing designated pockets that stretch in an east-westerly band north of Cheddar. • Poldens Woodland Creation – This woodland creation project aims to connect existing areas of woodland in the Polden Hills following guidance set out by the South West Nature Map. • Quantocks Woodland Intensification Project – Woodland intensification within the south-eastern part of the Quantock Hills is intended to link pockets of Ancient Woodland and other existing woodland in the catchments of a number of rivers. • Avalon Marshes Wetland Centre – The Avalon Marshes comprise the low lying land of the Brue Valley which extends from Glastonbury in the east, towards Bridgwater Bay in the West. A Wetland Centre is proposed by

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 62 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

Natural England associated with the Avalon Marshes Landscape Partnership to be located just outside the District’s boundary. Sedgemoor DC would seek to work with project sponsors to ensure cross district boundary linkages are developed where possible. Conclusions Policies RLT2 and RLT3 of the Local Plan, which have been saved within the Core Strategy, provide a sound and proven basis for the continued collection of developer contributions towards sports and informal recreational open space provision: • Policy RLT2 seeks 20 square metres of children's play space per new dwelling • Policy RLT3 seeks contributions towards the provision of outdoor sites for sport at a rate of 40 square metres per dwelling. The combined requirement of 60 square metres per dwelling is broadly equivalent to the combined Playing Pitch, Other Outdoor Sport and Recreational Open Space standards set out above (based on FIT benchmark standards). Estimated costings for the provision of these facilities should be reviewed so that S106/CIL contributions ensure reasonable prospect of provision. This study also recommends that additional contributions could be sought towards the provision of accessible natural greenspace designated as Local Nature Reserves.

3.9 Transport and public realm Responsibilities for delivery Somerset CC is responsible for transport planning and strategy and the delivery of highways schemes in Sedgemoor. The District Council also recognise transport as a key priority with respect to supporting development in the Core Strategy, maintaining economic competitiveness and providing access to the other services covered by this study. Assessment of infrastructure needs and costs and current projects. Somerset adopted the Somerset Future Transport Plan 2011-2026 in February 2011, which replaces the Local Transport Plan. An accompanying Technical Note to the Future Transport Plan, ‘Transport and Development’, advises that: ‘…all new development is required to address its own transport implications and those which are likely to have significant transport implications are required to prepare Transport Assessments, which determine whether the impact of the development on transport is acceptable.’ This places the onus for delivery of transport infrastructure necessary to bring forward strategic sites upon developers. Somerset CC have also adopted the ‘Bridgwater, Taunton & Wellington Future Transport Strategy’ (November 2011). This sets out a long term action plan and series of transport projects for Bridgwater, advising that good transport links to, in and around Bridgwater are fundamental to its economic and social vitality, and that congestion and its associated knock-on effects have been a concern for a number of years. A large number of the projects set out in the Future Transport Strategy correspond with proposals in the Bridgwater Vision, where common themes are the enhancement of public transport services and accessibility for pedestrians, cyclists. The Bridgwater Vision goes on to make the link with the creation of high quality public spaces, as exemplified by the Celebration Mile

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 63 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

project, a pedestrian priority route from the railway station to the Docks, involving coordinated high quality public realm treatment, shared surfaces / paving, lighting, street trees and public art. A Transport Topic Paper (April 2011) was prepared by Sedgemoor DC to support the examination of the Core Strategy, which set out further details of the evidence base for transport policy and strategy. During the preparation of the Topic Paper, and in consultation with Somerset CC, Sedgemoor DC have undertaken a prioritisation exercise to identify those “Core” Transport projects that are considered essential to the delivery of the Core Strategy. These are listed below: Highways • A38 / A39 North East Bridgwater Link Road – a new route will link the A38 and A39 through the North East Bridgwater development • A38 / A39 North East Bridgwater Link Road Railway Bridge • A38 Cattle Market Site Access – a link road from Bristol Road into the Cattle Market site • A38 / A39 Broadway Junction Improvements – a series of junction improvements on the principal route through Bridgwater, including safety and public realm improvements for walkers and cyclists. • A38 Huntworth Roundabout Improvements – junction improvements required in relation to distribution, housing and other development proposals in the vicinity of M5 Junction 24. • A38 / A39 Cross Rifles (Cannon) Roundabout Improvements – Somerset CC are in the process of designing junction improvements with funding secured from the North East Bridgwater development. • A39 Broadway / A38 Taunton Road Junction Improvements – Improvements to the junction to reduce queuing and improve pedestrian crossing facilities. • A39 Puriton Hill / Bath Road Junction Improvements – Junction improvements necessitated by the development of North East Bridgwater. • Colley Lane Relief Road – A scheme identified by the Bridgwater Town Transport Study as a means of relieving congestion on the A38 Taunton Road, A38 / A39 Broadway and Salmon Parade. • Leggar Link Road – The Leggar Link would reinstate a length of road removed many years ago. The immediate benefit would be to enable access to the retail area without the need to negotiate the Cross Rifles Junction, with further potential to improve bus routing into the town centre. • Puriton Energy Park Link Road – Link road required to improve access to the ROF Puriton site from the A39 and M5 Junction 23. • South Bridgwater Distributor Road – East-west distributor road serving housing development at Stockmoor Village and Willstock Village. This road has now been constructed. • Rhode Lane Bus Gate – Provision of bus gate enabling bus services to Willstock Village while preventing Rhode Lane being used as a route to central Bridgwater for motorists.

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 64 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

Walking and cycling • A38 / A39 North East Bridgwater Multi-User Route – this new route will link the A38 and A39 through the North East Bridgwater development. • North Petherton to Bridgwater Multi-User Route – provision of new sections of route at Stockmoor and Huntworth, together with maintenance and enhancement of existing sections of route to the north. In terms of assessing reasonable prospect of provision of transport infrastructure, the Sedgemoor Infrastructure Tracker demonstrates that direct provision of projects by developers, or financial contributions to enable delivery by Somerset CC, is achieved for the majority of “Core” transport projects. There does remain, however, a funding shortfall for the following highway projects: • Colley Lane Southern Relief Road – an escalation of costs beyond those predicted at the outset of the project means that there is currently a funding shortfall of £1,132,000 against the revised capital cost of £8,500,000. • A38 / A39 Broadway Junction Improvements – with an estimated capital cost of £500,000, these improvements are not linked to a single development scheme, but are central to the functioning of the Bridgwater and strategic road network. On the basis that these are strategic transport projects benefitting the highways network across Bridgwater, recouping the combined capital cost of £1,632,000 through a tariff on Bridgwater developments is considered justified. Tariff viability work relating to Bridgwater suggests that there could be a funding pot of around £4,500,000 available for transport and linked public realm schemes within the urban area (see the preliminary calculations attached at Appendix B1). The Council will pursue alternative funding routes to meet the shortfall for the Colley Lane Relief Road and A38/A39 Broadway Junction improvements, but should these not succeed, it is assumed these “Core” projects will assume priority for spending from the fund. This would reduce the finance available for other schemes in Bridgwater down to around £2,850,000. Establishing Sustainable Transport Funds Beyond the delivery of “Core” transport projects, the Council is committed to progressing public transport, cycling and walking projects that will encourage modal-shift away from use of private cars, particularly for short journeys within urban areas. There are clear synergies between the development of a transport strategy for a town and the delivery of public realm interventions. Set in the context of a well thought through movement framework, the types of environmental improvements set out in the Bridgwater Vision and Burnham-on- Sea and Highbridge Regeneration Strategy encourage walking and cycling as opposed to car travel. In turn, this improves passing trade for local retail businesses and reduced congestion, improves the efficiency of public transport options and further encourages walking and cycling. The Bridgwater Vision sets out seven catalyst projects, all of which incorporate significant transport and movement proposals as summarised below: • Renaissance in Northgate and the Docks – proposals include improvements to pedestrian routes and the creation of two new squares (Northgate Square & Kiln Square).

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 65 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

• The Clink – The Clink is proposed as a pedestrian orientated street, while Cross Rifles junction becomes a key gateway with high quality surface treatment. • Station Gateway – a new public transport interchange is created against the backdrop of a new square (Brunel Square); pedestrian and cycle connections across the railway are proposed. • Westgate – Mount Street will become a pedestrian orientated street; new north-south pedestrian links will be created and a new square will provided (Westgate Square). • Riverside – Provision of dedicated cycle and pedestrian routes with quality lighting and improvements to Blake Gardens. Eastover Street will become pedestrian orientated. • Celebration Mile – a pedestrian priority route leading from the railway station to the docks. • The River – Public art and lighting projects will be encouraged at key points to provide an attraction in its own right and central focus for the town. In the case of Burnham-on-Sea and Highbridge, the following public realm projects are identified by the Regeneration Strategy: • Burnham High Street – The street is currently very busy with traffic and parked cars and has narrow pavements, which are generally of poor quality. The streetscape along this area requires simplication in order to ease traffic movement, create more flexible spaces and provide a safer and more accessible pedestrian environment. • East to West Links – This initiative aims to create vibrant side streets, which run east to west, linking the High Street and Victoria Road to the Promenade. These streets currently form a key part of the transport network, but have narrow pavements with undefined parking areas. The streets require public realm improvements with regard to layout, surfacing, street furniture and improvements to the pedestrian environment. • Southern Esplanade - The Southern Esplanade is a continuation of the promenade, which is dominated by a wide expanse of concrete and tarmac. The development of a Linear Park along the southern promenade would add to the desirability of the town as a tourist destination. In order to ensure that priority transport and public realm schemes such as those outlined above can be progressed against a backdrop of public spending cuts, it is suggested that Sustainable Transport Funds are established for Bridgwater, and Burnham-on-Sea and Highbridge. Projects qualifying for finance from this source could include: • public transport infrastructure, such as bus priority measures, improvements to interchanges or revenue support for services; • low carbon transport infrastructure, including charging points for electric vehicles and electric bicycle hire; • multi-user trail provision, enhancement and/or maintenance; • public realm works linked to walking and cycling improvements; and

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 66 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

• ‘soft’ measures, such as sustainable travel awareness and travel planning initiatives. Sedgemoor DC would work with Somerset CC and other stakeholders to develop a package of schemes that would be considered to deliver the greatest benefits across a range of transport, environmental, economic and health indicators. Tariff viability work suggests that a Sustainable Transport Fund for Bridgwater could be in the region of £4,500,000. A similar fund for Burnham-on-Sea and Highbridge could be in the order of £1,100,000. Conclusions Work undertaken to support the Examination in Public of the Core Strategy demonstrated that there is reasonable prospect of provision of the highways projects necessary to support the development of strategic sites. Initial calculations have also shown that it should be possible through a CIL approach to pool sufficient funds to create Sustainable Transport Funds for Bridgwater, and Burnham-on-Sea and Highbridge. These funds would then be used to ‘top up’ or match fund finance available for strategic schemes, such as the Colley Lane Relief Road, and deliver priority walking and cycling schemes and associated public realm enhancements.

3.10 Waste Responsibilities for delivery The Somerset Waste Partnership (SWP), which consists of the five district and borough councils within Somerset and the County Council, is responsible for providing household waste and recycling services for the county. Formed in October 2007, SWP became the first countywide area to combine waste service functions under a single joint committee of Councillors from all Somerset local authorities. The Partnership's strategic disposal partner is Viridor Waste Management Ltd, who has a long term contract (30 years) for the treatment and disposal of waste and, therefore, an important ongoing role in the planning of waste management services. Viridor Waste Management operates household waste recycling centres, composting facilities and landfill disposal sites in Somerset. May Gurney is also one of Somerset’s main contractors, providing recycling and refuse collections throughout the county. Assessment of infrastructure needs and costs and current projects At the present time Somerset CC is at an early stage in overseeing the production of a Minerals and Waste Local Development Framework (LDF), as required by the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act (2004). This will include a Waste Core Strategy, which will set out Somerset CC’s approach to waste management planning in Somerset until 2028. This will replace the Waste Local Plan, adopted by the County Council in 2005. In addition the LDF will include a Waste Site Allocations document, allocating specific sites suitable for the development of waste facilities. Somerset CC consulted on their Pre-submission Waste Core Strategy from 31 October to 06 January 2012.

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 67 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

Somerset’s total waste management capacity in 2010 is summarised in the table below 5. Table 7 - Somerset's Total Waste Management Capacity in 2010 Management Method Operational Capacity in Tonnes Recycling 538,000 Of which composting/AD is 130,500 Residual Waste Treatment - C&D Waste recycling 52,000 Non-haz. Landfill 5,146,000m³ Inert Landfill Approximately 900,000m³

This capacity is provided through a range of waste facilities. Those which are located within Sedgemoor District are summarised in the table below. The following table lists the number of each type of waste facility in operation (as of 2010) within the Sedgemoor District. Table 8 - Number of Waste Facilities in Somerset by Type Waste Infrastructure Number Recycling Centres 10 Waste Transfer Stations 15 Operational inert landfill sites 0 Non-hazardous Landfill Sites 1 Operational Incinerators 0

Within Sedgemoor District area, there is currently one planned additional waste facility that has planning consent (granted in 2008) but is yet to be developed, as detailed below: • Walpole Aneaerobic Digestion Plant, Bridgwater – to be developed by Viridor Waste Management at the existing Walpole waste management facility between the A38 and the Bridgwater-Bristol railway line, approximately 5km north of Bridgwater. The plant will treat source separated organic waste to recover energy and compost for a temporary period until 2034. The design capacity of the facility is 45,000 tonnes/year. The AD process is expected to produce about 14,000 tpa of digester compost. Somerset County Council’s Waste Policy Team published a “ Waste Management Need to 2028” document (Waste topic paper 1) in March 2011. The report was prepared between November 2010 and February 2011. It provides a central part of the evidence base for Somerset’s emerging Waste Local Development Framework Core Strategy (WCS) in relation to waste management need and the findings underpin the Pre-Submission Waste Core Strategy (October 2011). The Needs Assessment document sets out waste management capacity needed to manage waste arisings over the plan period. Capacity requirements have been arrived at for the three waste streams:

5 Data taken from Somerset County Council’s Waste Topic Paper 1: Waste Management Need to 2028. Published in March 2011.

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 68 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

• Municipal Solid Waste • Commercial and Industrial Waste • Construction and Demolition Waste Based on planned housing growth for the County and commercial and industrial waste projections, the document summarises the additional waste capacity requirements for the County in order to adequately deal with projected waste arisings. Table 9 - Somerset Waste Capacity Requirements Management Method Total Capacity Target Delivery Date Requirement MSW/C&I Waste recycling 103,000 tonnes 2020 Residual Waste Treatment 228,000-336,000 tonnes 2015/16 Inert Landfill Approximately 314,000- End of 2015 477,000m³

The Pre-Submission Waste Core Strategy concludes that sufficient non-hazardous waste landfill capacity is available for the plan period, however the waste hierarchy, public perception and the landfill tax mean that other forms of waste disposal are preferred. In light of this, there is a significant capacity requirement for residual waste treatment and the strategy suggests that need for two Energy from Waste (EfW) plants, to provide this capacity. Based on national criteria and an assessment of the suitability of local areas to accommodate EfW facilities the Needs Assessment document concludes with a number of spatial zones, which would be best placed for the proposed development of a waste facility of this type. These zones are included in the Submission Waste Core Strategy (October 2011) and include the identification of a project in Sedgemoor: • Bridgwater Energy from Waste (EfW) Plant - Zone A in the Submission Waste Core Strategy covers an area located to the north of Bridgwater, the document comments that access to the transport network and its ability to serve two main centres of population in Bridgwater and Taunton makes it an area for further consideration for the development of a strategic waste management facility. More specifically, the Submission Core Strategy states that the former Royal Ordnance Factory at Puriton, which is designated in Sedgemoor’s emerging Core Strategy as being a suitable location for an Energy Park, may be an appropriate location. The site is identified as a potential opportunity to utilise a disused railhead to facilitate the transportation of waste. Other potential sites include land north of Express Park, plots within the Colley Lane Industrial Estate and land at Dunball Drove. The Pre-submission Core Strategy establishes a number of objectives to meet the county council’s vision, which states that by 2016 “…the facilities should be in place for a step-change in the management of biodegradable waste and for a major shift from landfilling to recovery of residual waste after recycling and reuse. By 2028 the facilities should be in place for Somerset to minimise the amount of waste sent for disposal to landfill to the small fraction of waste that remains after treatment, the materials used for landfill cover and certain hazardous wastes.”

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 69 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

Conclusions The preparation of the Waste Core Strategy by Somerset County Council is now well advanced, with the result that an Energy from Waste Plant may be developed in the vicinity of Bridgwater by 2016. A number of potential sites have been identified and continuing liaison with Somerset CC and the Waste Partnership will be beneficial to ensure an appropriate location is selected and the facility is provided in a timely fashion.

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 70 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

4 Strategic sites and priority infrastructure projects

The preparation of a Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) for Sedgemoor will enable the pooling of funds towards “core” infrastructure projects that will benefit developments across a wider area. For instance, the improvement of a major transport junction in Bridgwater could enhance the performance of the wider highway network of the town, to the advantage of all. Nevertheless, in certain instances the development of a site may be closely linked with a specific infrastructure project or projects. This may be due to the close proximity and accessibility of a particular infrastructure project or it may be that a specific deficiency of provision (e.g. primary school places) has been identified that must be addressed as a priority. In these cases, it may be advantageous to apply flexibility to how an overall CIL and S106 Planning Obligation package is formulated. The tables below set out the infrastructure needs (assessed using benchmark standards) and initial view on the infrastructure projects that may be linked to the development of strategic sites.

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 71 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

4.1 Cattle Market

Cattle Market – Potential Infrastructure Requirements and related Projects

Site Estimated Capital Capital Infrastructure Lead Planning Core Funding Category Project Title secured - Capital Funds Funding Status Organisation Consent Scheme Shortfall ownership Cost Secured Achieved

Community Centre - Community Bridgwater - Cattle Infrastructure Somerset CC No No £82,599 No £0 £82,599 & Cultural Market - 0.1 Community Requirement Centres Community Centre - Community Sedgemoor Bridgwater - Sydenham Project Yes Yes No £0 £0 & Cultural DC Community Centre

Community Centre - Bridgwater Community Bridgwater Town Hall Project Town Yes No £1,140,000 No £0 £1,140,000 & Cultural Cultural Centre - Phase 2 Council

Library - Bridgwater - Community Infrastructure Cattle Market - Library Somerset CC No No £35,190 No £0 £35,190 & Cultural Requirement Floorspace (11.7sqm)

Early Years - Bridgwater - Cattle Market Nursery / Infrastructure Education Somerset CC No No £80,911 No £0 £80,911 Pre-School Places (12 Requirement places) Primary School - Bridgwater - Cattle Infrastructure Education Somerset CC No No £416,738 No £0 £416,738 Market Primary School Requirement Places (34 places)

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 72 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

Cattle Market – Potential Infrastructure Requirements and related Projects

Site Estimated Capital Capital Infrastructure Lead Planning Core Funding Category Project Title secured - Capital Funds Funding Status Organisation Consent Scheme Shortfall ownership Cost Secured Achieved

Secondary Education - Bridgwater - Chilton Education Project Somerset CC Yes Yes £24,500,000 Yes £24,500,000 £0 Trinity Technology College BSF

Secondary Education - Education Bridgwater - Elmwood Project Somerset CC Yes Yes £3,700,000 Yes £3,700,000 £0 Specialist School BSF

Secondary Education - £22,300,000 Education East Bridgwater Project Somerset CC Yes No £22,300,000 No £0 Community College

Secondary Education - Education Penrose Specialist School Project Somerset CC Pending Pending £6,000,000 No £0 £6,000,000 BSF

Secondary School - Bridgwater - Cattle Infrastructure Education Somerset CC No No £448,533 No £0 £448,533 Market Secondary Requirement School Places (24 places)

Flood, Flood Risk Management Sedgemoor Water & - Bridgwater - Parrett Project Pending No £24,600,000 Pending Yes £9,840,000 £24,600,000 DC Wastewater Barrier

Dentists - Bridgwater - Infrastructure Somerset Health Cattle Market (0.2 No No £37,064 No £0 £37,064 Requirement PCT dentists) Doctors - Bridgwater - Infrastructure Somerset Health Cattle Market (0.2 No No £55,595 No £0 £55,595 Requirement PCT Doctors)

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 73 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

Cattle Market – Potential Infrastructure Requirements and related Projects

Site Estimated Capital Capital Infrastructure Lead Planning Core Funding Category Project Title secured - Capital Funds Funding Status Organisation Consent Scheme Shortfall ownership Cost Secured Achieved

Hospitals - Bridgwater - Infrastructure Somerset Health No No £7,001,492 £0 £7,001,492 72 acute and other beds Requirement PCT

Hospitals - Bridgwater - Somerset Health Bridgwater Community Project Pending Yes £33,200,000 Pending £0 £33,200,000 PCT Hospital Redevelopment

Accessible Natural Recreation, Greenspace - Bridgwater Infrastructure Sports & - Cattle Market Somerset CC No No £78,005 No £0 £78,005 Requirement Open Space Accessible Natural Greenspace (0.4Ha)

Accessible Natural Recreation, Greenspace - Bridgwater Sedgemoor Sports & Scheme No No No £0 £0 - Chilton Trinity Local DC Open Space Nature Reserve

Accessible Natural Recreation, Greenspace - Bridgwater Sedgemoor Sports & Project Pending Pending Pending £0 £0 - East Bridgwater Nature DC Open Space Reserve

Other Outdoor Sport - Recreation, Bridgwater - Cattle Infrastructure Sports & Somerset CC No No £130,570 No £0 £130,570 Market capacity for other Requirement Open Space outdoor sports (0.16Ha)

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 74 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

Cattle Market – Potential Infrastructure Requirements and related Projects

Site Estimated Capital Capital Infrastructure Lead Planning Core Funding Category Project Title secured - Capital Funds Funding Status Organisation Consent Scheme Shortfall ownership Cost Secured Achieved

Other Outdoor Sports - Recreation, Bridgwater - Chilton Futures for Sports & Project Yes Yes Yes £0 £0 Trinity Outdoor Sports Somerset Open Space Facilities Playing Pitches - Recreation, Bridgwater - Cattle Infrastructure Sports & Somerset CC No No £45,719 No £0 £45,719 Market Playing Pitch Requirement Open Space Capacity (0.47Ha)

Recreational Open Space Recreation, - Bridgwater - Cattle Infrastructure Sports & Somerset CC No No £200,382 No £0 £200,382 Market Recreational Requirement Open Space Open Space (0.3Ha)

Recreational Open Space Recreation, - Bridgwater - Sedgemoor Sports & Project Yes No £370,000 Pending £0 £370,000 Coronation Park DC Open Space Refurbishment

Recreational Open Space Recreation, - Bridgwater - Eastover Sedgemoor Sports & Project Yes No Pending £0 £0 Park / Cranleigh Gardens DC Open Space Refurbishment

Recreation, Sports Halls - Bridgwater Infrastructure Sports & - Cattle Market Sports Somerset CC No No £42,292 No £0 £42,292 Requirement Open Space Hall capacity (0.1 lanes)

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 75 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

Cattle Market – Potential Infrastructure Requirements and related Projects

Site Estimated Capital Capital Infrastructure Lead Planning Core Funding Category Project Title secured - Capital Funds Funding Status Organisation Consent Scheme Shortfall ownership Cost Secured Achieved

Recreation, Sports Halls - Bridgwater Futures for Sports & - Chilton Trinity School Project Yes Yes Yes £0 £0 Somerset Open Space New Sports Hall

Recreation, Sports Halls - Bridgwater Sedgemoor Sports & - East Bridgwater School Scheme Yes No £2,685,000 No £0 £2,685,000 DC Open Space New Sports Hall

Recreation, Sports Halls - Bridgwater Sedgemoor Sports & Sports and Social Club Project Yes Pending £2,000,000 Pending £316,000 £1,684,000 DC Open Space Reprovision

Swimming Pools - Recreation, Bridgwater - Cattle Infrastructure Sports & Somerset CC No No £42,292 No £0 £42,292 Market Swimming Pools Requirement Open Space (0.1 lanes)

Recreation, Swimming Pools - Futures for Sports & Bridgwater - Chilton Project Yes Yes Yes £0 £0 Somerset Open Space Trinity Swimming Pool

Transport & Highways - A38 / A39 Public Broadway Junction Scheme Somerset CC Yes N/A £500,000 No Yes £500,000 £0 Realm Improvements

Transport & Highways - A38 Bristol Public Road Cattle Market Site Scheme Developer No No Pending Yes £0 £0 Realm Link / Access

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 76 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

Cattle Market – Potential Infrastructure Requirements and related Projects

Site Estimated Capital Capital Infrastructure Lead Planning Core Funding Category Project Title secured - Capital Funds Funding Status Organisation Consent Scheme Shortfall ownership Cost Secured Achieved

Highways - A39 Transport & Broadway / A38 Taunton Public Scheme EDF Energy Yes N/A Pending Yes £0 £0 Road Junction Realm Improvements

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 77 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

4.2 Durleigh Road

Durleigh – Potential Infrastructure Requirements and related Projects

Site Estimated Capital Capital Infrastructure Lead Planning Core Funding Category Project Title secured - Capital Funding Funding Status Organisation Consent Scheme Shortfall ownership Cost Secured Achieved

Community Centre - Community Bridgwater - Durleigh Infrastructure Somerset CC No No £242,938 No £0 £242,938 & Cultural Road - 0.29 Community Requirement Centres

Community Centre - Wembdon Community Bridgwater - Wembdon Project Parish Pending Pending £2,000,000 Pending £0 £2,000,000 & Cultural New Village Hall Council

Community Centre - Bridgwater Community Bridgwater Town Hall Project Town Yes No £1,140,000 No £0 £1,140,000 & Cultural Cultural Centre - Phase 2 Council

Library - Bridgwater - Community Infrastructure Durleigh Road - Library Somerset CC No No £103,500 No £0 £103,500 & Cultural Requirement Floorspace (34.5sqm)

Early Years - Bridgwater - Durleigh Road Nursery / Infrastructure Education Somerset CC No No £237,974 No £0 £237,974 Pre-School Places (34 Requirement places) Primary School - Bridgwater - Durleigh Infrastructure Education Somerset CC No No £1,225,700 No £0 £1,225,700 Road Primary School Requirement Places (100 places)

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 78 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

Durleigh – Potential Infrastructure Requirements and related Projects

Site Estimated Capital Capital Infrastructure Lead Planning Core Funding Category Project Title secured - Capital Funding Funding Status Organisation Consent Scheme Shortfall ownership Cost Secured Achieved

Secondary Education - Education Bridgwater - Elmwood Project Somerset CC Yes Yes £3,700,000 Yes £3,700,000 £0 Specialist School BSF

Secondary Education - Education Bridgwater - Haygrove Project Somerset CC Pending Pending £24,600,000 No £0 £24,600,000 School

Secondary Education - Education Penrose Specialist School Project Somerset CC Pending Pending £6,000,000 No £0 £6,000,000 BSF

Secondary School - Bridgwater - Durleigh Infrastructure Education Somerset CC No No £1,319,214 No £0 £1,319,214 Road Secondary School Requirement Places (71 places)

Flood, Flood Risk Management - Sedgemoor Water & Bridgwater - Parrett Project Pending No £24,600,000 Pending Yes £9,840,000 £24,600,000 DC Wastewater Barrier

Dentists - Bridgwater - Infrastructure Somerset Health Durleigh Road (0.5 No No £109,010 No £0 £109,010 Requirement PCT dentists) Doctors - Bridgwater - Somerset Health Brent House Surgery Project Yes Yes Yes £0 £0 PCT replacement

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 79 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

Durleigh – Potential Infrastructure Requirements and related Projects

Site Estimated Capital Capital Infrastructure Lead Planning Core Funding Category Project Title secured - Capital Funding Funding Status Organisation Consent Scheme Shortfall ownership Cost Secured Achieved

Doctors - Bridgwater - Infrastructure Somerset Health No No £163,516 No £0 £163,516 Durleigh Road (1 Doctor) Requirement PCT

Hospitals - Bridgwater - Infrastructure Somerset Health No No £7,001,492 £0 £7,001,492 72 acute and other beds Requirement PCT

Hospitals - Bridgwater - Somerset Health Bridgwater Community Project Pending Yes £33,200,000 Pending £0 £33,200,000 PCT Hospital Redevelopment

Accessible Natural Recreation, Greenspace - Bridgwater Sedgemoor Sports & Scheme No No No £0 £0 - Bridgwater Community DC Open Space Forest

Accessible Natural Recreation, Greenspace - Bridgwater Infrastructure Sports & - Durleigh Road Somerset CC No No £229,425 No £0 £229,425 Requirement Open Space Accessible Natural Greenspace (1.2Ha)

Other Outdoor Sport - Recreation, Bridgwater - Durleigh Infrastructure Sports & Somerset CC No No £384,029 No £0 £384,029 Road capacity for other Requirement Open Space outdoor sports (0.46Ha) Other Outdoor Sports - Recreation, Bridgwater - Robert Futures for Sports & Blake & Elmwood Project Yes Yes Yes £0 £0 Somerset Open Space Schools Outdoor Sports Facilities

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 80 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

Durleigh – Potential Infrastructure Requirements and related Projects

Site Estimated Capital Capital Infrastructure Lead Planning Core Funding Category Project Title secured - Capital Funding Funding Status Organisation Consent Scheme Shortfall ownership Cost Secured Achieved

Playing Pitches - Recreation, Bridgwater - Durleigh Infrastructure Sports & Somerset CC No No £134,468 No £0 £134,468 Road Playing Pitch Requirement Open Space Capacity (1.38Ha) Playing Pitches - Recreation, Bridgwater - Rhode Lane Rhode Lane Sports & Scheme No No £0 £0 Wanderers Playing Wanderers Open Space Pitches

Recreational Open Space Recreation, - Bridgwater - Durleigh Infrastructure Sports & Somerset CC No No £589,358 No £0 £589,358 Road Recreational Open Requirement Open Space Space (0.9Ha)

Recreation, Recreational Open Space Sedgemoor Sports & - Bridgwater - The Meads Project Pending No Pending £0 £0 DC Open Space EcoPark

Recreation, Sports Halls - Bridgwater Infrastructure Sports & - Durleigh Road Sports Somerset CC No No £123,387 No £0 £123,387 Requirement Open Space Hall capacity (0.3 courts)

Recreation, Sports Halls - Bridgwater Sedgemoor Sports & - East Bridgwater School Scheme Yes No £2,685,000 No £0 £2,685,000 DC Open Space New Sports Hall

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 81 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

Durleigh – Potential Infrastructure Requirements and related Projects

Site Estimated Capital Capital Infrastructure Lead Planning Core Funding Category Project Title secured - Capital Funding Funding Status Organisation Consent Scheme Shortfall ownership Cost Secured Achieved

Sports Halls - Bridgwater Recreation, - Robert Blake & Futures for Sports & Project Yes Yes Yes £0 £0 Elmwood Schools New Somerset Open Space Sports Hall

Recreation, Swimming Pools - Futures for Sports & Bridgwater - Chilton Project Yes Yes Yes £0 £0 Somerset Open Space Trinity Swimming Pool

Swimming Pools - Recreation, Bridgwater - Durleigh Infrastructure Sports & Somerset CC No No £123,387 No £0 £123,387 Road Swimming Pools Requirement Open Space (0.2 lanes)

Transport & Highways - A38 / A39 Public Broadway Junction Scheme Somerset CC Yes N/A £500,000 No Yes £500,000 £0 Realm Improvements

Highways - A39 Transport & Broadway / A38 Taunton Public Scheme EDF Energy Yes N/A Pending Yes £0 £0 Road Junction Realm Improvements

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 82 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

4.3 Wembdon

Wembdon – Potential Infrastructure Requirements and related Projects

Site Estimated Capital Capital Infrastructure Lead Planning Core Funding Category Project Title secured - Capital Funding Funding Status Organisation Consent Scheme Shortfall ownership Cost Secured Achieved

Community Centre - Wembdon Community Bridgwater - Wembdon Project Parish Pending Pending £2,000,000 Pending £0 £2,000,000 & Cultural New Village Hall Council

Community Centre - Community Bridgwater Town Hall Bridgwater Project Yes No £1,140,000 No £0 £1,140,000 & Cultural Cultural Centre - Phase Town Council 2 Community Centres - Community Bridgwater - Wembdon Infrastructure Somerset CC No No £291,525 No £0 £291,525 & Cultural - 0.35 Community Requirement Centres

Library - Bridgwater - Community Infrastructure Wembdon - Library Somerset CC No No £124,200 No £0 £124,200 & Cultural Requirement Floorspace (41.4sqm)

Early Years - Bridgwater - Wembdon Infrastructure Education Somerset CC No No £285,569 No £0 £285,569 Nursery / Pre-School Requirement Places (41 places)

Primary School - Bridgwater - Wembdon Infrastructure Education Somerset CC No No £1,470,840 No £0 £1,470,840 Primary School Places Requirement (120 places)

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 83 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

Wembdon – Potential Infrastructure Requirements and related Projects

Site Estimated Capital Capital Infrastructure Lead Planning Core Funding Category Project Title secured - Capital Funding Funding Status Organisation Consent Scheme Shortfall ownership Cost Secured Achieved

Secondary Education - Education Bridgwater - Elmwood Project Somerset CC Yes Yes £3,700,000 Yes £3,700,000 £0 Specialist School BSF

Secondary Education - Education Bridgwater - Haygrove Project Somerset CC Pending Pending £24,600,000 No £0 £24,600,000 School

Secondary Education - Education Penrose Specialist Project Somerset CC Pending Pending £6,000,000 No £0 £6,000,000 School BSF

Secondary School - Bridgwater - Wembdon Infrastructure Education Somerset CC No No £1,583,057 No £0 £1,583,057 Secondary School Places Requirement (86 places)

Flood, Flood Risk Management Sedgemoor Water & - Bridgwater - Parrett Project Pending No £24,600,000 Pending Yes £9,840,000 £24,600,000 DC Wastewater Barrier

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 84 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

Wembdon – Potential Infrastructure Requirements and related Projects

Site Estimated Capital Capital Infrastructure Lead Planning Core Funding Category Project Title secured - Capital Funding Funding Status Organisation Consent Scheme Shortfall ownership Cost Secured Achieved

Dentists - Bridgwater - Infrastructure Health Somerset PCT No No £130,813 No £0 £130,813 Wembdon (0.6 dentists) Requirement

Doctors - Bridgwater - Infrastructure Health Somerset PCT No No £196,219 No £0 £196,219 Wembdon (1 Doctor) Requirement

Hospitals - Bridgwater - Infrastructure Health Somerset PCT No No £7,001,492 £0 £7,001,492 72 acute and other beds Requirement

Hospitals - Bridgwater - Health Bridgwater Community Project Somerset PCT Pending Yes £33,200,000 Pending £0 ######### Hospital Redevelopment

Accessible Natural Recreation, Greenspace - Bridgwater Sedgemoor Sports & Scheme No No No £0 £0 - Bridgwater DC Open Space Community Forest Accessible Natural Recreation, Greenspace - Bridgwater Infrastructure Sports & - Wembdon Accessible Somerset CC No No £275,310 No £0 £275,310 Requirement Open Space Natural Greenspace (1.4Ha) Other Outdoor Sport - Recreation, Bridgwater - Wembdon Infrastructure Sports & Somerset CC No No £460,835 No £0 £460,835 capacity for other Requirement Open Space outdoor sports (0.55Ha)

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 85 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

Wembdon – Potential Infrastructure Requirements and related Projects

Site Estimated Capital Capital Infrastructure Lead Planning Core Funding Category Project Title secured - Capital Funding Funding Status Organisation Consent Scheme Shortfall ownership Cost Secured Achieved

Other Outdoor Sports - Recreation, Bridgwater - Robert Futures for Sports & Blake & Elmwood Project Yes Yes Yes £0 £0 Somerset Open Space Schools Outdoor Sports Facilities

Recreation, Other Outdoor Sports - Sports & Bridgwater - Wembdon Project WVHPFCT Pending Pending Pending £50,000 -£50,000 Open Space MUGA

Playing Pitches - Recreation, Bridgwater - Wembdon Infrastructure Sports & Somerset CC No No £161,362 No £0 £161,362 Playing Pitch Capacity Requirement Open Space (1.66Ha) Playing Pitches - Recreation, Bridgwater - Wembdon Sports & Project WVHPFCT Pending Pending £2,000,000 Pending £50,000 £1,950,000 Village Hall and Playing Open Space Fields

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 86 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

Wembdon – Potential Infrastructure Requirements and related Projects

Site Estimated Capital Capital Infrastructure Lead Planning Core Funding Category Project Title secured - Capital Funding Funding Status Organisation Consent Scheme Shortfall ownership Cost Secured Achieved

Recreation, Recreational Open Sedgemoor Sports & Space - Bridgwater - Project Pending No Pending £0 £0 DC Open Space The Meads EcoPark

Recreational Open Recreation, Space - Bridgwater - Sedgemoor Sports & Project Yes No Pending £0 £0 Victoria Park DC Open Space Refurbishment Recreational Open Recreation, Space - Bridgwater - Infrastructure Sports & Somerset CC No No £707,229 No £0 £707,229 Wembdon Recreational Requirement Open Space Open Space (1.1Ha) Sports Halls - Recreation, Bridgwater - East Sedgemoor Sports & Scheme Yes No £2,685,000 No £0 £2,685,000 Bridgwater School New DC Open Space Sports Hall

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 87 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

Wembdon – Potential Infrastructure Requirements and related Projects

Site Estimated Capital Capital Infrastructure Lead Planning Core Funding Category Project Title secured - Capital Funding Funding Status Organisation Consent Scheme Shortfall ownership Cost Secured Achieved

Sports Halls - Recreation, Bridgwater - Robert Futures for Sports & Blake & Elmwood Project Yes Yes Yes £0 £0 Somerset Open Space Schools New Sports Hall Sports Halls - Recreation, Bridgwater - Wembdon Infrastructure Sports & Somerset CC No No £149,264 No £0 £149,264 Sports Hall capacity (0.4 Requirement Open Space courts)

Recreation, Swimming Pools - Futures for Sports & Bridgwater - Chilton Project Yes Yes Yes £0 £0 Somerset Open Space Trinity Swimming Pool

Swimming Pools - Recreation, Bridgwater - Wembdon Infrastructure Sports & Somerset CC No No £149,264 No £0 £149,264 Swimming Pools (0.2 Requirement Open Space lanes)

Transport & Highways - A38 / A39 Public Broadway Junction Scheme Somerset CC Yes N/A £500,000 No Yes £500,000 £0 Realm Improvements

Highways - A39 Transport & Broadway / A38 Public Scheme EDF Energy Yes N/A Pending Yes £0 £0 Taunton Road Junction Realm Improvements

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 88 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

4.4 Willstock Village (South Bridgwater Phase 3)

Willstock Village (South Bridgwater Phase 3) – Potential Infrastructure Requirements and related Projects

Site Estimated Capital Capital Infrastructure Lead Planning Core Funding Category Project Title secured - Capital Funding Funding Status Organisation Consent Scheme Shortfall ownership Cost Secured Achieved

Community Centre - Community Sedgemoor Bridgwater - Hamp Project Yes Yes No £0 £0 & Cultural DC ReCreation Centre Community Centre - Community Bridgwater Town Hall Bridgwater Project Yes No £1,140,000 No £0 £1,140,000 & Cultural Cultural Centre - Phase Town Council 2 Community Centres - Community Bridgwater - Willstock Infrastructure Somerset CC No No £218,644 No £0 £218,644 & Cultural Phase 3 - 0.26 Requirement Community Centres

Library - Bridgwater - Community Willstock Phase 3 - Infrastructure Somerset CC No No £93,150 No £0 £93,150 & Cultural Library Floorspace Requirement (31sqm)

Early Years - Bridgwater - Willstock Infrastructure Education Phase 3 Nursery / Pre- Somerset CC No No £214,177 No £0 £214,177 Requirement School Places (31 places) Primary School - Bridgwater - Willstock Infrastructure Education Somerset CC No No £1,103,130 No £0 £1,103,130 Phase 3 Primary School Requirement Places (90 places)

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 89 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

Willstock Village (South Bridgwater Phase 3) – Potential Infrastructure Requirements and related Projects

Site Estimated Capital Capital Infrastructure Lead Planning Core Funding Category Project Title secured - Capital Funding Funding Status Organisation Consent Scheme Shortfall ownership Cost Secured Achieved

Secondary Education - Education Bridgwater - Elmwood Project Somerset CC Yes Yes £3,700,000 Yes £3,700,000 £0 Specialist School BSF

Secondary Education - Education Bridgwater - Haygrove Project Somerset CC Pending Pending £24,600,000 No £0 ######### School

Secondary Education - Education Penrose Specialist Project Somerset CC Pending Pending £6,000,000 No £0 £6,000,000 School BSF

Secondary School - Bridgwater - Willstock Infrastructure Education Phase 3 Secondary Somerset CC No No £1,187,293 No £0 £1,187,293 Requirement School Places (64 places)

Flood Risk Flood, Management - Sedgemoor Water & Project Pending No £24,600,000 Pending Yes £9,840,000 ######### Bridgwater - Parrett DC Wastewater Barrier

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 90 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

Willstock Village (South Bridgwater Phase 3) – Potential Infrastructure Requirements and related Projects

Site Estimated Capital Capital Infrastructure Lead Planning Core Funding Category Project Title secured - Capital Funding Funding Status Organisation Consent Scheme Shortfall ownership Cost Secured Achieved

Dentists - Bridgwater - Infrastructure Health Willstock Phase 3 (0.4 Somerset PCT No No £98,109 No £0 £98,109 Requirement dentists) Doctors - Bridgwater - Health Brent House Surgery Project Somerset PCT Yes Yes Yes £0 £0 replacement

Doctors - Bridgwater - Health Taunton Road Surgery Project Somerset PCT Yes Yes Yes £0 £0 extension

Doctors - Bridgwater - Infrastructure Health Willstock Phase 3 (1 Somerset PCT No No £147,164 No £0 £147,164 Requirement Doctor)

Doctors - Rural Sedgemoor - North Health Project Somerset PCT ˜ ˜ ˜ £0 £0 Petherton Surgery replacement

Hospitals - Bridgwater - Infrastructure Health Somerset PCT No No £7,001,492 £0 £7,001,492 72 acute and other beds Requirement

Hospitals - Bridgwater - Bridgwater Community Health Project Somerset PCT Pending Yes £33,200,000 Pending £0 £33,200,000 Hospital Redevelopment

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 91 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

Willstock Village (South Bridgwater Phase 3) – Potential Infrastructure Requirements and related Projects

Site Estimated Capital Capital Infrastructure Lead Planning Core Funding Category Project Title secured - Capital Funding Funding Status Organisation Consent Scheme Shortfall ownership Cost Secured Achieved

Accessible Natural Recreation, Greenspace - Sedgemoor Sports & Bridgwater - Scheme No No No £0 £0 DC Open Space Bridgwater Community Forest

Accessible Natural Greenspace - Recreation, Bridgwater - Willstock Infrastructure Sports & Somerset CC No No £206,483 No £0 £206,483 Phase 3 Accessible Requirement Open Space Natural Greenspace (1.0Ha)

Other Outdoor Sport - Recreation, Bridgwater - Willstock Infrastructure Sports & Phase 3 capacity for Somerset CC No No £345,626 No £0 £345,626 Requirement Open Space other outdoor sports (0.41Ha) Other Outdoor Sports - Recreation, Bridgwater - Robert Futures for Sports & Blake & Elmwood Project Yes Yes Yes £0 £0 Somerset Open Space Schools Outdoor Sports Facilities Playing Pitches - Recreation, Bridgwater - Rhode Rhode Lane Sports & Scheme No No £0 £0 Lane Wanderers Wanderers Open Space Playing Pitches Playing Pitches - Recreation, Bridgwater - Willstock Infrastructure Sports & Somerset CC No No £121,021 No £0 £121,021 Phase 3 Playing Pitch Requirement Open Space Capacity (1.24Ha)

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 92 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

Willstock Village (South Bridgwater Phase 3) – Potential Infrastructure Requirements and related Projects

Site Estimated Capital Capital Infrastructure Lead Planning Core Funding Category Project Title secured - Capital Funding Funding Status Organisation Consent Scheme Shortfall ownership Cost Secured Achieved

Recreational Open Recreation, Space - Bridgwater - Sedgemoor Sports & Project Yes No Pending £0 £0 Mansfield Park DC Open Space Refurbishment

Recreation, Recreational Open Sedgemoor Sports & Space - Bridgwater - Project Pending No Pending £0 £0 DC Open Space The Meads EcoPark

Recreational Open Recreation, Space - Bridgwater - Infrastructure Sports & Willstock Phase 3 Somerset CC No No £530,442 No £0 £530,442 Requirement Open Space Recreational Open Space (0.8Ha) Sports Halls - Recreation, Bridgwater - Robert Futures for Sports & Blake & Elmwood Project Yes Yes Yes £0 £0 Somerset Open Space Schools New Sports Hall Sports Halls - Recreation, Bridgwater - Willstock Infrastructure Sports & Somerset CC No No £111,948 No £0 £111,948 Phase 3 Sports Hall Requirement Open Space capacity (0.3 courts)

Recreation, Swimming Pools - Futures for Sports & Bridgwater - Chilton Project Yes Yes Yes £0 £0 Somerset Open Space Trinity Swimming Pool

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 93 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

Willstock Village (South Bridgwater Phase 3) – Potential Infrastructure Requirements and related Projects

Site Estimated Capital Capital Infrastructure Lead Planning Core Funding Category Project Title secured - Capital Funding Funding Status Organisation Consent Scheme Shortfall ownership Cost Secured Achieved

Swimming Pools - Recreation, Bridgwater - Willstock Infrastructure Sports & Somerset CC No No £111,948 No £0 £111,948 Phase 3 Swimming Requirement Open Space Pools (0.2 lanes)

Transport & Highways - A38 / A39 Public Broadway Junction Scheme Somerset CC Yes N/A £500,000 No Yes £500,000 £0 Realm Improvements

Transport & Highways - A38 Public Huntworth Roundabout Project Somerset CC Yes Pending £1,735,000 Pending Yes £1,735,000 £0 Realm Improvements

Highways - A39 Transport & Broadway / A38 Public Scheme EDF Energy Yes N/A Pending Yes £0 £0 Taunton Road Junction Realm Improvements

Transport & Highways - Colley Lane Public Project Somerset CC Pending Pending £9,632,000 Pending Yes £9,632,000 £0 Relief Road Realm

Transport & Highways - South Public Bridgwater Distributor Project Developer Yes Yes Yes Yes £0 £0 Realm Road

Public Transport - Transport & Bridgwater Sustainable Public Scheme Somerset CC N/A N/A Pending Yes £0 £0 Transport Fund Realm Schemes

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 94 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

Willstock Village (South Bridgwater Phase 3) – Potential Infrastructure Requirements and related Projects

Site Estimated Capital Capital Infrastructure Lead Planning Core Funding Category Project Title secured - Capital Funding Funding Status Organisation Consent Scheme Shortfall ownership Cost Secured Achieved

Transport & Public Transport - Public Project Somerset CC Yes Yes £336,000 Yes Yes £336,000 £0 Rhode Lane Bus Gate Realm

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 95 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

4.5 Somerset Bridge

Somerset Bridge – Potential related Projects Site Estimated Capital Capital Infrastructure Lead Planning Core Funding Category Project Title secured - Capital Funding Funding Status Organisation Consent Scheme Shortfall ownership Cost Secured Achieved

Transport & Highways - A38 / A39 Public Broadway Junction Scheme Somerset CC Yes N/A £500,000 No Yes £500,000 £0 Realm Improvements

Highways - A39 Transport & Broadway / A38 Public Scheme EDF Energy Yes N/A Pending Yes £0 £0 Taunton Road Junction Realm Improvements Transport & Highways - Colley Lane Public Project Somerset CC Pending Pending £9,632,000 Pending Yes £9,632,000 £0 Relief Road Realm

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 96 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

4.6 Northgate

Northgate – Potential related Projects

Site Estimated Capital Capital Infrastructure Lead Planning Core Funding Category Project Title secured - Capital Funding Funding Status Organisation Consent Scheme Shortfall ownership Cost Secured Achieved Electricity Generation - Bridgwater - Northgate Energy Scheme Developer Yes No Pending
£0 £0 Gas CHP or Biomass Boiler

Transport & Highways - A38 / A39 Public Broadway Junction Scheme Somerset CC Yes N/A £500,000 No Yes £500,000 £0 Realm Improvements

Highways - A39 Transport & Broadway / A38 Public Scheme EDF Energy Yes N/A Pending Yes £0 £0 Taunton Road Junction Realm Improvements

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 97 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

4.7 Puriton Energy Park

Puriton Energy Park – Potential related Projects

Site Estimated Capital Capital Infrastructure Lead Planning Core Funding Category Project Title secured - Capital Funding Funding Status Organisation Consent Scheme Shortfall ownership Cost Secured Achieved

Transport & Highways - A38 / A39 Public Broadway Junction Scheme Somerset CC Yes N/A £500,000 No Yes £500,000 £0 Realm Improvements

Highways - A39 Transport & Broadway / A38 Public Scheme EDF Energy Yes N/A Pending Yes £0 £0 Taunton Road Junction Realm Improvements Transport & Highways - Puriton Public Scheme Developer No No £4,500,000 Pending Yes £4,500,000 £0 Energy Park Link Road Realm

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 98 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

4.8 Burnham-on-Sea Urban Extension

Burnham-on-Sea Urban Extension – Potential Infrastructure Requirements and related Projects Capital Site Plannin Estimated Capital Infrastructure Lead Fundin Core Funding Category Project Title secured - g Capital Funding Status Organisation g Scheme Shortfall ownership Consent Cost Achieved Secured Community Centre - Community Burnham BoS & Highbridge - Project Yes Yes No
£0 £0 & Cultural Town Council BAY Youth Centre Community Centre - Burnham-on- Community BoS & Highbridge - Sea Project Yes Yes No
£0 £0 & Cultural Burnham Community Community Centre Association Community Centre - Community Burnham BoS & Highbridge - Project Yes Yes No
£0 £0 & Cultural Town Council Princess Hall

Community Centre - Sedgemoor Community Highbridge - Morland Project Community Yes No No
£0 £0 & Cultural Community Centre Partnerships Relocation

Community Centres - Community BoS & Highbridge - Infrastructure Somerset CC No No £194,350 No
£0 £194,350 & Cultural Urban Extension - 0.23 Requirement Community Centres

Library - BoS & Community Highbridge - Urban Infrastructure Somerset CC No No £82,800 No
£0 £82,800 & Cultural Extension - Library Requirement Floorspace (27.6sqm)

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 99 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

Burnham-on-Sea Urban Extension – Potential Infrastructure Requirements and related Projects Capital Site Plannin Estimated Capital Infrastructure Lead Fundin Core Funding Category Project Title secured - g Capital Funding Status Organisation g Scheme Shortfall ownership Consent Cost Achieved Secured Early Years - BoS & Highbridge - BoS Infrastructure Education Urban Extension Somerset CC No No £190,379 No
£0 £190,379 Requirement Nursery / Pre-School Places (27 places) Primary School - BoS & Highbridge - BoS Infrastructure Education Urban Extension Somerset CC No No £980,560 No
£0 £980,560 Requirement Primary School Places (80 places) Primary School - BoS & Highbridge - Education Project Somerset CC Yes Pending Yes
£0 £0 Burnham-on-Sea Infants extension Primary School - BoS & Highbridge - Highbridge Infant and Education Junior School Project Somerset CC Yes Yes £5,147,940 Yes
£5,147,940 £0 Amalgamation (Churchfield Primary School) Secondary School - BoS & Highbridge - BoS Infrastructure Education Urban Extension Somerset CC No No £1,055,371 No
£0 £1,055,371 Requirement Secondary School Places (57 places) Secondary School - BoS Education & Highbridge - King Scheme Somerset CC Yes No No
Alfred School

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 100 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

Burnham-on-Sea Urban Extension – Potential Infrastructure Requirements and related Projects Capital Site Plannin Estimated Capital Infrastructure Lead Fundin Core Funding Category Project Title secured - g Capital Funding Status Organisation g Scheme Shortfall ownership Consent Cost Achieved Secured Extension

Dentists - BoS & Health Highbridge - Berrow Project Somerset PCT Yes Yes
£0 £0 Branch Surgery

Dentists - BoS & Highbridge - BoS Infrastructure Health Somerset PCT No No £87,208 No
£0 £87,208 Urban Extension (0.4 Requirement dentists) Doctors - BoS & Highbridge - BoS Infrastructure Health Somerset PCT No No £130,813 No
£0 £130,813 Urban Extension (1 Requirement Doctor) Doctors - BoS & Highbridge - Health Project Somerset PCT Yes
£0 £0 Highbridge Medical Centre extension Doctors - BoS & Highbridge - New Health Project Somerset PCT Yes Yes
£0 £0 Burnham-on-Sea branch surgery

Hospitals - BoS & Infrastructure Health Highbridge - 16 acute Somerset PCT No No £1,483,414
£0 £1,483,414 Requirement and other beds

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 101 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

Burnham-on-Sea Urban Extension – Potential Infrastructure Requirements and related Projects Capital Site Plannin Estimated Capital Infrastructure Lead Fundin Core Funding Category Project Title secured - g Capital Funding Status Organisation g Scheme Shortfall ownership Consent Cost Achieved Secured Hospitals - Bridgwater - Bridgwater Community Health Project Somerset PCT Pending Yes £33,200,000 Pending
£0 £33,200,000 Hospital Redevelopment

Accessible Natural Recreation, Greenspace - BoS & Sedgemoor Sports & Scheme No No No
Highbridge - Burnham DC Open Space & Brean Wetlands

Accessible Natural Greenspace - BoS & Recreation, Highbridge - BoS Infrastructure Sports & Somerset CC No No £183,540 No
£0 £183,540 Urban Extension Requirement Open Space Accessible Natural Greenspace (0.9Ha)

Other Outdoor Sport - Recreation, BoS & Highbridge - Infrastructure Sports & BoS Urban Extension Somerset CC No No £307,223 No
£0 £307,223 Requirement Open Space capacity for other outdoor sports (0.37Ha) Playing Pitches - BoS & Recreation, Highbridge - BoS Infrastructure Sports & Urban Extension Somerset CC No No £107,574 No
£0 £107,574 Requirement Open Space Playing Pitch Capacity (1.1Ha)

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 102 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

Burnham-on-Sea Urban Extension – Potential Infrastructure Requirements and related Projects Capital Site Plannin Estimated Capital Infrastructure Lead Fundin Core Funding Category Project Title secured - g Capital Funding Status Organisation g Scheme Shortfall ownership Consent Cost Achieved Secured Recreational Open Space - BoS & Recreation, Highbridge - BoS Infrastructure Sports & Somerset CC No No £471,486 No
£0 £471,486 Urban Extension Requirement Open Space Recreational Open Space (0.7Ha) Sports Halls - BoS & Recreation, Highbridge - BoS Infrastructure Sports & Urban Extension Sports Somerset CC No No £99,510 No
£0 £99,510 Requirement Open Space Hall capacity (0.2 courts) Swimming Pools - BoS Recreation, & Highbridge - BoS Infrastructure Sports & Urban Extension Somerset CC No No £99,510 No
£0 £99,510 Requirement Open Space Swimming Pools (0.2 lanes)

Recreation, Swimming Pools - Futures for Sports & Bridgwater - Chilton Project Yes Yes Yes
£0 £0 Somerset Open Space Trinity Swimming Pool

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 103 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

4.9 Highbridge Boatyard

Highbridge Boatyard – Potential Infrastructure Requirements and related Projects

Site Estimated Capital Capital Infrastructure Lead Planning Core Funding Category Project Title secured - Capital Funding Funding Status Organisation Consent Scheme Shortfall ownership Cost Secured Achieved Community Centre - Community Burnham BoS & Highbridge - Project Yes Yes No
£0 £0 & Cultural Town Council BAY Youth Centre Community Centre - Burnham-on- Community BoS & Highbridge - Sea Project Yes Yes No
£0 £0 & Cultural Burnham Community Community Centre Association Community Centre - Community Burnham BoS & Highbridge - Project Yes Yes No
£0 £0 & Cultural Town Council Princess Hall

Community Centre - Sedgemoor Community Highbridge - Morland Project Community Yes No No
£0 £0 & Cultural Community Centre Partnerships Relocation

Community Centres - Community BoS & Highbridge - Infrastructure Somerset CC No No £58,305 No
£0 £58,305 & Cultural Boatyard - 0.07 Requirement Community Centres Library - BoS & Community Highbridge - Boatyard - Infrastructure Somerset CC No No £24,840 No
£0 £24,840 & Cultural Library Floorspace Requirement (8.28sqm) Early Years - BoS & Highbridge - Boatyard Infrastructure Education Somerset CC No No £57,114 No
£0 £57,114 Nursery / Pre-School Requirement Places (8 places)

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 104 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

Primary School - BoS & Highbridge - Infrastructure Education Boatyard Primary Somerset CC No No £294,168 No
£0 £294,168 Requirement School Places (24 places) Primary School - BoS & Highbridge - Education Project Somerset CC Yes Pending Yes
£0 £0 Burnham-on-Sea Infants extension Secondary School - BoS & Highbridge - Infrastructure Education Boatyard Secondary Somerset CC No No £316,611 No
£0 £316,611 Requirement School Places (17 places) Flood Risk Management - BoS & Flood, Highbridge - Sedgemoor Water & Project Pending Pending £250,000 Pending £250,000 £0 Highbridge Boatyard DC Wastewater Flood Defence Structure

Dentists - BoS & Health Highbridge - Berrow Project Somerset PCT Yes Yes
£0 £0 Branch Surgery

Dentists - BoS & Infrastructure Health Highbridge - Boatyard Somerset PCT No No £26,163 No
£0 £26,163 Requirement (0.1 dentists)

Doctors - BoS & Infrastructure Health Highbridge - Boatyard Somerset PCT No No £39,244 No
£0 £39,244 Requirement (0.2 doctors)

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 105 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

Doctors - BoS & Highbridge - Health Project Somerset PCT Yes
£0 £0 Highbridge Medical Centre extension Hospitals - Bridgwater - Bridgwater Community Health Project Somerset PCT Pending Yes £33,200,000 Pending
£0 £33,200,000 Hospital Redevelopment

Accessible Natural Recreation, Greenspace - BoS & Sedgemoor Sports & Scheme No No No
Highbridge - Burnham DC Open Space & Brean Wetlands

Accessible Natural Recreation, Greenspace - BoS & Infrastructure Sports & Highbridge - Boatyard Somerset CC No No £55,062 No
£0 £55,062 Requirement Open Space Accessible Natural Greenspace (0.3Ha) Other Outdoor Sport - Recreation, BoS & Highbridge - Infrastructure Sports & Boatyard capacity for Somerset CC No No £92,167 No
£0 £92,167 Requirement Open Space other outdoor sports (0.11Ha) Playing Pitches - BoS & Recreation, Highbridge - Boatyard Infrastructure Sports & Somerset CC No No £32,272 No
£0 £32,272 Playing Pitch Capacity Requirement Open Space (0.33Ha) Recreational Open Recreation, Space - BoS & Infrastructure Sports & Highbridge - Boatyard Somerset CC No No £141,446 No
£0 £141,446 Requirement Open Space Recreational Open Space (0.2Ha)

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 106 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

Sports Halls - BoS & Recreation, Highbridge - Boatyard Infrastructure Sports & Somerset CC No No £29,853 No
£0 £29,853 Sports Hall capacity Requirement Open Space (0.1 courts) Swimming Pools - BoS Recreation, & Highbridge - Infrastructure Sports & Somerset CC No No £29,853 No
£0 £29,853 Boatyard Swimming Requirement Open Space Pools (0.05 lanes)

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 107 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

5 Developer Contributions Policy, the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) and Prioritisation

Financing the construction, maintenance and operation of infrastructure and services will depend on a wide range of funding sources including grants, loans, taxation, levies and rates. Many of these sources are specific to particular sectors and are identified in the Infrastructure Needs Assessment. A source of funding over which the Council has significant local discretion is developer contributions, which are currently collected by the Local Planning Authority (LPA) through Planning Obligations (also known as S106 agreements). A key benefit of developer contributions is that finance can be directed to meet local priorities across a wide range of infrastructure types, where it can be demonstrated that the infrastructure requirement directly relates to a proposed development. Financial contributions to infrastructure secured through obligations from different sites can be pooled, allowing for the creation of standard charges or tariffs. Planning Obligations can also be used to secure ‘in kind’ provision of infrastructure by a developer, such as the provision of a site and construction of a facility rather than a financial contribution. This chapter of the Delivery Strategy sets out recommendations on planning obligations, based on an analysis of the following factors: • The planning obligation mechanisms that are available to local authorities (S106 agreements, tariffs/standard charges, and the CIL). • The viability of developer contributions towards infrastructure costs. • The prioritisation of infrastructure sectors and projects in terms of where limited finance should be directed. Each of these matters are investigated in turn below.

5.1 Planning Obligations and the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Planning Obligations are currently administered solely through S106 of the Town and Country Planning Act, although the Government has recently finalised regulations for a complementary mechanism for securing finance with the introduction of the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL), Part 11, Section 205 (1) and (2) of the Planning Act 2008 makes provision for the imposition of CIL: “The Secretary of State may with the consent of the Treasury make regulations providing for the imposition of a charge to be known as Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL)”. “In making the regulations the Secretary of State shall aim to ensure that the overall purpose of CIL is to ensure that costs incurred in providing infrastructure to support the development of an area can be funded (wholly or partly) by owners or developers of land”. The Planning Act 2008 established powers to create a Community Infrastructure Levy in England and Wales. The Community Infrastructure Levy regulations

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 108 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

2010 made the first use of these powers and came into effect in April 2010 and were amended by the Coalition Government in April 2011. The regulations allow a charging authority to levy a charge on the owners or developers of land that is developed so that they contribute to the costs of providing the infrastructure needed to support the development of the area. As set out in section 2 of the report, the Government has set out plans to partially reform the Community Infrastructure Levy in the Localism Act 2011. The changes would require local authorities to pass a meaningful proportion of receipts to the neighbourhoods, as Neighbourhood Funds, where the development that gave rise to them took place and clarifies that receipts may be spent on the ongoing costs of providing infrastructure to support the development of the area, providing more local choice over how to implement a charge . The government has therefore launched a consultation on the views on the detailed implementation of these proposals, which ran until 30 December 2011. At the time of writing, the results are not yet known. The proposed reforms to the levy include the following: • Rebalancing the relationship between the charging authority and the independent examiner so the elected body has the final say on how they implement a charge in their area (Section 114 of the Localism Act). • Clarifying that the Community Infrastructure Levy can be spent on the ongoing costs of providing infrastructure as well as the initial costs (Section 115 of the Localism Act). • Requiring charging authorities to pass a meaningful proportion of receipts arising from development to other persons (Section 116 of the Localism Act), which we will use to direct funds to the neighbourhoods where development takes place; • Consideration as to whether the funds raised by the levy can be used to deliver affordable housing are also set out in the consultation document. The levy is intended to provide infrastructure to support the development of an area rather than to make individual planning applications acceptable in planning terms. As a result, there may still be some site specific impact mitigation requirements without which a development should not be granted planning permission. Some of these needs may be provided for through the levy but others may not, particularly if they are very local in their impact. Therefore, the Government considers there is still a legitimate role for development specific Planning Obligations to enable a local planning authority to be confident that the specific consequences of development can be mitigated.

Restrictions on the ‘pooling’ of S106 Planning Obligation funds. In order to ensure, however, that Planning Obligations and the CIL can operate in a complementary way and the purposes of the two regimes are clarified, the regulations scale back the way Planning Obligations operate. Limitations are placed on the use of planning obligations in three respects: • putting the Government’s policy tests on the use of planning obligations set out in Circular 5/05 Planning obligations on a statutory basis for developments which are capable of being charged the CIL;

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 109 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

• ensuring the local use of the levy and planning obligations does not overlap; and • limiting pooled contributions from planning obligations towards infrastructure which may be funded by the levy. On the local adoption of the levy or nationally after a transitional period of four years (6 th April 2014), the regulations restrict the local use of planning obligations for pooled contributions towards items that may be funded via the levy. The levy is the government’s preferred vehicle for the collection of pooled contributions. Pooled contributions may be sought from up to five separate planning obligations for an item of infrastructure that is not locally intended to be funded by the levy. The limit of five applies as well to types of general infrastructure contributions, such as education and transport. In assessing whether five separate planning obligations have already been entered into for a specific infrastructure project or a type of infrastructure, local planning authorities must look over agreements that have been entered into since 6 th April 2010. The Delivery Strategy has been prepared mindful of the CIL Regulations and guidance and the advantages and disadvantages of the S106, Tariff and CIL approaches. Under the CIL transitional arrangements, developers would become liable to pay the levy on sites where construction commences after 6 April 2014, but only in those areas where an approved charging schedule is in place. At the present time, it appears that the implementation of a CIL is at the discretion of LPAs, presenting Sedgemoor DC with a number of options for how developer contributions can be administered.

Options for Sedgemoor District Council In the case of Sedgemoor, it is expected that the adoption of a CIL by 6 April 2014 will be a priority so that, as a minimum, the collection of pooled contributions towards the Parrett Barrier can proceed. For other types of infrastructure it will be necessary to consider whether pooled contributions from more than five developments is necessary or achievable taking account of development viability. Table 10 below summarises the advantages and disadvantages of the S106 Planning Obligations, ‘Tariff’ and CIL approaches. Table 10 - Developer Contributions Options - the Pros and Cons of the S106, Tariff & CIL approaches. S106 Tariff CIL (typically 1 or 2 (pooled contributions developments) restricted to between 2 and 5 developments) Overview Can be flexibly Increased certainty, but Increased certainty and applied, but scope for negotiation and speed, but reduced considered slow to flexibility retained. Some flexibility. Regulation negotiate and potential for negotiation 55 does provide for inconsistent time to be reduced. payment relief in ‘exceptional circumstances’. More cost effective to secure contributions from small developments.

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 110 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

S106 Tariff CIL (typically 1 or 2 (pooled contributions developments) restricted to between 2 and 5 developments)

Infrastructure Necessary to Necessary to demonstrate CIL relaxes requirement types demonstrate direct direct link to development to demonstrate direct link to development link. Preparation Supplementary Planning Document Independent examination (SPD)(examination not required) of Charging Schedule required, leading to increased preparation costs. Joint examination of Charging Schedule with other LDF documents allowed, providing efficiencies. Powers Financial contributions and payments ‘in kind’ are Financial contributions allowed. and payments ‘in kind’ (land only) allowed. Payment Single payments, periodical payments, indefinite Single payment or types contributions and maintenance payments instalments defined by CIL Regulation 70. Geography Pooling between local authorities and different levels of payment between areas enabled. Review Regular update of SPD (examination not required) Independent examination of Charging Schedule required if reviewed.

With the publication of the Bridgwater Strategic Flood Defence Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) (adopted September 2009), Sedgemoor DC have already moved to implement option B, the tariff approach. The SPD applies to the whole urban area of Bridgwater and seeks a contribution of between £525 and £2,000 per dwelling towards the delivery of the Parrett Barrier, with the amount payable dependent on dwelling size and the flood zone of the development. The decision to implement a tariff for the Parrett Barrier is supported for the following reasons: • The collection of funds for the Parrett Barrier helps to demonstrate there is a reasonable prospect that this fundamentally important infrastructure project can be delivered. • The tariff approach sends a signal to developers and landowners about the minimum financial contribution that will be required, whilst retaining flexibility to negotiate payments towards other types of infrastructure through S106. • A relatively modest charge level ensures that contributions from small sites and brownfield developments can be achieved. It is considered that, in light of the findings of this study, Sedgemoor DC should seek to transfer this approach to a CIL, while considering the potential to add other infrastructure types. It is anticipated that transport, education, sports and recreational open space infrastructure projects could be identified as priority sectors to be added to a CIL. However in some instances, taking account of

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 111 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

varying development viability, the Council may decide to retain the flexibility of the conventional S106 approach to negotiate developer contributions on a site by site basis.

5.2 Developer Contributions Viability Assessment The scope for securing financial contributions from development is in simple terms determined by the residual value left after deducting all costs from the Gross Development Value (GDV, or end value of the constructed units). This remaining sum typically comprises the value of the land. It is considered that a suitable definition of viability for the purpose of this study is the attainment of a site value sufficiently in excess of the current or alternative use value in order for a landowner, acting reasonably, to release the land for development. In order to gain a sense of what might be considered a reasonable level to set developer contributions in Sedgemoor, Knight Frank were commissioned to undertake a Viability Study, which has informed the recommendations in this report. It is important to the note that the Knight Frank Viability Study was issued in February 2010 and the Council is now in the process of commissioning an update to inform CIL preparation. The approach taken to the viability assessment was to undertake appraisals using the residual valuation technique for a range of hypothetical site types as follows: • A. Bridgwater – greenfield site – 500 residential units • B. Bridgwater – brownfield site – 150 residential units • C. Burnham-on-Sea/Highbridge – brownfield site – 100 residential units • D. Cheddar – greenfield affordable housing exception site • E. Commercial distribution shed development on a greenfield site (6,500m²) For each hypothetical site , appraisals were repeated for Year 1 (2009), Year 5 (2013) and Year 9 (2017). A series of assumptions were adopted for the appraisals, which include: • Residential house price growth of 8% between Years 1 and 5, and 19% between Years 5 and 9. • Commercial yields improving (‘hardening’) over time from 8.4% in Year 1, to 6.5% in Year 5 and 5.5% in Year 9. • 30% affordable housing provision on greenfield sites, rising to 40% for years 5 and 9; 15% affordable housing provision on brownfield sites, rising to 20% for years 5 and 9. • Allowance for additional build cost in relation to achieving BREEAM Excellent for the commercial scenario, and mandatory Code for Sustainable Homes Levels for the residential scenarios. • A base level planning obligatin contribution of £3,000 for site specific requirements (e.g. immediate junction improvements) was assumed, with additional tariff/CIL contribution thresholds of £10,000, £15,000 and £20,000 also tested. It is important to note that the complexities and variables which affect the costs of construction and GDV render a generic assessment subject to significant change

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 112 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

in reality. Nonetheless the research yielded useful results from which the following key conclusions were drawn: • The residual valuations demonstrate that the charging of a tariff on residential development is justified, although the ‘viability gap’ will vary between sites. Drawing on the case studies presented in the Viability Study, it is considered that a standard charge in the order of £8,000 per dwelling is justified. This takes account of the typical duration required to obtain a planning consent and the period of time for which a consent is valid, on the basis that commencement of development is most likely to occur when the market has recovered to a stronger position. • It is considered that the phased introduction of a tariff is appropriate in order not to shock the market. Frequent review of the standard charge is recommended, with incremental increases to the standard charge of £3,000- £5,000 every three years suggested. • There are marginal increases in average values between Bridgwater and Burnham-on-Sea and Highbridge, however it is considered that these are not significant enough to warrant spatially differentiated tariff rates across the settlements. • Increasing requirements for affordable housing do have a negative impact upon land value, however this is absorbed by property price increases in all cases. • Research shows that the development of rural exception sites for affordable housing is unlikely to be viable without the benefit of Housing and Communities Agency (HCA) grant support. Given the significant community benefit such developments provide, the levying of tariffs on exception sites is not encouraged. There is a case, however, for pursuing affordable housing and infrastructure funding for rural areas in an integrated manner through the HCA Single Conversation. • The viability of commercial development is presently questionable due to low margins. The Viability Study considered the case of distribution sheds (Use Class B8), and the case for applying a tariff to other uses such as retail will need to be considered separately. There may be merit in applying a tariff to commercial uses including B8 uses in the future, but this should be the subject of review and should be offset against economic development objectives for the District.

5.3 Categorisation and prioritisation Bearing in mind that viability places limits on the finance that can be raised for infrastructure through developer contributions, it is likely to be necessary for the Council to make difficult decisions about the types of infrastructure and specific projects that should be first in order to receive funding. Figure 9 provides a summary of estimated infrastructure costs per unit that could form the basis of a charging schedule and shows total costs amounting to approximately £13,600 per unit. This is significantly more than the level recommended as an initial target charge (£8,000) and should not be considered exhaustive in terms of the infrastructure that could be required. For instance, rates per dwellings of £1,250 for flood risk management and transport are assumed for the chart and these may need to increase.

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 113 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

Figure 4 - Chart showing indicative infrastructure charges per dwelling

16000

Flood Risk Management

14000 Transport & Public Realm

Accessible Natural Greenspace 12000 Recreational Open Space

Other Outdoor Sports

10000 Playing Pitches

Sports Hall

8000 Swimming

Secondary Healthcare (Other) 6000 Secondary Healthcare (Acute) Dentists 4000 Doctors

Secondary Education 2000 Primary Education

Early Years Education 0 1

It is clearly outside the role of consultants to make decisions around the prioritisation of infrastructure, but it is possible to assist the Council through the establishment of a framework for categorising infrastructure that will assist with decision making. This framework has also informed the structure of a recommended planning contributions policy. There are many considerations that must be taken into account in making such decisions so a series of criteria have been used to form the prioritisation framework.

5.3.1 Strategic Significance and “Core Projects” This study has been prepared in support of the Core Strategy which identifies a series of strategic sites. In order to ensure that appropriate consideration is given

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 114 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

to the projects that will enable those sites to be brought forward, the following terms are used within a prioritisation framework: • Core Projects – these projects are required to deliver two or more strategic development sites; and/or are considered a priority to support the Vision or Economic Strategy for Sedgemoor. Should the establishment of a CIL be pursued, the need to identify infrastructure projects that would serve five or more sites may result in this category being expanded (see section 4.1 for information on Regulation 123). • Projects of importance to strategic sites – these projects are considered necessary for development to proceed at a particular strategic site and may be pursued through site specific S106 Planning Obligations.

5.3.2 National Planning Priorities Certain infrastructure sectors could be considered to take higher precedence when planning decisions are being made. These are reflected in the ability of statutory agencies to direct the refusal of planning applications; and requirements for LPAs to consult the Secretary of State on certain applications: • The Highways Agency is responsible for ensuring new developments do not impact on the safe and efficient operation of the strategic road network. Using Article 14 Directions, the Agency ultimately has the power to direct refusal of a planning application. • Under the Town and Country Planning (Consultation)(England) Direction 2009, the LPA is required to consult the Secretary of State on applications where a major development is located in an area at risk of flooding and the Environment Agency has issued an objection to the application. These powers are not representative of the wider spatial planning approach, but reflect national priorities about where development must be restricted if the delivery of critical infrastructure has not been secured. It is for these reasons that the topics of transport and flood risk management are expected to be priority topics during the examination of the Core Strategy.

5.3.3 Infrastructure Sectors Hierarchy of Need Most people would agree there are certain essential services required by a community, although the relative importance and ranking of different services could be enthusiastically debated. Table 11 sets out broad categories and a hierarchy that provides a starting point for discussions. Table 11 - Infrastructure Sectors Hierarchy of Need Category Infrastructure Sectors Basic Needs Energy, flood risk management, water, wastewater, transport, waste Safety & Health Care Ambulance, fire and rescue, police, primary and acute health care, social care Education & Skills Early years, primary, secondary and further education, information technology and communications Place-making & Self- Libraries, community centres, cultural facilities, sports facilities, fulfilment recreation, open space, enhanced public realm

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 115 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

The picture is of course more complex than that represented here. For instance, recognition of the preventative health benefits of exercise suggests that sports facilities should rank equally with health care. Open space can also play an important role in flood risk management, providing a further example of where a single project can serve more than one purpose. Nonetheless, it is expected that conventional service modes and priorities will continue to have a bearing on decisions made.

5.3.4 Alternative Funding Sources Reliance on funding from developer contributions varies widely between sectors, as does the availability of alternative sources of finance. The utilities, for example, are practically self-financing through a combination of rate payments and developer connection charges. Health and education providers tend to be independent in terms of revenue funding, but developer contributions towards the capital cost of projects can be of great assistance. In some cases developer contributions can be beneficial to demonstrate match funding for grant, while in others, a scheme may be absolutely dependent on developer contributions if it is to be brought forward. With respect to streetscape enhancements, a combination of options would need to be considered, such as HCA Single Conversation funding, the inclusion of a defined area of public realm within a development site, and combined delivery of transport and public realm improvements. The identification of alternative funding sources should be pursued wherever possible in order that the finance available from developer contributions can be channelled towards those sectors where options are more limited. Chapter 6 of this report sets out a number of alternative finance options that could be investigated.

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 116 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

6 Alternative Finance Mechanisms

As established in Chapter 4, the finance available for infrastructure provision from Planning Obligations is expected to be over-subscribed and therefore it will be necessary to pursue consider alternative funding sources wherever possible.

6.1 Grant

6.1.1 Flood Risk Management - Defra Partnership Funding In May 2011 Defra announced changes to the way funding will be allocated to flood and coastal defence projects. Instead of meeting the full costs of just a limited number of schemes, the new partnership approach to funding flood and coastal resilience will mean Government money is potentially available towards the costs of any worthwhile scheme. Funding levels will be based on the numbers of households protected, the damages being prevented, and the other benefits a project would deliver. Overall, more schemes are likely to go ahead than if the previous ‘all or nothing’ approach to funding were to continue. The reforms also aim to provide improved transparency and greater certainty over potential funding levels from the general taxpayer for every flood and coastal defence project. It will also allow local areas to have a bigger say in what is done to protect them. The new approach puts added emphasis on providing support to those most at risk and living in the most deprived parts of the country. A policy statement has been published on this approach. This states that this Flood and Coastal Resilience Partnership Funding will form part of Environment Agency’s overall capital allocation to grant fund flood and coastal erosion risk management projects in the 2012/13, 2013/14 and 2014/15 financial years. All projects supported by partnership funding will need to meet the criteria certain criteria as a minimum in every case, demonstrate that in present value terms the expected whole-life benefits exceed the whole-life costs of the scheme.

6.1.2 Local Sustainable Transport Fund The Government has announced, as part of the Local Transport White Paper, the creation of a Local Sustainable Transport Fund to help build strong local economies and address the urgent challenges of climate change. It reflects the Government’s core objectives of supporting economic growth by improving the links that move goods and people and meeting its commitment to reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The Fund represents a stage in the Government’s move away from specific grants to provide local authorities the freedom to develop the targeted transport packages that address the particular transport problems in their areas. Our aim is to facilitate best practice in the delivery of a wide range of sustainable transport packages. The Fund presents an opportunity for authorities to capture the benefits from previous demonstration projects and identify how those benefits can be transferred and brought to life in their own particular areas. The purpose of the Fund is to enable the delivery by local transport authorities of sustainable transport solutions that support economic growth while reducing

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 117 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

carbon. These solutions will be geared to supporting jobs and business through effectively tackling the problems of congestion, improving the reliability and predictability of journey times, enabling economic investment, revitalising town centres and enhancing access to employment. They should at the same time bring about changing patterns of travel behaviour and greater use of more sustainable transport modes and so deliver a reduction in carbon and other harmful emissions. The Fund also provides the opportunity to take an integrated approach to meeting local challenges and to delivering additional wider social, environmental, health and safety benefits for local communities. The Department for Transport state that it will be for local transport authorities, working in partnership with their communities, to identify the right solutions to meet the economic and environmental challenges faced in their areas. The DfT plans to make £560 million available to the Fund over the 4 year period to 2014-15. The funding will comprise both resource and capital. In the first round of bidding for the Local Sustainable Transport Fund the Department received 73 bids from across England. In the second round of bidding, the Department received 41 Expressions of Interest for Tranche 2 and 19 Initial Proposals for Large Projects. The deadline for short-listed Large Project business cases is 20 December 2011, and the deadline for Tranche 2 bids is 24 February 2012.

6.2 Local Taxation and Revenue Sources

6.2.1 Flood Risk Management Local Levy As identified in section 2.3, the Flood and Water Management Act (April 2010) sets out a policy direction that sees greater responsibility for the planning and financing of flood risk management falling to lead local flood authorities (the County Council) . In calling for the preparation of a long-term investment strategy in his independent review of the 2007 floods, Sir Michael Pitt said that, “this long-term approach should not assume that the costs of flood risks will be met centrally. There are direct beneficiaries from flood defence work, and aligning those who benefit with those who pay will bring greater efficiency and greater responsiveness from those carrying out the work .” The Government’s response to Sir Michael Pitt’s Review signalled that county and unitary local authorities should work closely with the EA to consider whether there is a case to invest in additional local priority projects, and determine the fairest way of raising the money to pay for them . The current funding strategy for Sedgemoor relies upon developer contributions secured through a tariff coupled with Environment Agency Grant-in-Aid finance. A further contributory funding option that could be explored would comprise a local levy on households and businesses, the cost of which would be offset against the projected increase in insurance premiums and excesses if no action was taken (as illustrated in Figure 5). It is estimated that every £1 currently being invested in new and improved defences in the UK reduces the long-term costs of flooding by on average £8, providing a robust justification and financial incentive for early action. Section 17 of the Flood and Water Management Act 2010 enables the Environment Agency to issue a levy to a lead local flood authority, in respect of flood and coastal erosion risk management functions, carried out in that local authority’s area by the Environment Agency. Levies must be issued in

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 118 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

Figureaccordance 5- Flood with Risk regulations Management made Levyunder offset section against 74 o fInsura the Localnce Premiums Government Finance Act 1988.

1. Do nothing 2. Install flood defences

isk r

flood Community Community

spend on flood spend on flood isk premiums defences Increasing Reduced Reduced flood r Externalities: impacts on Investment in economic other priorities performance; health etc.

Further work would be required to identify the options for collecting a levy, such as an increase in council tax, with the ring-fencing of flood risk management funding. Claims that infrastructure costs are to be balanced by lower insurance premiums would need to be substantiated with background research and agreements with the insurance industry. The Environment Agency’s long-term investment strategy (2009) advises that ‘ the trend is for insurance terms to more and more closely reflect local flood risk. We believe that insurers should reduce premiums and excesses when new defences are announced or built…At present there is no evidence that insurance premiums reduce when customers take measures to protect themselves from flooding .’ Beyond the potential for cost savings against rising insurance costs, further benefits of such an approach could include: • An equitable approach, with existing development contributing towards the cost of infrastructure in addition to new development. • The possibility of a reduced flood risk tariff payment, allowing for developer contributions to be redirected towards other infrastructure priorities. • A funding mechanism to help deliver the flood risk management infrastructure required for Burnham-on-Sea and Highbridge. Two examples of where similar approaches have been adopted, albeit at a county level, are set out here: Yorkshire Regional Flood Defence Committee Local Levy - A local levy is raised annually by the Regional Flood Defence Committee, voted on every

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 119 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

January. The levy is designed to fund a programme of flood reduction works that are important to the region, contributing to both increased protection of residences and business as well as economic regeneration. Typically they involve projects that would not otherwise receive funding from the usual central government funds. Gloucestershire One-off Levy – 4.5 inches of rain in July 2007 challenged Gloucestershire County Council with 4,500 flooded homes and businesses, transport infrastructure brought to a standstill, and the submersion of a water treatment plant which denied 350,000 people mains water for almost two weeks. Nearly £29m was provided by Government to assist with the recovery from the flooding, but no significant finance was made available for flood risk management measures that would make the county less vulnerable in the future. Politicians in Gloucestershire, with a track record of low council tax rises, consulted the community on whether they would pay a one-off levy to raise a ‘fighting fund’. There was a positive response and an extra 1.1% council tax rise for 2008/09 was turned into a fighting fund of nearly £10m.

6.2.2 Council Tax Local authorities are responsible for setting their budgets for the year and determining how much of the cost of a service or capital project will be met through council tax. Sedgemoor DC do, therefore, have some discretion over whether rates should be increased to deliver certain projects or service objectives, although the Council will also be under pressure to keep tax increases within acceptable limits. Should outright increases to council tax be considered unacceptable, the ‘ring-fencing’ of funds for a high profile priority project or ‘One-off Levy’ (as introduced by Gloucestershire – see section 6.2.1) may provide a vehicle for generating political support.

6.2.3 Car Parking Strategy Sedgemoor DC currently have limited control over car parking in Bridgwater, which reduces the ability of the Council to influence travel behavior or benefit from the revenue stream that public car parks provide. The Core Strategy Preferred Options advises that, as a large proportion of car parking in the town centre is privately owned, it is difficult to introduce initiatives aimed at managing demand. Within the town centre there are a number of particularly congested junctions and a large proportion of car trips are for short distances of less than 3km. It goes on to suggest that the ‘…issues of demand management could be tackled, initially, by gaining more control over retail parking in Bridgwater supported by pedestrianisation and restricted zones in the town centre .’ Working in conjunction with Somerset CC as the Future Transport Strategy is developed, it is recommended that Sedgemoor DC develop a car parking strategy that identifies where parking should be retained and how charges and revenue streams can be controlled. Options for the disposal of excess parking sites will depend on location, but may involve encouraging development of the site for a higher value use, such as residential or business, through the designation of sites within the LDF.

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 120 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

6.3 Lottery Funding For every £1 that the public spends on Lottery tickets, 28 pence goes to the Lottery good causes. These are the arts, charities and voluntary groups, heritage, health, education, the environment and sports. Funding is managed and allocated by a number of Lottery Funder organisations: • Arts Council England • Awards for All • Big Lottery Fund – who also allocate funding in association with Natural England and the BRE • Heritage Lottery Fund • NESTA (the National Endowment for Science, Technology and the Arts) • Olympic Lottery Distributor • Sport England • UK Film Council • UK Sport

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 121 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

7 Governance and Capacity for Delivery

Achievement of the Vision for Sedgemoor will rely on a wide range of public, private and community sector organisations working effectively and efficiently to deliver projects that assist in achieving common objectives. Sedgemoor DC have a crucial leadership and coordination role to play in this process, and it is intended that the production of this Infrastructure and Delivery Study will provide a platform and renewed impetus for project planning and delivery activities. This section of the report focuses on the organisational and resourcing measures for consideration by the Council that could enhance cross-sectoral working and organisational capacity. These relate to forward planning activities, while acknowledging that strategic planning and ‘visioning’ processes are now well advanced, and the project management and delivery skills to effectively execute implementation will become increasingly important within the Council. .

7.1 Governance for Infrastructure Planning Effective infrastructure planning can only be undertaken where partner infrastructure and service providers are actively involved in the process. The establishment of an Infrastructure Planning Group is therefore proposed, although careful preparatory work will be required to ensure that the role of the group is well defined and the frequency of meetings/activities is realistic given resource pressures on participants. Further important considerations include the geographical scope of the group and need to avoid duplication with existing forums for partnership working. Each of these matters are explored in further detail below.

7.1.1 The Role of an Infrastructure Planning Group Suggested roles and activities for the Infrastructure Planning Group include: • Updates to and approval of the Infrastructure Delivery Plan as a ‘live’ process (see Section 6.2) – ongoing input and verification by infrastructure and service providers will improve the accuracy and outcomes of the process. • Meetings and workshops focussed on particular issues or strategic sites that demand cross-sectoral working. • Updates and information sharing by the local planning authority on development sites expected to come forward in the short and medium term.

7.1.2 Cross-boundary Infrastructure Planning The geographical remits of infrastructure and service providers vary greatly from sector to sector. Where planning is undertaken at the County level, such as transport and education, partnership working across District boundaries would be naturally facilitated through County Council involvement in an Infrastructure Delivery Group. In other cases, such as the provision of amenity greenspace, responsibilities are more fragmented amongst a number of public, private and community organisations. A pragmatic approach needs to be taken to selecting organisations that form the core of an Infrastructure Planning Group, to balance broad representation with focus and efficiency at meetings. Consideration should

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 122 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

be given to infrastructure planning issues where cross-boundary issues may not have been fully investigated, and themes where there could be particular benefits for joint working between Districts and providers. A brief commentary on where common aims and projects link Sedgemoor DC with neighbouring authorities is provided below: • North Somerset Council – Sedgemoor has strong functional links with North Somerset, based around the tourism industry and travel to work patterns, which connect Weston-super-Mare with nearby Burnham-on-Sea/Highbridge and the employment centres of Bridgwater and Taunton. The two councils also face similar issues, with a significant portion of existing properties along the coast at risk of flooding. As a unitary authority, North Somerset Council has responsibility for transport planning in the District and is more closely engaged with the West of England Partnership at a strategic level than Somerset County Council. Opportunities for joint working on sectors including transport, flooding, education, sports and leisure might be investigated further. • Mendip District Council – functional links with Mendip in relation to infrastructure are generally considered to be weaker than those with other neighbouring authorities, although rural communities in the east of Sedgemoor do use local services in Wells, Street and Glastonbury. • Taunton Deane Borough Council – delivery of high quality, high frequency public transport on the A38 corridor connecting Wellington, Taunton and Bridgwater will depend on joint working towards a funding strategy, coordinated by Somerset County Council. • West Somerset Council – Sedgemoor DC are already working closely with West Somerset Council in relation to the Hinkley Point C nuclear power station proposals and associated development. Other projects that align the interests of the two authorities include the Steart Managed Realignment and transport proposals for the A39 corridor, with Sedgemoor occupying a ‘gateway’ location on tourism routes to the Quantocks, Minehead and Exmoor.

7.1.3 Relationship of Infrastructure Planning Group with existing forums. The concept of partnership working amongst infrastructure and service providers is hardly new and Sedgemoor already leads or participates in a range of cross- sectoral initiatives, including the ‘Somerset Strategic Partnership’ and ‘Sedgemoor in Somerset Partnership’ Local Strategic Partnerships (LSPs), the Somerset Water Management Partnership and Water Strategy group. Nevertheless, it is considered that the infrastructure planning process could provide a means for revitalising waning forums, by providing a common purpose to maintain a comprehensive Delivery Strategy. In seeking to establish an Infrastructure Planning Group, it will be important to avoid duplication where capable partnerships already exist, while taking the opportunity to review membership if necessary and align group objectives with the statutory requirement for LAs to undertake infrastructure planning. In order to reduce the resource demands upon organisations and ‘consultation fatigue’, it is recommended that meetings are targeted in relation to specific issues

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 123 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

that require a coordinated response, or focus on a particular strategic growth areas where infrastructure strategies are unclear. It is unlikely that it would be necessary to invite all IPG members to all meetings.

7.2 Infrastructure Planning as a ‘Live’ Process It is recommended that infrastructure planning and delivery is viewed by the Council as an iterative process, requiring regular (potentially annual) updates of the plan. Infrastructure and service providers are all engaged in their own strategy and business planning processes, meaning that information comes forward at different rates and varying levels of detail. For many sectors, the initial assessment of infrastructure requirements and capital costs set out in the Infrastructure and Delivery Strategy are high level estimates based on standards of provision. This means that project details and costs will need to be refined over time. Moreover, as major projects are worked up from outline schemes, through feasibility stages towards detailed design, they are often divided up into a series of work packages. Tracking progress, understanding phasing implications and assessing the deliverability of multiple projects in this context is challenging. In order to assist with this task, the Infrastructure Project Tracker issued alongside this Delivery Strategy will help enable the Council to store and review information on the costs, funding strategies and programming of infrastructure projects.

7.3 Creating Capacity to Drive Delivery The requirement to undertake infrastructure planning places additional pressure upon Local Planning Authorities resources, although it is acknowledged by Sedgemoor DC that the process is central to a true spatial planning approach and the delivery of the Vision for Sedgemoor. In order to take the infrastructure and delivery planning agenda forward, it is suggested that a staff role could be created that would include responsibility for the following tasks: • Management and updates to the Infrastructure Coordination Database and Delivery Strategy. • Coordination of Infrastructure Planning Group meetings and events, including an annual update on sites coming forward in the short and medium term. • Monitoring of Planning Obligation and CIL developer contributions towards infrastructure. • Monitoring of grant and lottery funding opportunities. • Business case development for projects where Sedgemoor is the lead organisation.

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 124 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

8 Conclusions and Next Steps

This Infrastructure and Delivery Study has drawn upon numerous work streams undertaken by Sedgemoor DC, Somerset CC and partner infrastructure and service providers. The objectives of the study have been to consolidate and analyse available information; and augment details of infrastructure requirements where appropriate through the application of high level standards. The outputs reflect a point in time and a number of areas for further investigation are identified and priority actions identified. Overarching procedural and policy recommendations are summarised below: • The establishment of an Infrastructure Planning Group is proposed, whose suggested roles and activities would include updates to and approval the Infrastructure Delivery Strategy, participation in multi-sectoral workshops, and information sharing on project phasing. In order to reduce resource pressures on organisations, it is suggested that the LSP’s of Somerset and/or Sedgemoor might be remodelled to perform these roles along with existing functions. • In order to lead the Infrastructure Planning Group, the creation of a new or modified staff position is recommended. Additional roles would include management of the Infrastructure Project Tracker, identification of funding options, and preparation of business cases for projects. • The preparation of a CIL by 6 th April 2014 that would cover as a minimum developer contributions towards the Parrett Barrier. Consideration should be given to expanding the CIL to cover other infrastructure sectors such as transport, education and sports and recreational open space. • Finance available towards infrastructure through Planning Obligations or a CIL is expected to be over-subscribed and therefore the Council should actively pursue alternative funding sources wherever possible. Options for consideration include a ‘one-off’ or sustained levy to deliver a specified priority projects, such as flood risk management infrastructure. Lottery funding may provides a means for taking forward public realm projects identified in the Bridgwater Vision and Burnham-on-Sea and Highbridge Regeneration Strategy.

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page 125 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Appendix A Infrastructure Needs Assessment

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

A1 Libraries

Libraries (Floor Space m ²) Baseline Core Strategy Geography/Site Dwellings Pop'n Demand Supply Demand (m²) (m²) (m²) Capital Cost Sedgemoor 10,605 24392 3384 2152 731.75 £2,195,235 Bridgwater 7,455 17147 2378.85 891 514.40 £1,543,185 NE Bridgwater 2,000 4600 138.00 £414,000 Cattle Market 170 391 11.73 £35,190 Gerber Foods 215 495 14.84 £44,505 Durleigh Road 500 1150 34.50 £103,500 Wembdon 600 1380 41.40 £124,200 S Bridgwater (Phases 1 & 2) 1,460 3358 100.74 £302,220 S Bridgwater (Phase 3) 450 1035 31.05 £93,150 Bridgwater Brownfield 2,060 4738 142.14 £426,420 Completions & Commitments 2,793 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A BoS & Highbridge 1,575 3623 502.57 787 108.68 £326,025 BoS Urban Extension 400 920 27.60 £82,800 Land at Boatyard 120 276 8.28 £24,840 BoS & Highbridge Brownfield 370 851 25.53 £76,590 Completions & Commitments 685 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Rural Sedgemoor 1,575 3623 502.57 474 108.68 £326,025 Key Rural Settlements 1,260 2898 86.94 £260,820 Other Sustainable Settlements 315 725 21.74 £65,205 Per Dwelling 1 2.3 N/A N/A 0.07 £207 Per Capita N/A 1 N/A N/A 0.03 £90

Assumptions/Notes Average household size: 2.3 Baseline Sedgemoor population: 112,800 Projected demand and capital cost based on Museums, Libraries and Archives Council (MLA) Best Practice Standards - Public Libraries, Archives and New Development: A Standard Charge Approach (June 2008): Provision of 30m² of Library space per 1000 people (estimated capital cost £90 per person).

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page A 1 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

A2 Archives

Archives (Floor Space m ²) Baseline Core Strategy Geography/Site Dwellings Pop'n Demand Supply Demand (m²) (m²) (m²) Capital Cost Sedgemoor 10,605 24392 676.8 2152 146.35 £482,952 Bridgwater 7,455 17147 475.77 891 102.88 £339,501 NE Bridgwater 2,000 4600 27.60 £91,080 Cattle Market 170 391 2.35 £7,742 Gerber Foods 215 495 2.97 £9,791 Durleigh Road 500 1150 6.90 £22,770 Wembdon 600 1380 8.28 £27,324 S Bridgwater (Phases 1 & 2) 1,460 3358 20.15 £66,488 S Bridgwater (Phase 3) 450 1035 6.21 £20,493 Bridgwater Brownfield 2,060 4738 28.43 £93,812 Completions & Commitments 2,793 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

BoS & Highbridge 1,575 3623 100.51 787 21.74 £71,726 BoS Urban Extension 400 920 5.52 £18,216 Land at Boatyard 120 276 1.66 £5,465 BoS & Highbridge Brownfield 370 851 5.11 £16,850 Completions & Commitments 685 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Rural Sedgemoor 1,575 3623 100.51 474 21.74 £71,726 Key Rural Settlements 1,260 2898 17.39 £57,380 Other Sustainable Settlements 315 725 4.35 £14,345 Per Dwelling 1 2.3 N/A N/A 0.01 £46 Per Capita N/A 1 N/A N/A 0.01 £19.80

Assumptions/Notes Average household size: 2.3 Baseline Sedgemoor population: 112,800 Projected demand and capital cost based on Museums, Libraries and Archives Council (MLA) Best Practice Standards - Public Libraries, Archives and New Development: A Standard Charge Approach (June 2008): Provision of 6m² of Archive space per 1,000 people (estimated capital cost £19.80 per person).

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page A 2 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

A3 Community Centres

Community Centres (Floor Space m ²) Baseline Core Strategy Geography/Site Dwellings Pop'n Demand Supply Demand (m²) (m²) (m²) Capital Cost Sedgemoor 10,605 24392 - - 6.10 £5,152,704 Bridgwater 7,455 17147 - - 4.29 £3,622,198 NE Bridgwater 2,000 4600 1.15 £971,750 Cattle Market 170 391 0.10 £82,599 Gerber Foods 215 495 0.12 £104,463 Durleigh Road 500 1150 0.29 £242,938 Wembdon 600 1380 0.35 £291,525 S Bridgwater (Phases 1 & 2) 1,460 3358 0.84 £709,378 S Bridgwater (Phase 3) 450 1035 0.26 £218,644 Bridgwater Brownfield 2,060 4738 1.18 £1,000,903 Completions & Commitments 2,793 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A BoS & Highbridge 1,575 3623 - - 0.91 £765,253 BoS Urban Extension 400 920 0.23 £194,350 Land at Boatyard 120 276 0.07 £58,305

BoS & Highbridge Brownfield 370 851 0.21 £179,774 Completions & Commitments 685 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Rural Sedgemoor 1,575 3623 - - 0.91 £765,253 Key Rural Settlements 1,260 2898 0.72 £612,203 Other Sustainable Settlements 315 725 0.18 £153,051 Per Dwelling 1 2.3 N/A N/A 0.001 £486 Per Capita N/A 1 N/A N/A 0.0003 £211

Assumptions/Notes Average household size: 2.3 Baseline Sedgemoor population: 112,800

Standard of one community centre per 4,000 population at a cost of £845,000 per community centre (Based on Shaping Neighbourhoods , 2003; Sport England Village and Community Halls Design Guidance Note , 2011; and Building Magazine Cost Model (2011) with locational factor applied.

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page A 3 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

A4 Early Years Education

Early Years Education (Total Children's Centres places - refined calculation) Baseline Core Strategy Geography/Site Dwellings Pop'n Demand Supply Demand Capital Cost Sedgemoor 10,605 24392 2096 2789 521 £3,644,159 Bridgwater 7,455 17147 0 507 £3,548,197 NE Bridgwater 2,000 4600 136 £951,897 Cattle Market 170 391 12 £80,911 Gerber Foods 215 495 15 £102,329 Durleigh Road 500 1150 34 £237,974 Wembdon 600 1380 41 £285,569 S Bridgwater (Phases 1 & 2) 1,460 3358 99 £694,885 S Bridgwater (Phase 3) 450 1035 31 £214,177 Bridgwater Brownfield 2,060 4738 140 £980,454 Completions & Commitments 2,793 N/A N/A N/A 190 £1,329,325

BoS & Highbridge 1,575 3623 107 £749,619 BoS Urban Extension 400 920 27 £190,379 Land at Boatyard 120 276 8 £57,114 BoS & Highbridge Brownfield 370 851 25 £176,101 Completions & Commitments 685 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Rural Sedgemoor 1,575 3623 107 £749,619 Key Rural Settlements 1,260 2898 86 £599,695 Other Sustainable Settlements 315 725 21 £149,924 Per Dwelling 1 2.3 N/A N/A 0.07 £476 Per Capita 0.43 1 N/A N/A 0.03 £207

Assumptions/Notes Average household size: 2.3 Baseline Sedgemoor population: 112,800 Projected demand and cost based on Somerset CC assumption that for every 150 dwellings there will be an average 21.43 children of pre-school age. Broken down for demand for group based childcare. Existing demand is based on 2010-2011 figures from the March 2011 Childcare sufficiency Assessment (Somerset County Council)

DCSF Basic Need Cost Multiplier for cost of Children’s Centre provision (£7000 per place) For 0-2 years, assumes national average take up of places of 31.84% of children on 55.3% of weekdays. For 3-4 years, assumes national average take up of places of 70.99% of children on 83.8% of weekdays.

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page A 4 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

A5 Primary Schools

Primary Education (Pupil Places) Baseline Core Strategy Geography/Site Dwellings Pop'n Demand Supply Demand Capital Cost Sedgemoor 10,605 24392 7632 8184 2121 £25,997,097 Bridgwater 7,455 17147 1491 £18,275,187 NE Bridgwater 2,000 4600 400 £4,902,800 Cattle Market 170 391 34 £416,738 Gerber Foods 215 495 43 £527,051 Durleigh Road 500 1150 100 £1,225,700 Wembdon 600 1380 120 £1,470,840

S Bridgwater (Phases 1 & 2) 1,460 3358 292 £3,579,044 S Bridgwater (Phase 3) 450 1035 90 £1,103,130 Bridgwater Brownfield 2,060 4738 412 £5,049,884 Completions & Commitments 2,793 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

BoS & Highbridge 1,575 3623 315 £3,860,955 BoS Urban Extension 400 920 80 £980,560 Land at Boatyard 120 276 24 £294,168 BoS & Highbridge Brownfield 370 851 74 £907,018 Completions & Commitments 685 N/A N/A N/A 137 £1,679,209 Rural Sedgemoor 1,575 3623 315 £3,860,955 Key Rural Settlements 1,260 2898 252 £3,088,764 Other Sustainable Settlements 315 725 63 £772,191 Per Dwelling 1 2.3 N/A N/A 0.2 £2,451 Per Capita 0.43 1 N/A N/A 0.09 £1,066

Assumptions/Notes Average household size: 2.3 Baseline Sedgemoor population: 112,800 Projected demand based on Somerset CC standard of 30 primary school places for every 150 additional dwellings

Estimated capital cost based on DCSF Basic Need Cost Multiplier (2008-2009) of £12,257 per primary school pupil place. Existing demand based and supply based on Somerset CC School Population Forecast and School Organisation Plan (March 2011)

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page A 5 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

A6 Secondary Schools

Secondary Education (School Places) Baseline Core Strategy Geography/Site Dwellings Pop'n Demand Supply Demand Capital Cost Surplus of 731 in Sedgemoor 10,605 24392 2014 1515 £27,980,535 Surplus of 480 in Bridgwater 7,455 17147 2014 1065 £19,669,485 NE Bridgwater 2,000 4600 286 £5,276,857 Cattle Market 170 391 24 £448,533 Gerber Foods 215 495 31 £567,262 Durleigh Road 500 1150 71 £1,319,214 Wembdon 600 1380 86 £1,583,057

S Bridgwater (Phases 1 & 2) 1,460 3358 209 £3,852,106 S Bridgwater (Phase 3) 450 1035 64 £1,187,293 Bridgwater Brownfield 2,060 4738 294 £5,435,163 Completions & Commitments 2,793 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Surplus of 77 in BoS & Highbridge 1,575 3623 2014 225 £4,155,525 BoS Urban Extension 400 920 57 £1,055,371 Land at Boatyard 120 276 17 £316,611 BoS & Highbridge Brownfield 370 851 53 £976,219 Completions & Commitments 685 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Surplus of 174 in Rural Sedgemoor 1,575 3623 2014 225 £4,155,525 Key Rural Settlements 1,260 2898 180 £3,324,420 Other Sustainable Settlements 315 725 45 £831,105 Per Dwelling 1 2.3 N/A N/A 0.1 £2,638 Per Capita 0.43 1 N/A N/A 0.06 £1,147

Assumptions/Notes Average household size: 2.3 Baseline Sedgemoor population: 112,800 Baseline figures based on Somerset CC Student Forecasts (January 2011) A standard of 30 students for each additional 210 dwellings has been applied (based on Somerset CC benchmark)

The DCSF Basic Need Cost Multiplier (2008-09) for Secondary School places is £18,469.

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page A 6 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

A7 Primary Healthcare – Doctors

Health (No. of Doctors) Baseline Core Strategy Geography/Site Dwellings Pop'n Demand Supply Demand Capital Cost Sedgemoor 10,605 24392 71 - 15 £3,468,166 Bridgwater 7,455 17147 50 - 11 £2,438,018 NE Bridgwater 2,000 4600 3 £654,063 Cattle Market 170 391 0.2 £55,595 Gerber Foods 215 495 0.3 £70,312 Durleigh Road 500 1150 1 £163,516 Wembdon 600 1380 1 £196,219 S Bridgwater (Phases 1 & 2) 1,460 3358 2 £477,466 S Bridgwater (Phase 3) 450 1035 1 £147,164 Bridgwater Brownfield 2,060 4738 3 £673,684 Completions & Commitments 2,793 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

BoS & Highbridge 1,575 3623 10 2 £515,074 BoS Urban Extension 400 920 1 £130,813 Land at Boatyard 120 276 0.2 £39,244 BoS & Highbridge Brownfield 370 851 1 £121,002 Completions & Commitments 685 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Rural Sedgemoor 1,575 3623 10 2 £515,074 Key Rural Settlements 1,260 2898 2 £412,059 Other Sustainable Settlements 315 725 0.5 £103,015 Per Dwelling 1 2.3 N/A N/A 0.001 £327 Per Capita 0.43 1 N/A N/A 0.00063 £142

Assumptions/Notes Average household size: 2.3 Baseline Sedgemoor population: 112,800 An average cost per sq.m. of £1,750 is assumed and an average floor space requirement of 130sq.m per GP has been applied, based on floor space and cost standards from NHS London Healthy Urban Developments Unit model, with the South West location factor applied.

The current aim of the Somerset PCT is to recduce the average GP list to 1,600 patients Existing demand based on figures in the ' The Strategic review of Primary Care Infrastructure' (Somerset NHS PCT September 2008)

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page A 7 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

A8 Primary Healthcare – Dentists

Health (No. of dentists) Baseline Core Strategy Geography/Site Dwellings Pop'n Demand Supply Demand Capital Cost Sedgemoor 10,605 24392 47 10.2 £2,312,111 Bridgwater 7,455 17147 33.04 0 7.1 £1,625,345 NE Bridgwater 2,000 4600 1.9 £436,042 Cattle Market 170 391 0.2 £37,064 Gerber Foods 215 495 0.2 £46,874 Durleigh Road 500 1150 0.5 £109,010 Wembdon 600 1380 0.6 £130,813

S Bridgwater (Phases 1 & 2) 1,460 3358 1.4 £318,310 S Bridgwater (Phase 3) 450 1035 0.4 £98,109 Bridgwater Brownfield 2,060 4738 2.0 £449,123 Completions & Commitments 2,793 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

BoS & Highbridge 1,575 3623 6.98 4 1.5 £343,383 BoS Urban Extension 400 920 0.4 £87,208 Land at Boatyard 120 276 0.1 £26,163 BoS & Highbridge Brownfield 370 851 0.4 £80,668 Completions & Commitments 685 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Rural Sedgemoor 1,575 3623 6.98 4 1.5 £343,383 Key Rural Settlements 1,260 2898 1.2 £274,706 Other Sustainable Settlements 315 725 0.3 £68,677 Per Dwelling 1 2.3 N/A N/A 0.001 £218 Per Capita 0.43 1 N/A N/A 0.0004 £95

Assumptions/Notes Average household size: 2.3 Baseline Sedgemoor population: 112,800 An average list size for dentists in Somerset is 2,400 patients per dentist was provided to Arup by Somerset PCT.

The average cost provision has been assumed to be equivalent to that for GPs (£1,750 per sq.m.) and floor space requirement of 130sq.m per dentist, based on floor space and cost standards from NHS London Healthy Urban Developments Unit model, with the South West location factor applied.

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page A 8 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

A9 Secondary Healthcare – Acute Beds

Health (Secondary Healthcare - Acute Beds) Baseline Core Strategy Geography/Site Dwellings Pop'n Demand Supply Demand Capital Cost Sedgemoor 10,605 24392 203 - 44 £5,246,612 Bridgwater 7,455 17147 - 31 £3,688,212 NE Bridgwater 2,000 4600 8 £989,460 Cattle Market 170 391 1 £84,104 Gerber Foods 215 495 1 £106,367 Durleigh Road 500 1150 2 £247,365 Wembdon 600 1380 2 £296,838

S Bridgwater (Phases 1 & 2) 1,460 3358 6 £722,306 S Bridgwater (Phase 3) 450 1035 2 £222,629 Bridgwater Brownfield 2,060 4738 9 £1,019,144 Completions & Commitments 2,793 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

BoS & Highbridge 1,575 3623 - 7 £779,200 BoS Urban Extension 400 920 2 £197,892 Land at Boatyard 120 276 0 £59,368 BoS & Highbridge Brownfield 370 851 2 £183,050 Completions & Commitments 685 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Rural Sedgemoor 1,575 3623 - 7 £779,200 Key Rural Settlements 1,260 2898 5 £623,360 Other Sustainable Settlements 315 725 1 £155,840 Per Dwelling 1 2.3 N/A N/A 0.004 £495 Per Capita 0.43 1 N/A N/A 0.002 £215

Assumptions/Notes Average household size: 2.3 Baseline Sedgemoor population: 112,800 Average number of acute care beds required per 1,000 people (sourced from Hospital Activity Statistics produced by the Department of Health) - 1.8 acute hospital beds, 0.9 maternity beds, 0.9 geriatric beds and 0.6 mental health beds. Floorspace standard (50m²) and cost per bed (Acute £2,390per m² all other bed types £1,620 per m²) (NHS London Healthy Urban Development Unit model, with a South West location factor applied).

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page A 9 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

A10 Secondary Healthcare – Other Beds

Health (Secondary Healthcare - Other Beds) Baseline Core Strategy Geography/Site Dwellings Pop'n Demand Supply Demand Capital Cost Sedgemoor 10,605 24392 271 - 59 £4,741,708 Bridgwater 7,455 17147 - 41 £3,333,280 NE Bridgwater 2,000 4600 11 £894,240 Cattle Market 170 391 1 £76,010 Gerber Foods 215 495 1 £96,131 Durleigh Road 500 1150 3 £223,560 Wembdon 600 1380 3 £268,272

S Bridgwater (Phases 1 & 2) 1,460 3358 8 £652,795 S Bridgwater (Phase 3) 450 1035 2 £201,204 Bridgwater Brownfield 2,060 4738 11 £921,067 Completions & Commitments 2,793 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

BoS & Highbridge 1,575 3623 - 9 £704,214 BoS Urban Extension 400 920 2 £178,848 Land at Boatyard 120 276 1 £53,654 BoS & Highbridge Brownfield 370 851 2 £165,434 Completions & Commitments 685 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Rural Sedgemoor 1,575 3623 - 9 £704,214 Key Rural Settlements 1,260 2898 7 £563,371 Other Sustainable Settlements 315 725 2 £140,843 Per Dwelling 1 2.3 N/A N/A 0 £447 Per Capita 0.43 1 N/A N/A 0 £194

Assumptions/Notes Average household size: 2.3 Baseline Sedgemoor population: 112,800 Average number of acute care beds required per 1,000 people (sourced from Hospital Activity Statistics produced by the Department of Health) - 1.8 acute hospital beds, 0.9 maternity beds, 0.9 geriatric beds and 0.6 mental health beds.

Foorspace standard (50m²) and cost per bed (Acute £2,390per m² all other bed types £1,620 per m²) (NHS London Healthy Urban Development Unit model, with a South West location factor applied).

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page A 10 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

A11 Indoor Sports – Swimming Pools

Swimming Pools (Lanes) Baseline Core Strategy Geography/Site Dwellings Pop'n Demand Supply Demand Capital Cost Sedgemoor 10,605 24392 19.7 12 4.3 £2,638,250 Bridgwater 7,455 17147 6.4 0 3.0 £1,854,611 NE Bridgwater 2,000 4600 0.8 £497,548 Cattle Market 170 391 0.1 £42,292 Gerber Foods 215 495 0.1 £53,486 Durleigh Road 500 1150 0.2 £124,387 Wembdon 600 1380 0.2 £149,264 S Bridgwater (Phases 1 & 2) 1,460 3358 0.6 £363,210 S Bridgwater (Phase 3) 450 1035 0.2 £111,948 Bridgwater Brownfield 2,060 4738 0.8 £512,475 Completions & Commitments 2,793 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

BoS & Highbridge 1,575 3623 - - 0.6 £391,819

BoS Urban Extension 400 920 0.2 £99,510 Land at Boatyard 120 276 0.0 £29,853 BoS & Highbridge Brownfield 370 851 0.1 £92,046 Completions & Commitments 685 N/A N/A N/A 0.3 £170,410 Rural Sedgemoor 1,575 3623 - - 0.6 £391,819

Key Rural Settlements 1,260 2898 0.5 £313,455 Other Sustainable Settlements 315 725 0.1 £78,364 Per Dwelling 1 2.3 N/A N/A 0.0004 £249 Per Capita N/A 1 N/A N/A 0.0002 £108

Assumptions/Notes Average household size: 2.3 Baseline Sedgemoor population: 112,800 Baseline Bridgwater population: 36,892 Projected demand and capital cost based on Sport England Sports Facility Calculator (Sep 2011 version) Assumes a typical swimming pool has 4 x 25m lanes

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page A 11 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

A12 Indoor Sports – Sports Halls

Sports Halls (Courts) Baseline Core Strategy Geography/Site Dwellings Pop'n Demand Supply Demand Capital Cost Sedgemoor 10,605 24392 29.7 29 6.4 £4,225,413 Bridgwater 7,455 17147 9.72 21 4.5 £2,970,340 NE Bridgwater 2,000 4600 1.2 £796,872 Cattle Market 170 391 0.1 £67,734 Gerber Foods 215 495 0.1 £85,664 Durleigh Road 500 1150 0.3 £199,218 Wembdon 600 1380 0.4 £239,062 S Bridgwater (Phases 1 & 2) 1,460 3358 0.9 £581,716 S Bridgwater (Phase 3) 450 1035 0.3 £179,296 Bridgwater Brownfield 2,060 4738 1.2 £820,778 Completions & Commitments 2,793 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

BoS & Highbridge 1,575 3623 - 4 1.0 £627,537 BoS Urban Extension 400 920 0.2 £159,374 Land at Boatyard 120 276 0.1 £47,812 BoS & Highbridge Brownfield 370 851 0.2 £147,421 Completions & Commitments 685 N/A N/A N/A 0.4 £272,929 Rural Sedgemoor 1,575 3623 - 4 1.0 £627,537 Key Rural Settlements 1,260 2898 0.8 £502,029 Other Sustainable Settlements 315 725 0.2 £125,507 Per Dwelling 1 2.3 N/A N/A 0.0006 £398 Per Capita N/A 1 N/A N/A 0.0003 £173

Assumptions/Notes Average household size: 2.3 Baseline Sedgemoor population: 112,800 Baseline Bridgwater population: 36,892 Projected demand and capital cost based on Sport England Sports Facility Calculator (Sep 2011 version) Assumes a typical sports hall provides 4 badminton courts.

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page A 12 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

A13 Playing Pitches

Playing Pitches (Ha) Baseline Core Strategy Geography/Site Dwellings Pop'n Demand Supply Demand Capital Cost Sedgemoor 10,605 24392 135.4 117 29.27 £2,852,066 Bridgwater 7,455 17147 44.3 27 20.58 £2,004,918 NE Bridgwater 2,000 4600 5.52 £537,872 Cattle Market 170 391 0.47 £45,719 Gerber Foods 215 495 0.59 £57,821 Durleigh Road 500 1150 1.38 £134,468 Wembdon 600 1380 1.66 £161,362 S Bridgwater (Phases 1 & 2) 1,460 3358 4.03 £392,646

S Bridgwater (Phase 3) 450 1035 1.24 £121,021

Bridgwater Brownfield 2,060 4738 5.69 £554,008 Completions & Commitments 2,793 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

BoS & Highbridge 1,575 3623 - - 4.35 £423,574

BoS Urban Extension 400 920 1.10 £107,574 Land at Boatyard 120 276 0.33 £32,272 BoS & Highbridge Brownfield 370 851 1.02 £99,506 Completions & Commitments 685 N/A N/A N/A 1.89 £184,221 Rural Sedgemoor 1,575 3623 - - 4.35 £423,574

Key Rural Settlements 1,260 2898 3.48 £338,859 Other Sustainable Settlements 315 725 0.87 £84,715 Per Dwelling 1 2.3 N/A N/A 0.0028 £269 Per Capita N/A 1 N/A N/A 0.0012 £117

Assumptions/Notes Average household size: 2.3 Baseline Sedgemoor population: 112,800 Baseline Bridgwater population: 36,892 Projected demand based on FIT Benchmark Standards (Overall - 1.2Ha/1,000 pop'n) Estimated capital cost based on Sport England Planning Kitbag Q2 2011 (Senior Grass Football Pitch - £75,000) Area of Senior Football Pitch based on Sport England Planning Kitbag (7,697sqm; 0.7697Ha)

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page A 13 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

A14 Other Outdoor Sports

Other Outdoor Sports (Ha) Baseline Core Strategy Geography/Site Dwellings Pop'n Demand Supply Demand Capital Cost Sedgemoor 10,605 24392 45.12 21 9.76 £8,145,259 Bridgwater 7,455 17147 14.76 5 6.86 £5,725,875 NE Bridgwater 2,000 4600 1.84 £1,536,117 Cattle Market 170 391 0.16 £130,570 Gerber Foods 215 495 0.20 £165,133 Durleigh Road 500 1150 0.46 £384,029 Wembdon 600 1380 0.55 £460,835 S Bridgwater (Phases 1 & 2) 1,460 3358 1.34 £1,121,365 S Bridgwater (Phase 3) 450 1035 0.41 £345,626 Bridgwater Brownfield 2,060 4738 1.90 £1,582,200 Completions & Commitments 2,793 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

BoS & Highbridge 1,575 3623 - - 1.45 £1,209,692

BoS Urban Extension 400 920 0.37 £307,223 Land at Boatyard 120 276 0.11 £92,167 BoS & Highbridge Brownfield 370 851 0.34 £284,182 Completions & Commitments 685 N/A N/A N/A 0.63 £526,120 Rural Sedgemoor 1,575 3623 - - 1.45 £1,209,692 Key Rural Settlements 1,260 2898 1.16 £967,754 Other Sustainable Settlements 315 725 0.29 £241,938 Per Dwelling 1 2.3 N/A N/A 0.0009 £768 Per Capita N/A 1 N/A N/A 0.0004 £334

Assumptions/Notes Average household size: 2.3 Baseline Sedgemoor population: 112,800 Baseline Bridgwater population: 36,892 Projected demand based on FIT Benchmark Standards (Overall - 0.4Ha/1,000 pop'n) Estimated capital cost based on Sport England Planning Kitbag Q2 2011 (average cost/Ha of bowling, tennis, athletics)

Area of bowling, tennis and athletics facilities based on Sport England Planning Kitbag

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page A 14 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

A15 Recreational Open Space

Recreational Open Space (Ha) - including equipped and informal play space Baseline Core Strategy Geography/Site Dwellings Pop'n Demand Supply Demand Capital Cost Sedgemoor 10,605 24392 90.2 19.5 £12,500,278 Bridgwater 7,455 17147 44.3 13.7 £8,787,324 NE Bridgwater 2,000 4600 3.7 £2,357,431 Cattle Market 170 391 0.3 £200,382 Gerber Foods 215 495 0.4 £253,424 Durleigh Road 500 1150 0.9 £589,358 Wembdon 600 1380 1.1 £707,229 S Bridgwater (Phases 1 & 2) 1,460 3358 2.7 £1,720,925 S Bridgwater (Phase 3) 450 1035 0.8 £530,422 Bridgwater Brownfield 2,060 4738 3.8 £2,428,154 Completions & Commitments 2,793 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

BoS & Highbridge 1,575 3623 - - 2.9 £1,856,477

BoS Urban Extension 400 920 0.7 £471,486 Land at Boatyard 120 276 0.2 £141,446 BoS & Highbridge Brownfield 370 851 0.7 £436,125 Completions & Commitments 685 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Rural Sedgemoor 1,575 3623 - - 2.9 £1,856,477 Key Rural Settlements 1,260 2898 2.3 £1,485,182 Other Sustainable Settlements 315 725 0.6 £371,295 Per Dwelling 1 2.3 N/A N/A 0.002 £1,179 Per Capita 0.43 1 N/A N/A 0.0008 £512

Assumptions/Notes Average household size: 2.3 Baseline Sedgemoor population: 112,800 Baseline Bridgwater population: 36,892 Projected demand based on FIT Benchmark Standards (0.8Ha/1,000 pop'n) Estimated capital costs based on a model site of 0.8Ha providing: 0.25Ha equipped childrens playspace; 0.25Ha formal park/garden; and 0.3Ha natural greenspace. Costs based on Spons Civils cost book (2010):

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page A 15 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

A16 Local Accessible Natural Greenspace

Local Accessible Natural Greenspace (Ha) Baseline Core Strategy Geography/Site Dwellings Pop'n Demand Supply Demand Capital Cost Sedgemoor 10,605 24392 112.8 24.4 £4,866,104 Bridgwater 7,455 17147 44.3 17.1 £3,420,727 NE Bridgwater 2,000 4600 4.6 £917,700 Cattle Market 170 391 0.4 £78,005 Gerber Foods 215 495 0.5 £98,653 Durleigh Road 500 1150 1.2 £229,425 Wembdon 600 1380 1.4 £275,310 S Bridgwater (Phases 1 & 2) 1,460 3358 3.4 £669,921

S Bridgwater (Phase 3) 450 1035 1.0 £206,483

Bridgwater Brownfield 2,060 4738 4.7 £945,231 Completions & Commitments 2,793 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

BoS & Highbridge 1,575 3623 - - 3.6 £722,689

BoS Urban Extension 400 920 0.9 £183,540 Land at Boatyard 120 276 0.3 £55,062 BoS & Highbridge Brownfield 370 851 0.9 £169,775 Completions & Commitments 685 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Rural Sedgemoor 1,575 3623 - - 3.6 £722,689

Key Rural Settlements 1,260 2898 2.9 £578,151 Other Sustainable Settlements 315 725 0.7 £144,538 Per Dwelling 1 2.3 N/A N/A 0.0 £459 Per Capita 0.43 1 N/A N/A 0.0 £200

Assumptions/Notes Average household size: 2.3 Baseline Sedgemoor population: 112,800 Baseline Bridgwater population: 36,892 Projected demand based on Natural England Accessible Natural Greenspace Standard of a 2Ha site within 300m of development. Standard calculated by assuming a dwelling density of 30 units per hectare (with average household size) within a circular area of radius 300m. This results in a standard of 1Ha per 1,000 population. Estimated capital cost based on model Local Nature Reserve utilising costs from Spons Civils cost book 2010.

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page A 16 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Appendix B Sustainable Transport Fund - Preliminary Calculations

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

B1 Sustainable Transport Fund – Preliminary Calculations

Settlement Strategic Site Dwellings Tariff contribution (£1,250 per dwelling 6) Bridgwater NE Bridgwater 2000 N/A Cattle Market 170 Delivery of complex access arrangements a priority. Gerber Foods 215 N/A (Ref: 08/1000157) Land at Durleigh Road 500 £625,000 Land at Wembdon 600 £750,000 South Bridgwater (Phases 1 & 1,460 N/A 2) Willstock Phase 3 450 £562,500 Bridgwater Brownfield & 2,060 £2,575,000 Windfall Completions & Commitments 2,793 N/A (excl. South Bridgwater, NE Bridgwater & Gerber Foods) Sub-Total 7,455 £4,512,500 Note: Tariff payments may be prioritized to make up funding shortfall for Colley Lane Relief Road (£1,132,000) and to deliver A38 / A39 Broadway Junction Improvements (£500,000). This would leave a remainder of £2,880,500 for a sustainable transport fund. Burnham- Urban Extension 400 £500,000 on-Sea & Highbridge Land at Boatyard 120 £150,000 BoS & Highbridge Brownfield 370 £462,000 & Windfall Completion & Commitments 685 N/A Sub-total 1,575 £1,112,000 Note: Tariff figures based on £1,250 per dwelling payment based on Bridgwater flood tariff requirements. Per dwelling payment to be reassessed for BoS & Highbridge. Key Rural Settlements 1,260 Other Sustainable Settlements 315 Total 10,605

6 A contribution of £1,250 per dwelling is based on the assumption that £3,000 per dwelling represents an appropriate minimum tariff contribution towards Tier 1 ‘Core’ infrastructure. This would be charged on all sites including brownfield sites. A Bridgwater flood defence tariff contribution of £1,750 is subtracted from the £3,000 Tier 1 tariff, leaving a potential £1,250 contribution towards public transport, walking and cycling, and travel awareness/management initiatives.

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page B 1 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX

Sedgemoor District Council Sedgemoor Infrastructure Delivery Strategy Strategy Refresh

4-05 | Issue | 31 January 2012 Page B 2 SIDS_REFRESH_REPORT_ISSUE_2012-01-31.DOCX