Agenda Item 7
West of England Planning, Housing and Communities Board 27 June 2016
Joint Spatial Plan and Transport Study – Update on Consultation and Programme
Purpose of Report
1. To present the results of the consultation on the Joint Spatial Plan (JSP) and Joint Transport Study (JTS) that was undertaken between 9th November 2015 and 29th January 2016, and update members on next steps in the work programme for both work packages.
Background
2. The JSP provides the joint framework to ensure development requirements come forward across the West of England authorities’ area up to 2036 in a co-ordinated manner. This co-operation on strategic planning matters is complemented by the approach which has been taken on strategic transport issues. A review of future strategic transport proposals is being undertaken through the JTS, to both inform future development proposals and develop future strategic transport proposals up to 2036, with delivery of this work coordinated with the JSP programme.
3. The councils are proposing to publish a Draft JSP Options document by Autumn 2016. The first stage in the preparation of the JSP was the publication of the Issues and Options (I&O) document, which highlighted the scale of the development issues and set out a range of potential locational options and spatial scenarios to address these. This consultation also covered the first stage of the JTS, and views were asked from stakeholders and the public on their perception of current challenges on the West of England’s transport network, JTS objectives and views on a range of interventions to address these challenges. The joint consultation was designed to comply with statutory planning requirements and exceeds the minimum requirements set out in each of the individual council’s Statements of Community Involvement (SCI).
4. The consultation started as planned on 9 November 2015 and closed on 29 January 2016. Awareness-raising was undertaken utilising both traditional media and social media. In total the consultation generated 125 separate pieces of press and media coverage in local papers, TV and radio. A full communications and engagement campaign was delivered via social media utilising Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, SlideShare and YouTube. Face to face events, stakeholder meetings and public roadshows were also used to not only raise awareness of the consultation but also to gather views and opinions. In total over 40 events and roadshows were arranged, which engaged with over a 1,000 people.
5. The JSP consultation received 899 responses, made up of responses to the three surveys (technical, public & young people) and representations made via letter, email, postcard and formal submissions. The JTS consultation received
1 644 responses, made up of responses to the survey and representations made via letter, email, postcards and formal submissions.
6. Emerging themes from the consultation on both work-streams were presented to members in March 2016. Since then, further assessment has been undertaken of each of the representations received, and responses to those representations which have been categorised by theme or survey question. A comprehensive summary of the results is outlined in the Consultation Report attached as Appendix 1, and key messages are outlined below. The full representations are available to view on the consultation website.
Key issues from the consultation on the Joint Spatial Plan
7. Most respondents agreed that the critical spatial issues had been identified in the I&O report, and that the Vision and objectives were appropriate. Many respondents considered that the total housing forecast presented in the report was about right, although housing developers thought that too few homes were being planned for, and members of the public and some town and parish councils considered the planned figure was too high.
8. Establishing a realistic target for the proportion of homes that should be affordable attracted significant representation. Housing developers felt that a substantial increase in the total proposed housing number would be needed to ensure enough affordable homes would be built, although members of the public considered that developers should provide a higher amount of affordable housing as part of their schemes, and that local authorities should be given a greater role as builders of affordable homes themselves.
9. Most respondents felt that all the reasonable strategic locations had been identified, although a number of other locations were also suggested. Respondents also generally agreed that a priority to build more homes in Bristol and our main towns was appropriate, although caveats were expressed about how this would be achieved. For example, members of the public thought that delivering transport and other infrastructure improvements would be vital to support further homes in already congested areas.
10.Most respondents felt that a combination of locations in the spatial scenarios presented in the I&O report would be most likely to deliver the plan’s objectives. In the public survey, the `Transport Focussed’ scenario was chosen most frequently, either in combination with others or alone. Protection of Green Belt was the second most frequently picked, again either in combination or alone.
Key Issues from the Consultation on the Joint Transport Study
11.The consultation on the JTS presented an assessment of current `issues’ on the West of England’s transport network, proposed study objectives and suggested a range of possible `concepts’ for new transport investment, across a range of modes, to stimulate discussion and suggestions for possible schemes.
2 12.There was overall agreement with the assessment of current issues identified on the transport network, and `congestion, reliability, resilience and connectivity’ was the issue clearly rated to be most important by respondents. The most important study objective was seen to be improving Quality of Life, followed by reducing carbon emissions. However, again all study objectives presented had significant support.
13.Of the range of potential transport concepts suggested, those seen as most important by respondents were strengthening and enhancing public transport corridors, walking and cycling `superhighways’, and extending the MetroWest local rail services. Improving freight routes and facilities was considered the least important of the transport concepts proposed in the consultation. A wide range of suggestions for further specific schemes was also tabled by respondents, and these further suggestions are also being assessed as part of the current study phase prior to the preparation of transport proposals.
Next Steps in the Programme
14.The views and comments received through the consultation and engagement programme are being taken into account in the assessment of spatial scenarios for development and the formulation of potential transport interventions to address both current issues and forecast development impacts.
15.Technical work is still underway on the appraisal of potential spatial options and transport packages. It is proposed that a recommendation on options for the spatial scenario and transport proposals will be presented to members by the end of September 2016, prior to the commencement of public consultation in Autumn 2016.
16.Key milestones moving forward include:
• the publication of, and consultation on, the draft JSP Options in Autumn 2016, together with a recommended package of complementary transport investment to address both current challenges on the network and the impact of forecast development; • Completion of the JTS by December 2016, taking account of consultation representations; • Further consultation on a revised JSP in Spring 2017; • Submission of the JSP to the Secretary of State by Summer 2017; and • Inclusion of the recommendations from the JTS in an updated Joint Local Transport Plan by end 2017.
Environmental Impact Assessment
17.The I&O document included consideration of the environmental impacts of its locational options and spatial scenarios. The JTS will include a strategic environmental summary of its recommended approach and packages. Following the completion of the study, its recommendations will be taken into account in the updating of the current Joint Local Transport Plan and draft of the Joint Spatial Plan. These will both include a full Strategic Environmental Assessment.
3 Risk
18.There are no risks arising directly from this report. Risks related to the JSP&TS will be managed through the Project Board.
Resources (financial and personnel)
19.Resources to progress the JSP&TS are as prioritised in the respective council budgets.
Equalities Implications
20.Whilst there are no direct implications arising from the recommendations in this report, equalities will be a key consideration of the JSP and JTS, and were intended to be reflected in the extent of stakeholder and public engagement undertaken in the recent public consultation.
Views of Joint Scrutiny Committee
21.The Joint Scrutiny Committee (JSC) received a report on key themes arising through the consultation in March 2016; and further views will be summarised to the next meeting of the Planning, Housing & Communities Board. JSC members received copies of the Joint Transport Board papers prior to their meeting held on 17th June 2016 giving an opportunity to JSC members to provide views to the Board.
Recommendation
That Members note the update on consultation and the next steps in the programme and give views.
Author: West of England LEP with support of officers in the engagement group for the JSP and JTS.
Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985 Background Documents:
None
Appendix 1: West of England Issues and Options Document and Joint Transport Study – Consultation Report.
4 Joint Spatial Plan and Transport Study 2015/16 Consultation Report
Chapter One 2015/16 Consultation and Engagement Methodology and Responses Aims of the consultation and engagement programme Consultation on the first formal stage in the preparation of the Joint Spatial Plan, the Issues and Options document, was undertaken between 9th November and 29th January 2016. The purpose of this was to highlight the scale of the development issues and set out a series of potential locational options and spatial scenarios to address these, including a commentary on transport impacts. The engagement and consultation programme also encompassed the first stage of the Joint Transport Study. It was been designed to comply with statutory planning requirements and exceeds the minimum requirements set out in each of the individual council’s Statements of Community Involvement (SCI).
The purpose of the consultation was to: • inform local residents and other interested stakeholders about the JSP & JTS process and how they can participate; • provide appropriate information to explain the issues and options and the drivers and rationale behind them; • engage, seek views and gather opinion on the JSP and JTS and the issues and options contained within them; • explore the suitability of potential options and identify relevant issues and impacts with local communities and stakeholders; • provide decision makers with information to assist them in making informed decisions about plan development and delivery.
The consultation and engagement programme focused on two key areas; raising awareness of the consultation and the key issues and options and secondly to encourage active participation in the consultation process itself.
The Engagement Programme The engagement programme utilised a range of communications and engagement methods including online, off line and face to face activity, local roadshows, consultation events, social media debate and surveys (both paper and online).
A comprehensive communications plan and key messages document was developed to ensure that the programme was appropriately targeted and that it had the broadest possible reach and appeal. The key messages document was used to ensure that the information provided to the public and key themes, messages and responses to issues raised were accurate, comprehensive and consistent across the area, subject matter and between the authorities.
1 Awareness raising was undertaken utilising both traditional media and social media throughout the consultation period. A media briefing was held on 6 November 2015, which was well attended by a full range of local print, broadcast, radio and online media. Council spokespeople provided the media with a presentation and overview of the issues and were available for interviews and statements, which resulted in significant positive media coverage of the consultation launch. A regular programme of media releases and articles was developed to run throughout the consultation period to raises awareness of the issues, encourage responses and allow people to participate in the debate. As well as launch and reminder releases, we also focused releases on key themes and issues including development on housing supply, transport issues, affordable housing, employment land and job creation and responded to local development concerns.
Social media including a dedicated Twitter feed, local authority Twitter and Facebook channels, YouTube and SlideShare were fully utilised to promote events, encourage survey responses, trigger debate and answer questions. A YouTube video can be accessed from here: https://youtu.be/Y1tJAYDr82A was developed which included interviews with key stakeholders and the public, outlining the importance of the subject matter and encouraging participation in the consultation process.
Face to face activity was also a key component of the engagement process and included a Stakeholder conference held on 27 November 2015 at University of West of England aimed at bringing together interested organisations, developers, transport providers, employers, parishes, residents and campaign groups. This included presentations on the process, the key issues and challenges facing the region both in terms of housing, the economy and transport and outlining possible future options, facilitated workshops and discussion groups on both housing and transport, as well as a Question and Answer session.
A range of presentations and discussion groups were also held with stakeholder groups, councillors and interested parties throughout the consultation period as necessary and as opportunities arose.
A series of staffed public roadshows were held throughout the area in shopping centres, libraries, colleges, libraries and other public venues supported by display and consultation materials. Attendance at these were varied but provided the opportunity for the public to ask local authority officers more detailed questions and to talk through their issues, ideas and preferences.
Three events focused on the business community were held in Bristol, South Gloucestershire and Weston-super-Mare Business attended by over 100 businesses and stakeholder groups, tailored to focus on the key concerns for the economy, transport and housing growth.
There was a particular focus on engaging with young people and to support this a dedicated school information pack was prepared which included specialist resources for teachers, a lesson plan and young person survey. We also held a schools conference attended by over 40 year 8 pupils, hosted by UWE, we also ran a
2 session for UWE planning students, RTPI South West Young Planners, South Gloucestershire Youth forum and the Bristol Junior Chamber of Commerce.
The Consultation Approach Comprehensive consultation information including summary documents, and surveys were made available to the public both online and from a range of public deposit points including council offices and local libraries.
Separate webpages were set up for the two consultations, however all of the communications, events and publicity was undertaken jointly to promote participation in both consultations. Each consultation webpage included the consultation documents (including a non-technical summary) and supporting technical information which were available for public viewing on a web based information hub with links to/from each council and available for public inspection at each council’s usual deposit stations.
A range of response mechanisms were developed to ensure that we received responses to the consultations. This included: • Postal and email representations • For the Joint Spatial Plan, the Issues and Options document was available as an online structured document, which allowed comment throughout the relevant sections • Responses through social media channels • Paper and online Joint Transport Study survey • Paper and online Issues and Options survey • Paper and online survey aimed at the public to support the Joint Spatial Plan consultation • Paper and online survey aimed at young people which supported both the Joint Spatial Plan and Transport Study
To support the consultation technical evidence base papers were also published as part of the consultation on the Joint Spatial Plan, these included: • Joint Spatial Plan Issues and Options (1033) • JSP Consultation Summary (901) • Call for sites register and map (843) • Transport Study Topic Paper (240) • Greenbelt Assessment (476) • Strategic Housing Market Assessment Volume 1 (187) • Strategic Housing Market Assessment Volume 2 (131) • Housing Capacity Evidence Paper (239) • Economic Development Needs Assessment (414) • Sustainability Appraisal Scoping Report (198) • Initial Sustainability Appraisal (243) • Flood Risk Methodology Paper (196) • Severnside Wetlands Paper (153) • Ecosystem Service Evidence Part 1 (744) • Landscape Sensitivity Summary Methodology Note (202)
3 • Infrastructure Paper (278) • Habitats Regulations (118) (number) indicates number of times document was downloaded during consultation period
The Joint Transport Study Key Principles Report was published in support of the Joint Transport Study and was downloaded 95 times and the JTS summary document was downloaded 527 times.
Level of engagement Face to face events, stakeholder meetings and public roadshows were used to not only raise awareness of the consultation but also to gather views and opinions. In total over 40 events and roadshows were arranged, which engaged with over a 1000 people and included the following:
• 19-November Bristol Planning & Law Conference • 24 November, Public Roadshow Town Hall, Weston-super-Mare • 27 November, Stakeholder Launch event at UWE • 1 December South Gloucestershire Parish Forum • 2 December, Public Roadshow Bristol Central Library • 3 December, Public Roadshow, Thornbury • 3 December, Public Roadshow, Lockleaze, Bristol • 3 December, WofE Infrastructure & Planning Group • 4 December, Public Roadshow, Kingswood Shopping Centre • 8 December, Public Roadshow, Long Ashton Park and Ride • 9 December, Public Roadshow, Hartcliffe Library, Bristol • 9 December, Public Roadshow, Green Park Station, Bath • 10 December, Public Roadshow, Winscombe • 11 December, Public Roadshow Keynsham Civic Centre • 16 December, Public Roadshow Whitchurch Community Hall • 5 January, Public Roadshow South Gloucestershire & Stroud College, Filton • 5 January, Public Roadshow Withywood Centre, Bristol • 6 January, Public Roadshow, University of West of England, • 6 January, Public Roadshow: Bath College, • 6 January Meeting with Bristol City Neighbourhood Partnerships • 7 January, Public Roadshow Arnos Manor Hotel Bristol • 8 January WofE Public Health partnership meeting • 12 January, Public Roadshow Nailsea Library • 12 January, Junior Chamber of Commerce, Bristol • 13 January, Public Roadshow Bristol Central Library • 13 January, Public Roadshow: Midsomer Norton Town Hall • 14 January, Public Roadshow, Weston-super-Mare Town Hall • 14 January, Public Roadshow Whitchurch Village Community Centre • 15 January, Public Roadshow, Yate Library • 15 January, Public Roadshow Weston College • 18 January, South Gloucestershire Council Staff engagement, Yate
4 • 20 January, Business Consultation Event - South Gloucestershire • 21 January, Student session with UWE Planning students • 21 January, Business Consultation Event - Bristol • 25 January, Schools Conference • 26 January, Business Consultation Event - North Somerset • 28 January, South West Young Planners event at UWE • 8 February, South Gloucestershire Youth Forum, Kingswood
In total the consultation generated 125 separate pieces of press and media coverage in local papers, TV and radio. We estimate the reach of online and print coverage to exceed 1million.
A full communications and engagement campaign was delivered via social media utilising Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, SlideShare and YouTube. This resulted in: Total impressions on Twitter: 598,500 o This represents 7,000 average views a day across the campaign Total number of tweets: 1,173 o This represents all scheduled and interactional tweets Total profile visits: 14,626 Total mentions of @WEJointPlanning: 332 Number of times consultation hashtag was used: 660 Potential reach of hashtag in January: 2,469,000 Total number of YouTube video views: 562 Total number of shares of JTS newsletter: 1,691 Total number of shares of JSP newsletter: 2,125
The Joint Spatial Plan consultation webpages were visited 13,246 times during the consultation period, whilst the Joint Transport Plan consultation webpages were visited 6,368 times. Analysis of Google Analytics can provide some insight into where these website visits came from, which shows that this generated visits both locally and nationally. The table below shows the percentage of visitors and their approximate location.
Joint Transport Study Joint Spatial Plan Bristol 45.58% Bristol 45.54% London 13.34% London 14.27% Bath 9.89% Bath 7.77% Stoke Gifford 2.02% Weston-super-Mare 2.02% Unknown 1.83% Unknown 1.59% Weston-super-Mare 1.59% Stoke Gifford 1.48% Birmingham 1.13% Birmingham 1.27% Reading 1.00% Slough 1.18% Cardiff 0.89% Cardiff 1.09% Bridgwater 0.78% Southampton 0.81% Clevedon 0.70% Leeds 0.75% Gloucester 0.70% Gloucester 0.69% Leeds 0.70% Cirencester 0.62% Southampton 0.65% Clevedon 0.55%
5 Responses to the Consultation The JSP consultation received 899 responses, made up of responses to the three surveys; issues and options (331), public survey (531) & young people (29) and representations made via letter, email, postcard and formal submissions.
The following graphs provide an analysis of the respondents who provided information about themselves as part of the consultation.
Gender 3%
41%
56%
Female Male Prefer not to say
Age 30%
25% 24%
20% 20% 17%
15% 14% 11% 10% 7%
5% 4% 3% 1% 0% Under 16 16 to 25 26 to 35 36 to 45 46 to 55 56 to 65 66 to 75 Over 75 Prefer not to say
6 Ethnicity 100%
90% 86%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20% 8% 10% 5% 1% 0% White British Black and minority Other white Prefer not to say background ethnic background background
Disability
5% 7%
89%
Yes No Prefer not to say
7 The JTS consultation received 644 responses, made up of responses to the survey and representations made via letter, email, postcards and formal submissions.
The following graphs provide an analysis of the respondents who provided information about themselves as part of the consultation.
Gender 3%
41%
56%
Female Male Prefer not to say
Age 30%
25% 24%
20% 20% 17%
15% 14% 11% 10% 7%
5% 4% 3% 1% 0% Under 16 16 to 25 26 to 35 36 to 45 46 to 55 56 to 65 66 to 75 Over 75 Prefer not to say
8 Ethnicity 100%
90% 86%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20% 8% 10% 5% 1% 0% White British Black and minority Other white Prefer not to say background ethnic background background
Disability
5% 7%
89%
Yes No Prefer not to say
9 Chapter Two - Joint Transport Study Consultation
Introduction
This chapter presents the findings of the West of England Joint Transport Study (JTS) Issues & Options consultation survey and the transport-related question in the Joint Strategic Plan (JSP). This chapter covers the feedback from respondents on:
• Transport issues; • Draft study objectives; and • Transport concepts.
It then concludes with a discussion covering the key themes from the analysis.
There were 425 responses to the JTS survey, although not every question was answered in every response. This analysis also takes into account 219 written representations related to transport that were submitted either to the JTS consultation or the JSP (including some joint responses). The number of open responses to the JTS survey and number of written representations is shown in the tables below. Note that the overall low level of responses should be taken into account when interpreting the findings.
Table 1 Numbers of Responses to JTS Survey Response % of Total Numbers Responses Total Survey Responses 425 - Issues open question responses 279 66% Objectives open question responses 159 37% Concepts open question responses 232 55%
Table 2 Numbers of Transport Written Representations Response % of Total Numbers Responses Total Transport Written Representations 219 - Issues related written representations 88 40% Objectives related written representations 90 41% Concepts related written representations 141 64%
Transport Issues
Closed Question Analysis
This question asked “How strongly do you agree or disagree with the issues we have identified so far?” The following options were given:
• Limited travel options; • Congestion, reliability, resilience, connectivity; • Environmental challenges; • Social challenges; and • Demand for housing and employment growth; infrastructure capacity.
10 Figure 1 illustrates how strongly the respondents feel about the issues provided. ‘Congestion, reliability, resilience, connectivity’ is viewed as the most important issue, with 70% of respondents strongly agreeing. ‘Limited travel options’ and ‘environmental challenges’ also have a high proportion of respondents strongly agreeing (53% and 51% respectively) or tending to agree. Most respondents strongly agree or tend to agree with ‘demand for housing and employment growth and infrastructure capacity’ and ‘social challenges’ but at lower levels.
Figure 1 How strongly do you agree or disagree with the issues? (420 responses)
Respondents were then asked “How would you rank these issues in order of importance?”
Figure 2 illustrates the responses to this question, where 1 is most important and 5 is least important. ‘Congestion, reliability, resilience and connectivity’ is viewed as the most important issue, where 1 and 2 rankings comprise 71% of the responses. ‘Limited travel options’ generated the next ranked issue where 1 and 2 comprise 58% of the responses. ‘Environmental challenges’, ‘demand for housing and employment growth, infrastructure capacity’ and ‘social challenges’ are viewed as less important, with higher numbers of 3, 4 and 5 rankings in each case.
Figure 2 How do you rank these issues? (422 responses)
11 Summary
The responses to the two questions (levels of agreement and rankings) are consistent, where they are ranked in the following order (most important to least important):
1. Congestion, reliability, resilience and connectivity; 2. Limited travel options; 3. Environmental challenges; 4. Demand for housing and employment growth; and 5. Social challenges
The respondents rank current problems on the transport network as more important than addressing the consequences of future growth or social challenges.
Open Question Analysis
The open ended issues question asked “Are there are any other transport issues that you feel should be considered?”
There were 279 responses to the JTS survey question and 88 written representations that discuss transport issues.
This section provides statistics on the numbers of responses that mentioned each of the five transport issues listed above. It first quotes the numbers of respondents that mentioned each issue, also expressed as a percentage of those who discussed transport issues in their response. It then provides further commentary on the specific topics raised under each issue, including the percentages of those who highlighted the transport issue under consideration.
Limited travel options
12 Overall, there are 175 survey responses within this category (63% of those providing responses to the open question on transport issues). There are 44 written representations in this category (50% of those mentioning transport issues in their written representations).
64 JTS responses and 33 written representations (37% of JTS survey responses and 75% of written representations in this category) comment on bus use. The majority of these responses commented on current services, with many mentioning specific areas where connectivity is an issue for them. Other responses discuss reliability and frequency of bus services. 26 JTS responses and 13 written representations (15% and 30% respectively) discuss the availability of rail routes and stations. The themes emerging from these responses indicate that some areas are poorly served by rail and that some stations and routes could be re-opened.
Four written representations and 16 JTS survey responses (9% of both) commented on walking as a mode of transport, whilst 43 survey responses (25%) and 9 written representations (20%) discuss cycling. Most of these responses suggest that both the availability and quality of cycling routes should be improved. This theme is frequently mentioned in relation to road safety. In terms of other modes of transport, Park & Ride, electric vehicles and powered two-wheelers are among the most mentioned responses. 12 JTS survey responses (7%) favoured the use of smart ticketing across modes, while this is mentioned less in the written representations.
Congestion, Reliability, Resilience, Connectivity
There are 62 survey responses relating to this category (22%) and 30 written representations (34% of those discussing issues), mostly commenting on the theme of congestion in general. However, 15 responses (24%) mention parking, some in relation to motorcycle parking which it is argued takes up less space than car parking.
A frequently discussed theme is connectivity. Respondents stated that connectivity in terms of bus routes and rail routes available could be improved, so that they are able to travel more flexibly at different times of the day, and that they could reach their destination via a direct route.
12 survey responses (19%) commented on HGVs and freight, and the negative effects of HGVs on local areas.
Environmental Challenges
There are 46 survey responses relating to this category (16%) and 18 written representations (20% of those discussing issues), although these are often general references to carbon emissions. There are 25 survey responses (54%) and five written representations (28%) that express concern about carbon emissions, particularly in relation to the amount of car travel in rural locations.
Social Challenges
13 There are 97 survey responses relating to this category (35%) and 11 written representations (13% of those discussing issues). The most frequently discussed theme within this section is the cost of travel, 35 survey responses (36%) stating that the cost of public transport is too high, and that a lower cost would encourage more people to use it.
Another frequently mentioned theme is road safety and transport security, with 34 survey responses (35%) and five written representations discussing this. The responses suggest that road safety is a concern, particularly for cyclists.
There are 20 survey responses (21%) and two written representations that discuss the theme of health, which includes access to healthcare facilities. In particular, it is clear that access to hospitals (particularly mental health facilities) is difficult using public transport, especially for vulnerable members of society.
Demand for Housing and Employment Growth; Infrastructure Capacity
There are 21 survey responses relating to this category (8%) and 16 written representations (18% of those discussing issues). 12 survey responses (57%) and 12 written representations (75%) expressed concern over the impact of new housing on the transport network. Only three responses across the survey and written representations showed a concern with parking in relation to new homes.
New Issues Suggestions
Other challenges which are mentioned are the discouraging of car use. Some responses stated that improvements to public transport should be made before car use is discouraged, whilst other responses supported the discouraging of car use.
Another frequently mentioned theme that emerged from the responses is the sharing of road space, particularly between car drivers, buses and cyclists in order to increase road safety.
In terms of other modes of transport, electric vehicles, car sharing and powered two wheelers are mentioned as sustainable modes of travel. Suggestions are made to encourage car sharing by locating car parks near to motorway junctions or other key locations.
Comparison of responses between Closed and Open Questions
There are links between the open question which asks respondents to discuss issues and the closed questions related to the issues section.
Within the closed questions, between approximately 30% and 70% stated that they ‘strongly agree’ with the various themes. Approximately 90% stated that they ‘strongly agree’ or ‘tend to agree’ with the issues within the theme of congestion, reliability, resilience and connectivity. Agreement from respondents is evident in the open-ended answers: in particular a number of responses commented on the reliability of bus services.
14 Although there are fewer responses which relate to an issue within the ‘congestion’ theme than ‘travel issues’ and ‘social challenges’, the closed questions demonstrate that respondents ranked ‘congestion’ as the most important theme.
Objectives
Closed Questions Analysis
This question asked “How strongly do you agree or disagree with the objectives we have identified so far?” The following options were given:
• Support economic growth; • Reduce carbon emissions; • Promote accessibility; • Contribute to better safety, health and security; and • Improve quality of life and a healthy natural environment.
Figure 3 illustrates how strongly the respondents agree or disagree with the objectives identified. ‘Improve quality of life and a healthy natural environment’ is identified as the most important objective, with 92% of respondents either strongly agreeing or tending to agree. ‘Promote accessibility’ is the next important objective, closely followed by ‘reduce carbon emissions’, although a higher proportion strongly agree with ‘reduce carbon emissions’ than ‘promote accessibility’. ‘Support economic growth’ has the lowest level of agreement, although 75% still strongly agree or tend to agree with this objective.
Figure 3 How strongly do you agree or disagree with the objectives? (411 responses)
Respondents were then asked “How would you rank these objectives in order of importance?”
15 Figure 4 illustrates the responses to this question, where 1 is most important and 5 is least important. ‘Improve quality of life and a healthy natural environment’ is ranked as the most important objective, where 1 and 2 make up 58% of the responses. ‘Reduce carbon emissions’ is the next ranked objective where 1 and 2 make up 46% of the responses. ‘Promote accessibility’ is ranked third, gaining 39% of the responses as 1 and 2 scores, closely followed by support economic growth. ‘Contribute to safety, health and security’ is considered the least important objective.
Figure 4 How would you rank these objectives? (405 responses)
Summary
From the responses to the two questions (levels of agreement and rankings), it is possible to determine the rankings of the objectives (most important to least important):
1. Improve quality of life and a healthy natural environment; 2. Reduce carbon emissions; 3. Promote accessibility; 4. Support economic growth; and 5. Safety, health and security.
Overall, improving quality of life is identified as the most important objective, whereas supporting economic growth is seen to be less important. This reflects the responses given by survey respondents on the relative level of importance of the different issues.
Open Question Analysis
The open ended objectives question asked “Do you think there are any other objectives you feel should be considered?”
16 There were 159 responses to the JTS survey question and 90 written representations that discuss objectives.
This section provides statistics on the numbers of responses that mentioned each of the five transport objectives listed above. It first quotes the numbers of respondents that mentioned each objective, also expressed as a percentage of those who discussed objectives in their response. It then provides further commentary on specific topics raised under each objective, including the percentages of those who highlighted the objective under consideration.
Support Economic Growth
There are 48 survey responses related to this objective in the survey (30% of responses relating to objectives). The most frequent response is to propose changes to the objective; 13 respondents (27%) wished for the title to be changed to ‘Support sustainable economic growth’ or similar, with a desire to ensure economic growth is not prioritised at the expense of any adverse environmental or social consequences. Other respondents have the opinion that economic growth should be equitable, that is to ensure that growth should seek to benefit all members of society and/or any benefits produced by economic growth should be distributed fairly.
There are 11 responses (23%) discussing the theme of creating transport infrastructure to unlock jobs and housing, of which many contributed opinions on promoting transport infrastructure in particular areas of the West of England. A further 11 respondents (23%) cover the theme of ensuring that there is a need to ensure appropriate transport infrastructure is in place before a development is built – for example, safeguarding sufficient parking spaces, undertaking traffic impact assessments, and ensuring good public transport links for new housing development.
The theme of reducing journey times and congestion is mentioned in six responses (13%), often citing a secondary benefit of reducing congestion as reducing carbon emissions. Reducing journey times is also mentioned with regards to public transport improvements.
There are 18 written representations related to this objective (20% of written representations relating to objectives). The notion of promoting ‘sustainable’ economic growth and ensuring equal wealth distribution was highlighted by one respondent. Four respondents highlighted the importance of ensuring that planned developments have successful transport links built before the development is opened.
Reduce Carbon Emissions
There are 29 responses relating to this objective in the survey (18% of responses relating to objectives), with 26 (90%) highlighting the need for the West of England’s transport system to be more sustainable and to encourage travel behaviour change. These respondents highlight the need to reduce car ownership and usage, through creating the infrastructure to support an increase in public transport usage, cycling and walking.
17 There are 22 written representations relating to this objective. Of these, 20 responses (91%) accept the need to provide a more sustainable transport network and to encourage travel behaviour change.
Five survey respondents and five written representations (17% and 22% respective of responses relating to this objective) suggested that the title of ‘Reduce carbon emissions’ should be changed to ‘Reduce transport emissions’, suggesting that there is a need to add other transport-induced pollutants to the objective (for example diesel emissions and air quality in general). It should however be noted that addressing poor air quality is included in the ‘contribute to better safety, health and security’ objective.
Promote Accessibility
There are 29 survey responses relating to this objective in the survey (18% of responses relating to objectives), with 23 (79%) covering the theme of improving access for all to employment, education and training. Many gave location specific- suggestions to enhance access, while also presenting ideas on how to enhance access, for example, new bus routes, promoting cycling, re-opening disused railway stations.
Different spatial scales of the objectives are mentioned in the responses, some are of a local nature while others are concerned with access to national markets and to rural areas.
‘Promote accessibility’ was the most frequently referenced objective in the written representations (41 responses, 46% of written representations related to objectives). Many respondents consider that it is important to improve access to employment through actions to support public transport, cycling and walking. 14 respondents (34%) wish to redress the balance of priorities in planning for transport, with them wishing to promote walking and cycling first, over private vehicles.
Contribute to Better Safety, Health and Security
There are 12 responses relating to this objective in the survey (8% of responses relating to objectives), of which the majority of respondents agreed with the nature of the objective. Some respondents suggest that better safety should be a separate objective and highlight that there is a lack of depth in promoting better health outcomes. Perceptions of safety on the transport network and the positive wellbeing impacts of transport policies are considered to be omissions. In the written representations, there is a broad agreement on the existing themes, with respondents agreeing that there is the need to encourage healthy travel choices, address poor air quality and improve safety for transport network users.
Improve Quality of Life and a Healthy Natural Environment
There are 15 responses relating to this objective in the survey (9% of responses relating to objectives), with the majority highlighting the impact on the rural environment (11 responses, 73%). These respondents strongly identified the need to
18 protect the rural and natural environment, suggesting the need for green belt land preservation. Four respondents (27%) mention the need to reduce impacts on the built environment, with a desire to ensure that policies promote the development of dense, well-connected urban areas and preserving/creating urban parks. There are only three written representations related to this objective.
Suggestions for other objectives 41 responses across the survey and the written representations suggest new objectives. Many responses promote specific schemes, rather than new objectives for the transport system. There is also the desire to ensure that local authorities have a duty to work together in planning for transport, and to work with neighbouring authorities outside of the West of England area (this aspiration is covered in the potential interventions, which include better working together). Respondents suggested objectives including reducing the need for travel, creating cost-effective car alternatives, and taking into account that many people still require vehicles to travel. These findings are reflected in the written representations.
Six responses across the survey and the written representations have general concerns with the current set of objectives on a more general level, suggesting that there are too many objectives, they are too vague, or they need to be reconfigured.
Comparison of responses between Closed and Open Questions
There is some consistency in the responses to the open and closed questions with regard to the economic growth objective. For the closed question ‘How strongly do you agree or disagree with the objective?’, the ‘support economic growth’ objective scores lowest in terms of the proportion of respondents strongly agreeing or agreeing with the objective. A number of respondents suggest that this objective should be revised, with the aim of promoting sustainable economic growth, as well as equitable growth.
‘Improving the quality of life and a healthy natural environment’ is the highest scoring objective for both closed questions, indicating that the public both support the objective and rank it as very important. Open question analysis has suggested that there is the desire, amongst respondents, for effective protection of rural and urban environments.
Transport Concepts
Closed Questions Analysis
The first question asked “Thinking about how these concepts relate to the issues and draft objectives, how strongly do you agree or disagree with the ideas outlined?”
• Strengthen and enhance public transport corridors; • Extend MetroBus network; • Extend MetroWest; • MetroWest ++; • Walking and cycling superhighways; • Orbital connectivity;
19 • Sub-regional pinch points and bottlenecks; • Strategic corridor packages; • Working better together; • Local Sustainable Transport Fund +; • Regional connectivity; • Freight; and • Travel demand management.
Figure 5 highlights how strongly the respondents agree or disagree with the above transport concepts. ‘Public transport corridors’, ‘walking and cycling superhighways’, and ‘working better together’ are the top three concepts with which respondents strongly agree and/or tend to agree. ‘Extending MetroWest’ and ‘MetroWest++’,’ sub- regional pinch points and bottlenecks’, and ‘LSTF+’ have a similar response, followed by ‘orbital connectivity’, ‘strategic corridor packages’, ‘travel demand management’ and ‘extending the MetroBus network’. ‘Freight’ has the lowest level of agreement.
Figure 5 How strongly do you agree or disagree with the concepts? (399 responses)
Respondents were then asked “Which of these concepts do you think is most important or would make the most difference to improving local transport?”
Figure 6 highlights which concepts are most important to respondents. The trend is broadly consistent with the results in Figure 5. This shows that the most important priorities in people’s responses are:
• Strengthen public transport corridors; • Walking and cycling superhighways; • Working better together; • MetroWest and MetroWest ++; • Pinch points and bottlenecks;
20 • Orbital Connectivity; • Extend MetroBus network; • LSTF+; and • Travel demand management.
Strategic corridor packages, regional connectivity and freight are cited by fewer numbers of respondents. Figure 6 Which of these concepts is most important? (408 responses)
Open Question Analysis
Open ended questions ask about concepts and schemes in both the JTS and the JSP surveys.
• The open ended concepts question in the JTS asked “Are there any specific schemes you would like to see includes within the concepts?” • The JSP Issues and Options survey (aimed at those who have read the Issues and Options note) asked “What transport improvements or measures would be required to support the scenarios” • The JSP survey for the general public asked “What transport improvements or measures would be required to support this level of new development?”
There were 232 responses to the JTS survey, 337 responses to the JSP survey (92 Issues and Options, 245 public) and 141 written representations that discuss concepts and schemes.
This section provides statistics on the numbers of responses that mentioned each of the concepts listed above. It first quotes the numbers of respondents that mentioned each concept, also expressed as a percentage of those who discussed transport concepts in their response. It then provides further commentary on the specific topics raised under each concept, including the percentages of those who highlighted the concept under consideration.
21 Strengthen and Enhance Public Transport Corridors
‘Strengthening and enhancing public transport corridors’ is mentioned in 99 JTS survey responses (43%), 141 JSP responses (42%) and 75 written responses (53% of written representations related to concepts). A frequently mentioned theme is the need for comfortable, reliable and frequent bus services connecting areas – this is particularly highlighted in the JSP responses mentioned in 41% of responses. The affordability of public transport is also raised frequently, as is the need for integrated multi-modal multi-operator ticketing.
The need for new stations is mentioned in many responses (24% of JTS survey responses, 29% of JSP survey responses, and 19% of written representations), and the most frequent suggestions are Charfield, Thornbury, Constable Road, Ashton Gate and Saltford. The need for developments to have rail connections is raised, both siting developments near existing stations, and building new stations for developments. Access to stations is raised as an issue, with suggestions for increasing parking capacity to provide a park and rail facility, and for introducing shuttle buses to local stations.
Park & Ride is mentioned frequently (26% of JTS survey responses, 16% of JSP survey responses and 36% of written representations), although there are several respondents who disagree with it being classed as public transport and consider that it increases car use. The need for longer hours at Park & Ride sites is highlighted, with suggestions that Park & Ride could also help with traffic peaks for events, such as football matches and the Balloon Fiesta. There are suggestions for new Park & Ride sites on key corridors into Bristol including the M32, as well as sites for Bath (from the east) and Weston-super-Mare (from the east). The importance of good interchanges/hubs is raised, and suggestions are made for moving Bristol bus station to Temple Meads to make a larger transport interchange, and creating a Yate transport hub.
Some respondents are concerned that those living in rural areas would not be able to take advantage of public transport improvements, and that more should be done to connect rural areas to the public transport network. Information provision is not raised frequently, although a few respondents highlight the need for reliable real time information.
Extend MetroBus Network
In the JTS consultation, 20 responses (9%) discuss MetroBus: seven respondents oppose MetroBus, with another two suggesting that more segregation is required for it to be effective, and a further two suggesting that it should be tested before any extensions are considered. In the JSP survey, 18 responses (5%) mention MetroBus, with one opposing, and 30 (21%) of the written representations discuss MetroBus, with four opposing. Many of the positive MetroBus responses across the consultation are in favour of expansion in general without specifying any routes. The most frequently suggested routes for MetroBus extensions are to Yate and East Bristol, but there are also suggestions for schemes in South Bristol (Whitchurch, Hicks Gate, Hartcliffe), North Somerset (Weston-super-Mare, Yatton, Clevedon) and
22 North Bristol (Thornbury, Cribbs Causeway, Avonmouth) as well as wider connections with areas outside of the West of England including Wiltshire.
Extend MetroWest
‘Extending MetroWest’ is mentioned in 32 JTS survey responses (14%), 91 JSP survey responses (27%) and 37 written representations (26%). A small minority of these object to MetroWest. Several respondents in favour of MetroWest are concerned at the timescales for Phase 1 and 2. Several respondents express support for the Henbury Loop (29 responses across the surveys and written representations) and the reopening of the line to Portishead is also frequently raised. Reopening old railway lines generally is frequently mentioned, with the Strawberry Line mentioned specifically by several respondents, and suggestions also made for the Sharpness branch and the Midland railway corridor through East Bristol. Extensions to Wiltshire (particularly Chippenham), Somerset and Gloucestershire (particularly Gloucester) are suggested, as well as more locations in North Somerset, Bristol Airport, and Cribbs Causeway. Several respondents also mention electrification of the MetroWest network.
MetroWest ++
‘MetroWest++’ is mentioned in 35 JTS responses (15%), 51 JSP responses (15%) and 16 written representations (11%), although it should be noted that the term ‘MetroWest++’ is rarely used. The majority of responses did not refer to specific routes, but are instead in favour of trams generally (particularly prominent in the JSP responses), as well as other systems such as trolleybuses, an underground system, a monorail and general rapid transit systems. Specific tram routes are suggested along the Bristol to Bath Cycle Path (with cycling provision to be retained), along the northern ring road, and to Bristol Airport.
There are several tram-train routes suggested to allow for connections between existing/proposed rail lines and population/employment centres, including:
• Avonmouth – Henbury - Clifton; • Yatton – Clevedon; • Patchway/Parkway - Bradley Stoke - Aztec West; • Filton North - Cribbs Causeway; • Bristol Temple Meads - city centre – Harbourside - Old Market; • Yate – Thornbury; • Yate - East Fringe - Newbridge Park & Ride - Bath; • Bristol Temple Meads – Lawrence Hill – Mangotsfield; and • Connections to Emersons Green, South Bristol and the Airport.
There are also suggestions for general rapid transit systems, including to Kingswood, Whitchurch, and connections between Bristol Temple Meads and the University of Bristol.
Walking and cycling `superhighways’
23 Walking and cycling are mentioned in 45 JTS responses (19%), 58 JSP responses (17%) and 24 written representations (17%), although the majority of respondents did not mention ‘cycle superhighways’ by name. The most frequently discussed theme is that of separating cyclists from other road users (including pedestrians). Respondents are in favour of both segregated routes along roads (‘superhighways’) and separate cycle tracks away from the road (including suggestions for a connection between the Frome Greenway and the Bristol to Bath Cycle Path; completing the Somerset Circle; and various connections from Clevedon to Yatton/Portishead/Weston and Nailsea/Festival Way).
Several respondents have raised concerns that walking and cycling are grouped together, as both groups potentially have quite different needs. Some respondents are keen that cycling is not used as a solution for all journeys, as it is less suitable for some vulnerable groups and not suitable for all journeys, and others suggest that the weather and topography in the region will pose barriers for some in cycling. Walking is discussed in less detail, but several responses mention the need for more pedestrian friendly environments.
Orbital Connectivity
Consultation materials referred to ‘better connectivity’ (including use of new roads to remove through traffic from urban centres) whereas the survey asked respondents about ‘orbital connectivity’ – both related themes are covered in this section. Better/orbital connectivity is mentioned in 42 JTS responses (18%), 56 JSP responses (17%) and 36 written representations (26%).
The most mentioned theme is the need for new connections to the motorway (33% of JTS surveys, 54% of JSP surveys and 36% of written representations), in particular a new junction onto the M4 in the East Fringe. New connections for the M5 are also mentioned (in particular the need for a connection to the airport), and a southern M4/M5 link road is also suggested by several respondents. The need for a complete ring road for Bristol is also a frequently mentioned theme, with several respondents also suggesting that the existing ring road needs improvements including widening. Several other new roads are suggested in responses, including an A46/A36 link road near Bath, Callington Road link and more local schemes. When discussing orbital connectivity, some respondents also wanted to make it clear that this should be considered for public transport as well as other road users.
Sub-regional pinch points and bottlenecks
‘Sub-regional pinch points and bottlenecks’ are mentioned in 20 JTS responses (9%), 16 JSP responses (5%), and 16 written representations (11%).
Several bypasses are suggested: • Backwell; • Saltford; • Stoke Gifford; • Banwell; and • Winterbourne
24 There are some suggestions about using tunnels or flyovers rather than roundabouts to minimise the time vehicles have to stop. Several pinch points on the motorway are identified, with M5 J19 being the most frequently mentioned, and M5 J20 and J21 and the Avonmouth Bridge also suggested as problems. A managed motorway from Clevedon to Cribbs Causeway is also identified to help with these junctions. Other key junctions identified as needing improvements are the M4 / M5 Almondsbury Interchange and A4 / A4174 Hicks Gate Roundabout, with some smaller local junctions also identified.
Some responses suggest that more river crossings are required to improve resilience in the region and provide alternative routes in the event of accidents and closures. A small minority of respondents suggest that rather than expanding junctions to remove pinch points and bottlenecks, the aim should be to reduce car use in these areas where possible through mode shift.
Strategic Corridor packages
‘Strategic corridor packages’ are mentioned in 13 responses to the JTS survey (6%), 18 responses to the JSP survey (5%), and in 14 written representations (10%). The majority of responses discuss increased bus priority and segregation on key routes (with a small minority against bus lanes). Other responses also suggest creating red routes or otherwise restricting parking along key corridors, and several responses also suggest downgrading the M32 and making use of it as a strategic corridor for other modes. Improvements along the A38 corridor are also suggested (it is not specified as to whether north or south is meant, or the whole length on both sides of Bristol), and on the A4174 Ring Road.
Working better together
‘Working better together’ is discussed in 17 responses in the JTS survey (7%), 14 responses in the JSP survey (4%), and 13 written representations (9%). The most frequently mentioned theme is the desire for local government control of public transport services, to include bus franchising (with several respondents unhappy about current monopolies in the city). A form of Integrated Transport Authority is also frequently mentioned (especially by respondents to the JTS), and a few respondents also suggest a Metro Mayor to cover the area.
Local Sustainable Transport Fund +
LSTF measures are discussed in 30 responses to the JTS survey (13%), 13 responses to the JSP survey (4%) and 17 written representations (12%). The most frequently mentioned theme is cycle hire, including suggestions for electric bicycles. Car clubs and car sharing are also frequent suggestions (including motorway park and share sites). Several respondents are in favour of more flexible working, including working from home and working different hours, and the need for suitable broadband to enable more flexible working is also mentioned.
There are several suggestions for improved interchange with bicycles, including park & cycle locations on the edge of towns, and increased provision for taking bicycles on trains and buses. Travel planning is suggested, including targeting businesses
25 and schools as well as personal travel planning, although a small minority of respondents are against travel planning as they do not consider it is very effective. Several respondents have also discussed the need for use of community transport and subsidised taxis to ensure that vulnerable people and people who live far away from main transport routes can also access public transport.
Regional Connectivity
‘Regional connectivity’ is the least discussed concept, with no mention at all in the JSP surveys. It was mentioned by six respondents in the JTS survey (3%) and five written representations (4%). Rail connectivity is mentioned most frequently, with people in favour of electrification generally, as well as connections to Birmingham specifically, and one respondent concerned about the delays to GWR electrification. One respondent also suggests that regional connectivity is needed, but that connections to London, Wales and the Midlands are already adequate, and that improvements should focus on connections to the south coast.
Freight
‘Freight’ is mentioned nine times in responses to the JTS survey (4%), two responses to the JSP survey (1%) and in 10 written representations (7%). The majority of responses are in favour of reducing the impact of freight on roads, with suggestions for restricted hours, weight restrictions, more efficient route planning, and the use of freight consolidation centres. There are several suggestions for shifting freight delivery to other modes, with rail being the most frequently suggested, but cycle couriers are also suggested for local deliveries. Low Emission Vehicles (LEV) are also suggested to reduce some of the negative impact on air quality and the environment caused by Heavy Goods Vehicles (HGVs). A small minority of responses are against freight restrictions, as they consider HGV access to be necessary for both business and personal deliveries.
Travel Demand Management
‘Travel demand management’ is mentioned in 31 JTS responses (13%), 19 JSP responses (6%) and 17 written representations (12%). Congestion charging is one of the most frequent suggestions (with a few suggestions for targeting freight rather than the general public). It is suggested that some exemptions are made (for example people with disabilities and those on lower incomes), and that the money raised could be used to fund sustainable transport schemes and initiatives.
Parking restrictions are another frequent suggestion, including reducing on-street parking, introducing a business charge for off-street parking, and extending Residents’ Parking Zones (RPZs). It should be noted that the majority of respondents in favour of RPZs are not in favour of a blanket extension, but schemes tailored to the individual areas, including different hours in areas that are more impacted by events than commuting, such as Ashton Gate.
Other suggestions include car free days or restrictions (such as odd/even number plates), Urban Traffic Management and Control and Low Emission Zones (LEZs). There is a small minority against travel demand management in any form, as well as
26 several respondents in favour of increasing free parking rather than restricting. While many of the respondents are in favour of RPZs as a concept, there are several who disagreed with the current implementation programme.
Other Suggestions
Many responses in the JSP survey did not give specific responses that could be categorised under the concepts: 63 responses (19%) suggested that improved public transport would be generally needed for developments, and 40 responses (12%) suggested that improved or new roads would be generally needed. 18 responses (5%) also suggested land use planning to ensure that services and employment are provided on site where possible, reducing the need to travel.
Improving the public realm is discussed in 14 JTS responses (6%), eight JSP responses (2%) and ten written representations (7%), with the majority of those respondents being interested in removing or restricting vehicles in Bristol city centre. 20mph zones are also discussed, with half of those respondents in favour of extensions and half wanting existing 20 mph zones removed.
The use of innovation and technology is raised as something “missing” from the concepts, and is mentioned in seven JTS responses (3%), two JSP responses (1%) and three written representations (2%), with the majority of respondents discussing how low emissions vehicles would help to mitigate some of the existing issues caused by cars. There are also suggestions of how technology would help to reduce the need to travel, including facilitating home working as discussed in the ‘LSTF+’ concept, but also including reducing the need to travel for services.
Comparison of responses between Closed and Open Questions
Strengthening and enhancing public transport corridors is identified as the most supported and most important concept in the closed questions. It is also the most discussed concept in the open responses, showing it to be a clear priority. Other priorities in both the closed and open questions are walking and cycling, extending MetroWest and MetroWest++. Working better together is seen as important in the closed questions, but is mentioned less frequently in the open responses, which may be due in part to members of the public being unfamiliar with transport governance structures, whilst still being in favour of effective joint working across local authority boundaries. The use of different terminology for better connectivity/orbital connectivity means that it is not considered of the same level of importance in the closed questions as in the open questions, suggesting that many respondents probably did not fully understand the concept of orbital connectivity (especially the use of new road links to remove traffic from urban areas). Regional connectivity and freight are considered the two least important concepts in the closed questions, and are also the least discussed in the open responses. In the case of freight, this might be due to many people not explicitly considering the importance of freight in meeting their daily needs, for example in delivering goods and servicing supermarkets.
Discussion
27 There are a number of links between the responses to the issues, objectives and concepts questions. This section considers the linkages between issues and objectives, and how this relates to concepts discussed and schemes suggested.
Cross tabulation of Issues and Objectives
Table 3 presents the cross tabulation of the closed questions on issues and objectives from the survey. The table highlights the percentage of responses that agree (strongly agree or tend to agree) with both the issue and the objective in question (e.g. 67% of respondents agree with both the issue of ‘limited travel options’ and the objective of ‘supporting economic growth’). The ‘total’ column refers to the total percentage of responses for each issue or objective (e.g. a total of 75% of the respondents agree with supporting economic growth, as can be seen in the earlier figures). These totals are included so that it can be seen where lower levels of agreement between issues and objectives may be due to low levels of agreement with the individual issue or objective, rather than a mismatch between the two.
Table 3 Cross tabulation of issues and objectives Issues
Total strongly agree/tend to agree with both Limited travel options Reliability, Congestion, Resilience, Connectivity Environmental Challenges Challenges Social Demand for Housing and Employment Growth; Infrastructure Capacity Total Support Economic Growth 67% 72% 60% 50% 66% 75% Reduce Carbon Emissions 75% 78% 75% 61% 69% 85% Promote Accessibility 80% 84% 75% 64% 75% 90% Contribute to Better Safety, Health and Security 75% 79% 73% 60% 71% 83% Improve Quality of life and a Healthy Natural Environment 81% 85% 78% 65% 75% 92%
Objectives Total 86% 91% 80% 66% 79% -
There is a link between people agreeing with the issue of limited travel options and the objectives to reduce carbon emissions, promote accessibility and improve quality of life and a healthy natural environment. There is also a link between agreement with the issue of environmental challenges and the objective to improve quality of life and a healthy natural environment.
There is some agreement between the issue of congestion, reliability, resilience and connectivity and the objective to support economic growth. Most people who agree with supporting economic growth see congestion as an important issue (it has the
28 highest level of agreement with support economic growth across all the issues). However, much lower levels of those who view that congestion is an important issue agree with the objective of supporting economic growth (it has the lowest level of agreement with congestion, reliability, resilience and connectivity across all the objectives). This suggests that, for many respondents, the issue of congestion is more important in terms of its impact on people, the environment and making the West of England a pleasant area to live and work, with the highest level of agreement with the objective to improve quality of life.
There are lower levels of agreement than might be expected between the issue of demand for housing and employment growth and the objective support economic growth, although this is in part due to the lower level of support overall for supporting economic growth. Respondents who support demand for housing and employment growth are less likely to consider supporting economic growth an important objective and are more likely to agree with ‘promote accessibility’ and ‘improve quality of life and a healthy natural environment’.
Agreement between the issue of social challenges and the objective contribute to better safety, health and security is also lower than expected. This is partially due to the low levels of support overall for social challenges, but for those who agree with social challenges as an issue, objectives relating to accessibility and quality of life are seen as more important.
Congestion, reliability, resilience and connectivity has the highest levels of agreement overall, demonstrating its links across all objectives, as discussed in some open responses. Congestion is seen as a problem that, if solved, would reduce carbon emissions, improve quality of life, and reduce negative impacts on transport in both the built and natural environment. Limited travel options also has a high level of agreement with most objectives, and some open responses suggest that it is the key issue, as limited travel options contributes to higher car use and congestion, which exacerbates environmental challenges and social challenges, as well as making it harder to deliver housing and employment.
Promote accessibility and improve quality of life and a healthy natural environment have the highest levels of agreement across the issues, again suggesting the importance of making the West of England a pleasant place to live, and also highlighting some of the frustrations with the existing transport network and its impacts on other areas of life.
Links to Issues
The majority of responses relating to ‘limited travel options’ commented on current bus services, with many mentioning specific areas where the reliability and frequency of bus services are an issue, including general connectivity. Responses include availability of rail routes and stations, with some areas being poorly served by rail, resulting in the suggestion that some stations and routes could be re-opened. A large proportion of responses suggest that both the availability and quality of cycling routes should be improved. The objective of ‘promoting accessibility’ also includes discussion of the importance of improving access to employment by supporting public transport, cycling and walking. Many gave locally-specific
29 suggestions on how to enhance access, while also presenting ideas on how to enhance access e.g. new bus routes, promoting cycling and re-opened rail stations.
These themes recur when considering concepts and schemes, where strengthening and enhancing public transport corridors is identified as the most important concept, and many respondents made general suggestions for improvements to buses, additional stations, and improvements to walking and cycling networks. MetroWest++ is a frequently mentioned concept, with many respondents particularly suggesting of a tram or metro system, and extending the MetroWest suburban railway network is also a frequent suggestion. There are some respondents suggesting extending MetroBus to more areas, but there are also a number of respondents who are not convinced of the benefits. Responses related to the ‘reduce carbon emissions’ objective also suggest that there is the need to provide a more sustainable transport network and to encourage travel behaviour change in the West of England. Other suggestions include the need to reduce car ownership and use, through creating the infrastructure to support an increase in walking, cycling and public transport patronage.
Responses relating to the ‘social challenges’ issue discuss the theme of health, including access to healthcare facilities. In particular, it is clear that access to hospitals (particularly mental health facilities) is difficult using public transport, particularly for vulnerable members of society. This links to the responses to the objective ‘contribute to better safety, health and security’, in which respondents highlight the lack of consideration of health impacts of transport. Respondents to the concepts question discuss the benefits of walking and cycling, including the potential for improving levels of physical activity in everyday life, with positive impacts on both physical and mental health. Concepts and schemes related to increasing walking and cycling are frequently mentioned, with several respondents discussing the links between facilitating an increase in active travel and promoting healthy lifestyles (both physically and mentally).
Links to Objectives
Responses relating to the objective ‘improve quality of life and a healthy natural environment’ are concerned about the impact of transport (existing and future) on both the rural and built environment. Air quality and noise levels are also raised as concerns in the issues section, and several respondents are concerned about the impact of congestion on the surrounding area. These challenges are not often discussed explicitly with regard to concepts or schemes, although there are suggestions for how to encourage mode shift and reduce car dependency. There are also suggestions of removing through traffic from urban areas, or otherwise restricting traffic, in order to make it a more pleasant environment for pedestrians and cyclists.
The objective ‘support economic growth’ did not often appear to be considered as important on an individual level, but respondents are concerned that any growth in jobs and housing in the area is sustainable. Respondents raised the importance of transport infrastructure being properly provided to mitigate the impacts of extra journeys due to development, and several respondents suggest that improvements are needed to manage the current levels of employment and housing before any
30 new developments are planned. The potential impact of any new development on the existing network is also raised in responses to the issues question. Many responses to the JTS and JSP raised the need to develop schemes around existing or proposed transport access, or to ensure that proper schemes are designed to mitigate traffic generated by new development without worsening existing issues. Additional stations and new motorway junctions are frequently suggested as important schemes, and some respondents suggest that, where possible, development should be focused in areas close to stations and motorway junctions.
Many respondents commented on congestion within the issues question, and responses to the questions relating to objectives discuss the theme of reducing journey times and congestion, with responses often citing the fact that a secondary benefit of reducing congestion could be to reduce carbon emissions. Responses rarely discuss the connection between congestion and economic growth explicitly, which is perhaps to be expected, as the impact on individuals is indirect – for the majority of respondents, congestion is a quality of life issue, with concerns about environmental issues (such as air quality and noise) and road safety (including tailbacks across junctions).
Summary and Conclusions
Based on the feedback from the consultation process, there are several lessons that can be taken forward in developing the JTS, although it should be noted that a relatively low response rate means that these conclusions should be considered with caution.
Overall, the responses are broadly supportive of the issues and objectives set out in the consultation:
• Transport issues – there was generally strong agreement in both the JTS survey and the open responses. At least two thirds of survey respondents tended to agree or strongly agreed with the five key issues, ranging from 66% for ‘social challenges’ to 86% for ‘limited travel options’ and 91% for ‘congestion, reliability, resilience and connectivity’. The open responses had a particularly strong focus on the quality of travel choices in the sub-region, including buses, rail and cycling.
• Transport objectives – there was generally strong agreement in both the JTS survey and the open responses. At least three quarters of survey respondents tended to agree or strongly agreed with the five objectives, ranging from 75% for ‘support economic growth’ to 92% for ‘improve quality of life and a healthy natural environment’. The open responses had a strong focus on improved accessibility to employment, education and training, more sustainable travel options, reduction in pollutants in general (not just carbon) and a greater focus on sustainable economic growth.
• Transport concepts – both the JTS survey and the open responses identified improving public transport corridors, walking and cycling and enhanced rail services as the most important priorities. Local authorities working better together to improve transport was also identified as a key priority in the JTS survey but
31 was identified by fewer people in the open responses. Improving orbital connectivity was an important theme in the JTS survey and was identified in a significant number of the open responses, including completion of the Ring Road and improved connections to both the M4 and M5.
The feedback from the consultation process demonstrates that there are important areas for reflection in the JTS. First, in terms of the issues, respondents have clearly identified that it is critical to improve travel choices and tackle congestion across the sub-region. The other challenges (social, environmental, economic) are all indirectly related to these fundamental challenges.
Second, in terms of the objectives, ‘improve quality of life and a healthy natural environment’, ‘reduce carbon emissions’ and ‘promote accessibility’ were identified by respondents as being most important. These appear to be the most tangible benefits to people from improving the transport system: people strongly relate these three goals to the priority challenges of tackling congestion and improving travel options.
Whilst ‘support economic growth’ is not the highest priority, three quarters of respondents tend to agree or strongly agree with this objective, although there has been feedback that this should be focused on sustainable economic growth, which benefits all members of society and avoids adverse environmental impacts. In the case of ‘contribute to better safety, health and security’, several respondents questioned if these should be grouped, highlighting that delivering better health outcomes through the transport system requires different forms of intervention to improving road safety. In articulating this objective, it will be necessary to clearly explain the rationale for improving road safety, improving health through active travel, tackling the health impacts of pollutants from traffic and improving access to health services – all of which will improve health outcomes in the sub-region.
In terms of the transport concepts, the following should be considered:
• Including public realm improvements – several respondents discuss the need for public realm improvements and their impact on promoting walking and cycling;
• Clarifying the ‘walking and cycling superhighways’ concept – many respondents are in favour of cycling improvements, including segregation and off- road cycle paths, but very few mention cycle superhighways. Some respondents also objected to the grouping together of walking and cycling, as they argued that the needs of the two groups are different;
• Considering the role of Park and Ride in ‘strengthen and enhance public transport corridors’ – it is seen as having the potential to abstract from other bus services: it would require careful planning as part of the overall strategy to minimise abstraction from other bus services;
• Considering the role of MetroBus and Rapid Transit – there is apparently stronger support for strengthening existing bus and rail corridors and development of new rail-based solutions than further development of the MetroBus network. It will be necessary to carefully consider the future role of
32 further MetroBus extensions and other rapid transit options in the future public transport network; and
• Clarification of ‘orbital connectivity/better connectivity ‘– the differing terminology in consultation materials confused some respondents. The link between providing additional road capacity on orbital routes and the potential for reducing traffic through the Bristol urban area is not always recognised.
Respondents are keen to minimise the impact of development on the transport network, with concerns about the current network and several suggestions that existing problems should be addressed before increasing development that could exacerbate the issues. There is also some recognition that further development could bring funding and make a better case for more radical transport interventions. There are a wide range of opinions in the responses, with strong arguments made both for reducing and facilitating car use. Some respondents view cycling as the solution while others consider the potential for increasing cycling to be limited. While all of these opinions should be taken into account when developing the JTS, it will not be possible to address all concerns at once and a balance will need to be reached.
33 Chapter Three – Joint Spatial Plan Issues and Options Consultation
This chapter presents the findings of the consultation on the West of England Joint Spatial Plan Issues & Options consultation. This chapter summarises the responses made to the 15 questions which were asked in the consultation document. They cover the following matters: • Issues, Vision and Spatial Objectives; • Number of new homes, building new homes and affordable homes; • Employment land; • Building more homes in Bristol and our main towns; • Strategic locations and spatial scenarios.
ISSUES 1. Have the most appropriate critical spatial issues been identified in addressing housing and wellbeing; the economy; the environment; and transport? 28 respondents agreed that the critical issues had been identified, although some sought amendments or caveated their support.
488 comments sought amendments to the issues identified or identified new issues.
Main issues raised
Changes suggested to identified issues:
Housing & wellbeing 170 responses were made. Housing need • Housing developers thought meeting the full objectively assessed need for housing should be more emphasised. They also felt that, by only considering the wider Bristol Housing Market Area, the issue of housing need across the West of England was not being properly addressed. Providing a level of homes in line with the aspirations of the Local Enterprise Partnership was also regarded as important. • Addressing the housing needs of a growing elderly population was raised by ten members of the public.
Housing delivery
34 • Greater emphasis on bringing empty properties back into use was raised by ten members of the public. They also thought the issue of developers implementing planning permissions promptly should be addressed and that a review of compulsory purchase powers should be undertaken. • Housing developers thought that the issue of the prompt delivery of housing should be more emphasised. Affordable housing • More emphasis on providing affordable housing for rent and ensuring affordable housing was genuinely affordable was sought by six members of the public.
Quality / character • Increased prominence to ensuring new housing was of high quality was sought by nine members of the public, who also stressed the importance of new housing respecting local character.
Sustainability of development locations • Locating new housing in areas with good access to employment, services, transport and community infrastructure was an issue raised by 14 members of the public. Community empowerment and involvement • Members of the public and organisations sought reference to: increasing opportunities for community self-build housing; greater reference to engaging communities in shaping their areas; and setting out the role of neighbourhood and parish plans in accommodating new housing.
Economy 25 responses were made to this issue. Sustainability • Supporting only sustainable economic growth was raised by four members of the public.
Tackling economic inequality • Addressing inequalities in employment opportunities and skills provision was raised.
Distribution of employment • More focus on redistributing employment opportunities across the West of England was raised.
Food and drink
35 • Recognising the economic importance of food and drink production, manufacturing and distribution was raised.
Environment 105 responses were made to this issue. Brownfield development • Prioritising brownfield over greenfield development was highlighted by 29 respondents, including six town and parish councils. • Recognition of the limitations of brownfield land on prompt and large-scale housing delivery was sought by housing developers.
Green Belt • Protection of the Green Belt was identified as a critical issue by 31 respondents, including six town and parish councils. • Housing developers thought that the Green Belt was not an environmental designation and that, where it was the most sustainable option, should be considered for meeting housing need.
Flooding • Avoiding housing development on flood plains and ensuring flood resilience was raised by eight members of the public.
Wildlife • Greater importance to wildlife protection was requested by seven members of the public.
Climate change • Increased emphasis on tackling climate change was emphasised by six members of the public.
Environmental assets • More prominence to protecting the area’s environmental assets including areas subject to landscape and heritage designations was sought by five respondents.
Transport and infrastructure 104 responses were made. Improvements • Focussing on resolving existing transport issues through the delivery of significant public transport infrastructure improvements was stressed by 29 members of the public. They also thought that improvements should be in place before new housing was built.
36 Active travel • A greater emphasis on promoting active travel and delivering new related infrastructure such as new cycling and walking routes was sought by nine members of the public.
Additional issues suggested: 28 responses sought inclusion of additional issues: • Pressure on existing community infrastructure such as schools, healthcare and recreation was raised by members of the public. The provision of new such infrastructure was also identified as important. • Food systems was raised by organisations and members of the public. • Elderly, young and disabled people’s needs were highlighted in comments as requiring inclusion. • Prioritising identified issues and accepting trade-offs was raised by members of the public. A range of other issues were also identified by individual members of the public: waste management; the role of the area’s universities; the need to look beyond 2036 so as to address long-term infrastructure needs; cultural and leisure facilities provision; and the retail economy and role of town centres.
VISION 2. Is the vision the most appropriate one for guiding development and growth in the West of England up to 2036? Are there any changes you would like to see to the vision?
Don’t know
No
Yes
37 Main issues raised: Changes/additions suggested to the Vision: • Refer to historic and cultural richness • Preserve and reinforce role of AONBs and green areas (Cotswolds Conservation Board) • Retention/protection of the Green Belt • Community involvement • Best and Most Versatile Agricultural Land and food systems • Climate change • Providing facilities and services • Effects on existing people and their lifestyles • Commitment to meeting the area’s housing need was requested by developers and house builders. Matters that respondents felt should be addressed through the Vision: • Increased geographical and social mobility • Addressing existing problems • Provision of employment opportunities for local population
Other comments on the Vision: • Make links between infrastructure and economy clear • Rising quality of life for all may be unsustainable • Sustainability and innovation should be the priority • Should indicate how sustainable patterns of growth could look like by end of plan period acknowledge employment and housing are inextricably linked. (developers) • Not strong enough link between vision and objectives • Query use/implementation of Vision • Query whether "rich and diverse environmental character will be integral to health and economic prosperity" • Query why West of England has to be 'fastest growing' • Need effective and ambitious Plan to help achieve first part of the Vision. (developer)
Governance and working arrangements: • Suggest joint working on a south Bristol plan. • Wiltshire and Mendip should be part of the Plan area • Need a sub-regional approach to financing cultural development
Other factors discussed: Development growth • Opinions were divided between avoiding the overexpansion of urban areas together with resisting the imposition of growth and expanding the urban edges. However, having design parameters for urban extensions is seen as key. Needs
38 to be a focus on re-using rural buildings and brownfield sites in urban areas. There needs to be a balance between population increase and employment opportunities. • Midsomer Norton and Radstock are supported for town expansion by landowners whilst another respondent suggests a new town at Churchill with a major bus upgrade along the A38.
Green Belt and the relationship to other environmental considerations • Most of those who raised the issue said that the Green Belt and AONB must be preserved with no Green Belt encroachment. Also raised were the preservation of the area’s environmental character, flood risk and the impact of new development on the character of smaller settlements. Developers support more focus on developing Green Belt land and green field areas of low environmental value.
Housing and community • The affordability of new homes and tackling deprivation and disadvantage were identified as being key. Other important factors include high quality durable housing, increasing housing density, a balanced housing mix, the provision of shared work space and live-work units. Self-build should be encouraged, the need for more student housing and making provision for the Travelling community were raised. • Local communities should be at the heart of good plan making and the farming community involved in discussions involving the impact of any potential development on their land.
Infrastructure • The majority of respondents stressed the importance of ensuring the necessary social and physical infrastructure is in place at the start. This includes high speed broadband and the identification of the location of new schools and colleges. All services should be accessible from major transport links and renewable energy opportunities maximised.
Transport • Transport is felt to be the greatest barrier to achievement. Some thought there should be a better analysis of commuter routes and that there is a need to invest in increasing the capacity of the local road network. The impact of growth on rail infrastructure is a concern. Innovative transport solutions should be considered including use of waterways, promoting Metro bus/ light rail system. Walking and cycling should be encouraged and public transport improved. A few felt adequate highway and parking provision is vital and that car usage is reduced and cars banned from gridlock hotspots.
39 SPATIAL OBJECTIVES 3. Are the spatial objectives the most appropriate ones for guiding development and growth in the West of England up to 2036? Are there any changes or are there other objectives you would like to see? Are the Spatial Objectives the most appropriate ones for guiding growth in the West of England up to 2036?
10: Support economic growth
9: Challenges of climate change
8: High quality design
7: Meet the full need for market and affordable…
6: Maximise the use of brownfield land
5: Maintain or enhance the environmental
4: New housing and employment linked to transport
3: Right infrastructure is provided
2: Promotes healthy lifestyles through quality design
1: Closing the gap
Number of Responses 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree Don't know
• 56 comments agreed that the most appropriate spatial objectives had been identified. • 206 comments sought amendments to the objectives identified. • 41 comments sought the inclusion of additional objectives.
Main issues raised Changes suggested to identified objectives:
Housing & wellbeing 95 comments were made. Housing delivery • Housing developers sought reference to meeting the objectively assessed need for housing in full. To boost housing supply they also thought the objective should be more positively worded, committing the JSP to exceeding minimum housing targets. They felt the objective would not be achieved as the evidence base would not identify the full need for housing in each Unitary Authority. • Individual members of the public sought reference to a range of matters concerning housing delivery. These included greater emphasis being placed on ensuring the timely delivery by housing developers of infrastructure required to
40 support new housing; the delivery of high density homes; and bringing Council- owned empty property back into use for housing.
Affordable housing • More prominence to affordable housing was sought by seven members of public. This included requesting reference to providing the full range of affordable housing types and tenures, plus a commitment to ensure homes were affordable to live in through the provision of high environmental performance standards.
Self-build • Reference to promoting opportunities for self-build housing was requested by two organisations and two members of the public.
Sustainable development • Within Objective 2, Historic England sought reference to sustainable development to ensure the area’s historic environment is adequately considered.
Economic growth 27 responses were made to this objective. Location • Individual members of the public sought reference to a range of matters concerning location. These included a commitment to: distribute employment opportunities across the West of England; focus on addressing socio-economic disadvantage in South Bristol; and encourage the co-location of housing and employment. • Housing developers thought that Objective 3 should be more specific, identifying critical employment locations. Sustainable growth • Reference to sustainable economic growth was sought by four respondents.
Transport & infrastructure 56 responses were made to this objective. Parking • Specific reference to parking-related matters was sought by six members of the public. Some sought reference to the provision of adequate car parking while, conversely, others thought priority should be given to reducing car parking spaces.
Infrastructure provision • Five members of the public sought reference to ensuring necessary infrastructure is in place prior to new housing.
Rail infrastructure
41 • A reference to improving rail infrastructure and access to it was requested by four members of the public.
Environment 99 responses were made to this objective. Green Belt • Stronger reference to protecting Green Belt from development was sought by eleven members of the public and organisations, including the Campaign to Protect Rural England (Avonside branch).
Greenfield land / open space and brownfield land • Housing developers thought Objective 10 was contrary to the Government’s National Planning Policy Framework as they felt the Framework does not seek to minimise greenfield land development and only encourages use of brownfield land. They also thought the objective should recognise the limitations of brownfield land for housing delivery and encourage greenfield development. • Members of the public felt that more emphasis should be given to utilising brownfield land development opportunities. They also generally thought that stronger reference be made to protecting greenfield land and open spaces from development.
Environmental services • Natural England and the West of England Nature Partnership thought Objective 7 should state that services provided by the environment will be considered when making decisions on patterns of growth.
Flooding • Specific reference to avoiding development in areas subject to flood risk was requested by three members of the public.
Climate change • Reference to adaptation to climate change and mitigation of its effects to minimise future risks was sought by Natural England and the West of England Nature Partnership.
Additional objectives suggested • An objective of involving communities, particularly on the location and type of development, was requested by seven members of the public and organisations. • A range of other objectives was also sought by individual members of the public and organisations: supporting the growth of the area’s universities; the provision of adequate social infrastructure including schools, health and community facilities; renewable energy provision; addressing physical activity issues for children; and protecting town centres, particularly for shopping.
42 NUMBER OF NEW HOMES
4. Are we planning for the right number of homes? Is there anything else we should take into consideration regarding the number of homes? • 142 respondents thought the proposed number of new homes was about right • 135 respondents felt too many homes were being proposed • 139 respondents considered that too few homes were being planned for. Main issues raised: Are we planning for the right number of homes? About right • 142 respondents thought the proposed target was about right. Most of these were members of the public, some of whom qualified their agreement by saying they did not have the expertise or knowledge to know.
Too high • 135 members of the public and organisations considered the target to be too high. Concerns were expressed at the potential negative impacts of housing growth, for example on the area’s environmental quality and character as well as the transport and community infrastructure.
Too few • 139 respondents, mostly housing developers, felt that a higher housing target should be set. They considered that a figure of around 130,000 new homes was more appropriate to meet demand, with the highest target suggested being 153,440. Reasons cited for an increased target included addressing previous under delivery, increasing affordable housing delivery and supporting economic growth.
Unsure • 65 respondents were unsure or felt they were not in a position to know whether it was the right number.
Is there anything else to take into consideration regarding the number of homes? Flexibility • Flexibility to adjust the housing number over time was sought by respondents who felt this would assist in adapting to future demographic and economic change.
Housing Market Area boundary
43 • The use of the Wider Bristol Housing Market Area for establishing the housing number was questioned by 59 respondents, mostly housing developers. They thought it was necessary to include the Bath Housing Market Area.
Infrastructure and environmental capacity • Capacity concerns relating to the impacts of new housing on infrastructure and the environment were raised by 82 respondents. Natural England and the West of England Nature Partnership considered that the sustainability of the location, design and construction of homes were as important considerations as the number of homes.
BUILDING THE NEW HOMES
5. What needs to happen to ensure the homes we need are built by 2036? 406 comments were made. Main issues raised: Increasing speed of housing delivery • Housing developers suggested a range of measures to expedite delivery, including: o Allocate strategic sites for housing development through the JSP rather than waiting for individual local plans to be produced o Promote a range of housing sites including greenfield sites. This was to recognise the increased constraints they considered to be generally found in redeveloping brownfield sites o Plan for sufficient and deliverable housing sites. This included providing more than the identified need to allow for flexibility, assessing the housing need of all the four West of England local authorities, ensuring sites are viable and clarifying planning obligation / infrastructure requirements o Ensure the local plan and development management process is efficient, flexible and focussed on housing delivery. This included the use of Local Development Orders and rapid granting of planning permissions for applications which accord with the JSP. • Penalising developers who fail to promptly implement planning permissions and measures to prevent landbanking were suggested by 55 members of the public and organisations. Prioritising brownfield development • 158 responses, mainly from members of the public, sought emphasis on measures to deliver homes on brownfield sites, including: o Providing incentives to developers of brownfield sites o Focussing on ensuring empty or underused properties, including commercial areas, are brought back or converted into residential use o Making the most efficient use of brownfield land by promoting higher density development.
44 Involvement and partnership work • The importance of strong community engagement was emphasised by 22 members of the public and organisations including the Avon Local Councils Association. • Partnership working between local authorities and interested parties such as local groups, self-builders, landowners, Government agencies, etc. was stressed by 14 members of the public. Infrastructure provision • Ensuring adequate infrastructure is in place prior to new housing, particularly relating to transport and employment, was a theme emphasised by members of the public and organisations. Other measures: • A range of other suggestions was made by 41 individual members of the public and organisations, including: o Set up a dedicated housing delivery body; o use innovative designs including prefabricated and temporary housing; o adequately assess suitability and capacity of sites, including historic character, to de-risk development process; o address capacity and skills issues in the construction industry; o increase publicly funded and council / housing association house building.
AFFORDABLE HOMES 6. What needs to happen to ensure enough of the homes built are affordable? 355 comments were made. Main issues raised: Increase housing target • Housing developers considered that building more homes overall would be needed in order to meet affordable housing targets.
Increase affordable housing proportion and ensure its delivery • A higher proportion of affordable housing as part of new housing was emphasised in 52 responses from members of the public. Focussing on ensuring developers deliver the affordable housing proportion was raised by a similar number of respondents.
Viability and delivery • A realistic approach to viability matters was sought by housing developers. They also thought that planning obligations and infrastructure requirements sought should reflect viability issues. Use alternative delivery mechanisms
45 • Measures suggested by respondents included promoting self-build; using local authority-owned land; increasing the ability of housing trusts and local authorities to deliver affordable homes.
Other measures suggested • A range of other suggestions was made by individual members of the public and organisations, including intervention by Government and providing incentives to developers of affordable housing.
EMPLOYMENT LAND – ISSUES 7. Have we identified the right employment issues? • 19 respondents thought the correct employment issues had been identified. • 66 responses sought the consideration of additional issues. Main issues raised: Additional employment / economic issues identified Economic sectors • Specific economic sectors and their potential for growth were identified by eleven members of the public and organisations. These included food / agriculture / horticulture, aviation, engineering, sport, digital / media and the tourism / visitor sectors. • Two responses thought strategic retail policy matters should be addressed saying the JSP should establish a sub-regional shopping hierarchy and examine the future role of The Mall shopping centre. • The Federation of Small Businesses sought recognition of the importance of small and medium sized enterprises and the availability of affordable business premises.
Accessibility and sustainability • Ten responses from members of the public emphasised the importance of employment opportunities being provided near to where people live to reduce commuting lengths.
Locations • Employment and economic issues relating to specific locations were identified by six members of the public and organisations. Bristol Port Company sought consideration of the Port’s future development needs at Avonmouth and Portbury. Other matters raised included: insufficient employment land in South Bristol; and out-commuting in Yate.
Other main issues: • Housing developers sought an alignment in the JSP between economic and housing growth.
46 • Individual members of the public and organisations sought consideration of a range of issues including superfast rural broadband provision; adequate parking for businesses; affordable premises for small and medium sized businesses; changing economic / employment trends such as homeworking; health and wellbeing matters; tackling socio-economic disadvantage; and protecting employment land from housing development. Evidence concerns • The Bristol Port Company considered that the Economic Development Needs Assessment should have addressed the strategic economic importance of the Port and its future growth. • Business West considered that the Economic Development Needs Assessment was flawed. They considered that key employment / economic growth locations and sectors were not analysed in sufficient detail; data used was out of date; and there was a failure to recommend provision of sufficient additional employment land to meet likely future business needs. • Housing developers identified a perceived inconsistency in the evidence. This related to the Bath & North East Somerset Council area being included in the Functional Economic Market Area identified in the Economic Development Needs Assessment but excluded from the Wider Bristol Housing Market Area identified in the Strategic Housing Market Assessment.
EMPLOYMENT LAND – LOCATION 8. Where should new employment land be located? 216 responses were made. Main issues raised: Accessibility and sustainability • Most respondents (approximately 140) emphasised the importance of locating employment land in the most accessible locations, particularly those that could be reached by sustainable transport methods. This included alongside new and existing housing to reduce travel; urban brownfield sites; major centres; close to public transport infrastructure; part of mixed use development; and alongside existing employment areas. Making the most efficient use of existing employment areas was also commonly raised. Specific locations • The Bristol Port Company identified port-related development needs at Avonmouth and Portbury. • Most of the other locations suggested were identified by individual members of the public and organisations who did not provide reasons for their choice of location or refer to specific proposals. The locations included Avonmouth / Severnside; Bristol Airport; Central Bristol; Enterprise Zones / Areas; Midsomer Norton; near to motorway junctions / corridors; Portishead; Somer Valley; Thornbury; Weston-super-Mare; Yate; and Yatton. The Federation of Small Businesses sought provision of small businesses across the West of England.
47 • South Bristol was identified by seven respondents who felt the area should be a focus for employment land to address socio-economic disadvantage and a paucity of employment opportunities.
Housing location considerations • Historic England, Natural England and the West of England Nature Partnership thought the same spatial considerations used to determine strategic housing locations should be applied to employment land.
Dependent on type Two responses considered that location would be dependent on the type of employment use. BUILDING MORE HOMES IN BRISTOL AND MAIN TOWNS 9. Is our priority of building more homes in Bristol and our main towns appropriate and how can this approach be achieved? • 89 respondents felt the approach was appropriate • 21 respondents did not think it was appropriate • 28 respondents favoured a combination of approaches Main issues raised: Achieving the approach • A range of measures was suggested by respondents including:
o providing incentives to developers to pursue brownfield housing development o using compulsory purchase powers more frequently o engaging with existing communities to ensure their infrastructure requirements are understood o focussing on conversion and re-use of derelict or underused land and buildings o careful assessment and high quality, sensitive design of urban intensification opportunities o delivering adequate infrastructure improvements, including transport, health, education, community and recreational facilities. Unsuitable approach • Housing developers considered the approach to be inappropriate citing insufficient availability of brownfield land to meet need. They also thought there was a lack of evidence on issues such as viability, availability, achievability and suitability to demonstrate the approach was suitable. • Other respondents expressed concerns that the approach could lead to poor quality urban environments and would also need to consider flood risk issues.
Combination of approaches • Housing developers thought a combination of approaches would be needed to meet housing demand. In addition to urban intensification this could include development on greenfield and Green Belt sites, urban extensions and new settlements.
48 STRATEGIC LOCATIONS 10. Have all the reasonable strategic locations been identified? Are there any others we should consider? • 37 respondents felt that all the reasonable strategic locations had been identified. • 15 locations (broad locations or sites) not shown in the Issues and Options document were put forward.
Additional potential strategic locations suggested: (some of which are within or adjacent to the locations identified in the Issues and options document)
o Congresbury o Land at Junction 18 of the M4 near Tormarton o Wickwar o Falfield o Rudgeway o Land east of Lyde Green and west of Pucklechurch o Filton o Rangeworthy - Heath End area, with a new M5 junction at Tytherington and a new railway station at Wickwar o North of Buckover o West of Twerton, Bath – urban extension o Pilning o Bath and its surroundings – urban extensions o Land at Longwell Green between the A4174, Court Farm Road and Longwell Green o Junction 14 of the M5 where a business park and park and ride facility can be accommodated to ease congestion on the A38 Junction with the M5 Land at Whitfield Gate, which could also be considered for park and ride and employment. STRATEGIC LOCATIONS – SUITABILITY 11. Do you have comments on the suitability of any of the strategic locations?
Main issues raised: Support from housing developers; opposition from local people and organisations • In general, comments on the suitability of strategic locations for development were put forward by housing developers promoting housing development in those locations. Conversely, responses which emphasised the inappropriateness of the strategic locations tended to be received from local people and organisations.
Comments on strategic locations identified in Issues & Options document Urban intensification locations: • Communities of Bristol north & east fringe:
o North and east fringe potential to accommodate development was suggested given proximity to existing facilities and services and transport infrastructure
49 Urban extension locations: • East of Kingswood / Warmley
o Traffic congestion and flood risk concerns were raised. • Bridgeyate / Oldland Common o Potential negative impacts from traffic congestion were identified • North of M4 / M5
o The Environment Agency sought reassurance that flood risk issues had been fully considered in this location. • South West Bristol
o The areas on both sides of the A38 were identified as suitable strategic development locations. They were felt to benefit from good transport accessibility and few environmental constraints. o Green Belt was raised as an issue that was considered to make development unsuitable. • Weston-super-Mare
o The area to the east of the M5 close to Junction 21 was suggested as a strategic development location o The Environment Agency considered development should be avoided in the Flood Zone 3 part of the Congresbury Yeo / Oldbridge River / Puxton Moor flood plain. • Hicks Gate
o Retaining the gap between Keynsham and Bristol was identified as a reason for avoiding development in this location. The Environment Agency identified flood risk issues in parts of this location. Completing the ring road was felt important to make development suitable in this location. o The location’s perceived good transport accessibility and ability to incorporate significant green infrastructure was regarded as making it a suitable strategic location. • Whitchurch
o Land to the east and west of the A37 close to the Norton Lane junction was identified as appropriate for strategic development o Completing the ring road was felt important to make development suitable in this location. The Environment Agency identified potential flood risk issues associated with the Brislington Brook
50 Town expansion locations: • Clevedon
o Land to the south of Clevedon and east of M5 Junction 20 were seen as suitable development locations o Concerns about perceived transport inadequacies were raised • Nailsea o Land on the western side of Nailsea was suggested as an appropriate development location • Portishead
o Concerns were raised regarding traffic congestion on the A369 and the capacity of the proposed rail link and whether there would be adequate car parking o Land to the south of Portbury Common (B3124) and Portbury Hundred (A369) were seen as suitable development locations. Land at Shipway Farm was considered suitable for port-related development. • Keynsham
o Addressing traffic and transportation issues was raised. The Environment Agency identified flood risk issues in parts of this location. o Proximity to existing facilities and services was identified as a reason in support of development. Land on the south side of the town was identified as suitable for development. • Midsomer Norton and Radstock o The suitability of development in this location, particularly given the recent Somer Valley Enterprise Zone designation, was raised • Thornbury
o The need to restore railway links before building new housing was raised • Yate / Chipping Sodbury
o Development potential was suggested in this location, including to take advantage of proposed transport improvement and to connect with the M4. The area in the vicinity of Engine Common was identified as a suitable development location o The Environment Agency sought consideration of flood risk issues downstream from this location. Other settlements / locations:
• Avonmouth (employment) / Severnside
o Severn Beach’s proximity to the employment area of Central Park was suggested as a reason why it could accommodate further residential development. The proposed M49 Junction was identified as a justification for development both for Severnside and Severn Beach.
51 o The Environment Agency advised against considering residential development in parts of this area subject to Flood Zone 3 prior to agreeing a strategic flood defence approach. • Charfield
o Development potential was suggested as it would take advantage of proposed transport improvements, e.g. reintroduction of rail services, and what was seen as a lack of significant environmental constraints. • Pucklechurch o This location and land to its west was identified as having characteristics suitable for development • Winterbourne, Frampton, Coalpit Heath
o Coalpit Heath’s existing facilities, proximity to major employment areas and proposed transport improvements were suggested as reasons for the suitability of development o The Environment Agency advised that consideration should be given to a strategic flood storage solution so as to reduce flood risk downstream. • Banwell
o Concerns about perceived transport inadequacies were raised. The Environment Agency noted that the area north of Biddle Street was subject to high flood risk. • Churchill o Concerns about perceived transport inadequacies were raised. • Long Ashton
o Proximity to Bristol and good transport accessibility were highlighted as characteristics which made this location a suitable strategic area • Pill
o A strategic location covering Pill and Easton-in-Gordano was supported on the grounds of its perceived accessibility and deliverability. o Conversely, the case for residential development in this location was considered to be weak due to what was felt to be poor transport accessibility and congestion. • Yatton
o Concerns about flood risk were expressed • Saltford o Comments suggested that traffic and transportation issues needed to be addressed • Temple Cloud / Clutton
o This location was deemed unsuitable due to poor transport facilities.
52 Dispersed locations • Bath & NE Somerset:
o Development near Bath was promoted to support the city’s economic and commercial growth Other issues raised • Respondents sought consideration of a range of issues in the choice of strategic locations. These included ensuring adequate assessment of built and natural environment capacity; infrastructure provision; engagement with neighbouring authorities; and a comprehensive transport strategy.
STRATEGIC LOCATIONS – ADVANTAGES OR DISADVANTAGES 12. Do some strategic locations have advantages or disadvantages in terms of addressing the plan’s critical issues? Main issues raised:
Advantages • The advantages of strategic locations were identified generally by developers promoting housing in those areas. They pointed to positive characteristics including good transport accessibility; proximity to existing facilities and services, including employment; and the ability to provide new community and green infrastructure as part of the location’s development. Disadvantages • Generally, responses from members of the public and organisations such as town and parish councils emphasised the disadvantages of the strategic locations. Their comments focussed on potential negative environmental impacts, including the loss of green field and Green Belt land. Concerns about traffic congestion and the over-development of existing settlements were also expressed.
SPATIAL SCENARIOS 13. Which spatial scenario (or mix of scenarios) is likely to best deliver the plan’s objectives? Respondents were not restricted to the selection of a single scenario; multiple scenarios were frequently selected with advantages expressed. Respondents often identified that a combination of more than one scenario would likely deliver the plan’s objectives.
The majority of comments made when discussing potential spatial scenarios were from individual members of the public. Key stakeholders and organisations provided input when relevant to their areas of focus.
Overall Pattern of Responses:
53 • Of the five scenarios presented, the majority of responses showed preference towards a transport focused scenario, either in combination with others or alone. • Protection of Green Belt was the second most frequently chosen scenario, again either in combination or alone. These were followed by Scenario 4: A more event spread of development and Scenario 2: Concentration at Bristol Urban Area, with the least selected scenario being Scenario 5: New Settlement.
Key findings related to each Scenario Presented: Scenario 1: Protection of the Green Belt 120 responses indicated support for the protection of the Green Belt scenario.
• 77 responses specifically identified advantages of this scenario: o The majority of responses came from individual members of the public and there was support from campaign and local amenity groups. Parish council support for this scenario was referenced within statements from: Olveston, Sodbury, Pill and Easton-in-Gordano, Yatton, Congresbury, Barrow Gurney, Cleeve, Backwell, Wraxall and Failand, Dodington, Bitton, South Stoke and Norton Malreward Parish Councils. o Constraining urban sprawl and environmental protection were raised most often as reasons for support, with particular reference to protecting agricultural land, encouraging brownfield development, combating climate change, and the benefits to public health and wellbeing. • 8 responses addressed negative impacts of this scenario, including a potential restraint to housing growth and the impact of encouraging unsustainable transport links. o Developers promoting sites within the Green Belt expressed the need to release areas of Green Belt to allow the delivery of the JSP housing quantum within more sustainable locations.
Scenario 2: Concentration at Bristol Urban Area 100 responses indicated support for this scenario.
• 89 responses highlighted advantages of this scenario: o Stakeholders referred to sustainable low-carbon extensions and sustainable transport links. There was support from individual members of the public specifically in relation to brownfield development. o Advantages discussed included; the ability for employment focused development; the ability this scenario has in allowing more sustainable transport links and shorter commuter distances; the reduced cost of infrastructure development and the reduced environmental impact of development, combating climate change. • 35 responses highlighted specific disadvantages of this scenario including, the already overcrowded nature of the city, the increased impact this scenario would have on traffic congestion and the increased pressures on infrastructure and utilities.
54 Scenario 3: Transport focused 167 responses indicated support for a transport focused scenario.
• 134 comments were made specifically highlighting advantages of this scenario: o Highways England considered it vital to ensure that new development is focused on areas where there is good sustainable public transport provision that enhances current links. o Enhancing current transport links and developing more sustainable methods of travel across the West of England (WoE) were raised the most. Related to this were advantages in combating congestion issues across the WoE and developing multimodal travel options. • 3 comments presented disadvantages relating to an increased pressure on rural land and increases in pollution levels from transport network development.
Scenario 4: A more event spread of development 101 respondents indicated support for this scenario.
• 61 comments identified advantages of this spatial scenario: o There was a view that this scenario would help to develop a diverse housing stock, and opportunities for spreading development and economic benefits. o The ability to spread development and growth across the WoE and the benefits and opportunity to develop a diverse housing stock were raised the most. The reduction of traffic build up and the ability to better connect the WoE area were also identified as benefits to this scenario. • 3 responses reflected disadvantages including; the increase in car dependency, potential environmental degradation of rural areas and an increased resistance to development as more communities are impacted.
Scenario 5: New Settlement 29 comments were made in support of this scenario.
• 14 responses highlighted advantages namely in relation to; the ability to focus infrastructure and utility development and the benefits of integrated development of housing and employment. o Amongst those offering support were some Parish Councils. Barrow Gurney Council said that Scenario 5 should be elevated to a higher level of consideration. The West of England Nature Partnership said that new settlements provide an opportunity to develop a new garden village or Eco- town to showcase environmental and ecological best practice. Waddeton Park Limited indicated that the company was giving considerations to the possibility of bringing forward a new settlement, however no site was identified.
55 • 2 disadvantages were highlighted; the expensive nature of this option and; the potential poorly developed infrastructure and utilities networks.
A combination of all scenarios: 44 responses were made in support of a combination of all scenarios presented, highlighting that the benefits of each scenario could be combined to induce a mixture of development type to address multiple WoE level issues.
Key focuses for a spatial scenario going forward: In addition to comments made in relation to a given spatial scenario, 138 responses were made that highlighted fundamental focuses needing to be addressed in any chosen scenario:
Environment: • 27 comments highlighting the need for the protection of environmental assets specially mentioning the 2 AONBs, ancient woodland and agricultural land. • 13 responses promoted the need for green infrastructure focus. • 9 responses said there was a need for a regional climate change resilience scenario. o Both stakeholder and member of public responses suggested the need for a regional scale, coordinated approach to planning which looks to maximise multiple social, economic and environmental benefits. In particular responses from Avon Wildlife Trust, Natural England, Historic England and Wessex Water considered there was need for a joint approach with principles of green infrastructure; strategic ecological networks; and an ecosystems services approach to development.
Infrastructure and Transport: • 15 responses highlighted that any scenario will essentially depend of the infrastructure development to an area. • 15 responses mentioned that development was completely dependent on transport resilience. o Highways England discussed the importance and role of public transport in sustainable development and its interrelation to impacts on the natural environment and quality of life.
Urban Design: • 14 responses addressed the need for urban design and place making principles within a final scenario. o There was a suggestion of the need for future development to adapt to changing lifestyles and the need to properly address life-enhancing infrastructure.
Cross Boundary:
56 • 4 responses discussed development impacts outside of the WoE area, particularly in relation to transport and infrastructure. o Sedgemoor District Council raised the issue of cross boundary development impacts, specifically in relation to the M5, A370 and A38, with significant development likely to result in additional traffic needing to be addressed.
Economics: • 9 responses referred to the need for an economically focused development scenario with particular mention to a skills focused development reflecting local objectives and needs.
NEW SETTLEMENT 14. If a new settlement is a solution, how big should it be and where would you suggest it could go? • 113 responses considered that a new settlement could be a solution • 62 responses felt that a new settlement was not a solution Main issues raised: New settlement as a solution • Waddeton Park Ltd said they were seriously considering the possibility of bringing forward a new settlement and said they are in discussion with landowners to assemble sufficient land to promote a new settlement of up to 5000 dwellings. No location was indicated. However, the four authorities have jointly written to Wadderton Park Ltd to inquire further to their response. • Additionally we have more recently received a new settlement proposal from the Tortworth Estate in relation to a garden village at Buckover (South Gloucestershire). We will continue to assess the potential of this submission. • Comments indicated that respondents understood ‘new settlement’ could mean a new stand-alone location or a significant expansion to an existing settlement. Various suggestions were made but these were not generally supported by specific land submissions and/or were related to strategic locations already identified. New settlement not a solution • Respondents suggested a number of reasons why they considered a new settlement was not a solution. These included the length of time to develop a new settlement; the cost of new infrastructure; and the lack of any new settlements being promoted. Other issues raised • Respondents sought consideration of a range of issues in the consideration of a new settlement. These included ensuring adequate infrastructure provision, particularly transport, green and health infrastructure; and robust assessment of environmental impacts.
57 TRANSPORT 15. What transport improvements or measures would be required to support the scenarios? 478 responses were made. Main improvements / measures suggested: • Strengthen and enhance public transport corridors o Comfortable, reliable and frequent buses connecting areas o Affordable public transport o Need for integrated multi-modal multi-operator ticketing o New railway stations, e.g. at Charfield, Thornbury, Ashton Gate and Saltford o Need for significant new development to have railway station connections o Access to railway stations o Additional Park & Ride facilities o New public transport interchanges • Extend MetroBus network o Suggested extensions included: Yate and East Bristol; South Bristol (Whitchurch, Hick’s Gate, Hartcliffe); North Somerset (Weston-super-Mare, Yatton, Clevedon) and North Bristol (Thornbury, Cribbs Causeway, Avonmouth) • Extend MetroWest o Reopen old railway lines, e.g. Strawberry Line; Sharpness; East Bristol o Extend to Bristol Airport and Cribbs Causeway o Extend lines into Wiltshire, Somerset and Gloucestershire • MetroWest ++ o Tram / tram-train routes suggested: . Avonmouth – Henbury – Clifton . Yatton – Clevedon . Patchway / Parkway – Cribbs Causeway . Filton North – Cribbs Causeway . Bristol Temple Meads – City Centre – Harbourside – Old Market . Bristol Temple Meads – Lawrence Hill – Mangotsfield . Yate – Thornbury . Yate – East Fringe – Newbridge Park & Ride – Bath . Connections to Emerson’s Green, South Bristol and the Airport • Cycle superhighways o New separate and segregated cycle routes, e.g. connection between Frome Greenway and Bristol to Bath Railway Path; complete the Somerset Circle; connections from Clevedon to Yatton / Portishead / Weston-super-Mare and Nailsea / Festival Way • Better connectivity o New motorway network connections, e.g. M4 junction to connect to East Fringe; M5 junction to connect to Airport; Southern M4/M5 link road o Complete Bristol ring road o New roads, e.g. A46/A36 link road near Bath; Callington Road link
58 • Sub-regional pinch points and bottlenecks o New bypasses, e.g. Backwell, Saltford, Stoke Gifford, Banwell, Winterbourne o Address M5 pinchpoints at Junctions 19-21 o Managed motorway between Clevedon and Cribbs Causeway o Reduce congestion at M4 / M5 Almondsbury interchange; A4 / A4174 Hick’s Gate roundabout o More road river crossings • Strategic corridor packages o Increased bus priority and segregation on key routes o Create red routes or restrict parking along key corridors o Downgrade the M32 and use it as a strategic corridor for other modes o Improvements along the A38 corridor and A4174 • Working better together o Local government control of public transport services needed o Integrated Transport Authority required • Local Sustainable Transport Fund + o Increased bicycle hire, car clubs and car sharing o More flexible working should be promoted o Improved bicycle interchange facilities, including park & cycle locations on edge of towns o Improved provision for taking bicycles on trains and buses o Use of community transport and subsidised taxis to enable access to public transport • Travel demand management o Congestion charging o Parking restrictions, including reducing on-street parking, introducing a business charge for off-street parking and extending Residents’ Parking Zones. o Car free days or restrictions such as odd / even number plates. o Urban Traffic Management and Control systems o Low Emission Zones • Other suggestions o General suggestions were made for improved new public transport and new roads o Ensuring location of new housing is close to employment and services to reduce need to travel o Improving the public realm, e.g. removing or restricting vehicles in Bristol City Centre o Use of innovation and technology, such as promoting low emission vehicles and home working.
59 Appendix A – Officer Responses to Joint Spatial Plan Issues and Options Consultation submissions
FROM CATEGORY Sub Category STOCK RESPONSE
ISSUES • General Changes suggested to identified issues CRITICAL ISSUES Have the most o Housing & wellbeing The critical Issues arte the strategic issues or appropriate critical problems that need to be address by the JSP. It is the 170 responses were made. spatial issues function o of the JSP to develop the most appropriate been identified in • Housing need policy framework as a solution to address these addressing issues. Once the issues are clearly defined, then the housing and • Housing developers thought meeting the strategic priorities and the Vision can be developed in wellbeing; the full objectively assessed need for order to drive the development of the policy economy; the housing should be more emphasised. framework. This section of the JSP document sought They also felt that, by only considering environment; and to define the critical issues but the comments the wider Bristol Housing Market Area, received predominantly entailed an objective or even transport? the issue of housing need across the a policy solution. West of England was not being properly addressed. Providing a level of homes in The approach to defining the critical issues will be line with the aspirations of the Local reviewed in the draft JSP. Some of the issues raised Enterprise Partnership was also sought to broaden the scope of the plan to beyond its regarded as important. strategic remit and such issues are more appropriately • Addressing the housing needs of a considered through UA Local Plan review. Otherwise growing elderly population was raised by it is considered that most of the issues have been ten members of the public. addressed although the critical issues will be reviewed through the preparation of the Draft JSP options plan, • Housing delivery • Greater emphasis on bringing empty properties back into use was raised by ten members of the public. They also thought the issue of developers
60 FROM CATEGORY Sub Category STOCK RESPONSE
implementing planning permissions promptly should be addressed and that a review of compulsory purchase powers should be undertaken. • Housing developers thought that the issue of the prompt delivery of housing should be more emphasised. • Affordable housing More emphasis on providing affordable housing for rent and ensuring affordable housing was genuinely affordable was sought by six members of the public.
• Quality / character Increased prominence to ensuring new housing was of high quality was sought by nine members of the public, who also stressed the importance of new housing respecting local character.
• Sustainability of development locations Locating new housing in areas with good access to employment, services, transport and community infrastructure was an issue raised by 14 members of the public.
• Community empowerment and involvement Members of the public and organisations
61 FROM CATEGORY Sub Category STOCK RESPONSE
sought reference to: increasing opportunities for community self build housing; greater reference to engaging communities in shaping their areas; and setting out the role of neighbourhood and parish plans in accommodating new housing.
o Economy 25 responses were made to this issue.
• Sustainability Supporting only sustainable economic growth was raised by four members of the public.
• Tackling economic inequality Addressing inequalities in employment opportunities and skills provision.
• Distribution of employment More focus on redistributing employment opportunities across the West of England.
• Food and drink Recognising the economic importance of food and drink production, manufacturing and distribution was raised.
o Environment
62 FROM CATEGORY Sub Category STOCK RESPONSE
105 responses were made to this issue.
• Brownfield development • Prioritising brownfield over greenfield development was highlighted by 29 respondents, including six town and parish councils. • Recognition of the limitations of brownfield land on prompt and large- scale housing delivery was sought by housing developers. • Green Belt • Protection of the Green Belt was identified as a critical issue by 31 respondents, including six town and parish councils. • Housing developers thought that the Green Belt was not an environmental designation and that, where it was the most sustainable option, should be considered for meeting housing need. • Flooding Avoiding housing development on flood plains and ensuring flood resilience was raised by eight members of the public.
• Wildlife Greater importance to wildlife protection was
63 FROM CATEGORY Sub Category STOCK RESPONSE
requested by seven members of the public.
• Climate change Increased emphasis on tackling climate change was emphasised by six members of the public.
• Environmental assets More prominence to protecting the area’s environmental assets including areas subject to landscape and heritage designations was sought by five respondents.
o Transport and infrastructure 104 responses were made.
• Improvements Focussing on resolving existing transport issues through the delivery of significant public transport infrastructure improvements was stressed by 29 members of the public. They also thought that improvements should be in place before new housing was built.
• Active travel A greater emphasis on promoting active travel and delivering new related infrastructure such as new cycling and walking routes was sought by nine members of the public.
64 FROM CATEGORY Sub Category STOCK RESPONSE
• Additional issues suggested 28 responses sought inclusion of additional issues:
o Pressure on existing community infrastructure such as schools, healthcare and recreation was raised by members of the public. The provision of new such infrastructure was also identified as important. o Food systems was raised by organisations and members of the public. o Elderly, young and disabled people’s needs were highlighted in comments as requiring inclusion. o Prioritising identified issues and accepting trade- offs was raised by members of the public. o A range of other issues were also identified by individual members of the public: waste management; the role of the area’s universities; the need to look beyond 2036 so as to address long-term infrastructure needs; cultural and leisure facilities provision; and the retail economy and role of town centres.
FROM CATEGORY Sub Category STOCK RESPONSE
• Changes suggested to the Vision General VISION Many of the requests for change relate to detailed Is the vision the o Refer to historic and cultural richness points, some of which are more relevant to the Spatial most appropriate o Preserve and reinforce role of AONBs and green Priorities, some to the Sustainability Appraisal and areas (Cotswolds Conservation Board)
65 FROM CATEGORY Sub Category STOCK RESPONSE
one for guiding o Retention/protection of the Green Belt some to UA Local Plan reviews. Some of the requests development and o Community involvement for changes to the Vision are more appropriately growth in the o Best and Most Versatile Agricultural Land and addressed via the policy framework. West of England food systems Climate change up to 2036? Are o The Vision should be a short, succinct expression of Providing facilities and services there any changes o the overall direction to drive the policy framework in o Effects on existing people and their lifestyles the JSP and Local Plan reviews. you would like to o Commitment to meeting the area’s housing see to the vision? need was requested by developers and house The vison will be re-visited in light of the comments in builders. order to consider whether any amendments are • Matters that should be addressed through the appropriate Vision:
o increased geographical and social mobility o existing problems o Provision of employment opportunities for local population • Other comments on Vision
o Make links between infrastructure and economy clear o Rising quality of life for all may be unsustainable o Sustainability and innovation should be the priority o Should indicate how sustainable patterns of growth could look like by end of plan period acknowledge employment and housing are inextricably linked. (developers) o Not strong enough link between vision and objectives o Query use/implementation of Vision o Query whether "rich and diverse environmental 66 FROM CATEGORY Sub Category STOCK RESPONSE
character will be integral to health and economic prosperity" o Query why West of England has to be 'fastest growing' o Need effective and ambitious Plan required help achieve first part of the Vision. (developer) • Governance and working arrangements o Suggest joint working on a south Bristol plan. o Wiltshire and Mendip should be part of the Plan area o Need a sub-regional approach to financing cultural development • Other factors discussed
o Development growth • Opinions were divided between avoiding the overexpansion of urban areas together with resisting the imposition of growth and expanding the urban edges. However, having design parameters for urban extensions is seen as key. Needs to be a focus on re-using rural buildings and brownfield sites in urban areas. There needs to be a balance between population increase and employment opportunities. • Midsomer Norton and Radstock are supported for town expansion by landowners whilst another respondent suggests a new town at Churchill with a major bus upgrade along the A38.
67 FROM CATEGORY Sub Category STOCK RESPONSE
o Green Belt and environment • Most of those who raised the issue said that the Green Belt and AONB must be preserved with no Green Belt encroachment. Also raised were the preservation of the area’s environmental character, flood risk and the impact of new development on the character of smaller settlements. Developers support more focus on developing Green Belt land and green field areas of low environmental value.
o Housing and community • The affordability of new homes and tackling deprivation and disadvantage were identified as being key. Other important factors include high quality durable housing, increasing housing density, a balanced housing mix, the provision of shared work space and live-work units. Self build should be encouraged, the need for more student housing and making provision for the Travelling community were raised. • Local communities should be at the heart of good plan making and the farming community involved in discussions involving the impact of any potential development on their land.
o Infrastructure
68 FROM CATEGORY Sub Category STOCK RESPONSE
• The majority of respondents stressed the importance of ensuring the necessary social and physical infrastructure is in place at the start. This includes high speed broadband and the identification of the location of new schools and colleges. All services should be accessible from major transport links and renewable energy opportunities maximised.
o Transport • Transport is felt to be the greatest barrier to achievement. Some thought there should be a better analysis of commuter routes and that there is a need to invest in increasing the capacity of the local road network. The impact of growth on rail infrastructure is a concern. Innovative transport solutions should be considered including use of waterways, promoting Metro bus/ light rail system. Walking and cycling should be encouraged and public transport improved. A few felt adequate highway and parking provision is vital and that car usage is reduced and cars banned from gridlock hotspots.
69 FROM CATEGORY Sub Category STOCK RESPONSE
SPATIAL OBJECTIVES Changes suggested to identified objectives Spatial Objectives General Are the spatial Housing & wellbeing The Spatial Objectives will be revised to more clearly objectives the o 95 comments were made. focus on the strategic priorities for the Plan (NPPF most Para 155). This is to ensure the strategic nature of appropriate • Housing delivery the Plan as set out in the Memorandum of ones for guiding • Housing developers sought reference to Understanding in 2014. It is the role of UA Local Plan development meeting the objectively assessed need reviews to address more detailed points. The four and growth in for housing in full. To boost housing spatial priorities will focus on the following : the West of supply they also thought the objective 1. To identify and meet the full need for housing England up to should be more positively worded, 2. To meet the space needed for new job 2036? Are there committing the JSP to exceeding creation to facilitate strong economic growth any changes or minimum housing targets. They felt the as set out in the LEP Strategic Economic are there other objective would not be achieved as the Plan objectives you evidence base would not identify the full 3. To ensure a spatial strategy where new would like to need for housing in each Unitary development is properly aligned with see? Authority. infrastructure. • Individual members of the public sought 4. To protect and enhance the sub-region’s reference to a range of matters diverse and valuable environment concerning housing delivery. These However the original 10 spatial objectives have included greater emphasis being placed been retained as sub-objectives on ensuring the timely delivery by housing developers of infrastructure All the detailed points requesting changes to wording required to support new housing; the will be considered in the preparation of the JSP delivery of high density homes; and and any appropriate changes made. bringing Council-owned empty property back into use for housing. • Affordable housing More prominence to affordable housing was sought by seven members of public. This included requesting reference to providing the full range of affordable
70 FROM CATEGORY Sub Category STOCK RESPONSE
housing types and tenures, plus a commitment to ensure homes were affordable to live in through the provision of high environmental performance standards. • Self-build Reference to promoting opportunities for self-build housing was requested by two organisations and two members of the public. • Sustainable development Within Objective 2, Historic England sought reference to sustainable development to ensure the area’s historic environment is adequately considered.
o Economic growth 27 responses were made to this objective. • Location • Individual members of the public sought reference to a range of matters concerning location. These included a commitment to: distribute employment opportunities across the West of England; focus on addressing socio- economic disadvantage in South Bristol; and encourage the co-location of housing and employment. • Housing developers thought that Objective 3 should be more specific,
71 FROM CATEGORY Sub Category STOCK RESPONSE
identifying critical employment locations. • Sustainable growth • Reference to sustainable economic growth was sought by four respondents.
o Transport & infrastructure 56 responses were made to this objective. • Parking Specific reference to parking-related matters was sought by six members of the public. Some sought reference to the provision of adequate car parking while, conversely, others thought priority should be given to reducing car parking spaces. • Infrastructure provision Five members of the public sought reference to ensuring necessary infrastructure is in place prior to new housing. • Rail infrastructure A reference to improving rail infrastructure and access to it was requested by four members of the public.
o Environment 99 responses were made to this objective. • Green Belt • Stronger reference to protecting Green Belt from development was sought by eleven members of the public and
72 FROM CATEGORY Sub Category STOCK RESPONSE
organisations, including the Campaign to Protect Rural England (Avonside branch). • Greenfield land / open space and brownfield land • Housing developers thought Objective 10 was contrary to the Government’s National Planning Policy Framework as they felt the Framework does not seek to minimise greenfield land development and only encourages use of brownfield land. They also thought the objective should recognise the limitations of brownfield land for housing delivery and encourage greenfield development. • Members of the public felt that more emphasis should be given to utilising brownfield land development opportunities. They also generally thought that stronger reference be made to protecting greenfield land and open spaces from development. • Environmental services • Natural England and the West of England Nature Partnership thought Objective 7 should state that services provided by the environment will be considered when making decisions on
73 FROM CATEGORY Sub Category STOCK RESPONSE
patterns of growth. • Flooding • Specific reference to avoiding development in areas subject to flood risk was requested by three members of the public. • Climate change • Reference to adaptation to climate change and mitigation of its effects to minimise future risks was sought by Natural England and the West of England Nature Partnership. • Additional objectives suggested o An objective of involving communities, particularly on the location and type of development, was requested by seven members of the public and organisations. o A range of other objectives was also sought by individual members of the public and organisations: supporting the growth of the area’s universities; the provision of adequate social infrastructure including schools, health and community facilities; renewable energy provision; addressing physical activity issues for children; and protecting town centres, particularly for shopping.
74 FROM CATEGORY SUB CATEGORY STOCK RESPONSE
NUMBER OF NEW Are we planning for the right number of homes? The identification of the Objectively Assessed Needs General HOMES About right and the housing target for the plan area is a critical Are we planning o 142 respondents thought the proposed target part of the plan making process. The responses for the right was about right. Most of these were members of received will assist in refining the approach to ensure number of the public, some of whom qualified their that the plan is based on the most robust evidence homes? Is there agreement by saying they did not have the available. anything else we expertise or knowledge to know. should take into Too high consideration o 135 members of the public and organisations regarding the considered the target to be too high. Concerns number of were expressed at the potential negative impacts homes? of housing growth, for example on the area’s environmental quality and character as well as the transport and community infrastructure. o Too few 139 respondents, mostly housing developers, felt that a higher housing target should be set. They considered that a figure of around 130,000 new homes was more appropriate to meet demand, with the highest target suggested being 153,440. Reasons cited for an increased target included addressing previous under delivery, increasing affordable housing delivery and supporting economic growth.
o Unsure 65 respondents were unsure or felt they were The Joint Spatial Plan will be subject to monitoring not in a position to know whether it was the right and review to ensure that it remains fit for purpose. number. • Is there anything else to take into consideration The evidence base will be updated to include the
75 FROM CATEGORY SUB CATEGORY STOCK RESPONSE
regarding the number of homes? Bath Housing Market Area. The wider Bristol and Bath HMAs will each generate their own Objectively Flexibility o Assessed Need figures which will inform the housing Flexibility to adjust the housing number over time requirement for the whole plan area. was sought by respondents who felt this would assist in adapting to future demographic and The draft plan will emphasise the importance of economic change. sustainability, environmental capacity, infrastructure Housing Market Area boundary o delivery and place making. The use of the Wider Bristol Housing Market Area for establishing the housing number was questioned by 59 respondents, mostly housing developers. They thought it was necessary to include the Bath Housing Market Area. o Infrastructure and environmental capacity Capacity concerns relating to the impacts of new housing on infrastructure and the environment were raised by 82 respondents. Natural England and the West of England Nature Partnership considered that the sustainability of the location, design and construction of homes were as important considerations as the number of homes.
FROM CATEGORY SUB CATEGORY STOCK RESPONSE
BUILDING THE NEW General HOMES o Increasing speed of housing delivery The plan will need to demonstrate that the overall housing requirement is deliverable, and that there is What needs to • Housing developers suggested a range of flexibility and choice. This will be through a happen to ensure measures to expedite delivery, including: combination of strategic locations identified through the homes we • Allocate strategic sites for housing the Joint Spatial Plan and a range of sites delivered
76 FROM CATEGORY SUB CATEGORY STOCK RESPONSE
need are built by development through the JSP rather through the UA local plans. The detailed format of 2036? than waiting for individual local plans to strategic locations will be considered as the plan be produced making process progresses. • Promote a range of housing sites including greenfield sites. This was to recognise the increased constraints they considered to be generally found in redeveloping brownfield sites • Plan for sufficient and deliverable housing sites. This included providing more than the identified need to allow for flexibility, assessing the housing need of all the four West of England local authorities, ensuring sites are viable and clarifying planning obligation / infrastructure requirements • Ensure the local plan and development management process is efficient, flexible and focussed on housing delivery. This included the use of Local Development Orders and rapid granting of planning permissions for applications which accord with the JSP The plan retains a strong brownfield first principle. Additional work is being undertaken to understand • Penalising developers who fail to promptly the potential capacity of urban sites, and how these implement planning permissions and might be delivered. measures to prevent landbanking were suggested by 55 members of the public and organisations.
o Prioritising brownfield development • 158 responses, mainly from members of
77 FROM CATEGORY SUB CATEGORY STOCK RESPONSE
the public, sought emphasis on measures to deliver homes on brownfield sites, including: Strong community engagement and partnership working is essential to producing a successful plan. • Providing incentives to developers of brownfield sites • Focussing on ensuring empty or underused properties, including commercial areas, are brought back or converted into residential use • Making the most efficient use of brownfield land by promoting higher The importance of the timely delivery of essential density development. infrastructure is recognised as important to the o Involvement and partnership work delivery of the plan’s objectives. • The importance of strong community engagement was emphasised by 22 The Joint Spatial Plan will set out the strategic members of the public and organisations context with detailed delivery being guided by local including the Avon Local Councils plans and masterplans where there will be an Association. opportunity to consider alternative and innovative • Partnership working between local solutions. authorities and interested parties such as local groups, self-builders, landowners, Government agencies, etc. was stressed by 14 members of the public.
o Infrastructure provision • Ensuring adequate infrastructure is in place prior to new housing, particularly relating to transport and employment, was a theme emphasised by members of the public and organisations.
78 FROM CATEGORY SUB CATEGORY STOCK RESPONSE
o Other measures: A range of other suggestions was made by 41 individual members of the public and organisations, including: • Set up a dedicated housing delivery body; use innovative designs including prefabricated and temporary housing; adequately assess suitability and capacity of sites, including historic character, to de-risk development process; address capacity and skills issues in the construction industry; increase publicly funded and council / housing association house building.
FROM CATEGORY SUB CATEGORY STOCK RESPONSE
AFFORDABLE HOMES Increase housing target General What needs to o happen to ensure • Housing developers considered that enough of the building more homes overall would be homes built are needed in order to meet affordable affordable? housing targets.
o Increase affordable housing proportion and The comments received on affordability and ensure its delivery affordable housing are being considered as part of the technical evidence to determine the Objectively • A higher proportion of affordable housing Assessed Needs and housing target. as part of new housing was emphasised in 52 responses from members of the public.
79 FROM CATEGORY SUB CATEGORY STOCK RESPONSE
Focussing on ensuring developers deliver The plan recognises that viability issues will affect the affordable housing proportion was potential delivery. A viability assessment will be raised by a similar number of respondents. undertaken.
o Viability and delivery • A realistic approach to viability matters Strategic issues around viability will be considered in was sought by housing developers. They the viability assessment. Delivery mechanisms have also thought that planning obligations and been considered as part of the delivery and infrastructure requirements sought should implementation section of the draft plan. Local reflect viability issues. authorities will consider local viability issues that affect delivery. o Use alternative delivery mechanisms • Measures suggested by respondents included promoting self-build; using local authority-owned land; increasing the ability of housing trusts and local authorities to deliver affordable homes.
o Other measures suggested • A range of other suggestions was made by individual members of the public and organisations, including intervention by Government and providing incentives to developers of affordable housing.
o
FROM CATEGORY SUB CATEGORY STOCK RESPONSE
80 FROM CATEGORY SUB CATEGORY STOCK RESPONSE
EMPLOYMENT LAND Additional employment / economic issues General – ISSUES identified Have we Economic sectors identified the o The Economic Development Needs Assessment has right Specific economic sectors and their potential for taken into account the role of different sectors of the employment growth were identified by eleven members of the economy. The assessment will inform the approach issues? public and organisations. These included food / to employment in the Joint Spatial Plan. agriculture / horticulture, aviation, engineering, sport, digital / media and the tourism / visitor Retail matters will be considered in the review of the sectors. Local Plans having regard to the spatial strategy established in the Joint Spatial Plan. Two responses thought strategic retail policy matters should be addressed saying the JSP The Economic Development Needs Assessments should establish a sub-regional shopping takes into account the contribution of all scales of hierarchy and examine the future role of The business including small and medium sized Mall shopping centre. enterprises. The Federation of Small Businesses sought recognition of the importance of small and The draft Transport and Infrastructure objectives for medium sized enterprises and the availability of the spatial strategy aim to create sustainable affordable business premises. patterns development. o Accessibility and sustainability Ten responses from members of the public Bristol Port is referred to in the Issues and Options emphasised the importance of employment document and will be referenced in the next stage of opportunities being provided near to where people the Joint Spatial Plan. Its role is acknowledged. The live to reduce commuting lengths. issues for south Bristol are acknowledged. The draft Transport and Infrastructure objectives for the spatial o Locations strategy aim to create sustainable patterns Employment and economic issues relating to specific development. locations were identified by six members of the public and organisations. Bristol Port Company
81 FROM CATEGORY SUB CATEGORY STOCK RESPONSE
sought consideration of the Port’s future This is reflected in the draft spatial objectives. development needs at Avonmouth and Portbury. Other matters raised included: insufficient The Joint Spatial Plan will address strategic employment land in South Bristol; and out employment matters and Local Plans will include further detail on specific development matters. The commuting in Yate. draft spatial objectives aim to assist in closing the gap between disadvantaged and other communities. o Other main issues: • Housing developers sought an alignment in the JSP between economic and housing growth. • Individual members of the public and organisations sought consideration of a Bristol Port is referred to in the Issues and Options range of issues including superfast rural document and will be referenced in the next stage of broadband provision; adequate parking for the plan. Its role is acknowledged. businesses; affordable premises for small The Assessment is soundly based and has had and medium sized businesses; changing regard to the information necessary to set out the economic / employment trends such as strategic approach to employment development. The homeworking; health and wellbeing draft Joint Spatial Plan will indicate the approach to matters; tackling socio-economic additional employment land. There will be an disadvantage; and protecting employment opportunity to comment on this before the JSP is land from housing development. finalised. The evidence base will continue to be revised and there will be further opportunity to input • Evidence concerns on this during the next phase of consultation. o The Bristol Port Company considered that the See comments on the approach to the Strategic Economic Development Needs Assessment Housing Market Assessment above – ‘Number of should have addressed the strategic economic New Homes’ importance of the Port and its future growth. o Business West also thought the Economic Development Needs Assessment was flawed. They considered that key employment / economic growth locations and sectors were not
82 FROM CATEGORY SUB CATEGORY STOCK RESPONSE
analysed in sufficient detail; data used was out of date; and there was a failure to recommend provision of sufficient additional employment land to meet likely future business needs. o Housing developers identified a perceived inconsistency in the evidence. This related to the Bath & North East Somerset Council area being included in the Functional Economic Market Area identified in the Economic Development Needs Assessment but excluded from the Wider Bristol Housing Market Area identified in the Strategic Housing Market Assessment.
FROM CATEGORY SUB CATEGORY STOCK RESPONSE
General EMPLOYMENT LAND – Main issues raised: LOCATION Where should new • Accessibility and sustainability employment land be Most respondents (approximately 140) emphasised the The draft Transport and Infrastructure objectives for the located? importance of locating employment land in the most spatial strategy aim to create sustainable patterns of accessible locations, particularly those that could be development. These are supported by the Economic reached by sustainable transport methods. This Growth and Environment objectives. included alongside new and existing housing to reduce travel; urban brownfield sites; major centres; close to public transport infrastructure; part of mixed use development; and alongside existing employment
83 FROM CATEGORY SUB CATEGORY STOCK RESPONSE
areas. Making the most efficient use of existing employment areas was also commonly raised.
• Specific locations
o The Bristol Port Company identified port-related development needs at Avonmouth and Portbury. Bristol Port is referred to in the Issues and Options o Most of the other locations suggested were identified by individual members of the public document and will be referenced in the next stage of the and organisations who did not provide reasons plan. Its role is acknowledged. for their choice of location or refer to specific proposals. The locations included Avonmouth / The draft spatial objectives aim to facilitate economic Severnside; Bristol Airport; Central Bristol; growth of both existing employment centres such as the Enterprise Zones / Areas; Midsomer Norton; Enterprise Zone and Enterprise Areas and in new near to motorway junctions / corridors; locations which will deliver the scale and type of job Portishead; Somer Valley; Thornbury; Weston- generation identified in the Strategic Economic Plan for super-Mare; Yate; and Yatton. The Federation the West of England. of Small Businesses sought provision of small businesses across the West of England.
o South Bristol was identified by seven respondents who felt the area should be a focus for employment land to address socio-economic disadvantage and a paucity of employment opportunities. • Use housing location considerations Historic England, Natural England and the West of England Nature Partnership thought the same spatial considerations used to determine strategic housing This will be taken into account in the preparation of the JSP. The existing Bristol Local Plan identifies South Bristol
84 FROM CATEGORY SUB CATEGORY STOCK RESPONSE
locations should be applied to employment land. as a priority area for regeneration.
• Dependent on type Two responses considered that location would be The draft Transport and Infrastructure objectives for the dependent on the type of employment use. spatial strategy aim to create sustainable patterns of development and these are supported by the Environment objectives.
The locational issues associated with different forms of employment use are acknowledged and will be taken into account.
FROM CATEGORY SUB CATEGORY STOCK RESPONSE
BUILDING MORE • Achieving the approach General HOMES IN BRISTOL The 4 West of England (WoE) unitary authorities AND MAIN TOWNS o A range of measures was suggested by recognise there is a pressing need for new housing and the benefits that new development will provide Is our priority of respondents including: including transport improvements, and the building more • providing incentives to developers to opportunity to address inequality of access to homes homes in Bristol pursue brownfield housing development and jobs. and our main • using compulsory purchase powers more The scale of the issues to address will require a towns frequently strategic approach. In the WoE, we need to take
85 FROM CATEGORY SUB CATEGORY STOCK RESPONSE
appropriate and • engaging with existing communities to steps to ensure more homes are built of the right how can this ensure their infrastructure requirements type and mix and in locations that people and approach be are understood businesses need. achieved? • focussing on conversion and re-use of Building more homes in Bristol and our main towns derelict or underused land and buildings will play a key role in meeting the full need for • careful assessment and high quality, market and affordable housing. It will also support a sensitive design of urban intensification pattern of development which promotes the Plan’s opportunities spatial objectives as set out at page 18 of the I&Os • delivering adequate infrastructure Consultation Document. improvements, including transport, health, The feedback received, including the identification of education, community and recreational a range of measures that will help support and facilities. accommodate the delivery of more homes will be used to help inform the next stage of the Plan. This will ensure the JSP accords with the presumption in favour of sustainable development and that we positively meet the development needs of the area in • Unsuitable approach accord with the NPPF. o Housing developers considered the approach to be inappropriate citing insufficient availability of The purpose of the JSP is to formulate the most brownfield land to meet need. They also thought appropriate spatial strategy which will be that which there was a lack of evidence on issues such as most effectively delivers the Plan’s vision and viability, availability, achievability and suitability objectives in the most sustainable way having to demonstrate the approach was suitable. considered the reasonable alternatives. Whilst there is a preference to maximise brownfield land, an o Other respondents expressed concerns that the approach could lead to poor quality urban appropriate balance will need to be established as to environments and would also need to consider the degree of reliance to be made on brownfield site flood risk issues. delivery. This will help clarity the extent to which greenfield • Combination of approaches locations are needed to meet the Plan’s housing target. o Housing developers thought a combination of approaches would be needed to meet housing The degree of urban intensification that the JSP relies on will need to be presented as part of the
86 FROM CATEGORY SUB CATEGORY STOCK RESPONSE
demand. In addition to urban intensification this evidence base to support the next stage of the JSP could include development on greenfield and and to demonstrate soundness test with regard to Green Belt sites, urban extensions and new how alternative options have been considered. settlements.
FROM CATEGORY SUB CATEGORY STOCK RESPONSE
STRATEGIC LOCATIONS • 37 respondents felt that all the reasonable strategic The I&Os consultation at Table 5.1 set out the main General Have all the locations had been identified. places/ settlements where it was considered most reasonable • 15 locations (broad locations or sites) not shown in likely opportunities for further strategic growth could strategic locations the Issues and Options document were put be delivered. It was recognised that there will be been identified? forward. smaller sites or combinations of locations which Are there any Additional potential strategic locations suggested: could also make a contribution. The locational others we should options presented in the Issues and Options consider? o Congresbury o Land at Junction 18 of the M4 near Tormarton consultation sought to identify the principal options o Wickwar and to seek people’s comments on whether all the reasonable strategic locations been identified. o Falfield o Rudgeway The additional potential locations submitted during o Land east of Lyde Green and west of the I&Os consultation will be assessed to determine Pucklechurch their relative suitability as potential strategic o Filton development locations. The Housing and o Rangeworthy - Heath End area, with a new M5 Employment Land Availability Assessment (HELAA) junction at Tytherington and a new railway and JSP SA, to be published as evidence to support station at Wickwar the next stage of the JSP Plan will present the o North of Buckover analysis of the assessments undertaken with regard o West of Twerton, Bath – urban extension to how additional locations perform as potential o Pilning strategic locations. The views and information o Bath and its surroundings – urban extensions received to the I&Os consultation will be taken into consideration as part of this process.
87 o Land at Longwell Green between the A4174, Formulating the most appropriate spatial strategy Court Farm Road and Longwell Green entails selecting the most appropriate combination of o Junction 14 of the M5 where a business park locations to achieve the Plan’s objectives/ vision. and park and ride facility can be accommodated This will be informed by the sustainability appraisal to ease congestion on the A38 Junction with the (SA) process. The SA will be used to confirm the M5 most sustainable locations. o Land at Whitfield Gate, which could also be considered for park and ride and employment.
FROM CATEGORY SUB CATEGORY STOCK RESPONSE
STRATEGIC LOCATIONS – General • SUITABILITY Support from housing developers; opposition from local people and organisations The new locations submitted during the I&Os Do you have consultation will be assessed to determine their In general, comments on the suitability of comments on the o relative suitability as potential strategic development strategic locations for development were put suitability of any of the locations. Formulating the most appropriate spatial forward by housing developers promoting strategic locations? strategy entails selecting the most appropriate housing development in those locations. combination of locations to achieve the Plan’s Conversely, responses which emphasised the objectives/ vision. This will be informed by the inappropriateness of the strategic locations sustainability appraisal (SA) process. tended to be received from local people and organisations. The Housing and Employment Land Availability • Comments on strategic locations identified in Assessment (HELAA) and JSP SA to be published Issues & Options document as evidence to support the next stage of the JSP Plan will present assessments of how each location Urban intensification locations: o performs in suitability/ sustainability terms. This will • Communities of Bristol north & east fringe take into consideration the views and information received to the I&Os consultation. • North and east fringe potential to Please refer to these documents for how the accommodate development was suitability of locations for strategic growth has been suggested given proximity to existing considered. facilities and services and transport
88 FROM CATEGORY SUB CATEGORY STOCK RESPONSE
infrastructure
o Urban extension locations: • East of Kingswood / Warmley • Traffic congestion and flood risk concerns were raised. The Housing and Employment Land Availability • Bridgeyate / Oldland Common Assessment (HELAA) and JSP SA to be published as evidence to support the next stage of the JSP • Potential negative impacts from traffic Plan will present assessments of how each location congestion were identified performs in suitability/ sustainability terms. This will • North of M4 / M5 take into consideration the views and information received to the I&Os consultation. • The Environment Agency sought Please refer to these documents for how the reassurance that flood risk issues had suitability of locations for strategic growth has been been fully considered in this location. considered. • South West Bristol • The areas on both sides of the A38 were identified as suitable strategic development locations. They were felt to benefit from good transport accessibility and few environmental constraints. • Green Belt was raised as an issue that was considered to make development unsuitable. • Weston-super-Mare The Housing and Employment Land Availability • The area to the east of the M5 close to Assessment (HELAA) and JSP SA to be published Junction 21 was suggested as a as evidence to support the next stage of the JSP strategic development location Plan will present assessments of how each location
89 FROM CATEGORY SUB CATEGORY STOCK RESPONSE
• The Environment Agency considered performs in suitability/ sustainability terms. This will development should be avoided in the take into consideration the views and information Flood Zone 3 part of the Congresbury received to the I&Os consultation. Yeo / Oldbridge River / Puxton Moor flood plain. Please refer to these documents for how the suitability of locations for strategic growth has been • Hicks Gate considered. • Retaining the gap between Keynsham and Bristol was identified as a reason for avoiding development in this location. The Environment Agency identified flood risk issues in parts of this location. Completing the ring road was felt important to make development suitable in this location. • The location’s perceived good transport accessibility and ability to incorporate significant green infrastructure was regarded as making it a suitable The Housing and Employment Land Availability strategic location. Assessment (HELAA) and JSP SA to be published as evidence to support the next stage of the JSP • Whitchurch Plan will present assessments of how each location • Land to the east and west of the A37 performs in suitability/ sustainability terms. This will close to the Norton Lane junction was take into consideration the views and information identified as appropriate for strategic received to the I&Os consultation. development Please refer to these documents for how the • Completing the ring road was felt suitability of locations for strategic growth has been important to make development considered. suitable in this location. The Environment Agency identified potential flood risk issues associated with the
90 FROM CATEGORY SUB CATEGORY STOCK RESPONSE
Brislington Brook
o Town expansion locations: • Clevedon • Land to the south of Clevedon and east of M5 Junction 20 were seen as suitable development locations • Concerns about perceived transport The Housing and Employment Land Availability inadequacies were raised Assessment (HELAA) and JSP SA to be published • Nailsea as evidence to support the next stage of the JSP Plan will present assessments of how each location • Land on the western side of Nailsea performs in suitability/ sustainability terms. This will was suggested as an appropriate take into consideration the views and information development location received to the I&Os consultation. • Portishead Please refer to these documents for how the suitability of locations for strategic growth has been • Concerns were raised regarding traffic considered. congestion on the A369 and the capacity of the proposed rail link and whether there would be adequate car parking • Land to the south of Portbury Common (B3124) and Portbury Hundred (A369) were seen as suitable development locations. Land at Shipway Farm was considered suitable for port-related development. • Keynsham • Addressing traffic and transportation issues was raised. The Environment
91 FROM CATEGORY SUB CATEGORY STOCK RESPONSE
Agency identified flood risk issues in parts of this location. • Proximity to existing facilities and The Housing and Employment Land Availability services was identified as a reason in Assessment (HELAA) and JSP SA to be published support of development. Land on the as evidence to support the next stage of the JSP south side of the town was identified as Plan will present assessments of how each location suitable for development. performs in suitability/ sustainability terms. This will take into consideration the views and information • Midsomer Norton and Radstock received to the I&Os consultation. • The suitability of development in this Please refer to these documents for how the location, particularly given the recent suitability of locations for strategic growth has been Somer Valley Enterprise Zone considered. designation, was raised • Thornbury • The need to restore railway links before building new housing was raised • Yate / Chipping Sodbury • Development potential was suggested in this location, including to take advantage of proposed transport improvement and to connect with the M4. The area in the vicinity of Engine Common was identified as a suitable development location • The Environment Agency sought The Housing and Employment Land Availability consideration of flood risk issues Assessment (HELAA) and JSP SA to be published downstream from this location. as evidence to support the next stage of the JSP Plan will present assessments of how each location o Other settlements / locations: performs in suitability/ sustainability terms. This will take into consideration the views and information
92 FROM CATEGORY SUB CATEGORY STOCK RESPONSE
• Avonmouth (employment) / Severnside received to the I&Os consultation. Please refer to these documents for how the • Severn Beach’s proximity to the suitability of locations for strategic growth has been employment area of Central Park was considered. suggested as a reason why it could accommodate further residential development. The proposed M49 Junction was identified as a justification for development both for Severnside and Severn Beach. • The Environment Agency advised against considering residential development in parts of this area subject to Flood Zone 3 prior to agreeing a strategic flood defence The purpose of the JSP is to formulate the most approach. appropriate spatial strategy which will be that which • Charfield most effectively delivers the Plan’s vision and objectives in the most sustainable way having considered the Development potential was suggested reasonable alternatives. Whilst there is a preference to as it would take advantage of proposed maximise brownfield land, an appropriate balance will transport improvements, e.g. reintroduction of rail services, and what need to be established as to the degree of reliance to be was seen as a lack of significant made on brownfield site delivery. This will help clarity environmental constraints. the extent to which greenfield locations are needed to • Pucklechurch meet the Plan’s housing target. The degree of urban intensification that the JSP relies on will need to be • This location and land to its west was presented as part of the evidence base to support the identified as having characteristics next stage of the JSP and to demonstrate soundness test suitable for development with regard to how alternative options have been • Winterbourne, Frampton, Coalpit Heath considered. • Coalpit Heath’s existing facilities,
93 FROM CATEGORY SUB CATEGORY STOCK RESPONSE
proximity to major employment areas and proposed transport improvements were suggested as reasons for the suitability of development • The Environment Agency advised that consideration should be given to a strategic flood storage solution so as to reduce flood risk downstream. • Banwell • Concerns about perceived transport inadequacies were raised. The Environment Agency noted that the area north of Biddle Street was subject to high flood risk. • Churchill • Concerns about perceived transport inadequacies were raised. • Long Ashton • Proximity to Bristol and good transport accessibility were highlighted as characteristics which made this location a suitable strategic area • Pill • A strategic location covering Pill and Easton-in-Gordano was supported on the grounds of its perceived accessibility and deliverability.
94 FROM CATEGORY SUB CATEGORY STOCK RESPONSE
• Conversely, the case for residential development in this location was considered to be weak due to what was felt to be poor transport accessibility and congestion. • Yatton • Concerns about flood risk were expressed • Saltford • Comments suggested that traffic and transportation issues needed to be addressed • Temple Cloud / Clutton • This location was deemed unsuitable due to poor transport facilities.
o Dispersed locations • Bath & NE Somerset • Development near Bath was promoted to support the city’s economic and commercial growth • Other issues raised
o Respondents sought consideration of a range of issues in the choice of strategic locations. These included ensuring adequate assessment of built and natural environment capacity; infrastructure provision; engagement with neighbouring
95 FROM CATEGORY SUB CATEGORY STOCK RESPONSE
authorities; and a comprehensive transport strategy.
FROM CATEGORY SUB CATEGORY STOCK RESPONSE
STRATEGIC LOCATIONS – General ADVANTAGES OR The locational options consulted on during the DISADVANTAGES Issues and Options consultation will be assessed to determine their relative suitability as potential Do some strategic strategic development locations. Formulating the locations have most appropriate spatial strategy entails selecting advantages or the most appropriate locations to achieve the Plan’s disadvantages in objectives/ vision. This will be informed by the terms of • Advantages sustainability appraisal (SA) process. addressing the plan’s critical o The advantages of strategic locations were issues? identified generally by developers promoting housing in those areas. They pointed to positive Additionally all strategic locations are being characteristics including good transport evaluated through technical assessments that accessibility; proximity to existing facilities and contribute to the Joint Spatial Plan evidence. The services, including employment; and the ability outputs of these assessments will help inform to provide new community and green decision making on the overall suitability of a given infrastructure as part of the location’s strategic location taking into account transport development. accessibility, environmental risk, employment and infrastructure provision. Advantages and • Disadvantages disadvantages relating to a specific location will be o Generally, responses from members of the addressed and reviewed to provide a narrative public and organisations such as town and regarding development decisions in a given location. parish councils emphasised the disadvantages These narratives and assessments of locations will of the strategic locations. Their comments take into account public input from consultations.
96 FROM CATEGORY SUB CATEGORY STOCK RESPONSE
focussed on potential negative environmental impacts, including the loss of green field and Green Belt land. Concerns about traffic congestion and the over-development of existing settlements were also expressed.
FROM CATEGORY SUB CATEGORY STOCK RESPONSE
General SPATIAL SCENARIOS Respondents were not restricted to the selection of a The purpose of the JSP is to formulate the most Which spatial single scenario; multiple scenarios were frequently appropriate spatial strategy which will be that which scenario (or mix of selected with advantages expressed. Respondents most effectively delivers the Plan’s vision and scenarios) is likely to often identified that a combination of more than one objectives in the most sustainable way having best deliver the plan’s scenario would likely deliver the plan’s objectives. considered the reasonable alternatives. The most objectives? appropriate spatial scenario will take account of all options/typologies of development presented at the Issues and Options stage. The majority of comments made when discussing potential spatial scenarios were from individual members of the public. Key stakeholders and Views expressed will inform assessments of organisations provided input when relevant to their locations suitability. Ongoing engagement will be areas of focus. undertaken through consultation to allow input to the JSP preparation. Overall Pattern of Responses: Of the five scenarios presented, the majority of responses showed preference towards a transport focused scenario, either in combination with others or alone. Protection of Green Belt was the second most
97 FROM CATEGORY SUB CATEGORY STOCK RESPONSE
frequently chosen scenario, again either in combination or alone. These were followed by Scenario 4: A more event spread of development and Scenario 2: Concentration at Bristol Urban Area, with the least selected scenario being Scenario 5: New Settlement.
Key findings related to each Scenario Presented: Scenario 1: Protection of the Green Belt The Issues and Options document highlighted 120 responses indicated support for the protection of several scenarios for development. Each option had the Green Belt scenario. its own merits and issues. The purpose of the JSP is to formulate the most appropriate spatial strategy which will be that which most effectively delivers the • 77 responses specifically identified advantages of Plan’s vision and objectives in the most sustainable this scenario: way having considered the reasonable alternatives. o The majority of responses came from Public opinion on these scenarios have helped to individual members of the public and there shape the development of more refined spatial was support from campaign and local scenarios. The outcome will be presented within the amenity groups. Parish council support for Draft plan document for further consultation. The this scenario was referenced within Green Belt retention scenario was strongly statements from: Olveston, Sodbury, Pill supported by members of the public. Green Belt and Easton-in-Gordano, Yatton, assessment will continue to be reviewed as part of Congresbury, Barrow Gurney, Cleeve, the evidence. Officers are assessing the potential of Backwell, Wraxall and Failand, Dodington, all scenarios to deliver the housing need. Bitton, South Stoke and Norton Malreward Parish Councils. o Constraining urban sprawl and environmental protection were raised most often as reasons for support, with particular reference to protecting agricultural land, encouraging brownfield development,
98 FROM CATEGORY SUB CATEGORY STOCK RESPONSE
combating climate change, and the benefits to public health and wellbeing. • 8 responses addressed negative impacts of this scenario, including a potential restraint to housing growth and the impact of encouraging unsustainable transport links. o Developers promoting sites within the Green Belt expressed the need to release areas of Green Belt to allow the delivery of the JSP housing quantum within more sustainable locations.
Scenario 2: Concentration at Bristol Urban Area
100 responses indicated support for this scenario. The Issues and Options document highlighted several scenarios for development. Each option had its own merits and issues. The purpose of the JSP is • 89 responses highlighted advantages of this to formulate the most appropriate spatial strategy scenario: which will be that which most effectively delivers the o Stakeholders referred to sustainable low carbon Plan’s vision and objectives in the most sustainable extensions and sustainable transport links. way having considered the reasonable alternatives. There was support from individual members of Public opinion on these typologies have helped to the public specifically in relation to brownfield shape the development of more refined spatial development. scenarios which will be presented within the Draft plan document for further consultation. o Advantages discussed included; the ability for employment focused development; the ability this scenario has in allowing more sustainable transport links and shorter commuter distances; the reduced cost of infrastructure development and the reduced environmental impact of development,
99 FROM CATEGORY SUB CATEGORY STOCK RESPONSE
combating climate change. • 35 responses highlighted specific disadvantages of this scenario including, the already overcrowded nature of the city, the increased impact this scenario would have on traffic congestion and the increased pressures on infrastructure and utilities.
Scenario 3: Transport focused 167 responses indicated support for a transport The Issues and Options document highlighted focused scenario. several scenarios for development. Each option had its own merits and issues. The purpose of the JSP is to formulate the most appropriate spatial strategy • 134 comments were made specifically highlighting which will be that which most effectively delivers the advantages of this scenario: Plan’s vision and objectives in the most sustainable o Highways England considered it vital to way having considered the reasonable alternatives. ensure that new development is focused on Public opinion on these typologies have helped to areas where there is good sustainable shape the development of more refined spatial public transport provision that enhances scenarios which will be presented within the Draft current links. plan document for further consultation. A Transport focused option was considered as the most o Enhancing current transport links and developing more sustainable methods of supported spatial scenario. A final JSP will utilise the travel across the West of England (WoE) Joint Transport Study and Sustainability Appraisal were raised the most. Related to this were assessments to determine locations that are advantages in combating congestion issues sustainable and suitable with relation to transport across the WoE and developing multimodal infrastructure. travel options. • 3 comments presented disadvantages relating to an increased pressure on rural land and increases in pollution levels from transport network development.
100 FROM CATEGORY SUB CATEGORY STOCK RESPONSE
Scenario 4: A more event spread of development 101 respondents indicated support for this scenario. The Issues and Options document highlighted several scenarios for development. Each option had its own merits and issues. The purpose of the JSP is • 61 comments identified advantages of this spatial to formulate the most appropriate spatial strategy scenario: which will be that which most effectively delivers the o There was a view that this scenario would Plan’s vision and objectives in the most sustainable help to develop a diverse housing stock, way having considered the reasonable alternatives. and opportunities for spreading Public opinion on these typologies have helped to development and economic benefits. shape the development of more refined spatial o The ability to spread development and scenarios which will be presented within the Draft growth across the WoE and the benefits plan document for further consultation. and opportunity to develop a diverse housing stock were raised the most. The reduction of traffic build up and the ability to better connect the WoE area were also identified as benefits to this scenario. • 3 responses reflected disadvantages including; the increase in car dependency, potential environmental degradation of rural areas and an increased resistance to development as more communities are impacted.
Scenario 5: New Settlement 29 comments were made in support of this scenario. The Issues and Options document highlighted several scenarios for development. Each option had • 14 responses highlighted advantages namely in its own merits and issues. The purpose of the JSP is relation to; the ability to focus infrastructure and to formulate the most appropriate spatial strategy utility development and the benefits of integrated
101 FROM CATEGORY SUB CATEGORY STOCK RESPONSE
development of housing and employment. which will be that which most effectively delivers the Plan’s vision and objectives in the most sustainable o Amongst those offering support were some Parish Councils. Barrow Gurney Council way having considered the reasonable alternatives. said that Scenario 5 should be elevated to a Public opinion on these typologies have helped to higher level of consideration. The West of shape the development of more refined spatial England Nature Partnership said that new scenarios which will be presented within the Draft settlements provide an opportunity to plan document for further consultation. develop a new garden village or Eco-town The four authorities have jointly written to Wadderton to showcase environmental and ecological Park Ltd to inquire further to their response. best practice. Waddeton Park Limited Additionally we have recently received a new indicated that the company was giving settlement proposal from the Tortworth Estate in considerations to the possibility of bringing relation to a garden village at Buckover (South forward a new settlement, however no site Gloucestershire). We will continue to assess the was identified. potential of this submission. • 2 disadvantages were highlighted; the expensive nature of this option and; the potential poorly developed infrastructure and utilities networks.
A combination of all scenarios: 44 responses were made in support of a combination of all scenarios presented, highlighting that the benefits of each scenario could be combined The Issues and Options document highlighted to induce a mixture of development type to address several scenarios for development. Each option had multiple WoE level issues. its own merits and issues. The purpose of the JSP is to formulate the most appropriate spatial strategy which will be that which most effectively delivers the Key focuses for a spatial scenario going forward: Plan’s vision and objectives in the most sustainable In addition to comments made in relation to a given way having considered the reasonable alternatives. spatial scenario, 138 responses were made that This may be a combination of one or more of the highlighted fundamental focuses needing to be scenarios consulted on in the Issues and Options. addressed in any chosen scenario:
102 FROM CATEGORY SUB CATEGORY STOCK RESPONSE
Environment: • 27 comments highlighting the need for the protection of environmental assets specially mentioning the 2 AONBs, ancient woodland and agricultural land. • 13 responses promoted the need for green In response to concerns raised and in accordance infrastructure focus. with national policy and guidance on plan making, the JSP process key environmental assets have • 9 responses said there was a need for a been avoided when identifying areas for regional climate change resilience scenario. development to allow protection of the West of o Both stakeholder and member of public England’s environmental assets. For further detail responses suggested the need for a please refer to our technical reports presented at the regional scale, coordinated approach to Issues and Options stage and further reports to be planning which looks to maximise multiple presented at the draft plan stage. social, economic and environmental benefits. In particular responses from Avon Wildlife Trust, Natural England, Historic England and Wessex Water considered there was need for a joint approach with principles of green infrastructure; strategic ecological networks; and an ecosystems services approach to development.
Infrastructure and Transport: • 15 responses highlighted that any scenario will essentially depend of the infrastructure development to an area. • 15 responses mentioned that development A final JSP will utilise the Joint Transport Study, was completely dependent on transport Sustainability Appraisal and infrastructure viability assessments to determine locations that are
103 FROM CATEGORY SUB CATEGORY STOCK RESPONSE
resilience. sustainable and suitable with relation to transport infrastructure. o Highways England discussed the importance and role of public transport in sustainable development and its interrelation to impacts on the natural environment and quality of life.
Urban Design: • 14 responses addressed the need for urban design and place making principles within a final scenario. Urban design and Place making will be reviewed as an evidence base for the JSP and will be progressed o There was a suggestion of the need for future development to adapt to changing in further stages of the plan. lifestyles and the need to properly address life-enhancing infrastructure.
Cross Boundary: • 4 responses discussed development impacts outside of the WoE area, particularly in relation Through the Duty to Cooperate we will continue to to transport and infrastructure. work with our neighbouring authorities formally. o Sedgemoor District Council raised the issue of cross boundary development impacts, specifically in relation to the M5, A370 and A38, with significant development likely to result in additional traffic needing to be addressed.
Economics: • 9 responses referred to the need for an
104 FROM CATEGORY SUB CATEGORY STOCK RESPONSE
economically focused development scenario with particular mention to a skills focused As part of the draft plan evidence base an economic development reflecting local objectives and strategy will be presented and will be utilised to help needs. inform the development of a final JSP.
FROM CATEGORY SUB CATEGORY STOCK RESPONSE
WEST OF ENGLAND LEP
General NEW SETTLEMENT • New settlement as a solution If a new settlement is All responses to the Issues and Options consultation Waddeton Park Ltd said they were seriously o are being reviewed. The four authorities have jointly a solution, how big considering the possibility of bringing forward a written to Wadderton Park Ltd to inquire further to should it be and new settlement and said they are in discussion their response. Additionally we have more recently with landowners to assemble sufficient land to where would you received a new settlement proposal from the promote a new settlement of up to 5000 suggest it could go? Tortworth Estate in relation to a garden village at dwellings. No location was indicated. Buckover (South Gloucestershire). We will continue Comments indicated that respondents o to assess the potential of this submission. understood ‘new settlement’ could mean a new stand-alone location or a significant expansion to an existing settlement. Various suggestions were made but these were not generally supported by specific land submissions and/or were related to strategic locations already identified. • New settlement not a solution
o Respondents suggested a number of reasons To ensure a robust evidence base all call for sites why they considered a new settlement was not a have been reviewed and considered in informing the
105 FROM CATEGORY SUB CATEGORY STOCK RESPONSE
WEST OF ENGLAND LEP
solution. These included the length of time to draft plan. develop a new settlement; the cost of new infrastructure; and the lack of any new settlements being promoted. • Other issues raised o Respondents sought consideration of a range of issues in the consideration of a new settlement. These included ensuring adequate infrastructure provision, particularly transport, green and health infrastructure; and robust assessment of environmental impacts.
FROM CATEGORY SUB CATEGORY STOCK RESPONSE
TRANSPORT General • The suggestions for transport improvements and What transport Strengthen and enhance public transport corridors measures will be taken into account in the preparation of improvements or the Joint Spatial Plan and Joint Transport Strategy. A measures would be o Comfortable, reliable and frequent buses variety of measures are being explored and evaluated. connecting areas required to support the Affordable public transport scenarios? o o Need for integrated multi-modal multi-operator ticketing o New railway stations, e.g. at Charfield, Thornbury, Ashton Gate and Saltford o Need for significant new development to have railway station connections o Access to railway stations o Additional Park & Ride facilities
106 FROM CATEGORY SUB CATEGORY STOCK RESPONSE
o New public transport interchanges • Extend MetroBus network o Suggested extensions included: Yate and East Bristol; South Bristol (Whitchurch, Hick’s Gate, Hartcliffe); North Somerset (Weston-super-Mare, Yatton, Clevedon) and North Bristol (Thornbury, Cribbs Causeway, Avonmouth) • Extend MetroWest
o Reopen old railway lines, e.g. Strawberry Line; Sharpness; East Bristol o Extend to Bristol Airport and Cribbs Causeway o Extend lines into Wiltshire, Somerset and Gloucestershire • MetroWest ++
o Tram / tram-train routes suggested: . Avonmouth – Henbury – Clifton . Yatton – Clevedon . Patchway / Parkway – Cribbs Causeway . Filton North – Cribbs Causeway . Bristol Temple Meads – City Centre – Harbourside – Old Market . Bristol Temple Meads – Lawrence Hill – Mangotsfield . Yate – Thornbury . Yate – East Fringe – Newbridge Park & Ride – Bath . Connections to Emerson’s Green, South Bristol and the Airport
107 FROM CATEGORY SUB CATEGORY STOCK RESPONSE
• Cycle superhighways
o New separate and segregated cycle routes, e.g. connection between Frome Greenway and Bristol to Bath Railway Path; complete the Somerset Circle; connections from Clevedon to Yatton / Portishead / Weston-super-Mare and Nailsea / Festival Way • Better connectivity
o New motorway network connections, e.g. M4 junction to connect to East Fringe; M5 junction to connect to Airport; Southern M4/M5 link road o Complete Bristol ring road o New roads, e.g. A46/A36 link road near Bath; Callington Road link • Sub-regional pinch points and bottlenecks
o New bypasses, e.g. Backwell, Saltford, Stoke Gifford, Banwell, Winterbourne o Address M5 pinchpoints at Junctions 19-21 o Managed motorway between Clevedon and Cribbs Causeway o Reduce congestion at M4 / M5 Almondsbury interchange; A4 / A4174 Hick’s Gate roundabout o More road river crossings • Strategic corridor packages
o Increased bus priority and segregation on key routes o Create red routes or restrict parking along key corridors
108 FROM CATEGORY SUB CATEGORY STOCK RESPONSE
o Downgrade the M32 and use it as a strategic corridor for other modes o Improvements along the A38 corridor and A4174 • Working better together o Local government control of public transport services needed o Integrated Transport Authority required • Local Sustainable Transport Fund + o Increased bicycle hire, car clubs and car sharing o More flexible working should be promoted o Improved bicycle interchange facilities, including park & cycle locations on edge of towns o Improved provision for taking bicycles on trains and buses o Use of community transport and subsidised taxis to enable access to public transport • Travel demand management o Congestion charging o Parking restrictions, including reducing on-street parking, introducing a business charge for off- street parking and extending Residents’ Parking Zones. o Car free days or restrictions such as odd / even number plates. o Urban Traffic Management and Control systems o Low Emission Zones • Other suggestions
109 FROM CATEGORY SUB CATEGORY STOCK RESPONSE
o General suggestions were made for improved new public transport and new roads o Ensuring location of new housing is close to employment and services to reduce need to travel o Improving the public realm, e.g. removing or restricting vehicles in Bristol City Centre o Use of innovation and technology, such as promoting low emission vehicles and home working.
110 Appendix B – Officer Responses to Joint Transport Study consultation submissions
From Category Sub-category Issue Summary of issue Officer Response General Issues Travel options Bus Respondents raised many issues with Improving bus infrastructure to make buses in the WoE area, including bus travel more attractive will be a key inadequate routes/services (gaps in priority for the JTS. The JTS highlights provision including orbital and cross that public transport usage is relatively city); poor frequencies on some low in the West of England and that routes making bus use difficult; much because of the coverage of bus longer journey times than by car networks, they represent the best being a deterrent; the difficulty of opportunity to increase the number of interchange (times aligning poorly, people using public transport. Strategies many different stops); poor quality to improve the experience of bus users buses being used on some routes; and encourage this modal shift is accessibility issues (some buses are therefore an important component of unsuitable for users with mobility the Study. issues and most are unsuitable for users with visual impairments); the cost of buses (especially if more than one route offered by different operators was required); services being withdrawn; insufficient bus priority meaning that there is no advantage to using the bus.
111 General Issues Travel options Rail Respondents raised many issues with The need for new rail services and trains in the WoE area, including the infrastructure to tackle congestion and limited routes and stations in the unlock land for employment and housing area; the low frequency of most will be considered as part of the services; poor reliability; difficulty of transport modelling for the JTS and the interchange (both poorly timed rail JSP. New rail infrastructure and services connections and difficulty of are part of a wider package of measures changing from another mode to rail); including buses, cycling, walking, overcrowding in some carriages. interchanges and strategic corridor improvements. Some locations will remain difficult to serve by rail. With a modest modal share, 2.1% of journeys to work in the 2011 Census, and despite impressive levels of passenger growth in recent years rail’s role is a supporting one. Buses with the ability to deliver high frequency and extensive networks of services will remain the main form of public transport. Capacity constraints on the local rail network and the need to balance local, regional, national and freight services will determine which new stations and services are possible. The high costs of major capacity improvements lies outside the scope of the JTS and JSP with Network Rail’s Western Route Study and Government funding expected to deliver them.
112 General Issues Travel options Cycling Respondents raised several issues Providing for active and sustainable related to cycling including the lack of travel will be central to the JTS and the cycling routes between many emerging strategy. destinations, and the low quality of Cycling infrastructure schemes are being some routes that are provided, with considered as part of the JTS. some routes very disjointed and other routes considered unsafe (including due to issues with lighting) General Issues Travel options Walking Respondents raised several issues Providing for sustainable modes of related to walking including a lack of transport, in particular walking and suitable pedestrian routes in some cycling, will be central to the JTS. The places, the need for further nature of the strategy development pedestrianisation, and poor quality means that walking has by necessity routes (including poor lit). Others been considered at a conceptual level. also felt that walking was mostly Walking policy will be considered further overlooked in the strategy. in the next Joint Local Transport Plan. General Issues Travel options Ticketing Ticketing was raised as an issue by The Councils are working towards several respondents, with the lack of delivery of an integrated ticketing integrated ticketing cited as a system that can be used across different difficulty in making longer journeys operators and different modes. In with several modes. The cost of addition, smart ticketing methods for having to buy several different tickets paying for travel that is convenient and to make one journey was also raised. straightforward to use will make public transport more attractive. Developing a ticketing strategy that builds upon the work in this area that has already been done, will play a significant part in the region's transport strategy.
113 General Issues Congestion Journey time Respondents felt that congestion has Congestion has been identified as a key a large impact on journey times in existing problem in the sub region, the West of England area, by bus and especially at peak times for journeys by by car, with peak journey times being car and bus (where buses get stuck with much longer and also very unreliable, general traffic). Our current major making it difficult to plan ahead. transport scheme programme, in particular MetroBus is intended to provide quicker and more reliable public transport options. The JTS will suggest a strategy and new schemes aimed at tackling exactly this congestion and unreliable journey times. General Issues Congestion Impacts on Respondents believed that Congestion has been identified as a key environment congestion along key corridors was existing problem in the sub region. (urban/rural) having a negative impact on the The JTS will suggest a strategy and new surrounding areas with issues such schemes aimed at tacking congestion, air the quality of place, as well as noise, quality and improving quality of life. air quality and safety impacts. Strategic corridor packages that include improved environments for pedestrians and cyclists will be considered as part of the JTS. General Issues Congestion Hotspots Congestion hotspots were identified There are various congestion hotspots as an issue, with long delays being across the West of England area. The caused along whole corridors by one Joint Transport Study technical work will or two junctions or unsuitable road identify where mitigation is needed in layouts. light of existing pressures and through forecasting the impacts from development traffic. The final Joint Transport Study will set out a range of measures to help minimise traffic impacts and to increase highway capacity where necessary to support the economic growth and development of
114 the sub region.
General Issues Congestion HGVs/Freight Respondents identified issues with The West of England’s large population, the levels of HGVs and freight size and diverse economic activity vehicles using certain routes generates significant amounts of freight. (especially smaller unsuitable ones) With housing and employment growth and creating higher levels of through the JSP the levels of freight congestion in some areas. movement will increase. Road borne freight will remain the main option for distribution. The Joint Local Transport Plan recognises and acts on the need to balance the requirements for distributing goods whilst mitigating the adverse impact of vehicles on communities. General Issues Environment Carbon Respondents expressed concern Limited travel options, especially in rural about carbon emissions, especially areas, and the environmental challenges due to the level of car use in more that transport presents have been rural areas because of a lack of identified as key existing problems in the suitable alternatives. sub region. The West of England has several areas where levels of harmful emissions are regularly above acceptable levels. These are currently being addressed through Air Quality Management Areas. The JTS will suggest a strategy and new schemes aimed at reducing reliance on
115 the private car.
General Issues Environment Air quality Respondents raised the issue of The environmental challenges that reduced air quality due to high levels transport presents, including that of of travel by car. There were concerns poor air quality, has been identified as a about the impact along busy key existing problem in the sub region. corridors especially, and how this The West of England has several areas impacted local residents and other where levels of harmful emissions are users such as pedestrians and regularly above acceptable levels. These cyclists. are currently being addressed through Air Quality Management Areas . Strategic corridor packages that include improved environments for pedestrians and cyclists will be considered as part of the JTS. One of the policy objectives of the Joint Local Transport Plan is to reduce carbon emissions by providing better travel choices such as walking, cycling and better public transport. The JTS will suggest a strategy and new schemes aimed at reducing reliance on the private car.
116 General Issues Environment Noise Respondents were concerned about Transport associated noise is recognised the levels of noise along busy as a significant negative influence on the corridors, and the negative impact quality of life for affected residents. The that this could have on those living in JTS seeks to prioritise those transport the area. modes and measures that minimise noise impacts, for example walking, cycling and electrified public transport where appropriate. Regarding freight, encouragement of non road options for the movement of goods will help to address noise issues. General Issues Environment Public realm Respondents identified the need for Consideration of options to reduce the quality public realm to encourage dominance of road traffic, especially in sustainable travel behaviour, with the city centres is included in the study. suggestion that the dominance of road traffic needed to be reduced, especially in city centres. General Issues Social Cost of travel The cost of travel was identified as an Public transport fares are largely out of issue, with low income people being the control of the local authorities. Bus more likely to be reliant on public fares are mostly set by commercial transport, but less likely to be able to operators. New bus franchising powers, afford it. Again the high cost of as part of devolution, will provide taking more complicated journeys greater powers for local authorities to (multiple operators or modes) was influence fare levels, although there raised as an issue. would be a cost implication (for the authorities). Free bus travel for senior citizens and some disabled people remains a statutory requirement. For rail fares some are regulated by the Department for Transport, with others left to the train operating company. The West of England is committed to smarter forms of integrated ticketing.
117 General Issues Social Safety and security Respondents raised concerns about Road safety is recognised as key through road safety for all users, including the the JTS work, by the adoption of the detrimental effects of freight on strategic objective to contribute to other road users and concerns about better safety, health and security. The the safety of cyclists using existing prioritisation of cycling investment facilities. schemes, for example in the development of segregated cycle routes, would contribute to the achievement of this objective, and this will be considered further through the JTS. General Issues Social Health The importance of promoting healthy Healthy modes of travel, primarily modes of travel was raised, as was cycling and walking, will be an important the issue of health impacts due to part of the JTS and the strategy that vehicles (air quality and noise). comes from it. The negative health Access to healthcare was also raised, impacts due to vehicles, particularly in with hospitals and mental health congested urban areas, are already facilities both raised as difficult to understood and being addressed (e.g. access. AQMAs). The JTS will seek to ensure less polluting modes are central to the strategy, with the aim of mitigating the adverse impacts of vehicles. By promoting a general improvement in transport networks, access to healthcare facilities would benefit; however, the strategic nature of the study means that access to specific facilities is not part of the its remit. General Issues Housing Impacts on network Respondents were concerned that Potential development locations being new housing would result in the considered by the JSP will be modelled addition of traffic onto an already to understand how additional traffic will stretched network, with concerns impact on the existing transport about impacts on local hotspots (such networks; improvements will be as junctions close to any suggested to mitigate the impact of new
118 development) and the wider developments. network.
General Objectives Support Amend objective Respondents suggested that while The five transport goals are set out in economic economic growth was an important priority order and all are required to growth goal, it should not be at the expense provide a balanced approach. of all the other goals, and that any Consultation responses to the Joint economic growth supported should Transport Study reveal strong support be sustainable. for all five goals. General Objectives Support Strategic connections Respondents raised the importance Strategic connections, included those economic of strategic road and rail links, suggested, are already being improved growth including links between main areas of by MetroBus and MetroWest; further employment (such as between Bristol improvements will be considered and city centre, the East Fringe and the reflected in the JTS strategy. North Fringe) as well as connections to international gateways such as the port (especially freight connections) and the airport. General Objectives Support Congestion Congestion was identified as a Congestion has been identified as a key economic problem for economic growth, with existing problem in the sub region growth delays and unpredictable journey causing delays and unpredictable times costing business money (both journey times. The JTS will seek to in terms of transporting goods and address this and present a transport visiting clients), deterring businesses strategy that will support economic from expanding in the area. growth on the West of England. General Objectives Support Transport Respondents were concerned that The concern about the mis match economic infrastructure/planning transport infrastructure in the WoE is between the demand for and supply of growth currently insufficient for the amount transport network capacity is widely held of journeys being made, and that and appreciated by the authorities; the unless new infrastructure was need for improvements to address this provided (either to shift journeys concern will be considered in the JTS.
119 away from the car/HGV or to provide new routes), this would limit the economic attractiveness of the area.
General Objectives Support Unlock jobs and Respondents felt that new transport The need for new transport economic housing infrastructure and interventions infrastructure and interventions to growth would be required in order to unlock unlock land for employment and housing land for employment and housing will be considered as part of the development in the area, as many transport modelling for the JTS and the locations are currently either poorly JSP. The need to support economic connected or the local transport growth and future development will be network is at capacity. central to the strategy that emerges from the JTS. General Objectives Carbon Change objective Several respondents felt that the Air quality issues other than carbon scope of this objective was too small, dioxide impacts are addressed and that it should be expanded to elsewhere, through the objectives (i) to include reducing all transport contribute to better safety, health and emissions, not just carbon. security; and (ii) to improve quality of life and a healthy natural environment. The preferred approach is therefore to restrict this objective to the headline issue of carbon emissions only. General Objectives Carbon Sustainable transport Respondents felt that in order to Sustainable modes of travel, public network reduce carbon emissions, there transport, cycling and walking, will be an would need to be serious important part of the JTS and the improvements to the sustainable strategy that comes from it. transport network for viable mode shift to occur. General Objectives Carbon Behavioural change Respondents felt that behavioural The JTS will assume sustainable travel change needed to be encouraged in modes will continue be encouraged and order to reduce carbon emissions, will also consider re allocation of road
120 both through travel space in city centres (in favour of planning/education and through sustainable modes of travel). restrictions. General Objectives Accessibility Access for all to Respondents felt that it was Key employment and education centres employment, important for public transport to outside the central urban areas are more education and training serve key attractors such as difficult to serve by public transport. The employment and education centres, current major schemes programme, in so that those without a car would not particular MetroBus, starts to address be excluded difficulties of getting these locations in the North Fringe, and between residential areas and any South Bristol. Future schemes will be non central employment/education identified in the JTS. Ensuring access to was raised in particular. employment will be central to its success. General Objectives Accessibility Mode Respondents felt that it was Providing for sustainable modes of priorities/hierarchy important to not just focus on access transport, in particular walking and to places by road, but that priority cycling, will be an important part of the should be given to walking and JTS strategy. cycling access (with some respondents citing the hierarchy of modes in Manual for Streets 2). General Objectives Accessibility Rural accessibility Respondents felt that the issues of It is difficult to provide a full range of rural accessibility was not fully multi modal travel options to many of addressed, and that it will be the rural areas in the West of England. important to recognise that different The Transport Study has however solutions will be needed in rural assessed the traffic and congestion areas, and that in some places access challenges across both urban and rural by car will still be very important. areas and potential mitigations identified where appropriate. It will be important to maximise the opportunities for non car travel where possible to reduce the overall network impacts of car use on congestion across the West of England network.
121 General Objectives Health, safety, Healthy travel Respondents felt that it was Healthy modes of travel, primarily security important to promote and give cycling and walking will be central to the priority to healthier modes of travel, JTS and the strategy that comes from it. such as walking and cycling, as this The JTS will also seek to ensure less could have wider benefits for the polluting modes are central to the population. Increased levels of approach and where possible more walking due to using public transport polluting traffic is reduced from central was also noted as beneficial for locations. health. General Objectives Health, safety, Safety Respondents felt that it was Road safety is recognised as key through security important for road safety to be the JTS work, by the adoption of the considered, including improving strategic objective to contribute to conditions for cyclists, measures to better safety, health and security. The remove HGVs from unsuitable roads, prioritisation of cycling investment and dealing with accident hotspots. schemes, and improved network management to address the impacts of HGV traffic, will contribute to the achievement of this objective, and this will be considered further through the JTS.
122 General Objectives Health, safety, Air quality Respondents felt that it was The environmental challenges that security important to address the impact of transport presents, including that of road travel on air quality in areas, poor air quality, has been identified as a with polluted corridors such as the key existing problem in the sub region. A38 having a detrimental impact on The West of England has several areas the health of those living nearby as where levels of harmful emissions are well as those walking or cycling along regularly above acceptable levels. These the corridors. are currently being addressed through Air Quality Management Areas . Strategic corridor packages that include improved environments for pedestrians and cyclists will be considered as part of the JTS. One of the policy objectives of the Joint Local Transport Plan is to reduce carbon emissions by providing better travel choices such as walking, cycling and better public transport. The JTS will suggest a strategy and new schemes aimed at reducing reliance on the private car.
123 General Objectives Quality of Life Impact on urban Respondents were concerned about The environmental challenges that environment the impact of the transport network transport presents, including that of in urban environments, especially poor air quality, has been identified as a along busy road corridors, which key existing problem in the sub region. severed communities and had a The West of England has several areas negative impact on the quality of where levels of harmful emissions are place as well as causing noise and air regularly above acceptable levels. These quality issues. are currently being addressed through Air Quality Management Areas . Strategic corridor packages that include improved environments for pedestrians and cyclists will be considered as part of the JTS. One of the policy objectives of the Joint Local Transport Plan is to reduce carbon emissions by providing better travel choices such as walking, cycling and better public transport. The JTS will suggest a strategy and new schemes aimed at reducing reliance on the private car. General Objectives Quality of Life Impact on rural Respondents were concerned about Traffic impacts in rural environments and environment the impact of the transport network in villages will present an ongoing in rural environments, including challenge as the West of England when main roads pass through small continues to grow and prosper. The villages unsuitable for the volume of Transport Study needs to identify traffic, severing communities and opportunities to maximise the use of having a negative impact on the non car modes and support quality of place. There were also development in the most sustainable concerns on noise and air quality locations and where the overall total along the routes having an impact on vehicle miles travelled on the network flora and fauna in the area. can be minimised. The study has identified existing challenges in terms of
124 pinch points through villages and potential mitigations identified where appropriate.
General Concepts Public Park and ride Many respondents were concerned The strategy for P&R sites needs to be transport about the inclusion of P&R under developed alongside objectives for the corridors public transport corridors, as they overall transport network. P&R is believed it was not "true" public envisaged to play a crucial role in transport, and in many cases would improving travel choices, particularly lead to more vehicle km, as well as when considered alongside parking having a negative impact on the area management policies in city centres. the site was in. The location of P&R sites needs to be carefully considered and needs to balance the impact of the area surrounding the site and the impact on the overall number of journeys made by private car. Private car can sometimes be the only option for people in surrounding areas. In Bristol and Bath the P&R services are effective at reducing the number of private car journeys in to the City Centre.
125 General Concepts Public Bus Respondents discussed several topics The potential for wider improvements to transport related to buses including the need the bus network are being considered as corridors for smaller connecting services to part of the study, however routes and allow those off main corridors to network are currently primarily access bus services (especially in rural delivered through commercial operators, areas); the need for cross city and which need to take into account the orbital bus services; the need for profitability of the bus services that they more comfortable high quality provide. Where there is a specific social vehicles (with some suggesting low need and a commercial case cannot be emissions vehicles also); and specific demonstrated, the councils can pay for a new routes such as better services to bus operator to provide a bus service Southmead Hospital (more direct) from their revenue budgets. and improved links to Frenchay and Thornbury. General Concepts Public New stations Respondents were in favour of new Suggestions for re opening stations to transport stations for new developments tackle congestion and unlock housing corridors where possible, and also suggested and employment growth are being many new stations for existing considered as part of the JTS. All new residential areas in the city, and the stations must demonstrate a good use of rail stations for park and ride. business case and have funding secured. The most commonly suggested Capacity constraints on the local rail stations were Charfield, Thornbury, network and the need to balance local, Constable Road/Lockleaze/Horfield, regional, national and freight services Ashton Gate and Saltford. Other will determine which new stations and suggestions included: St Annes, services are possible. The high costs of Ashley Hill, Portway P&R, Hallen, major capacity improvements lies North Filton, Lawrence Weston, outside the scope of the JTS and JSP with Winterbourne, Chipping Sodbury, Network Rail’s Western Route Study and Corsham, Wellington, Long Ashton, St Government funding expected to deliver Philips, Bathampton and Somerset them. Further consultation on the JTS generally. and the emerging transport strategy will take place in the Autumn 2016.
126 General Concepts Public Interchanges Respondents discussed the need for Journeys by public transport sometimes transport improved interchanges, including consist of multiple modal stages and corridors between bus and rail generally. The therefore involve interchange. In order difficulty of connecting between to make journeys by sustainable Bristol bus station and Bristol Temple transport modes more convenient, it is Meads was raised, with suggestions important that connections can be easily for moving the bus station to be made in safe and comfortable waiting closer to the railway station for one environments. Sustainable travel choices integrated transport hub. can also be made more convenient by Suggestions were also made for the making information readily available and expansion of Yate transport hub. by providing simple, cross modal ticketing. Opportunities for better interchange are being investigated as part of the study. General Concepts Public Affordability The high cost of travel was raised as a Public transport fares are largely out of transport deterrent to using public transport, the control of the local authorities. Bus corridors especially for people who already fares are mostly set by commercial own cars. The lack of integrated operators. New bus franchising powers, ticketing was a common complaint, as part of devolution, will provide as changing between bus companies greater powers for local authorities to or transferring from bus to train was influence fare levels, although there often very expensive, limiting access would be a cost implication (for the to public transport in some areas. authorities). Free bus travel for senior citizens and some disabled people remains a statutory requirement. For rail fares some are regulated by the Department for Transport, with others left to the train operating company. The West of England is committed to smarter forms of integrated ticketing.
127 General Concepts Metrobus Against Some respondents were against Major cities in Britain and Europe have a planning more MetroBus routes transport mode (rapid transit) that when the efficacy has not been caters for journeys along core corridors tested yet in Bristol. Others are very that cannot be accommodated much against the scheme generally, effectively by heavy rail or local bus. and several feel that it would be Whilst the Councils are currently better to use trams instead. There delivering a MetroBus rapid transit were also some responses suggesting network, tram based options will be that more prioritisation and considered if they represent the most segregation was required, and some effective solution for that corridor. criticism of the environmental damage caused by the current Key to delivering a fast and reliable schemes. service will be the level of segregation that gives the bus/tram priority over other traffic. General Concepts Metrobus New routes There were several suggestions for A range of routes is under consideration. new routes, with Yate and East The study will consider the feasibility of Bristol being the most commonly routes, likely demand, potential for suggested destinations. Other segregation, cost, and integration with destinations/routes suggested were: other public transport modes. North Somerset, Bath Easton, Lockleaze, Frenchay, Ashton Gate, Whitchurch, Cribbs to Avonmouth, Thornbury and Somer Valley. General Concepts Metrowest Henbury loop Many respondents believed that the Proposals for extending Henbury Line Henbury Loop was preferable to the services are being considered as part of Henbury Spur, and should be built as the JTS. a priority.
128 General Concepts Metrowest Portishead Many respondents mentioned the The authorities are committed to the re reopening of the Portishead line, and introduction of passenger services on were keen that is should progress as the Portishead line as quickly as possible; soon as is possible. it is a very complex scheme, nonetheless, construction work will begin on the Portishead line in 2018 when all requisite statutory powers have been secured. Regular newsletters with updates on progress with MetroWest can be found on the TravelWest website http://travelwest.info/metrowest General Concepts Metrowest Reopen old lines In addition to Portishead, The need for re opening old rail lines to respondents suggested that old tackle congestion and unlock land for railway lines should be reopened, employment and housing will be including those that are now only to considered as part of the transport freight, and those where the lines modelling for the JTS and the JSP. New have been removed entirely. rail lines and services are part of a wider Suggestions were made for the package of measures including buses, Strawberry Line, the Midland railway cycling, walking, interchanges and corridor and the Sharpness Branch. strategic corridor improvements. Some locations will remain difficult to serve by rail. With a modest modal share, 2.1% of journeys to work in the 2011 Census, and despite impressive levels of passenger growth in recent years rail’s role is a supporting one. Buses with the ability to deliver high frequency and extensive networks of services will remain the main form of public transport. Capacity constraints on the local rail network and the need to balance local, regional, national and freight services will determine which
129 new lines, stations and services are possible. The high costs of major capacity improvements lies outside the scope of the JTS and JSP with Network Rail’s Western Route Study and Government funding expected to deliver them.
General Concepts Metrowest++ Trams Respondents suggested the use of Major cities in Britain and Europe have a trams around the city, with some transport mode (rapid transit) that suggesting that trams should replace caters for journeys along core corridors Metrobus. Other specific suggestions that cannot be accommodated included the Bristol to Bath Railway effectively by heavy rail or local bus. Path, the northern ring road and links Whilst the Councils are currently to the airport. delivering a MetroBus rapid transit network, tram based options will be considered if they represent the most effective solution for that corridor.
Key to delivering fast and reliable service will be the level of segregation that gives the bus/tram priority over other traffic.
130 General Concepts Metrowest++ Tram train Tram train was suggested as a Opportunities for tram train and other solution in many areas to allow areas tram options are under consideration as not currently served by stations or part of the study. existing railway lines to be better connected. Suggestions for specific routes included Portishead, Avonmouth/Henbury/Clifton, Yatton Clevedon, South Bristol, Bristol Airport, Aztec West/Bradley Stoke, Emersons Green, Bristol Temple Meads city centre Harbourside Old Market Bristol Temple Meads, Filton Cribbs Causeway, Bristol Temple Meads North Fringe General Concepts Metrowest++ General rapid transit Respondents suggested the need for Opportunities for tram train and other other forms of rapid transit such as tram options are under consideration as and underground system, monorail, part of the study. However consideration light railway system and trolleybuses. of more costly modes would need to Specific routes suggested included take account of the challenge of the connections to Kingswood, formulation of a robust business case connections to Whitchurch, Bristol and access to funding. Temple Meads to University of Bristol and Emersons Green to Bath. General Concepts Walking and Separate walking and Several respondents suggested that Improving walking and cycling cycling cycling the needs of pedestrians and cyclists infrastructure will be a key priority for superhighways were very different, and they should the JTS. While parts of the West of not be grouped together, as that England have higher than average levels would lead to unsatisfactory designs of walking and cycling, much of our area for both. The speed disparity suffers from limited transport options between the two groups was brought which results in high private car use. up, especially for super highways, Strategies to improve the experience of and it was suggested that forcing pedestrians and cyclists and to pedestrians and cyclists into the encourage this modal shift is therefore
131 same space could be unsafe. an important component of the study.
General Concepts Walking and Cycling segregation Linked to above, the need for cycling This suggestion is being considered as cycling only routes was raised, segregated part of the JTS. Further consultation on superhighways from both pedestrians (where the JTS and the emerging transport possible) and motorised vehicles, to strategy will take place in the Autumn ensure safety and to allow cyclists to 2016. move without impedance. Both on road segregated cycle routes and off road designated cycle paths were suggested. General Concepts Walking and Walking issues Improved walking facilities generally Providing for sustainable modes of cycling were suggested, including creating transport, in particular walking and superhighways more car free spaces, improving the cycling, will be central to the JTS. The legibility of signage, and making nature of the strategy development pedestrian routes accessible for all. means that walking has by necessity It was suggested that the Bristol been considered at a conceptual level. Walking Strategy and Manual for The implementation of any pedestrian Streets 2 should be followed. improvements at the local level will benefit from bespoke local guidance, such as the Bristol Walking Strategy and the Bath Pattern Book. General Concepts Orbital/better Ring road There were suggestions for These suggestions are being considered connectivity improvements on the existing ring as part of the JTS. road and many people were also in favour of extending the A4174 through south Bristol to complete the
132 ring road.
General Concepts Orbital/better New road links Respondents suggested new road The study is considering the role of new connectivity links to improve connectivity without highway investment as part of a multi the need for passing through the city modal package and/or to address centre, with suggestions including existing network capacity constraints. Redcliffe Way flyover, M5 new junction new Bristol Airport, Callington Road Link, A36/A46 link, rebuilding Highway Lane Road, M4/M5 south link and A38 Havyatt Green to A370 Congresbury. Improved connections to the motorway generally were also suggested. General Concepts Orbital/better M4 junction Several respondents stated the need This suggestion is being considered as connectivity for a new junction on the M4 to the part of the JTS. East of Bristol (M4J18a) General Concepts Pinch points Bypasses Respondents believed that main The Stoke Gifford Transport Link will roads were passing through open in 2017; the other suggestions are unsuitable areas causing congestion being considered as part of the JTS. hotspots and reducing the quality of place, and that bypasses should be built to remove through traffic. Suggestions included Backwell, Saltford, Stoke Gifford, Banwell, Congresbury, Winterbourne and the A303.
133 General Concepts Pinch points Resilience Respondents believed that the The study is considering the role of new network was not sufficiently resilient, highway investment as part of a multi with incidents having a large impact. modal package and/or to address The lack of suitable alternatives to existing network capacity constraints, the motorway network was noted, as including areas where network resilience were limited crossing points (such as presents an existing constraint on over the Bristol channel and the performance. rail/road crossing at Avonmouth Portbury), leaving few easy alternative routes. General Concepts Pinch points M5 pinch points Respondents identified a number of The study is considering opportunities key pinch points along the M5 for extensions to the existing managed corridor, with suggestions that motorway network. schemes are required to address problems at M5 J21, M5 J20, M5 J19 and the Almondsbury Interchange. It was also suggested that there were problems at the Avonmouth Bridge, and that the managed motorway scheme should be extended further south to Clevedon. General Concepts Strategic Bus priority Several respondents believed that Bus travel makes best use of the limited corridor more bus priority and segregation road space as more passengers can be packages was required in order to make carried for a given area. The JTS travelling by bus more attractive, but recognises that bus travel needs to be there were also some respondents made more attractive to people, who were against losing already primarily by improving journey times and limited road space to bus lanes. the reliability of services. Priority and segregation achieves these goals because it removes buses from congestion. Opportunities for further public transport corridor improvements will be considered as part of the study.
134 General Concepts Strategic Red routes/parking Respondents wanted the removal of These suggestions are being considered corridor restrictions parking on key route to free up space as part of the JTS. Further consultation packages for other uses, including cycling on the JTS and the emerging transport facilities, bus priority, other PT strategy will take place in the Autumn schemes and more car lanes. 2016 General Concepts Working Integrated transport Respondents believed that this was Devolution, the creation of a Combined better authority important to ensure that the four Authority and bus franchising powers together authorities worked in a joined up will offer the local authorities more fashion to deliver schemes, and some control over the public transport also suggested a metro mayor. network. General Concepts Working Control of public Respondents believed that control of Devolution, the creation of a Combined better transport public transport would allow the local Authority and bus franchising powers together authorities to have greater say in will offer the local authorities more routes (improving socially necessary control over the public transport transport), and would improve network. integration between modes. General Concepts LSTF+ Cycle hire Respondents suggested the need for Improving cycling infrastructure will be a a Bristol wide cycle hire scheme, to key priority for the JTS. Strategies to expand on the current offering in improve the experience of cyclists and to Bath and at BTM/BPW encourage this modal shift is therefore an important component of the study. General Concepts LSTF+ Car clubs/sharing A variety of suggestions related to The JTS will assume that shared car use shared cars were made, including car will be encouraged through travel clubs that avoided the need for car planning. ownership, local car sharing schemes, and car sharing schemes across the wider area (including park and share sites along motorways)
135 General Concepts LSTF+ Travel Several respondents suggested the Travel planning will be an important part planning/flexible possibility of reducing the need to of the JTS and the strategy that comes working travel, or changing the time at which from it. people travel to alleviate issues on the road, such as through flexible working. Respondents all stressed the importance of various travel planning measures at schools, places of employment etc to attempt to address issues of congestion and access. General Concepts Regional General Limited responses on regional The authorities will continue to work connectivity connectivity, but of those who did with its neighbours, Highways England mention it, they were keen that and the rail industry to improve regional regional connectivity should be for connectivity. sustainable modes as well as roads. General Concepts Freight Mode shift Respondents wanted a shift away Whilst alternative modes for freight will from road based freight, with greater continue to be encouraged where use of rail and water. New rail appropriate (e.g. the Bristol/Bath Freight depots were suggested, with only the Consolidation Centre), achieving a last leg done by road. significant change in freight mode split from road based to rail or water based remains problematic. General Concepts Freight Impact on areas Several respondents had concerns The JTS will assume that sustainable about the impact HGVs were having travel should be encouraged, including on areas they passed through, with the promotion of non road options for road safety, air quality and noise freight movements. The role of freight issues all raised. Freight distribution consolidation centres will also be centres were suggested as a potential considered through the JTS. solution, as was mode shift (see above)
136 General Concepts Travel demand On street parking and Respondents were mostly in favour RPS will be considered as part of the JTS. Management RPZs of RPZs as a tool, but they believed The RPS will continue to be monitored that they should only be applied on a and reviewed by Bristol City Council. case by case basis, with suggestions Your comments have been passed to such as match day restrictions Bristol City Council officers and have around Ashton Gate. been noted. General Concepts Travel demand Workplace parking levy Respondents suggested that This suggestion is being considered as Management businesses should be charged for off part of the JTS. Further consultation on street parking spaces so that they the JTS and the emerging transport would be more likely to encourage strategy will take place in the Autumn employees to travel by sustainable 2016. modes. General Concepts Travel demand Other restrictions There were suggestions for A number of travel demand Management congestion charging in city centres, management measures have been as well as low emission zones, and pioneered in other areas of the UK, some suggested removing traffic including congestion charging, low from the city centre (through traffic emission zones and re routing through or all traffic). traffic. The potential for adoption of any of these interventions in the West of England will be considered through the JTS. General Concepts Other Land use planning Respondents suggested that land use Transport advice, including principles like planning should be used to minimise minimising long distance travel and co the need to travel, such as mixed use locating employment and housing is developments that allow people to being provided to support the live close to where they live production of the JSP. General Concepts Other Public realm Respondents mentioned the need to Providing for active and sustainable make the public realm pleasant to travel will be central to the JTS and the encourage walking and cycling, and emerging strategy. to reduce the visual impact of cars on One of the key objectives of the JLTP is the local environment. to reduce traffic volumes, noise and emissions and protect the natural environment in order to improve quality
137 of life and a healthy, natural environment:
General Concepts Other Innovation and Respondents suggested that The importance of innovation and new technology innovation and technology had technologies is noted and developments important roles to play in improving elsewhere, for example tram trains, transport in the city, with topics contact less ticketing and driverless cars, mentioned including the use of will be closely monitored for potential driverless cars and low emission future use. Rolling out superfast vehicles, as well as new mass transit broadband is a priority for the West of technologies. The importance of England Local Enterprise Partnership. good broadband was also mentioned as being important to encourage more flexible working. General Concepts Other Airports and ports Respondents stressed the need for The importance of international connections an improvement to connections to gateways is recognised in the Joint Bristol Airport by all modes, and Transport Study and where some respondents all suggested that improvements to connections are improved connections to the port appropriate these will be included in the would also be beneficial for the area. strategy. The importance of all modes is also a key feature of the Joint Transport Study. Concern about old railway track The railway alignment (for the Callington being turned into road, wants more Link) is protected as a transport corridor details on scheme (appears to be in the local plan but the specific use of referring to Callington Road link, has this corridor is yet to be determined. The sent two very similar responses) JTS will suggest a strategy and new schemes aimed at tacking congestion, air quality and improving quality of life.
138 Has requested a response. Mentions The authorities are committed to the re delays to Portishead line, wants introduction of passenger services on reduced traffic lights in quiet periods, the Portishead line as quickly as possible; better scheduled temporary works it is a very complex scheme, and changes to pedestrian crossings. nonetheless, construction work will begin on the Portishead line in 2018 when all requisite statutory powers have been secured. Regular newsletters with updates on progress with MetroWest can be found on the TravelWest website http://travelwest.info/metrowest Traffic lights are only installed where necessary and the majority are already setup with intelligent controls that are vehicle activated. The 4 councils do operate a road booking system to help coordinate roadworks in a way that helps manage the inevitable impacts in the least disruptive way. The timings for pedestrian crossings are setup to balance the needs of all users and to minimise accident risk. CLH Pipeline Have submitted maps of client's This is a strategic study, hence proposed System Ltd pipeline system and wish to be schemes will only be identified in contacted if any are to be impacted principle; as and when schemes are by proposed schemes. taken forward in more detail, the normal search for utilities will be undertaken. Long letter covering several issues The study will make recommendations including the need for more for transport investment over the next innovative solutions (such as an 20 years. A wide range of potential underground system, which he would solutions is under consideration like to be a champion for); improving including major public transport relations between cyclists and improvements and enhancements for
139 drivers; a change in attitude generally cyclists and pedestrians. he would like the WoE to be "less old fashioned".
Persimmon 5 page report, suggests that some The presence of sustainable travel Homes Severn conclusions in the Key Principles choices at various locations across the Valley Report are inaccurate, discussion of sub region is acknowledged, including at transport topic paper (including locations that will benefit from the suggestion that Backwell, Yatton, introduction of the passengers services Keynsham and Portishead have on the Portishead railway line. In most higher levels of sustainable access cases however, sustainable transport than acknowledged) and suggestion modes will not be sufficient to mitigate that developer funding contributions delays caused by additional travel should be staggered to speed up demand. The Joint Transport Study development. The opportunity technical work will identify where presented by the Portishead rail link mitigation is needed in light of existing to open up further development is pressures and through forecasting the identified. impacts from development traffic.
140 FOSBR Would like response to confirm The need for new rail lines, stations and receipt. Have sent in results of rail services to tackle congestion and unlock survey and 8 page report they have land for employment and housing will be also sent response to JSP. Discuss considered as part of the transport need for Rail Development Study, modelling for the JTS and the JSP. New expansion of Metrowest, improved rail lines and services are part of a wider interchanges. Suggest specific package of measures including buses, schemes including connection to cycling, walking, interchanges and Whitchurch, Flax Bourton, Coalpit strategic corridor improvements. Some Heath, Hallen, Charfield, Saltford and locations will remain difficult to serve by Ashton Gate stations, better bus rail. With a modest modal share, 2.1% of access to stations (including orbital journeys to work in the 2011 Census, services and feeder services), and despite impressive levels of Henbury Loop, tram train on Severn passenger growth in recent years rail’s Beach and Portishead lines. They role is a supporting one. Buses with the have responded to each concept, and ability to deliver high frequency and also suggest more of a focus is extensive networks of services will needed on ticketing. Second remain the main form of public response appears to be answering transport. Capacity constraints on the another questionnaire, but includes local rail network and the need to stakeholder details and another copy balance local, regional, national and of the survey. freight services will determine which new lines, stations and services are possible. The high costs of major capacity improvements lies outside the scope of the JTS and JSP with Network Rail’s Western Route Study and Government funding expected to deliver them. The potential for tram trains is noted and experience from the Sheffield to Rotherham pilot scheme will be closely monitored for possible future schemes.
141 Friends of One page report focussing on Ashton Ashton Gate is amongst several potential Ashton gate Gate station and interchange with station sites being investigated as station Metrobus. Includes link to campaign schemes that would support new website. development and tackle existing transport challenges. Additionally in January 2016 Bristol City Council allocated £50,000 to develop the business case for a station at Ashton Gate. Bristol City Council is currently drawing up a brief for the work. All new stations must demonstrate a good business case and have funding secured. The business case and JTS work is the starting point to see if a new station at Ashton Gate is feasible. Former director of highways, The Joint Transport Study will assess a transport and engineering at Avon, range of mitigations which will include directs comments schemes of the type suggested. The Three attachments (two duplicates), performance of each mitigation will be including comments on North influenced by development scenarios Somerset schemes (Barrow Gurney and assessed in light of overall network bypass, Clevedon spur, airport link). benefits and deliverability. Also suggests changing funding system for highway improvements that unlock developments. Fisher German Have attached map sheets where This is a strategic study, hence proposed LLP Esso have apparatus close to schemes will only be identified in proposed works (although do not principle; as and when schemes are appear to show WoE area) taken forward in more detail, the normal search for utilities will be undertaken.
142 Federation of 3 page report attached, ranking the Noted. The impacts of traffic and Bath Residents issues and concepts, with some transport on the Bath environment are Association general comments about issues in widely recognised, for example through Bath, such as the impact of traffic on the adopted Bath Transport Strategy. As a World Heritage Site. They are a partner organisation with other West pleased at the links between JTS and of England urban authorities, Bath & JSP and would like more joined up North East Somerset Council continues planning on existing proposed to ensure that the special character of development. the City of Bath World Heritage Site is taken fully into account, as both the JSP and JTS are progressed. Has submitted the results of a survey 1. Further phases of MetroWest projects on 20mph and RPZs in Bristol, as well are proceeding and further rail as a letter with comments on existing enhancements are being considered and proposed schemes. Questions the Portway P&R Station is a stated sample size for JTS survey. priority for Bristol City Council. 2. MetroBus was subject to a rigourous design and business case and bidding process. 3. In considering a joined up vision for multi modal travel, MetroBus has a place and this is being considered. 4. Comments on the M32 are noted. 5. Bristol Temple Quarter Enterprise zone incentives are funded based upon future business rate reciepts. Extensive monitoring of of jobs growth is being undertaken by the Local Enterprise Partnership and Bristol City Council. 7. Comments noted. 8. Comments on air quality are noted. 9. The JTS and JSP are focussed on these issues specifically, comments noted.
143 10. Extensive monitoring of the 20MPH is being carried out by Bristol City council and the University of the West of England. 11. Extensive monitoring of RPS is being carried out by Bristol City council with the assistance of independant consultants.
Dodington Have submitted response for JTS and Noted. Comments relating to the cycle Parish Council JSP, want to protect green belt and strategy referred to cycle strategy believe the balance of housing and consultation. employment development is off. They have also attached a response to the draft cycling strategy. Curo Mulberry Short report, mostly around Noted. Bath & North East Somerset Park development in the south of Bath Council is aware that proposals for the and their land holdings. Details Mulberry Park site are continuing to proposal for cable car. evolve. The plans for a cable car system will be considered at the appropriate
144 time, through the conventional local planning processes.
Gallagher 8 page report supporting site Your proposal will be considered as part Estates Pill development at Pill. of the further development preparation of the JSP. The transport implications of proposed development locations will also be considered as part of the JSP preparation. The strategic transport implications will be considered in the preparation of the JTS. Health and Letter stating they have no Noted Safety representation to make at this time, Executive but providing further details for information and future consultation. Highways 4 page letter supportive of existing Highways England is a partner in the England work and suggesting further work development of the JTS. Regular that should be done at the next stage meetings will ensure comments are to provide better evidence. understood and integrated into the Study. West of Joint response for JSP and JTS. 25 The public consultation showed wider England Public page report following workshop support for sustainable travel modes, Health about health, transport and planning. which would have consequential Partnership Most of response is for JSP, but benefits for healthier lifestyles discusses issues and objectives, as incorporating more walking and cycling, well as the potential for working plus a shift away from car use, which together at early stages in the would reduce emissions. These are strategy to ensure public health important themes for the JTS. outcomes will be positive.
145 Joint JSP/JTS response. 6 page The business sector is an important (SUSCOM) report, mostly focussing on JTS. partner in the development of the JTS Would like higher priority for Smart and provides useful insights that help Choice modes and integrated inform the development of the JTS. The ticketing, as well as a greater focus recommendation that higher priority be on health. given to 'Smarter Choices/Behaviour Change Measures' is well made, as are the comments in respect of the ticketing, the affordability of public transport and health. Yatton Parish Joint JSP/JTS responses, focus on JSP. Concerns about further development in Council 5 page report, concludes Yatton not Yatton are noted along with references suitable for development. to highway issues and rail capacity. Technical work to assess transport implications from development scenarios is being carried out to feedback into the JSP process. Where scenarios include development in service villages the transport impacts will be assessed and used to help inform a preferred development scenario. The strategic transport impacts from all development up to 2036 will then be assessed in the preparation of the JTS which will identify appropriate mitigation. Or Your proposal will be considered as part of the further development preparation of the JSP. The transport implications of proposed development locations will also be considered as part of the JSP preparation. The strategic transport implications will be considered in the
146 preparation of the JTS.
Short letter focussing on the St Anne’s Park is amongst several potential for St Annes station. Some potential station sites being investigated preliminary work has been done by as schemes that would support new the Brislington Community development and tackle existing Partnership which can be provided if transport challenges. Additionally in requested. January 2016 Bristol City Council allocated £50,000 to develop the business case for a station at Ashton Gate. Bristol City Council now intends that this should form part of a wider MetroWest enhancements piece of work including possible stations at St Anne’s Park and Constable Road. Bristol City Council is currently drawing up a brief for the work. All new stations must demonstrate a good business case and have funding secured. The MetroWest
147 enhancements and JTS work is the starting point to see if a new station at St Anne’s Park is feasible.
South Bristol 4 page report representing business The schemes put forward are being Business views, several new road schemes considered as part of this process suggested, as well as rail link to including further stages of the Ring airport, extension of waterways into Road, Callington Road Link and links to central Bristol. Against 20mph zones. the Motorway network. Addtionally a barrage is being considered as part of the Tidal Flood Risk Management Strategy. Extensive monitoring of the 20MPH is being carried out by Bristol City council and the University of the West of England. Living Heart for 2 page response promotes Providing for active and sustainable Bristol removing traffic from central Bristol travel will be central to the JTS and the onto orbital routes where possible. emerging strategy. Also suggests improvements to bus One of the key objectives of the JLTP is and cycling infrastructure, and that it to reduce traffic volumes, noise and needs to be recognised that an emissions and protect the natural increase in congestion is unavoidable environment in order to improve quality if the city grows, but it can be of life and a healthy environment. The managed better. schemes put forward are being considered as part of this process
148 including a city centre package and improvements of orbital routes.
Life Cycle UK 2 page response, suggesting the need The authorities are already committed to for well thought out cycling improving cycling facilities and infrastructure and the need for more infrastructure through its cycling thought on health impacts. strategy and active modes are being considered as part of the JTS. Latteridge 4 attachments some duplicates. 4 The suggestion for greater aspiration is Road page response believes greater noted, but this should be tempered with Community vision is needed as well as more the need for the JTS to be deliverable Group attention given to new technology. within its timescale. The JTS will seek to Other topics covered include freight address many of the issues raised, such depots, online shopping, M4 new as MetroWest+. The proposed new M4 junction, improved bus/rail services, Junction in the Emerson's Green area and increased integration of modes. will be subject to a bespoke study starting in 2016. 8 page report commenting on all Your proposal will be considered as part issues/objectives/concepts, happy to of the further development preparation be contacted to discuss of the JSP. The transport implications of further.Focuses on need for proposed development locations will improved access by foot/bike directly also be considered as part of the JSP from houses need to think about preparation. The strategic transport the first 400m not just big projects implications will be considered in the like super highways. Importance of preparation of the JTS. employment locations to be near houses. Discourage car use by not providing parking spaces at
149 destinations. Urban dwellers suffer worst of the health impacts caused by air pollution from those living in hinterland driving in. Deliver the Weston to Clevedon cycle link and the Weston to Brean cycle link. Locate hospitals where can access by walk/cycle. Increase car occupancy. Integrated bus and rail ticketing
CPRE Avonside 9 page report, discussing issues Thank you for a very interesting paper including the need for more which accords in many ways with the sustainable transport, social objectives of the both the Joint Spatial exclusion in rural areas due to lack of Plan and Transport Study. access to transport, and the potential negative environmental impacts of any expansion of Bristol Airport. Congresbury 2 page response suggesting that There are various congestion hotspots Parish Council transport improvements in across the West of England area. The Congresbury are necessary. They Joint Transport Study technical work will believe development in the area will identify where mitigation is needed in not be viable without large light of existing pressures and through investment in transport forecasting the impacts from infrastructure. development traffic. The final Joint Transport Study will set out a range of measures to help minimise traffic impacts and to increase highway capacity where necessary to support the economic growth and development of the sub region.
150 Bishopston, 4 page response, goes through It is acknowledged that the main radial Cotham and concepts individually. Concerns routes are multi functioning. Comments Redland about the main roads running are useful and it is recognised that Neighbourhood through their areas (A38 and A4018). careful thought must be given to the balance that needs to be struck between strategic movements and local amenity. The response is helpful and suggestions have been noted. Bishopston, Cotham and Redland should work with Bristol City Council through their neighbourhood partnerships on local issues. 3 page response discussing local The comments supporting cycling transport, high costs of buses, and investment and rail improvements in the south coast connectivity. Bath area are noted, and these will be considered through the JTS. Public transport fares are largely out of the control of the local authorities, as bus fares are mostly set by commercial operators. Local traffic issues in Batheaston are beyond the scope of the JTS work, which is designed to provide a high level strategic approach for the sub region. Bathampton 8 page response cmmenting on Noted. The impacts of traffic and Meadows specific sections of the JTS report. transport on the Bath environment are Alliance Oppose building P&R in Bathampton widely recognised, for example through Meadows. the adopted Bath Transport Strategy. As a partner organisation with other West of England urban authorities, Bath & North East Somerset Council continues to ensure that the special character of the City of Bath World Heritage Site is
151 taken fully into account, as both the JSP and JTS are progressed. The role of park & ride across the West of England, including Bath, will be considered through the JTS.
Barton Have atached 35 page report on Thank you for your submission and for Wilmore transport supporting Warmley Urban the information provided. Your proposal Extension. will be considered as part of the further development of the JSP. The transport implications of proposed development locations will also be considered as part of the JSP preparation.
4 page response covering topics It is agreed that the relationship including the connection between between land use, transport and land use and transport, the need for technological developments is complex flexible planning and the difficulty of and ever changing, which requires planning for multi stage journeys. constant attention; however, plans are required to provide the statutory basis to deliver schemes. The modelling methodology that informs the study uses a multi mode model that does include time and inter change penalities; for example, a trip by bus or train includes walk access time, wait time, on bus time, inter change time (if required) and egress time. The authorities invest in a wide range of
152 data collection and analysis to help define, appraise, deliver, monitor and evaluate schemes and policies. Development sites have and will continue to be fully serviced as dictated by national and local policies.
Barrow Gurney 4 page response, going through The suggestions on how best to improve Parish Council concepts individually. public transport are noted along with the challenge about the role of walking and cycling in the UK. Some of the other issues you mention including capacity on strategic highway links like the A38 are being assessed in the technical work to draw out the relative merits of the potential development scenarios. The outputs will then be used to inform a preferred scenario as part of further development and preparation of the JSP. The strategic transport implications will be considered in the preparation of the JTS which will set out a package of mitigations.
153 Backwell 5 page response, combined JSP/JTS. There are various congestion hotspots Residents' Contains link to TPA report on across the West of England area and it is Association transport done for Backwell acknowledged that whilst the use of Neighbourhood Plan. sustainable transport modes needs to be maximised, these may not be sufficient to mitigate delays caused by additional travel demand. The Joint Transport Study technical work will identify where mitigation is needed in light of existing pressures and through forecasting the impacts from development traffic. The final Joint Transport Study will set out a range of measures to help minimise traffic impacts and to increase highway capacity where necessary. Ramblers Avon 4 page response (including survey), The key point that the pedestrian needs Area focussing on the need for higher to be reinstated at the top of the priority for walkers. transport hierarchy in the development of schemes is noted. Providing for sustainable modes of transport, in particular walking and cycling, will be central to the JTS. The nature of the strategy development to date means that walking has by necessity been considered at a high level; in the next stage, more detail on the planned investment in walking will be provided.
154 BNP Paribas 5 page respone setting out their Noted. Real proposed plans and focus, state they Estate/Avon cannot make a comment on the Fire and Rescue strategy at this stage but reserve the Service right to be involved later.
Bristol Airport 10 page response covered potential The role of the airport in the sub future expansion of the airport and regional context is understood and current insufficient transport access recognised within the JSP and JTS (by car and by public transport). workstreams. The transport technical Concept 10. International Gateways assessment work takes account of the is omitted from the main issues planned expansion of the airport and will paper. Need a new/closer rail link, assess impacts on the surface transport Metrobus and improved road links. network. The existing challenges are understood including the capacity of the A38 and the implications for public transport routes. Your four proposed schemes have been noted and have been included in the initial long list of schemes for consideration. The Bristol 5 page response, suggests that retail The importance of retail is recognised, Alliance needs to be considered as a specific both in terms of the economy and subset of economic growth, and that supporting Bristol City Centre as a focus should be on access to Bristol destination for leisure, culture, and retail city centre. in its own right. Bristol City Centre is one of the most important locations for our transport network and will form a key part of the JTS strategy. Commercial 4 page PBA report on transport Your proposal will be considered as part Estates Group supporting development at land to of the further development of the JSP. the west of Pucklechurch. The transport implications of proposed development locations will also be
155 considered as part of the JSP preparation.
22 page report attached on the The key point about the opportunities BANES potential for bus Quality Contract for, and benefits of, a bus Quality Council Scheme in BANES. Contract Scheme in B&NES are noted. The conclusion of this submission, that further consideration of a QCS is paused while the Buses Bill and devolution proposals for the West of England are progressed, is also noted. Devolution, the creation of a Combined Authority and bus franchising powers will offer the local authorities more control over the public transport network. Cleeve Parish 1 page response, concern about The comments about traffic pressure on Council housing close to the A370 and airport the A370 are noted along with a growth. Suggests need for new preference for development to happen parking facilities along the A370 to in Bristol as far as possible or to form an help and encourage people to park urban extension. These comments will and access the X1 bus service which be considered as part of the further is currenlty happening informally. development preparation of the JSP and Transport Study. The Study will take account of aspirations to grow passenger numbers using Bristol Airport when formulating proposals for mitigations.
156 Churchill Parish 4 page response, goes through The concern about congestion on the Council concepts individually. Concerns A38 is noted. The technical work will about the A38 and HGVs on consider how development scenarios unsuitable roads and weight limits impact upon this key corridor both to not being enforced. inform decision making for the JSP and to identify mitigations in the Transport Study. Your comments about the strategic function of certain routes in the context of HGVs are noted along with the need for safe highway layouts and these will be considered as part of the further development of the Transport Study. Chew Valley Attached are details of of their Traffic impacts in rural environments and Neighbourhood response to Chew Valley Traffic in villages will present an ongoing Consultation as well as JTS response, challenge as the West of England although appear to be identical 2 continues to grow and prosper. Whilst page responses covering parking the Transport Study needs to identify issues, congestion and lack of public opportunities to maximise the use of transport. non car modes it is difficult to provide a full range of multi modal travel options to many of the rural areas. The Transport Study has however assessed the traffic and congestion challenges across both urban and rural areas and potential mitigations will be identified where appropriate. Business West Have attached notes of Business Thank you for your submission and West JTS workshop, a report looking support for the JTS and JSP. Support for at WoE housing challenges, a report the vision, goals and objectives of the JTS looking at the weaknesses of the is noted. Your priorities for investment, SHMA and their own draft report on are being considered in the JTS. The the SHMA as well as a consultation request for involvement in the Study has
157 response. been agreed through representation on the JTS Steering Group.
Bristol North 3 page response focussing on the The Cribbs Patchway New Development West North Fringe, in particular Henbury has been subject to a thorough appraisal Constituency Loop and CPNN impacts. and a package of transport improvements put together; these were tested through South Gloucestershire's Core Strategy Examination in Public process and endorsed by the Inspector; the Core Strategy and the CPNN SPD is now adopted. The re introduction of passenger services on the Henbury Line has also been subject to thorough assessment and will see MetroWest train services start in 2021 with new stations at Henbury, North Filton and Ashey Down; passengers will then be able to travel by train between the North Fringe and Avonmouth/Severn Beach with one change of train. The location of Henbury Station has been subject to public consultation, the outcome of which will be reported in June 2016. The project is committed to securing a design at Henbury Station that permits future conversion to a loop service if required. An additional new station on the
158 Henbury Line adjacent to Charlton Road has been assessed; it is not necessary as the area will sit in the catchment of Henbury and North Filton stations. The frequency of services at St.Andrews Road Station will be increased to hourly as part of MetroWest Phase 1. Electrification of the local rail network is already an aspiration of the local authorities.
159 Bristol Green Have attached Bristol Green Party The recognition and support for many of Party Transport Policy draft as well as the issues and concepts in the response, covering topics such as submission is noted. At its heart the JTS health and improved information. will seek to improve travel choices and They also go through the concepts improve the lives of residents whilst individually. reducing transport's impact on the environment in line with much of your policy. Improving walking and cycling infrastructure will be a key priority for the JTS. While parts of the West of England have higher than average levels of walking and cycling, much of our area suffers from limited transport options which results in high private car use. Strategies to improve the experience of pedestrians and cyclists and to encourage this modal shift is therefore an important component of the study. Improving bus infrastructure to make bus travel more attractive will be a key priority for the JTS. The JTS highlights that public transport usage is relatively low in the West of England and that because of the coverage of bus networks, they represent the best opportunity to increase the number of people using public transport. Strategies to improve the experience of bus users and encourage this modal shift is therefore an important component of the Study. Devolution, if agreed, the creation of a Combined Authority may offer bus franchising powers will offer
160 the local authorities more control over the public transport network.
Backwell Parish 5 page response, combined JSP/JTS. There are various congestion hotspots Council Contains like to TPA report on across the West of England area and it is transport done for Backwell acknowledged that whilst the use of Neighbourhood Plan. sustainable transport modes needs to be maximised, these may not be sufficient to mitigate delays caused by additional travel demand. The Joint Transport Study technical work will identify where mitigation is needed in light of existing pressures and through forecasting the impacts from development traffic. The
161 final Joint Transport Study will set out a range of measures to help minimise traffic impacts and to increase highway capacity where necessary.
Rail and 8 emails focussing on local rail The need for new rail lines, stations and Maritime Trade improvements (new stations, services to tackle congestion and unlock Union reopening lines), plus 10 attachments land for employment and housing will be to support suggestions. considered as part of the transport modelling for the JTS and the JSP. New rail lines and services are part of a wider package of measures including buses, cycling, walking, interchanges and strategic corridor improvements. Some locations will remain difficult to serve by rail. With a modest modal share, 2.1% of journeys to work in the 2011 Census, and despite impressive levels of passenger growth in recent years rail’s role is a supporting one. Buses with the ability to deliver high frequency and extensive networks of services will remain the main form of public transport. Capacity constraints on the local rail network and the need to balance local, regional, national and freight services will determine which new lines, stations and services are
162 possible. The high costs of major capacity improvements lies outside the scope of the JTS and JSP with Network Rail’s Western Route Study and Government funding expected to deliver them. The potential for reusing old railway corridors is noted.
163 Bristol Spatial Long response from student society The recognition and support for many of Planning with specific comments on the the issues and concepts in the Society Transport Study document as well as submission is noted. At its heart the JTS more general comments on will seek to improve travel choices and administration. improve the lives of residents whilst reducing transport's impact on the environment in line with much of your submission. The authorities are committed to the re introduction of passenger services on the Portishead line as quickly as possible; it is a very complex scheme, nonetheless, construction work will begin on the Portishead line in 2018 when all requisite statutory powers have been secured. Regular newsletters with updates on progress with MetroWest can be found on the TravelWest website http://travelwest.info/metrowest . Improving walking and cycling infrastructure will be a key priority for the JTS. While parts of the West of England have higher than average levels of walking and cycling, much of our area suffers from limited transport options which results in high private car use. Strategies to improve the experience of pedestrians and cyclists and to encourage this modal shift is therefore an important component of the study. Improving bus infrastructure to make bus travel more attractive will be a key priority for the JTS. The JTS highlights
164 that public transport usage is relatively low in the West of England and that because of the coverage of bus networks, they represent the best opportunity to increase the number of people using public transport. Strategies to improve the experience of bus users and ecourage this modal shift is therefore an important component of the Study. Devolution, if agreed, the creation of a Combined Authority may offer bus franchising powers will offer the local authorities more control over the public transport network.
165 West of Attachments containing revised The JTS is intended to formulate England LEP economic growth forecasts for the schemes and packages to address both WoE area. the shortfalls in current network performance as well as to accommodate the needs of future growth in the West of England. The future year `scenario’ used to assess the transport packages as they emerge will therefore need to include updated forecasts of employment growth to ensure that the packages are robust. The provision of the Oxford Economics forecasts is timely in this respect, and will be taken into account when assessing the effectiveness of the transport packages prior to consultation in the Autumn. Tortworth 5 page JTS report (followed by JSP Thank you for your submission and for Estate report) focussing on impact on parcel the information provided. Your proposal Company of land in South Gloucestershire, will be considered as part of the further close to Thornbury. development of the JSP. The transport implications of proposed development locations will also be considered as part of the JSP preparation.
166 Bristol Port 6 page report, combined JTS/JSP, The importance of managing freight and Company concerns about impact of passenger passenger trains alongside and without rail on freight rail in the area. prejudicing each other is fully recognised. Both MetroWest Phase 1 and 2 are being designed to take into account current and future freight movements including double tracking of parts of the Portishead Line, remodelling of Parson Street Junction, new signalling and the partial re instatement of the Down Relief Line between Parson Street and Bristol Temple Meads. In the assessment of options to re introduce passenger services on the Henbury Line as part of MetroWest Phase 2, the adverse impact of the Henbury Loop based options on the level crossing at the main gate for Avonmouth Docks was acknowledged, as was the difficultly of mitigating this. The local authorities acknowledge that this remains a problem that needs to be addressed if proposals for the Loop are resurrected. The importance of network resilience for freight movements is noted and the JTS will suggest a strategy and new schemes aimed at tacking this and congestion. Further consultation on the JTS and the emerging transport strategy will take place in the Autumn 2016.
167
England will be considered through the JTS.
Wrington 6 page combined JTS/JSP response The concerns raised about development Parish Council goes through concepts individually, and/or transport improvements outside and raises issues with access to the the Bristol urban area are noted. At this airport. stage there is a need to investigate the most suitable locations for development across the West of England area to provide a technical basis for decision making. The process will include looking at the potential for transport improvements to mitigate development scenarios and this will include an assessment of a range of options and modes. Mostly out of scope, but would like The potential impact of Oldbury Power impacts of Nuclear New Build at Station should be addressed by the Oldbury to be considered in JSP and scheme promotor; however, the JTS is JTS. mindful of the proposal in considering potential interventions that could also serve Oldbury (e.g. M5 Junction 14). Gloucestershire Discusses the links and common The West of England authorities County Council interests between WoE and recognise the links and many shared Gloucestershire, including interests with Gloucestershire and will MetroWest extensions to connect continue to maintain joint working the two, works on the M5 and Severn relationships, such as that on MetroWest Bridge tolls. Phase 2 (extending services from Yate) and on other issues.
169 Parish Councils 2 page response concerned with Your comments will be considered as Airport access to the airport and the impact part of the further development Association of expansion on the surrounding preparation of the JSP. At this stage area. international gateways including the airport are widely seen as having an important role in the economic growth of the sub region. The technical work will assess the impacts of development scenarios on the transport network in light of the continued role of the airport as a significant trip attractor and their aspirations to grow. The strategic transport implications of the JSP will be considered in the preparation of the Joint Transport Study.
170