1 Taunton Deane Core Strategy
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
TAUNTON DEANE CORE STRATEGY – SUBMISSION REPORT SUMMARY OF RESPONSES TO PUBLICATION (Reg 27) Page 1. Whole Plan 2 2. Proposals Maps 6 3. Vision for Borough 7 4. Strategic Objective 1: Climate Change 11 5. SO2: Economy 13 6. SO3: Town and other Centres 15 7. SO4: Housing 17 8. SO5: Inclusive Communities 18 9. SO6: Accessibility 19 10. SO7: Infrastructure 23 11. SO8: Environment 25 12. Policy CP1 Climate Change 28 13. Policy CP2 Economy 33 14. Policy CP3Town and other Centres 37 15. Policy CP4 Housing 44 16. Policy CP5 Inclusive Communities 51 17. Policy CP6 Transport and Accessibility 60 18. Policy CP7 Infrastructure 64 19. Policy CP8 Environment 68 20. Policy SP1 Sustainable Development Locations 84 21. Policy SP2 Realising the vision for Taunton 91 22. Policy SP3 Realising the vision for Wellington 98 23. Policy SP4 Realising the vision for the Rural Areas 102 24. Policy SS1 Monkton Heathfield 107 25. Policy SS2 Priorswood/Nerrols 118 26. Policy SS3 Wellington – Longforth 124 27. Policy SS4 Wellington – Cades/Jurston 126 28. Policy SS5 Wellington – Strategic Employment Site 127 29. Policy SS6 Staplegrove – Broad Location for Growth 128 30. Policy SS7 Comeytrowe/Trull – Broad Location for Growth 130 31. Policy SS8 Taunton – Broad Location for Strategic Employment 134 32. Policy DM1 General requirements 137 33. Policy DM2 Development in the Countryside 141 34. Policy DM3 Gypsy and Traveller Site Selection Criteria 146 35. Policy DM4 Design 148 36. Policy DM5 Use of Resources and Sustainable Design 150 37. Representations on Omission Sites 154 38. Infrastructure Delivery Plan 157 39. Sustainability Appraisal 167 CORE STRATEGY SCHEDULE OF CHANGES 173 CORE STRATEGY KEY ISSUES 185 1 Whole Plan ORGANISATION(S) ISSUE (insert comment id in SUMMARY OF REP SOUNDNESS TEST RECOMMENDED CHANGE COUNCIL RESPONSE PROPOSED brackets) CHANGE Support Natural England (562) Support for the production of a forward looking document None Support noted None which recognises the role of the natural environment in creating successful sustainable communities. There are a number of elements within the Core Strategy which are particularly supported including the extent to which the document embraces the concept of green infrastructure; the inclusion of Accessible Natural Greenspace Standards (ANGSt) and the identification, on the proposals Map, of bat consultation zones. Sustainability Somerset County Council As strategic Planning Authority and Transport Planning None Support noted – comment on SA dealt None Appraisal (516) Authority, based on the evidence provided, we do not have with under Sustainability Appraisal; any comments to make on ‘issues of soundness’. There is references to Future Transport Plan made; some concern, however, that the scoring system used to IDP comment dealt with under IDP; Travel assess the development options in the Sustainability Appraisal Planning comment dealt with under CP6. is not explained; while the final scores are not included in the document. References to Somerset Local transport Plan should be Somerset’s Future Transport Plan. There are some inconsistencies between the Core Strategy and the IDP. Too little emphasis on Travel Planning. Support Highways Agency The Council has positively and effectively engaged with the None Support noted None (covering letter) Highways Agency in the process of the preparation of the plan, in relation to both its content and development of the transport evidence base. This has enabled the Highways Agency initial concerns to be largely addressed and I am able broadly to support the plan’s strategy and proposals. Water Environment Agency (295) 1. The Core Strategy does not include any consultation with the None 1. Wessex Water and South West Water 1. None provision water providers to ensure that the proposals are supported were consulted on water supply as well by adequate provisions within the relevant company’s Water as sewage treatment. They did not Resource Plan. identify any strategic problems in terms 2. Include a specific policy for windfall development, particularly of water supply for future development. since the identified housing provision for the plan period has 2. Policy CP8 covers all development on 2. None been demonstrated to be delivered entirely within Flood unallocated Greenfield sites outside of Zone 1. The policy should not support housing within areas settlement boundaries. An additional known to be at a high risk of flooding (i.e. Flood Zone 3). policy for windfall development is not Although Policy CP8 goes some way to clarify TDBCs considered necessary. The Core position on unallocated Greenfield sites, but this may be Strategy only contains high level or better placed in a separate policy for windfall sites. strategic policies. More detailed 2 ORGANISATION(S) ISSUE (insert comment id in SUMMARY OF REP SOUNDNESS TEST RECOMMENDED CHANGE COUNCIL RESPONSE PROPOSED brackets) CHANGE policies for the management of development will be included in the Site Allocations DPD. Consultation Some of the public exhibitions held regarding Core Strategy None None of the public exhibitions were by None 1. DW Alder Town were invitation only and were considered overly restrictive. The invitation only and were widely publicised Planning Consultants consultation events relating to the various stages of the Core through public notices on notice boards, on Behalf of Strategy have not been suitably advertised. The info has been parish councils, the Council’s newsletter landowner: South of only advertised on Taunton Deane Borough Council web-site, and website and the local press. Notices Harris’ Farm, not on the front page but buried in the planning related were not only in the Star, but also in the Hillcommon (117) sections where only those looking for the info would venture. Somerset County Gazette and Wellington 2. DW Alder Town Also, concerns were raised as to the accessibility of the Weekly News, which cover an area wider Planning Consultants information as not everyone has internet access and although than Taunton Deane. After the Reg 25 on Behalf of notices have been put in the Star newspaper, it is only Public Consultation the Council published landowner: distributed to certain areas and is not accessible for everyone. the Summary of Consultation Response in Broadlands (132) Concerns over the fact that the public were not given a chance December 2010. This document included 3. DW Alder Town to comment on the changes made to the Core Strategy since the Council response to the Planning Consultants the last consultation, for example, the exclusion of Killams site. representations. Although there is no on Behalf of The public have not been given opportunity to comment on the requirement to do so, the Council landowner: Cornhill, principles of this or alternative provision that was put in place. published a first draft of the Core Strategy Wellington (210) There is no list of what the evidence base contains and it on its website in February 2011 to enable 4. DW Alder Town cannot therefore be assumed that the content of the DPD is everyone to examine the substance of Planning Consultants justified by evidence, and there is no clear reference to the what was to be formally published for on Behalf of aims of the Sustainable Community Strategy or how these public consultation under Reg 27 in July landowner: have been incorporated into the plan. and August 2011. There is no requirement Highlands, Cotford for an additional stage of public St. Luke (258) consultation between the Reg25 and the 5. DW Alder Town Reg 27 public consultations. Planning Consultants There is a list of the evidence base at on Behalf of Appendix 2 on page 127 of the Core landowner: Foxes Strategy. These documents were Meadow, Wellington published on the Council’s website at the (225) start of the Reg 27 public consultation. The Sustainable Community Strategy is part of the evidence base. Delivery 1. DW Alder Town 1. The plan fails to explain how its key policies will be achieved The draft Core Strategy refers to 1. The IDP only sets out the major None Planning Consultants as the plan states that many of the objectives will be funded allocated sites but it would be more infrastructure requirements for on Behalf of by the CIL. However, this is not due to be brought in for appropriate for these to be in the Site development that will be funded landowner: South of some time and even then it will not cover everything. This is Allocations DPD rather than the Core through CIL. Development will still Harris’ Farm, no suggestion that of how it is intended to cover the shortfall. Strategy. provide the usual on site requirements Hillcommon (130) such as access roads and utility 2. DW Alder Town connections. 3 ORGANISATION(S) ISSUE (insert comment id in SUMMARY OF REP SOUNDNESS TEST RECOMMENDED CHANGE COUNCIL RESPONSE PROPOSED brackets) CHANGE Planning Consultants 2. The delivery sections of the Core and Spatial Policies do not There are separate policies relating 2. The delivery sections are not intended None on Behalf of provide enough detail on how, when and by whom the to spatial and land use planning to provide detail, but to signpost the landowner: policies will be delivered. More detail would be able to be which should be integrated. delivery and funding mechanisms, Broadlands (145) provided if the policies themselves were more focused. delivery bodies and key delivery dates. 3. DW Alder Town The detail is provided in other Planning Consultants documents such as the IDP, CIL and on Behalf of Urban Extensions SPD. landowner: Cornhill, 3. Although it is considered that the plan goes beyond 3. Not agreed. It is a spatial plan. None Wellington (223) traditional land use planning it maintains distinct separation 4. DW Alder Town between land use and spatial planning by having separate Planning Consultants policies relating to these. on Behalf of 4.