Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013)

Statement of Consultation

For further information please contact: Strategic Planning City Council Brunel House St George’s Road Bristol BS1 5UY Telephone: 0117 903 6725 Email: [email protected]

Contents 1. Introduction ...... 5 2. Who was consulted?...... 7 3. Consultation methods used ...... 21 Stage 1 – Call for Sites and Sustainability Appraisal Scoping Report (2008) ...... 22 Stage 2 – Consideration of options (2010) ...... 23 Stage 3 – Consideration of preferred approach (2012) ...... 24 4. Summary of main issues raised and how they were addressed in the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies ...... 25 Stage 1 – Call for Sites and Sustainability Appraisal Scoping Report (2008) ...... 26 Stage 2 – Consideration of options (2010) ...... 27 Development management policies...... 27 Suggested development management policies ...... 49 Site allocations...... 51 Sites suggested for allocation...... 95 Designations ...... 100 Stage 3 – Consideration of preferred approach (2012) ...... 109 Development management policies...... 109 Suggested development management policies ...... 123 Site allocations...... 124 Sites suggested for allocation...... 155 Designations ...... 156 Appendix 1 – Development Management Policies Health Impact Assessment...... 165 Appendix 2 – Key changes made to development management policies, site allocations and designations in the preparation of the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies...... 171 Development management policies...... 171 Site allocations...... 175 Designations ...... 188

- 3 -

Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

1. Introduction This document sets out how Bristol City Council has sought participation from communities and stakeholders during preparation of Bristol Local Plan’s Site Allocations and Development Management Policies. In doing so it demonstrates how the council has complied with the requirements of its Statement of Community Involvement (October 2008) and Regulation 19 of the Town and Country Planning (Local Planning) () Regulations 2012. Alongside the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version, Regulation 19 requires the council to publish a statement setting out the following: a) which bodies and persons were invited to make representations under Regulation 18; b) how those bodies and persons were invited to make such representations; c) a summary of the main issues raised by those representations; and d) how the issues have been addressed in the Local Plan.

- 5 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

- 6 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

2. Who was consulted? Members of the Bristol Development Framework Consultation Database were kept informed of progress and opportunities for involvement throughout the preparation of the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies. The organisations, groups and individuals in this database are listed below. Specific consultation bodies: Abbots Leigh Parish Council Monmouthshire County Council Almondsbury Parish Council National Grid UK Avon and Constabulary National Power Plc Bath and North East Somerset Council Natural England Bridgend County Borough Council Network Rail Bristol Primary Care Trust Newport City Council Bristol South and West Primary Care Trust North Bristol NHS Trust Bristol Water Council BT Group Plc O2 Ltd Cardiff Council Orange Coal Authority Town Council Downend and Bromley Heath Parish Council Pill and Easton-In-Gordano Parish Council Dundry Parish Council Pilning and Severn Beach Parish Council English Heritage Somerset County Council Environment Agency South Council Town Council South West Strategic Health Authority Gloucestershire County Council Parish Council Government Office for the South West T-Mobile (UK) Ltd Abbots Parish Council United Bristol Healthcare NHS Trust Hanham Parish Council Vodafone Ltd Highways Agency Wales and West Utilities Homes and Communities Agency Wessex Water Hutchinson 3G UK Ltd Western Power Distribution Town Council Whitchurch Parish Council Long Ashton Parish Council Winterborne Parish Council Marine Management Organisation

General consultation bodies: ABC Tree Services Angus Meek Partnership Ltd Acorn Architectural Services APG Planning ACT Aquarius Land ACTA Community Theatre Architecton Action Aid UK - Education Dept Architects RMA Adams Holmes Associates Architecture Centre Adrian Forber Adrian Jones Architects Arnos Park Action Group Advisory Council for the Education of Romany Arnos Vale Cemetery Trust and other Travellers Art and Power African Initiatives Arts and Business South West Age Concern Bristol Arts Council England AGM City Space Development Arts Matrix Airbus UK Art Warehouse Air Quality Management Resource Centre Arup Alan J Engley and Associates Ascent Architecture Alder King Ashfield Land Alec French Architects Down Allotments Association Alison Turner Architect Ashley, Easton and Lawrence Hill Alliance Against South Bristol Ring Road Neighbourhood Partnership Allied Welsh Ltd Ashley Neighbourhood Renewal Alterian Ltd Ashley Vale Action Group Alzheimers Society – Bristol Branch Ashley Vale Allotments Amana Education Trust Ashton Park Ltd Amethyst Property Investments Ltd and Longmoor Land Ltd Amnesty International Ashton Vale Community Association Andrew Wilson Partnership Ashton Vale Heritage Group Andrew Wotton Associates Ashton Vale Project and Vence Ltd

- 7 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation Asian Arts Agency Black Carers Project Asian Day Centre Black Development Agency Ltd Aspect 360 Ltd Black South West Network Aspects and Milestones Trust Bond Pearce LLP Aspire Planning Bovis Homes Ltd At Bristol Conservation Society Atis Real BPA Consultants Atis Real Weatheralls Ltd Braboco Limited Atkins Ltd Branchwalkers Tree Services Atwood Drive Allotments BRAVE Enterprise Agency Avon and Bristol Law Centre Bread Youth Project Avon and Mental Health Trust BREEAM Avon Area Ramblers Bridge Foundation Avon Autistic Foundation Limited Brimble Lea and Partners Avon Badger Group and Broomhill Meadows Avon Bat Group Brislington Community Partnership Avon CDA Brislington Neighbourhood Partnership Avon Fire Authority Brislington Conservation and Amenity Society Avon Gardens Trust Brislington Conservation and History Society Avon Gorge and Downs Wildlife Project Avon Organic Group Bristol Aero Collection Avon Riding Centre Bristol Alliance Avon RIGS Group Bristol and Avon Chinese Women’s Group Bristol and Gloucestershire Archaeological Avon Youth Association Society and Neighbourhood Bristol and Somerset Energy Efficiency Centre Partnership Bristol and People First Avonmouth Community Council Bristol and South West SERA Avril Baker Consultancy Bristol BSL Forum AWA Ltd Bristol Camra Campaigning Group Awaz Utoah Raise Your Voice Bristol Care and Repair AWW Architects Bristol Carpet Manufacturing Co Ltd Axa Real Estate Investment Managers Bristol Chamber of Commerce and Initiative Axa Sunlife Bristol Channel Federation of Sea Anglers Aztech Architecture Bristol Children’s Playhouse Baker Associates Bristol Citizens Advice Centre Ballymore Properties Ltd Bristol City Council Councillors Bangladesh Association, Bath and West Bristol City Football Club Barbados and Caribbean Friends Association Bristol Citywide Forum Barbados – Shakti Imani Inclusion Project Bristol Civic Society Barclays Bank PLC Bristol Community Accountancy Project Barefoot Power UK Bristol Community Housing Foundation Barnardo’s South West Bristol Community Transport Barracks Lane Allotments Bristol Cultural Development Partnership Barratt Strategic Ltd Bristol Cycling Campaign Barrs Court Holdings Ltd Bristol Debt Advice Centre Barry Golledge Associates Ltd Bristol Dial-A-Ride Barton Hill Settlement Bristol Disability Equality Forum Barton Willmore Bristol Drugs Project BDP Bath Chamber of Commerce Bristol East Constituency MP Bath Road Allotments Bristol East Side Traders BBA Architects Ltd Bristol Electric Railbus Ltd BBC Bristol Environment Trust Beard Construction Bristol Environmental Technologies and Beaumont Homes Services Bedminster Down Allotments Bristol Fairtrade Network Bedminster Down and Uplands Society Bristol Ferry Boat Company Berkeley Wilde Bristol Film Office Bevan Brittan Bristol Food Links Task Group Bifield Road Allotments Bristol Friends of the Earth Bishopston, Cotham and Redland Bristol Gay Village Business and Residents Neighbourhood Partnership Bristol Gospel Hall Trust Bishopston Opposing Glut of Supermarkets Bristol Green Capital Momentum Group Bishopston Society Bristol Greenpeace Bishopston Traders Association Allotments Bristol Horse Society

- 8 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation Bristol Housing Partnership Building Design Partnership Bristol Industrial Archaeological Society Building Design Services Bristol Infracare LIFT Ltd Burford (Cabot) Ltd Bristol Inter Faith Group Burgess Salmon Bristol Inter-Lets Burundian Community Association Bristol International Airport Bush Consultancy Bristol Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual Forum Business in the Community Bristol Living Streets Business West Bristol Magpies CAAAD Project Bristol Mauritian Association Cabot, Clifton and Clifton East Neighbourhood Bristol Methodist Centre Partnership Bristol Mind Cabot Property Partnership Bristol Multi Faith Forum Cad Plan Bristol Music Room Calcutt Design Associates Bristol Muslim Cultural Society Caldecotte Consultants Bristol Natural History Consortium Campaign for Better Transport Bristol Naturalists Society Campaign for Real Ale Bristol Neighbourhood Planning Network Campaign for the Achievement of Sustainable Bristol North West Constituency MP Knowle Bristol Older People’s Forum Canal and River Trust Canford B Allotments Bristol Ornithological Club Canford E Allotments Bristol Parks Forum Care Forum Bristol Partnership Carlyle Development Group Bristol Port Company Carlyle Skelton Development Group Bristol Property Agents Association Carmel Christian Centre Bristol Pubs Group Castle Park Users' Group Bristol Race Forum Castlemore Securities Limited Bristol Racial Equality Council Cater Business Park Bristol Regional Environmental Records Centre Cavel Group Bristol Rovers Football Club CBI South West Bristol Rugby Club CBRE Investors Bristol Shop Mobility Centre for Employment and Enterprise Bristol Sikh Council Development Bristol Socialist and Environmental Association Centre for Sustainable Energy Bristol Society of Architects Centro Per La Comunita Italiana Bristol South Constituency MP CEREP Redcliff Sarl Bristol Spaceworks Ltd CGMs Consulting Bristol Sports Council Chalet Gardens Allotments Bristol Survivors Network Chancerygate Asset Management Ltd Bristol Taleem-ul-Islam Trust Charitable Trusts Bristol Tenants Recourse Centre Charlton Road Allotments Bristol Tree Forum Chew Valley Lake Art Studio Bristol TUC Chilworth Properties Ltd Bristol Unison Chris Dent Architect Bristol University Student Union Chris Thomas Ltd Bristol Urban Design Forum Christian Aid Bristol Visual and Environment Group Christmas Steps and St Michaels Association Bristol and West Churches Conservation Trust Bristol West Constituency MP Circomedia Bristol Women’s Forum City Academy Bristol Young People’s Forum City Farms and Community Gardens Bristol Youth Work Project City of Bristol College Gardens Cityscape British Empire and Commonwealth Museum Civic Planning and Design Group British Geological Survey Civil Aviation Authority British Horse Society Civil Service Pensioners Alliance British Retail Consortium Clarke Willmott British Trust for Conservation Volunteers Clifton and Improvement Society Board Broadwalk Shopping Centre Clifton Design and Draw Brook Road Properties Shopping Centre Brunelcare Clifton Maybank Developments BS10 Planning Group Close Ashton Park (GB) Ltd Buchanan Partnership Cluttons LLP Bucknall Austin Colin Buchanan and Partners

- 9 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation College Road Allotments Disabled Travel Service Colliers CRE Dittrich Hudson Architects Collins and Coward Ltd D J Foley Community at Heart Neighbourhood Planning DLP Consultants Ltd Group DMS Consulting Community in Partnership Dominic Taylor Architecture and Design Community Recycling Network Chamber of Commerce Complete Technical Services Ltd Dovercourt Road Allotments Concinnitas DP Daw Architects Conservation Advisory Panel DPDS Consulting Co-operative Food Property Dreweatt Neate Cooper Partnership Drivers Jonas Coronation Power Limited DSG Building Services Cotswold Community Association DTZ Council for the Preservation of Ancient Bristol Dubbers Lane Allotments Council of Ethnic Minority Organisations Duckmoor Road Residents Association Counterslip Baptist Church Dundry View Neighbourhood Partnership CPRE Avonside Dusk Til Dawn CPRE BANES Eagle Land Limited CPRE Gloucestershire East Bristol Advice Centre CPRE North Somerset Easter Gardens Community Association Cranbrook Road Allotments Eastgate Open Market Traders Creative Learning Agency Easton and Lawrence Hill Community Creative Partnerships Partnership Crest Nicholson Easton and Lawrence Hill Neighbourhood Crest Strategic Projects and Key Properties Management Crosby Homes Easton Community Neighbourhood Council Crown Estate Office Easton Community Centre CSJ Planning Consultants Easton Community Partnership CSV Avon Training Easton, Lawrence Hill Neighbourhood Renewal CSV Environment Eastville Day Centre CTC Right to Ride - South West Region EcoJam Cubex Land Ecomotive Housing Cushman and Wakefield Ecovillage Network UK D2 Planning Limited Eco Futures Dalton Warner Davis EDAW Dame Emily Park Project Edward Bright Dandara Ltd Edward Ware Homes DAVAR Egregoria David Ames Associates Elan Homes David Cahill Design Consultant Ellis and Co Chartered Building Surveyors David G Emery RIBA Elmgrove Centre David Farnsworth Appreciation Society Employment for People with Disabilities David James and Partners Enfusion David Lock Associates Ltd English Partnerships David Wilson Homes Entec UK Ltd DC Planning Ltd Enterprise Allotments Deeley Freed Estates Ltd ENVIRON Del Piero Ltd Environment Delivery Group Dementia Care Trust Equality and Human Rights Commission Department for Constitutional Affairs Equality South West Department for Culture, Media and Sport Equine Consultancy Group Department for Environment, Food and Rural ESHA Architects Affairs Estuary Wildlife Group European Movement – Bristol Branch Department for Work and Pensions FA Bartlett Tree Expert Co Ltd Destination Bristol Faculty of the Built Environment, UWE Development Land and Planning Consultants Fairtrade Somerset Ltd Farrell And Company Development Planning Partnership Fawcett Society Devplan UK Federation of Bristol Green Parties DFCAD Services Federation of City Farms and Community Dialogue Gardens Diocesan Board of Finance Federation of Small Businesses Disability Forum Disabled Living Centre

- 10 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation FFT Planning: Friends, Families and Travellers Greater Neighbourhood Partnership and Traveller Law Reform Project Gregory Gray Associates Hope Green Party – Bristol Filwood, Knowle and Windmill Hill Grittleton Road Allotments Neighbourhood Partnership Guinness Trust Filwood Sports and Social Club GVA Grimley First Fox Architecture GWE Business West First Great Western Gypsy and Travellers Representative First Group Gypsy Council Firstplan Halcrow Group Fishponds Farmers Market Half Acre Lane Allotments Fishponds Locality Action Group Ltd Hallam Land Management Ltd Folland Ltd Hamilton-Baillie Associates Limited Forest of Avon Harbourside Forum Forestry Commission – and Withywood Kick Start Region Hartcliffe and Withywood Ventures Fortfield Road Allotments Hartcliffe Community Association Fowlers of Bristol Ltd Hartcliffe Community Campus Village Museum Hartcliffe Health and Environment Action Group Friends of Arnos Vale Cemetery Hartcliffe and Withywood Community Friends of Blaise Partnership Friends of Brandon Hill Hartwell Plc Friends of HAVEN Friends of Callington Road Nature Reserve Headley Park Community Association Friends of Crow Lane Open Spaces Healthy Places Happy People Group Friends of Easter Garden Heaton Planning Ltd Friends of Fox Park Helius Energy PLC Friends of Hebron Burial Ground and Community Council Friends of Okebourne Henbury and Neighbourhood Friends of South Purdown Partnership Friends of Stoke Lodge Henbury Conservation Society Friends of Suburban Bristol Railways Henderson Global Investors Friends of the Avon New Cut and District Community Association Friends of Troopers Hill Hengrove and Neighbourhood Fulcrum Consulting Partnership Fulfords Land and Planning Services , and Westbury on Trym Fulfords Streets Ahead Neighbourhood Partnership Further and Higher Education Henleze Society Fusion Online Limited Hewlett Packard Ltd Fusion Planning Consultants HHEAG Future West Highbury Residents Association Gabriel Estates Ltd Hindu Temple Garden History Society Hoddell Associates GCP Architects Home Builders Federation Gerald Eve Home Energy Services Ghaidan Architects Home Office Gilmore Planning Services Hopwood and Swallow Ginger Gallery Horfield A Allotments GJS Architects Horfield and District Allotments Association GL Hearn Horfield and Neighbourhood Gleeds (Bristol) Partnership Glyn Leaman Architects Horfield Community Association Goadsby and Harding Commercial Horfield Rose Goffenton Drive Allotments Hotwells and Clifton Wood Community Good Penny Island Partnership Association Goulston Road Allotments Housing Strategy Group Graham Moir Associates Howzatt Graham Taylor Associates Hughes Property Grainger PLC Humberts Planning Graphic Packaging International Ltd Humdard Grazebrook Design Hungerford Road Community and Social Greater Bedminster Community Partnership Association Greater Brislington Neighbourhood Partnership Hunter Page Planning Ltd Greater Bristol Transport Alliance Hyder Consulting (UK) Ltd Imperial Park Community Forum Indian Women’s Association – SW England

- 11 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation Industrial Agents Society Leith Planning Inland Waterways Association Levvel Innocent Fine Art Ltd Lewis Foster Lewis Inscape Architects Light Rail Transit Association Insignia Richard Ellis Linden Homes Western Ltd Inventures Living (DLC) Ian Baseley Associates Living Easton Ian Jewson Planning Ltd Lloyds TSB Commercial Banking Idapt Design Services Local Postwatch Imperial Tobacco Ltd Lockleaze Neighbourhood Trust Institute of Directors Lockleaze Sports Ground I.R.I.S Lockleaze Voice Irish Life Development Agency Islamic Information Centre Bristol London Planning Practice J C Planning Consultants Love Food Festival J Drewe Design Consultants Lovell Partnerships JFL Planning Consultants Lush Shoes JF Poling and Associates Lyons Davidson Job Centre Plus Maddox Design Ltd John Iles Associates Malago Valley Conservation Group John Lysaght Properties Ltd Malcolm Padfield Building Design Consultant John Page Architects Malcolm X Centre John Wesley’s Chapel Mall Galleries Johnstone Land Manor Farm Community Association Joint Local Access Forum Maple Close Residents Association Jones Day Marksbury Area Community Association Jones Lang LaSalle Martin Robeson Planning JPC Strategic Planning and Leisure Ltd Martineau JT Group McCarthy and Stone Ltd Junction Limited Partnership McCreadies Kebele MediaWise Trust Ken Parke Planning Consultants Ltd Mendip Hills AONB Service Kersteman Road Allotments Metford Road Allotments Key Transport Consultants Ltd Midshires Estates Ltd Kingfisher Group Mina Road Park Group Kingsdown Conservation Group Ministry of Defence King Sturge Mobile Operators Association Kingsweston, Avonmouth Neighbourhood Monsdale Drive Allotments Partnership Montpelier Conservation Group Kingsweston Preservation Society Moon Design and Build Kingswood Community Association Mothers for Mothers Kingswood Constituency MP Mothers’ Union – Bristol Diocese K. M. Vickers Mouchel Kirkwells MWA Knight Frank MWD Architects Knightstone Housing Myrtle Hall C Allotments Knowle Community Association Narracott Oxford Mills Architects Ltd Knowle Planning Group Narroways Millennium Green Trust Knowle Safe Office Nathaniel Lichfield and Partners Health Association National Amusements Ltd Knowle West Media Centre National Federation of Gypsy Liaison Groups Knowle West Neighbourhood Renewal National Federation of Market Traders Knowle West Residents Planning Group National Grid Knowle, Windmill Hill, Filwood Neighbourhood National Market Traders Federation Partnership National Romani Rights Association LA21 Land Use Group National Trust Lafarge Aggregates Ltd National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Lands Improvement Holdings PLC Workers Landscape, Transport and Conservation Forum Needham Haddrell Land Trust Developments Neil Hadley Associates Ltd Landmark Practice Net-Work South Bristol Laurence Associates Netham Allotments Lawn Tennis Association New Brooklea Allotments Lawrence Hill URC and Methodist Church New Earth Solutions Layfield Allotments Newcombe Estates Company Ltd Learning and Skills Council Newland Homes

- 12 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation NFU (SW Region) Planning Bureau Limited Nick Davies Associates Planning Perspectives LLP Nigel Bray and Family Planning Potential Nigel Cant Planning Planning Solutions Nike Group of Companies Plummers Hill Allotments Nilaari Agency Polysigns Exhibition and Display NJL Consulting Portishead Chamber of Trade Noma Architects Ltd Portland and Brunswick Squares Association Norman Associates Powell Dobson Urbanists North Bristol Advice Centre Princess Royal Trust Carers Centre North Bristol Forum on Transport, Landscape QEH Theatre and Conservation Quattro Design Ltd Northern Slopes Initiative Race Forum Northern Trust R and J Consultants NR Steering Group Rapleys LLP North Street Traders Association RE Insp1red Norwich Union Life Redcatch Community Association Novas Housing Support Group Redcatch E Allotments O and H Property Ltd Redcliffe Community Forum Oatlands Avenue Allotments Redcliffe Futures Odournet UK Redcliffe Parade Environmental Association Off Centre Gallery Redland and Cotham Amenities Society Office of Government Commerce Action Group O'Leary Goss Architects Ltd Redland Tree Services One in Eight Redrow Homes South Wales Open Spaces Society Redrow Homes South West Limited Origin 3 Planning Refugee Action Osbourne Clarke Regen South West Our Common Future Renaissance Land Overseas Chinese Association Re:Work Ltd Oxford Architects RIBA Bristol and Bath Packers Allotments Richard Ellis Planning Consultancy Park and Ride - The Bush Consultancy Richard Pedlar Architects Passenger Focus Richmond Terrace Residents Association Paul and Company Rider Levett Bucknall Paul Kentish and Co RNIB South West Paul Rossiter Associates RNID Bristol Office Paul Sharpe Associates Robert Hitchings Limited Paul’s Place Robin Bradbeer Ltd P Brady Electrical Rock Allotments Peacock and Smith Rock Community Centre Ltd Pedestrians Association Roger Tym and Partners Peel Group Rolls Royce Peel Holdings ROOM Peel Investments (UK) Ltd Roundhouse Day Centre Pegasus Planning Group Royal London Asset Management Pendock Road Allotments Royal West of England Academy Penrilla Consultants Royate Hill Allotments Perretts Park Allotments RPS Group People’s Cultural Palace Ltd RREEF Ltd People’s Republic of RTPI South West Persimmon Homes Ltd St. Barnabas Church Persimmon Homes Severn Valley St. Bede’s Catholic College Persimmon Homes Wessex St. George A Allotments Peter Evans Partnership St. George Community Association PFA Consulting St. George Neighbourhood Partnership PfP Homes/BCHA St. George’s Bristol PfP Regeneration St. Giles Allotments PG Group St. John’s Residents’ Association Philip Clifford Design St. Jude’s Tenants Association Phillips Planning and Development Consultants St. Mary Redcliffe Picture This Moving Image St. Mary Redcliffe C. of E. V. C. Primary School Pindar Design Partnership St. Modwen Developments Ltd P J Orchard Architects St. Paul’s Health and Wellbeing Project Places for People Developments Ltd St. Paul’s Neighbourhood Management Planning and Environmental Services Ltd St. Paul’s Unlimited Community Partnership

- 13 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation St. Paul’s Youth Promotion Ltd South West Somali Community Association St. Peter’s Rise Allotments South West Strategic Leaders’ Board St. Stephen’s Community Work Project Sovereign Housing Association St. Werburgh’s Community Association Specialist Publications St. Werburgh’s Neighbourhood Association Speedwell Allotments Safer Bristol Community Safety Team Speedwell Residents Association Sainsbury’s Supermarkets Ltd Spike Island Salecreate Ltd Sport England South West Sanderson Wetherall SPRA and NP Save Sea Mills Garden Suburb Springfield Allotments Savills SS Great Britain Schumacher UK Stafford Eales Sea Mills Action Residents Team Stapleton Allotments Sea Mills and Coombe Dingle Community Stapleton and Begbrook Community Forum Association Sea Mills Community Association Stapleton and Frome Valley Conservation Sea Mills Signal Station Allotments Society Second Site Property Holdings Stapleton Conservation Society Security 2000 Ltd Steps Gallery Segro Industrial Estates Stewart Ross Associates Sehatmand Aurat Stockwood Community Association Self-Help Community Housing Association Ltd Stoke Bishop Community Association SERA Stoke Lane Allotments Shakti Imani Inclusion Project Stokes Pension Fund Ltd Shared Care Network Stonewall Area Housing Committee Strategic Land Partnership Shirehampton Community Action Forum Stratland Shirehampton Greens Streets Alive Shirehampton Public Hall Committee Stride Treglown Limited Shop for Jobs Strutt and Parker Show of Strength Theatre Company Student Community Action Signet Planning Sturminster and Stockwood Community Sikh Resource Centre Association Smiths Gore Sudanese Community Association Residents Association Support Against Racist Incidents Snowdon Road Allotments Supporters of Southmead Action Group Sustainability South West Social Economy Sustainable Bishopston Social Enterprise Works Sustainable Construction Services Sofa Project Sustainable Redland Soil Association Sustrans Somerfield Stores Swanmoor Crescent Allotments Somer Housing Group Swiss Drive Neighbourhood Watch Soroptimist International of Bristol T and C Design Services SOS Group Talbot Road Allotments South Bristol Advice Centre Taylor Wimpey UK Limited South Bristol Church and Community Trust TCN South East England Regional Development Templegate Training Agency Terence Higgins Trust Southmead Allotments Terence O’Rourke Ltd Southmead and Henbury Area Housing Tesco Stores Ltd Committee Tetlow King Planning Southmead Community Association Theatre Bristol Southmead Development Trust Theatres Trust Southmead Youth Forum Thingwall Park Allotments Southville Community Development Thursby Associates Association Transition Information Project Southville LETS South West Arts Marketing Tom Russell Architects South West Chamber of Commerce Tony Thorpe Associates South West Councils Totterdown Residents Environmental and South West Housing Body Social Action South West Planning Aid Touchwood Enterprises Ltd South West Public Transport Forum Tourism Skills Network South West South West Regional Development Agency Transition City Bristol South West RSL Consortium Transport for Greater Bristol

- 14 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation Transport for London Wells Road Traders Travel Foundation Wellwomen Information Travelling Light Westbury Land United Neighbours Association Tree Aid Westbury Park Community Association Treework Services Ltd Welsh Assembly Tribal MJP Westbury-on-Trym Society Trinity Care Service West of England Centre for Inclusive Living Trinity Community Arts West of England Partnership Tuffin Ferraby and Taylor Whicheloe Macfarlane Turley Associates Whitchurch Folk House Association Tynings Field Allotments Whitefield Road Allotments Unions Out West Whiteladies Road Business Association UNITE Group PLC White Young Green Planning Universities Superannuation Scheme Ltd White Young Green Wellington Whittock Road Allotments University of the West of England Wholesale Fruit Centre Bristol Ltd University of the West of England Student Wickham Hill Allotments Union Willmore Iles Architects Upper Horfield Community Trust Wilmott Parks Group Urban Splash Wills and Company URS Wiltshire County Council UWE Estates Department Wind Prospect Developments Ltd Vassall Centre Trust Windmill Hill City Farm Vertigo SDC Limited Windmill Hill Community Association Vic Love Architects Winsor and Leaman Architects Victoria Rooms Windsor Terrace Housing Co-Op Viridor Waste Management Withywood Community School Viva! W M Morrison Supermarkets Plc Vivid Regeneration Womens Forum Volunteer Centre – Bristol Woodcraft Folk VOSCUR Woodland Trust Waitrose Ltd Woodward A P Limited Walsingham Planning WPB Planning Watershed Media Centre WSP Development and Transportation WCC Hortis Ltd WWF Wedmore Vale Allotments YWCA Bristol Young Women’s Centre Welham and Hanna Chartered Architects Individuals: Aburrow, A Bartlett, A Box, K Acton-Campbell, R Bartlett, K Brace, Mr and Mrs Adams, B Basey, C Brain, D Allen, M Basterfield, S Bremner, V Allen, Mr and Mrs Batley, W Bridgewater, P Allen, P Battson, A Briggs, Mr Allen, S Baverstock, S Britton, J Amarasuriya, T Bayley, F Britton, D Anglin, Mr Beacham, P Brooker, A Annetts, R Beachgood, Mr and Mrs Brooks, E Anstey, T Beckey, I Brough, M Anthwal, V Beese, R Brown, A Appleton , G Begent, Mr Brown, A Appleyard, D Bell, D Brown, A Arthur, K Bell, D Brown, C Aygun, N Billingham, Mr Brown, D Bagley, E Bisp, A Brown, E Bagshaw, P Black, R Brown, J Baker, G Bohin, J Brown, Mr Baker, P Bohin, W Brown, P Bale, L Boichot, T Brown, T Bale, S Bond, J Brownhill, R Balfry, G Borek, K Browning, R Banfield, J Boston, P Brownsey, C Bannerman, J Boulton, S Brunel, I Barker, N Bowden, J Brunt, P Barnes, P Bowden, R Bryant, Mr Barratt, L Bowes, K Buchan, A

- 15 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation Buck, Mr and Mrs Cytera, M Fowkes, J Budd, S Danton, S Fowler, D Burke, D Darley, J Fox, A Burt, N Davies, C Francis, J Burton, A Davies, M Francke, G Burton, P Davies, Mr and Mrs Franklin, R Butler, C Davies, Mr and Mrs Frape, A Butler, Mr and Mrs Davies, R Freeman, J Butler, S Davies, R French, S Buttigieg, J Davies, S Frenkel, J Byrne, M Davis, Mr and Mrs Freshwater, H Cains, A Dawson, H Frost, M Carbon, C Day, A Fryer, S Carmack, L De Landre-Grogan, P Galvin, F Carneby, B De'Ath, B Gane, L Carpenter, B De'Ath, R Gannaway, K Carr-Hyde, J Delor, C Gardiner , R Caseley, S Derrick, S Gaymer, C Cawser, C Dewdney, R George, R Chadwick, D Dickens, J Gibbs, M Chaffe, G Dicker, G Giddings, V Chamberlain, J Dixon, Mr and Mrs Gilborson, Mr and Mrs Chappell, M Dixon, R Gill, L Chappell , Mr and Mrs Donaldson, J Gillard, D Charlesworth, J Downer, C Gilliam, J Chilcott, P Duffy, M Gilliam, R Christopher, D Dunn, M Gillrd, A Chugg, A Dunning, S Ginger, M Clapp, J Dunton, T Goff, A Clark, Mr Durrant, C Golding, L Cleave, A Dyer, K Golding, P Clent, Mr Eastment, E Gonzalez, E Clothier, E Edwards , R Goodland, J Coates, B Edwards-Brown, J Goodridge, L Cogan, D Edwards-Brown, T Goodwin, P Cole, K Eiler, J Gornall, D Coles, J Ellis, M Gough, M Coles, Mr Ellison, M Gover, I Collins, M Ennis, Mr and Mrs Grant, J Coltman, Mr and Mrs Esmarch, F Green, J Colwill, M Essex, A Green, T Comer, P Eva, C Griffen, B Conneely, M Evatt, W Grigereit, C Connor, D Ewan, J Gunson, R Connor, H Farmer, G Guyatt, R Cook, D Farr, G Gwyn, R Cook, R Farrar, D Haines, A Coombes, H Farrugia, C Haines, T Coombes, M Fear, A Hale, G Cooper, E Featherstone, A Hale, P Cooper, I Felski, A Hallett, E Cooper, L Feneley, R Hallett, J Cooper, M Ferguson, A Hamer, Mr and Mrs Corner, R Ferry, N Hamilton, D Costigan, C Fews, C Hamilton , E Cotterell, G Fieldhouse, J Hamilton , P Coutts, H Fifoot, K Hammond, R Couzens, W Fillingham, R Hancock , S Cox, J Flanagan, B Hancock , T Crabb, P Flegg, C Hanmer, C Cronk, L Flook, W Harbert, S Cross, K Flower, M Harris, C Cross, V Flowers, R Harris, W Croucher, H Floyd, P Harrison, R Curtis, L Forber, A Hart, G Curtis, P Ford, Mr Hart, T

- 16 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation Harvey, J Jones, A Massey, B Haughton, E Jones, C Masters, C Hawkings, C Jones, D Mayer, S Hay, N Jones, E McCallum, A Hayes, A Jones, I McCarthy, K Hayles, Mr Jones, J McCartney, M Haynes, R Jones, J McDonald, J Haynes, T Jones, J McGinn, R Hayward, A Jones, L McIlroy, P Hayward , L Jones, N McMillan, A Hazell, A Jones, N McMillan, C Healy, M Jones, S McMillan, R Healy, M Jordan, F Mctear, J Hedley, R Joslin, M Meacham, M Helson, R Keates, Mr and Mrs Mead, M Henderson, M Kebbell, P Mead, N Hendy, L Keen, P Meakin, D Heppell, S Kettlety, Mr and Mrs Megson, J Herbert, E Kidwell, N Mellor, A Herbert-Golden, C King, A Metcalf, S Hewitt, S King, A Miller, J Hicks, J Kirk, A Milligan, R Higgins, T Kite, J Mills, M Hill, K Knechtel, H Mitchell, Mr and Mrs Hinksman, D Knight, J Mitchell, L Hindmarsh, L Knoepfel, B Miyakoshi, M Hobbs, P Krause, J Mizen, P Holbrook, Mr and Mrs Kray, M Moore, B Hollis, D Kumra, S Moore, J Holloway, Mr and Mrs Laker, M Moore, M Holmyard, J Lamb, K Morgan, B Hook, S Lambert, M Morgan, B Hooper, L Landen, M Morgan, D Hope, A Lane, C Morgan, H Horsham, R Langley, J Morgan, L Hosie, B Lavelle, M Morgan, A Hosking, A Lawrence, C Morgan, S Houghton, D Lay, T Morris, G Howard, C Layland, S Morris, Mr and Mrs Howard, Mrs Lee, Mr and Mrs Morris, Mrs Howell, A Lee, M Moss, H Howl, C Lee, R Moss, Mr and Mrs Hudson, R Leonard, B Mugford, Miss Hulin, M Leonard, P Munden, S Hurley, P Leonard, N Murray, J Hutchings, Mr and Mrs Lewis, Mrs Mushens, R Iles, M Liebling, H Nailor, D Jackson, C Lilley, S Napier, D Jackson, T Lindsay, Mr and Mrs Neale, D James, D Lines, Y Needham, Mr and Mrs James, G Lippett, P Nelmes, C James, N Loades, E Nelmes, M James, O Long, N Nelson, E Jarlett, D Lopez, M Nelson, L Jarrett, R Low, C Netcott, P Jarvis, K Lubetkin, S Newland, Mr and Mrs Jefferies, A Lune, P Newman , P Jefferies, Mrs Lynch, J Newport, P Jefferson, C Lyus, J Nicholls, R Jeffries, K Macey, M Norman, N Jenkins, J Macfarlane, S Nutt, D Jephcote, M Maggs, D Oakley, Mr and Mrs Jimenez, A Mansfield-Williams, E O'Connor, J Jobson, P March, P Oldfield, A Johnston, R Marklew, L O'Leary, Mr and Mrs Jolley, J Martin, L O'Leary, D

- 17 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation O'Neill, N Ralph, D Sims, A Orchard, B Ramsden, S Singh, G O'Regan, R Ramu, A Skeels, I Osborne, D Randall, J Skelton, C O'Sullivan, A Rawlinson-Smith, J Small, M Otten, M Rawlinson-Smith, R Smallman, M Otten, Mr Redman, J Smart, J Otty, S Redway, D Smith, A Oulton, W Reed, R Smith, C Oulton, J Reeve, D Smith, D Palfrey, J Reid, D Smith, D Pallett, R Reitano, M Smith, D Palmer, J Renshaw, A Smith, D Parker, C Riboulet, M Smith, J Parker, H Rice, J Smith, Mr and Mrs Parkes, D Richards, Mr and Mrs Smith, Mr and Mrs Parkes, S Richards , F Smith, Mr and Mrs Parr, L Richmond, Mr and Mrs Smith, P Parr, S Riley, K Smith, P Patel, S Rivers, G Smith, R Patterson, H Rivers, Mr and Mrs Smith-Uncles, S Paul, D Robbins, D Snow, A Peacock, L Roberts, B Sowter, E Pearce, A Roberts, J Spada, R Pearce, Mr and Mrs Roberts, D Sparke, A Pearce, S Roberts, O Sparks, I Pedler, A Robinson, C Spelman, R Peggie, J Robson, T Spring, K Pegler, C Rockey, S Starr, Mr and Mrs Pendlington, C Roffey, S Staynings, J Pennington, M Ronicle, J Sterland, R Penny, Mr and Mrs Roper, T Sterling, T Penrose, G Rosenfeld, S Stevens, C Perilli, L Rosewell, P Stevens, Mr and Mrs Peters, S Rossiter, J Stevenson, J Pettigrew, J Rothery, S Stirling, C Phillips, A Rouse, P Stock, G Phillips, E Routh, C Stokes, K Phillips, Mr and Mrs Rowe, D Stone, J Phillips, R Rumph, Mr Stoneman, N Phippen, C Russell, A Strachan, M Piasecki, J Russell, S Straker, P Pickford, E Rutter, C Stride, R Piekarniak, P Rydon, H Stringer, Mr and Mrs Pike, A Saba, N Strode, Mr and Mrs Pirie, N Sampson, R Stuart, W Pitt, Mr and Mrs Sawday, A Studley, J Pomphrey, Mr and Mrs Scammell, E Sumeghy, S Pomphrey, W Scammell, T Summerhayes, S Pool, T Schollar, Mrs Summerhill, K Portlock, D Scott, P Summers, R Poulton, M Sebok, Mrs Sutton, A Power, N Serie, D Sutton, D Pratt, H Sharkey, J Swailes, J Price, M Sharp, G Swain, S Price, P Sheard, P Sweet, R Priestley, A Shenton, M Swingler, C Procter, E Shenton-Collins, L Swinton, C Pugsley, Mrs Sheppard, T Symes, Mr and Mrs Purkis, V Shodunke, M Tait, C Quayle, N Short, B Tancock, Mr and Mrs Quilter, B Shutt, I Tankins, L Radice, D Silman, R Taylor, G Radice, R Silverthorne, P Taylor, H Ragget, J Simpson, Mr and Mrs Taylor, N Rainey, P Teszka, L

- 18 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation Thirunavakarasan, A Tuohy-Tillson, R White-Bower, M Thomas, B Turner, C Whitfield, K Thomas, D Turrell, A Wilkes, Mrs Thomas, I Tuttiett, A Wilkinson, D Thomas, J Tyler, A Williams, A Thomas, N Usher, J Williams, C Thomas, S Usher, P Williams, G Thomas, S Vaccaro, J Williams, H Thomas, S Vallis, I Williams, J Thompson, R Van-Tull, E Williams, M Thorne, J Varney, E Williams, Mr and Mrs Thorne, S Venn, E Williams, S Thornley, Mr and Mrs Viner, M Williamson, B Thorpe-Tonkin, M Vinnicombe, Mr Williamson, R Tiley, D Vowles, P Wilson, S Tillson, M Waines, Mrs Windsor, H Timmins, W Wakelin, D Winfindale, C Timmins, M Wakley, R Winstanley, S Tiryaki, S Walker, M Wollen, S Trace, Mr Warburton, Mr and Mrs Woodman, M Tranter, A Ward, J Woodward, M Trapnell, M Watson, N Wright, S Treadwell, J Watts, J Wrigley, A Treasure, J Watts, H Wyatt, L Tripp, Mr and Mrs Webster, S A Yandell, J Trowbridge, D Webster, K Yarrow, R Trowbridge, M Wedge, D Yates, Mr Tucker, A Weeks, J Yeo, A Tucker, D Weeks, L Yeomans, Miss Tucker, M Welchman, V Young, A Tucker, M West, P Young, C Tume, C Weston, G Young, E Tunnah, D Wheeler, M Younger, J Tuohy, M Wheeler, P Tuohy-Tillson, M White, K

- 19 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

- 20 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation 3. Consultation methods used There were three main stages in the preparation of the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies: Stage 1 – Scoping and Call for Sites (2008) Stage 2 – Consideration of Options (2010) Stage 3 – Consideration of Preferred Approach (2012). This section sets out the range of methods used to involve, consult, notify and inform communities and stakeholders during each stage. In addition to the methods carried out at each stage, to ensure continuous participation throughout the preparation process, council officers regularly met with groups, organisations and stakeholders to discuss the emerging Site Allocations and Development Management Policies. This included regular liaison meetings between officers of the council and its adjoining local authorities (Bath and North East Somerset, North Somerset and South Gloucestershire Councils) as well as groups such as the Bristol Property Agents Association, the Bristol Civic Society and the Bristol Neighbourhood Planning Network. Evening discussion and update events with members of the Bristol Development Framework Consultation Database were held throughout the process. Council officers met with stakeholders such as the Environment Agency and NHS Bristol to discuss specific issues. The council regularly consulted the city’s 14 Neighbourhood Partnership areas and sought opportunities to present and discuss the emerging document with them. In accordance with the Equality Act 2010, the council has carried out an Equality Impact Assessment of the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies. This is available to view separately on the council’s website. A Health Impact Assessment of the Development Management policies was also carried out. The summarised results of this assessment can be found at Appendix 1.

- 21 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation Stage 1 – Call for Sites and Sustainability Appraisal Scoping Report (2008) Consultation methods used: A) Call for Sites Between 31st October and 19th December 2008 the council carried out a ‘Call for Sites’ exercise. Its purpose was to provide an opportunity for individuals and organisations to suggest land or buildings for possible inclusion in the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies. The Call for Sites exercise was publicised in the following ways: Local media A press release was published and carried by a number of local newspapers and publications. This included the ‘Bristol Evening Post’ and ‘Thrive’ magazine, which has a circulation of approximately 800 voluntary and community organisations across Bristol. Website The Call for Sites exercise was promoted on the Bristol City Council website homepage, the Consultation Finder and through the council’s email alert initiative, Bristol News Direct. It was further promoted through the websites and e-mail circulation lists of several community and development industry organisations. A web-based briefing was also produced to help organisations and individuals understand and engage in the process. Notifying the Bristol Development Framework Consultation Database The approximately 1,500 individuals, groups, organisations, public bodies, infrastructure and service providers on the Bristol Development Framework Consultation Database were notified. An evening meeting was also held at the Pavilions, Hannover Quay in October 2008 to discuss the Call for Sites process with interested members of the Database. Presentations A number of presentations were given to community groups and neighbourhood partnerships across the city to explain the role of the Call for Sites exercise and how they could respond. B) Sustainability Appraisal Scoping Report In October 2008 the council consulted stakeholder organisations on the Site Allocations and Development Management Sustainability Appraisal Scoping Report. The purpose of the Scoping Report was to seek comment on the proposed scope and approach to the Sustainability Appraisal of the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies. It identified, for example, a range of baseline data on the current state of Bristol, the objectives of other plans, policies and programmes which influence the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies and the set of sustainability objectives that the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies would be tested against. It also identified and sought comment on the key sustainability issues and problems that the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies could address.

- 22 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Stage 2 – Consideration of options (2010) Consultation methods used: Consultation documents In June 2010 the council published the ‘Site Allocations and Development Management Options Document’. Informed by the Call for Sites exercise, the Options Document sought public comment on possible options for site allocations and designations. It also set out initial ideas on the scope and content of development management policies.

Consultation on the document ran for 20 weeks between 14th June and 29th October 2010. Members of the Bristol Development Framework Consultation Database were notified. The document was made available for inspection in the city’s public libraries and Brunel House and placed on the council’s website, along with a questionnaire. Hard copies were made available free to community groups and organisations on request. Website The Options Consultation document was promoted on the Bristol City Council website homepage, the Consultation Finder and through the council’s email alert initiative, Bristol News Direct. Drop-in events Drop-in events (from noon-8pm) were held in community venues in each of the city’s 14 Neighbourhood Partnership areas to enable local people to discuss the initial options with council officers. Evening discussion events Evening discussion and update events with members of the Bristol Development Framework Consultation Database about the Options Consultation document were held in March, July and October 2010 in central Bristol locations. This included three events held on 19-21st October to discuss the draft Development Management Policies. Local media A press release about the Options Consultation document was published and carried by a number of local newspapers and publications. This included the ‘Bristol Evening Post’ and ‘The Pigeon’ magazine, which has a circulation of approximately 11,000 households and businesses in South Bristol. Council publications An article about the Options Consultation document was carried in the August 2010 edition of ‘Bristol News’, the council newspaper distributed to all households and business in the city.

- 23 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation Stage 3 – Consideration of preferred approach (2012) Consultation methods used: Consultation document In March 2012 the council published the ‘Site Allocations and Development Management Preferred Approach Document’ for consultation. Utilising comments received on the Options Consultation documents, the Preferred Approach Document identified the council’s favoured approach to site allocations, designations and development management policies. Consultation on the document ran for eight weeks between 23rd March and 18th May 2012. Members of the Bristol Development Framework Consultation Database were notified. The Preferred Approach Document was made available for inspection in the city’s public libraries and Brunel House and placed on the council’s website, along with a questionnaire. Hard copies were made available free to community groups and organisations on request. Website The Preferred Approach Document was promoted on the Bristol City Council website homepage, the Consultation Finder and through the council’s email alert initiative, Bristol News Direct. Drop-in events Drop-in events (from 4-8pm) were held in community venues in five of the city’s Neighbourhood Partnership areas to enable local people to discuss the preferred options with council officers. Local media A press release about the Preferred Approach Document was published and carried by, amongst others, the ‘Bristol Evening Post’.

- 24 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation 4. Summary of main issues raised and how they were addressed in the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies This section sets out the main issues that were raised by communities and stakeholders during the preparation of the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies and how they were addressed.

A summary of the key changes that have been made to the development management policies, site allocations and designations in the preparation of the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies is provided at Appendix 2.

- 25 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Stage 1 – Call for Sites and Sustainability Appraisal Scoping Report (2008) A: Call for Sites 1,100 submissions were received in relation to 600 sites. Sites received from the Call for Sites exercise were assessed for possible inclusion in the 2010 Site Allocations and Development Management Options Consultation Document. When considering whether sites should be included a number of factors were taken into account. These included the physical characteristics of the site, its accessibility, context, historic and environmental considerations and the likelihood of the site being delivered for the land use suggested by the promoter. When the Options Consultation Document was published in June 2010, a schedule of the sites suggested during the Call for Sites exercise was placed on the council’s website. This schedule summarised which sites had been included and, for those that had not been included, the reason for this. This schedule is available to view on the council’s website at: http://www.bristol.gov.uk/page/planning-and-building- regulations/call-sites-schedules-and-maps B: Sustainability Appraisal Scoping Report Comments were received from four stakeholder organisations. These comments helped inform the choice of baseline data, the other relevant plans, policies and programmes that should be considered, and the sustainability objectives that the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies would be tested against. They also informed the key sustainability issues and problems that the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies could address.

- 26 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation Stage 2 – Consideration of options (2010) 7,800 separate comments were received from 4,833 respondents on the June 2010 Options Document, together with 23 petitions containing some 9,000 signatures.

The main issues raised and how they were addressed in the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies are set out in the tables below.

Development management policies Summary of main issues raised on draft development management policies by respondents to the 2010 Options Document and how they were addressed in the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies.

Main issues raised How they were addressed

Policy DM1 Specialist Housing (NB this became Policy DM1 Residential Sub- divisions, Shared and Specialist Housing in the Preferred Approach Document and DM2 in the Publication Version)

• Need to clarify / define Following changes made to policy in Preferred policy terminology Approach Document: • Consider security and • Greater clarification and explanation provided, parking issues e.g. further detail included on how harmful impacts might be assessed and how good • Impact on natural and built standard of accommodation might be environment assets achieved. • Thresholds or restrictions • Additional section on older persons’ housing on Houses in Multiple included. Occupation and subdivisions needed • Consider housing needs of older people

Policy DM2 Retail and Town Centre Uses

• Financial and professional For Preferred Approach Document separate services (Use Class A2) in policies on the following matters were included to Primary Shopping Areas address issues raised at Options Consultation should be supported stage: retail, leisure and hotel development (Policy DM6); shopping areas and frontages (DM7); local • Recognise contribution of centres (DM8); and food and drink and the leisure and cultural facilities evening economy (DM9). to centres • Include primary frontage Issues also addressed in Preferred Approach designation Document in following ways: • Clearer support for retail in • Policy DM7 maintained presumption that retail secondary frontages uses in Primary Shopping Areas will remain in needed that use, but also recognised potential positive contribution other uses could make. • Detail needed on out of centre shopping • Policy DM7 supported retail development in Secondary Shopping Frontages where it would • Certain shopping areas help maintain or enhance function of centre.

- 27 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed require their own vision • Greater clarity provided in policy DM6 on retail and related uses outside centres. • St. Michael’s Hill Local Centre should not be split • St. Michael’s Hill Local Centre amended to be between two development located wholly within Site Allocations and plan documents Development Management Policies area following changes to boundary of Bristol • Stronger protection sought Central Area Plan. for public houses • New policy DM5 included specifically on • Clarify meaning of protection of public houses. ‘cumulative impact’ re food and drink uses • Policy DM9 addressed food and drink uses and their impacts, including health impacts of • Greater consideration takeaways in close proximity to schools and needed to hours of youth facilities. operation of food and drink uses and their impacts • Policy should address mobile fast-food units and be extended to consider health impacts of restaurants, cafés and particularly takeaways close to facilities used by children

Policy DM3 Markets (NB this became Policy DM10 in the Preferred Approach Document and DM11 in the Publication Version)

• Impacts of new markets on • Addressed by policy stating that new markets existing businesses should should not harm the vitality, viability and be considered diversity of existing centres, which would include impact on existing businesses.

Policy DM4 Retaining valuable employment sites (NB this became Policy DM11 in the Preferred Approach Document and DM12 in the Publication Version)

• More flexibility sought. Allow • Approach of setting out a broad range of loss of employment sites criteria maintained in Preferred Approach where other economic Document. development uses are proposed • Less flexibility sought. Fix status of employment sites so loss is not allowed

Policy DM5 The Health Impacts of Development (NB this became Policy DM12 in the Preferred Approach Document and DM14 in the Publication Version)

• Appropriate threshold to Following changes made to policy in Preferred request a Health Impact Approach Document: Assessment. • To ensure consistency, policy amended so that

- 28 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed • Policy should clarify thresholds for residential and non-residential expectations and scope of development are in line with council’s definition health impacts to be of 'super major’ developments: i.e. 100 or more addressed homes and 10,000m² or more floorspace. • Policy should state that • More detail on expectations and scope of major transport proposals health impacts to be addressed provided. come within its scope • Policy included statement that Health Impact • Should state that Assessment would be required ‘where the addressing health proposal is likely to have a significant impact inequalities is within scope on health and wellbeing’. This could cover of a Health Impact major transport proposals where it is Assessment. considered they are likely to have significant impact. • Consideration of health inequalities retained.

Policy DM6 Green Infrastructure Provision

• Clarify ‘multifunctional green Following changes made to policy in Preferred Infrastructure’ Approach Document: • Greater emphasis on • ‘Multifunctional Green Infrastructure’ clarified in development connecting to explanatory text. Strategic Green • New provision introduced to ensure Infrastructure Network development seeks connections to Strategic • Strengthen policy regarding Green Infrastructure Network. provision of new trees • Policy amended so that additional or enhanced • Clarify ‘natural water trees will be ‘expected’ rather than resources’ ‘encouraged’ as part of landscaping elements of development proposals. • Policy amended and explanatory text provided to clarify approach regarding development which proposes water features.

Policy DM7 Development Involving Existing Green Infrastructure (NB this became Policy DM15 in the Preferred Approach Document and DM17 in the Publication Version)

• Clarify ‘Incidental Open Following changes made in Preferred Approach Space’ Document: • Include nature conservation • Policy amended to describe ‘Incidental Open as a consideration in Space’ as ‘Unidentified Open Space’ with protection of open spaces explanatory text provided. • Policy sub-heading on • Nature conservation matters are addressed in ‘Water’ should be included policy DM9. within policy on • Policy provisions relating to water included in Development Adjacent to policy DM20 with explanatory text provided. Waterways

- 29 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed

Policy DM8 Kingsweston and Avonmouth Urban Edge (NB this became Policy DM16 Avonmouth and Kingsweston Levels in the Preferred Approach Document and DM18 in the Publication Version)

• Clarify purpose of policy Following changes made to policy in Preferred Approach Document: • Concern name of policy could imply scrappy • Policy made clear the acceptability of certain development forms of development. • Include references to role of • Name of policy amended and references to area in managing flood risk, flood risk, wetlands and historic environment providing wetland habitats provided in explanatory text. and to the historic Policy reflects various Core Strategy policies, environment particularly policy BCS4, which would make it • Concern policy could restrict inappropriate to identify land for new employment. important uses such as employment

Policy DM9 Development Involving Biological and Geological Conservation Sites (NB this became Policy DM17 Development and Nature Conservation and Policy DM18 Regionally Important Geological Sites in the Preferred Approach Document and DM19 and DM20 in the Publication Version)

• Re-word policy so that Following changes made to policy DM17 in biological or nature Preferred Approach Document: conservation issues can be • Explanatory text expanded to provide greater weighed against other clarity as to what constitutes nature issues conservation value in Bristol. • Relevant cross-referencing to legislation and approach to international and national sites of nature conservation importance and protected species added. • Protection for Sites of Nature Conservation Importance strengthened. • Sequential approach to mitigation included. • More information on role and function of Wildlife Network and Wildlife Corridors set out. Separate policy (DM18) on Regionally Important Geological Sites also provided in Preferred Approach Document.

Policy DM10 Development of Private Gardens (NB this became Policy DM19 in the Preferred Approach Document and DM21 in the Publication Version)

• Opposed to any loss of • Explanatory text in Preferred Approach garden space Document policy DM19 expanded on policy aims. • Larger gardens could be

- 30 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed developed providing usable space was retained • Clarify approach in areas where higher densities were acceptable • Gardens should be given greater protection in areas with fewer parks • Need to conserve appearance of front gardens

Policy DM11 Development Adjacent to Waterways (NB this became Policy DM20 in the Preferred Approach Document and DM22 in the Publication Version)

• Strengthen policy by adding Following changes made in Preferred Approach waterway provisions of Document: policy DM15 • Policy DM20 included waterway provisions of • Exempt Bristol Port from DM11. policy provisions relating to • DM20 explained policy’s requirements relating public access, enhancing to public access would not normally be sought leisure and recreation for applications in Bristol Port. • Add reference to requiring Issue of sustainable drainage systems considered sustainable drainage to be adequately addressed by Core Strategy systems for schemes policies BCS13, BCS15 and BCS16. adjacent to waterways Issue of protecting historic character considered to • Include reference to be adequately addressed by Core Strategy policy protecting historic character BCS22 and Preferred Approach Document and assets directly and Development Management policy DM29. indirectly related to waterways

Policy DM12 Transport Development Management (NB this became Policy DM21 in the Preferred Approach Document and DM23 in the Publication Version)

• Clarify terminology Following changes made to policy in Preferred Approach Document: • Increase priority for pedestrians and cyclists • Explanatory text clarified terminology. • Car parking should not • Increased emphasis on cycling and pedestrian prioritise on-street over off- matters provided. street • Reference to on-street and off-street parking • Change parking standards removed. schedule to provide more • Provision of electric vehicle charging points bicycle parking spaces included in parking schedule. • Mention charging points for electric cars and car-free / low-car development in Controlled Parking Zones

- 31 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed and resist proposals for new long-stay car parking

Policy DM13 Transport Schemes (NB this became Policy DM22 in the Preferred Approach Document and DM24 in the Publication Version)

• Policy should include • DM13 safeguards land for known transport additional new rail stations schemes and proposals being pursued by the and road, cycling and council and / or partners through the Joint walking schemes Local Transport Plan or by organisations such as Network Rail and the Highways Agency. • Existing rail stations and Schemes suggested by respondents not lines, bus routes and known or being pursued in this way, therefore transport depots should be delivery uncertain and so not included. safeguarded • Considered unnecessary to safeguard • No need to safeguard operational railway and bus routes. Protection Hallen Marsh to Kings of existing transport facilities addressed by Weston Lane rail link as has Core Strategy policy BCS10. been partly built on • Potential for Hallen Marsh to Kings Weston rail link to be implemented therefore continued safeguarding considered appropriate.

Policy DM14 Greenways (NB this became Policy DM23 in the Preferred Approach Document and DM25 in the Publication Version)

• Policy should: Following changes made to policy in Preferred Approach Document: o maintain integrity of existing and • Greater clarity provided regarding intention to contribute to delivery maintain and enhance Greenways network. of proposed routes • Explanatory text made clear improvements to o promote delivery of be achieved either as part of development’s Greenways through design or through Section 106 Agreements. design of new development rather • Explanatory text described how Greenways than negotiations on network would be shown on maps on council’s Section 106 website. Greenways not a specific planning Agreements designation as they consist of mixture of on- and off-road routes combining existing • Show Greenways network highways network as well as open spaces. on Proposals Maps Therefore not considered appropriate to show network on Policies Map.

Policy DM15 Local Character and Distinctiveness (NB this became Policy DM24 in the Preferred Approach Document and DM26 in the Publication Version)

• Include more detail or Following changes made to policy in Preferred elements of 1997 Local Approach Document: Plan policies • Policy amended to more directly state what is • Strong protection for sought in respect of each aspect of local

- 32 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed existing character needed character and distinctiveness. • Strike a balance between • Further detail added in respect of infill protecting character and development and other specific development encouraging modern design types. • Respect scale, materials, • Links to sustainability policies addressed. details and building lines of • References to ‘physical condition of the area’ existing development, and ‘cultural and socio-economic aspects’ particularly for infill removed. development

• Development should respond to local topography • Include references to designing healthy and walkable places and enhancing natural environment • Failure to recognise policy’s role in implementing Core Strategy’s sustainability policies • Clarify terminology, e.g. ‘physical condition of area’

Policy DM16 Development Layout and Form (NB this became Policy DM25 Layout and Form in the Preferred Approach Document and DM27 in the Publication Version)

• Stronger references to Following changes made to policy in Preferred safety and security needed Approach Document: • Give greater attention to • Safety and security addressed including role of trees and other several specific references. green infrastructure • Prescriptive references to perimeter blocks • Emphasise importance of removed, although general principles of policy design in promoting active still support this built form. lifestyles • Landscape design and integration of green • Mention orientation of infrastructure made key parts of the policy buildings and plot size to along with links between layout and orientation facilitate passive solar of development and passive solar design. design and micro Local character and historic features considered to generation be adequately addressed in policies DM24 and • Refer to boundary DM29. treatments, context and historic townscape features • Policy overly prescriptive regarding perimeter blocks • Extend ownership and management plans to cover

- 33 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed new green infrastructure

Policy DM17 Public Realm (NB this became Policy DM26 in the Preferred Approach Document and DM28 in the Publication Version)

• Promote active travel and Following changes made to policy in Preferred give priority to walking and Approach Document: cycling over access by car • Greater emphasis provided on importance of • Emphasise public safety, activity and surveillance in public realm, both of tree planting, local character which contribute to personal safety. and distinctiveness • Policy promotes inclusion of opportunities for (including retention or recreation and relaxation, including seating, to reinstatement of traditional potential benefit of both older users and young surface materials and street people. furniture) and age-related issues such as the provision • Policy expects landscape features and green of additional seating planting to be integral to design of public realm. • Design of public realm should improve • Policy seeks retention or reclamation and opportunities for children reuse of traditional surfaces and street and young people to meet furniture. and play • Provision of convenient pedestrian and cycle • Reference to active street routes and inclusive access throughout public edge treatments to parks realm sought in policy. and green spaces could promote changes that would negatively affect their character and value

Policy DM18 Design of New Buildings (NB this became Policy DM27 in the Preferred Approach Document and DM29 in the Publication Version)

• Include references to safety Following changes made to policy in Preferred and security and to local Approach Document: character and • Policy now directly addresses safety and distinctiveness. security through requirement for appropriate • Emphasise incorporation of surveillance of external spaces. trees, living walls and other • New buildings expected to incorporate green infrastructure in new opportunities for green infrastructure. development Emerging policy approaches that promote the • Design of buildings should expression of buildings’ function and circulation in promote use of stairs rather their design will support the prominent placement than lifts through location and design of stairwells in new buildings. and design of stairwells Local character and historic features considered to be adequately addressed in policies DM24 and DM29.

Policy DM19 Alterations to Existing Buildings (NB this became Policy DM28 in

- 34 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed the Preferred Approach Document and DM30 in the Publication Version)

• Greater consideration Following changes made to policy in Preferred needed to additions or Approach Document: alterations to roofs of • Specific mention made of roof form of buildings existing buildings and and also wider street scene, which would allow changes that would affect the spaces between buildings to be the spaces between considered. buildings • Explanatory text confirms scope for poorer • Emphasise incorporation of quality buildings to be significantly remodelled. green infrastructure in alterations to existing Policy does not specifically seek opportunities for buildings green infrastructure, but where they would be in keeping with the host building they would be • Requirement to respect supported. existing buildings should not be allowed to restrict opportunities for poorer quality buildings to be redeveloped or remodelled to a high standard

Policy DM20 Heritage Assets (NB this became Policy DM29 in the Preferred Approach Document and DM31 in the Publication Version)

• Concern about reference to Following change made to policy in Preferred heritage assets of ‘national Approach Document: importance’ - could prevent • Reference to ‘national importance’ removed policy being applied to and explanatory text sets out what constitutes assets of local importance a heritage asset. • Clarify meaning of ‘heritage Policy DM29 will work alongside other design assets’ policies to address matters such as small-scale • Provide more detail on accretions and loss of historic features and ensure small-scale accretions and that the special character and historic interest of loss of historic features Bristol’s heritage assets is safeguarded. • Need guidance showing link Broader context for city’s historic environment and between policy and links between planning policy and Conservation emerging Conservation Area Character Appraisals considered to be Area Character Appraisals adequately addressed by Core Strategy. • Provide more contextual information, e.g. economic benefits of heritage assets, identifying some of the city’s outstanding historic features, etc.

Policy DM21 Recycling and Refuse Provision in New Development (NB this became Policy DM30 in the Preferred Approach Document and DM32 in the Publication Version)

- 35 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed

• Difficult to meet policy and Following changes made to policy in Preferred also achieve high design Approach Document: standards • Space standards added along with recognition • Need to future-proof against that collection regimes likely to change and changes to refuse collection development will need to keep pace with this regimes change. • Implications of refuse • Cross-references made to council’s existing storage for security and supplementary guidance on recycling and natural environment refuse storage, particularly in respect of safe access and servicing arrangements. Policy encourages design of secure internal storage or screened external storage, and if used correctly does not promote the free open storage of bins, addressing concerns raised about security.

Policy DM22 Pollution Control, Air and Water Quality (NB this became Policy DM31 in the Preferred Approach Document and DM33 in the Publication Version)

• Define ‘unacceptable Following change made to policy in Preferred impact’ Approach Document: • Address light pollution • Explanatory text clarifies ‘unacceptable impact’ and includes reference to light pollution • Emphasise avoidance rather than mitigation Purpose of mitigation is to effectively counteract unacceptable impact and consequently there • Should development that is would be no such impact once mitigation had been expected to have an applied. unacceptable impact be allowed at all, with or Reduced developer contributions in exchange for without mitigation? environmental improvements cannot be offered by this policy, as developer contributions are usually • Are off-site measures an targeted at mitigating impacts of proposed appropriate form of development on specific planning considerations; mitigation? in most cases, it would be inappropriate to trade • Policy should reward one issue off against the other in the way development that improves suggested. environment, e.g. reduced developer contributions

Policy DM23 Contaminated Land (NB this became Policy DM32 in the Preferred Approach Document and DM34 in the Publication Version)

• Policy should reward Reductions in developer contributions in exchange development that improves for environmental improvements cannot be offered the environment, for by this policy, as developer contributions are example through reduced usually targeted at mitigating the impacts of developer contributions. proposed development on specific planning considerations; in most cases, it would be inappropriate to trade one issue off against the other in the way suggested.

- 36 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed

Policy DM24 Noise Mitigation (NB this became Policy DM33 in the Preferred Approach Document and DM35 in the Publication Version)

• Policy should reward • Reductions in developer contributions in development that improves exchange for environmental improvements the environment, for cannot be offered by this policy, as developer example through reduced contributions are usually targeted at mitigating developer contributions. the impacts of proposed development on specific planning considerations; in most cases, it would be inappropriate to trade one issue off against the other in the way suggested.

Summary of main issues raised on draft development management policies in the 2010 Options Document by attendees at the discussion events held on 19-21 October 2010 and how they were addressed in the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies.

Main issues raised How they were addressed

Policy DM1 Specialist Housing

• Clarify policy wording/ • Greater clarification and explanation provided, terminology, e.g. ‘over- e.g. further detail included on how harmful concentration’ impacts might be assessed and how good standard of accommodation might be • Can quantifiable standards achieved. be referred to or a cross reference made to • Space standards practice note under established guidance preparation at the time. Subsequently documents (e.g. Mayor of published in July 2011. London’s Housing Design • Policy re-structured to allow a balanced Guide)? consideration between accessibility and • Possible contradiction: concentration issues. would implementation of • ‘Security’ included as a matter for criterion v) lead to a consideration in explanatory text. concentration that criterion i) seeks to avoid? • Existing Development Management policy addresses refuse and recycling issues. • Include ‘security’ as a matter to be considered in • ‘Adaptability’ included as a matter for criterion iii) consideration in explanatory text. • Criterion iv) - need clarity on • ‘Natural Environment’ indirectly referred to in refuse/recycling standards definition of residential characteristics and that council will apply qualities in explanatory text. • Emphasise adaptability of • Additional section on Older Persons’ housing new purpose built included. accommodation, e.g. if student numbers plummet this would help avoid being left with numerous single

- 37 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed person cells • Could criterion ii) include reference to ‘natural environment and trees’? • Consider elderly and disabled people’s housing

Policy DM2 Retail and Town Centre Uses

• Concern regarding • Thresholds for the sequential approach have development proposals for been added and policy directs retail to centres. large floorplates • Clarify proposals for • Flood risk matters would be taken into account, incorporating active in accordance with the sequential test. frontages. In Redcliffe there is a problem due to flood risk and companies not being able to get insurance for active frontages • Concept of a retail hierarchy • The hierarchy is set out in the Core Strategy a little out-dated? Should and is a requirement on the NPPF. The we focus more on approach to out of centre retailing has been considering freestanding set out within the policy for town centres uses. shops as well as shops in centres and understand how they fit in with overall retail provision? • Concerned at little change • The policy has been amended to apply to all from Local Plan approach: town centre uses as defined in the National i.e. overwhelming focus on Planning Policy Framework. shopping within centres but

what about other uses such as offices? • Concern proposed centre • The boundaries of centres are based on boundaries drawn too evidence in the Citywide Retail Study. Policy tightly, leaving little for town centre uses sets out the approach to opportunity for expansion edge of centre development, including relevant and inclusion of other uses distances. • Re national chain stores • The focus of centres and the role of secondary and local shops, how can frontages and local centres can assist with we ensure that local allowing local businesses to flourish. The businesses have the policies complement other strategies to chance to flourish? support and encouraged independents. • Cumulative impacts of food • Potential for crime and anti-social behaviour and drink uses and would be a factor in determining unacceptable unacceptable environmental effects. impacts need to be explained further; is crime

- 38 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed and anti-social behaviour included? • Need to be explicit about • Policies have been amended to allow for other role of centres as focuses appropriate uses which support the role of for the community. centres. This can include art and cultural uses. Sometimes purely retail uses / development can do little to enhance centres whereas the arts can significantly enhance them • A more detailed suite of policies has been developed to address town centre uses, shopping areas and frontages, local centres and food and drink and the evening economy.

Policy DM3 Markets

• Need to look at economic • Policy encourages market provision and takes impacts of markets on account of the impact on existing centres. existing businesses. Shops have high overheads and could be put in danger by competition from market sellers with fewer overheads

Policy DM4 Retaining valuable employment sites

• Should promote new • Core Strategy policy BCS8 promotes delivery employment sites of new employment land and sites over plan period 2006-2026 • More focus on retaining sites for employment, not • Aim of policy is to retain valuable employment just retaining existing uses. This could be employment uses building and current use operating from either existing or new premises

Policy DM5 The Health Impacts of Development

• Greater emphasis needed • Disagree with making specific health on promoting active travel in references in the policy; including certain new development to issues could mean other issues not listed are increase likelihood of overlooked. walking • No mention of effect green • Reference added in supporting text and space / infrastructure has practice note which accompanies the policy. on physical and mental Signpost to Policies BCS9, DM6 and DM7 also health. Key links between provided in supporting text / guidance note. relevant policies missing • Thresholds should be given • Thresholds brought in line with the 'super' more thought: 100 houses major developments definition – i.e. 100

- 39 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed is a very large scheme - homes or 10,000 sq m floorspace – with the should be reduced as 50 council reserving the right to request HIA for houses can have a large smaller developments. impact. Conversely 1000sqm is actually quite a small commercial development (e.g. 4 small 250 sqm shops in a centre are likely to have positive health impacts). • Wording too vague. Policy • Addressed in supporting text and practice needs to define what note. constitutes significant impact on health

Policy DM6 Green Infrastructure Provision

Multifunctionality of green infrastructure • Expand on meaning of new • The multifunctional role of green infrastructure green infrastructure is discussed in the explanatory text which has provision being been added. multifunctional

Provision of trees • This will vary from site to site. The overall • Could there be a quota or objective is to increase tree cover. measure for providing trees

with new developments as

there is for allotments? • Further references to the benefits of trees have • Policy lists 3 beneficial been added. effects of trees to be taken into account. Could other beneficial qualities be

added, e.g. improving air quality and reducing particulates, and contributing to visual amenity and health and wellbeing? Additional links / references • Link between green • All relevant policies are used in deciding infrastructure policies and planning applications. health policy would be useful

Policy DM7 Development Involving Existing Green Infrastructure

Mitigation for loss of trees • Can policy include duty to • The tree replacement standard addresses

- 40 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed ensure replacement trees these matters. Landscape conditions are used are managed? What about in planning applications. financial contributions

towards management of trees? • Could policy wording • The Core Strategy aims to increase tree cover. include commitment to ‘replace’ and if possible ‘increase’ overall canopy cover? • Could there be a native • The use of native species is normally species planting policy preferred. where trees are being lost and replaced within a development? Definition of ‘important’ trees • How do we determine • The importance of trees is a matter which whether or not a tree is would be assessed based on the ‘important’? Could the word circumstances of each case. ‘important’ be removed since tree replacement standards are set out in the policy? This infers that the standard will be applied to all trees of 15 cm diameter or more without the need to determine whether those trees are important. Reference to ‘woodland’ • Should policy make • References to aged and veteran trees and to reference to trees and ancient woodland have been added. Areas of ‘woodland’ as there are substantial tree cover are noted as landscape small areas within city which features. have additional value and benefits and some of these are at risk. Protection of open spaces • Policy doesn’t seem to treat • Important open spaces are specifically ‘important’ open spaces designated on the Policies Map. A revised very differently from approach to unidentified open spaces has ‘incidental’ open spaces been included in the policy. other than illustrating them on a map.

• Concern that any ‘important’ or ‘incidental’ open space • There is a comprehensive set of policies to might be valuable for wildlife address nature conservation matters. without being designated as

- 41 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed an SNCI or part of the Wildlife Network and would not require an assessment to be done before development can be carried out.

Policy DM8 Kingsweston and Avonmouth Urban Edge

• Could existing open space • The policy reflects the approach in the core policies cover this area strategy and clarifies the approach to without need for another development on undeveloped areas at designation? Kingsweston and Avonmouth Levels. • Could policy include more • The existing environmental considerations flexibility to enable land to relating to flood risk and internationally be developed for important habitats do not allow for employment employment if balance of development allocations. demand against provision

outweighs the need/cost of protecting assets and addressing constraints? • Does policy have regard to • The policy is consistent the emerging Core what South Gloucestershire Strategy for South Gloucestershire. council is proposing in adjacent area? • Land in this area has • The explanatory text recognises the flood risk potential role for future flood in the area. The Strategic Flood Risk management. Should the Assessment identifies areas of functional flood wording include protection plain. or provision of land for flood management/mitigation purposes?

Policy DM9 Development Involving Biological and Geological Conservation Sites

Wording and terminology • Term ‘Regionally Important • The term used is locally recognised and is Geological Site’ should be synonymous with local geological sites. replaced with ‘Local

Geological Site’ as recommended in the Defra Local Sites Guidance (2006)

• Under ‘General Principles for Development’ the first sentence ought to say ‘impact upon biodiversity and geology’

- 42 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed • In the section on SNCI’s, • Mitigation and enhancement are appropriate should wording include terms in this context. ‘compensated’ alongside

‘mitigated’?

Policy content • References to enhancement have been added. • In section on Wildlife Network, point (i) states that connectivity should be ‘maintained or replaced’ but should it also include an aspiration to ‘enhance’? • More emphasis needed on • There is a specific policy to address geological Local Geological Sites as conservation. per SNCIs and Wildlife Network? Should be an assessment of whether development is likely to damage the geological site. Status of SNCIs and the Wildlife Network • Paragraph 3.9.1 states that • The SNCIs are designated on the Policies SNCI’s ‘will be designated Map. References to the approach to through this development designation have been added to the plan process and shown on explanatory text. the proposals map’. Can the council clarify the current status/extent of SNCIs and how this is likely to change as SNCIs are updated on a more regular basis than development plans?

Policy DM10 Development of Private Gardens

• Should it be development • The wording reflects the intentions of the ‘on’ rather than ‘of’ private policy. gardens?

• No reference made to the • The two issues cannot be directly compared as council’s open space private gardens are not available as a public standards. Policy should recreational resource. However, the recognise that gardens introduction to the policy confirms that private become even more gardens make an important contribution to important in areas identified green infrastructure. as not meeting these standards, for example because of poor access to publicly available open space

- 43 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed • Is this the policy to address • Approach to front gardens has been ‘concreting over’ of front addressed in the policy. Other policies address gardens for car parking related matters such as drainage and flood spaces? If so, would benefit risk. from specific mention

• Have regard to crime and • Addressed in design policies. security issues • The introduction to the policy confirms that • Can policy be strengthened, private gardens make an important e.g. by stating that contribution to green infrastructure. development involving loss of gardens ‘will not generally be appropriate’ and by creating a stronger link with green infrastructure policy? • Point (i) states that loss of • The Core Strategy Policy BCS20 indicates the gardens might be areas where higher density forms of appropriate ‘where higher development may be appropriate. [housing] densities are appropriate’. This needs to be clarified. For instance is higher density appropriate in areas that are already generally high density or in low density areas which could benefit from an increase in density? • Point (ii) refers to • Explanatory text has been added to give ‘demonstrable improvement examples of where improved urban design to the urban design of an would result. area’. How will this be determined? • More specificity and clearer • The introductory paragraphs and explanatory definitions needed. text has added detail and context.

Policy DM11 Development Adjacent to Waterways

• Should policy make • There are specific policies that address reference to flood relief? flooding and drainage matters. • Point (i) promotes public • The need for a balance between uses is access to waterways, but acknowledged. there needs to be a balance

as too much public access can undermine wildlife value. • Quite a few waterways have • There is a specific policy to address RIGS. geological / geomorphological interest -

- 44 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed could this be added as point (vi)?

• Could we mention the • The approach to trees is set out in other multifunctional role of trees policies. in maintaining / promoting both wildlife and bank stability? • Point (iii) says that • The policy refers to feasibility. development should ‘where feasible open culverted, piped or covered waterways’. This is not appropriate in all circumstances. • Policy could be • All policies relevant to a proposal would be strengthened by making used in deciding planning applications. more links to other policies.

Policy DM12 Transport Development Management

• Issue of parking for disabled • Parking for disabled people addressed in main people policy wording and schedule of parking standards. • What is difference between ‘on-street’ and ‘frontage’? • ‘On-street’ and ‘frontage’ terms removed from policy in Preferred Approach Document. • More consideration needed to loading / servicing • Loading / servicing addressed in main policy wording and schedule of parking standards.

Policy DM13 Transport Schemes

• Sites chosen seem • Choice of sites reflects known transport overwhelmingly bus-related schemes being pursued by the council and / or partners through the Joint Local Transport Plan or by organisations such as Network Rail and the Highways Agency.

Policy DM14 Greenways

• Mention retention of existing • Policy amended in Preferred Approach Greenways Document to make clear new development should protect existing Greenways.

Design Policies: DM15 Local Character and Distinctiveness; DM16 Development Layout and Form; DM17 Public Realm; DM18 Design of New Buildings; and DM19 Alterations to Existing Buildings

• Issue of health and well- Following changes made to policies in Preferred being should be referred to Approach Document:

- 45 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed in all design policies. Refer • Health is referred to in the most relevant to Marmott Review on Preferred Approach policies, notably DM25 reducing health inequalities, Layout and Form (formerly DM16), in which New York’s Active Design creating a healthy environment is an Guidelines and Sport overarching principle of the policy. England’s planning tools. • Trees, green infrastructure and natural • Reflect importance of trees features referred to in DM25 Layout and Form (formerly DM16), DM26 (formerly DM17) and • More specificity needed in DM27 (formerly DM18). policies. A reference to quantifiable space • Explanation to DM24 (formerly DM15) confirms standards could be that innovative and contemporary design can sufficient also be supported. • Reference should be made Core Strategy policy BCS18 covers residential to economic viability. This space standards. will affect whether ‘high Quality urban design is not considered to affect quality’ can be achieved. viability as no prescriptive standards are set by the • Too much emphasis on policies. ‘context’. Iconic city buildings would not have been built if they had been ‘slaves to context’. ‘Having regard to context’ could lead to developments which create a replica, a pastiche or a contemporary version of the neighbouring buildings, none of which are likely to be universally welcomed. Introduction of design policies should include a reference to allowing developers to justify their own design philosophy. • In order to shorten policies or reduce their number, could cross-reference be made to other published or adopted policies and guidance?

Policies DM15 Local Character and Distinctiveness

• Policy should not promote Following changes made to policies in Preferred development which is ‘too’ Approach Document: permeable as this would • Policy DM25 Layout and Form (formerly have potential to generate DM16) has been changed to better address crime and security issues. safety and security, including several specific

- 46 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed references.

DM16 Development Layout and Form

• Perimeter blocks should not Following changes made to policy in Preferred always be required – Approach Document: “wherever possible” in • Prescriptive references to perimeter blocks policy wording goes too far. removed in Preferred Approach Document, It is role of Design and although general principles of policy still Access Statement to justify support this built form. particular approach.

Policy DM20 Heritage Assets

• Can policy protect assets Following changes made to policy in Preferred discovered during Approach Document: construction / • Explanatory text in Preferred Approach refurbishment, e.g. old Document explores the need for detailed painted adverts? building surveys in some cases, which will help • Re. criterion ii) under to identify hidden features. ‘General Principles’, • Explanatory text refers to the importance of a recognition is needed to full understanding of the asset, which would reflect that an overall include the building as a whole. assessment of the building rather than just individual assets will be carried out. This is in order to ensure proportionality.

Policy DM21 Recycling and Refuse Provision in New Development

• Challenge to achieve all Following changes made to policy in Preferred elements of the first part of Approach Document: this policy, especially if • Capacity requirements for recycling and refuse perimeter block storage added. development is sought. Points to need for • Explanation refers to council’s guidance note communal approach so that on waste and recycling provision, providing provision is shared. Can the further guidance on the size and design of policy include reference to recycling and refuse storage, including management arrangements dimensions of different sized bins. for communal facilities? • Can space standards be provided so that developers can accommodate them into the design of their schemes?

- 47 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed

Policy DM22 Pollution Control, Air and Water Quality Policy DM23 Contaminated Land Policy DM24 Noise Mitigation

• Could policies reward Following change made to policy in Preferred developers for improving Approach Document: environment through their • Reference is made to health impacts of schemes, for example pollution in introduction to policy. through reduced Section 106 contributions? Reduced developer contributions in exchange for environmental improvements cannot be offered by • Pollution and noise policies this policy, as developer contributions are usually should also be cross- targeted at mitigating specific impacts of proposed referenced with greenways development; in most cases, it would be and health policies. inappropriate to trade one issue off against the other in the way suggested.

- 48 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Suggested development management policies Summary of additional development management policies suggested by respondents to the 2010 Options Document and how they were addressed in the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies.

Additional How it was addressed development management policy suggested

Retail development in Issue addressed by Preferred Approach Development retail parks Management policy DM6 which sets out approach to retail development in out of centre locations.

Designated Mineral Policy included in Preferred Approach Document (DM36 Safeguarding Areas Minerals Safeguarding Areas).

New mineral Addressed by Preferred Approach Document policy DM36. development

Unstable land Policy included in Preferred Approach Document (DM35 Unstable Land).

Policy on unexploded Issue more appropriately addressed through Building ordnance risk Regulations process, therefore development plan policy not management considered necessary.

Telecommunications Policy included in Preferred Approach Document (DM34 Telecommunications)

Policy setting out Council’s Regulation 123 schedule lists infrastructure that it priorities for funding may apply Community Infrastructure Levy revenues to. As through Community part of annual process to set revenue budget and Capital Infrastructure Levy Programme, the Mayor will make decisions on the infrastructure that will receive these revenues.

Policies on priority Priority green infrastructure areas are established by Core areas for and Strategy policy BCS9. This identifies the city’s strategic management of new green infrastructure network of open spaces, wildlife green infrastructure network corridors etc. that will be maintained, protected and enhanced. The Site Allocations and Development Management Policies designates areas of Important Open Space in accordance with policy BCS9. Policy BCS9 and Preferred Approach Document Development Management policy DM13 seek to ensure new development incorporates new green infrastructure. The management of new green infrastructure will be considered as part of the planning application process, for example with the attachment of planning conditions to ensure management regimes for the new green infrastructure are in place.

General housing Core Strategy policy BCS18 refers to standards the council policy setting out will apply for residential development regarding internal

- 49 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Additional How it was addressed development management policy suggested specific standards for space and Lifetime Homes. situation, layout, Preferred Approach Document Development Management internal space, policy DM30 sets out standards for recycling / refuse external amenity storage. space, privacy, The parking standards schedule to accompany Preferred adaptability, cycle Approach Document Development Management policy storage, DM21 addresses the provision of adequate cycle storage. refuse/recycling Preferred Approach Document policy DM25 addresses the storage and access to provision of adequate private or communal amenity space. public transport. Recommended that London Housing Design Guide be adopted as standard

Policy on minimum Core Strategy policy BCS10 seeks to ensure development distance standards for proposals maximise opportunities for the use of walking, new development in cycling and public transport. relation to key local Core Strategy policy BCS20 promotes higher density facilities, with aim of residential development in centres and locations with good creating a healthy city. transport accessibility. Preferred Approach Document Development Management policy DM12 seeks to ensure new development improves health and reduces health inequalities.

Policy promoting Policies included in Preferred Approach Document (DM1 delivery of specialist Residential Sub-divisions, Shared and Specialist Housing older persons and DM2 Wheelchair Accessible Housing) accommodation.

- 50 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Site allocations Summary of main issues raised on site allocations by respondents to the 2010 Options Document and how they were addressed in the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies.

Main issues raised How they were addressed

BSA0101 Henacre Open Space Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • Open space / recreation: Option A: In June 2012 the Avonmouth and Kingsweston Neighbourhood Partnership declared the site as • Loss of land important surplus to the open space requirements of the for recreation and Neighbourhood Partnership Area. nature conservation • Nature conservation: • Concerns regarding Addressed by new ‘development consideration’ in flooding and increased Publication Version. congestion • Flood risk: • Land contamination / Addressed by ‘development consideration’ in historic land filling and Publication Version. nearby aviation fuel line could hamper • Land contamination / historic land filling: development Addressed by Core Strategy policy BCS23 and Development Management policy DM34. Development proposals will have to ensure they address these policies as part of the planning application process. • Aviation fuel line: Addressed by ‘development consideration’ in Publication Version.

BSA0102 Land at Lawrence Weston Campus of City of Bristol College Option A (Mixed-use: Housing, community use and offices) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • Community use: Option A: Maintained as part of the allocation in the Preferred Approach Document. • Support inclusion of community uses • Masterplan: Addressed by ‘development consideration’ in • Masterplan should Options Consultation Document. determine the final uses

BSA0103 Land to the west and south-west of Deering Close Option A Mixed-use (Housing and open space) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • Open space: Housing and open space allocation considered

- 51 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed Option A: appropriate due to residential context, likely difficulty in developing all the site and opportunity to improve • Loss of open space area. • Question delivery of • Topography: housing given difficult Addressed in allocation for housing and open space site topography and and ‘development consideration’ which recognises Tree Preservation parts of the site likely to be undevelopable. Order • Trees: • Development needs to New development will be expected to retain be informed by important green infrastructure assets such as trees ecological survey and and incorporate new and/or enhanced green appropriate mitigation infrastructure in line with Core Strategy Policy BCS9. undertaken. • Ecological survey: Addressed by ‘development consideration’ in Options Consultation Document.

BSA0104 Sea Mills Infant School Option A (Housing), Option B (Housing and Open Space) and Option C (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • Open space: Options A and B: A housing and open space allocation was selected for the Preferred Approach Document. This was • Loss of open space considered appropriate as the site is not required for important for use as a school, has a residential context, is in city recreation council ownership and will provide children’s play • Negative impacts on space in the Sea Mills area, which reflected the Sea Mills aspirations of the Area Green Space Plan for Conservation Area Avonmouth and Kingsweston. Main issues raised about • Conservation area: Option A: New development will be expected to deliver high standards of design which safeguards important • Support option subject historic and townscape character. This is in line with to design reflecting Core Strategy Policies BCS21 and BCS22. findings of an ecological survey and • Ecological survey: appropriate mitigation Addressed by ‘development consideration’ in being undertaken. Options Consultation Document.

BSA0105 Portway Tip, Portway Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • In June 2012 Avonmouth and Kingsweston Option A: Neighbourhood Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site as part of the Area Green Space • Loss of open space Plan process. Site to be designated as Important important for Open Space. recreation and nature conservation • Increased pressure on

- 52 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed community facilities • Concerns about flooding, visual impact, impact on health and well-being, highway safety, access and increased traffic pollution • Land contamination and a drain across the site could hamper development

BSA0106 Land to rear of Sylvan Way and High Grove Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • Provision of suitable access for 10 homes likely to Option A: require demolition, which would harm the Sea Mills Conservation Area. Therefore site not considered • Loss of open space appropriate for allocation. important for recreation and nature conservation • Concern about access and impact on Conservation Area • Land ownership and covenants may hinder delivery of housing development

BSA0107 Land to the rear of Ridingleaze Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • Site constraints and density: Option A: New development will be expected to safeguard the amenity of existing development and create a high • Housing not quality environment for future occupiers in appropriate due to site accordance with Core Strategy Policy BCS21. constraints and poor Support for higher density housing in accessible physical condition locations is provided by Core Strategy Policies • Concern about BCS7 and BCS3. Core Strategy Policy BCS20 also potential for high states that the appropriate density of development density development. will be informed by factors including site characteristics and the need to achieve high quality, well-designed developments.

BSA0108 Sunny Hill garage site Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

- 53 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed

Main issues raised about • Provision of suitable access for 10 homes likely to Option A: require demolition, which would harm the Sea Mills Conservation Area. Therefore site not considered • Negative impact on appropriate for allocation. Conservation Area, open space and nature conservation • Concerns that access and covenant may hinder delivery of housing development

BSA0109 206-208 Grazing land at Woodwell Road Option A (Housing), Option B (Gypsy and Traveller residential site) and Option C (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • Approach to Gypsy and Traveller site provision Options A and B: being reviewed, therefore site not considered appropriate for allocation. • Loss of land important

for allotment provision, nature conservation, open space and recreation • Transport / traffic- concerns • Increased pressure on local community facilities • Flooding and drainage

BSA0110 Land at Moorend Gardens Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • In June 2012 Avonmouth and Kingsweston Option A: Neighbourhood Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site as part of the Area Green Space • Loss of land important Plan process. Site to be designated as Important for recreation Open Space. • Difficult site access

BSA0201 Elderberry Walk Open Space Option A (Mixed-Use: Housing and open space) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • In March 2012 Henbury and Southmead Option A: Neighbourhood Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site as part of the Area Green Space • Loss of land important Plan process. Site to be designated as Important for recreation and Open Space.

- 54 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed nature conservation • Concern about increased congestion, impact on community facilities, historic character and archaeology

BSA0202 Crow Lane Open Space Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • In March 2012 Henbury and Southmead Option A: Neighbourhood Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site as part of the Area Green Space • Loss of open space Plan process. Site to be designated as Important important for Open Space. recreation and nature conservation • Flooding • Negative impact upon Conservation Area • Increased pressure on existing community facilities • Transport concerns

BSA0203 Former Dunmail Primary School Option A (Housing), Option B (Housing and Gypsy and Traveller residential site) and Option C (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • Approach to Gypsy and Traveller site provision Options A and B: being reviewed, therefore site not considered appropriate for allocation as Gypsy and Traveller • Loss of open space residential site. important for recreation and nature • A housing allocation was selected for the Preferred conservation Approach Document. This was chosen as the site was not required for school use, has a residential • Negative impacts on context, reflects the aspirations of Core Strategy flooding, pollution, Policy BCS3 and is in a relatively sustainable congestion, parking location close to shops and services. It will also and noise contribute to meeting the Core Strategy target for • Increased pressure on providing new homes. already stretched • Nature conservation: community facilities Addressed by addition of two new ‘development • Land instability may considerations’ in the Preferred Approach hamper development Document. Main issues raised about • Traffic / issues: Option A: Addressed through Development Management

- 55 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed • In addition to those policy DM23. This will require a Transport above, some support Assessment to be submitted alongside a planning was received, application where development is likely to have a suggesting family and significant traffic impact. This will enable the council smaller accessible and to assess impacts of proposals and identify any affordable / social necessary mitigation measures. homes should be • Flooding and drainage: provided. New development will be expected to incorporate Main issues raised about water management measures to reduce surface Option B: water run-off and ensure it does not increase flood risk elsewhere in line with Core Strategy Policy • In addition to those BCS16. noted above, concerns about potential • Community facilities: negative impact on Addressed by Core Strategy policy BCS11. social cohesion • Land instability: Inappropriate access for Any land stability issues will be expected to be towed vehicles and addressed in line with the Preferred Approach highway safety issues Document draft Development Management policy DM35.

BSA0204 Land At Brentry Lane, Brentry Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • Nature conservation: Option A: Addressed by addition of two ‘development considerations’ in Preferred Approach Document. • Loss of open land Firstly, development will be expected to maintain or important for nature strengthen the integrity and connectivity of the site conservation and as part of the Bristol Wildlife Network including recreation retaining and strengthening the strategic green • Negative traffic infrastructure to provide a wildlife corridor. Secondly, impacts, e.g. noise, development should not harm the trees on the pollution and boundaries of the site. congestion due to • Open land / recreation: inadequate access / A housing allocation was selected for the Preferred road infrastructure. Approach Document. This was chosen as the site is no longer required for hospital use, has a residential context, reflects the aspirations of Core Strategy Policy BCS3 and is in a relatively sustainable location close to shops and services. It will also contribute to meeting the Core Strategy target for providing new homes. • Traffic issues: Addressed through Development Management policy DM23. This will require a Transport Assessment to be submitted alongside a planning application where development is likely to have a significant traffic impact. This will enable the council to assess impacts of proposals and identify any

- 56 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed necessary mitigation measures.

BSA0205 Fonthill Park, Southmead Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • In March 2012 Henbury and Southmead Option A: Neighbourhood Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site as part of the Area Green Space • Loss of open space Plan process. Site to be designated as Important important for Open Space. recreation and nature

conservation • Concerns about increased congestion, narrow access and the impact upon community facilities

BSA0206 Trymside Open Space Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • In March 2012 Henbury and Southmead Option A: Neighbourhood Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site as part of the Area Green Space • Loss of open space Plan process. Site to be designated as Important important for Open Space. recreation and nature conservation • Concerns regarding flooding, impact upon social problems in the area and visual impact of development • Negative impact on pedestrian routes

BSA0207 Okebourne Road Open Space Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • In March 2012 Henbury and Southmead Option A: Neighbourhood Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site as part of the Area Green Space • Loss of open space Plan process. Site to be designated as Important important for Open Space. recreation and nature conservation • Negative impacts on flooding, pollution, congestion, parking, views and noise • Increased pressure on

- 57 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed already stretched community facilities

BSA0208 Tranmere Avenue Open Space Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • In March 2012 Henbury and Southmead Option A: Neighbourhood Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site as part of the Area Green Space • Loss of open space Plan process. Site to be designated as Important important for nature Open Space. conservation and recreation • Traffic-related concerns • Flooding • Suitability of the site for housing questioned given noise from adjacent road and railway • Impact on already stretched community facilities

BSA0209 Arnall Drive Open Space Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • In March 2012 Henbury and Southmead Options A and B: Neighbourhood Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site as part of the Area Green Space • Loss of open space Plan process. Site to be designated as Important important for Open Space. recreation • Pressure on already stretched community facilities and infrastructure (sewage system) • Traffic-related concerns • Impact on trees and Conservation Area

BSA0210 Brentry Hill Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • In March 2012 Henbury and Southmead Option A: Neighbourhood Partnership voted to reject possible

- 58 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed • Loss of open land disposal of site as part of the Area Green Space important for Plan process. Site to be designated as Important recreation Open Space. • Inadequacy of local community facilities to cope with development • Transport / traffic issues • Suitability of site questioned due to site’s gradient, size and close proximity to busy roads

BSA0211 Land to rear of Redshelf Walk Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • Open land: Options A: A housing allocation was selected for the Preferred Approach Document. This was chosen as the site • Loss of open land has a residential context, it reflects the aspirations of which should be used Core Strategy Policy BCS3 and is in a relatively for allotments sustainable location close to shops and services. It • Need for ecological will also contribute to meeting the Core Strategy survey to be carried target for providing new homes. out before any • Ecological survey: decision is made on Addressed by ‘development consideration’ included the allocation and in Options Consultation Document. appropriate mitigation and enhancement is undertaken.

BSA0212 19-21 Pen Park Road Option A (Mixed use: Housing and business), Option B (Housing) and Option C (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • Parking: Option A: Addressed through Development Management policy DM23. This will require a Transport • Impact of parking in Assessment to be submitted alongside a planning area where there is application where development is likely to have a already pressure from significant traffic impact. This will enable the council nearby hospital to assess impacts of proposals and identify any • Unlikely that business necessary mitigation measures. use would be viable • Business use: on the site Reflects aspirations of Core Strategy Policy BCS3 which encourages new development to incorporate employment floorspace.

- 59 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed

BSA0213 Richeson Walk garage site Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • Garage and parking provision: Option A: A housing allocation was selected for the Preferred Approach Document. This was chosen as the site is • Concern at loss of underused, has a residential context, reflects the garage and parking aspirations of Core Strategy Policy BCS3 and is in a provision relatively sustainable location close to shops and • Traffic / transport services. It will also contribute to meeting the Core issues, e.g. narrow Strategy target for providing new homes. access lane and • Traffic / transport: maintaining access for Addressed through Development Management existing residents policy DM23. This will require a Transport Assessment to be submitted alongside a planning application where development is likely to have a significant traffic impact. This will enable the council to assess impacts of proposals and identify any necessary mitigation measures.

BSA0301 Avon Way – Land at SITA Depot/Eldred Close/ Druid Stoke Avenue – Land at rear Sea Mills Lane Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • A housing allocation was selected for the Preferred Option A: Approach Document. This was chosen subject to further assessment of flood risk and surface water • Traffic issues, e.g. drainage, as the site was not required as waste congestion and contractor depot, has a residential context and is in highway safety a relatively sustainable location close to shops and • Nature conservation services. It will also contribute to meeting the Core impacts, particularly Strategy target for providing new homes. on wildlife network • Traffic / transport: • Capacity of local Addressed through Development Management schools and other policy DM23. This will require a Transport community facilities to Assessment to be submitted alongside a planning cope with new application where development is likely to have a development significant traffic impact. This will enable the council to assess impacts of proposals and identify any necessary mitigation measures. • Nature conservation: Addressed by addition of ‘development consideration’ in Preferred Approach Document to ensure new development maintains or strengthens the integrity and connectivity of the wildlife network. • Community facilities: Addressed by Core Strategy policy BCS11.

- 60 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed

BSA0302 Coombe House Elderly Persons' Home Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • Visual amenity: Option A: Addressed by Core Strategy policy BCS21 and the design Development Management Policies which • Concern about will ensure new development delivers high negative impact on standards of design. visual amenity • Nature conservation: • Buffer needed to Addressed by addition of amended ‘development adjacent Sites of consideration’ in Preferred Approach Document to Nature Conservation ensure new development provides ecological Interest mitigation measures which may include a buffer to the adjacent Site of Nature Conservation Interest.

BSA0401 Lockleaze Open Space Option A (Mixed-use: Housing and open space) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • In March 2012 Horfield and Lockleaze Option A: Neighbourhood Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site as part of the Area Green Space • Loss of open space Plan process. Site to be designated as Important important for Open Space. recreation and nature conservation • Inadequacy of community facilities in area to support growth • Impact on Conservation Area • Transport / traffic issues

BSA0402 Bonnington Walk former allotments site Option A (Mixed-use: Housing and open space) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • A housing allocation was selected for the Preferred Option A: Approach Document. This was chosen as the site has a residential context, it reflects the aspirations of • Loss of open space Core Strategy Policy BCS3 and is in a relatively important for sustainable location close to shops and services. It recreation, nature will also contribute to meeting the Core Strategy conservation and target for providing new homes. allotment provision • Nature conservation, green corridor and cycle path: • Protect green corridor Addressed by boundary of site being reduced in the and proposed cycle Preferred Approach Document. A strip of land path adjacent to the adjacent to railway was proposed for designation as

- 61 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed railway Important Open Space, while the northern section would be designated as a Site of Nature • Rising of Horfield Conservation Interest. Brook on bottom half of site a possible • Allotment provision: constraint Addressed by addition of amended ‘development consideration’ in Preferred Approach Document • Traffic impacts such which provided more detail regarding the as congestion expectation that new development would lead to the • Concern about close provision of new allotments either on or nearby to proximity of overhead the site. power lines • Horfield Brook: Amending the site boundary by retaining a strip of land adjacent to the railway as Important Open Space will reduce any possible impacts from the brook. • Traffic / transport: Addressed through Development Management policy DM23. This will require a Transport Assessment to be submitted alongside a planning application where development is likely to have a significant traffic impact. This will enable the council to assess impacts of proposals and identify any necessary mitigation measures. • Overhead power lines: Addressed by ‘development consideration’ included in Options Consultation Document.

BSA0403 Romney House and Lockleaze School Option A (Mixed-use: Housing and business) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • A housing allocation was selected for the Preferred Option A: Approach Document. This was chosen subject to the site not being required for school or office use as the • Loss of land important site has a largely residential context, reflects the for community facilities aspirations of Core Strategy Policy BCS3 and will and open space / contribute to meeting the Core Strategy target for recreation providing new homes. • Preserve sports hall • Sports hall: for use by Fairfield Addressed by addition of ‘develoment consideration’ School and / or local in Preferred Approach Document. community • Bus link: • Concern at Planning permission was granted for the bus link in development April 2011 (ref. 10/05550/FB). consideration regarding future bus • Traffic / transport: link on grounds of Addressed through Development Management noise and vibration as policy DM23. This will require a Transport well as potential Assessment to be submitted alongside a planning

- 62 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed adverse impact on application where development is likely to have a pedestrian safety significant traffic impact. This will enable the council to assess impacts of proposals and identify any • Transport / traffic necessary mitigation measures. issues, e.g. access and congestion • Nature conservation: Addressed by addition of two ‘development • Decision on allocation considerations’ in Preferred Approach Document should be informed by regarding need for development to be informed by an ecological survey an ecological survey and maintain or strengthen the and wildlife corridor integrity and connectivity of the Wildlife Network. should be maintained or strengthened

BSA0404 BT Depot, Filton Road Option A (Housing and business), Option B (Housing) and Option C (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • A housing allocation was selected for the Preferred Options A and B: Approach Document. This was chosen as the site has a residential context, is underused therefore • Impact on already represents a good use of land in line with Core pressurised Strategy Policy BCS20, is in a relatively sustainable community facilities location close to shops and services and will and traffic congestion contribute to meeting the Core Strategy target for Main issues raised about providing new homes. Option A: • Community facilities: • Concern about Addressed by Core Strategy policy BCS11. business element due to concerns about • Traffic congestion: noise and visual Addressed through Development Management disturbance policy DM23. This will require a Transport Assessment to be submitted alongside a planning application where development is likely to have a significant traffic impact. This will enable the council to assess impacts of proposals and identify any necessary mitigation measures.

BSA0405 Romney Avenue Infants and Nursery School Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • The site is proposed for allocation for community Option A: use (school) in the Publication Version as the site has been identified as having potential to meet • Negative impacts on education need in the local community. open space / recreation, nature conservation, and the privacy of adjoining occupiers • Site may be required for future school use

- 63 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed or children’s recreation • Transport / traffic issues

BSA0406 Wellington Hill Playing Field Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • In March 2012 Horfield and Lockleaze Option A: Neighbourhood Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site as part of the Area Green Space • Loss of open space Plan process. Site to be designated as Important important for Open Space. recreation, nature conservation, reducing flood risk and health and wellbeing. • Traffic issues

BSA0407 Land to rear of Shaldon Road Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • A housing allocation was selected for the Preferred Option A: Approach Document. This was chosen as the site has a largely residential context, is underused • Loss of land important therefore represents a good use of land in line with for nature Core Strategy Policy BCS20, is in a relatively conservation, sustainable location close to shops and services and recreation and air will contribute to meeting the Core Strategy target quality for providing new homes. • Delivery of housing • Nature conservation: hindered by difficult Addressed by addition of one new and one vehicle access and amended ‘development considerations’ in Preferred topography, access Approach Document regarding need for rights to private development to maintain or strengthen the integrity garages, and noise and connectivity of the Wildlife Network and that and air pollution ecological mitigation measures may include a buffer issues from Muller to the adjacent Site of Nature Conservation Interest. Road • Traffic: • Traffic issues, e.g. Addressed through Development Management congestion policy DM23. This will require a Transport • Impact on already Assessment to be submitted alongside a planning pressurised application where development is likely to have a community facilities significant traffic impact. This will enable the council to assess impacts of proposals and identify any • Impact on integrity and necessary mitigation measures. function of wildlife corridor and buffer • Community facilities: needed to protect Addressed by Core Strategy policy BCS11. adjacent Site of

Nature Conservation

- 64 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed Interest

BSA0408 Land to rear of Muller Road Bus Depot Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • In March 2012 Horfield and Lockleaze Option A: Neighbourhood Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site as part of the Area Green Space • Loss of open space Plan process. Site to be designated as Important important for Open Space. recreation and nature conservation • Local community facilities inadequate to support new development • Traffic / transport issues • Topography, flooding and cycle path could hinder housing development

BSA0409 Land at Gainsborough Square Option A (Mixed-use: Housing and retail), Option B (Mixed-use: Office and retail) and Option C (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • A housing, business, community use and retail Options A and B: allocation was selected for the Preferred Approach Document. This was chosen as the site has a • Loss of open land residential context and it reflects Core Strategy important for Policy BCS7 which directs higher density forms of recreation development, smaller scale office developments, • Allocation and design community facilities and new investment in retail of housing should be development into Bristol's network of centres. based on findings of • Ecological survey: an ecological survey Addressed by addition of ‘development Main issues raised about consideration’ in Preferred Approach Document. Option B: • Delivery of offices and retail: • Question likelihood of Given that site is within a centre, both offices and offices and retail being retail are considered appropriate as they are ‘town delivered in this centre’ uses defined by Government planning policy. location

BSA0410 St. Peter's Elderly Persons' Home Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

• Negative impact on • A housing allocation was selected for the Preferred nature conservation Approach Document. This was chosen subject to the site no longer being required for elderly persons’

- 65 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed • Traffic congestion housing, as the site has a residential context and will contribute to meeting the Core Strategy target for • Loss of employment providing new homes. opportunities • Nature conservation: Addressed by ‘development consideration’ in Options Consultation Document. • Traffic: Addressed through Development Management policy DM23. This will require a Transport Assessment to be submitted alongside a planning application where development is likely to have a significant traffic impact. This will enable the council to assess impacts of proposals and identify any necessary mitigation measures.

BSA0501 Blackberry Hill Hospital, Manor Road Option A (Mixed-use: Housing, business and institutional uses) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • A housing, business and institutional use allocation Option A: was selected for the Preferred Approach Document. This was chosen as the site is no longer needed for • Loss of open space health care provision, has a largely residential known as the 'Laundry context and would be likely to be appropriate given Field' important for the historic character and layout of the buildings and recreation, visual the desire to preserve local employment amenity, landscape opportunties. It will also contribute to meeting the character and nature Core Strategy target for providing new homes. conservation • Nature conservation: • Negative traffic Addressed by addition of two ‘development impacts, e.g. considerations’ in Preferred Approach Document. congestion, pollution These will expect development to be informed by an and parking due to ecological survey and maintain or strengthen the inadequate transport Wildlife Network. infrastructure. • Traffic: • Adverse impacts on Addressed through Development Management existing residents from policy DM23. This will require a Transport noise from business Assessment to be submitted alongside a planning uses, character of the application where development is likely to have a Conservation Area significant traffic impact. This will enable the council and already to assess impacts of proposals and identify any pressurised necessary mitigation measures. community facilities • Conservation Area: • Ecological survey Addressed by ‘development consideration’ included should be carried out in Options Consultation Document. before any decision on the allocation is made • Noise from business uses: and integrity and In terms of their amenity and pollution impacts, function of the wildlife business uses [uses within B1(a) offices, B1(b) corridor should be Research and Development, and B1(c) Light

- 66 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed maintained or Industry] are defined as land uses which can be strengthened carried out within a residential area without causing detriment to that area. • Community facilities: Addressed by Core Strategy policy BCS11.

BSA0502 Glenside Campus, Blackberry Hill Option A (Mixed-use: Housing, business and institutional uses) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • A housing, business and institutional use allocation Option A: was selected for the Preferred Approach Document. This was chosen as the site is no longer needed for • Negative traffic education provision, has a largely residential context impacts, e.g. and would be likely to be appropriate given the congestion, pollution historic character and layout of the buildings and the and parking due to desire to preserve local employment opportunties. It perceived inadequate will also contribute to meeting the Core Strategy transport infrastructure target for providing new homes. • Loss of open spaces • Traffic: within site - adverse Addressed through Development Management impacts on area's policy DM23. This will require a Transport historic character Assessment to be submitted alongside a planning • Possible harm to application where development is likely to have a nature conservation significant traffic impact. This will enable the council and adjacent Grove to assess impacts of proposals and identify any Wood and Frome necessary mitigation measures. Valley • Historic character: • Integrity and function Addressed by ‘development considerations’ of wildlife corridor regarding Conservation Area, the historic should be maintained environment and listed buildings. or strengthened • Nature conservation: Addressed by addition of two ‘development considerations’ in Preferred Approach Document. These will expect development to be informed by an ecological survey and maintain or strengthen the Wildlife Network.

BSA0503 St Matthias Campus, College Road Option A (Mixed-use: Housing, business and institutional uses) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • Kipper’s Field: Option A: Site boundary amended in Preferred Approach Document to remove paddock. • Loss of paddock at western end of site, • A housing, business and institutional use allocation known locally as was selected for the Preferred Approach Document. 'Kipper's Field', This was chosen as the site is no longer needed for important for education provision, is in a relatively sustainable

- 67 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed recreation, horse- location, has a largely residential context and would grazing, visual be likely to be appropriate given the historic amenity and nature character and layout of the buildings and the desire conservation. to preserve local employment opportunties. It will also contribute to meeting the Core Strategy target • Negative traffic for providing new homes. impacts, e.g. congestion, pollution, • Traffic: highway safety and Addressed through Development Management parking policy DM23. This will require a Transport Assessment to be submitted alongside a planning • Adverse impacts on application where development is likely to have a the site's historic significant traffic impact. This will enable the council character to assess impacts of proposals and identify any • Landowner considered necessary mitigation measures. site's boundary should • Historic character: be extended to include Addressed by ‘development consideration’ included playing field and in Options Consultation Document. tennis court area to north to provide • Playing field and tennis court: flexibility and viability Considered in Preferred Approach Document to for site's merit designation as Important Open Space. redevelopment

BSA0504 Playing Fields, Brook Road, Speedwell Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • Open space: Option A: Site is unused with no public access. This is considered to reduce impact caused by its loss. • Loss of open space important for • A housing allocation was selected for the Preferred recreation Approach Document. This was chosen as the site is unused, has a residential context, is in a relatively • Decision on allocation sustainable location close to the bus stops on Brook should be based on Road and Whitehall Road and will contribute to the findings of an meeting the Core Strategy target of providing new ecological survey homes. • Nature conservation: Addressed by addition of ‘development consideration’ in Preferred Approach Document to ensure new development is informed by an ecological survey.

BSA0505 Snowdon Road Open Space (accessed from Small Lane) Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • In March 2012 Greater Fishponds Neighbourhood Option A: Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site as part of the Area Green Space Plan process. Site • Loss of open space to be designated as Important Open Space. important for nature conservation and

- 68 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed recreation • Impact upon Conservation Area • Traffic issues • Land instability and land contamination

BSA0506 Open Space rear of Abingdon Road and Honiton Road Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • The site is proposed for allocation for community Option A: use (school) in the Publication Version as the site has been identified as having potential to meet • Loss of open space education need in the local community. important for recreation • Traffic concerns • Lack of local facilities, land contamination and land instability may hinder development

BSA0507 Duchess Way Open Space Option A (Mixed-use: Housing with open space) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • In March 2012 Greater Fishponds Neighbourhood Option A: Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site as part of the Area Green Space Plan process. Site • Concern about to be designated as Important Open Space. developing in proximity to M32 on grounds of safety, noise and pollution • Impact on nature conservation • Transport / traffic issues • Impact on Conservation Area and footpaths through the site

BSA0508 Part of Playing Field south of Rose Green Close Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • A housing allocation was selected for the Preferred Approach Document. This was chosen as the site is

- 69 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed Option A: underused, has a residential context, is in a relatively sustainable location close to the bus stops • Access from Rose on Brook Road and Whitehall Road and will Green Road into the contribute to meeting the Core Strategy target of site already blocked providing new homes. by development • Access: Addressed by ‘development consideration’ included in Options Consultation Document.

BSA0509 206-208 Briarwood School, Briar Way and Forest Road Playing Field Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • Site required for school use therefore not proposed Option A: for allocation or designation. • Loss of special school provision

BSA0510 Halbrow Crescent/Delabere Avenue Open Space Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

• Loss of open space • In March 2012 Greater Fishponds Neighbourhood important for Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site recreation as part of the Area Green Space Plan process. Site to be designated as Important Open Space. • Traffic / transport issues

BSA0511 Begbrook Drive Open Space Option A (Housing), Option B (Mixed-use: Housing and Gypsy and Traveller residential site) and Option C (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • The site is proposed for allocation for community Options A and B: use (school) in the Publication Version as the site has been identified as having potential to meet • Loss of open space education need in the local community. important for recreation and nature • Nature conservation: conservation Addressed by addition of ‘development consideration’ in Preferred Approach Document to • Transport / traffic ensure a buffer is provided to the adjacent Site of issues, e.g. Nature Conservation Interest. congestion, highway safety, parking problems and access. • Impact on community facilities, the Conservation Area and wider historic character of the area. • Legal covenant, land contamination and

- 70 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed land stability may hamper development • Buffer needed to adjacent Site of Nature Conservation Interest

BSA0512 Gleeson House sheltered accommodation, Dodisham Walk Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • A housing allocation was selected for the Preferred Option A: Approach Document. This was chosen as the site was no longer required to provide care to elderly • Negative impacts on people, has a residential context, is in a relatively character of the area sustainable location close to a parade of local shops and increased traffic and will contribute to meeting the Core Strategy congestion target of providing new homes.

• Character of area: Addressed by Core Strategy policy BCS21. • Traffic: Addressed through Development Management policy DM23. This will require a Transport Assessment to be submitted alongside a planning application where development is likely to have a significant traffic impact. This will enable the council to assess impacts of proposals and identify any necessary mitigation measures.

BSA0513 Garage site, Woodland Way Option A (Housing), Option B (Industry and Warehousing) and Option C (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • A housing allocation was selected for the Preferred Options A and B: Approach Document. This was chosen as the site is currently underused, has a residential context, is in a • Poor access and relatively sustainable location close to Lodge likelihood of adverse Causeway District Centre and will contribute to impacts on either new meeting the Core Strategy target of providing new or existing adjoining homes. residential occupiers • Access: • Decision on allocation Addressed by ‘development consideration’ in should be based on Options Consultation Document. the findings of ecological survey • Ecological survey: Addressed by addition of ‘development consideration’ included in Preferred Approach Document.

BSA0514 Part of Gill Avenue/Lanaway Road Open Space Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

- 71 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed

Main issues raised about • In March 2012 Greater Fishponds Neighbourhood Option A: Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site as part of the Area Green Space Plan process. Site • Loss of open space to be designated as Important Open Space. important for recreation • Traffic / transport concerns

BSA0801 Morley/Ashley/Southey Street Works Option A (Mixed-use: Housing and light industry) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • Contamination: Option A: Addressed by Core Strategy policy BCS23. • Need to address • Employment: possible land Allocation reflects aspirations of Core Strategy contamination Policy BCS3 which seeks to retain employment uses, encourage a mix of uses and ensure a mix of • Concern expressed new housing that a large amount of employment on site may not be viable

BSA0802 Shiner Ltd Builders Merchants, Church Road Option A (Mixed-use: Housing and business) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • Contamination: Option A: Addressed by Core Strategy policy BCS23. • Need to address possible land contamination

BSA0803 Land at Junction of Church Road and Heber Street, Redfield Option A (Business), Option B (Housing) and Option C (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised: N/A • None raised.

BSA0804 Ducie Road Option A (Housing), Option B (Business) and Option C (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • As the site had not yet been declared surplus and its Options A and B: future use is likely to be considered by the Neighbourhood Partnership, the development of the • Loss of car-parking site may not be deliverable. Therefore it is not important for viability proposed for allocation or designation. of local businesses

- 72 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed

BSA0901 Marling Road – Stables and Land, St George Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • The site is proposed for allocation for community Option A: use (school) in the Publication Version as the site has been identified as having potential to meet • Loss of open space education need in the local community. important for nature conservation, food growing, recreation, visual amenity and horse grazing / riding. • Traffic impacts • Oversubscribed community facilities • Decision on allocation should be based on findings of an ecological survey

BSA0902 Plummers Hill Open Space Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • In March 2012 St George Neighbourhood Option A: Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site as part of the Area Green Space Plan process. Site • Loss of open space to be designated as Important Open Space. important for recreation and nature conservation • Increased pressure on community facilities • Traffic / transport issues

BSA0903 Allotments to rear of Air Balloon Road and Hillside Road Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • In March 2012 St George Neighbourhood Option A: Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site as part of the Area Green Space Plan process. Site • Loss of allotments and to be designated as Important Open Space. impact on nature

conservation • Traffic issues

BSA0904 Soaphouse Ind. Est, Howard Street Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • A certificate of lawfulness for car vehicle repairs

- 73 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed Option A: including an MOT bay was granted on this site in 2011. The delivery of this allocation is therefore • None raised. questionable and the site is consequently not proposed for allocation.

BSA0905 Caravan storage yard Option A (Gypsy and Traveller residential site) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • Gypsy and Traveller residential sites to be Option A: considered in a separate Local Plan. • Loss of open space important for recreation • Poor site access • Increased congestion • Impact on nature conservation

BSA0906 Car Sales site at 62–74 Bell Hill Road, St George Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • A housing allocation was selected for the Preferred Option A: Approach Document. This was chosen as the site has a largely residential context, is in a relatively • Negative impact on sustainable location close to local shops and will traffic congestion, contribute to meeting the Core Strategy target of parking and already providing new homes. pressurised community facilities • Traffic: Addressed through Development Management policy DM23. This will require a Transport Assessment to be submitted alongside a planning application where development is likely to have a significant traffic impact. This will enable the council to assess impacts of proposals and identify any necessary mitigation measures. • Community facilities: Addressed by Core Strategy policy BCS11.

BSA0907 47–49 Summerhill Road, Bristol Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • N/A Option A: • None raised

BSA0908 Gladstone Street Children's Playground Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

- 74 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed

Main issues raised about • In March 2012 St George Neighbourhood Option A: Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site as part of the Area Green Space Plan process. Site • Negative impact on to be designated as Important Open Space. recreation

BSA0909 118 Blackswarth Road, Bristol Option A (Housing), Option B (Business) and Option C (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • A housing allocation was selected for the Preferred Option A: Approach Document. This was chosen as the site is in a sustainable location close to St George (Church • Potential negative Road) Town Centre and will contribute to meeting impact on already the Core Strategy target of providing new homes. pressurised community facilities • Traffic: and parking provision Addressed through Development Management Main issues raised about policy DM23. This will require a Transport Option B: Assessment to be submitted alongside a planning application where development is likely to have a • Question viability of significant traffic impact. This will enable the council business use given to assess impacts of proposals and identify any number of nearby necessary mitigation measures. vacant business units • Community facilities: Addressed by Core Strategy policy BCS11.

BSA1001 Alderman Moore’s former allotments Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • Nature conservation: Option A: Addressed by addition of new ‘development consideration’ in Preferred Approach Document. • Loss of land important for nature • Allotments: conservation and Council’s Allotment Strategy identified site as not allotments required for allotment use. Therefore considered to be appropriate for development to meet Core • Flood risk, loss of Strategy objectives. open space, land stability issues • Flood risk: associated with former Addressed by ‘development consideration’ in coal workings and the Options Consultation Document. negative amenity impacts of any new • Loss of open space: housing being Council’s Allotment Strategy identified site as not adjacent to industrial required for allotment use. Also, site in sustainable sites to the north and location with a partly residential context and would east help to contribute to Core Strategy objectives regarding the provision of new homes. Therefore • Environment Agency housing allocation considered appropriate. sought inclusion of 8- metre wide wildlife • Land stability: Addressed with addition of new ‘development

- 75 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed corridor alongside consideration’ in Preferred Approach Document. Colliter's Brook • Negative amenity impacts: Addressed with addition of new ‘development consideration’ in Preferred Approach Document. • Wildlife corridor: Addressed with addition of new ‘development consideration’ in Preferred Approach Document.

BSA1002 Land at and adjacent to Malago House, Bedminster Road Option A (Mixed-use: Housing and light industry) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • Flood risk: Option A: Addressed by ‘development consideration’ in Options Consultation Document. • Flood risk and land contamination • Land contamination: Addressed by Core Strategy policy BCS23 and • Should have stressed Development Management policy DM34. need for delivering Development proposals will have to ensure they new community address these policies as part of the planning facilities (both application process. community buildings and amenity space) as • Delivering new community facilities: well as better public Addressed by Core Strategy policy BCS11. transport • Better public transport and increased congestion: • Increased congestion Addressed through Development Management policy DM23. This will require a Transport Assessment to be submitted where a development is likely to have significant traffic impact. It will enable the council to assess impacts of proposals and identify any necessary mitigation measures.

BSA1003 Car parking / storage to the south of South Liberty Lane Option A (Travelling Showpeople site) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about Site has been developed as a freight terminal under Option A: permitted development and is operational. Therefore not proposed for allocation or designation. • Delivery unlikely due

to existing operation

• Difficult site access / highway safety issue • Concern regarding concentration of similar sites

BSA1004 Former Ashton Sidings and Engineering Depot Option A (Housing) and Option B (Nature Conservation)

- 76 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed

Main issues raised about Site has vehicle access constraints. Currently no Option A: evidence to demonstrate satisfactory access and egress can be achieved. Therefore not considered appropriate • Negative impact on to allocate site for housing. green infrastructure

corridor Site possesses a number of characteristics which • Would prevent new suggest potential in future to be suitable for housing if rail line and station access / egress matters can be resolved. For example, is an underused site on previously developed land in • Harmful to area’s sustainable location close to city centre with excellent appearance, links to bus, cycle and pedestrian network. particularly given Avon Gorge proximity Therefore option to designate the site for Nature Conservation not considered appropriate. Development • Housing would result proposals that do come forward will be expected to in detached address site’s nature conservation value and mitigate community any harmful impact. • Flood risk and access

BSA1005 East Street / Dalby Avenue / Stafford Street Option A (Mixed-use: Housing, offices and retail) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • Flood risk: Option A: Addressed by ‘development consideration’ in the Options Consultation Document. • Flood risk

BSA1006 Hayleigh Elderly Persons Homes and adjacent club, Myrtle Street Option A (Mixed-use: Housing, offices and community uses) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • Trees: Option A: Addressed by Core Strategy policy BCS9 and Development Management policy DM17. • Need to retain site’s Development proposals will have to ensure they trees and open space address these policies as part of the planning if site redeveloped application process. • Loss of valuable • Open Space: elderly peoples’ home Addressed by Core Strategy policy BCS9 and Development Management policy DM15. These policies aim to ensure that new development incorporates an appropriate level and quality of new and / or enhanced open space. • Elderly Persons’ Home: Site was subject to council’s Residential Futures process which investigated future approach to provision of residential services for older people. On 26 July 2012 Cabinet decided that Hayleigh Elderly Persons’ Home should be closed. The council’s draft School Organisation Strategy 2012-2016 identified

- 77 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed this site as suitable for a new two-form entry Primary School. It is therefore proposed in the Publication Version to be allocated for ‘Community use (school)’.

BSA1007 Garages and workshop, Cooperage Lane Option A (Housing), Option B (Mixed-use: Housing and business) and Option C (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • Historic and townscape character: Option A and B: Addressed by Core Strategy policies BCS21 and BCS22 and Development Management policy • Historic and DM26. Development proposals will have to ensure townscape character they address these policies as part of the planning Main issues raised about application process. Option A: • Housing density: • Potential for housing Addressed by Core Strategy Policy BCS20 which of too high a density states that the appropriate density of development will be informed by factors including site • Option should include characteristics and the need to achieve high quality, open green space well-designed developments. • Open Space: Addressed by Core Strategy policy BCS9 Development Management policy DM15. These policies aim to ensure that new development incorporates an appropriate level and quality of new and / or enhanced open space.

BSA1008 Granby House, St John’s Road Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • Historic character: Option A: Addressed by ‘development consideration’ in Options Consultation Document. • Retain historic quality of Granby House • Nature conservation: Addressed by addition of new ‘development • Need bat survey consideration’ in Preferred Approach Document. • Incorporate natural • Open Space: green space Addressed by Core Strategy policy BCS9 and • Development of Development Management policy DM15. These northern strip must not policies aim to ensure that new development impact on St John’s incorporates an appropriate level and quality of new Road residents and / or enhanced open space. privacy • Protecting privacy of adjoining residents: • Northern strip should Addressed by Core Strategy policy BCS21 and be designated for Development Management policies DM27 and nature conservation DM29. Development proposals will have to ensure they address these policies as part of the planning application process.

- 78 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed

BSA1009 206-208 North Street and land to rear Option A (Mixed-use: Housing and retail), Option B (Mixed-use: Office and retail) and Option C (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • Adjoining site (BSA1006): Options A and B: The council’s draft School Organisation Strategy 2012-2016 identified site BSA1006 as suitable for a • Site should be new two-form entry Primary School. It is therefore considered alongside proposed in the Publication Version to be allocated adjoining site for ‘Community use (school)’. (BSA1006 - Hayleigh Elderly Persons Home) to enable a proposal for mixed- use development.

BSA1010 Former Granada / Gala Bingo Club, North Street and land to rear Option A (Mixed-use: Housing and retail), Option B (Mixed-use: Office and retail) and Option C (Do not allocate for development)

None Not applicable

BSA1011 Site adjacent to Holy Cross Church, Dean Lane Option A (Housing), Option B (Business) and Option C (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • Drainage: Options A and B: Addressed by Core Strategy Policy BCS16 which will ensure new development incorporates water • Environment Agency management measures to reduce surface water run- identified Combined off and ensure it does not increase flood risk Storm Overflows in elsewhere. area. Concerned new development should • Traffic and highway safety: not add to impact of Addressed through Development Management storm water overflows policy DM23. This will require a Transport into River Avon Assessment to be submitted alongside a planning Main Issues raised about application where development is likely to have a Option A: significant traffic impact. It will enable the council to assess impacts of proposals and identify any • Traffic and highway necessary mitigation measures. safety issues given Dean Lane is a narrow, busy road

BSA1012 Former petrol filling station, Coronation Road Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • Wildlife Corridor: Option A: Site is separated from River Avon (New Cut) by busy Coronation Road, therefore limited • Take opportunities to opportunities to form a wildlife corridor. form wildlife corridor Core Strategy policy BCS9 and Development

- 79 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed given site’s close Management policy DM15 will ensure new proximity to River development incorporates new and/or enhanced Avon and Dame Emily green infrastructure. Park.

BSA1101 Bath Road Open Space (west of Totterdown Bridge) Option A (Mixed-use: Housing and business) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • In March 2012 the Knowle, Filwood and Windmill Hill Option A: Neighbourhood Partnership declared the site as surplus to the open space requirements of the • Loss of open space Neighbourhood Partnership Area. It is considered important for suitable for development and is allocated as a recreation, visual Temple Quarter Enterprise Zone Opportunity Site in amenity and wildlife the Publication Version.

BSA1102 Salcombe Road Recreation Ground Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • In March 2012 the Knowle, Filwood and Windmill Hill Option A: Neighbourhood Partnership declared the site as surplus to the open space requirements of the • Loss of open space Neighbourhood Partnership Area. important for recreation • The site is allocated for housing in the Publication Version as the site has a largely residential context • Loss of privacy for and will contribute to meeting the Core Strategy adjoining residents target of providing new homes. • Traffic issues, e.g congestion, parking and access

BSA1103 Red Lion Works, Greenleaze Road/Wells Road Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about N/A Option A:

• None

BSA1104 Retail shops and car parking, Wells Road and Oxford Street Option A (Mixed-use: Housing and retail), Option B (Mixed-use: Offices and retail) and Option C (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • Car parking: Options A and B: Addressed by ‘development consideration’ included in Options Consultation Document. • Disagreement on

approach to car park on the site: could be reduced in size to accommodate

- 80 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed development or should be retained to support local shops

BSA1105 Former Allotments, Bellevue Terrace Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • A housing allocation was selected for the Preferred Option A: Approach Document. This was chosen as the site is currently underused, has a largely residential • Loss of land important context, is in a relatively sustainable location close for recreation and to Totterdown Local Centre and will contribute to visual amenity meeting the Core Strategy target of providing new • Adverse amenity homes. impacts for residents • Amenity impacts: of adjoining Bellevue Addressed by Core Strategy policy BCS21. Terrace • Traffic: • Traffic issues, e.g. Addressed through Development Management congestion, pressure policy DM23. This will require a Transport on parking spaces and Assessment to be submitted alongside a planning inappropriate access application where development is likely to have a • Land stability and significant traffic impact. It will enable the council to contamination issues assess impacts of proposals and identify any necessary mitigation measures. • Land stability: Addressed by ‘development consideration’ included in Options Consultation Document. • Contamination: Addressed by Core Strategy policy BCS23.

BSA1106 Jubilee Pool, Jubilee Road Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • It is the council's intention that the site should Option A: continue to be used as a public swimming pool therefore it is not proposed for allocation or • Loss of valuable designation. recreational facility

BSA1107 Higham Street Open Space Option A (Housing), and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • In March 2012 the Knowle, Filwood and Windmill Hill Option A: Neighbourhood Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site as part of the Area Green Space • Loss of open space Plan process. Site to be designated as Important important for nature Open Space. conservation, visual amenity and recreation

- 81 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed

BSA1201 Land at Broom Hill Option A (Housing), Option B (Industry and Warehousing) and Option C (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • A housing allocation was selected for the Preferred Options A and B: Approach Document. This was chosen as the site is in a relatively sustainable location close to shops, • Loss of land important employment and public transport infrastructure, has for recreation / open a residential context to the north and west and will space, nature contribute to meeting the Core Strategy target of conservation, historic providing new homes. landscape character, visual amenity, air • Open space: quality and food Site boundary reduced in Preferred Approach growing / allotments Document. Much of the open space excluded from the allocation boundary will be designated as • Constraints to Important Open Space. High quality and prominent development identified areas of natural / informal open space will also be included overhead provided as an integral part of the site’s electricity power lines, development. This is in line with Core Strategy flooding, drainage and Policy BCS9 and the council’s Open Space noise from nearby Standards industrial uses • Nature conservation: • Traffic and transport Addressed by amended ‘development consideration’ issues, e.g. highway in Preferred Approach Document to ensure safety, congestion and development makes provision for ecological the lack of public mitigation measures. transport Main issues raised about • Historic landscape character: Option A: Addressed by amended ‘development consideration’ in Preferred Approach Document to ensure • In addition to above, development makes provision for ecological impact on already mitigation measures. These measures will include pressurised the retention of important veteran trees and mature community facilities. hedgerows. Main issues raised about • Visual amenity: Option B: Addressed by Core Strategy policy BCS21. • In addition to above, • Air quality: question Addressed by Development Management policy on appropriateness given Air Quality. This will require an air quality vacant units on assessment which will enable the council to assess adjoining Brislington any change in air quality resulting from the proposed Trading Estate development and consider whether mitigation • Concerns about noise, measures are necessary. highway safety and • Food growing / allotments: congestion issues Addressed by amendment to site boundary in Preferred Approach Document to remove the actively-used allotments. The allotments will now be safeguarded as Important Open Space. • Overhead power lines:

- 82 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed Addressed by ‘development consideration’ included in Options Consultation Document. • Flooding and drainage: Addressed by addition of new ‘development considerations’ in Preferred Approach Document to ensure development is informed by a Flood Risk Assessment, reduces flood risk to existing properties, provides improvements to drainage infrastructure and incorporates Sustainable Drainage Systems • Noise: Addressed by amended ‘development consideration’ in Preferred Approach Document to ensure that noise, pollution and nuisance issues from nearby industrial uses are addressed through design and layout of new housing. • Traffic and transport: Addressed through Development Management policy DM23. This will require a Transport Assessment to be submitted alongside a planning application where development is likely to have a significant traffic impact. It will enable the council to assess impacts of proposals and identify any necessary mitigation measures. • Community facilities: Addressed by Core Strategy policy BCS11.

BSA1202 Paintworks Phase 3 Option A (Mixed-use: Housing and business) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • Addressed by addition of ‘development Option A: consideration’ in Preferred Approach Document. • Protect adjoining River Avon

BSA1203 Government Offices, Flowers Hill Brislington Option A (Mixed-use and business) and Option B (Industry and Warehousing) and Option C (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • Community facilities: Options A and B: Addressed by Core Strategy policy BCS11. • Adverse impact on • Noise and air pollution: existing community Addressed by ‘development consideration’ included facilities in Options Consultation Document. • Noise and air pollution • Nuclear War Civil Defence Room: issues from nearby Addressed by addition of ‘development industrial uses consideration’ included in Preferred Approach

- 83 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed • Preserve Nuclear War Document. Civil Defence Room

BSA1204 Tramway Road Retail Park Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • Traffic and transport: Option A: Addressed through Development Management policy DM23. This will require a Transport • Adverse impact on Assessment to be submitted alongside a planning traffic congestion and application where development is likely to have a existing community significant traffic impact. It will enable the council to facilities assess impacts of proposals and identify any necessary mitigation measures. • Community facilities: Addressed by Core Strategy policy BCS11.

BSA1205 Wicklea and adjacent land Option A (Community use) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • The site is proposed for allocation for community Option A: use (school) in the Publication Version as the site has been identified as having potential to meet • Loss of allotment education need in the local community. provision, open space, youth centre facilities • Nature conservation: and land with Addressed by amended ‘development consideration’ importance for nature in Preferred Approach Document. conservation

BSA1206 Former Rock Allotments, Allison Road Brislington Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • In June 2012 the Greater Brislington Neighbourhood Option A: Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site as part of the Area Green Space Plan process. Site • Loss of open space to be designated as Important Open Space. important for recreation, allotments and nature conservation • Traffic issues

BSA1207 493–499 Bath Road Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • A housing allocation was selected for the Preferred Option A: Approach Document. This was chosen as the site is currently underused, has a largely residential • Mixed-use context, is in a relatively sustainable location close development favoured to Sandy Park Road Local Centre and will contribute • Traffic and access to meeting the Core Strategy target of providing new

- 84 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed relating to the site’s homes. proximity to the Bath • Traffic and access: Road Addressed through Development Management policy DM23. This will require a Transport Assessment to be submitted alongside a planning application where development is likely to have a significant traffic impact. It will enable the council to assess impacts of proposals and identify any necessary mitigation measures.

BSA1208 Land to South of Tramway Road Retail Park Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • Nature conservation: Option A: Addressed by addition of two ‘development considerations’ in Preferred Approach Document. • Decision on allocation These will expect development to be informed by an should be informed by ecological survey and maintain or strengthen the an ecological survey Wildlife Network. and site's integrity and function as a wildlife • Traffic: corridor should be Addressed through Development Management maintained or policy DM23. This will require a Transport strengthened Assessment to be submitted alongside a planning application where development is likely to have a • Traffic issues, e.g. significant traffic impact. It will enable the council to congestion and assess impacts of proposals and identify any access issues relating necessary mitigation measures. to the site’s proximity to the Bath Road

BSA1209 St Anne's Park Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • In March 2012 the Greater Brislington Options A: Neighbourhood Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site as part of the Area Green Space • Loss of open space Plan process. Site to be designated as Important important for Open Space. recreation, wildlife and visual amenity

BSA1210 Former Petrol Filling Station, Bath Road Option A (Mixed-use: Housing and business), Option B (Housing) and Option C (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • Traffic: Options A: Addressed through Development Management policy DM23. This will require a Transport • Traffic issues, e.g. Assessment to be submitted alongside a planning access, congestion application where development is likely to have a and highway safety significant traffic impact. It will enable the council to • Protect nature assess impacts of proposals and identify any

- 85 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed conservation value of necessary mitigation measures. the river corridor • Nature conservation: • Impacts from waste Addressed by addition of ‘development sites on the north side considerations’ in Preferred Approach Document. of the river in St These will ensure development is informed by an Phillips Marsh ecological survey, will be expected to maintain or strengthen the integrity and connectivity of the site as part of the Bristol Wildlife Network and seek to protect and, if possible, enhance the River Avon. • Proximity of waste sites: Addressed by ‘development consideration’ included in Options Consultation Document.

BSA1211 Birchwood Elderly Persons' Home, Birchwood Road Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • Elderly persons’ home: Options A: Site no longer required to provide care for elderly people. • Loss of valuable elderly persons’ home • Landscape character: Addressed by ‘development consideration’ included • Address landscape in Options Consultation Document. character and protection of adjoining • Nature conservation: River Avon Site of Addressed by addition of ‘development Nature Conservation consideration’ in Preferred Approach Document to Importance by ensure new development makes provision for providing a buffer mitigation measures where appropriate, which may include a buffer to the adjacent Site of Nature Conservation Interest.

BSA1212 Newbridge Road open space, Newbridge Road Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • In March 2012 the Greater Brislington Option A: Neighbourhood Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site as part of the Area Green Space • Loss of open space Plan process. Site to be designated as Important important for Open Space. recreation, nature conservation and visual amenity

BSA1213 801 Bath Road Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • A housing allocation was selected for the Preferred Option A: Approach Document. This was chosen as the site is currently underused, has a largely residential • Favour retention of context, is in a relatively sustainable location close business operating on to Brislington Local Centre and will contribute to

- 86 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed the site meeting the Core Strategy target of providing new homes. • Traffic issues, e.g. access, noise, • Traffic: congestion and Addressed through Development Management highway safety policy DM23. This will require a Transport Assessment to be submitted alongside a planning • Negative impacts on application where development is likely to have a adjacent Conservation significant traffic impact. It will enable the council to Area and listed assess impacts of proposals and identify any buildings necessary mitigation measures. • Conservation Area and listed buildings Addressed by ‘development consideration’ included in Options Consultation Document.

BSA1301 Site of former City of Bristol College (Hartcliffe Campus), Hawkfield Road Option A (Housing), Option B (Mixed-use: Housing and business) and Option C (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • A housing and business allocation was selected for Options A and B: the Preferred Approach Document. This was chosen as the site is no longer required for education • Loss of open space provision, is in a sustainable location close to Symes important for nature District Centre, reflects the regeneration aspirations conservation and of Core Strategy policy BCS1 to introduce a new mix recreation of housing type, size and tenure and provide new employment opportunities in South Bristol and will contribute to meeting the Core Strategy target of providing new homes. • Nature conservation: Addressed by amended ‘development consideration’ in Preferred Approach Document to ensure development makes provision for ecological mitigation measures. In addition, a new development consideration was added to ensure that development maintains or strengthens the integrity and connectivity of the site as part of the Bristol Wildlife Network.

BSA1302 Imperial Park (vacant southern section) Option A (Industry and Warehousing), Option B (Business) and Option C (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • A business and leisure allocation was selected for Option A and B: the Preferred Approach Document. This reflected the planning permissions granted in January 2012 • Landowner considered for four outline planning applications on this site. both options These were for a public house; hotel; B1 business unsuitable on grounds units and car showroom; and a care home, 31 of viability and failure

- 87 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed to reflect context of houses and 12 flats. To reflect these permissions, existing uses on the Preferred Approach Document stated that a Imperial Park small element of housing would also be acceptable alongside the business and leisure uses proposed • Retain wildlife corridor for allocation. • Wildlife corridor: Addressed by addition of ‘development consideration’ in Preferred Approach Document to ensure that the integrity and connectivity of the Wildlife Network is maintained or strengthened.

BSA1303 Open Space at The Groves (part of Valley Walk Open Space) Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • In March 2012 the Dundry View Neighbourhood Option A: Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site as part of the Area Green Space Plan process. Site • Loss of open space to be designated as Important Open Space. important for

recreation and nature

conservation

BSA1304 Bristol Water Bedminster Depot, Bishopsworth Road Option A (Mixed-use: Housing and light industry), Option B (Housing) and Option C (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • A housing allocation was selected for the Preferred Option A: Approach Document. This was chosen as the site has a largely residential context, is in a relatively • Landowner considered sustainable location close to shops and bus routes light industry would on Bishopsworth Road and will contribute to meeting limit flexibility in the Core Strategy target of providing new homes. redeveloping the site

BSA1305 Land to the north-west of Vale Lane Option A (Industry and Warehousing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • An industry and warehousing allocation was Option A: selected for the Preferred Approach Document. This was chosen as site adjoins an established, • Loss of open space functioning industrial estate which has seen recent important for nature investment in new buildings and it reflects the conservation wildlife aspirations of Core Strategy Policies BCS1 and and landscape BCS8 which seek the provision of new industrial and character warehousing land to support economic regeneration • Question market and growth in South Bristol. attractiveness of site • Nature conservation: for industry and Addressed by ‘development consideration’ in warehousing given Preferred Approach Document. ‘backland’ location • Landscape character:

- 88 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed Addressed by ‘development consideration’ included in Options Consultation Document.

BSA1306 Land to the west of Vale Lane Option A (Industry and Warehousing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • In response to concerns raised about the potential Option A: harmful impacts on this part of the Malago Valley Site of Nature Conservation Interest and the • Loss of open space difficulty of providing mitigation for these impacts, it important for nature was considered inappropriate to allocate this site for conservation wildlife industrial and warehousing use. Instead it is and landscape proposed for designation as a Site of Nature character Conservation Interest. • Question market attractiveness of site for industry and warehousing given ‘backland’ location

BSA1307 Part of Whitehouse Centre, Fulford Road Option A (Mixed-use: Housing and open space) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • A housing and open space allocation was selected Option A: for the Preferred Approach Document. This was chosen as the site is underused, has a residential • Loss of land important context, is in a relatively sustainable location close for recreation and to local shops, presents an opportunity to create nature conservation additional public open space and will contribute to • Ecological survey meeting the Core Strategy target of providing new should be carried out homes. before any • Ecological survey: development Addressed by addition of ‘development considerations are consideration’ in Preferred Approach Document. finalised

BSA1308 Part of Kings Head Lane Park (accessed via Vicarage Road) Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • In March 2012 the Dundry View Neighbourhood Option A: Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site as part of the Area Green Space Plan process. Site • Loss of open space to be designated as Important Open Space. important for recreation, nature conservation and visual amenity • Traffic and transport issues

- 89 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed

BSA1309 St Augustine's Church and Vicarage, Whitchurch Lane Option A (Housing), Option B (Housing and community use) and Option C (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about N/A Options A and B: • None

BSA1310 Part of Withywood Park Open Space Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • In March 2012 the Dundry View Neighbourhood Options A and B: Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site as part of the Area Green Space Plan process. Site • Loss of open space to be designated as Important Open Space. important for recreation and nature conservation

BSA1311 Part of Valley Walk (south) Open Space Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • In March 2012 the Dundry View Neighbourhood Options A: Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site as part of the Area Green Space Plan process. Site • Loss of open space to be designated as Important Open Space. important for recreation and nature conservation

BSA1312 Part of Willmott Park Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • In March 2012 the Dundry View Neighbourhood Option A: Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site as part of the Area Green Space Plan process. Site • Loss of open space to be designated as Important Open Space. important for recreation and nature conservation

BSA1313 Part of Valley Walk (north) Open Space Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • In March 2012 the Dundry View Neighbourhood Option A: Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site as part of the Area Green Space Plan process. Site • Loss of open space to be designated as Important Open Space. important for recreation and nature conservation

BSA1401 Hengrove Park

- 90 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed Option A (Regeneration Area including open space: Housing, office and open space) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • An allocation for housing, offices and open space in Option A: the form of a large high quality park was selected for the Preferred Approach Document. This was chosen • Loss of land important as Hengrove Park is the largest regeneration site in for recreation the city with long-identified potential to be the • Impact on already centrepiece of a transformed South Bristol. It pressurised provides the opportunity to reinforce the success of community facilities Phase 1 of the Park’s regeneration. It also reflects the priority given in the Core Strategy to the • Increased traffic regeneration of South Bristol through additional congestion mixed-use development and the provision of new • Risk of employment opportunities. It will significantly overdevelopment contribute to meeting the Core Strategy target of providing new homes. The site is also in a • Adequate landscaping sustainable location close to community facilities, / retention of green employment areas and proposals for significant space needed improvements to public transport infrastructure. Its between new potential to provide new office floorspace will also development and St help meet the Core Strategy target of delivering Giles estate 60,000m² of new office floorspace in South Bristol. • Flooding on east side • Recreation: of site and south of St The allocation will result in a reduction in the current Giles Estate amount of open land on Hengrove Park. However, • Protection of alongside the proposed housing and offices, the intention of the allocation is that a large, high quality sought which runs park will also be secured. The proposed allocation through parts of east and development considerations amended in and north of site Preferred Approach Document to make this clear. Furthermore, significant existing recreational opportunities and open space will continue to be safeguarded as the site allocation boundary excludes the Play Park adventure playground, the Wheels Park and the approximately 14 hectares of wildlife-rich open land in the west of Hengrove Park known locally as ‘The Mounds’. • Community facilities: Addressed by Core Strategy policy BCS11. • Traffic and transport: Significant transport improvements are proposed which have the potential to reduce congestion, improve the accessibility of the area, attract investment and provide greater transport choices. Also addressed through Development Management policy DM23. This will require a Transport Assessment to be submitted alongside a planning application where development is likely to have a significant traffic impact. It will enable the council to

- 91 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed assess impacts of proposals and identify any necessary mitigation measures. • Nature conservation: Addressed by addition of three ‘development considerations’ in Preferred Approach Document. These will ensure new development seeks to identify and protect important habitats and species, maintain the site’s value as a wildlife corridor and explore opportunities to open the culverted Brislington Brook. • Landscape and urban design: Addressed by Core Strategy policies BCS21 and BCS9. A new ‘development consideration’ was also added in Preferred Approach Document to ensure that new development faces on to new open areas. • Flooding and drainage: New development considerations added to Preferred Approach Document to ensure development is informed by a Flood Risk Assessment and incorporates Sustainable Drainage Systems.

BSA1402 Oasis Academy Playing Fields and New Fosseway (Bush/RAC) School Option A (Mixed-use: Housing and open space) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • Recreation / open space: Option A: Addressed by reducing size of allocation site boundary in Preferred Approach Document and • Loss of open space designating the remainder as Important Open important for Space. recreation and nature conservation • Nature conservation: Addressed by additional ‘development consideration’ • Traffic issues, e.g. in Preferred Approach Document to ensure congestion, noise and development is informed by ecological survey and, if air pollution as well as necessary, mitigation measures proposed to worsened highway alleviate any negative impacts. safety • Traffic: Addressed through Development Management policy DM23. This will require a Transport Assessment to be submitted alongside a planning application where development is likely to have a significant traffic impact. It will enable the council to assess impacts of proposals and identify any necessary mitigation measures.

BSA1403 Briery Leaze Road Open Space (south of Whitchurch District Centre) Option A (Mixed-use: Housing with open space), Option B (Offices with open space) and Option C (Do not allocate for development)

- 92 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed

Main issues raised about • In March 2012 the Hengrove and Stockwood Options A and B: Neighbourhood Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site as part of the Area Green Space • Loss of open space Plan process. Site to be designated as Important important for Open Space. recreation and nature conservation

BSA1404 Paddocks and allotments, Oatlands Avenue and Great Hayles Road Option A (Mixed-use: Office, community use and allotments), Option B (Housing, community use and allotments) and Option C (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • In March 2012 the Hengrove and Stockwood Options A and B: Neighbourhood Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site as part of the Area Green Space • Loss of open space Plan process. Site to be designated as Important important for Open Space. recreation and nature conservation

BSA1405 Craydon Road Open Space Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • In March 2012 the Hengrove and Stockwood Option A: Neighbourhood Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site as part of the Area Green Space • Loss of open space Plan process. Site to be designated as Important important for Open Space. recreation and nature conservation

BSA1406 Former Petherton Road School site, Petherton Road Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • Ecological survey: Option A: Addressed by addition of ‘development consideration’ in Preferred Approach Document. • Ecological survey should be carried out • Proximity of industry: with mitigation Addressed by ‘development consideration’ in measures being Options Consultation Document. provided where appropriate • Proximity of industrial uses may hinder housing development

BSA1407 Maesknoll Elderly Persons' Home, Bamfield Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about N/A Option A:

- 93 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed • None

BSA1408 Greville Day Centre and Elderly Persons' Home, Lacey Road Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • In July 2012 Cabinet agreed plans to use this site for Option A: people with dementia, therefore it is not proposed for allocation. • Loss of valuable elderly persons’ home and day care centre • Increased pressure on community facilities • Transport / highway issues • Bat survey needed

BSA1409 Land off Sturminster Road/Sturminster Close Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about • In March 2012 the Hengrove and Stockwood Option A: Neighbourhood Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site as part of the Area Green Space • Loss of open space Plan process. Site to be designated as Important important for Open Space. recreation and nature conservation

BSA1410 Counterslip Baptist Church, 648–652 Wells Road Option A (Housing) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about N/A Option A: • None

BSA1411 Loxton Square and garage site Option A (Housing with small retail unit) and Option B (Do not allocate for development)

Main issues raised about N/A Options: • None

- 94 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Sites suggested for allocation Summary of sites suggested for allocation by respondents to the 2010 Options Document and how they were addressed in the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies

Site details and How they were addressed allocation promoted

281 Gloucester Road, Site located within Primary Shopping Area of Gloucester Bishopston Road Town Centre. Therefore retail and active ground floor uses, rather than residential use, proposed for Housing safeguarding and promotion in accordance with Core Strategy policy BCS7 and Development Management policy DM7.

Car Park, Harden Site located within Stockwood Local Centre. Therefore Road, Stockwood retail and active ground floor uses, rather than residential use, proposed for safeguarding and promotion in Housing accordance with Core Strategy policy BCS7 and Development Management policy DM8.

The Gainsborough Site located in Lockleaze (Gainsborough Square) Local Public House, Centre. Consequently, subject to other Local Plan policies, Lockleaze retail use would be acceptable where it would help maintain or enhance the function of the centre. Allocation of site for Retail retail uses therefore not considered necessary.

Land to north west of Site located in area designated by Preferred Approach Campbell Farm Drive, Document Development Management policy DM16 Lawrence Weston Avonmouth and Kingsweston Levels. DM16 sought to ensure area remained primarily undeveloped. Site’s Housing development for housing would not be consistent with aims of DM16.

Crooks Marsh, Core Strategy policy BCS4 does not promote new Avonmouth allocations for employment development on greenfield land in Avonmouth area for number of reasons including flood Employment (Use risk, nature conservation and highways capacity issues. Class B1/B2) Site instead proposed for designation by Preferred Approach Document Development Management policy DM16 Avonmouth and Kingsweston Levels.

Gloucester Road Core Strategy policy BCS4 does not promote new Railway Sidings, allocations for employment development on greenfield land Avonmouth in Avonmouth area for number of reasons including flood risk, nature conservation and highways capacity issues. Employment (Use Site instead proposed for designation as Site of Nature Class B1/B2) Conservation Interest.

Land adjacent to Core Strategy policy BCS4 does not promote new ‘Access 18’ and allocations for employment development on greenfield land Kingsweston Lane, in Avonmouth area for number of reasons including flood Avonmouth risk, nature conservation and highways capacity issues. Site instead proposed for designation by Preferred Employment Approach Document Development Management policy

- 95 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Site details and How they were addressed allocation promoted DM16 Avonmouth and Kingsweston Levels.

Land at Bramble Drive, Due to topography and ecological value of site, only limited Sneyd Park portion would be developable and this would not be capable of accommodating 10 or more units, the threshold Housing for considering sites for a housing allocation.

Land off Ermine Way, Part of site proposed to be designated as Important Open Shirehampton Space as considered important for one or more characteristics identified by Core Strategy policy BCS9: Housing recreation, leisure and community use, townscape and landscape quality and visual amenity.

Maynard Road, Part of site proposed to be designated as Important Open Hartcliffe Space as considered important for one or more characteristics identified by Core Strategy policy BCS9: Housing recreation, leisure and community use, townscape and landscape quality and visual amenity.

Yew Tree Farm, Site in Green Belt. Government planning policy and Core Bedminster Down Strategy promote protection of land within Green Belt from inappropriate development. Housing

Craydon Grove, Site in Green Belt. Government planning policy and Core Stockwood Strategy promote protection of land within Green Belt from inappropriate development. Housing

Land East of Site in Green Belt. Government planning policy and Core Coldharbour Lane, Strategy promote protection of land within Green Belt from Broomhill inappropriate development. Housing

Keynsham Garden Site in Green Belt. Government planning policy and Core Centre, Brislington Strategy promote protection of land within Green Belt from inappropriate development. Mixed-use

Land at Ashton Vale Site in Green Belt. Planning permission for stadium not yet implemented. After implementation council will review Stadium Green Belt boundary as part of Local Plan review.

623-625 Bath Rd, Site had outline planning permission for residential Kensington Hill development. Therefore not considered necessary to allocate site as principle of residential development already Housing accepted by council.

Land adjacent to Part of site proposed to be designated as Important Open Henrietta Street, Lower Space as considered important for one or more characteristics identified by Core Strategy policy BCS9:

- 96 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Site details and How they were addressed allocation promoted Easton recreation, leisure and community use, townscape and landscape quality and visual amenity. Housing

Former Bristol & West Gypsy and Traveller residential sites to be considered in a Sports Ground, separate Local Plan. Portway

Traveller residential site

Halls of Residence, Allocation not considered necessary to deliver housing Stoke Park development on this site; instead, residential intensification in this sensitive location more appropriately dealt with Housing through planning application process.

Former Pool Site, Crow Gypsy and Traveller residential sites to be considered in a Lane, Henbury separate Local Plan. Gypsy and Traveller residential site

Garages, opposite Site assessed in preparing Options Consultation document. Craydon Rd Public Site considered too small to allocate. Convenience, Stockwood Housing

Showcase Cinema and Government planning policy and Core Strategy promote a Kentucky Fried sequential approach to provision of retail development Chicken, Avonmeads whereby retail uses are directed to centres. Insufficient Retail Park evidence submitted to justify retail allocation at this out-of- centre site. Retail

Land at Ashdene Site considered too small for allocation. Avenue, Eastville Housing

Open space at Site proposed to be designated as Important Open Space Marshfield Road, as considered important for one or more characteristics Fishponds identified by Core Strategy policy BCS9: recreation, leisure and community use, townscape and landscape quality and Housing visual amenity. Part of site also proposed to be designated as Site of Nature Conservation Interest.

Wesley College, Part of site proposed to be designated as Important Open College Park Drive, Space as considered important for one or more Westbury-on-Trym characteristics identified by Core Strategy policy BCS9: recreation, leisure and community use, townscape and

- 97 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Site details and How they were addressed allocation promoted Housing landscape quality and visual amenity.

Corner of Redland Site proposed to be designated as Important Open Space Road and Elmgrove as considered important for one or more characteristics Road, Redland identified by Core Strategy policy BCS9: recreation, leisure and community use, townscape and landscape quality and Housing visual amenity.

Open space at Allocation not considered appropriate due to potential Sheldrake Drive, Snuff negative impacts on trees and landscape considerations. Mills Housing and play area

Land adjacent to Site in Green Belt. Government planning policy and Core Scotland Farm, Strategy promote protection of land within Green Belt from Brislington inappropriate development. Future development (no use specified)

Land south of Knowle Site considered too small for allocation in isolation. Reservoir, Adjacent site BSA1106 not taken forward as an allocation Knowle in Preferred Approach Document as it is council's intention that site should continue to be used as public swimming Housing pool.

30-34 Cannon Street, Site in Town Centre location. Core Strategy policy BCS7 Bedminster promotes mixed-use development in centres, therefore allocation not considered necessary to enable suggested Mixed-use development.

Land adjacent to St. Allocation not considered appropriate due to small size of Luke's Road, Victoria site and potential negative amenity impacts on existing Park properties and local area. Housing

Offices, Upton Road, Allocation not appropriate due to potential negative impacts Southville of loss of valuable employment floorspace. Insufficient evidence submitted (for example, how the site had been Housing unsuccessfully marketed for employment uses) to justify loss of employment floorspace.

Builder's yard, Site not submitted by the landowner, therefore concerns Henleaze Road, over deliverability of suggested allocation. Eastfield Housing

Avonmeads Retail Government planning policy and Core Strategy promote Park sequential approach to provision of retail development whereby retail uses are directed to centres. Insufficient Retail, leisure and

- 98 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Site details and How they were addressed allocation promoted other complementary evidence submitted to justify retail allocation on this out-of- uses centre site.

- 99 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Designations Summary of main issues raised on draft designations by respondents to the 2010 Options Document and how they were addressed in the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies

Main issues raised How they were addressed

Safeguarded Transport Links

Various amendments to safeguarded The safeguarding designation reflect the routes suggested proposals that are set out in the Core Strategy.

Safeguarded Park and Ride Sites

Do not safeguard park and ride site Site may be required to provide park and ride on M32 facility. Safeguarding is appropriate.

Rail Infrastructure

Various rail sites identified for Rail infrastructure safeguarding sites are safeguarding identified.

Principal Industrial and Warehousing Areas

Bush Industrial Estate (PIWA70), Whitehall

Object to designation: Designation maintained in Preferred Approach Document. Reasons: • too small • Well-used, functioning estate relatively • too close to residential properties close to strategic road network. Mixed-use or 100% residential • Residential proximity does not appear to allocation preferred harm market interest as evidenced by total occupancy of units. • Strategic context of identified shortage of industrial land outside Avonmouth means statutory development plan designation considered useful as would provide additional policy protection to ensure the estate continues to be safeguarded for industrial and warehousing uses. • PIWA in an area which is not the most prosperous part of the city and in a ward () which contains only one other PIWA (Crew’s Hole Road).

Area between 151-157 Crew’s Hole Road, part of Crew’s Hole Road (PIWA71), Crew’s Hole

Object to designation. Reasons: Proposed designation removed from Preferred Approach Document. • outdated buildings

- 100 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed • vacant since 2009 Prefer mixed-use development to include housing and new B1 units

Imperial Tobacco site, part of East Court / Winterstoke Road (PIWA78), Ashton Vale

Object to designation. Reasons: Designation maintained in Preferred Approach Document. Reasons: • Given predominantly office use and proximity to residential uses, • Employment Land Study recommended more flexible approach needed designation because site: was occupied when surveyed in 2007; had few • Prefer allocation for commercial residential proximity constraints; had uses, including offices good access to the Strategic Road

Network; and formed part of adjoining industrial and warehousing buildings along Winterstoke Road. • Designation could help to ensure the southern third is redeveloped for industry and warehousing.

Atlantic Road and Avonbridge Trading Estate (PIWA36), Avonmouth

Object to designation. Reasons: Designation maintained in Preferred Approach Document. Reasons: • Buildings vacant and out-of-date • Site within main Avonmouth industrial Prefer allocation for wider range of area with strong industrial estate economic development uses characteristics, e.g. good separation from residential uses and close to strategic road network. • Core Strategy examination hearings heard from landowners and the Industrial Agents Society who promoted the need for more industrial land in this area. This land would appear well placed to accommodate this demand.

South Liberty Lane / Brook Gate (PIWA85), Ashton Vale

Object to designation. Reasons: Designation maintained in Preferred Approach Document. Reasons: • Prefer allocation for wider range of economic development uses • Land suitable for industrial and (such as public and community warehousing uses which is identified as uses) and not solely industry and being in short supply. warehousing. • Central part of PIWA in particular performs strongly with almost total occupancy. • Apart from housing along the eastern

- 101 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed part of South Liberty Lane, PIWA benefits from good separation from housing as is bounded by railway lines, open space and Green Belt.

SCA Packaging, south of Deep Pit Road, part of Fishponds Trading Estate (PIWA56), Clay Hill / Speedwell

Object to designation. Reasons: Designation maintained in Preferred Approach Document. Reasons: • Site is underused, outdated buildings, provides little • Shortage of industrial and warehousing employment and has conflicting land means it is important to safeguard residential uses to the south. sites which continue, as with this site, to be viable and appropriate for industrial Prefer mixed-use allocation. and warehousing businesses.

• Whilst housing adjoins parts of the site, buffering is provided by mature trees and relatively busy Brook Road. To the north is Fishponds Trading Estate industrial area with its long-established industrial uses. Taken together, it is considered that continued industrial and warehousing development is still appropriate and would not cause unacceptable environmental impact on the amenity of neighbouring occupiers. • Site within Hillfields ward which is not the most economically prosperous ward. This suggests site is valuable in the area as it contributes to providing local, skilled job opportunities in a relatively disadvantaged part of the city.

Glenfrome Road (north) (PIWA48), St Werburgh’s / Baptist Mills

Object to designation. Reasons: Proposed designation removed from Preferred Approach Document. • Gas Holder no longer required for operational purposes and likely to be removed within five years. Given expected ‘abnormal’ remediation costs resulting from previous gas holder use, industrial and warehousing development might not be viable Prefer an allocation to allow a range of uses, including affordable housing, and not just industry and warehousing

- 102 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed

Temple Gate Distribution Centre (PIWA82), off York Road, nr Bath Bridge

Object to designation. Reasons: Designation maintained in Preferred Approach Document. Reasons: • Site unattractive to distributors who prefer locations on key • PIWA almost fully occupied by arterial routes distribution businesses suggesting it continues to be attractive to storage / • Constrained by planning distribution market. As economy recovers condition which restricts hours of from recession, the undeveloped land at operation the western end of the site could be • Underused as it contains a taken up for industrial and warehousing significant area of undeveloped in the future. land • PIWA performs well as evidenced by • Prefer mixed-use allocation for high occupancy, good physical condition residential, B1 business and retail of buildings, adequate separation from residential areas and close access to strategic road network.

Woodpecker House and 42-46 Lodge Causeway, part of Lodge Causeway (west) (PIWA54), Ridgeway / Fishponds

Object to designation. Reasons: Designation maintained in Preferred Approach Document. Reasons: • unsuitable as HGV access is via narrow residential Balaclava • Both sites occupied and form part of Road surrounding established industrial area which is almost fully occupied. • conflicting adjacent residential uses • Re Woodpecker House, access does not seem to be affecting the site’s • over-provision of industrial and attractiveness to the market as rest of warehousing land in the area Balaclava Industrial Estate is fully occupied. • Re 42-46 Lodge Causeway, while the site does have a house next to it (No. 40 Lodge Causeway), this seems to be connected with the business at 42-46; the house is included within the proposed PIWA designation.

Former Parnall’s Works, part of Lodge Causeway / Goodneston Road (north) (PIWA52), Fishponds

Object to designation. Reasons: Designation removed from Preferred Approach Document. • Long term vacancy indicates no

demand for industrial and Replaced with an allocation for mixed-use warehousing floorspace development including housing, business and community use.

- 103 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed

Diamonite Industrial Park, part of Lodge Causeway / Goodneston Road (PIWA52), Fishponds

Object to designation. Reasons: Designation maintained in Preferred Approach Document. Reasons: • Site benefits from B1 office consent • Site provides accommodation for a range of industrial and warehousing • Surrounding buildings also have businesses, particularly at the lower cost planning permission for non- / quality end of the market. industrial uses which indicates character of area is changing • Recent signs of investment. Prefer mixed-use allocation for • High levels of occupancy. employment and housing.

Graphic Packaging, Filwood Road / Goodneston Road (south) (PIWA53), Fishponds

Object to designation. Reasons: Designation removed from Preferred Approach Document. • buildings outdated, inefficient and

underused Replaced with an allocation for mixed-use development of housing and business.

Former Brenmark Engineering site, part of Whitby Road (north) (PIWA90), St Anne’s

Object to designation. Reasons: Designation maintained in Preferred Approach Document. Reasons: • buildings vacant • Site is part of Whitby Road (north) PIWA Prefer allocation for business, retail, which seems to be strongly performing residential, leisure etc. industrial area as evidenced by high levels of occupancy, generally good physical condition of buildings, good access to the strategic road network and no residential proximity constraints.

Centres

North View (Westbury Park) District Centre (CEN0012)

Extend boundary as there are shops Centre boundary included shops on the on the south side (of North View south side of North View, therefore no Centre) which should be protected change needed. too.

Filton Road Local Centre (CEN0016)

Review Filton Road so that disused Centre boundary amended in Preferred shops can be converted to housing if Approach Document to exclude 88-96 Filton retail is no longer needed Road from centre boundary.

- 104 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed

Gloucester Road Town Centre (CEN0021)

Review Gloucester Road so that The aim of the policy is to maintain the disused shops can be converted to vitality and viability of the centre. No change housing if retail is no longer needed proposed.

Clifton Town Centre (CEN0023)

Centre boundary should end at 39 Centre boundary amended in Preferred and 40 Princess Victoria St to reflect Approach Document to reflect comment. low proportion of commercial uses and to seek to preserve residential amenity

St George (Church Road) Town Centre (CEN0032)

Extend to east to encourage new Primary shopping area extended on south shops in area side of Church Road.

Symes (Hartcliffe) District Centre (CEN0042)

Extend boundary to north east to Centre boundary amended in Preferred include Hartcliffe Community Centre Approach Document to include church but and extend it south to include St. not the community centre as it is considered Andrew's Church. too remote from centre.

Queen’s Road, Withywood Local Centre (CEN0043)

Extend boundary to south to include Centre boundary amended in Preferred Withywood Centre and Rising Sun Approach Document to include Withywood Public House Centre. Rising Sun was already within the centre boundary.

Designate Kingsway Shopping No change proposed as not part of the Precinct (St George) as a local centre hierarchy in the Core Strategy. Core Strategy Policy BCS7 recognises and protect local shopping facilities in smaller parades and individual shops.

Primary Shopping Areas

Fishponds (PSA0008)

Object to failure to include part of Designation maintained in Preferred Channons Hill Retail Park within Approach Document as site not considered Primary Shopping Area designation. to represent retail core of Fishponds Town Centre in accordance with Core Strategy policy BCS7 and Development Management policy DM7.

East end of centre should be primary No change proposed as primary shopping area is considered to relate area where A1

- 105 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed shopping area uses predominate.

Shirehampton

Extend primary shopping area at No changed proposed as primary shopping north west end area is considered to relate area where A1 uses predominate.

Secondary Shopping Frontages

Add secondary frontages at Cotham Locations are not within identified centres. Road and Lower Redland Road Existing shopping provision would be subject to local shopping provisions of Core Strategy Policy BCS7.

Sites of Nature Conservation Interest

Purdown/Stoke Park area - designate The proposed designation accurately reflects geography defined by IOS0118, the extent of nature conservation interest. IOS0123 and BSA0401 as (i) IOS, (ii) Historic Parkland, and (iii) SNCI.

Review evidence for nature The designation is considered to accurately conservation interest at Wesley reflect extent of nature conservation interest. College

Review SNCI at Ashdene Avenue. Part of the proposed SNCI has been removed to reflect site circumstances.

Suggest nature reserve at Saxon The site has not been identified as having Road nature conservation interest.

Delete SNCI designation from The The area is of nature conservation interest Mounds and designation is appropriate.

SNCI at Ashton should reflect Planning permission has not been permitted development implemented.

Regionally Important Geological Sites

No comments

Local Historic Parks and Gardens

Sea Mills Garden Suburb should be The designation is not considered designated as a local historic park appropriate for this designed urban and garden landscape. Other forms of protection and character recognition likely to be more appropriate.

Stoke Lodge should be designated The designation is not considered appropriate location. The surroundings are

- 106 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed designated as an Important Open Space.

Extend designations at The designation correctly reflects the extent Purdown/Stoke Park of the historic park.

Green Belt

Ashton Vale stadium permission site Planning permission was granted in very should be removed from Green Belt special circumstances and remains unimplemented.

Important Open Space

Various proposed allocations on Area The approach to these sites is set out in the Green Space Plan sites suggested to Site Allocations table above. be Important Open Space

Land at Somerset Street Kingsdown The site is retained as Important Open should not be designated. Space as it is considered to be important for townscape and visual amenity.

Land at Brean Down Avenue, The site has been designated as Important Henleaze should be open space Open Space.

Wesley College site should not be The site is retained as Important Open Important Open Space Space as it is considered to be important for townscape and visual amenity.

Open area at Glenside campus The site is retained as Important Open should not be Important Open Space Space as it is considered to be important for townscape and visual amenity.

Playing field closest to St Matthias The boundary has been amended. should be included in site allocation

Land of Little Paul Street should be The site is of a small scale and not designated as Important Open appropriate for designation as Important Space. Open Space.

Land at Elmgrove Road should not The site is retained as Important Open be designated as Important Open Space as it is considered to be important for Space. townscape and visual amenity.

Upper terrace at Princes Lane Clifton The boundary of the Important Open Space should be open space. has been amended to include this area.

Land at Princess Victoria Street The site is of a small scale and not should be open space. appropriate for designation as Important Open Space.

Land at Ashdene Avenue should not The boundary of the Important Open Space be important open space. has been amended in this area.

- 107 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed

Land at Cobden Street should be The site has been designated as Important open space. Open Space.

Land at Cousins Lane should be The boundary of the Important Open Space open space has been amended to include this area.

Land at Ermine Way Shirehampton The site is retained as Important Open should not be important open space. Space as it is considered to be important for townscape and visual amenity.

Various proposed allocations on Area The approach to these sites is set out in the Green Space Plan sites suggested to Site Allocations table above. be Important Open Space

Land at Somerset Street Kingsdown The site is retained as Important Open should not be designated. Space as it is considered to be important for townscape and visual amenity.

Avonmouth and Kingsweston Levels

Part of area should be used for Extent of designation was reduced to employment development exclude smaller tracts of land surrounded by existing development and areas by the coast subject to the international habitat designation.

Sewage Works Expansion

Alternative larger safeguarding area Existing substantial safeguarded area is sought considered appropriate.

Minerals Safeguarding Areas

No comments

- 108 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Stage 3 – Consideration of preferred approach (2012) 888 separate comments were received on the March 2010 Preferred Approach Document from 335 respondents, together with three petitions with 403 signatures relating to BSA1111 Kingswear Road, Torpoint Road and the Marksbury Road College Site; 147 signatures relating to BSA0203 Former Dunmail Primary School; and 1,365 signatures relating to BSA0501 Blackberry Hill Hospital. The main issues raised and how they were addressed in the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies are set out in the tables below.

Development management policies Summary of main issues raised on draft development management policies by respondents to the Preferred Approach Consultation Document and how they were addressed in the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies.

Main issues raised How they were addressed

Policy DM1 Residential Sub-divisions, Shared and Specialist Housing (NB this became Policy DM2 in the Publication Version)

• ‘General Criteria’ section • Issues relating to housing mix, refuse, cycling should provide further and accommodation standards are addressed detailed guidance on by other Adopted Core Strategy policies and housing mix, refuse, cycling, proposed Development Management policies. accommodation standards etc. • Policy is too restrictive. • The need to exercise appropriate controls over Should promote this form of certain forms of residential development is development rather than considered reasonable. assume a negative impact. • ‘Specialist Student Housing’ • Criteria (ii) and (iii) removed from Specialist section - criteria (ii) and (iii) Student Housing’ element. Policy requires will create over- application of the ‘General Criteria’, including concentrations close to consideration of concentration issues, for institutions. student development outside of the city centre. • ‘Older Persons’ Housing’ • The policy provides a flexible approach to section should set out the Older Persons’ housing with an emphasis on type of housing and care maintaining independence. options suitable for older people.

Policy DM2 Affordable Housing Provision: Smaller Sites (NB this became Policy DM3 in the Publication Version)

• No published evidence • The ‘Bristol Housing Viability Study’ has been base. published since 2009. A further study ‘Addendum Report on Small Sites’ has been • Would Registered Providers made available at the Publication stage. accept single units or small quantities of affordable • Policy amended to apply to residential housing within a schemes of 10 to 14 units. development?

- 109 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed • Policy should only apply to residential developments of 5+ units to avoid time consuming negotiations over small amounts of affordable housing. • What type of residential • The council’s ‘Planning Obligations’ SPD uses does the policy apply identifies which residential uses are exempt to? from affordable housing obligations.

Policy DM3 Wheelchair Accessible Housing (NB this became Policy DM4 in the Publication Version)

• The proportion of • The requirement is considered proportionate to Wheelchair Accessible the need. accommodation should be • ‘Lifetime Homes’ standards are addressed by increased to 10%. other Adopted Core Strategy policies and • All units should be built to proposed Development Management policies. ‘Lifetime Homes’ standard. • The policy identifies the minimum threshold to • The policy would penalise secure a single unit based on the proportion areas where larger required. A significant proportion of housing schemes don’t come delivery is also derived from sites of 50+ units. forward.

Policy DM4 Protection of Community Facilities (NB this became Policy DM5 in the Publication Version)

• The policy should provide a • Floorspace requirements will vary depending guideline floorspace on local need and demand. A single standard requirement for community may be difficult to apply. buildings for a given • The policy has been amended to allow population size. consideration of whether other community • The policy may result in uses are willing and able to come forward to vacancy of ground floor use the site or buildings. uses. Unacceptable that an • The need to protect community facilities is unviable commercial use considered reasonable but may be balanced should be offered for other against other policy objectives. types of community use. • The policy should allow for the loss of a community facility where its redevelopment would bring about a greater set of community benefits e.g. affordable housing.

- 110 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed

Policy DM5 Protection of Public Houses (NB this became Policy DM6 in the Publication Version)

• Criteria (ii) should read ‘a • Text to criteria (ii) amended. diverse range…’ • Further explanation required • The existing policy text provides an of ‘established’ public appropriate level of explanation. houses, ‘adequate marketing’ and ‘distinctive features’. • Unacceptable that a viability • The policy seeks to protect public houses from appraisal be submitted closure. Viability assessments are required to before an application can be justify such closures (where no adequate registered. alternative provision is available) and form a necessary part of the application submission.

Policy DM6 New Retail, Leisure and Hotel Development (NB this became Policy DM7 Town Centre Uses in the Publication Version)

• 150sq m too low for small • Revised to 200 sq m scale uses • Policy should indicate • Sequential approach to out of centre where out of centre development is included. development will be considered • Impact assessment • Thresholds considered appropriate for retail thresholds inappropriate and A1 to A5 to ensure no harmful impacts on local centres. Thresholds for leisure and office development have been added. • Clarify edge of centre • Definitions added consistent with NPPF. definitions

Policy DM7 Shopping Areas and Frontages (NB this became Policy DM8 in the Publication Version)

• Clarify meaning of high • The policy aims generally to retain A1 uses in proportion, define primary shopping areas, whilst allowing for acceptable proportions uses which contribute positively to centres.

Policy DM8 Local Centres (NB this became Policy DM9 in the Publication Version)

• Allow for community uses in • Revised approach to secondary frontages frontages allows for this. Such uses may also be acceptable in primary shopping areas where

they make a positive contribution. • Clearer definitions should • Policy contains criteria against which individual

- 111 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed be included proposals can be assessed

Policy DM9 Food and Drink Uses and the Evening Economy (NB this became Policy DM10 in the Publication Version)

• Recognise diversity of uses • The policy allows consideration of a range of uses • More detail on uses • Criteria in policy and other DM policies should required for each area enable all aspects of proposal to be addressed • More definition of • Impacts are likely to vary from place to place. cumulative impacts and The policy allows a judgement to be made in harmful concentrations the light of local circumstances. • More detail on matters such • Design policies would enable these matters to as pub gardens, window be addressed. types • Take aways and restaurants • The policy allows for the varied impacts of have different impacts uses to be taken into account. • Mobile fast food outlets • Where planning permission is required, the should be mentioned policy could be used in respect of these uses. • Support for pubs • Specific policy provided relating to pubs. • Include design matters in • Design matters are addressed in other policies. policy

Policy DM10 Markets (NB this became Policy DM11 in the Publication Version)

• Policy is too permissive as it • The policy guards against the loss of markets. could result in loss of Wording has been amended to strengthen this. markets

Policy DM11 Retaining Valuable Employment Sites (NB this became Policy DM12 in the Publication Version)

• More flexibility sought on • Flexibility on approach to PIWAs addressed by approach to Principal addition of new Development Management Industrial and Warehousing policy DM13. Areas (PIWAs) to reflect • Publication Version policy DM12 allows National Planning Policy employment-generating uses, community Framework para 22 facilities and affordable housing where it is • Policy should recognise that demonstrated that there is no demand for employment-generating employment uses. uses outside Use Class B1-

B8 uses could support wider economic development • Policy should allow for conversion to community facilities without need for justification through an

- 112 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed Economic Statement • Policy should allow loss where redevelopment would bring about greater set of community benefits, such as the provision of additional affordable housing

Policy DM12 The Health Impacts of Development (NB this became Policy DM14 in the Publication Version)

• Refer to a healthy natural • Reference to “Healthy Living Environment” environment rather than just covers the built environment as well as the a healthy ‘living’ natural environment. Original wording environment. Trees and considered appropriate. woods are vital to the health

and wellbeing of people in the UK. • Support policy and use of • Checklist referred to in practice note which Sport England Active accompanies the policy. Design checklist • All new dwellings in Bristol • Addressed by Core Strategy policy BCS11 in the local plan period ‘Infrastructure and Developer Contributions’. should provide for new or enhanced existing sport and recreation facilities to help create opportunities for physical activity whilst having a major positive impact on health and mental wellbeing. • Do not consider 100 • Thresholds consistent with council’s definition dwellings in the context of of ‘super major’ developments under the Bristol Bristol to be 'super' major Planning Protocol. Different threshold likely to development. Threshold cause confusion. should be 150/200 or greater. • Policy vague, onerous and • Large evidence base on use of HIAs nationally not supported by evidence and internationally. Environment is one of the base. The causes of ill- wider determinants of health, but not the only health are complex and one. NPPF includes number of references to numerous and the majority how planning system can support health and of them are not related to wellbeing and promote healthy communities. land use planning or development. • Clarity on the content of a • Provided in practice note which accompanies Health Impact Assessment the policy. for super-major

- 113 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed developments should be provided. • Any healthy living obligation • The recommendations of an HIA could cover required should be issues such as layout, access, landscaping embodied within CIL. This is and mitigation of adverse impacts; these are not a relevant land use matters appropriately addressed by development control policy. development management policies. • Include reference to health • Can be addressed in practice note guidance implications of global which accompanies the policy. environmental change.

Policy DM13 Green Infrastructure Provision (NB this became Policy DM15 in the Publication Version)

• Viability considerations • Viability is referred to in the policy should be included in policy • Threshold for allotment • Approach reflects council’s Allotment Strategy provision is unclear • Trees requirements should • Trees may be appropriate, where practicable, apply only to large sites in developments of all scales. • Trees should not be planted • This is a detailed matter to address when so as to constrain size assessing landscape details of planning applications • Refer to climate change • Value of trees in a changing climate is referred to • Refer to benefits of high • Policies overall aim to secure high quality quality landscape design design

Policy DM14 Open Space for Recreation (NB this became Policy DM16 in the Publication Version)

• Space standards including • Standards reflect council’s Park and Green walking time are over Spaces Strategy and are considered prescriptive appropriate and necessary • Ensure high quality design • Policies aim to secure high quality design

Policy DM15 Development Involving Green Infrastructure (NB this became Policy DM17 in the Publication Version)

• Refer to ancient woodland • The policy has been amended to refer to trees. • Policy should reflect Core • Policy aims to protect retained important open Strategy and allow for spaces. It is not necessary or appropriate to specified development of repeat the Core Strategy. open space • Tree compensation should • The standard is clear and straightforward. It is not be based on trunk size. applicable to important trees. It appropriately Standard is prescriptive and

- 114 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed complicated. addresses the impact of lost trees. • Approach to unidentified open space is unclear, • It is appropriate that small locally important could frustrate housing open spaces can be retained. Housing delivery developments do not require development of such spaces. • Should refer to hedgerows • Hedgerows are an acknowledged element of green infrastructure subject to Core Strategy Policy BCS9. Where sites including hedgerows have been allocated for development, development considerations aims at retaining them have been included.

Policy DM16 Avonmouth and Kingsweston Levels (NB this became Policy DM18 in the Publication Version)

• Policy not consistent with • Policy reflects the significant environmental positive approach to considerations in the areas, in particular flood enabling growth risk and nature conservations matters. • Reference to character is • Reference to undeveloped character has been inappropriate replaced with undeveloped status. • Give more recognition to • The importance of the wider area is economic potential of the acknowledged in the Core Strategy and the area policy’s introductory paragraphs.

Policy DM17 Development and Nature Conservation (NB this became Policy DM19 in the Publication Version)

• Clarification of ancient and • References have been changed to ancient veteran trees woodland, aged trees and veteran trees (reflects NPPF glossary).

• The approach reflect the adopted Core • All designations should be Strategy Policy BCS9. clearly identified – online sources not acceptable

Policy DM18 Regionally Important Geological Sites (NB this became Policy DM20 in the Publication Version)

No comments

Policy DM19 Development of Private Gardens (NB this became Policy DM21 in the Publication Version)

• Do not favour loss of • Policy takes into account impact on character gardens in conservation and there are specific policies to address areas or development of conservation areas and listed buildings and listed gardens their settings. • Do all criteria have to be • The policy sets out circumstances where use

- 115 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed met? of garden land may be acceptable. • Policy is too prescriptive, • Policy is consistent with the NPPF. It generally references to character retains private gardens whilst allowing for their development in specified limited • Could frustrate delivery of circumstances. housing target • Front gardens are addressed in the policy • Front garden parking can cause visual damage

Policy DM20 Development Adjacent to Waterways (NB this became Policy DM22 in the Publication Version)

• Should refer to historic • Historic environment is addressed in other environment policies. • Refer to visual amenity • Visual amenity issues are addressed in other policies.

Policy DM21 Transport Development Management (NB this became Policy DM23 in the Publication Version)

• Parking standards: • Parking standards consistent with National Planning Policy Framework and set at an o No evidence to justify appropriate level consistent with National Use Class B1 car Planning Policy Framework’s and Core parking standards Strategy’s aspirations for achieving sustainable o For Use Classes A3-A5, patterns of development. 1 space per 20sqm of net drinking / dining area • 1 space per 20sqm of drinking / dining area fails to recognise the considered to be appropriate standard for non- diversity of uses and city centre locations. Approach to parking in appropriate locations for city centre is addressed through Bristol Central these uses. Maximum Area Plan. should be 0 for city centre locations through to the more conventional 1 space / 5sqm net elsewhere with discretion for applicants to justify their proposals • Parking part of the policy • There may be circumstances where tree cover should promote provision of over car-parking facilities not suitable. Policy tree cover over car-parking states provision of parking should be integral areas to development. This means that development proposals will be required to consider all relevant development plan policies. This will include policies which address tree-related issues such as Core Strategy policy BCS9 and Development Management policy DM15. • Second part of criterion iv. • Provision of facilities for cyclists criterion of the policy wording should applies to major non-residential schemes (i.e.

- 116 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed make clear that the >1,000 sqm). Considered that major retail provision of facilities for development could generate a relatively high cyclists is only applicable to number of staff. Therefore considered commercial and office reasonable to expect cycling facilities to be development rather than provided for this type of development as would retail help encourage sustainable forms of commuting.

Policy DM22 Transport Schemes (NB this became Policy DM24 in the Publication Version)

• Re proposed Bus Rapid • Addressed by location of proposed stadium Transit alignment shown on site being labelled on the Policies Map. proposals map running along the southern boundary of the proposed Bristol City Football Club stadium, logical to highlight the stadium and its enabling development on the Draft Proposals Map

Policy DM23 Greenways (NB this became Policy DM25 in the Publication Version)

• Clarification sought on third • Clarification on third bullet addressed in bullet point of policy: amended policy with use of the word ‘adjacent’ rather than ‘close proximity’, and addition of o meaning of 'close ‘where possible’ in the third criterion. proximity to greenway network' is • Issue of tree-lined Greenways considered to vague be adequately addressed by policy wording that new sections or spurs of Greenways o should be amended to include the term should be ‘appropriately…landscaped’. There 'where possible'. might also be circumstances where it would be Incorporation of third inappropriate for Greenways to be tree-lined, party land for this e.g. where highway safety or more general purpose would, for safety / security concerns are raised. example, be prohibited • Policy should explicitly refer to Greenways being tree- lined

Policy DM24 Local Character and Distinctiveness (NB this became Policy DM26 in the Publication Version)

• Provide stronger protection • Added additional policy text that protects for character buildings and character buildings and structures and seeks other historic features such the reuse of materials from any whose

- 117 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed as pavings and walls. demolition is accepted. • Clarify how the city centre • Added explanatory text to clarify role of city context study will be used to centre context study. influence use of policy. • The term “appropriately” refers to the need to • Define “appropriately”. make a judgement and what is appropriate will by necessity vary according to the site. This is • Under ‘Specific reflected by para.2.26.4. Development Types’ provide flexibility for • In conjunction with the rest of the policy and applicants to justify their the explanatory text, ‘Specific Development approach rather than Types’ is considered to provide sufficient provide preclude certain flexibility to support a range of design types of response. responses. • Insist on design & access • Application Information section sets out that statements addressing each Design and Access Statements should refer to policy criterion. the policy criteria. • Protect shopfronts and • Design principles for shopfronts are covered by address poor quality policy DM29 for new buildings and, through a shopfronts through cross-reference to DM29, DM30 for existing sympathetic reinstatement. buildings. • Consider specific section on • Tall buildings are covered by existing adopted tall buildings. guidance in SPD1 and may receive further coverage in the Central Area Plan. • Consider encouraging design codes. • Design codes are encouraged by Core Strategy policy BCS21.

Policy DM25 Layout and Form (NB this became Policy DM27 in the Publication Version)

• Requirement not to • Changed policy to say “where such potential prejudice potential of may reasonably exist”. adjoining sites could unduly • Clarified that all criteria apply. restrict development. Only apply where potential may • The distinction between the public and private reasonably exist. realm is covered by criterion (i) under “Blocks and Plots”. • Unclear whether all applications need to meet • The benefits of green infrastructure and green all criteria. infrastructure principles are covered by Core Strategy policy BCS9 and policies DM15-22. • There is no requirement to distinguish clearly between • The impact of development on views is public and private realms. covered by policy DM26. • Under landscaping refer to more of the benefits of green infrastructure and consider the impact on views.

- 118 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed

Policy DM26 Public Realm (NB this became Policy DM28 in the Publication Version)

• Sustainable drainage • Clarified that the requirement to integrate systems should only be SUDS, natural and historic features and required if they are planting into the design of the public realm only appropriate to the size and applies to schemes where these are proposed design of the public realm in or required by other policies to be provided / the development. retained. • Remove “any” from • A requirement to preserve pavement lines reference to integrating would reduce opportunities for innovation and planting. would not prevent changes to the road layout carried out by the highway authority under • Policy should preserve permitted development. pavement lines. • Appropriate tree planting as part of landscape • Add a requirement for trees design is covered by policy DM27. in car parking. • The need to create of links to greenways and • Require links to footway / other walking / cycle routes where possible is cycleway / greenway covered by policy DM25 and the requirement network to be created in policy DM27 for development to create a where possible. well-defined and inter-connected network of • Policy is complex and streets and spaces. prescriptive but imprecise. • Policy includes a degree of flexibility to allow balanced judgements to be made. To make it more precise would increase prescription.

Policy DM27 Design of New Buildings (NB this became Policy DM29 in the Publication Version)

• Presumption against single • Dual aspect is sought “where possible” so aspect development incorporates a degree of flexibility. The conflicts with need to make reference to dual aspect balances efficient use efficient use of land. of land with the need for a quality living environment. • Requirements for shopfronts to have regard to • The policy does not prescribe a particular host building and street design of shopfront and would permit scene will stifle innovation. innovative solutions if well designed with respect to their context. • Policy should address the energy efficiency of new • Energy efficiency and renewables in new buildings and the impact of buildings are covered by policies BCS13-15 of development on existing the Core Strategy. renewables e.g. by • Policy DM27 requires new development to overshadowing. enable existing development to achieve • Policy is repetitive and appropriate levels of daylight. This requirement prescriptive. Provide more could be used to address the overshadowing general encouragement to of existing renewables. create fine contemporary • Policy does not prescribe architectural styles or

- 119 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed architecture. tastes and would support fine contemporary architecture.

Policy DM28 Alterations to Existing Buildings (NB this became Policy DM30 in the Publication Version)

• Encourage retention and • Criterion (ii) and para.2.30.5 cover the reinstatement of traditional retention of traditional features where known. architectural details, In most cases it would not be practical for including those that come to planning control to protect details that come to light during development. light during the development once permission has been granted. • Policy has too much emphasis on the retention • Para.2.30.4 supports significant change to of traditional architectural poorer quality buildings. Added text features. Encourage encouraging innovative solutions to good innovative design solutions. quality existing buildings where they would be of exceptional design quality. • Refer specifically to the traditional features of pubs. • Policy DM6 covers pubs. • Encourage removal of • Removing small-scale accretions would count small-scale accretions. positively in assessing a scheme against the policy. • Resist roof gardens. • The impact of roof gardens on privacy will be • Address environmental addressed case by case through general issues such as the consideration of amenity. presence of protected species before permitting • The council has a legal duty to consider alterations. protected species in the planning process. They do not need to be addressed by the policy.

Policy DM29 Heritage Assets (NB this became Policy DM31 in the Publication Version)

• Reflect the potential • Added references to the economy and contribution of heritage regeneration to introductory text. assets to the economy. • Added clarity about relationship with • Clarify how policy works conservation area character appraisals and with conservation area policies DM26-30 to introductory text. character appraisals. • Changed (i) from “preservation” to • Add “conservation” to (i) to “conservation”. allow change necessary for • Added clarification to policy that low impact continued life not just energy efficiency measures and renewables preservation in aspic. should be prioritised over invasive measures. • Energy efficiency and • More detailed policies are not considered to be renewables should not be at required as policy DM31 will be used in the expense of heritage. conjunction with policies DM26-30, which • Provide more detailed provide considerable detail. policies for conservation • What constitutes heritage is not explained in

- 120 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed areas and listed buildings. exhaustive detail as applicants are required to demonstrate a thorough understanding of the • Provide more explanation of significance of the asset themselves. The what heritage is e.g. council will assess this understanding with cobbles, ironwork etc. respect to policy DM31 and relevant national • It is not appropriate to seek policy/guidance. to protect any building that • The council’s local listing web pages have now any individual considers been launched and provide details of the local may have merit before listing process. details of the local list process are available.

Policy DM30 Recycling and Refuse Provision in New Development (NB this became Policy DM32 in the Publication Version)

• More guidance needed on • The council does not have a capacity trade waste bins. Should requirement for trade waste but an appropriate not be stored on level of off-street provision is sought by the pavements. policy. • Policy fails to provide any • The explanatory text sets out capacity clarity on level of storage standards for housing, allows for changing required. Should reference collection regimes and makes clear cross- a frequently revised practice references to an up-to-date guidance note. note.

Policy DM31 Pollution Control, Air Quality and Water Quality (NB this became Policy DM33 in the Publication Version)

• Identify AQMAs in word and • Information on AQMAs and the Water plan form. Framework Directive is readily available elsewhere. • Clarify extent of waterways covered by Water • Tree planting is not given undue prominence Framework Directive. as it is unlikely to mitigate specific identifiable impacts, but could form part of a wider • Recognise the potential package of mitigation particularly under criteria contribution of tree planting. (i) and (v). • Add Core Strategy policy • BCS9 not added, as a number of other policies BCS9 to Policy Links. could also be relevant but BCS23 is the key policy.

Policy DM32 Contaminated Land (NB this became Policy DM34 in the Publication Version)

• None raised. N/A

Policy DM33 Noise Mitigation (NB this became Policy DM35 in the Publication Version)

• Provide greater clarity and • Explanatory text has been changed to set out consistency on the use of the information that should be submitted with

- 121 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed noise limiting conditions. applications, levels of noise that will be acceptable for housing and confirmation that • May not always be mitigation measures will be required. appropriate to require a noise assessment e.g. in • In the city centre it will still be appropriate to city centre where residents assess environmental noise and seek an could be expected to appropriate living environment within new tolerate a higher level of development. noise than usual. • BCS9 not added, as a number of other policies • Add Core Strategy policy could also be relevant but BCS23 is the key BCS9 to Policy Links. policy.

Policy DM34 Telecommunications (NB this became Policy DM36 in the Publication Version)

• Not clear whether one or all • Clarified that development must satisfy all criteria need to be satisfied. criteria. • Refer to Core Strategy • Other policies including BCS9 will apply where policy BCS9 and other DM relevant without additional cross-referencing. policies to prevent loss of green infrastructure for masts.

Policy DM35 Unstable Land (NB this became Policy DM37 in the Publication Version)

• Known areas of unstable • Not appropriate as unstable land is not a land should be shown on planning designation. Information is available Proposals Map elsewhere.

Policy DM36 Minerals Safeguarding Areas (NB this became Policy DM38 in the Publication Version)

• Entire resource area should • The purpose of mineral safeguarding areas is be shown and safeguarded. to avoid needless sterilisation by non-mineral Prior extraction of surface resources. The majority of the identified coal coal resources can easily resource area in Bristol is developed land and take place without undue is therefore already sterilised. The identified harm to residential amenity. safeguarding area is undeveloped land in the Green Belt.

Policy DM37 Sewage Treatment Works (NB this became Policy DM39 in the Publication Version)

• Cross references sought • All relevant policies are applicable to development

- 122 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Suggested development management policies Additional development management policies suggested by respondents to the Preferred Approach Document and how they were addressed in the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies.

Additional development How they were addressed management policy suggested

Policy promoting wider It is considered that this issue would more community use of existing appropriately be addressed by education providers and new sports facilities at rather than through a development plan policy. schools

Policy stating how the Policy included in Site Allocations and Development Government’s commitment Management Policies (DM1 Presumption in favour of to the presumption in favour sustainable development). of sustainable development (National Planning Policy Framework, para 15) will be dealt with

- 123 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Site allocations Summary of main issues raised on site allocations by respondents to the Preferred Approach Document and how they were addressed in the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies.

Main issues raised How they were addressed

BSA0102 Land at Lawrence Weston Campus of City of Bristol College, Lawrence Weston Preferred Option: Mixed-use (housing, community use and office)

• Delivery of office use • Office and supermarket use: questioned due to viability Addressed by amended allocation in Publication Version: retail added, office • Supermarket should be removed. included subject to need to consider impact on • A housing, community use and retail Ridingleaze shops allocation is proposed in the Publication Version. This is because the site is no longer • Lack of evidence to justify required by the City of Bristol College and loss of playing field the playing field is no longer required by the Gateway School. It is also in a sustainable location for mixed-use development being close to Ridingleaze District Centre and close to shops and public transport stops on Long Cross reflecting Core Strategy policy BCS3. An element of retail development is considered appropriate as site is located adjacent to Ridingleaze District Centre.

BSA0103 Land to the west and south-west of Deering Close, Lawrence Weston Preferred Option: Mixed-use (housing and open space)

• Loss of open space • A housing allocation is proposed in the Publication Version. This is because the site • Impacts on nature is underused, has a residential context, is in conservation, trees and the a sustainable location close to shops and green corridor extending from services in Ridingleaze District Centre and the gardens of the properties will contribute to meeting the Core Strategy on Rockwell Avenue target of providing new homes. • Unsuitability of access from • Open space: Fernhill Lane Addressed by ‘development consideration’ in • Difficult topography will Publication Version which ensures that impact viability of undeveloped parts of the site should be development given suitable landscape treatment. • Nature conservation and green corridor: Addressed by ‘development consideration’ in Preferred Approach Document regarding need for development to be informed by an ecological survey and make provision for mitigation measures, where appropriate. • Trees:

- 124 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed New development will be expected to retain important green infrastructure assets such as trees and incorporate new and/or enhanced green infrastructure in line with Core Strategy policy BCS9. • Access: Addressed through Development Management policy DM23. This will require a Transport Assessment to be submitted alongside a planning application where development is likely to have a significant traffic impact. This will enable the council to assess impacts of proposals and identify any necessary mitigation measures. • Topography: Addressed in ‘development consideration’ which recognises parts of the site are likely to be undevelopable.

BSA0104 Sea Mills Infant School, Sea Mills Preferred Option: Mixed-use (housing and open space)

• Entire site should become a • A housing and children’s play area allocation traditional park is proposed in the Publication Version. This is because the site is not required for use as • Impact on trees and a school and has a residential context. It is Conservation Area also in a relatively sustainable location, • Viability of developing the site approximately 500m from the local shops on given gradient and poor Shirehampton Road and close to bus stops drainage on Sylvan Way and Westbury Lane. It will also provide children’s play space in the Sea Mills area, reflecting the aspirations of the Park Improvement Plan for Avonmouth and Kingsweston. It will also contribute to meeting the Core Strategy target of providing new homes. • Trees: New development will be expected to retain important green infrastructure assets such as trees and incorporate new and/or enhanced green infrastructure in line with Core Strategy policy BCS9. • Conservation Area: Addressed by ‘development consideration’ in Preferred Approach Document.

BSA0107 Land to the rear of Ridingleaze, Lawrence Weston Preferred Option: Housing

• Traffic issues, e.g. impact on • Traffic:

- 125 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed parking provision and access Addressed through Development via Ottery Close Management policy DM23. This will require a Transport Assessment to be submitted alongside a planning application where development is likely to have a significant traffic impact. This will enable the council to assess impacts of proposals and identify any necessary mitigation measures.

BSA0203 Former Dunmail Primary School, Southmead Preferred Option: Housing

• Loss of open space important • A housing allocation is proposed in the for recreation and nature Publication Version. This is because the site conservation, e.g. trees and is not required for use as a school, has a hedgerows residential context, and reflects the aspirations of Core Strategy Policy BCS3 to • Negative impacts on health make more efficient use of underused land. It and wellbeing is in a relatively sustainable location • Traffic issues, e.g. approximately 350m from the shops and congestion, parking and services of Arnside Road District Centre and pollution close to bus stops / routes on Pen Park Road. It will also contribute to meeting the • Increased pressure on Core Strategy target of providing new already stretched community homes. facilities • Nature conservation / brownfield flora: • Important habitat for Addressed by ‘development considerations’ brownfield flora where the in Preferred Approach Document. school has been demolished - this area should be retained • Traffic: Addressed through Development Management policy DM23. This will require a Transport Assessment to be submitted alongside a planning application where development is likely to have a significant traffic impact. This will enable the council to assess impacts of proposals and identify any necessary mitigation measures. • Community facilities: Addressed by Core Strategy policy BCS11.

BSA0204 Land At Brentry Lane, Brentry Preferred Option: Housing

• Traffic issues, e.g. congestion • Traffic: and pollution Addressed through Development Management policy DM23. This will require a • Loss of land important for Transport Assessment to be submitted nature conservation alongside a planning application where • Visual impact on historic development is likely to have a significant character of area traffic impact. This will enable the council to

- 126 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed • Should be a mix of open assess impacts of proposals and identify any space and housing to necessary mitigation measures. maintain the wildlife corridor • Nature conservation / wildlife corridor: Addressed by ‘development considerations’ in Preferred Approach Document. • Historic character: Addressed by ‘development considerations’ in Preferred Approach Document.

BSA0211 Land to rear of Redshelf Walk, Brentry Preferred Option: Housing

• None N/A

BSA0212 19-21 Pen Park Road, Southmead Preferred Option: Mixed use (housing and business)

• None N/A

BSA0213 Richeson Walk garage site, Henbury Preferred Option: Housing

• None N/A

BSA0301 Land at SITA Depot on the corner of Avon Way and Sea Mills Lane, Stoke Bishop Preferred Option: Housing

• Environment Agency • Site no longer considered appropriate to be commented that majority of allocated because it has been identified by site is in Flood Zone 2 (flood the council for ongoing use as a parks depot. zone 3 with climate change scenario) and a main river culvert runs through its middle from west to east. This along with need for appropriate easement may have significant implications on amount of development that can be delivered.

BSA0302 Coombe House Elderly Persons' Home, Westbury-on-Trym Preferred Option: Housing (pending the outcome of the review of the Residential Futures Programme)

• Essential that buffer to the • Considered appropriate to maintain adjacent Site of Nature ‘development consideration’ so that a buffer Conservation Interest is may be needed. The ecological survey will included in ‘development inform the mitigation measures that will be consideration’. most appropriate.

- 127 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed

BSA0402 Bonnington Walk former allotments site, Lockleaze Preferred Option: Housing

• Negative impact on nature • A housing allocation is proposed in the conservation, open space, Publication Version. This is because the site health and wellbeing, and has a largely residential context and is in a congestion. sustainable location approximately 350m from both Lockleaze (Gainsbourough • Close proximity of overhead Square) and Filton Avenue Local Centres power lines may have and. It is also close to bus stops / routes on possible adverse health Wordsworth Road and Bonnington Walk and impacts adjacent to the new Concorde Way cycle • Inadequacy of open spaces, route. It also reflects the aspirations of Core schools and shopping Strategy policy BCS3 which seeks to make facilities in the area to serve more efficient use of underused land. It will additional residents also contribute to meeting the Core Strategy target of providing new homes. • Uncertainty regarding inclusion of northern section • Nature conservation and open space: of site within the site Addressed by boundary of site being boundary - understand this to reduced for the Preferred Approach be a Site of Nature Document. A strip of land adjacent to railway Conservation Interest. is proposed for designation as Important Open Space, while the northern section would be designated as a Site of Nature Conservation Interest. • Traffic / transport: Addressed through Development Management policy DM23. This will require a Transport Assessment to be submitted alongside a planning application where development is likely to have a significant traffic impact. This will enable the council to assess impacts of proposals and identify any necessary mitigation measures. • Overhead power lines: Addressed by ‘development consideration’ included in Preferred Approach Document. • Community facilities: Addressed by Core Strategy policy BCS11.

BSA0403 Romney House and Lockleaze School, Lockleaze Preferred Option: Housing (subject to not being required for future school or office use)

• Lack of evidence to justify • A housing allocation is proposed in the loss of playing field Publication Version. This is because the site has a largely residential context, reflects the • Traffic issues, e.g. inadequate aspirations of Core Strategy Policy BCS3 road links and poor quality and will contribute to meeting the Core

- 128 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed road surface Strategy target for providing new homes. • Traffic / transport: Addressed through Development Management policy DM23. This will require a Transport Assessment to be submitted alongside a planning application where development is likely to have a significant traffic impact. This will enable the council to assess impacts of proposals and identify any necessary mitigation measures.

BSA0404 BT Depot, Filton Road, Horfield Preferred Option: Housing

None raised N/A

BSA0405 Former Romney Avenue Junior School, Lockleaze Preferred Option: Housing (subject to not being required for future school use)

• Traffic issues, e.g. inadequate • A community use (school) allocation is road links and poor quality proposed for the Publication Version as the road surface site has been identified as having potential to meet education need in the local community. • Site should be retained for education use

BSA0407 Land to rear of Shaldon Road, Lockleaze Preferred Option: Housing

• Loss of open space • A housing allocation is proposed in the Publication Version. This is because the site • Traffic issues, e.g. access, has a largely residential context, is parking, noise and poor underused therefore represents a good use quality road surface of land in line with Core Strategy Policy • Buffer should be incorporated BCS20, is in a relatively sustainable location in order to reduce impact of close to shops and services and will development on adjacent Site contribute to meeting the Core Strategy of Nature Conservation target for providing new homes. Interest - strengthen wording • Traffic / transport: of relevant development Addressed through Development consideration Management policy DM23. This will require a Transport Assessment to be submitted alongside a planning application where development is likely to have a significant traffic impact. This will enable the council to assess impacts of proposals and identify any necessary mitigation measures. • Buffer: Considered appropriate to maintain ‘development consideration’ so that a buffer may be needed. The ecological survey will

- 129 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed inform the mitigation measures that will be most appropriate.

BSA0409 Land at Gainsborough Square, Lockleaze Preferred Option: Mixed-use (housing, business, community use and retail)

• Traffic issues, e.g. inadequate • Traffic / transport: road links and poor quality Addressed through Development road surface Management policy DM23. This will require a Transport Assessment to be submitted alongside a planning application where development is likely to have a significant traffic impact. This will enable the council to assess impacts of proposals and identify any necessary mitigation measures.

BSA0410 St. Peter's Elderly Persons' Home, Horfield Preferred Option: Housing (pending the outcome of the review of the Residential Futures Programme)

• Inadequate community • Community facilities: facilities, shops and public Addressed by Core Strategy policy BCS11. transport infrastructure in area • Traffic / transport: to support new residents Addressed through Development Management policy DM23. This will require a Transport Assessment to be submitted alongside a planning application where development is likely to have a significant traffic impact. This will enable the council to assess impacts of proposals and identify any necessary mitigation measures.

BSA0501 Blackberry Hill Hospital, Manor Road, Fishponds Preferred Option: Mixed-use (housing, business and institutional use)

• Loss of open space known as • A housing with mixed-uses allocation is the 'Laundry Field' important proposed in the Publication Version. This is for recreation, visual amenity because the site is no longer needed for and nature conservation secondary health care provision, has a largely residential context, is in a relatively • Transport / traffic impacts, sustainable location close to Fishponds e.g. congestion, highway Town Centre and will contribute to meeting safety, pollution and parking the Core Strategy target for providing new pressure. homes. A proportion of mixed-use • Landowner expressed development including business use would concern that the requirement also be acceptable given the relatively large for a masterplan which size of the site, the historic character and included BSA0502 and 0503 internal layout of the buildings and the desire would add constraints in to preserve local employment opportunities. terms of the differing land • Open space: ownerships and availability A ‘development consideration’ has been

- 130 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed • Landowner expressed added to the Publication Version which will concern that development ensure development is designed to respect consideration requiring the outlook of the adjacent College Court retention of listed buildings properties and the openness of their may lead to retention of boundary. It is considered that this has the buildings and/or structures potential to offer some mitigation in response which do not enhance historic to concerns expressed about the loss of value of site. open space. • Two respondents were • Traffic / transport: concerned that the privately Addressed through Development owned Manor Gardens House Management policy DM23. This will require a was included in site boundary. Transport Assessment to be submitted alongside a planning application where development is likely to have a significant traffic impact. This will enable the council to assess impacts of proposals and identify any necessary mitigation measures. • Masterplan: ’Development consideration’ amended in Publication Version so that the masterplan should only consider the development of the adjoining allocation sites rather than having to be produced in conjunction with them. • Listed buildings: ’Development consideration’ amended in Publication Version so that the masterplan for the site should identify the listed builings and structures and other heritage assets to be retained and enhanced. • Privately owned properties: Removed from site allocation boundary in Publication Version.

BSA0502 Glenside Campus, Blackberry Hill, Fishponds Preferred Option: Mixed-use (housing, business and institutional use)

• Traffic / transport issues, e.g. • Traffic / transport: congestion, noise and Addressed through Development highway safety Management policy DM23. This will require a Transport Assessment to be submitted • Be sympathetic to listed alongside a planning application where buildings on site and the development is likely to have a significant character of Conservation traffic impact. This will enable the council to Area assess impacts of proposals and identify any • Impact on overstretched necessary mitigation measures. community facilities, nature • Listed buildings / Conservation Area / conservation, trees and landscape character: landscape character Addressed by ‘development considerations’ regarding Conservation Area, the historic

- 131 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed environment and listed buildings. • Nature conservation: Addressed by ‘development considerations’ regarding need for ecological survey and maintaining or strengthening the Wildlife Network. • Trees: Addressed by ‘development consideration’ regarding Tree Preservation Orders.

BSA0503 St Matthias Campus, College Road, Fishponds Preferred Option: Mixed-use (housing, business and institutional use)

• Traffic / transport issues, e.g. • Traffic / transport: congestion, parking and Addressed through Development narrow access Management policy DM23. This will require a Transport Assessment to be submitted • Impact on landscape alongside a planning application where character and trees development is likely to have a significant • Pressure on already stretched traffic impact. This will enable the council to community facilities assess impacts of proposals and identify any necessary mitigation measures. • Landowner considered masterplan would add • Landscape character and trees: constraints in terms of the Addressed by ‘development considerations’ differing land ownerships and regarding Tree Preservation Orders, availability, which could delay Conservation Area, the historic environment development. and listed buildings. • Extend site boundary to • Community facilities: include adjacent playing field Addressed by Core Strategy policy BCS11. in order to reflect the current • Masterplan: ownership. ’Development consideration’ amended in • Landowner expressed Publication Version so that the masterplan concern regarding reference should only consider the development of the to buildings of merit, noting adjoining allocation sites rather than having that the Conservation Audit to be produced in conjunction with them. records the non-listed • Site boundary: buildings as being of low merit Amended in Publication Version to include • Landowner objected to mixed- adjacent playing field. use nature of allocation, • Buildings of merit: considering that residential- ’Development consideration’ amended in led development is the only Publication Version so that the masterplan viable and feasible use for the for the site should identify the listed builings site and structures and other heritage assets to • Landowner considered it was be retained and enhanced. unnecessarily prescriptive to • Mixed-use allocation: require retention of pedestrian Allocation amended in Publication to and cycle routes through site ‘Housing with mixed-uses’. A proportion of mixed-use development including business

- 132 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed use would be acceptable given the relatively large size of the site, the historic character and internal layout of the buildings and the desire to preserve local employment opportunities. • Pedestrian and cycle routes: Development consideration amended in Publication Version so that development should create suitable pedestrian and cycle routes through the site to connect to the surrounding area.

BSA0504 Playing Fields, Brook Road, Crofts End / Rose Green Preferred Option: Housing

• Lack of evidence to justify • A housing allocation is proposed in the loss of playing field Publication Version. This is because the site is currently unused open space and has a residential context. It is also in a relatively sustainable location close to the bus stops on Brook Road and Whitehall Road and will contribute to meeting the Core Strategy target of providing new homes. In addition, planning permission for 80 dwellings has been granted on the site, subject to the signing of a Section 106 Agreement (ref. 11/01729/F).

BSA0506 Open Space rear of Abingdon Road and Honiton Road, Mayfield Park, nr Fishponds Preferred Option: Community use (school)

• Loss of open space important • A community use (school) allocation is for recreation – lack of proposed for the Publication Version as the evidence to justify loss site has been identified as having potential to meet education need in the local community. • Traffic congestion • Land contamination and land instability may hinder development of site

BSA0508 Part of Playing Field south of Rose Green Close, Rose Green / Clay Hill Preferred Option: Housing

• Development should include • This site is no longer considered appropriate open space to be used by the to be allocated because of uncertainty community, and a buffer zone regarding the likelihood of delivery given and green link to Rose Green access constraints. Road

- 133 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed

BSA0511 Begbrook Drive Open Space, Broomhill / Frenchay Preferred Option: Community use (school)

None raised N/A

BSA0512 Gleeson House sheltered accommodation, Dodisham Walk, Fishponds Preferred Option: Housing

• Site should be used for older • Site is no longer required to provide care for people’s housing elderly people.

BSA0513 Garage site, Woodland Way, Chester Park / Hillfields Preferred Option: Housing

• Should be allocated for • A housing allocation is proposed in the mixed-use development Publication Version. This is because the site is currently underused, has a largely residential context, is in a relatively sustainable location approximately 400m from Lodge Causeway District Centre and close to bus routes on Lodge Causeway, Thicket Avenue, Charlton Road, Hillfields Avenue and Henshaw Road and will contribute to meeting the Core Strategy target of providing new homes.

BSA0515 Graphic Packaging, Filwood Road, Fishponds Preferred Option: Mixed-use (housing and business)

None raised N/A

BSA0516 Former Parnall’s Works site, west of Filwood Road / north of Goodneston Road, Fishponds Preferred Option: Mixed-use (including housing, business and community use)

None raised N/A

BSA0801 Morley/Ashley/Southey Street Works, St Werburgh’s Preferred Option: Mixed-use (housing and light industry)

• Landowner questioned • Employment space: feasibility of providing a Considered appropriate to maintain ‘significant proportion’ of ‘development consideration’ as reflects employment space. An aspirations of Core Strategy policy BCS3 alternative of 20,000 square which seeks to retain employment uses; the feet of small flexible site was previously in employment use. workspace was promoted. • Housing capacity: • Landowner considered 100 homes considered a reasonable housing capacity given for the estimate of capacity. Final capacity to be site should be 115. determined through planning application

- 134 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed • Environment Agency process. commented that the SFRA • Flood risk: Level 2 suggests site would Addressed in council’s Flood Risk Topic not be able to accommodate Paper. 100 dwellings outside the Flood Zone 3 climate change area.

BSA0802 Shiner Ltd Builders Merchants, Church Road, Redfield Preferred Option: Mixed-use (housing and business)

• Culverted Wain Brook on the • It does not appear that the culvert runs site along Church Road could through the site. This issue is addressed by be de-culverted as part of the Development Management policy DM22 development which states that new development should, where feasible and viable, open culverted, piped or covered waterways.

BSA0803 Land at Junction of Church Road and Heber Street, Redfield Preferred Option: Business

None raised N/A

BSA0901 Marling Road – Stables and Land, St George Preferred Option: Community use (school)

• Use of site as play area for Air • A community use (school) allocation is Balloon School is preferable proposed in the Publication Version. This is to school use because the site has been identified as having potential to meet education need in the local community.

BSA0904 Part of Soaphouse Industrial Estate, Howard Street, Whitehall / St George Preferred Option: Housing

• None raised • A certificate of lawfulness for car vehicle repairs including an MOT bay was granted on this site in 2011. The delivery of this allocation is therefore questionable and the site is consequently not proposed for allocation.

BSA0906 Car Sales site at 62–74 Bell Hill Road, St George Preferred Option: Housing

• ‘Development consideration’ • Development consideration removed from requiring comprehensive Publication Version. development with the adjacent site BSA0901 should be removed in light of the school use now proposed on

- 135 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed BSA0901.

BSA0907 47–49 Summerhill Road, St George Preferred Option: Housing

• Preferable to allocate site for • A housing allocation is proposed in the housing and retail; ideal for Publication Version. This is because the site elderly respondents in has a largely residential context, is in a adjacent Butler House relatively sustainable location close to local shops, services and bus stops on Clouds Hill Road and Summerhill Road and will contribute to meeting the Core Strategy target of providing new homes.

BSA0909 118 Blackswarth Road, Redfield Preferred Option: Housing

• Concerns about access and • A housing allocation is proposed in the negative impact on local Publication Version. This is because the site employment given recent adjoins the boundary of St George (Church opening of new business on Road) Town Centre therefore reflects Core site Strategy policies BCS7 and BCS20, which directs higher density housing to locations in and close to Bristol's network of centres. It is also close to bus stops on Church Road and will contribute to meeting the Core Strategy target of providing new homes. • Access: Addressed through Development Management policy DM23. This will require a Transport Assessment to be submitted alongside a planning application where development is likely to have a significant traffic impact. This will enable the council to assess impacts of proposals and identify any necessary mitigation measures.

BSA1001 Alderman Moore’s former allotments Preferred Option: Housing

• To support allocation, • Flood risk issue addressed in council’s Flood Environment Agency sought Risk Topic Paper. housing to be sequentially • Improving the habitat of Colliter’s Brook is located in Flood Zone 1. addressed by ‘development consideration’ Opportunities to improve the which expects new development to make habitat of Colliter’s Brook provision for ecological mitigation measures, should be sought through which could include habitat improvements. site’s redevelopment

BSA1002 Land at and adjacent to Malago House, Bedminster Road Preferred Option: Mixed-use: Housing and light industry

- 136 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed

• Environment Agency noted • Flood risk issue addressed in council’s Flood site falls wholly within Flood Risk Position Paper. Zone 2 and sought • Housing capacity: reassurance housing could 90 homes considered to be reasonable pass sequential test estimation. • Landowner considered estimated figure of 90 homes might be conservative

BSA1005 East Street / Dalby Avenue / Stafford Street Preferred Option: Mixed-use: Housing, office and retail

None N/a

BSA1006 Hayleigh Elderly Persons Homes and adjacent club, Myrtle Street Preferred Option: Mixed-use: Housing, offices and community uses)

• Estimated number of homes Site was subject to council’s Residential Futures (30) too high; insufficient process which investigated the future approach social infrastructure to support to the provision of residential services for older it. people. On 26 July 2012 Cabinet decided that Hayleigh Elderly Persons’ Home should be

closed. The council’s draft School Organisation Strategy 2012-2016 identified the site as suitable for a new two-form entry Primary School. It is therefore proposed to be allocated in the Publication Version for ‘Community use (school)’.

BSA1007 Garages and workshop, Cooperage Lane Preferred Option: Housing and business

None N/a

BSA1008 Granby House, St John’s Road Preferred Option: Housing

None N/a

BSA1009 206-208 North Street and land to rear Preferred Option: Mixed-use: Housing, office and retail

• Site should be planned in Site not included in Publication Version due to conjunction with the adjacent significant uncertainty regarding its delivery as lock-up garages and site redevelopment no longer being pursued by a BSA1006 developer. • Estimated number of homes (15) too high as there is insufficient social infrastructure to support it

- 137 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed

BSA1010 Former Granada / Gala Bingo Club, North Street and land to rear Preferred Option: Mixed-use: Housing and small-scale office and retail

None raised N/a

BSA1011 Site adjacent to Holy Cross Church, Dean Lane Preferred Option: Housing

• Estimated number of homes • Housing capacity: (10) extremely high given 10 homes considered to be reasonable small size of site estimation. • Highways strategy needed to • Highway strategy: resolve the uses of Dean Addressed through Development Lane. Management policy DM23. This will require Transport Assessment to be submitted alongside a planning application where development is likely to have significant traffic impact.

BSA1012 Former petrol filling station, Coronation Road Preferred Option: Housing

• Estimated number of homes • 10 homes considered to be reasonable (10) too high estimation.

BSA1103 Red Lion Works, Greenleaze Road/Wells Road, Knowle Park Preferred Option: Housing

None raised N/A

BSA1104 Retail shops and car parking, Wells Road and Oxford Street, Totterdown Preferred Option: Mixed-use (housing, office and retail)

• Loss of open space important • This site is no longer considered appropriate for recreation and community to be allocated because of concerns events expressed about potential negative impacts and the site’s small size. Therefore, an • Traffic issues, e.g. parking allocation is not considered necessary. difficulties and congestion • Any development needs to be designed sensitively • Question delivery of office and retail • Loss of frontage to Oxford Street

BSA1105 Former Allotments, Bellevue Terrace, Totterdown Preferred Option: Housing

- 138 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed

None raised N/A

BSA1108 Land at Novers Hill, east of Hartcliffe Way and west of Novers Lane / Novers Hill Preferred Option: Housing

• Loss of open space important • A housing allocation is proposed in the for nature conservation; strip Publication Version as the Knowle West of land between site and sites Regeneration Framework process identified BSA1114 and BSA1119 this site as suitable for this use. insufficient in size to protect • Nature conservation: integrity of Site of Nature Addressed by ‘development considerations’ Conservation Interest regarding development being informed by an • Negative impacts on ecological survey and making provision for landscape character, visual mitigation measures. In addition, amenity, recreation and views development will be expected to maintain or to and from the site strengthen the integrity and connectivity of the Wildlife Network. • Transport / traffic issues, e.g. congestion, parking, narrow • Landscape character / views / visual amenity access and highway safety / sloping nature of site: Addressed by ‘development consideration’ • Sloping nature of the site and that development should be designed to possible subsidence call into reflect sloping nature and prominence of site. question appropriateness of allocation • Traffic: Addressed through Development • Landowner questioned need Management policy DM23. This will require a to consider part of site for Transport Assessment to be submitted education use. alongside a planning application where development is likely to have a significant traffic impact. This will enable the council to assess impacts of proposals and identify any necessary mitigation measures. • Education use: ’Development consideration’ regarding additional education use on part of the site is considered appropriate as the expansion of Greenfield Primary School is set out in the council’s draft School Organisation Strategy 2012-2016.

BSA1109 Land adjoining Hartcliffe Way and Hengrove Way, Inn’s Court Preferred Option: Housing

• Negative impact on land • A housing allocation is proposed in the important for nature Publication Version as the Knowle West conservation Regeneration Framework process identified this site as suitable for this use. • Varying site topography would make housing development • Nature conservation: Addressed by ‘development consideration’

- 139 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed difficult to deliver regarding development being informed by an ecological survey and making provision for mitigation measures, where approriate. In addition, development will be expected to maintain or strengthen the integrity and connectivity of the Wildlife Network.

BSA1110 The Hangar Site & Filwood Park, north of Hengrove Way Preferred Option: Mixed-use (housing, open space and business)

• Loss of land important for • A housing, open space and business nature conservation and open allocation is proposed in the Publication space / recreation. Provide Version as the Knowle West Regeneration green corridor through site Framework process identified this site as suitable for these uses. • Negative impacts on amenity of adjoining residents, e.g. • Nature conservation: views, light, privacy, traffic Addressed by ‘development consideration’ congestion and noise regarding development being informed by an ecological survey and making provision for • Landowner requested that mitigation measures, where approriate. In ‘development considerations’ addition, development will be expected to be amended to accord with maintain or strengthen the integrity and planning permission which connectivity of the Wildlife Network. permits up to 150 residential units and up to 8000 sqm of • Open space / recreation: employment floorspace. Allocation provides for retention of part of the existing open space. • Amenity impacts: Addressed by Core Strategy policy BCS21 and the design Development Management policies. • Planning permissions: ’Development consideration’ amended to reflect planning permission.

BSA1111 Kingswear, Torpoint Road and Marksbury Road College Site Preferred Option: Mixed-used (housing, open space, community use and business)

• Negative impacts on open • For the Publication Version, two sites were space, nature conservation created from the Preferred Approach and views Document’s BSA1111. BSA1111 in the Publication Version relates to only the • Landscape impact of any Marksbury Road College site. BSA1124 development on the site relates to the Kingswear Road, Torpoint needs to be addressed. The Road and Haldon Close part of the Preferred following new development Approach Document’s BSA1111. consideration should be

added: "Development In the Publication Version BSA1124 is should:…take account of the proposed to be allocated for Housing as the landscape character of the Knowle West Regeneration Framework

- 140 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed area, having regard to long process identified this site as suitable for this distance views and the use. prominence of the site" In the Publication Version BSA1111 is • Concern as part of site is a proposed to be allocated for community use Site of Nature Conservation (including school) and housing with business Interest. Compensation as the Knowle West Regeneration measures sought Framework process identified this site as • Question capacity of site to suitable for these uses. accommodate proposed • Open space: levels of housing Addressed by ‘development considerations’ • Retain Marksbury College in Publication Version for both BSA1111 and building for community and BSA1124 which seek to ensure new commercial use development provides improvements and / or access to adjoining areas of open space. • Landowner of part of site concerned at extent of open • Landscape impact: space envisaged including the Addressed by amended ‘development 3250sqm of allotment land consideration’ in Publication Version. This stated in development seeks to ensure that new development is considerations designed to respect the sloping nature and prominence of the site. • Nature conservation: Addressed by ‘development considerations’ in the Publication Version for both BSA1111 and BSA1124 regarding development being informed by an ecological survey and making provision for mitigation measures, where approriate. In addition, development will be expected to maintain or strengthen the integrity and connectivity of the Wildlife Network. • Housing capacity: Number of homes considered to be reasonable estimation. Final amount to be determined through planning application process. • Marksbury Road College building: Allocation for BSA1111 in Publication Version includes community and business use. • Amount of open space envisaged: Considered to be an appropriate amount.

BSA1112 Knowle West Health Park, Downton Road Preferred Option: Mixed-use (community use, open space, business and housing)

• More guidance needed to • Addressed by ‘development consideration’ ensure cumulative impact of regarding development being informed by an

- 141 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed development of this and the ecological survey and making provision for other sites in Knowle West mitigation measures, where appropriate. Regeneration Framework Area would be positive for wildlife

BSA1113 Land adjoining Airport Road between Creswicke Road and to the east of Ilminster Avenue Preferred Option: Housing

• Negative impacts on nature • A housing allocation is proposed in the conservation Publication Version as the Knowle West Regeneration Framework process identified • Environment Agency this site as suitable for this use. questioned whether the scale of development suggested on • Nature conservation / wildlife corridor: this site (and site BSA1117) Addressed by ‘development considerations’ could be achieved given regarding development being informed by an proximity of Brislington Brook ecological survey and making provision for and its associated flood risk mitigation measures, which would include an and wildlife corridor appropriate corridor / buffer between housing and Brislington Brook. • More guidance needed to ensure cumulative impact of • Flood risk: development of this and the Addressed by council’s Flood Risk Topic other sites in Knowle West Paper. Regeneration Framework Area would be positive for wildlife

BSA1114 Land at Novers Hill, adjacent to industrial units Preferred Option: Housing and light industry

• Loss of open space important • A housing and business allocation is for nature conservation; strip proposed in the Publication Version as the of land between this site and Knowle West Regeneration Framework sites BSA1108 and BSA1119 process identified this site as suitable for insufficient in size to protect these uses. integrity of Site of Nature • Nature conservation: Conservation Interest. Addressed by ‘development considerations’ • Negative impacts on regarding development being informed by an landscape character, visual ecological survey and making provision for amenity, recreation and views mitigation measures. In addition, to and from the site. development will be expected to maintain or strengthen the integrity and connectivity of • Transport / traffic issues, e.g. the Wildlife Network. congestion, parking, narrow access and highway safety • Landscape character / views / visual amenity / sloping nature of site: • Sloping nature of the site and Addressed by ‘development consideration’ possible subsidence call into that development should be designed to question appropriateness of reflect sloping nature and prominence of site. allocation

- 142 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed • Landowner did not agree with • Traffic: light industry part of Addressed through Development allocation; site inappropriate Management policy DM23. This will require a location for industry given Transport Assessment to be submitted topography and difficult HGV alongside a planning application where access. Employment element development is likely to have a significant could potentially render the traffic impact. This will enable the council to development of the site assess impacts of proposals and identify any unviable. necessary mitigation measures. • Light industry component of allocation: Allocation amended in Publication Version to ‘Housing and business’ to provide additional flexibility regarding the type of employment uses to be provided on this site.

BSA1115 Former Florence Brown school, west of Leinster Avenue Preferred Option: Housing

• Proposed road and cycle • Addressed by amended ‘development route through site could have consideration’ in Publication Version. negative impacts on the safety of the children (and their families) who attend the adjacent Children's Centre.

BSA1116 Open spaces either side of Inns Court Drive Preferred Option: Housing

None raised N/A

BSA1117 Land adjoining Airport Road between Creswicke Road and to the east of Ilminster Avenue Preferred Option: Housing

• Negative impacts on nature • A housing allocation is proposed in the conservation Publication Version as the Knowle West Regeneration Framework process identified • Environment Agency this site as suitable for this use. questioned whether the scale of development suggested on • Nature conservation / wildlife corridor: this site (and site BSA1113) Addressed by ‘development considerations’ could be achieved given regarding development being informed by an proximity of Brislington Brook ecological survey and making provision for and its associated flood risk mitigation measures, which would include an and wildlife corridor appropriate corridor / buffer between housing and Brislington Brook. • More guidance needed to ensure cumulative impact of • Flood risk: development of this and the Addressed by ‘development consideration’ other sites in Knowle West that development should be informed by a Regeneration Framework site-specific flood risk assessment. Area would be positive for

- 143 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed wildlife

BSA1118 Broad Plain House and associated land, Broadbury Road Preferred Option: Housing

• Question appropriateness of • A housing allocation is proposed in the allocation given site is being Publication Version as the Knowle West used as social club and Regeneration Framework process identified activity centre this site as suitable for this use.

BSA1119 Land to east of Hartcliffe Way, south of the Waste Depot Preferred Option: Industry and warehousing

• Negative impacts on nature • Addressed by ‘development consideration’ to conservation ensure development is informed by an ecological survey and makes provision for mitigation measures.

BSA1120 Land and buildings between 2 to 20 Filwood Broadway Preferred Option: Mixed-use (retail, business and housing)

• Supermarket needed on this • ‘Development consideration’ makes site to attract other much reference to development being expected to needed businesses such as include convenience retail, which could be a cobblers and dry cleaners supermarket.

BSA1121 Cloverdown Residential Care Home, Kenmare Road Preferred Option: Housing

None raised N/A

BSA1122 Sports court and former swimming pool site on the north-east corner of the Filwood Broadway and Creswicke Road junction Preferred Option: Mixed-use (business, retail and housing)

• Should be for housing only • A business, retail and housing allocation is proposed in the Publication Version as the • Design of site should be Knowle West Regeneration Framework informed by ecological process identified this site as suitable for assessment these uses.

BSA1123 Filwood Library and adjoining land, Filwood Broadway Preferred Option: Mixed-use (business, retail and housing)

• Mix of residential types should • A housing allocation is proposed in the be provided on site plus a Publication Version as the Knowle West safe play area for children Regeneration Framework process identified this site as suitable for this use.

• Housing mix: Addressed by Core Strategy policy BCS18.

- 144 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed

BSA1201 Land at Broom Hill, Brislington Preferred Option: Housing

• Loss of land important for • A housing allocation is proposed in the nature conservation, Publication Version as site is in a sustainable recreation / open space, location close to the supermarket and shops historic landscape character, of Broomhill Road / Fermain Avenue Local visual amenity, air quality, Centre, shops on the Brislington Retail Park, trees and food growing / community facilities, employment areas and allotments. public transport infrastructure, with a residential context to the north and west. It • Flood risk and drainage will also contribute to meeting the Core problems Strategy target of providing new homes. • Traffic and transport issues, • Nature conservation: e.g. access, highway safety, Addressed by amended ‘development congestion and lack of public consideration’ in Preferred Approach transport Document to ensure development makes • Proximity of overhead power provision for ecological mitigation measures. lines • Open space: • Additional strain on already Site boundary reduced in Preferred pressurised community Approach Document. Much of the open facilities space excluded from the allocation boundary will be designated as Important Open Space. • Landowner of majority of site High quality and prominent areas of natural / expressed concerns about: informal open space will also be provided as o Access: sought the re- an integral part of the site’s development. inclusion of area of This is in line with Core Strategy Policy land at the north-east BCS9 and the council’s Open Space corner of the site Standards. adjacent to the police • Historic landscape character: station which links the Addressed by amended ‘development site from Broomhill consideration’ in Preferred Approach Road. Document to ensure development makes They also thought provision for ecological mitigation measures. possible indicative These measures will include the retention of access route to the important veteran trees and mature site from School Road hedgerows. shown on the map as passing through • Visual amenity: allotments was not Addressed by Core Strategy policy BCS21. necessary. They • Air quality: considered access Addressed by Development Management could be achieved to policy on Air Quality. This will require an air the north of the quality assessment which will enable the allotments. council to assess any change in air quality o Important trees and resulting from the proposed development hedgerows: They and consider whether mitigation measures considered that the are necessary.

- 145 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed ‘development • Food growing / allotments: consideration’ which Addressed by amendment to site boundary sought to protect in Preferred Approach Document to remove important trees and the actively-used allotments. The allotments hedgerows could will now be safeguarded as Important Open constrain the site's Space. housing capacity. They suggested • Flooding and drainage: therefore that the Addressed by ‘development considerations’ development in Preferred Approach Document to ensure consideration should development is informed by a Flood Risk be amended to: Assessment, reduces flood risk to existing "Where appropriate, properties, provides improvements to retain or incorporate drainage infrastructure and incorporates important trees and Sustainable Drainage Systems. hedgerows within the • Traffic and transport: development". Addressed through Development o Housing capacity / Management policy DM23. This will require a density: They Transport Assessment to be submitted considered number of alongside a planning application where homes estimated for development is likely to have a significant this site (350) was too traffic impact. It will enable the council to high. They suggested assess impacts of proposals and identify any a capacity of between necessary mitigation measures. 189-216 dwellings was • Overhead power lines: more realistic based Addressed by ‘development consideration’ on their assessment of included in Preferred Approach Document. the site’s constraints and appropriate • Community facilities: density levels. Addressed by Core Strategy policy BCS11. • Landowner concerns: o Access: considered appropriate not to include area of land at the north-east corner of the site adjacent to the police station as the local Neighbourhood Partnership voted not to dispose of it as part of the Area Green Space Plan process. It is proposed to designate it as Important Open Space. Regarding the indicative access route through the allotments it is considered appropriate to maintain this as appropriate access and egress to the site is still to be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the council. o Important trees and hedgerows: ‘development consideration’ amended in Publication Version so

- 146 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed that the important trees and hedgerows to be retained will be identified by a tree survey. o Housing capacity: Estimated capacity amended in Publication Version to 300 homes.

BSA1202 Paintworks Phase 3 and adjacent land, Arno’s Vale Preferred Option: Mixed-use (housing and business)

• Environment Agency noted • Addressed by council’s Flood Risk Topic that significant proportion of Paper. site falls within Flood Zone 3 ‘climate change area’ according to the SFRA Level 2. Given this, they questioned whether the 230 homes estimated for this site could be located outside of the Flood Zone 3 ‘climate change’ area.

BSA1203 Government Offices, Flowers Hill Brislington Preferred Option: Mixed-us (housing and business)

• Site should have access by • Delivery concerns as uncertain whether this foot or bike from Hungerford access could be achieved given different site Road as it would encourage ownerships. cycling and walking by providing a continuous link

BSA1204 Tramway Road Retail Park, Kensington Park, nr Arno’s Vale Preferred Option: Housing

• Landowner did not think • This site is no longer considered appropriate housing deliverable as site is to be allocated because of uncertainty in retail use and they have no regarding the likelihood of delivery as the aspiration to dispose of site. landowner does not wish to pursue residential development.

BSA1205 Wicklea and adjacent land, St Anne’s / Broom Hill, nr Brislington Preferred Option: Community use (school)

• Loss of valued, well-used • A community use (school) allocation is community facility proposed in the Publication Version as site has been identified by the council as having • Traffic issues, e.g. parking, potential to meet education need in the local congestion and highway community. safety • Traffic: • Loss of open space important Addressed through Development for recreation and nature Management policy DM23. This will require a

- 147 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed conservation as would lead to Transport Assessment to be submitted the loss of part of St Anne's alongside a planning application where Valley Site of Nature development is likely to have a significant Conservation Interest. traffic impact. It will enable the council to assess impacts of proposals and identify any necessary mitigation measures. • Open space and nature conservation: Addressed by ‘development considerations’ regarding ecological survey, mitigation measures and enhancing links to St Anne’s Valley.

BSA1207 493–499 Bath Road, Kensington Park, nr Arno’s Vale Preferred Option: Housing

• Retail uses sought as well as • A housing allocation is proposed in the housing Publication Version as site has largely residential context and is currently • Access from the rear of the underused, therefore the allocation site to the shops on Sandy represents a good use of land in line with Park Road sought Core Strategy policy BCS20. It is also in a sustainable location approximately 300m from the shops and services of Sandy Park Road Local Centre and close to the supermarket at Castle Court and bus routes along Bath Road. It will also contribute to meeting the Core Strategy target of providing new homes. • Access: Delivery concerns as uncertain whether this access could be achieved given different site ownerships and other amenity impacts.

BSA1208 Land to South of Tramway Road Retail Park, Kensington Hill, nr Brislington Preferred Option: Housing

• Allocation should promote • This site is no longer considered appropriate other suitable land uses, in to be allocated because planning permission particular a pub/restaurant for a public house was granted in October 2012. In order to reflect this decision it is not considered appropriate to allocate the site for housing as it does not appear to be deliverable.

BSA1210 Former Petrol Filling Station, Bath Road, Arnos Vale / Totterdown Preferred Option: Mixed-use (housing and business)

None raised N/A

BSA1211 Birchwood Elderly Persons' Home, Birchwood Road, St Anne’s Park

- 148 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed Preferred Option: Housing

• Wording of development • Considered appropriate to maintain consideration regarding ‘development consideration’ so that a buffer ecological mitigation needs to may be needed. Ecological survey will inform be strengthened so that mitigation measures that will be most mitigation measures 'shall' appropriate. rather than ‘may’ include a buffer to the adjacent Site of Nature Conservation Interest.

BSA1213 801 Bath Road, Brislington Preferred Option: Housing

None raised N/A

BSA1301 Site of former City of Bristol College (Hartcliffe Campus), Hawkfield Road, Hartcliffe Preferred Option: Mixed-use (housing and business

• Loss of former sports area • A housing and business allocation is within site important for nature proposed in the Publication Version. This is conservation. Questioned because the site is no longer required by the whether possible to mitigate City of Bristol College for education and / or compensate for its provision, is in a sustainable location loss approximately 300m from the shops and services of Symes District Centre and is • Lack of evidence to justify adjacent to employment areas and is loss of formal sports field approximately 200m from Hengrove Park • Questioned business element with its new community facilities. There are of allocation given presence also bus stops close to the site along of other business parks in Hawkfield Road whilst nearby Hengrove Park area is subject to proposals for significant improvements to public transport through the provision of new transit routes. The allocation reflects the regeneration aspirations of Core Strategy Policy BCS1 to introduce a new mix of housing type, size and tenure and provide new employment opportunities. It will contribute to meeting the Core Strategy target of providing new homes. Its potential to provide new office floorspace will help meet the Core Strategy target of delivering 60,000m² of new office floorspace in South Bristol. • Nature conservation: Addressed by ‘development consideration’ in Preferred Approach Document to ensure development makes provision for ecological mitigation measures. • Business element of allocation:

- 149 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed The allocation reflects the regeneration aspirations of Core Strategy Policy BCS1 to provide new employment opportunities in South Bristol. Its potential to provide new office floorspace will help meet the Core Strategy target of delivering 60,000m² of new office floorspace in South Bristol.

BSA1302 Imperial Park (vacant southern section), Hartcliffe Preferred Option: Mixed-use (business and leisure)

• Landowner considered • Allocation in Publication Version amended to allocation should be for ‘Business, housing and leisure’. business, leisure and • Wildlife buffer: housing, rather than just Addressed by ‘development consideration’ in business and leisure. This Preferred Approach Document that was because housing, along development should maintain or strengthen with leisure and business the integrity and connectivity of the Wildlife uses, was granted planning Network. permission in January 2012. • Provision of wildlife buffer to adjacent Hengrove Way Site of Nature Conservation Interest sought.

BSA1304 Bristol Water Bedminster Depot, Bishopsworth Road, Bedminster Down Preferred Option: Housing

• Allocation should include light • A housing allocation is proposed in the industry as well as housing in Publication Version. This is because the site order to promote new has a largely residential context, is in a business opportunities relatively sustainable location close to shops and bus routes on Bishopsworth Road and will contribute to meeting the Core Strategy target of providing new homes. Also, viability of light industrial units on this relatively small site might be questionable, therefore the allocation would be potentially undeliverable.

BSA1305 Land to the north-west of Vale Lane, Bedminster Down Preferred Option: Industry and Warehousing

• Loss of open space important • An industry and warehousing allocation is for nature conservation. proposed in the Publication Version. This is Particularly important as a because the site adjoins an established, foraging area for badgers. functioning industrial estate which has seen Buffer between the proposed recent investment in new buildings. It also development site and the reflects the aspirations of Core Strategy surrounding SNCI was Policies BCS1 and BCS8 which seek the needed. provision of new industrial and warehousing

- 150 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed land to support economic regeneration and growth in South Bristol. • Nature conservation: Addressed by ‘development consideration’ in Preferred Approach Document.

BSA1307 Part of Whitehouse Centre, Fulford Road, Hartcliffe Preferred Option: Mixed-use (housing and open space)

• Environment Agency noted • A housing allocation is proposed in the significant proportion of site Publication Version. This is because the site falls within Flood Zone 2. In is underused, has a residential context, is in order to support allocation a relatively sustainable location close to local they considered housing shops and will contribute to meeting the Core proposed would need to be Strategy target of providing new homes. sequentially located in Flood • Flood risk: Zone 1. They also pointed out Addressed by ‘development consideration’. that a culverted main river runs across the eastern • Nature conservation: boundary of the site. As part Addressed by ‘development consideration’. of draft policy DM20 the feasibility of opening up the • Culvert: culvert for flood risk and Can be addressed if necessary through the wildlife benefits should be planning application process with reference explored to policy DM22. • Balance between housing and open space needs to reflect that site is a Wildlife Network Site and most of it can be regarded as a Bristol Biodiversity Action Plan Habitat 'Open Mosaic Habitat on previously developed land'

BSA1309 St Augustine's Church and Vicarage, Whitchurch Lane, Whitchurch Preferred Option: Mixed-use (housing and community use)

• None raised N/A

BSA1401 Hengrove Park Preferred Option: Regeneration Area (housing, offices and open space)

• Appropriate balance between • Estimated number of homes reduced from housing and open space not 1,500 to 1,000 in Publication Version. struck. Estimated number of • Loss of playing pitches: homes too high. Will mean ’Development consideration’ in Publication that ‘destination park’ long- Version states that development should envisaged for Hengrove Park secure a large park sufficient in size to would not be achieved. accommodate sport pitches. • Lack of evidence to justify • Siting of housing and access:

- 151 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed potential loss of formal sports Addressed by ‘development consideration’ pitches that development should take a co-ordinated approach to the delivery of the allocation and • Siting of housing and access be guided by community involvement. Will should protect amenity of also be addressed by Core Strategy policy residents of St Giles estate. BCS21 and the design Development • Environment Agency Management policies. considered allocation could • Flood risk: have significant flood risk / Addressed by amended ‘development drainage implications off-site. consideration’ in Publication Version. They advised that the Flood Risk Assessment for the site • Sustainable Drainage Systems: should consider the impacts Considered to be addressed by on the Brislington and Malago ‘development consideration’ in Preferred catchments as a whole, rather Approach Document. than being confined to the site boundary. They also felt that off-site improvements may be appropriate to address flood risk in addition to on-site attenuation through Sustainable Drainage Systems.

BSA1402 Former New Fosseway School, Hengrove Preferred Option: Housing

• Lack of evidence to justify • A housing allocation is proposed for the loss of formal sports pitches Publication Version. This is because the site is not required by the Oasis Academy, it has a residential context, is in a relatively sustainable location approximately 650m from the shops and services of Whitchurch (Oatlands Avenue) District Centre and is also close to bus stops on New Fosseway Road. It will also contribute to meeting the Core Strategy target of providing new homes and the regeneration aims of Core Strategy Policy BCS1 by introducing a new mix of housing type, size and tenure into South Bristol.

BSA1406 Former Petherton Road School site, Petherton Road, Hengrove Preferred Option: Housing

• Lack of evidence to justify • A housing allocation is proposed for the loss of formal sports pitches Publication Version. This is because the site is not required for education purposes, it has a residential context to the south-east and is in a relatively sustainable location approximately 250m from the shops and bus routes on Hengrove Lane. It will also

- 152 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed contribute to meeting the Core Strategy target of providing new homes and the regeneration aims of Core Strategy Policy BCS1 by introducing a new mix of housing type, size and tenure into South Bristol.

BSA1407 Maesknoll Elderly Persons' Home, Bamfield, Hengrove Preferred Option: Housing (pending the outcome of the review of the Residential Futures Programme)

• Favour continued use of the • In July 2012 Cabinet agreed plans to close site for elderly persons’ this elderly persons’ home. It is proposed for housing a housing allocation in the Publication Version. • Concern at potential negative traffic impacts • Traffic: Addressed through Development Management policy DM23. This will require a Transport Assessment to be submitted alongside a planning application where development is likely to have a significant traffic impact. It will enable the council to assess impacts of proposals and identify any necessary mitigation measures.

BSA1408 Greville Day Centre and Elderly Persons' Home, Lacey Road, Stockwood Preferred Option: Housing (pending the outcome of the review of the Residential Futures Programme)

• Favour continued use of the • In July 2012 Cabinet agreed plans to use this site for elderly persons’ site for people with dementia, therefore it is housing not proposed for allocation. • Concern at potential negative traffic impacts

BSA1410 Counterslip Baptist Church, 648–652 Wells Road, Hengrove Preferred Option: Housing

• Landowner of site raised • This site is no longer considered appropriate concerns whether allocation to be allocated because the landowner has could be delivered as there indicated that delivery might not be possible are no immediately available due to a lack of alternative sites locally to land parcels available to accommodate their relocation. enable them to re-locate to Oatland Avenue District Centre

BSA1411 Loxton Square and garage site, Hengrove Preferred Option: Housing

- 153 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed

• None raised N/A

- 154 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Sites suggested for allocation Summary of sites suggested for allocation by respondents to the Preferred Approach Document and how they were addressed in the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies

Site details and allocation How they were addressed promoted

Land at Ashton Vale Respondent’s land in Green Belt. Planning permission for stadium not yet implemented. After 30,000 seat stadium implementation council will review Green Belt boundary as part of Local Plan review. Allocation not included.

Territorial Army site on Site in edge-of-centre location. National Planning Whiteladies Road Policy Framework and Core Strategy promote sequential approach to provision of retail Retail development, and development whereby retail uses are directed to education and related centres. Insufficient evidence submitted to justify purposes retail allocation on this site.

Former Dairy Crest depot at Site was subject to planning application for 14 Parrys Lane, Stoke Bishop dwellings which was granted planning permission in December 2012. Not considered necessary to Residential allocate as principle of residential development already accepted by council.

Former Elizabeth Shaw Site included in Site Allocations and Development Chocolate Factory, Easton Management Policies for allocation for mixed-use development (Site ref. BSA0805). Development site with planning principles to be agreed with local people

Keynsham Garden Centre on National Planning Policy Framework and Core the A4 nr A4 Bath Road Park Strategy seek to protect Green Belt from and Ride at Brislington inappropriate development, particularly development which has negative impacts on its openness. Mixed-use development Therefore not considered appropriate to support incorporating housing, suggested allocation. business and leisure uses

Parcel of land north of National Planning Policy Framework and Core Ironmould Lane, Brislington Strategy seek to protect Green Belt from inappropriate development, particularly development Residential which has negative impacts on its openness. Therefore not considered appropriate to support suggested allocation.

Land adjacent to Campbell Suggested allocation considered contrary to Farm Drive, Lawrence Development Management policy DM18 as site’s Weston development for housing would not be consistent Residential with area’s undeveloped status.

- 155 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Designations Summary of main issues raised on designations from respondents to the Preferred Approach Document and how they were addressed in the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies

Main issues raised How they were addressed

Safeguarded Transport Links

Object to safeguarding land for The proposal is referred to in the adopted Whitchurch bypass Core Strategy; safeguarding remains appropriate.

Safeguarded Park and Ride Sites

Opposed to siting of park and ride on No change. It is necessary to safeguard the M32 site which has potential use as a park and ride facility.

Rail Infrastructure

No comments received

Principal Industrial and Warehousing Areas

Bush Industrial Estate (PIWA70), Whitehall

Object to designation. Reasons: Proposed designation maintained in Publication Version. Reasons: • Site bounded on three sides by conflicting residential occupiers • Fully occupied, functioning estate. and businesses are dependent • Relatively close to strategic road on HGV deliveries. network. • Site not designated in 1997 Local • BCC Pollution Control has received only Plan or 2003 Proposed one record of a complaint being made Alterations. about the estate. This dates back to • Site too small to be strategically 2000. This indicates that site’s continued important as identified by Core use as an industrial estate is not causing Strategy policy BCS8. unacceptable amenity and environmental impacts. Prefer allocation for either mixed use or 100% residential scheme. • Estate operating at high occupancy on each visit over past 5 years. Indicates industrial and warehousing market is not put off by residential proximity. • Site in not the most prosperous part of the city and in a ward (St George West) which contains only one other PIWA (Crew’s Hole Road). Indicates that designation could be useful in ensuring these business and job opportunities are maintained.

- 156 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed

150 Crew’s Hole Road, part of Crew’s Hole Road (PIWA71), Crew’s Hole

Object to designation. Reasons: Proposed designation removed from Publication Version. • site unsuited to HGV access as

extremely restricted in width, on a

busy road which offers no HGV turning space • Since 2008, it has not been possible to find tenants or purchasers at reasonable commercial rents

Imperial Tobacco site, part of East Court / Winterstoke Road (PIWA78), Ashton Vale

Object to designation. Reasons: Proposed designation removed from Publication Version. • Following demolition, there is no

remaining floorspace on site which is or can be used for industrial or warehousing process • Marketing revealed no demand for premises • Site adjacent to residential uses in a zone of transition no longer characterised by industrial uses • Industrial and warehousing uses would not be deliverable on remaining undeveloped land

SCA Packaging, south of Deep Pit Road, part of Fishponds Trading Estate (PIWA56), Clay Hill / Speedwell

Object to designation. Reasons: Proposed designation maintained in Publication Version. Reasons: • Site available for mixed-use including residential development • Shortage of industrial and warehousing land means it is important to safeguard • Vast majority of site underused. land which continues, as with this site, to • Only 14 people employed on site, be viable and appropriate for industrial representing inefficient use of and warehousing businesses. land. • While housing adjoins parts of the site, • Use of part or all of the upper buffering is provided by mature trees and plateau of the site for new relatively busy Brook Road. BCC employment uses as part of Pollution Control has no record of mixed-use development would complaints being made about the site. increase overall number of jobs. Indicates continued industrial and warehousing use would not lead to • Site in sustainable location for unacceptable environmental or amenity residential with good transport

- 157 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed links, adjacent employment impacts. opportunities and nearby schools. • Site is within Hillfields ward which is not • Buildings outdated. the most economically prosperous ward. This suggests that site is valuable in the • Lower part of site has residential area as it contributes to providing local, context opposite on Brook Road. skilled job opportunities in relatively • Marketing revealed no demand disadvantaged part of city. for outmoded premises. • A planning application for industrial and Prefer mixed-use allocation. warehousing development on the northern half of the site was granted outline planning permission in November 2012. This indicates that the applicant considers that industrial and warehousing development continues to be viable and suitable in this location.

Former Brenmark Engineering site, part of Whitby Road (north) PIWA90, St Anne’s

Object to designation. Reasons: Proposed designation maintained in Publication Version. Reasons: • Buildings on site have been demolished following vandalism. • Site part of Whitby Road PIWA, a Site currently being used as open strongly performing industrial area storage on a temporary basis. evidenced by high levels of occupancy, generally good physical condition of • Not viable to redevelop the site buildings, good access for HGVs to the for warehousing strategic road network and no residential • Oversupply of similar properties proximity constraints. in vicinity. • BCC Pollution Control has only one • Site not on an industrial estate – record of a complaint being made about it is an island site. the site and this relates to use of the site for an illegal rave. This indicates that continued industrial and warehousing use would not lead to unacceptable environmental or amenity impacts.

Thomas Ware and Sons Tannery and Bristol Metal Spraying, part of Clift House Road / Coronation Road (PIWA0083-E), Southville

Object to designation. Reasons: Proposed designation maintained in Publication Version. Reasons: • Designation not compliant with NPPF which encourages different • Buildings are occupied and in reasonable land uses. physical condition. • Existing premises will not meet • Although there are residential properties the needs of the market in the opposite the site, any potential conflict future and could become vacant. could be said to be mitigated by the noise from the busy A370 (Coronation and Clift • Site in prime location for House Roads). sustainable mixed-use

- 158 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed development. PIWA designation • BCC Pollution Control report that whilst restricts future development complaints of black smoke and odour potential. from the tannery were made occasionally between 1996 and 2009, no complaints have been made since October 2009. This indicates that continued industrial and warehousing use would not lead to unacceptable environmental or amenity impacts. • Close proximity to Brunel Way provides good HGV access and subsequent links to the A4 Portway and A370.

St Luke’s Hall, William Street, part of Bedminster Trading Estate (PIWA0074-E) (parts)

Object to designation. Reasons: Proposed designation maintained in Publication Version. Reasons: • Vacant since December 2011 • Any potential negative amenity impacts • No longer suitable to modern on adjacent residential properties are industrial and warehousing users mitigated by site having rear access / • Industry and warehousing servicing area which backs on to the detrimental to amenity of industrial properties of Willway Street. neighbouring residential BCC Pollution Control have no record of properties any complaints being made about this site. This indicates that continued • Site to the east and southeast of industrial and warehousing use would not the site has been cleared and it is lead to unacceptable environmental or understood that owner is amenity impacts. considering developing site for non-industrial uses • Possible that building could still be of interest to an industrial and / or • Contrary to NPPF warehousing business as there are examples on the Bedminster Trading Estate and across city of older buildings continuing to be occupied by a range of industrial and warehousing businesses. • The surrounding Bedminster Trading Estate continues to perform well as evidenced by generally high levels of occupancy and reasonable physical condition of buildings. • Regarding adjacent site, in December 2012 planning permission was granted to application ref. 12/03794/F for use of site for the storage of self-storage units (Use Class B8). This suggests the area is still of interest to warehousing / storage businesses.

- 159 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed

Land bounded by Whitehouse St, Whitehouse Place and Princess Street, part of Bedminster Trading Estate (PIWA0074-E)

Object to designation. Reasons: Proposed designation maintained in Publication Version. Reasons: • Site bounded on two sides by residential development • Site is part of Bedminster Trading Estate which continues to perform well as • Shortage of residential evidenced by generally high levels of development in Bristol occupancy and reasonably good physical • Site in sustainable residential condition of buildings. location close to employment, • BCC Pollution Control report that two public transport, schools and complaints have been made about the Bedminster Town Centre Timber Merchants, in 2007 (noise from Prefer a housing allocation wood planer) and 2009 (odour) but both were unsubstantiated. This indicates that continued industrial and warehousing use would not lead to unacceptable environmental or amenity impacts.

Substation site, part of Seabank Power Station (PIWA0041), Avonmouth

Object to designation. Reasons: Designation maintained in the Publication Version. • Substation site is "operational

land" and there may need to be The types of uses that are likely to be further essential utility acceptable in principle on PIWAs are set out development at the site in the in Development Management Policy DM13 future. Concerned that PIWA This specifies essential public utilities designation would prevent this. development as one of these uses.

Diamonite Industrial Park, part of Lodge Causeway / Goodneston Road (PIWA52), Fishponds

Object to designation. Reasons: Designation removed from Publication Version. • old, poor quality premises Replaced with an allocation for mixed-use • HGVs have difficulty accessing development of housing with business. the site • Existing floor space cannot be easily sub-divided • Not economically viable to refurbish existing buildings • Lack of market demand for employment floorspace within this area • Changing character of surrounding area

- 160 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed Prefer mixed-use allocation.

Centres

Filton Road

Some shops have re-opened outside No change proposed. Centre is considered the proposed Centre boundary to reflect the core of the local shopping and service uses.

Primary Shopping Areas

Clifton Village

Regent Street should all be Primary Amended to extend Primary Shopping Area Shopping Area to Regent Street, reflecting high proportion of A1 uses.

Gloucester Road

Additional areas should be Primary Shopping Area extended to west safeguarding reflecting strength of side of road between Hatherley Road and centre Cambridge Road.

Fishponds

Primary shopping area should be Extent of primary shopping area is retained considered to accurately reflect area where A1 use classes predominate.

Secondary Shopping Frontages

Gloucester Road

Secondary frontage between Designation partly removed to reflect limited Berkeley Road and Nevil Road not retail content. Change from primary to appropriate secondary at junction of Nevil Road.

Sites of Nature Conservation Interest

Change boundary of SNCI at Ashton The boundary accurately reflects the extent Vale of nature conservation interest.

Land at Bristol Port should not be The site has local importance for nature included in SNCI conservation. Designation is appropriate.

Regionally Important Geological Sites

No comments on extent of No change designations

- 161 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed

Local Historic Parks and Gardens

No comments received N/A

Green Belt

A number of sites in the Green Belt Addressed in ‘Sites suggested for allocation’ were promoted for allocation by table above. respondents

Important Open Space

Various comments relating to sites Important Open Space designation has been arising from Area Green Space applied to all Area Green Space Plan sites Plans. which Neighbourhood Committees agreed should not be subject to disposal.

Land at Somerset Street, Kingsdown No change. Site is clearly visible from public – site is privately owned and has no viewpoints and is important for its townscape public access value and visual amenity.

Land at Mina Road – proposed No change. Land is part of a larger removal of designation from part of undeveloped area which is important for its land townscape and landscape quality.

Land at Sea Mills (rear of Sylvan No change. It is not proposed to allocate the Way sites for development. However, they are not considered to constitute important open space as they do not have wider public amenity value.

Avonmouth and Kingsweston Levels

Proposal to allocate land west of Proposed designation maintained in Kingsweston Lane for employment Publication Version. Employment allocation development inappropriate having regard to environmental constraints.

Sewage Works Expansion

No comments on extent of No change. designation

Minerals Safeguarding Areas

Safeguarding area should reflect The purpose of mineral safeguarding areas entire extent of Coal Resource Areas is to avoid needless sterilisation by non- mineral resources. The majority of the identified coal resource area in Bristol is developed land and is therefore already sterilised. The identified safeguarding area is

- 162 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Main issues raised How they were addressed undeveloped land in the Green Belt.

- 163 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

- 164 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Appendix 1 – Development Management Policies Health Impact Assessment This section contains a Health Impact Assessment of the Development Management policies. The table below sets out the recommendations of Bristol Partnership’s Healthy City Group and Green Capital Land Use and Planning Group regarding the Development Management policies in the March 2012 Site Allocations and Development Management Preferred Approach Document. The council’s response to these recommendations is also provided in the table. The recommendations were informed by a half-day workshop held on 17th April 2012 attended by 21 people comprising professionals from a range of backgrounds (mostly health and environment related) and Bristol City Council officers. The aim of the workshop was to develop a health and sustainability response to the Development Management policies of the Preferred Approach Document so as to inform the policies to be included in the Publication Version.

Summary of the key recommendations made by Bristol Partnership’s Healthy City Group and Green Capital Land Use and Planning Group to the Development Management policies of the March 2012 Preferred Approach document and the council’s response to the recommendations.

Preferred Key Recommendations Bristol City Council response Approach Development Management Policy

DM2: Minimum design, Core Strategy policy BCS21: Quality Residential sustainability and space Urban Design and BCS15: Subdivisions, standards should apply to all Sustainable Design and Construction Shared and residential developments applies to all new residential Specialist including student development. Core Strategy policy Housing accommodation. BCS18: Housing Type applies space standards to all new residential development with the exception of student housing, which is not designed as permanent accommodation.

Lifetime home standards Core Strategy policy BCS18: should be used to improve Housing Type identifies the Lifetime the quality and quantity of Homes Standard as a means of homes for people with a assessing the accessibility and disability. adaptability of new housing. Development Management policy DM2: Residential Subdivisions, Shared and Specialist Housing requires all older persons housing to be built to the Lifetime Homes Standard. Development Management policy DM4: Wheelchair Accessible Housing requires a proportion of residential accommodation to be

- 165 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Preferred Key Recommendations Bristol City Council response Approach Development Management Policy wheelchair accessible.

DM6: Public Article 4 direction needs to The use of an Article 4 Direction to Houses be introduced to removed require a planning application for a permitted change from A4 to change of use from a pub to a shop A1/2/3. is under consideration.

DM7: Town Policies should refer to the Core Strategy policy BCS7: Centres Centre Uses character, vitality, viability and Retailing acknowledges the and diversity of the centres. contribution of Centres to the vitality DM8: of the city, the diversity of its Shopping shopping provision and to social Areas and inclusion. The function of centres is Frontages also explained. The policy DM11: encourages uses which contribute to Markets maintaining the vitality, viability and diversity of centres.

DM7: Town Retail Impact Assessments Where Retail Impact Assessments Centre Uses should address the impact are required Development on: Management policy DM7: Town Centre Uses requires local consumer - Employment in the local choice and the range and quality of retail sector; the comparison and convenience - Impact on retail offer, to be taken into account. retail sector;

- Local parades and shops; - Access to affordable, safe and nutritious food.

DM8: Independent business zones Core Strategy Policy BCS7: Centres Shopping should be allocated within and Retailing seeks a mix of retail Areas and centres and multiple provision in all Centres including Frontages operators restricted. opportunities for small shops and independent traders.

Article 4 direction needs to Responses to recent Government be introduced to protect consultations have suggested food-retailing uses from non- changes to the GPDO that would food retailing uses. create a new use class for supermarkets.

DM10: Food Reword final sentence of The existing policy text is considered and Drink policy to read: ‘Takeaways in appropriate. Uses and the close proximity to schools Evening and youth facilities will not

- 166 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Preferred Key Recommendations Bristol City Council response Approach Development Management Policy Economy be permitted as they are likely to influence behaviour harmful to health and undermine the promotion of healthy lifestyles’.

DM14: The Policy should include Core Strategy policy BCS13: Climate Health additional criteria: ‘Taking Change asks development to Impacts of into account the health respond to global environmental Development implications of global change through contributions environmental change.’ towards mitigation and adaptation to climate change.

DM15: Green Allotments should be Development Management policy Infrastructure provided for all super major DM15: Green Infrastructure Provision Provision schemes and smaller provides for food growing space developments. The within all new residential distribution and location of development where practicable, and allotments should aim to the provision of allotments to meet encourage walking and specific standards set out in the cycling. council’s Allotment Strategy.

DM17: Expand the list of important Core Strategy policy BCS9: Green Development open space types set out in Infrastructure sets out the range of Involving the policy to include ‘food social, economic and environmental Existing growing’, ‘biodiversity’ and benefits to Green Infrastructure Green ‘greenway network’. including space for local food Infrastructure production within the city, protected and enhanced biodiversity and provision of green active travel routes.

Tree compensations Core Strategy policy BCS9: Green standards should seek to Infrastructure seeks the incorporation increase the quantity of trees of new/and or enhanced Green and provide appropriate Infrastructure in all new development. species (i.e. native tree Development Management policy species). DM27: Layout and Form seeks the use of appropriate tree specimens, including native trees, in landscape schemes.

Land for food growing Core Strategy policy BCS9: Green should be protected. Infrastructure and Development Management policy DM17: Development Involving Green Infrastructure seeks the protection of individual green assets and important

- 167 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Preferred Key Recommendations Bristol City Council response Approach Development Management Policy open spaces which will include allotments. Development Management Policy DM21: Development of Private Gardens seeks protect of garden areas which may be used for food growing.

Need to establish links Core Strategy policy BCS9: Green between new and existing Infrastructure seeks the green spaces. enhancement and extension of the connectivity of the strategic green infrastructure network.

Strategy required for the Funding upgrades to existing green upgrading of existing green spaces could be made available spaces (use of CIL?) through CIL. including high quality

provision in areas of deprivation where gaps have been identified.

DM19: Policy wording in relation to The existing policy text is considered Development Wildlife Corridors should be appropriate. and Nature strengthened to read Conservation ‘Development which would have a harmful impact on the connectivity and function of sites in Wildlife Corridors will not be permitted except…’

DM23: Policy should be re-worded Core Strategy policy BCS10 Transport to promote active travel and Transport and Access Improvements Development to reflect the transport user requires the design of schemes to Management hierarchy i.e. pedestrian – reflect the transport user priorities set cycle – public transport – out in the Joint Local Transport Plan individual car user. i.e. pedestrians, cyclists, public transport, access for commercial vehicles, short stay visitors by car and private car.

Parking standards should be The above priorities underpin the revised. Current standards parking standards, which indicate encourage car dependency maximum provision for cars and and sedentary lifestyles minimum provision for cycles. rather than promoting active travel and the transport user hierarchy. Multi-use car

- 168 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Preferred Key Recommendations Bristol City Council response Approach Development Management Policy parks should be encouraged rather than individual developments meeting only their own requirements.

DM27: Layout Policy should include The policy ensures that the layout and Form consideration of how the and form of development provides for development is used in the attractive and functional spaces evening and at night. throughout the day.

Streets and spaces design Core Strategy policy BCS10 criteria should place greater Transport and Access Improvements emphasis on walking and requires the design of schemes to cycling. reflect the transport user priorities set out in the Joint Local Transport Plan i.e. pedestrians, cyclists, public transport, access for commercial vehicles, short stay visitors by car and private car.

Landscape design criteria Core Strategy Policy BCS9: Green should include opportunities Infrastructure requires development for formal and informal play to contribute to an appropriate and social interaction. quantity and quality of open space. Development Management policy DM16: Open Space for Recreation sets minimum quality, access and quantity standards for recreation space that includes children and young peoples play space and active sports space.

DM29: Policy should include Such requirements would be Design of reference to designs that unnecessarily prescriptive and New make use of the stairs rather contrary to the national policy Buildings than lifts to encourage approach to achieving good design. physical activity.

DM30: Policy should require Such measures may be appropriate Alterations to development to address where development necessitates the Existing under-provision of cycle need for further infrastructure. Buildings parking. Policy should require development to retrofit sustainable energy and energy efficiency measures throughout the entire

- 169 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Preferred Key Recommendations Bristol City Council response Approach Development Management Policy building.

DM33: Policy should make The policies’ broad reference to Pollution reference to impacts on environmental impacts is considered Control, Air human and animal health. appropriate. Quality and Mitigation schemes should The policies seek to ensure that no Water Quality also take account of the cumulative environmental impacts DM35: Noise cumulative impacts of arise as mitigation will always be Mitigation development, existing and sought. proposed, in the area.

New policy The location of all new Core Strategy policy BCS20 Effective residential development and Efficient Use of Land seeks should be determined by higher densities of development in access standards to a range and around the city centre, in or of services including public close to other centres and along or transport, shops and close to main public transport routes. community facilities, schools The policy also sets out criteria to and health centres. establish appropriate densities, which include current and future levels of accessibility by walking, cycling and public transport to a range of employment, services and facilities.

- 170 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation Appendix 2 – Key changes made to development management policies, site allocations and designations in the preparation of the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies The tables below set out the main changes that have been made to the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies during its preparation from the 2010 Options Consultation Documents to the Publication Version.

Development management policies Summary of the main changes made to the development management policies from the 2010 Options Consultation Documents to the Publication Version.

Publication Version Policy Key changes

DM1 Presumption in favour of Policy included following Preferred Approach sustainable development Document stage and publication of National Planning Policy Framework in March 2012.

DM2 Residential Sub- Additional section on Older Persons’ housing divisions, Shared and included. Specialist Housing Further policy and explanatory text added to improve clarity. Location criteria for student accommodation simplified.

DM3 Affordable Housing Policy added at Preferred Approach stage. Provision: Smaller Sites Threshold level increased to 10 units.

DM4 Wheelchair Accessible Policy included following Options consultation Housing stage.

DM5 Protection of Policy added at Preferred Approach stage. Policy Community Facilities amended to allow consideration of whether other community uses are willing and able to come forward to use the site or buildings.

DM6 Public Houses Policy added at Preferred Approach stage. Text to criterion (ii) amended to read ‘a diverse range…’

DM7 Town Centre Uses Policy applies to all town centre uses, reflecting the NPPF. Approach to out of centre development within a sequential approach has been added. Thresholds for impact assessments have been revised and added. A suite of 5 policies has been created to address linked town centre and retail planning issues.

DM8 Shopping Areas and Retention of A1 uses within primary shopping Frontages areas has been strengthened and clarified, whilst allowing for uses which would make a positive

- 171 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Publication Version Policy Key changes contribution to the centre.

DM9 Local Centres A specific policy for local centres has been added.

DM10 Food and Drink Uses Additional criteria have been added to the policy and the Evening Economy against which the impacts of such uses can be assessed.

DM11 Markets Policy wording has been re-ordered to improve clarity.

DM12 Retaining Valuable Reduction in criteria to be met before loss of Employment Sites employment site is allowed.

DM13 Development Policy included following Preferred Approach proposals on Principal Document stage and publication of the National Industrial and Warehousing Planning Policy Framework in March 2012. Areas

DM14 The Health Impacts of • Thresholds for Health Impact Assessments Development (HIAs) brought in line with the council’s definition of 'super' major developments (100 homes or 10,000 sq m floorspace), with the council reserving the right to request HIA for smaller developments. • Core Strategy policies BCS9 and BCS10 included in policy links section. • Health Impacts of Development practice note produced.

DM15 Green Infrastructure Approach to strategic green infrastructure network Provision included. More detail on the approach to trees included.

DM16 Open Space for Separate policy included. Standards for open Recreation space provision added.

DM17 Development Involving Approach to unidentified open spaces clarified. Green Infrastructure

DM18 Avonmouth and Change of name. Approach to future review is set Kingsweston Levels out. References to open or undeveloped character changed to ‘undeveloped status’.

DM19 Development and Supporting information added about the hierarchy Nature Conservation of nature conservation designations.

DM20 Regionally Important Separate policy added for geological sites. Geological Sites

- 172 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Publication Version Policy Key changes

DM21 Development of Private The contribution of gardens to the character of an Gardens area is referred to in the introductory text.

DM22 Development Adjacent Policy amended to address the loss of open to Waterways waterways.

DM23 Transport Development • Greater emphasis in policy to ensure new Management development provides for needs of pedestrians and cyclists. • ‘Parking and Servicing’ section of the policy amended to: o remove unnecessary detail regarding aims that parking and servicing proposals should contribute to; o clarify that proposals for parking, servicing and loading should make effective and efficient use of land and be integral to design of development. • Parking standards schedule amended: o For Use Class B1 (Business), standards increased to provide more cycle parking and schedule amended to require provision of electric vehicle charging points; o For Use Class C3 (Dwelling houses) and C4 (Houses in Multiple Occupation), schedule amended to require provision of electric vehicle charging points.

DM24 Transport Schemes Text added to policy to clarify that development proposals on land safeguarded for transport schemes which would prejudice their implementation will not be permitted.

DM25 Greenways Policy amended to clarify that: • development proposals will be expected to protect function and amenity of existing Greenway route and, where possible, connect to proposed routes; • new sections of Greenway routes or spurs should be appropriately designed and landscaped.

DM26 Local Character and Policy amended with additional policy text that Distinctiveness protects character buildings and structures and seeks the reuse of materials from any whose demolition is accepted. Explanatory text added to

- 173 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Publication Version Policy Key changes clarify role of city centre context study.

DM27 Layout and Form Policy amended so that requirement not to prejudice potential of adjoining sites only applies “where such potential may reasonably exist”.

DM28 Public Realm Policy amended to clarify that the requirement to integrate SUDS, natural and historic features and planting into the design of the public realm only applies to schemes where these are proposed or required by other policies to be provided / retained.

DM29 Design of New No significant changes. Buildings

DM30 Alterations to Existing No significant changes. Buildings

DM31 Heritage Assets Added further references to conservation area character appraisals for clarity and the economic benefit of heritage assets to introductory text. Policy amended to state that assets and their settings should be “conserved or enhanced” rather than “preserved or enhanced”.

DM32 Recycling and Refuse No significant changes. Provision in New Development

DM33 Pollution Control, Air No significant changes. Quality and Water Quality

DM34 Contaminated Land No significant changes.

DM35 Noise Mitigation Explanatory text amended to be more self- contained following the deletion of PPG24.

DM36 Telecommunications No significant changes.

DM37 Unstable Land Policy to address unstable land was added.

DM38 Minerals Safeguarding Policy for Minerals Safeguarding Areas was Areas added.

DM39 Sewage Treatment No significant changes. Policy was added to reflect Works the proposed safeguarding site.

- 174 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Site allocations Summary of the main changes made to the site allocations from the 2010 Options Consultation Documents to the Publication Version. The table focuses on the key changes to the allocations, such as amendments to site boundaries, land uses allocated and estimated capacity of sites allocated for housing. It excludes changes to the sites ‘development considerations’ made through the preparation process. These are set out in Section 4 of the document.

Site Allocation Key changes

BSA0101: Part of Henacre This site was re-introduced from the Options Open Space, Lawrence Consultation Stage. In June 2012 the Avonmouth Weston and Kingsweston Neighbourhood Partnership declared the site as surplus to the open space requirements of the Neighbourhood Partnership Area. A housing allocation was selected for this site.

BSA0102: Land at former Retail use has been included within allocation and Lawrence Weston Campus of office use removed. City of Bristol College, Lawrence Weston

BSA0103: Land to the west The allocation of this site has been amended from and south-west of Deering housing and open space to housing. Close, Lawrence Weston

BSA0104: Former Sea Mills The allocation of this site has been amended from Infant School, Sea Mills housing and open space to housing and children's play area.

BSA0105: Portway Tip, In June 2012 Avonmouth and Kingsweston Portway, Shirehampton Neighbourhood Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site as part of the Area Green Space Plan process. Site to be designated as Important Open Space.

BSA0106: Land to rear of Provision of suitable access for 10 homes likely to Sylvan Way and High Grove, require demolition, which would harm the Sea Mills Sea Mills Conservation Area. Therefore site not considered appropriate for allocation.

BSA0107: Land to the rear of A housing allocation was selected for this site. Ridingleaze, Lawrence Weston

BSA0108: Sunny Hill garage Provision of suitable access for 10 homes likely to site, Sea Mills require demolition, which would harm the Sea Mills Conservation Area. Therefore site not considered appropriate for allocation.

BSA0109: Grazing land at Approach to Gypsy and Traveller site provision Woodwell Road, being reviewed, therefore site not considered Shirehampton appropriate for allocation.

- 175 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Site Allocation Key changes

BSA0110: Land at Moorend In June 2012 Avonmouth and Kingsweston Gardens, Lawrence Weston Neighbourhood Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site as part of the Area Green Space Plan process. Site to be designated as Important Open Space.

BSA0201: Elderberry Walk In March 2012 Henbury and Southmead Open Space, Southmead Neighbourhood Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site as part of the Area Green Space Plan process. Site to be designated as Important Open Space.

BSA0202: Crow Lane Open In March 2012 Henbury and Southmead Space, Henbury Neighbourhood Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site as part of the Area Green Space Plan process. Site to be designated as Important Open Space.

BSA0203: Former Dunmail Approach to Gypsy and Traveller site provision Primary School, Southmead being reviewed, therefore site not considered appropriate for allocation as Gypsy and Traveller residential site. A housing allocation was selected for the Preferred Approach Document.

BSA0204: Land At Brentry A housing allocation was selected for this site. Lane, Brentry

BSA0205: Fonthill Park, In March 2012 Henbury and Southmead Southmead Neighbourhood Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site as part of the Area Green Space Plan process. Site to be designated as Important Open Space.

BSA0206: Trymside Open In March 2012 Henbury and Southmead Space, Southmead Neighbourhood Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site as part of the Area Green Space Plan process. Site to be designated as Important Open Space.

BSA0207: Okebourne Road In March 2012 Henbury and Southmead Open Space, Brentry Neighbourhood Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site as part of the Area Green Space Plan process. Site to be designated as Important Open Space.

BSA0208: Tranmere Avenue In March 2012 Henbury and Southmead Open Space, Henbury Neighbourhood Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site as part of the Area Green Space Plan process. Site to be designated as Important Open Space.

BSA0209: Arnall Drive Open In March 2012 Henbury and Southmead

- 176 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Site Allocation Key changes Space, Henbury Neighbourhood Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site as part of the Area Green Space Plan process. Site to be designated as Important Open Space.

BSA0210: Brentry Hill, In March 2012 Henbury and Southmead Brentry Neighbourhood Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site as part of the Area Green Space Plan process. Site to be designated as Important Open Space.

BSA0211: Land to rear of A housing allocation was selected for this site. Redshelf Walk, Brentry

BSA0212: 19-21 Pen Park A housing and business allocation was chosen for Road, Southmead this site.

BSA0213: Richeson Walk This site was not considered appropriate to be garage site, Henbury allocated because of uncertainty regarding the likelihood of delivery of 10 units given the access constraints.

BSA0301: Land at SITA Depot This site was no longer considered appropriate to on the corner of Avon Way be allocated because it has been identified by the and Sea Mills Lane, Stoke council for ongoing use as a parks depot. Bishop

BSA0302: Coombe House A housing allocation was selected for this site. Elderly Persons' Home, Westbury-on-Trym

BSA0401: Lockleaze Open In March 2012 Horfield and Lockleaze Space, Lockleaze Neighbourhood Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site as part of the Area Green Space Plan process. Site to be designated as Important Open Space.

BSA0402: Bonnington Walk Boundary change from Options Consultation to former allotments site, address nature conservation, green corridor and Lockleaze cycle path. The allocation also changed from Mixed use(housing and open space) to housing.

BSA0403: Romney House The allocation of the site has been changed from and Lockleaze School, Mixed-use (housing and business) to housing. Lockleaze

BSA0404: BT Depot, Filton A housing allocation was selected for the Road, Horfield Preferred Approach Document.

BSA0405: Former Romney The site is proposed for allocation for community Avenue Junior School, use (school) in the Publication Version as the site Lockleaze has been identified as having potential to meet

- 177 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Site Allocation Key changes education need in the local community.

BSA0406: Wellington Hill In March 2012 Horfield and Lockleaze Playing Field, Horfield Neighbourhood Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site as part of the Area Green Space Plan process. Site to be designated as Important Open Space.

BSA0407: Land to rear of A housing allocation was selected for this site. Shaldon Road, Lockleaze

BSA0408: Land to rear of In March 2012 Horfield and Lockleaze Muller Road Bus Depot, Neighbourhood Partnership voted to reject Lockleaze possible disposal of site as part of the Area Green Space Plan process. Site to be designated as Important Open Space.

BSA0409: Land at A housing with business, community use and retail Gainsborough Square, was selected for this site. Lockleaze

BSA0410: St. Peter's Elderly A housing allocation was selected for this site. Persons' Home, Horfield

BSA0501: Blackberry Hill The estimated housing capacity has been Hospital, Manor Road, increased from 200 to 300 homes to better reflect Fishponds site’s potential capacity and ensure efficient use of land.

BSA0502: Glenside Campus, The estimated housing capacity has been Blackberry Hill, Fishponds increased from 100 to 300 homes to better reflect site’s potential capacity and ensure efficient use of land.

BSA0503: St Matthias The estimated housing capacity has been Campus, College Road, increased from 100 to 300 homes to better reflect Fishponds site’s potential capacity and ensure efficient use of land. The site area has been increased to incorporate former UWE playing field. At the Preferred Approach Stage an area of paddock was removed from the site boundary.

BSA0504: Former Playing A housing allocation was selected for this site. Fields, Brook Road, Crofts End / Rose Green

BSA0505: Snowdon Road In March 2012 Greater Fishponds Neighbourhood Open Space (accessed from Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site Small Lane), Fishponds as part of the Area Green Space Plan process. Site to be designated as Important Open Space.

BSA0506: Open Space rear of The site is proposed for allocation for community

- 178 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Site Allocation Key changes Abingdon Road and Honiton use (school) in the Publication Version as the site Road, Mayfield Park, nr has been identified as having potential to meet Fishponds education need in the local community.

BSA0507: Duchess Way In March 2012 Greater Fishponds Neighbourhood Open Space, Stapleton Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site as part of the Area Green Space Plan process. Site to be designated as Important Open Space.

BSA0508: Part of Playing This site was no longer considered appropriate to Field south of Rose Green be allocated because of uncertainty regarding the Close, Rose Green / Clay Hill likelihood of delivery given the access constraints.

BSA0509: Briarwood School, Site required for school use therefore not Briar Way, Hillfields proposed for allocation or designation.

BSA0510: Halbrow Crescent / In March 2012 Greater Fishponds Neighbourhood Delabere Avenue Open Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site Space, Fishponds as part of the Area Green Space Plan process. Site to be designated as Important Open Space.

BSA0511: Begbrook Drive The site is proposed for allocation for community Open Space, Broomhill / use (school) in the Publication Version as the site Frenchay has been identified as having potential to meet education need in the local community.

BSA0512: Gleeson House A housing allocation was selected for this site. sheltered accommodation, Dodisham Walk, Fishponds

BSA0513: Garage site, A housing allocation was selected for the Woodland Way, Chester Park Preferred Approach Document. / Hillfields

BSA0514: Part of Gill Avenue In March 2012 Greater Fishponds Neighbourhood / Lanaway Road Open Space, Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site Fishponds as part of the Area Green Space Plan process. Site to be designated as Important Open Space.

BSA0515: Graphic The estimated housing capacity has been Packaging, Filwood Road, increased from 120 to 208 to reflect the planning Fishponds permission on the site.

BSA0516: Former Parnall's The estimated housing capacity has been Works site, west of Filwood increased from 40 to 83 to reflect the planning Road / north of Goodneston permission on the site. Road, Fishponds

BSA0517: Diamonite This is a new site introduced to reflect the Industrial Park, Goodneston resolution to grant planning permission on the site Road, Fishponds subject to a section 106 agreement.

- 179 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Site Allocation Key changes

BSA0801: Morley / Ashley / A housing and light industry allocation was Southey Street Works, St selected for this site. Werburgh's

BSA0802: Shiner Ltd Builders A housing and business allocation was selected Merchants, Church Road, for this site. Redfield

BSA0803: Land at Junction of A business allocation was selected for this site. Church Road and Heber Street, Redfield

BSA0804: Ducie Road, As the site had not yet been declared surplus and Lawrence Hill its future use is likely to be considered by the Neighbourhood Partnership, the development of the site may not be deliverable. Therefore it is not proposed for allocation or designation.

BSA0805: Land at former This is a new site introduced to reflect the Elizabeth Shaw Factory, development potential of the site of a unused Greenbank Road, Easton previously developed site. The council was minded to grant planning permission however the section 106 agreement was not signed.

BSA0901: Marling Road - The site is proposed for allocation for community Stables and Land, St George use (school) in the Publication Version as the site has been identified as having potential to meet education need in the local community.

BSA0902: Plummers Hill In March 2012 St George Neighbourhood Open Space, Croft's End / St Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site George as part of the Area Green Space Plan process. Site to be designated as Important Open Space.

BSA0903: Allotments to rear In March 2012 St George Neighbourhood of Air Balloon Road and Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site Hillside Road, St George as part of the Area Green Space Plan process. Site to be designated as Important Open Space.

BSA0904: Part of Soaphouse This site was no longer considered appropriate to Industrial Estate, Howard be allocated because of uncertainty regarding the Street, Whitehall / St George likelihood of delivery as part of the site recently had a Certificate of Lawfulness issued for proposed change of use to car vehicle repairs business which includes MOT bay.

BSA0905: Caravan storage Gypsy and Traveller residential sites to be yard, Cousins Lane, St considered in a separate Local Plan. Site not George proposed for allocation or designation.

BSA0906: Car Sales site at A housing allocation was selected for this site. 62-74 Bell Hill Road, St

- 180 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Site Allocation Key changes George

BSA0907: 47 - 49 Summerhill A housing allocation was selected for this site. Road, St George

BSA0908: Gladstone Street In March 2012 St George Neighbourhood Children's Playground, Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site Redfield as part of the Area Green Space Plan process. Site to be designated as Important Open Space.

BSA0909: 118 Blackswarth A housing allocation was selected for the Road, Redfield Preferred Approach Document.

BSA1001: Alderman Moore's A housing allocation was selected for this site. former allotments, Ashton Development considerations added to address Vale nature conservation, land stability, noise and pollution, health impact assessment and safeguarded transit route issues.

BSA1002: Land at and A housing and light industry allocation was adjacent to Malago House, selected for this site. Site boundary enlarged to Bedminster Road, incorporate gasholder. Bedminster

BSA1003: Land to south of Site removed due to it being developed as a South Liberty Lane, Ashton freight terminal under permitted development. Vale

BSA1004: Former Ashton Site removed due to uncertainty that satisfactory Sidings and Engineering vehicle access and egress cannot be achieved. Depot, Ashton Gate / Bower Ashton

BSA1005: East Street / Dalby Site removed due to uncertainty regarding delivery Avenue / Stafford Street, of allocation given it is no longer being pursued by Bedminster a developer.

BSA1006: Hayleigh Elderly Allocation changed to ‘Community use (School)’ to Persons' Home and adjacent reflect the council’s draft School Organisation Club, Myrtle Street, Southville Strategy 2012-2016 which has identified the site for a new two-form entry Primary School.

BSA1007: Garages and A housing with business allocation was selected workshops, Cooperage Lane, for this site. The estimated housing capacity has Southville been increased from 25 to 78 to reflect the planning permission on the site.

BSA1008: Granby House, St. A housing allocation was selected for this site. Johns Road, Bedminster

BSA1009: 206-208 North Site removed due to uncertainty regarding delivery Street and land to rear, of allocation as a significant part of the site is now

- 181 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Site Allocation Key changes Southville occupied by a supermarket.

BSA1010: Former Granada / A housing and small-scale office and retail Gala Bingo Club, North allocation was selected for this site. The Street, Bedminster estimated housing capacity has been increased from 15 to 22.

BSA1011: Site adjacent to A housing allocation was selected for the Holy Cross Church, Dean Preferred Approach Document. Lane, Bedminster

BSA1012: Coronation Road, A housing allocation was selected for this site. Southville

BSA1101: Bath Road Open This site was re-introduced from the Options Space (west of Totterdown Consultation Stage. It was a site considered as Bridge), Totterdown surplus by the Area Green Space Plan process and the Neighbourhood Committee decided should be disposed of for development. A Temple Quarter Enterprise Zone Opportunity Site allocation has been selected for this site.

BSA1102: Part of Salcombe This site was re-introduced from the Options Road Recreation Ground, Consultation Stage. It was a site considered as Knowle Park surplus by the Area Green Space Plan process and the Neighbourhood Committee decided should be disposed of for development. A housing allocation was selected for this site.

BSA1103: Red Lion Works, A housing allocation was selected for this site. Greenleaze Road / Wells Road, Knowle Park

BSA1104: Retail shops and This site was no longer considered appropriate to car parking, Wells Road and be allocated because of concerns expressed Oxford Street, Totterdown about potential negative impacts and the site’s small size, an allocation is not considered necessary.

BSA1105: Former Allotments, A housing allocation was selected for this site. Bellevue Terrace, Totterdown The estimated housing capacity has been decreased from 20 to 9.

BSA1106: Jubilee Pool, It is the council's intention that the site should Jubilee Road, Upper Knowle continue to be used as a public swimming pool therefore it is not proposed for allocation or designation.

BSA1107: Higham Street In March 2012 the Knowle, Filwood and Windmill Open Space, Totterdown Hill Neighbourhood Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site as part of the Area Green Space Plan process. Site to be designated as

- 182 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Site Allocation Key changes Important Open Space.

BSA1108: Land at Novers A housing allocation was selected for this site. Hill, east of Hartcliffe Way and west of Novers Lane / Novers Hill

BSA1109: Land adjoining A housing allocation was selected for this site. Hartcliffe Way and Hengrove Way, Inn's Court

BSA1110: The Hangar Site A housing, open space and business allocation and Filwood Park, north of was selected for this site. The estimated housing Hengrove Way capacity has been increased from 145 to 150.

BSA1111: Marksbury Road This site has been subdivided into BSA1111 and College Site BSA1124 reflect the separate delivery programmes on the different parts of the original site. The allocation has been changed to Community use (including school), housing and business.

BSA1112: Knowle West A community use, open space, business and Health Park, Downton Road housing allocation has been selected for this site.

BSA1113: Land adjoining A housing allocation was selected for this site. Airport Road between The estimated housing capacity has been reduced Creswicke Road and to the from 135 to 100 to reflect the potential developable east of Ilminster Avenue area.

BSA1114: Land at Novers The allocation of this site has been amended from Hill, adjacent to industrial housing and light industry to housing and units business.

BSA1115: Former Florence A housing allocation was selected for this site. Brown school, west of Leinster Avenue

BSA1116: Open spaces either A housing allocation was selected for this site. side of Inns Court Drive, Inn's Court

BSA1117: Land adjoining A housing allocation was selected for this site. Airport Road between Creswicke Road and to the east of Ilminster Avenue

BSA1118: Broad Plain House A housing allocation was selected for this site. and associated land, Broadbury Road

BSA1119: Land to east of An industry and warehousing allocation was

- 183 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Site Allocation Key changes Hartcliffe Way, south of the selected for this site. Waste Depot

BSA1120: Land and buildings A retail, business and housing allocation has been between 2 to 20 Filwood selected for this site. Broadway

BSA1121: Cloverdown A housing allocation was selected for this site. Residential Care Home, Kenmare Road

BSA1122: Sports court and A business, retail and housing allocation has been former swimming pool site on selected for this site. the north-east corner of the Filwood Broadway and Creswicke Road junction

BSA1123: Filwood Library The allocation of this site has been amended from and adjoining land, Filwood mixed-use (business, retail and housing) to Broadway housing.

BSA1124: Kingswear Road, This site has been subdivided into BSA1111 and Torpoint Road and Haldon BSA1124 reflect the separate delivery Close programmes on the different parts of the original site. A housing allocation was selected for this site.

BSA1201: Land at Broom Hill, A housing allocation was selected for the Brislington Preferred Approach Document. Site boundary reduced in Preferred Approach Document. Much of the open space excluded from the allocation boundary designated as Important Open Space. The estimated housing capacity has been reduced from 350 to 300 to reflect the potential developable area.

BSA1202: Paintworks Phase The allocation of this site has been changed from 3 and adjacent land, Arno's mixed-use (housing and business) to Temple Vale Quarter Enterprise Zone Opportunity Site.

BSA1203: Government A housing and business allocation was selected Offices, Flowers Hill, for this site. Brislington

BSA1204: Tramway Road This site was no longer considered appropriate to Retail Park, Kensington Park, be allocated because of uncertainty regarding the nr Arno's Vale likelihood of delivery as the landowner does not wish to pursue residential development.

BSA1205: Wicklea and The site is proposed for allocation for community adjacent land, St Anne's / use (school) in the Publication Version as the site Broom Hill, nr Brislington has been identified as having potential to meet

- 184 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Site Allocation Key changes education need in the local community.

BSA1206: Former Rock In June 2012 the Greater Brislington Allotments, Allison Road, Neighbourhood Partnership voted to reject Broom Hill, nr Brislington possible disposal of site as part of the Area Green Space Plan process. Site to be designated as Important Open Space.

BSA1207: 493-499 Bath Road, A housing allocation was selected for this site. Kensington Park, nr Arno's Vale

BSA1208: Land to South of This site was no longer considered appropriate to Tramway Road Retail Park, be allocated because planning permission for a Kensington Hill, nr public house was granted in October 2012. In Brislington order to reflect this decision it is not considered appropriate to allocate the site for housing as it does not appear to be deliverable.

BSA1209: St. Anne's Park, St In March 2012 the Greater Brislington Anne's Neighbourhood Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site as part of the Area Green Space Plan process. Site to be designated as Important Open Space.

BSA1210: Former Petrol The allocation of this site has been changed from Filling Station, Bath Road, mixed-use (housing and business) to Temple Arnos Vale / Totterdown Quarter Enterprise Zone Opportunity Site

BSA1211: Birchwood Elderly A housing allocation was selected for this site. Persons' Home, Birchwood Road, St Anne's Park

BSA1212: Newbridge Road In March 2012 the Greater Brislington open space, Newbridge Road, Neighbourhood Partnership voted to reject St Anne's possible disposal of site as part of the Area Green Space Plan process. Site to be designated as Important Open Space.

BSA1213: 801 Bath Road, A housing allocation was selected for this site. Brislington

BSA1301: Site of former City A housing and business allocation was selected of Bristol College (Hartcliffe for the Preferred Approach Document. Campus), Hawkfield Road, Hartcliffe

BSA1302: Imperial Park A business and leisure allocation was selected for (vacant southern section), the Preferred Approach Document. The Hartcliffe Publication Version has changed to allocation of this site to Business, housing and leisure.

- 185 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Site Allocation Key changes

BSA1303: Open Space at The In March 2012 the Dundry View Neighbourhood Groves (part of Valley Walk Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site Open Space), Hartcliffe as part of the Area Green Space Plan process. Site to be designated as Important Open Space.

BSA1304: Bristol Water A housing allocation was selected for the Bedminster Depot, Preferred Approach Document. Bishopsworth Road, Bedminster Down

BSA1305: Land to the north- An industry and warehousing allocation was west of Vale Lane, selected for the Preferred Approach Document. Bedminster Down This was chosen as site adjoins established, functioning industrial estate.

BSA1306: Land to the west of In response to concerns raised about the potential Vale Lane, Bedminster Down harmful impacts on this part of the Malago Valley Site of Nature Conservation Interest and the difficulty of providing mitigation for these impacts, it was considered inappropriate to allocate this site for industrial and warehousing use. Instead it is proposed for designation as a Site of Nature Conservation Interest.

BSA1307: Part of Whitehouse The allocation of this site has been changed from Centre, Fulford Road, mixed-use (housing and open space) to housing. Hartcliffe

BSA1308: Part of Kings Head In March 2012 the Dundry View Neighbourhood Lane Park (accessed via Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site Vicarage Road), Highridge / as part of the Area Green Space Plan process. Bishopsworth Site to be designated as Important Open Space.

BSA1309: St Augustine's A housing and community use allocation was Church and Vicarage, selected for the Preferred Approach Document. Whitchurch Lane, Whitchurch

BSA1310: Part of Withywood In March 2012 the Dundry View Neighbourhood Park Open Space, Withywood Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site as part of the Area Green Space Plan process. Site to be designated as Important Open Space.

BSA1311: Part of Valley Walk In March 2012 the Dundry View Neighbourhood (south) Open Space, Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site Hartcliffe as part of the Area Green Space Plan process. Site to be designated as Important Open Space.

BSA1312: Part of Willmott In March 2012 the Dundry View Neighbourhood Park, Hartcliffe Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site as part of the Area Green Space Plan process. Site to be designated as Important Open Space.

- 186 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Site Allocation Key changes

BSA1313: Part of Valley Walk In March 2012 the Dundry View Neighbourhood (north) Open Space, Hartcliffe Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site as part of the Area Green Space Plan process. Site to be designated as Important Open Space.

BSA1401: Hengrove Park The estimated housing capacity has been reduced from 1,500 to 1,000 homes to ensure sufficient land available for provision of large park, whilst continuing to ensure efficient use of land. The allocation has been amended to delete ‘regeneration area’.

BSA1402: Former New Recreation / open space issues addressed by Fosseway School, Hengrove reducing size of allocation site boundary in Preferred Approach Document and designating the remainder as Important Open Space. A housing allocation has been selected for this site.

BSA1403: Briery Leaze Road In March 2012 the Hengrove and Stockwood Open Space (south of Neighbourhood Partnership voted to reject Whitchurch District Centre), possible disposal of site as part of the Area Green Hengrove Space Plan process. Site to be designated as Important Open Space.

BSA1404: Paddocks, In March 2012 the Hengrove and Stockwood Oatlands Avenue and Great Neighbourhood Partnership voted to reject Hayles Road, Hengrove possible disposal of site as part of the Area Green Space Plan process. Site to be designated as Important Open Space.

BSA1405: Craydon Road In March 2012 the Hengrove and Stockwood Open Space, Stockwood Neighbourhood Partnership voted to reject possible disposal of site as part of the Area Green Space Plan process. Site to be designated as Important Open Space.

BSA1406: Former Petherton A housing allocation was selected for this site. Road School site, Petherton The estimated housing capacity has been reduced Road, Hengrove from 60 to 40.

- 187 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Designations Summary of the main changes made to the designations from the 2010 Options Consultation Documents to the Publication Version.

Designation Key changes

Safeguarded Transport Links

South Bristol Link Small section of proposed route that falls within Bristol City Council boundary at Bedminster Down added at Preferred Approach stage.

Route amended in Publication Version to reflect June 2012 SBL consultation documents which show Link passing through Imperial and Hengrove Parks.

North Fringe to Hengrove Package Route amended in Publication Version to in Hengrove Park area reflect June 2012 BRT consultation documents which show route passing down Bamfield and along Whitchurch Lane.

Safeguarded Park and Ride Sites

No changes.

Rail Infrastructure

Portway Park and Ride Station Location of station amended in Publication Version slightly to avoid being shown as located on a bend.

Principal Industrial and Warehousing Areas (PIWAs)

• 150 Crew’s Hole Road, part of Proposed designations for these sites Crew’s Hole Road (PIWA71), removed. Crew’s Hole • Area between 151-157 Crew’s Hole Road, part of Crew’s Hole Road (PIWA71), Crew’s Hole • Imperial Tobacco site, part of East Court / Winterstoke Road (PIWA78), Ashton Vale • Glenfrome Road (north) (PIWA48), St Werburgh’s / Baptist Mills

• Diamonite Industrial Park, part Designation removed and replaced with an of Lodge Causeway / allocation for housing with business. Goodneston Road (PIWA52),

- 188 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Designation Key changes Fishponds

• Former Parnall’s Works, part of Designation removed and replaced with an Lodge Causeway / Goodneston allocation for housing, business and Road (north) (PIWA52), community use. Fishponds

• Graphic Packaging, Filwood Designation removed and replaced with an Road / Goodneston Road allocation for housing and business. (south) (PIWA53), Fishponds

Parts of the following PIWAs: Minor changes made to the boundaries of these PIWAs to remove parts / sites which • Bedminster Trading Estate contain non-industrial and warehousing uses. (PIWA74-E and PIWA74-W) • Brislington Trading Estate / Bath Road (north) (PIWA45) • Cater Road (PIWA32) • Clift House Road / Coronation Road (PIWA83) • Netham Road / Blackswarth Road (north) (PIWA72-N) • St Phillip’s Marsh (PIWA68)

Centres

Filton Avenue Centre boundary revised. Clifton Village (Princess Victoria Street) Queen’s Road, Withywood Symes Avenue, Hartcliffe

Primary Shopping Areas

Clifton Village Additional primary shopping areas. Gloucester Road Church Road, St George

Lodge Causeway Revised Primary Shopping Area. Stapleton Road

Secondary Shopping Frontages

Gloucester Road Revised secondary frontages. Shirehampton Lodge Causeway

- 189 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Designation Key changes Clifton Village Stapleton Road

Sites of Nature Conservation Interest

Concorde Drive, Southmead Additional SNCI designation. Barkleys Hill, Stapleton

Ashdene Avenue, Eastville SNCI reduced.

Regionally Important Geological Sites

No changes.

Local Historic Parks and Gardens

No changes.

Green Belt

No changes to Green Belt designations.

Important Open Space

Various locations Important Open Space designation has been applied to all Area Green Space Plan sites which Neighbourhood Committees agreed should not be subject to disposal. Minor changes were also made to a few Important Open Spaces to remove buildings from the designated area.

Brean Down Avenue, Westbury Areas of Important Open Space added. Park

Bishopthorpe Road, Horfield

Romney Avenue, Lockleaze Princes Lane, Clifton Cobden Street, Barton Hill Gaunt’s Ham Park, Barton Hill Herapath Street, Barton Hill Cousins Lane, St George Hudds Vale Road, St George Wick Road, Brislington

Ashdene Avenue, Eastville Areas of Important Open Space reduced or removed. Duchess Way, Stapleton (area of

- 190 - Bristol Local Plan - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013) Statement of Consultation

Designation Key changes private gardens) Stibbs Hill, St George St Matthias Campus, Fishponds

Avonmouth and Kingsweston Levels

Following options consultation, extent of designation was reduced to exclude smaller tracts of land surrounded by existing development and areas by the coast subject to the international habitat designation.

Sewage Works Expansion

No changes.

Minerals Safeguarding Areas

See Policy DM38 above. Minerals safeguarding area has been added at south east Bristol, in the Green Belt

- 191 -