Representations

SEDGEMOOR LOCAL PLAN REVIEW - REGULATION 19 PUBLICATION VERSION (JANUARY 2017)

1.0 Introduction

1.1.1 These representations have been prepared by Ian Jewson Planning Ltd on behalf of Greenhill & Brownfield and relate to Sedgemoor District Council’s (SDC’s) consultation on the Proposed Submission Local Plan (January 2017). Whilst Greenhill & Brownfield has a general interest in SDC’s forward planning it also has specific interests in relation to land referred to as H057a (land at edge of Woolavington) and H337 (land west of Sedgemoor Way) in the Strategic Housing Land Availability Report 2016. Where relevant these representations will highlight the potential for residential development on this land. IJP previously submitted reps in relation to the Stage 1 Consultation review of the Local Plan (October 2015). An additional consultation took place between June and August 2016 which focussed on Bridgwater and the Tier 1 settlements.

1.1.2 These representations provide comments on the soundness of the proposed policies in relation to the specific questions raised by the Regulation 19 consultation with reference to evidence base documents where relevant.

1.1.3 Specific consideration has been given to the following policies:

• Policy S 2 (Spatial Strategy for Sedgemoor) • Policy S 3 (Infrastructure Delivery) • Policy S 4 (Sustainable Development Principles) • Policy T 2 (Tier 2 Settlement Objectives) • Policy T 3 (Tier 2 Settlement Housing) • Policy D 7 (Affordable Housing)

Representations

1.1.4 These policies are discussed in turn in the following sections and where appropriate we have made suggested changes for the policy to be considered sound.

2.0 Policy S 2 (Spatial Strategy for Sedgemoor)

Housing and Employment Requirement

2.1.1 The Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) prepared by Peter Brett Associates in September 2016 concludes that the Objectively Assessed Housing Need (OAHN) in Sedgemoor is (annually over the 2011-32 period) 644 dwellings per annum (13,530 over the full emerging Plan period). We welcome that the SHMA figure identified in the Local Plan Review has been expressed as a ‘minimum requirement’ as this reflects the NPPF’s aim of boosting significantly the supply of housing.

2.1.2 The SHMA identifies a demographic based need for between 609 and 635 dwellings per annum. It bases the OAHN of 644 dwellings per annum on the highest of the demographic scenario ranges which would meet the predicted job growth forecast figure and takes into account an allowance for concealed households. Taking all of this evidence together the SHMA suggests that across the District there is a good match between potential job growth and the likely growth in the resident workforce.

2.1.3 The SHMA has also provided clarity on the additional housing need likely to be generated from Hinkley Point C (HPC).

2.1.4 However, it is important to note that the HPC figures have not been added to the OAHN. The SHMA states that HPC is expected to provide around 900 additional jobs with many more jobs created in the construction phase, which will necessitate the need for additional housing in Sedgemoor. The SHMA also predicts that there will be a further 176 jobs created from the impact of HPC (i.e. other jobs created as a result of the direct new jobs at HPC). The overall Representations

likely effect in Sedgemoor is at least an additional 708 residents in employment but this could be significantly higher.

2.1.5 With the figures for the additional jobs created in Sedgemoor from HPC added in to the Oxford Economics (OE) forecast the level of housing required according to the SHMA is 653 dwellings per annum based on past trends. This is higher than the 644 dwellings per annum identified as the OAHN. In our view the higher figure (653) which takes into account growth from HPC should be used in the Local Plan Review.

2.1.6 Due to the uncertain impact of HPC we consider that the level of growth required may be much higher than the 653 dwellings identified based on past trends. The uncertain impact is summarised in Paragraph 57 of the SHMA which suggests that assumptions will change as the project evolves:

‘‘Whilst the HPC position is summarised at the point of drafting, the project position will evolve quickly. Base assumptions which underpinned the planning process to inform the Development Consent Order Accommodation Strategy will change. Local unemployment figures and the workforce profile and projections will also evolve. The project makes provision for the Socio-Economic Advisory Group(SEAG) to monitor the housing impacts and the Councils have secured housing mitigation funds to respond to local concerns. The HCA are also directly engaged locally to expedite a complimentary programme of ‘Starter Homes’ and EDFE own a large tranche of land with outline planning consent for housing.’’

2.1.7 As a result of the uncertain nature of HPC the SHMA suggests that the impact should be closely monitored by Sedgemoor in the Annual Monitoring Report. Paragraph 58 of the SHMA states:

‘‘The Annual Monitoring Report will summarise project implementation, impacts and benefits and highlight any key changes to local conditions. It will therefore be important for the Council to monitor and review Representations

impacts on the housing market and to maintain a dynamic view of housing need.’’

2.1.8 In the light of the understandable uncertainty over the precise figures, it is important to take a positive view to provide flexibility and enable the provision of sufficient housing to be delivered. Further clarity on the additional housing need generated by HPC and how it will be delivered should be set out in the Local Plan Review document to ensure it is planned for appropriately in the future. Without this it is not possible to fully understand whether the overall proposed housing requirement is appropriate.

2.1.9 It is recognised that there are many unknowns on the impact of HPC which could result in unforeseen events, therefore Policy S 2 needs to ensure that it is flexible enough to address a significant housing shortfall which may occur if the project goes ahead.

2.1.10 To take into account the predicted level of housing generated from HPC based on past trends and to ensure the impact of HPC is closely monitored by the Council we consider that the beginning of Policy S 2 should be amended as follows (shown as tracked changes):

‘‘During the plan period (2011-2032), the Council will plan, monitor and manage the delivery of a minimum of 13530 13,713 new homes (644 653 per annum) and 75 hectares of land for B1, B2 and B8 uses (business, general industrial and storage and distribution) to help meet the need for new homes, support the economy and create 9,795 new jobs.

The impacts of HPC on the housing market will be monitored closely by the Council in an Annual Monitoring Report to maintan a dynamic view of housing need, and if necessary the housing need adjusted to take into account the full impacts.’’ Representations

2.1.11 We note that the District Council have identified a requirement to deliver 75 hectares of employment land for B1, B2 and B8 uses to help create 9,795 jobs in the plan period.

2.1.12 We acknowledge that the requirement for around 75 hectares of employment land is likely to be proposed within the District’s core settlements including Bridgwater, Burnham, Highbridge and Cheddar. However, Policy S2 is not specific on how the employment land will be distributed in the District.

2.1.13 The Employment Land Review identifies a number of mixed use sites in lower tiered settlements which are rejected in terms of future employment potential on the basis that they are residential-led where employment uses are likely to be small scale. Policy S2 should be amended to ensure a flexible approach is provided to allow appropriate employment sites to come forward in the lower tiered settlements where opportunities exist. This is recommended in the Employment Land Review and should be translated into policy text.

Settlement Hierarchy

2.1.14 We are in general support of the settlement hierarchy and the distribution of development identified in Policy S2, however we have a number of comments.

2.1.15 Policy S2 sets out the settlement hierarchy for the District and identifies Bridgwater as a Principal Town which is allocated the largest amount of the overall housing requirement in the plan period. This is a logical approach based on the level of services, facilities and employment opportunities available. However, as set out in our previous representations on earlier versions of the Local Plan Review we have concerns regarding the allocation of sites located in the floodplain which should be discounted unless it can be demonstrated that there are no other reasonable options available. For instance land at East Bridgwater (Policy B4) is identified in the Sustainability Appraisal (SA) as located in a high risk flood zone which will have a negative effect on the objective to reduce the vulnerability to climate change. Representations

2.1.16 Paragraph 100 of the NPPF is clear that:

‘‘Local Plans should be supported by Strategic Flood Risk Assessment and develop policies to manage flood risk from all sources, taking account of advice from the Environment Agency and other relevant flood risk management bodies, such as lead local flood authorities and internal drainage boards. Local Plans should apply a sequential, risk based approach to the location of development to avoid where possible flood risk to people and property and manage any residual risk, taking account of the impacts of climate change.’’

2.1.17 Paragraph 101 goes on to clarify that ‘The aim of the Sequential Test is to steer new development to areas with the lowest probability of flooding. Development should not be allocated or permitted if there are reasonably available sites appropriate for the proposed development in areas with a lower probability of flooding.’

2.1.18 Whilst in principle it may be considered appropriate to locate the majority of development in larger settlements the significant risk of flooding now and in the future, together with the implications of climate change suggest that a more appropriate strategy which seeks to avoid areas of flood risk should be considered preferable. This does not mean that development within and adjacent to Bridgwater is not acceptable. However, in appropriate cases lower tier settlements should be identified for increasing levels of growth as an alternative to building in the flood plain.

2.1.19 Due to the rural nature of Sedgemoor and the concentration of services, facilities and employment opportunities in the major settlements it is unlikely that Policy S2 would result in a spatial distribution consistent with wider sustainability objectives. However, the Local Plan should identify specific strategic sites in appropriate locations which could provide a significant contribution to district housing needs and reduce reliance on less appropriate housing sites in the flood plain. Representations

2.1.20 The SA identifies maximum and high growth options in lower tiered settlements which are considered to have major positive effects on the objective of reducing vulnerability to climate change because they provide an opportunity to steer growth to areas at low risk to flooding seeking to enable people to live in a home suitable to their needs, with the scale of potential allocations increasing the diversity of the housing on offer, and having a major positive effect on improving opportunities and access to jobs. A number of Tier 2 settlements are identified as having these major positive effects including Woolavington.

2.1.21 We note that the settlement hierarchy shown in Table 4.1 is based on the Role and Function evidence. Table 4.6 provides more detail on the associated scale of development in each settlement. For Tier 2 settlements one of the criteria includes:

‘‘New strategic greenfield allocation(s) adjacent to the settlement boundary (minimum of 570 dwellings across all 6 settlements), to be identified through subsequent site allocations Development Plan Document or Neighbourhood Plans;’’

2.1.22 This general approach is welcomed and reflects the evidence in the SA which suggests that there are opportunities for high levels of growth in the Tier 2 settlements including Woolavington. However, this does not appear to have been translated into the overall quantum of housing allocated in the Tier 2 settlements where sustainable sites exist. We consider that there is potential to achieve more than the 575 units proposed in the Tier 2 settlements in the plan period. This is particularly the case for Woolavington. As set out further below Land at Woolavington (SHLAA references H057 and H337) which is identified as an opportunity site in the SHLAA, can provide a mixed-use extension to the settlement.

2.1.23 Overall we do not believe that the Local Plan Review has allocated sufficient growth towards lower tiered settlements including Woolavington where opportunities exist for a higher quantum of housing. Whilst we have not Representations

proposed any specific amendments to the settlement hierarchy we consider it should be updated in accordance with the higher housing requirement (set out earlier in our comments on Policy S 2) to distribute the additional dwellings across the District, with a particular emphasis on Tier 2 settlements and avoiding locations with significant constraints.

3.0 Policy S 3 (Infrastructure Delivery)

3.1.1 As drafted this policy does not allow the viability of a scheme to be considered when negotiating Section 106 agreements. The policy is therefore inconsistent with national policy (paragraph 173 and 182 of the NPPF). The policy needs to have some flexibility to prevent delay in the delivery of new development. The policy also suggests that development proposals should demonstrate that full regard has been given, where appropriate, to implementing the requirements of the Infrastructure Delivery Strategy. In our view the term ‘full regard’ is vague and could be misinterpreted. The policy also does not differentiate between different scales of development proposals.

3.1.2 Further clarity should be provided in Policy S3 on allowing applicants to demonstrate viability and how infrastructure will be delivered for different scales of development.

4.0 Policy S 4 (Sustainable Development Principles)

4.1.1 We support the need to ensure development proposals demonstrate sustainable development principles. However, we question whether this policy is necessary as these principles are already reflected in national guidance (the framework). On this basis Policy S4 should be deleted.

5.0 Policy T 2 (Tier 2 Settlement Objectives)

5.1.1 This policy suggests that development in the Tier 2 settlements will be supported which meet a number of objectives. Some of these criteria are unclear and need to be amended to ensure the delivery of development is not Representations

restricted. We have commented on the criteria of Policy T 3 below (comments in red):

‘‘Proposals for development in the Tier 2 Settlements will be supported which meet the following objectives:

• Enhance and sustain their role as service centres for local communities • Meet as a minimum the requirements for district growth as set out below; • Improve self-containment; For settlement or Sedgemoor as a whole? • Respect environmental limits; • Improve their overall sustainability, having regard to environmental, social and economic factors; This needs to be consistent with the NPPF in terms of the overall positive balance instead of suggesting improvement. • Meet the needs of the local community. How is this measured?’’

5.1.2 On this basis we consider that the SDC should amend this policy where relevant to provide more clarity.

6.0 Policy T 3 (Tier 2 Settlement Housing)

6.1.1 Policy T3 sets out how proposals outside of the settlement boundaries of Tier 2 settlements will be supported in the interim subject to meeting various criteria which we support. Due to the potential delays in neighbourhood plans and allocations documents this will be important to ensure that development which is sustainable is approved without delay to support SDC’s housing requirement. Whilst sites are often identified in neighbourhood plans to deliver sustainable development it will be important to ensure that neighbourhood plans are not used as a mechanism to restrict development (to avoid an antidevelopment stance). Representations

6.1.2 In addition, Policy T3 requires criteria to be satisfied before support can be given for development of proposals outside the settlement boundaries of Tier 2 settlements. However, some of these criteria are potentially ambiguous and this could lead to delay in delivering housing sites at a time when supply needs to be boosted quickly. For instance the last criteria suggests that proposals must be considered in consultation with the town/parish council and local community although it does not clarify whether support should be demonstrated. In our view this criteria is vague and unnecessary and therefore should be deleted from Policy T3.

6.1.3 Policy T 3 also includes a table which allocates a minimum requirement for housing in each Tier 2 settlement in the plan period. We welcome that the allocations have been expressed as a ‘minimum’ in terms of the quantum proposed allowing flexibility in delivery to ensure local needs are met and boosting significantly the supply of housing. This also accords with the overall spatial strategy identified in Policy S2. However, we do not believe that sufficient growth has been allocated towards Woolavington and it is not clear where the figure of 150 dwellings has been derived from in the evidence base.

6.1.4 In the evidence base it is suggested that a maximum growth option in Woolavington (900 dwellings) is considered to have a major negative effect on objectives relating to reducing contributions to climate change and the effect on congestion. This seems reasonable based on the size of Woolavington as a Tier 2 settlement, however, in the short term there is still an opportunity to allocate a higher quantum of development in Woolavington than the 150 dwellings specified.

6.1.5 Land at Woolavington (SHLAA references H057 and H337) as edged red on the plan (attached at Appendix 1) has previously been promoted for development and was also the subject of an outline planning application in August 2012 for a mixed use development including 60 dwellings (reference 54/13/00005). Notably the proposals were well received by the public with only 3 letters of objection being submitted by local residents. The proposals were Representations

also supported by the Ward Councillor. The site is also identified as an opportunity site for development in the District Council’s SHLAA 2016. An earlier and larger proposal included a new doctors surgery which was subsequently approved on land elsewhere in Woolavington and therefore the proposals did not proceed. However, the previous planning applications identified that the site was suitable for development. The land still represents an opportunity for development and could make an important contribution to meeting future market and affordable housing needs. The 2014 SHLAA recognises the land as an ‘opportunity site’ although suggests that it may not yield development until 2020 onwards. In reality the site is available now and the earlier planning application on the northern part of the site and recent baseline assessments have not identified any insurmountable constraints which would prevent development from coming forward.

6.1.6 The site performs well against the stated objectives of the SA but in contrast to other housing options in Woolavington, is large enough to provide employment development and community facilities, land for outdoor sport and recreation and areas for biodiversity enhancement. On this basis the site should be considered the most favourable option for growth at Woolavington.

6.1.7 The 2014 SHLAA correctly identifies the land as comprising a total site area of approximately 38.3 hectares and a potential yield of 700-800 dwellings. The scale of development land provides a significant opportunity to deliver a large scale, sustainable and mixed use development. In addition, as the site is within a single family’s ownership development could proceed on a phased basis across a number of review periods so that appropriate levels of growth could be provided to meet need as circumstances change. The site is also of a size that would allow for significant community benefits and infrastructure to be delivered in a comprehensive mixed use development. This would include employment and retail developments, new education facilities, public open space, outdoor sport and recreation facilities and areas for specialist housing including homes for the elderly and self-build. Representations

6.1.8 The land lies adjacent to the southern boundary of Woolavington and could be easily linked with existing services and infrastructure. Development at the site would also provide opportunities for delivering significant improvements to community infrastructure as well as appropriate employment opportunities for local people. For reference an illustrative masterplan is submitted in support of these representations to demonstrate how earlier phases of development in the northern part of the site could come forward (see Appendix 2). We have also attached a launch document previously submitted to SDC which demonstrates deliverability of the site on a phased basis (see Appendix 3). We have also commenced engagement with the relevant Parish Council’s.

6.1.9 In our previous representations on the Stage 1 scope and approach consultation a number concerns were raised in relation to the Sustainability Appraisal which do not appear to have been addressed. In particular concerns were raised with the scoring of individual sites does not appear to be consistent. Specifically a comparison of sites H057 and H337 against H426 suggests that this is the case. It is also not clear why H057 and H337 are not considered to be available in the short term when the land is being promoted for development now and there are no insurmountable problems which would prevent the site coming forward in the short term. The opportunity to provide local employment on site has not been identified. This should be considered as a positive and scored more favourably than other smaller sites where this would not be possible.

6.1.10 In terms of the updated role and function of settlements it is still not clear from the available evidence whether the assessment has properly scored the individual settlements. For its size Woolavington has a wide range of services which are not fully expressed within the Role and Function evidence base. It is well located to wider employment opportunities at Bridgwater and close to the proposed Puriton Energy Park.

6.1.11 As set out above we consider that the Local Plan Review has not quantified the figure of 150 dwellings allocated in Woolavington based on all available Representations

evidence. We welcome that the settlement allocations have been identified as a minimum which will be important to ensure that further growth is possible in settlements such as Woolavington, but we still have concerns that the figure identified for Woolavington is too low and not reasonably justified. As set out in our comments on Policy S 2 we consider that the additional housing generated from the impact of HPC should be allocated to unconstrained sites in lower tiered settlements such as Woolavington.

7.0 Policy D 7 (Affordable Housing)

7.1.1 We generally support this policy and the thresholds for affordable housing identified in tables 7.2 and 7.3. However, the policy text only proposes affordable housing provision on sites for 6 dwellings or more whereas the tables include different thresholds depending on the sites location and typology. The policy needs to be consistent with the thresholds identified in the tables. With this in mind the beginning of Policy D 7 should be amended as follows (shown as tracked changes):

‘‘The Council will seek to negotiate appropriate affordable housing provision on sites of 6 dwellings or more in accordance with the thresholds and Policy Targets set out in Tables 7.2 and 7.3 on a site by site basis taking into account viability considerations. Negotiations will take into account the relevant thresholds and Policy Targets set out in Tables 7.2 and 7.3.’’

7.1.2 Policy D 7 also suggests that affordable housing should form part of the overall development and be well integrated with any market housing. We are concerned that this is vague and could potentially lead to issues during the planning application process. Clarity should be provided in Policy D7 on what ‘well integrated’ actually means.

Representations

Appendix 1 – Land at Woolavington Red Line Plan

Representations

Appendix 2 – Masterplan relating to northern part of site

Representations

Appendix 3 – Land at Wooolavington Launch Document

Residential Development at: Land West of Woolavington Hill Woolavington

Site Launch Document

Prepared by Ian Jewson Planning Ltd & Thrive Architects

On Behalf of:

July 2016 PLANNING FOR THE LONG TERM FUTURE OF WOOLAVINGTON

2 Contents

Introduction 1 Site Location & Context 2 Existing Settlement & Characteristics 4 Planning Policy Context 6 Site Assessment 7 Consultation 10 Masterplan 12 Conclusion 14 4 Introduction

This document is a key component of the The document shows that the site is a sustainable evidence base underpinning the promotion of location for growth, with no major physical, land west of Woolavington Hill, Woolavington environmental or viability constraints affecting for residential-led mixed-use development with the site. It forms the basis for taking forward the associated community infrastructure, potentially design process by appraising the characteristics incorporating employment and commercial uses, of the site and surrounding area, and establishing including retail. It explains the suitability and key design principles for future development. It deliverability of the site for development having refers to relevant technical studies and how these regard to its location and the characteristics of inform the design process, and concludes with a the surrounding area. site masterplan.

1 Site Location & Context

The site (30.10 Ha) is situated immediately the A39 Bath Road together with existing loose south/south-west of Woolavington, a Key Rural knit housing development to the south provide Settlement which is well located to existing and a sense of containment to the site. To the west future employment opportunities, and has a good there is agricultural land and a further road – range of key services and facilities. The site is Crancombe Lane. approximately 5.5 km north-east of the centre of Bridgwater and 3 km east of Junction 23 of The site comprises arable and pasture land, none the M5. The A39 Bath Road to the south of the of which is subject to any statutory landscape site provides a main road link to the motorway designation. The Somerset Levels and Moors junction and Bridgwater. Special Protection Area and Ramsar Site is the nearest designated site, situated approximately The site is bounded by existing residential 3km to the north-east. development and playing ields to the north. The B3141 Woolavington Hill to the east and

M5 Puriton

J23 Puriton Hill Woolavington

Site Crossington

A39 Bath

Road

A39 Bath Road

To Bridgwater

Site Context Plan

2 Site Location Plan

3 Bitham Lane

Old Mill Road Woolavington Village Hall

Allotments adjacent to site Knowle End

Play Area North West Area of Site

4 Existing Settlement & Characteristics

Woolavington is one of a number of villages of expansive, post-war housing estate development Saxon and Medieval origin that have evolved along comprising two storey houses and bungalows. This the northern lank of the Polden Hills that form a development provides a hard, urban edge to the long low ridge cutting across the Somerset Levels site and adjoining land. and Moors. There are no designated heritage assets The historic centre of the village is concentrated within the immediate vicinity of the site acting in the north of the settlement around Lower as a constraint to development. There is an Road, Tapps Lane and Church Street where archaeological Site of County Importance to the there are numerous listed buildings, including west of the site. the Grade 1 listed Church of St. Mary. Further south towards the site the village is dominated by

View North Across site towards rear of properties along Sedgemoor Way

5 Planning Policy Context

Development Plan

The principle Development Plan for Sedgemoor District Council comprises the Core Strategy Local Development Framework CORE STRATEGY Local Plan (adopted 2011) and saved policies of Published Version the Sedgemoor District Local Plan 1991 – 2011. The development plan identiies Woolavington as a Key Rural Settlement whose role is to act as a focus for: • local growth that promotes greater self- containment and a stronger, sustainable local community; • local housing and employment growth; and

• the provision of key local services and Shaping the Future of facilities. Sedgemoor 2006-27

May 2013 Core Strategy Local Plan Review (Adopted September 2011)

The Council has undertaken consultation on which comprises a signiicant part of the the irst stage of a review of the Local Plan with promotion site is identiied as a possible housing a view to rolling the Plan period forward by site. Consultation has taken place on a range of another 5 years. Through the review, the Council growth options for the village, from 0-49 dwellings is advocating growth over the period 2011 – 2032 to 150 plus dwellings. based on a High Economic Growth Forecast, which will require the delivery of at least 586 The site has been promoted through the SHLAA dwellings per annum, and the provision of 9,791 and is identiied in the most recent issue (2014) new jobs over the Plan period. as an opportunity site.

Woolavington is identiied as a Tier 2 settlement in a revised Settlement Hierarchy. The Plan review highlights that Tier 2 settlements can play their part in helping to meet District-wide development needs. Land south of Woolavington

6 Site Assessment

Key Site Features Landscape

This section highlights the existing physical The site is situated within the Mid Somerset Hills features of the site and indicates those that are National Landscape Character Area and within to be retained as they are considered to make a the Polden Hills Landscape Character Area as positive contribution to the future development deined in the Sedgemoor District Landscape of the site: Assessment and Countryside Design Summary. • Public Right of Way BW2/44 along Bitham Lane and tree belt/hedgerows to be The landscape character is described as a series maintained and enhanced as a signiicant of hills rising out of the low wetland landscape of landscape and ecological feature; the Somerset Levels and Moors that have typically • Green Lane/Bridleway BW37/1 and Public rolling, broad proiles with steeper slopes on the Right of Way BW2/42 to be safeguarded and south side of the Polden Hills. Hedgerows and enhanced where appropriate; deciduous woodland are signiicant features. • Boundary mixed species hedgerows to be retained and enhanced, or replaced with native The assessment of the Polden Hills landscape species planting where required for access; character area identiies frequent long views • Existing topographical features and land form over the Levels and Moors and to the other hill to provide SUDS drainage opportunity; and areas. It states that tree planting at village’s edges • Views across countryside towards distant hills would help absorb housing developments into the and across the Levels. surrounding landscape.

Blackford Highbridge

Key B3139 B3139 B3139

LEVELS AND MOORS B3151 West HuntspillHuntspill River M5 B3141 River Brue Peat Moors River Parrett 145000N East Huntspill Clay Moors Levels Stockland Bristol

Levels - estuarine Pawlett Burtle Mendip District WestLevels Somerset - Islands District A38 Combwich South Drain Sea Edge/Intertidal Zone Woolavington Puriton Cossington

140000N Chilton Bawdrip Polden Cannington Edington Nether A39 Stowey P o dl e n H sli Catcott

Ashford A39 A39 Reservoir Shapwick Chedzoy BridgwaterBridgwater Ashcott Spaxton Durleigh Hawkridge Reservoir Reservoir King's Sedgemoor Drain

Enmore 135000N Sowy River A361 River ParrettWestonzoyland Goathurst

North Petherton Middlezoy A372

Landscape Character Area Plan M5 South Somerset District Bridgwater

7 Highways & Transport Drainage

The site access points as indicated on the An extract from the Environment Agency Flood Masterplan have been investigated to ensure Risk Map below conirms that the site lies wholly that access can be achieved to accommodate within Flood Zone 1. The site is therefore at low the proposed development. Vehicular access risk of looding and as such is appropriate for from Woolavington Hill is likely to take the form development. of a priority junction or roundabout junction depending on the scale of development and mix Previous technical work indicates that surface of uses to be accommodated on the site. water run-off can be attenuated on-site using SUDS principles including swales and attenuation Bus services operate via Cossington Lane, to the basins. Further testing will be required to establish north of the site, to Bridgwater, Glastonbury and whether surface water can be discharged to Wells. ground utilising soakaways and permeable paving. Overall there is nothing to suggest that surface Ecology water run-off and lood risk associated with the proposed development cannot be effectively An initial Phase 1 walkover survey has managed on site. established the potential need for further survey work although at this stage there are no known constraints which would preclude the development of the site.

Environment Agency Flood Risk Map

8 Site Assessment

Local Services & Facilities

Woolavington beneits from a wide range of local facilities and amenities within walking and cycling distance of the site. These include a Co-op foodstore, post ofice, play area, playing ields, bus stops (Cossington Lane), hairdressers/beauticians, Local petrol illing station, the village primary school, Shop doctor’s surgery, village and community hall, local shop and church. Woolavington is also close Village Church to the new community hospital at East Bower, Primary Hall Bridgwater. School

10 Minute Walk Short bus trips enable access to facilities and services further aield, including East Bridgwater Community School, Bridgwater College, Sainsbury’s superstore, Bridgwater railway station and Bridgwater town centre where a wide range of retail and leisure facilities exist.

Playing The site itself, as a whole, provides an opportunity Bus Fields Co-op Stop 5 Minute Walk to deliver new community, employment and commercial, including retail, uses both for future residents and the existing community, Hairdressers contributing to self-containment and enhancing the sustainability of the settlement.

Petrol Station

Local Amenities Plan

9 Consultation

Part of the site was the subject of development Consultation will involve: proposals in 2013. During that time a • Discussions with Council oficers and considerable amount of consultation was statutory consultees; and undertaken to gauge local opinion. The proposals • Discussion with Parish Council; culminated in a planning application for 60 dwellings and associated development which was In the event that it is decided to proceed with a supported by the Ward Councillor and received planning application: only 3 letters of objections from local residents. • Distribution of consultation lealets outlining Whilst the planning application was unsuccessful proposals for the site and providing details of this was largely due to the requirements of Policy a public exhibition; P4 and the fact that an alternative site at Crockers • Organising public exhibition event to Hill had already been approved. However, the provide an opportunity to explain proposals detailed consultation work undertaken at the for development of the site to the local time was helpful in highlighting the views of the community and seek feedback; and community and indicated strong support for the • Review and submit consultation responses and principle of development on this site. how they have inluenced the proposals in a Statement of Community Involvement. The purpose of community and stakeholder engagement is to understand issues raised by the local planning authority, statutory consultees and the local community in order to consider and respond in a manner that contributes towards shaping a inal development scheme for the site.

10 11 Opportunities & Constraints

This section identiies the key opportunities and constraints arising from the site assessment which have in turn informed the development of the masterplan. Key opportunities and constraints are: • Site size and location enables a range of potential uses to be accommodated, contributing to settlement sustainability and self-containment; • Develop green links utilising existing public footpath and bridleway corridors; • Maximise connectivity through the site and to adjoining uses/the village; Sports Field • Extend the allotments; • Opportunities to create green infrastructure such as linked green spaces and play areas responding to site topography where it may constrain built development, eg. exposed ridge line; • Opportunities to incorporate long distance views to hills and across Levels; • Protect existing hedgerows and trees and replace where removal required to facilitate access; • Primary access to be achieved from B3141 Woolavington Hill; • Drainage features can be incorporated into Allotments block structure of Masterplan; and • Incorporate appropriate landscaping and boundary treatments, and create a more sensitive development edge.

Bitham Lane

12 Sports Field

55 Pedestrian Access

Green Edge

Local Ridgeline

60 Pedestrian Access

Allotments

Footpath Retained 55 Hedgerow 50 Retained Hedgerow

Vehicle 45 Access

Bitham Lane Green Edge Footpath

Retained Footpath Hedgerow 50 Retained Vehicle Hedgerow 45 Access

40

Green Edge

Constraints & Opportunities Plan

13 Masterplan

This document has discussed the site assessment factors that have informed the Masterplan for land off Woolavington Hill. Accordingly the Masterplan adheres to the following key development principles:

• To accommodate a phased approach to the • To include well integrated development blocks development of the site with community that relate well to and overlook public spaces; uses to support residential development • Provide an integrated network of green and the potential to deliver employment/ infrastructure, including public open space, commercial uses in later phases or as part of a play areas and links to the existing allotments; comprehensive package of development; • To promote sustainable transport options • The provision of a mix of housing to relect through well integrated pedestrian and local housing need; cycle links, proximity to bus routes and local • The provision of a high quality, landscaped facilities; and environment that respects the wider • Inclusion of SUDS system within the site. landscape character;

KEY

Residential

Bungalows

Care Home

Self Build Plots

Shop/Community Uses

Greenspace

14 Pedestrian Links

Pedestrian Links

Bungalows

Landscape

Buffer Play Pedestrian Links

New Allotments Bungalows

Pedestrian Links Play

Shop/Community Uses

Phase 1 Care Home Bitham Lane

Phase 2 Landscape Buffer

Play Extra Care

Attenuation Area

Self Build Plots

15 Conclusions

The landowner is promoting this site through the The landowner is seeking to engage with review of the Sedgemoor Core Strategy. The site Sedgemoor District Council and the local represents a logical and natural extension to the community to bring forward development that village of Woolavington and is a suitable location is both sympathetic to local need and context, for growth to help meet the development needs and which aligns with the Council’s spatial of the village and wider District. The site is development strategy for the District for the next relatively free of constraint, and is sustainable, 15 years. deliverable and available for development.

16 17 Thrive Architects (South West) Limited, Unit 5 Middle Bridge Business Park, Bristol Road, Portishead,Bristol, BS20 6PN

t: 01275 407000

www.thrivearchitects.co.uk