Flood Risk and Drainage Note

APPENDIX D – FLOOD RISK AND DRAINAGE NOTE

Selwood Garden Village Proposals – Representations to the Mendip Local Plan Part 2

South Frome Mendip District Council Local Plan Part II – Pre-Submission Consultation fdWritten Representation - Flood Risk and Drainage February 2018 173624

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The proposed Selwood Garden Village located south of Frome covers an area of approximately 400 acres and would have the potential to accommodate 2,000 homes, employment land, education facilities, sports and recreation areas, a local centre and further ancillary and complementary facilities.

The Flood Map for Planning shows the majority of the site to be located in Flood Zone 1, indicating a low level of flood risk from fluvial and/or tidal sources. In accordance with the NPPF, all development types and land uses are suitable within Flood Zone 1. There are small portions of the site, to the south and east, that are located in Flood Zone 2 and 3, associated with proximity to the River Frome. Flood Zone 2 is an area of medium flood risk, whereas Flood Zone 3 is an area of high flood risk. The preference would be to steer built development outside the extent of these areas.

The Long Term Flood Risk from Surface Water Map indicates that the majority of the site is at a very low risk of surface water flooding, which is defined as a chance of flooding of less than 1 in 1000 each year. There are some areas within the site that are at a low risk of surface water flooding, associated with natural overland flow routes and depressions within the topography. There are also areas within the vicinity of the watercourse at a medium to high risk of surface water flooding. If built development could not be steered outside the extent of these areas, the drainage strategy would ensure that water conveyance could still be achieved so as not to have any adverse impacts.

Furthermore, there is the potential to utilise the areas that are already affected by surface water flooding for contributing to the management of surface water runoff through the inclusion of Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS), such as attenuation basins and swales. In addition to accommodating the natural surface water runoff, these areas could be enhanced to accommodate the runoff from the developed areas, in order to mimic the natural surface water runoff regime.

Page: 2

The surface water drainage strategy would include a range of SuDS features within the masterplan to manage the rate and volume of runoff. The SuDS strategy would include attenuation basins within development parcels, connected using swales or pipe runs which would discharge to the River Frome at a controlled rate. This strategy would take into account the national, regional and local policies relevant to flood risk and surface water drainage, and would use source control as well as site and regional control features. The use of SuDS features in the drainage strategy would provide a range of additional environmental and community benefits, including a variety of landscape, recreation, ecology and water quality benefits that would add to the overall character of the completed scheme.

The wider drainage strategy will need to take into consideration the existing topography and overland flow routes and any existing constraints across the whole site, and as such, development parcels will have a reliance upon one another. It is therefore important that any submission considers how each phase will be delivered in relation to the wider drainage strategy, particularly where different phases rely upon each other for connection to the discharge receptor i.e. the River Frome. A wider strategy for the whole site is something that would therefore be established, to ensure a comprehensive and joined up solution to the management of surface water runoff is achieved.

Given the scale of the development, it is anticipated that additional foul drainage capacity will need to be provided and most likely improvements to the foul sewerage infrastructure. It is necessary to satisfy the capacity requirements of the existing and new development sustainably in order to avoid detrimental effects on existing residents and the environment, whilst delivering on the requirements of the development. The challenges from foul drainage will be mitigated through careful planning and programming in order to minimise risk, disruption and cost with delivering the scheme.

Page: 3

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Vectos have been appointed by NVB Architects to provide preliminary transport, highway, flood risk and drainage advice in relation to the proposed Garden Village south of Frome.

1.2 This document has been prepared to provide high level advice in relation to flood risk and drainage in order to inform any development proposals for the land.

1.3 This document has been prepared to outline the rationale behind a comprehensive residential led mixed-use development as a promotion to the Mendip Local Plan Part II, which is currently in the pre-submission consultation phase.

Scheme

1.4 The proposed scheme is for the urban extension of South Frome. The proposed development measures approximately 400 acres and would have the potential to accommodate 2,000 homes, employment land, education facilities, sports and recreation areas, a local centre and further ancillary and complementary facilities. The location of the site is shown below in Figure 1.1.

Figure 1.1 -Site Location Plan

1.5 As can be seen from Figure 1.1 above, the site is bounded by the A361 and railway to the east, A361 to the south, Marston Road and industrial land to the west, and the town of Frome to the north. The River Frome forms a significant component of the southern site area, crossing the site from the south, with land levels to the west falling towards it.

Page: 4

Technical Review

1.6 This Technical Review provides an overview of the local flood risk and drainage baseline conditions, investigating the opportunities, constraints, and risks associated with the site.

1.7 The remainder of this report is structured as follows:

• Section 2 – Outlines the relevant policies and guidance documents; • Section 3 – Provides a baseline overview in relation to flood risk; • Section 4 – Provides an overview in relation to surface water drainage and the principles and concepts of the sustainable surface water drainage strategy; and • Section 5 – Summarises and concludes the report.

Page: 5

2 POLICY

2.1 This section outlines the relevant national, regional and local policies and guidance associated with the proposed development.

National Planning Policy Framework

2.2 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) sets out the Government’s national policies for flood risk management in a land use planning context within England, with a Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) setting out how these are expected to be applied.

2.3 The NPPF states that developers and local authorities should try to relocate existing development to land in zones with the lowest probability of flooding. Where new development is proposed in areas of higher risk, the policy aims to make it safe without increasing flood risk elsewhere and where possible, reducing flood risk overall.

2.4 The definitions of the different Flood Zones are set out in Table 1 of the PPG (below), from low to high probability of river and sea flooding. These refer to the Environment Agency’s Flood Map for Planning (River and Sea) which shows the location of these Flood Zones. These Flood Zones refer to the probability of river and sea flooding, ignoring the presence of flood defences. These Flood Zones account for the possible impacts of climate change over the development design life and the consequent changes in the future probability of flooding.

2.5 A change in land use resulting from a proposed development may involve an increase in flood risk if the vulnerability of the development is changed. Table 2 of the PPG classifies different types of land uses in accordance with their flood risk vulnerability. Residential schemes are classified on Table 2 as More Vulnerable development.

Page: 6

2.6 Whereas Table 2 of the PPG categorises different types of land use and development according to their vulnerability to flood risk, Table 3 (below) of the PPG maps these vulnerability classes against the flood zones definitions as set out in Table 1, to indicate whether a proposed development would be considered as being “appropriate” or alternatively where the proposed development type should not be permitted. Although this assessment relates to the Flood Zones, as set out on the Environment Agency’s Flood Map for planning (Rivers and Sea), surface water and other sources of flooding would also need to be taken into account.

2.7 Table 3 makes reference to occasions where the Exception Test is required. This is a method to demonstrate and help ensure that flood risk to people and property will be managed satisfactorily, while allowing necessary development to go ahead in situations where suitable sites at lower risk of flooding are not available. Essentially, the two parts of the Exception Test require for a proposed development to demonstrate that it will i) provide wider sustainability benefits to the community that outweigh flood risk, and ii) that it will be safe for its lifetime, without increasing flood risk elsewhere and where possible to reduce flood risk overall.

2.8 The site has been designated by the Environment Agency as Flood Zone 1, given the low risk from rivers and sea. The proposed development is residential, defined as a More Vulnerable land use. Based on the criteria in the NPPF as outlined above, the flood risk vulnerability and flood zone compatibility of the proposed development is considered to be appropriate.

Page: 7

2.9 An assessment of surface water and other sources of flooding would need to be taken into account. The possible impacts of climate change over the development design life and the consequent changes in the future probability of flooding would also need to be considered. This FRA provides this assessment to demonstrate the suitability of the site for a residential development, and outlines a conceptual strategy for the management of surface water runoff.

Non-Statutory Technical Standards

2.10 The non-statutory technical standards (NTS) for sustainable drainage systems, produced by the Department for Environmental, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) March 2015, states that for developments on greenfield sites, peak surface water runoff rates and volumes must never exceed the peak greenfield runoff rate for the same event.

2.11 Surface water conveyance routes under exceedance conditions must also be planned for so as to ensure that life and property are not put at risk in the event of drainage system failure or with the occurrence of storm events that are in excess of design standards.

Mendip District Local Plan (2006-2029)

2.12 The Mendip District Local Plan sets out the long term strategic vision for the future of the District and how it will develop over the next 15 years.

2.13 The key policy with regard to flood risk and surface water management is given below:

Page: 8

Mendip District Local Plan Part II Draft for Pre-submission Consultation

2.14 The Mendip District Local Plan Part II is presently in the consultation phase. The purpose of the Plan Part II is to set out a long term strategic vision for the future of the District, including housing, economic development and infrastructure. Frome is stated as a key area of growth within Section 10 of the document.

2.15 The strategic wholistic development of the south Frome area will provide a comprehensive strategy for sustainable development of the town enabling the coming forward of significant infrastructure and facilities during the current plan period and beyond.

Mendip District Council Strategic Flood Risk Assessment

2.16 The NPPF requires that Local Plans should be supported by a Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA). The SFRA identifies areas that may flood, taking into account all potential sources of flooding. Mendip District Council commissioned Royal Haskoning to produce the SFRA which was finalised in April 2008.

2.17 The SFRA refers to a number of flooding issues, which partially affected the site, along the River Frome at Frome. Water meadows have been created to mitigate flooding from this source, which residents believe reduced the flooding in Frome in 2008.

2.18 The SFRA states that developments should use Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) to control surface water before it enters the watercourse. Within a large urban area such as Frome, the combined effect of water discharge from SuDS must be addressed to prevent further flooding issues downstream.

Somerset Local Flood Risk Management Strategy (2014)

2.19 Somerset County Council (SCC) are the Lead Local Flood Authority (LLFA) for the development site and coordinate local flood risk through a flood risk management strategy. The LLFA’s responsibility, and the focus of the strategy, is to consider flooding from surface water, groundwater and ordinary watercourses. The flooding and risk from Main Rivers, such as the River Frome adjacent to the site, remains the responsibility of the Environment Agency.

Page: 9

2.20 The Flood Risk Management Strategy provides an overview of flood risk in the County and sets out objectives and measures for how SCC (and the associated Districts and Boroughs, including therefore Mendip District Council) will manage and reduce flood risk.

West of England Sustainable Drainage Developer Guide (2015)

2.21 SCC, in their role as LLFA to Mendip District Council, are responsible for providing guidance and for reviewing and approving proposals for the management of surface water from development sites.

2.22 SCC have collaborated with Bristol City, Bath and North East Somerset, North Somerset and South Gloucestershire Councils to develop a SuDS guidance document for the region – West of England Sustainable Drainage Developer Guide. The guidance provides information on the planning, design and delivery of attractive, high quality and well-integrated SuDS schemes which should offer multiple benefits to the environment and community alike. Furthermore, as this has been developed for a region, it provides consistency in the required approach and vision for drainage schemes.

Policy Conclusions

2.23 The flood and surface water drainage proposals for the site are consistent with the policies and approach as set out within the NPPF, Local Plan and supporting local guidance documents.

Page: 10

3 FLOOD RISK

Fluvial Flooding

3.1 The Flood Map for Planning classifies land areas based on the risk of flooding from fluvial and/or tidal flood sources. The Flood Map for Planning does not capture other flood sources, nor does it represent the benefits from flood defences or the impacts of climate change. However, in terms of land use planning and steering development proposal, the Flood Map for Planning is a principal source of data and therefore of particular relevance to the site.

3.2 The Flood Map for Planning for this area is shown in Figure 1.2, with the majority of the site located in Flood Zone 1, indicating a low level of flood risk from fluvial and/or tidal sources. There are small portions of the site, to the south and east of the site area, that are located in Flood Zone 2 and 3, due to proximity to the River Frome. Flood Zone 2 is an area of medium flood risk, whereas Flood Zone 3 is an area of high flood risk, as defined in the Policy section.

Figure 1.2 – Flood Map for Planning

3.3 The NPPF and the associated PPG provides guidance in relation to the vulnerability of different land use and development types to these flood zones. All development land uses are considered to be appropriate in Flood Zone 1 in accordance with the NPPF. Consideration would be given to the location of less vulnerable land uses in Flood Zones 2 and 3, informed by the guidance in the NPPF and the requirements of the Sequential Test and Exception Test.

3.4 The Flood Map for Planning shows flooding extents without the increases resulting from climate change, which given the development design life would need to be considered. Without improvements to flood defences, this would result in an increase in flood extent

Page: 11

and/or depth of flooding over the land area, with some areas currently in Flood Zone 1 being affected and with other areas in Flood Zone 2 and 3 having a deeper depth of flooding.

3.5 Equally, there are opportunities to refine and modify the floodplain extents, for example, by creating flood storage space in areas that are not currently affected. The practice of making space for water or floodplain compensation when appropriately incorporated into a masterplan, such as with the creation of wetland meadows and ponds, can provide interesting enhancements that benefit both the local environment and community.

3.6 The main challenges are the need to ensure that the development provides measures to mitigate and manage the impact of flooding to the site and surrounds and to demonstrate that there is no adverse impact on flooding as a consequence of the development proposals.

3.7 There is only a small portion of the site located in Flood Zones 2 and 3. These areas could be utilised for less vulnerable uses, such as Public Open Space or water compatible development such as sports fields or areas for nature conservation and biodiversity. These areas could also be enhanced, in order to increase the storage of floodwater within them, such as through re-profiling land areas to create basins and lakes. This would offer benefits to flood risk downstream, through the creation of a greater space for flood storage.

3.8 These areas would be affected during particularly wet periods, and as such, would be designed to be resilient to flood waters. The community activities that these areas would be used for would therefore be limited or prevented during wet periods. However, during these periods, it is likely that the wet conditions would have restricted the activities from taking place, reducing the impact of the temporary loss of these facilities to the community.

Surface Water Flooding

3.9 Surface water flooding is a result of overland flow that can follow a rainfall event, before the runoff enters a watercourse or sewer. This form of flooding is usually associated with high intensity rainfall events but can also occur with lower intensity rainfall or melting snow where the ground is saturated, frozen, developed or has a low permeability.

3.10 The flood risk relates to both the conveyance of waters to the site by overland flow from areas outside the site and also areas within the site itself, and the ponding of these waters in depressions in the topography. Given the overall extent of the site, surface water runoff is an

Page: 12

important consideration, with the potential impacts on flows from development through the addition of impermeable surfaces and the possible restriction to the conveyance of flows.

3.11 The Long Term Flood Risk from Surface Water Map is shown in Figure 1.3, and shows the majority of the site to be unaffected by surface water flooding, which is defined as a very low risk and means that each year, this area has a chance of flooding of less than 1 in 1000. There are some areas of the site with a low risk of surface water flooding, together also with areas in the vicinity of the watercourse with a medium and high risk.

Figure 1.3 – Surface Water Flooding

3.12 Although the planning restrictions on the use of land areas affected by surface water flooding are different to those affected by fluvial flooding, the development proposals would be informed by the risks and take appropriate consideration into the layout of the scheme.

3.13 The layout would avoid constraints to flow paths and where required, it would include measures to improve the resistance and resilience of land uses and development types to surface water flooding.

3.14 In addition, measures that ensured that offsite areas and vulnerable parts of the development were not adversely affected by surface water flooding would be brought into the scheme, for example using features for conveying runoff at a safe rate and route.

3.15 There is the potential to better utilise areas already affected by surface water flooding for the management of surface water, through the inclusion of Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS). In addition to accommodating the natural surface water runoff, these areas could be enhanced to accommodate the surface water runoff from the developed areas, in order for these areas to mimic the natural surface water runoff regime (e.g. greenfield runoff rates).

Page: 13

4 SURFACE AND FOUL DRAINAGE

4.1 It is well understood that one of the effects of development is to reduce the permeability of the site and consequently to change its response to rainfall. Therefore, a suitable surface water drainage strategy is required to ensure that the surface water runoff regime is managed appropriately so as to avoid any adverse impacts over the site and surrounds.

4.2 The NPPF states that flood risk to land and property must not be increased as a result of development. The Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) to the NPPF states that flood risk should not increase for events up to and including a flood event with a 1 in 100-year return period, with an appropriate allowance made for climate change, as also informed by the NPPF.

4.3 Development proposals put pressure on existing foul drainage systems, which may require for existing networks or treatment facilities to be improved or reinforced. A strategy would be needed to understand the impacts and for these to be discussed with the local sewerage provider, which for South Frome is Wessex Water. Wessex Water are then able to consider what improvements are required, and to bring these into a programme for delivery.

Surface Water Drainage Concepts

4.4 A desktop study of the bedrock geology, using British Geological Survey (BSG) maps, indicates the majority of the site to be underlain by Mudstone (Forest Marble Formation and Oxford Clay Formation) with parts of the site underlain by Limestone (Cornbrash Formation). There are superficial deposits over some of the site, with Alluvium (clay, silt, sand and gravel) adjacent to the River Frome, and River Terrace Deposits (sand and gravel) to the south.

4.5 A desktop study of the local soil types, using Soilscapes information, indicates that the site is underlain by loamy and clayey soils with impeded drainage to the stream network.

4.6 Whilst infiltration of water to ground is towards the top of the sustainable drainage hierarchy, given the underlying ground conditions it is anticipated that only a small portion of the site (if any) will have scope for the use of infiltration measures, meaning an attenuation-led drainage strategy would be used for the management of surface water.

4.7 With an attenuation-led drainage strategy, surface water runoff would be conveyed across and from the site, working with the existing topography and overland flow paths, to an appropriate discharge receptor which is likely to be the River Frome in this instance.

Page: 14

Surface Water Drainage Principles

4.8 A fundamental principle of sustainable development in terms of flood risk is the reduction of surface water run-off from new developments. Surface water drainage arrangements for a development site must ensure that the volumes and peak discharge rates leaving the developed site, are no greater than those for the site prior to it being developed.

4.9 The proposed surface water management strategy has been derived based upon the principles of SuDS, in accordance with the NTS and would be developed in accordance with the local guidance as set out in the West of England Sustainable Drainage Developer Guide.

4.10 The key components of a conceptual surface water drainage strategy are first to consider the potential for infiltration of water into the ground or secondly to determine an appropriate and available discharge receptor for surface water drainage from the developed site. Third to understand the conveyance routes across and from the site, taking into consideration the site topography, development layout and levels of drainage features and infrastructure. Finally, to assess the impact of the development on the surface water runoff regime, and the mitigation measures to be used within the site to manage these to an acceptable level.

4.11 The rate and volume of runoff would be managed through appropriately located attenuation features at a site, plot and source control level. This include attenuation basins within the site area, with the development connected to these features using swales and pipe runs, and with flow control features incorporated at the outfall to enable a controlled discharge.

4.12 Due to the scale of development, it is important that any phased submission considers how each development parcel will be delivered in relation to the surface water drainage strategy, particularly where different phases rely on each other. Consideration would also be given to the implementation of the strategy during construction and operation of the development.

Community and Environmental Benefits from SuDS

4.13 In addition to the management of surface water runoff, a drainage strategy, utilising SuDS incorporated into the masterplan, would provide a range of environmental and community benefits. In addition to the benefits that SuDS bring to landscape, recreation, ecology and water quality, they can greatly enhance the feel of a scheme and add to the overall vision.

4.14 The environmental and community benefits from well-integrated SuDS include:

Page: 15

• Attenuation – storing and slowly releasing surface water runoff is one of the primary benefits of SuDS, giving management of surface water and reduction of flood risk; • Water Treatment – pollution found in surface water runoff can be harmful to watercourses, groundwater and coastal waters. The soils, gravels and vegetation present in SuDS features act as filters, helping to remove and treat pollutants; • Water Re-use – rainwater harvesting and re-use for non-drinking purposes such as watering land, toilet flushing etc will help to reduce potable water demand, lower drainage discharges and can contribute towards BREEAM requirements; • Biodiversity and Habitat – creation of transitional environments suited to a wide-range of flora and fauna, with the inclusion of plants, trees and other vegetation designed to support local biodiversity and also to develop green corridors that are a benefit to ecology as well as helping to better connect the scheme through improved mobility; • Amenity – SuDS integrate greenery and transitional water features, adding landscape value, improving the visual character of a development and even being an amenity use. For example the inclusion of ponds that can be used for fishing, attenuation basins that can be used as recreational areas when dry and the creation of an environment that would make an interesting destination for pedestrian and cycle routes to wrap around. • Education – SuDS present opportunities to educate and engage communities in water management and sustainability. If schools and colleges incorporate SuDS on their premises, they can be viewed as a valuable learning opportunity. The can also add to community interests and groups, through educational activities completed in and around the SuDS (for example, bird spotting, wildflowers, photography etc). • Open Space – SuDS can be incorporated into areas of open space, and can provide valuable community recreational space when both wet and dry (i.e. playing fields and fishing ponds). The use of public open space for containing water during particularly wet periods is a sensible use of space, given that most outdoor activities would be limited during these periods, and these areas can therefore be utilised for water management.

4.15 A surface water drainage solution using SuDS that offer a wide-range of additional benefits to the environment and community would be the approach adopted at South Frome. A conceptual surface water strategy indicating the proposed discharge receptor, conveyance routes and the possible location of attenuation features is illustrated in Figure 1.4. In addition, the environmental and community benefits that can be delivered by a well- integrated SuDS scheme are shown, including images of how these could look.

Page: 16

Figure 1.4 – Conceptual Surface Water Drainage Strategy and Environmental and Community Benefits from SuDS

Page: 17

Foul Drainage Strategy

4.16 Given the scale of the development, it is anticipated that additional foul drainage capacity will need to be provided and most likely improvements to the foul sewerage infrastructure, and discussions with Wessex Water in due course will confirm what improvements will need to be made.

4.17 It is necessary to satisfy the capacity requirements of the existing and new development sustainably in order to avoid detrimental effects on existing residents and the environment, whilst delivering on the requirements of the development.

4.18 The challenges from foul drainage will be mitigated through careful planning and programming in order to minimise risk, disruption and cost with delivering the scheme.

Page: 18

5 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

5.1 Vectos have been appointed by the landowners of south Frome to provide preliminary flood risk and drainage advice in relation to the proposals for a Garden Village to the south of Frome. This document has been prepared to provide high level advice in relation to flood risk and drainage in order to inform future development proposals and the emerging masterplan for the land.

5.2 The majority of the site is in Flood Zone 1, indicating a low level of flood risk from fluvial and/or tidal sources. Flood Zone 1 is appropriate for all land uses and development types.

5.3 There is only a small portion of the site in areas of medium to high flood risk. These areas could be utilised for less vulnerable uses, such as Public Open Space or water compatible development such as sports fields or areas for nature conservation and biodiversity.

5.4 These areas could also be enhanced, in order to increase the storage of floodwater within them, such as through re-profiling land areas to create basins and lakes. This would offer benefits to flood risk downstream, through the creation of a greater space for flood storage.

5.5 The majority of the site is shown to be at a very low risk of surface water flooding. There are some areas of the site shown to have a low risk of surface water flooding, together also with areas in the vicinity of the watercourse that are shown to have a medium and high risk.

5.6 The layout would avoid constraints to flow paths and where required, it would include measures to improve the resistance and resilience of development to surface water flooding.

5.7 There is the potential to better utilise areas already affected by surface water flooding for the management of surface water runoff, through the inclusion of Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS). In addition to accommodating the natural surface water runoff, these areas could be enhanced to also accommodate the surface water runoff from the developed areas.

5.8 A surface water drainage strategy, utilising Sustainable Drainage System (SuDS) incorporated into the masterplan, would provide a range of environmental and community benefits. In addition to the benefits these bring to landscape, recreation, ecology and water quality, they are features that can greatly enhance the feel of a scheme and add to the overall vision.

Page: 19

5.9 Given the scale of the development, it is anticipated that additional foul drainage capacity will need to be provided and most likely improvements to the foul sewerage infrastructure.

5.10 It is necessary to satisfy the capacity requirements of the existing and new development sustainably in order to avoid detrimental effects on existing residents and the environment, whilst delivering on the requirements of the development. The challenges from foul drainage will be mitigated through careful planning and programming in order to minimise risk, disruption and cost with delivering the scheme.

5.11 The development proposals would be complaint with the requirements of the NPPF and also the regional and local policy in relation to flood risk, and a surface water drainage strategy would be incorporated into the layout in order to manage the surface water runoff.

Ability to Deliver Improvements

5.12 Planning and delivering development in an incremental and piecemeal manner, as is proposed currently within the pre-submission Part 2 Local Plan document for sites south of Frome, limits the scale and influence of supporting infrastructure by virtue of the requirements of the NPPF.

5.13 Alternatively, comprehensive planning and delivery of development, comprising in the order of 2,000 homes, employment land, education facilities, sports and recreation areas, a local centre and further ancillary and complementary facilities will enable an equally comprehensive and more certain approach to enabling and delivering the supporting infrastructure and services.

5.14 A wider drainage strategy for the area will be needed, informed by the topography and overland flow routes and any existing constraints, therefore, development parcels will have a reliance upon one another. It is important that any submission considers how each phase will be delivered in relation to the wider drainage strategy, particularly where different phases rely on each other for connection to the discharge receptor i.e. the River Frome.

5.15 The risk of adopting an incremental approach would limit the effectiveness of a well- integrated surface and foul drainage solution for this area. In conclusion therefore, there are significant material reasons and benefits of adopting a comprehensive approach to planning and delivery of development south of Frome that is supported by the NPPF.

APPENDIX E – ECOLOGICAL CONSTRAINTS REPORT

Selwood Garden Village Proposals – Representations to the Mendip Local Plan Part 2

ECOLOGICAL CONSTRAINTS REPORT

South Frome Consortium

Selwood Garden Village ______

Ref: 1162 February 2018

This report has been prepared for the client for the purposes of accompanying this planning application. Any dissemination beyond this purpose is not permitted, without the written consent of Grass Roots Ecology Ltd. CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION 1

2. METHODOLOGY 2

3. ECOLOGICAL CONSTRAINTS 5

4. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ANY FUTURE SITE ALLOCATION 10

5. SUMMARY 12

PLANS

PLAN GRE 1 HABITATS PLAN

Selwood Garden Village Ecological Constraints Report Ref: 1162

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Grass Roots Ecology has been commissioned on behalf of South Frome Consortium to carry out an initial ecological constraints exercise on land south of Frome (‘the site’), pursuant to lodging representations to the pre-submission draft of the Mendip Local Plan Part 2: Sites and Places DPD with the view to securing an allocation for approximately 2,000 homes, employment land and other supporting infrastructure.

1.2 This ecological constraints report sets out the findings of an initial phase 1 habitat survey undertaken at the site and in doing so:

a) establishes the initial ecological constraints and value of the site; b) sets out additional survey work which would likely be required to support more detailed site proposals and any forthcoming planning application; and c) identifies appropriate recommendations and mitigation that should be accepted when bringing forward any future development of the site.

2. METHODOLOGY

2.1 This ecological constraints report has been prepared with due regard to the recent guidance for ecological report writing produced by the Chartered Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management (CIEEM)1. It has been undertaken by a ‘suitably qualified ecologist’ with nearly 10 years’ experience as a practising ecological consultant and more than 13 years experience within the environmental assessment and development planning sectors. The author also holds both Bachelor of Science and Master of Science degrees in ecology related subjects, is a full member of CIEEM and possesses relevant European Protected Species licences with both Natural England and Natural Resources Wales.

2.2 It has been informed by both desk and field survey elements, as detailed below.

Desk Study

2.3 Both Somerset Environmental Records Centre (SERC) and Wiltshire & Swindon Biological Records Centre (WSBRC) were contacted in December 2017 to provide protected/notable species records (within a 4km search radius) and information on designated sites (6km search radius).

2.4 Additional information on protected species and statutory designated sites relating to a wider search area was also obtained where appropriate from inspecting the online National Biodiversity Network (NBN) Gateway2 and Multi- Agency Geographic Information for the Countryside (MAGIC)3 databases respectively.

Phase 1 Habitat Survey

2.5 An initial extended Phase 1 habitat walkover of the site was carried out in December 2017 in line with the methodology set out by the Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC)4, as recommended by Natural England.

2.6 Whilst the habitat survey was undertaken at a sub-optimal time of year for botanical survey, it is considered that an accurate assessment of the value of the site in ecological terms could be made on this occasion (habitats influenced by agriculture of limited ecological value dominate the site).

1 Chartered Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management (CIEEM) (2015) Guidelines for Ecological Report Writing, CIEEM, Technical Guidance Series, accessed at: http://www.cieem.net/data/files/Resource_Library/Technical_Guidance_Series/Guidelines_for_Ecological_Report_Writin g/Guidelines_for_Ecological_Report_Writing_and_Appendices_May2015.pdf 2 https://data.nbn.org.uk 3 http://magic.defra.gov.uk 4 Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC) (2010) Handbook for phase 1 habitat survey – a technique for environmental audit.

2.7 Particular attention was given during the habitat survey for the presence of protected, notable or priority species, with specific consideration given to the following groups/species.

Bats

2.8 Given the full legal protection5 afforded to all UK bat species under schedule 5 of The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) and schedule 2 of The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 (the Habitats Regulations), all trees and buildings within the site were appraised for their potential to support roosting bats. A general assessment of the value of the habitats within the site for foraging and navigating bats was also made.

Other fully protected species

2.9 Habitat considered to offer suitable opportunities for other species afforded full legal protection6 under The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) and Habitats Regulations (for example Great Crested Newts Triturus cristatus and Hazel Dormice Muscardinus avellanarius) was also identified where appropriate as part of the habitat survey.

Badgers

2.10 Given the legal protection afforded to Badger Meles meles under the Protection of Badgers Act 1992, particular attention was given to any evidence indicating activity, such as the presence of a sett, well-worn paths/push-throughs, footprints, latrines and foraging signs. Where possible, this search extended to 30m from the site boundary.

Birds

2.11 Any birds were recorded, either visually or by call, as part of the habitat survey. Habitats within the site were also appraised for their suitability for foraging and nesting birds.

Other notable species

2.12 The site was also appraised for its potential to support any other notable fauna and flora. For example, partial legal protection7 is afforded to the widespread UK reptile species8 (Common Lizard Zootoca vivipara, Slow-worm Anguis fragilis, Grass Snake Natrix natrix and Adder Vipera berus) under Schedule 5 of The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) and any habitats considered suitable for this group within and in close proximity to the site were identified.

5 where both the species and its habitat (roosting sites) are protected. 6 where both the species and its habitat (breeding and resting sites) are protected. 7 where the species itself is protected (from killing and injury) but not its habitat. 8 Note that the survey area does not contain suitable habitat for the less common UK reptile species (Sand Lizard Lacerta agilis and Smooth Snake Coronella austriaca) which are afforded full legal protection (like bats and Great Crested Newts).

Ecological Evaluation

2.13 The value of the habitats within the site and nearby designated sites have been assessed as part of this ecological constraints report with due regard to the latest guidelines for ecological evaluation published by CIEEM9. These guidelines also set principles for identifying and determining the magnitude of impacts.

9 Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management (now CIEEM) (2006) Guidelines for Ecological appraisal in the United Kingdom

3. ECOLOGICAL CONTRAINTS

Context and surrounding habitats

3.1 Measuring approximately 160ha the site is located to the immediate south of Frome. Existing development (predominately industrial and commercial) is located to the north and west of the site with major roads, the River Frome and a railway line located to the south and east.

3.2 The majority of the site comprises grassland pasture and some arable land intersected by a hedgerow network along with occasional ditches. Some farm and residential buildings are also present along with roads and the River Frome which traverse the site.

Statutory designated sites

3.3 The nearest statutory designated site is Longleat Woods Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) located approximately 1.6km to the southeast of the site. It is designated predominately on account of its ancient woodland habitat with populations of Hazel Dormice also known to be present.

3.4 Also of note is Mells Valley Special Area of Conservation (SAC) located approximately 2.5km to the northwest of the site. This European designated site is designated on account of its important Greater Horseshoe bat Rhinolophus ferrumequinum populations.

3.5 Other statutory designated sites which are situated at a further distance from the site include:

• Vallis Vale SSSI (2.5km northwest) – woodland habitat (continuous with the Mells Valley SAC) • Postlebury Wood SSSI (3.2km southwest) – woodland habitat • Bradley Woods SSSI (3.9km southeast) – Alder Alnus glutinosa woodland

3.6 There are other statutory designated sites beyond 4km from the site but these are considered to be outside of the zone of influence.

Non-statutory designated sites

3.7 A Local Wildlife Site (LWS) (Vinney Lane) is located within the site. This represents a short length of stream which is recognised for its notable invertebrate interest.

3.8 Land in close proximity to the southwest beyond the A361 is recognised for its parkland habitat (Marston Park LWS).

3.9 Other LWSs in the vicinity include:

• Horley Wood LWS (700m south) – semi-natural woodland and plantation habitats • Thickthorn Wood LWS (900m south) – semi-natural woodland, scrub and ride habitats

Habitats within the site

3.10 Habitats are shown on Plan GRE 1.

Improved and semi-improved grassland

3.11 The majority of the site represents intensively managed improved and semi- improved grassland which offers limited value in ecological terms.

3.12 Most of the sward is species poor being dominated by species such as Perennial Rye-grass Lolium perenne, Creeping Bent Agrostis stolonifera and White Clover Trifolium repens. Some areas of semi-improved grassland may exhibit elevated value in botanical terms and would be subject to further survey work.

Arable

3.13 A number of the fields have been ploughed to support crops and are of negligible value in ecological terms.

Hedgerows

3.14 Hedgerows delineate the majority of the fields across the site. Note that these are not drawn on Plan GRE 1 owing to the scale of the plan.

3.15 Many of the hedgerows are intensity managed and species-poor, being dominated by Blackthorn Prunus spinosa. Other species comprise and Field- maple Acer campestre, Hawthorn Crataegus monogyna, Elder Sambucus nigra, Dog-rose Rosa canina and Elm Ulmus minor. Ivy Hedera helix tends to dominate the ground flora with other species comprising Lords-and-Ladies Arum maculatum, Cow Parsley Anthriscus sylvestris, Common Nettle Urtica dioica, Wood-avens Geum urbanum, Ground-Ivy Glechoma hederacea and False-brome Brachypodium sylvaticum. Only occasional standard mature trees are present within the hedgerows and comprise predominantly Oak Quercus robur and Ash Fraxinus excelsior. Hedgerows which support a (relatively) higher number of species are present in the north and northwest parts of the site.

3.16 The hedgerow network is of some value within the context of the site, principally for the opportunities presented to faunal groups (e.g. bats and birds) rather than for any botanical interest.

Ponds

3.17 A small pond is located in the west of the site. It is surrounded by a small area of scrub and trees.

River Frome

3.18 The River Frome, a meandering watercourse, traverses the eastern part of the site and forms part of the boundaries. Alder dominates along its length in places along with ruderal vegetation such as Great Willowherb Epilobium hirsutum, Hemlock Conium maculatum and Common Nettle.

3.19 The watercourse is of some value in ecological terms, principally for its role as a corridor for a range of wildlife.

Local Wildlife Site

3.20 A small length of stream/ditch is designated as a local wildlife site (Vinney Lane) in recognition of its notable invertebrate interest, as shown on Plan GRE 1.

Other

3.21 Land in the northeast of the site is currently under development for residential purposes.

3.22 A number of farm buildings and residential properties and associated gardens are present within the site.

3.23 A railway line forms part of the eastern boundary of the site. Trees and scrub along the embankment have recently undergone clearance works with only areas of grassland remaining.

3.24 The site also supports some small areas of semi-natural broadleaved woodland and an area of allotments.

Fauna considered to be utilising the site

Bats

3.25 BRERC returned records for Common Pipistrelle Pipistrellus pipistrellus, Soprano Pipistrelle Pipistrellus pygmaeus, Noctule bat Nyctalus noctula, Serotine bat Eptesicus serotinus, Brown Long-eared bat Plecotus auritus, Brandt’s bat Myotis brandtii, Whiskered bat Myotis mystacinus, Natterer’s bat Myotis nattereri, Barbastelle bat Barbastella barbastellus, Bechstein’s bat Myotis bechsteinii, Lesser Horseshoe bat Rhinolophus hipposideros and Greater Horseshoe bat within the requested search area. In addition, records were returned for a Daubenton’s bat Myotis daubentonii bat roost within Blatch Bridge (B3092) located on the east boundary of the site.

3.26 Habitats within the site, in particular the River Frome corridor, are considered to offer good foraging and navigating opportunities for local bat populations.

3.27 As already mentioned, a population of Greater Horseshoe bats is known to be present at the nearby Mells Valley SAC located approximately 2.5km to the northwest of the site. Various habitat features within the site may be used for commuting purposes with grassland habitat also offering suitable foraging opportunities.

3.28 A number of the buildings within the site offer potential to support roosting bats with some mature trees also exhibiting potential bat roosting features.

3.29 The presence of a Greater Horseshoe bat roost in close proximity to the site does necessitate a higher than normal level of survey effort across the survey period. It is considered that activity survey visits would be required each month from May to September with survey effort further increased through deploying a series of automated bat recording detectors across the site. Further survey work would be required in relation to any buildings proposed for demolition.

Amphibians (Great Crested Newts)

3.30 The pond within the site has the potential to support Great Crested Newts as populations are known to be present in the wider area with nearest records returned from BRERC being situated beyond 3km to the north on the opposite side of Frome.

3.31 As such, the pond would be screened for this protected species by undertaking an initial eDNA analysis with any further aquatic surveys performed to determine the population if presence is detected.

Badgers

3.32 Badgers are known in the local area with a number of records returned by BRERC within the search area.

3.33 The short sward grassland is considered to provide good foraging habitat for this species, however, no evidence of use was found during the habitat survey.

Birds

3.34 A number of notable birds were returned by BRERC within the search area including Bullfinch Pyrrhula pyrrhula, Nightingale Luscinia megarhynchos (historic from 1994) and Siskin Spinus spinus from within/close to the site.

3.35 The River Frome corridor and hedgerows are also considered to offer good foraging and nesting habitat for a number of other birds, potentially notable

species, and a series of specific breeding bird surveys would likely be required as part of any future detailed proposals for the site to fully understand the value of the site for breeding birds.

3.36 In relation to wintering birds, the site is considered to be of limited value overall, principally on account of its location adjacent to urban areas.

Reptiles

3.37 Some areas of grassland which have escaped regular grazing and management do support a longer sward which could offer opportunities to any reptile populations. Margins along the River Frome and adjacent to the railway line also provide suitable habitat for this group.

3.38 Specific surveys of these areas would likely be required to support any future site allocation.

Otter and Water Vole

3.39 Both Otter Lutra lutra and Water Vole Arvicola amphibious are known along stretches of the River Frome. The watercourse is considered to offer some opportunities for Otter but is considered generally unsuitable for Water Vole given the extent of the flow.

Hazel Dormice

3.40 Hedgerows in the north and northwest of the site do offer suitable habitat for this protected species with Hazel Corylus avellana occasionally found. Specific surveys are likely to be required to support any future site allocation.

Other

3.41 Following the initial habitat survey and desk study undertaken no other protected/notable species are considered to be utilising habitats within the site.

4. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ANY FUTURE SITE ALLOCATION

4.1 Habitat features of note within the context of the site have been identified on Plan GRE 1 and these constraints and resultant considerations for future development have informed the initial masterplan which accompanies the representation submission.

Designated sites

4.2 In relation to the nearby Mells Valley SAC, a series bat activity surveys will be undertaken to establish whether there is any potential for significant impacts on Greater Horseshoe bats (and hence whether any mitigation would be required).

4.3 In relation to the Vinney Lane LWS (stream with notable invertebrates) which is located within the site, this will be retained in full with any necessary buffer habitat.

4.4 Development of the site is not considered to materially affect any other of the identified designated sites.

Habitats

4.5 The hedgerow network and the River Frome corridor are habitats considered to be of ecological value within the context of the site.

4.6 The concept masterplan demonstrates retention of these habitat features and integration within wider green infrastructure, which would be able to accommodate informal open space and a range of new habitats.

4.7 Loss of the agricultural grassland habitat which dominates remaining areas within the site is not considered to be significant in ecological terms. Retained and new habitats would be integrated and enhanced as part of a green infrastructure strategy with provision of new species-rich grassland which is currently absent from the site.

Fauna

4.8 The retention of protected/notable species would need to be given due regard as part of any emerging detailed design concepts associated with any future site allocation. Mitigation, enhancement and necessary safeguarding measures during construction would be required to ensure species protection and legal compliance.

4.9 As already outlined, further survey work in relation to the following groups/species would likely be required to inform any future allocation and development of the site:

• Bats – a series of surveys to establish activity patterns and species with particular focus given to Greater Horseshoe bats and identifying any important commuting routes; • Great Crested Newts – eDNA screening of the pond within the site; • Reptiles – to establish any presence within suitable habitat; • Birds – a series of breeding bird surveys to establish any notable species; and • Hazel Dormice – specific surveys of suitable habitat should these be lost to development proposals.

4.10 This additional survey work would establish a detailed ecological baseline upon which impacts can then be assessed for any future development of the site. This would form part of a full ecological impact assessment suitable in scope to accompany any planning application submission.

4.11 An ecological construction, enhancement and management plan would also need to be produced to ensure habitats and species protection, legal compliance and delivery of net ecological gains post-construction.

4.12 Consultation with Mendip District Council (and Natural England where required) would be required to agree the scope of additional survey work and the principles of any species-specific mitigation strategies.

5. SUMMARY

5.1 An initial phase 1 habitat survey and desk study has been undertaken by Grass Roots Ecology pursuant to lodging representations to the pre-submission draft of the Mendip Local Plan Part 2: Sites and Places DPD with the view to securing an allocation for approximately 2,000 homes, employment land and other supporting infrastructure.

5.2 There are considered to be no overriding ecological constraints in relation to any future allocation of the site. The masterplan has been informed by advice received from ourselves and is considered to respond well to the ecological constraints and opportunities that the site offers.

5.3 However, additional survey work and species-specific surveys would be required to further inform the detailed masterplanning process and maximise opportunities to achieve biodiversity gains. This will also ensure that a full and comprehensive ecological baseline is established to allow for a robust ecological impact assessment.

KEY: SITE BOUNDARY IMPROVED GRASSLAND SEMI-IMPROVED GRASSLAND ARABLE

WOODLAND BUILDINGS/GARDENS LOCAL WILDLIFE SITE DEVELOPMENT UNDER CONSTRUCTION

ALLOTMENTS ROADS/HARDSTANDING RIVER FROME POND

CLIENT: South Frome Consortium

REF: 1162

REV: A

DATE: 09.02.18

SCALE: nts

north

T: 01386 700072 | E: [email protected] | W: www.grassroots-ecology.co.uk

APPENDIX F – EMERGING MASTERPLAN

Selwood Garden Village Proposals – Representations to the Mendip Local Plan Part 2

APPENDIX G – DEVELOPMENT VISION AND PROSPECTUS

Selwood Garden Village Proposals – Representations to the Mendip Local Plan Part 2

Selwood Garden Village Development Vision and Prospectus DOCUMENT MANAGEMENT

Produced by NVB Architects

Document ref 1731 1800A

Date 08/02/2018

Purpose MDC Part 2 Reps

2 NVB Architects CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION 7.0 URBAN DESIGN PRINCIPLES

1.1 Purpose of Report 4 7.1 Engagement and local input 18 1.2 Executive Summary 4 7.2 Walkable neighbourhoods 18 7.3 Distinctive neighbourhoods 18 2.0 PROPOSED SITE 7.4 Affordable Housing 19 7.5 Permeable Neighbourhoods 19 2.1 Options for Frome Expansion 5 7.6 Local centre 19 2.2 Location and boundaries 6 7.7 Green Space and Sports Provision 20 2.3 Existing uses Inside the site 7 7.8 Legacy and maintenance 20 2.4 Existing uses Outside the site 7 8.0 MASTERPLAN SUMMARY 3.0 CONSULTATION 8.1 Summary 21 3.1 Meeting with the Community 8 8.2 Conclusions 21 3.2 Key Messages from Stakeholders 8

4.0 CONTEXT

4.1 Landscape 9 4.2 Connectivity 9 4.3 Heritage 10 4.4 Ecology 10

5.0 VISION

5.1 Mendip District Council 11 5.2 Frome Town Council Vision 12 5.3 Development Vision 13 5.4 The Garden Village 13

6.0 THE PROPOSALS

6.1 Proposal Summary 14 6.2 Landscape Framework 14 6.3 Movement Networks 15 6.4 Use and Character 16 6.5 Phasing 17 6.6 Offsite Improvements 17 6.7 Energy Resources 17

Selwood Garden Village 3 1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Purpose of Report 1.2 Executive Summary

NVB Architects and Grassroots Planning have responded We are in the midst of a housing crisis, and there is to the recently issued Local Plan Part 2 site allocation broad cross party political support for providing new plan and have put forward an alternative development homes, particularly those that are affordable for the strategy for Selwood Garden Village which is located to next generation of home buyers. This appears locally the south of Frome incorporating approximately 2000 as minimum land supply targets which district councils homes, commercial land and supporting infrastructure. are required to meet. In the event that authorities do This Development Vision and Prospectus is an not meet the targets they become open to ‘predatory explanation of the proposal in support of the strategy. applications’ which seek to provide new housing in inappropriate areas, without making suitable contributions to the local communities where they are located. This has happened in the district and will happen This document is to be read in conjunction with the in Frome unless new development is planned more supporting drawings, planning statements, ecology strategically. report, transport study, strategic landscape & visual assessment (SLVA) and heritage reports. Frome is a sustainable town for development - primarily because of its railway station and comparatively good transport links to the A36. Frome has also been under provided for with new homes over the last 10 years compared to Wells, Glastonbury and Shepton Mallet despite it being the largest town in the district. It is therefore highly likely that it will be required to grow in the next 10-20 years.

Unless this growth is planned at the start, it is likely to come from poorly planned incremental expansion (such as the currently proposed pt2 sites) which make little or no contribution to local infrastructure. This causes significant harm to existing communities and often creates disconnected areas - such as new housing under construction at Wallbridge.

The Selwood Garden Village proposals have been prepared by an independent consortium (including Frome residents) representing the landowners and is intended to insure that Frome gets well planned development that provides high quality housing and infrastructure, whilst minimising the impact of development and providing a positive contribution to a prosperous and thriving town.

4 NVB Architects 2.0 PROPOSED SITE

2.1 Options for Frome Expansion

Frome is the best-connected town in Mendip and a sustainable location for new development. It is the largest town in the Mendip area and the only town with rail connections. Frome has proved to be a very popular place to live with several national surveys referring to its recent renaissance. It has recently experienced a significant increase in house prices whilst average earnings remain relatively low in comparison.

Frome is a hillside town defined by the steep lanes such as Catherine Hill. The river flows “s” like through the town south to north and the meadow flood plain has become a valuable recreational resource. The wider limits of the town defined by landscape constraints; to the west a steep escarpment creates a strong landscape containment and very difficult building conditions, to the north the landscape setting of the historic Orchardleigh Park, challenging topography and the potential for visual coalescence with Beckington, to the east lies the barrier of the bypass and railway and the flood plain whilst to the south lie the relatively gentle hillsides where land is defined by the defensible features that the bypass and Extract from submission drawings railway embankments and cuttings provide.

The landscape constraints around the west, north and east leave the gentle gradient hillside to the south as the most sustainable location for further growth. Whilst the site is on the southern edge of the town it is only 30 minutes’ walk from the town centre and only 10 minutes by bicycle. Existing bus services already run to the edge of the area and these can be combined into a loop improving bus services across the south of Frome.

Much of the town lies to the south of the river and it is largely 20th century developments that have extended the town north. The modern town is now split equally north and south of the river and there is little undeveloped and unconstrained land within the current built up area. Extract from drawings showing gradients in Frome (darker colours = steeper slopes)

Extract from drawings showing site constraints including Railway, Bypass, Blatchbridge, Existing Lanes and steep gradients.

Selwood Garden Village 5 2.2 Location and boundaries

The proposed site is on the southern side of Frome. It is approximately 161Ha in area (excluding the area around Blatchbridge) and is bounded by the river, railway and bypass to the south and east, by the bypass to the west and by the industrial estate to the north.

The site straddles the boundary of Frome Town and Selwood Parish Councils.

The railway line cuts across the valley on a prominent embankment closing the valley views to the east. The embankment is approximately 5m above river level and has become quite wooded in part.

The bypass is also raised on an embankment and closes the valley to the west. The bypass landscape margin is Proposed site boundary also wooded especially on the eastern side as it climbs the hill. A small section of the northern boundary adjoins Feltham Drive , The Mount and Little Keyford Lane. These are the nearest residential communities to the site and are supported by a primary school and a small supermarket.

Between Culverhill in the east and the Marston Gate retail area in the west the boundary is predominantly larger industrial and commercial units. These are visually prominent along the ridgeline.

Administrative Boundaries

General site topography

6 NVB Architects 2.3 Existing uses Inside the site

Most of the land contained within the railway, bypass and town boundary is agricultural; mainly dairy with some arable. There are a few isolated residential properties located along the lanes and a cluster of properties around Blatchbridge.

Within the site are several old farm complexes but the only operational farm is Side Hill Farm located to the south of Little Keyford Lane. Little Keyford Lane itself starts as part of the Culverhill area and has a variety of residential properties on both sides to the east of the site. Keyford Manor lies to the north of the lane and is a listed building with mature trees in its grounds.

The only significant road within the site is the B3092 road south to Maiden Bradley, Mere and Shaftesbury. It is still National Landscape Character Areas a country road with grass verges and hedges. It crosses an old bridge over the river at Blatchbridge and has been improved as it approaches the bypass

2.4 Existing uses Outside the site

The Marston Gate Retail area comprises a large supermarket (Sainsburys), a DIY store (Homebase Extract from Ordinance Survey Drawings currently being re-branded), Halfords and a few other retail units, and McDonalds and KFC fast food outlets. The police also have their mobile units based there.

The area east of the retail centre is an extensive industrial and commercial estate containing a wide variety of manufacturing (Singers and Dairy Crest), warehousing (J Harding and Sons), builders merchants (Tipadel and Jewsons), and service companies (ATS and Platinum Cars). There are also a large number of smaller units and the Somerset County Council recycling centre operated by Viridor.

Outside the line of the railway and bypass to the south is an extension of the agricultural landscape, largely dairy and pasture. There is a cluster of buildings at Feltham but the nearest villages at Corsley, Woodlands, Tytherington and Trudoxhill are some distance away. Extract from Access Plan 1731 1071A

Selwood Garden Village 7 3.0 CONSULTATION

3.1 Meeting with the Community 3.2 Key Messages from Stakeholders

Discussions with the Town Council had previously The following key messages are noted from the public highlighted a dissatisfaction with the way that piecemeal engagement. development has been coming forward in the town with little or no supporting infrastructure that has wider • There is an urgent need for new housing in Frome, benefits beyond the individual developments. NVB with house prices becoming a significant barrier to Architects involvement with the charitable body ‘Fair younger people staying in the town. Housing for Frome’ also identified the growing need for • There has been insufficient allocation of new affordable housing in the town. employment sites as the town has grown, increasing out-commuting. Frome need a range of employment A briefing paper was prepared to aide preliminary sites, particularly medium sized offices. discussions with various stakeholders. Meetings were then held over November 2017 – January 2018 with • There is consensus at all levels that new housing a range of stakeholders including the Town, District should be high quality, and should not provide bland and Community Councillors for the town. Most of the standard developer house types but should aspire to the best possible design as evidenced around the councillors representing Frome residents attended country. meetings and the feedback received was overwhelmingly positive with the overriding message being well planned • New development should be planned such that it development, even at a large scale, was encouraged makes a reasonable contribution to the infrastructure in preference to piecemeal. Concerns were also raised that is required to maintain and enhance the quality about the emerging site allocations set out in Part 2 and of living in the town. This should include green- their potential to undermine a more comprehensive space, schools, workspaces, and medical /social care strategic scale development south of the town. provision. • Small scale / incremental development on the edge Given that the majority of the site put forward is located of the town is strongly resisted on the grounds within Selwood Parish, and not Frome Town, discussions of increased pressure that it causes on existing were held with the parish councillors and ward member infrastructure. for Selwood. Again, the proposal were broadly well received with attendees understanding the pressing • New development should deliver high levels need for housing and the benefits of planning for this affordable housing, and should not seek to reduce figures on grounds of viability. in a comprehensive way. Issues have been identified in respect of the management of community facilities and • Blatchbridge has a strong community but is blighted parkland that will serve Frome but fall within Selwood by through traffic. It should be protected and and discussion are ongoing in respect to how this will be enhanced where possible. dealt with.

Meetings have also been held with those involved in education and health care in the town as well as those interested in addressing the problems associated with the housing crisis.

More extensive and detailed consultation is planned in the Spring to obtain the views of the wider community and clearly identify the priorities that residents have for infrastructure investment.

8 NVB Architects 4.0 CONTEXT

4.1 Landscape 4.2 Connectivity

NVB Landscape have prepared a Strategic Landscape Vectos have prepared a Transport Statement to and Visual Appraisal (SLVA) which accompanies this accompany this submission. This document has been submission. This has been completed in accordance with prepared with reference to National Planning Policy Landscape Institute guidelines (2013) which sets out a Framework (NPPF), Manual for Streets (1&2), Somerset methodology for assessment. County Council Transport Policies (2011), Somerset future transport Plan (2011), Mendip District Council The study includes a desk based study of valued Local Plan Part 1 (adopted) and Part 2 (draft for landscapes as prescribed by National and Regional consultation). designations, a photographic study recording visual character, and summary statements on the sensitivity This study finds that recent development around the of the landscape character to accommodate change town has made insufficient contribution to infrastructure through new development. including facilities and transport - particularly sustainable travel such as walking, cycling and buses. The summary findings are that: The report finds that Frome is a sustainable location • The development would have direct and significant for new housing in Mendip, largely as a result of the changes on agricultural land within the development train station, but also through comparatively good road area. connections to the A36.

• The development would have negligible impact on the regional and national character areas.

• The landscape has significant capacity for change (accommodate development) within minimal impacts on the character of Frome.

• The proposals, which include the retention of areas of existing trees/ hedgerows, together with the significant mitigation including the creation of new green infrastructure (in line with principles of Garden Towns) are likely to minimise the impacts of development.

It is recommended that a full Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment be undertaken to guide more detailed plans for the site and support any future planning application.

Extract from SLVA Extract from Transport Report

Selwood Garden Village 9 4.3 Heritage 4.4 Ecology

Armour Heritage have prepared a desk based Historic A preliminary Ecology report has been prepared by Environment Assessment which accompanies this Grassroots planning to accompany this submission. The submission. This is completed in accordance with report is based on desk based records study, and site National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), former visits. The report, identifies the following features which Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) and Local Planning inform the context of proposals: recommendations and policies. The land is largely Agricultural with comparatively low The report includes a desk based assessment of all ecological value. sites within 1km of the site boundary, potential sites of unidentified archaeology, and scoping for impacts on The river corridor provides an attractive habitat and any assets within a wider 3km of the study area. would require further study. Proposals to retain this feature present a significant benefit. There are 12 heritage assets within the boundary area, low to moderate potential for buried archaeology and Hedgerows and pockets of woodland are likely to there are a small number of assets with 3km of the site provide habitats for a wide range of species. These are which would require further study during development of retained as far as possible in proposals to form green- any proposals. ways which is welcomed.

The summary is that there would likely be some harm The area is likely to provide habitats for bats, and it is associated with development on this scale, but that is recommended that surveys should be undertaken to below the threshold that might preclude development inform any subsequent planning application. of the site, and should be balanced against the public benefit which includes an urgent need to provide new Preliminary findings are that development of the site and sustainable housing (particularly affordable units) would not give rise to significant adverse effects if within the district. mitigation measures are adopted.

It is recommended that further studies be undertaken during the development of an outline application in order to fully understand impact, avoid them where possible or mitigate them where this is not possible. This should include consultation with the various statutory bodies including Mendip District Council (planning and conservation), Somerset County Council (archaeology) and Historic England where appropriate.

Extract from Historic Environment Study

10 NVB Architects 5.0 VISION

5.1 Mendip District Council

The Mendip District Council have developed visions for Local people have access to a good range and choice both the district and the individual towns. They are in the of housing which better reflects their needs rather than form of narrative descriptions written in 2029. the demand from the other parts of the sub-region. The location of most recent housing development has been A Vision of Mendip District in 2029 in the town’s built up area making use of a good supply of previously developed land although in a manner sensitive In 2029, Mendip remains a rural, multi-centred district of to the town’s built heritage. Land to the south east of great diversity. Although still strongly influenced by larger the town was set aside in response to concerns about centres outside the district for jobs, shopping and leisure. the intensity of brownfield redevelopment. This land has Mendip’s market towns have continued to improve delivered exemplar development of well designed zero their services, facilities and amenities, enabling a higher carbon homes and community facilities, including a new proportion of peoples’ needs to be met locally... school and extensive open space meeting a range of recreation needs. These areas are also well connected New development, primarily focused in the towns, has to the other parts of the town through well conceived made efficient use of land but has been used to reinforce foot and cycle links including crossings of the railway and the distinctive character of each place. the river. Within the town centre, the Saxonvale area and the recently completed redevelopment of the Westway In Frome and Wells, promoting a better balance Centre now mean that residents and communities nearby between homes and jobs has been achieved. In Frome, meet almost all of their shopping needs in the town, economic development has been stimulated to improve particularly fashions and other high quality goods that opportunities for local employment, reducing the people previously travelled to Bath to buy. outflow of the workforce to Bath or places in the west of Wiltshire. Furthermore, the appeal of its town centre These redeveloped areas also offer a wider range of has been dramatically improved by major redevelopment restaurants and social venues, including a larger cinema, which makes the most of the natural and cultural assets making Frome an attractive destination for a good night of the town. out, whilst a hotel, within easy walking distance of the town centre, provides for guests. The environment of the The diversification of the local economy is continuing, wider town centre is also improved. As well as new public with high speed broadband access helping to counteract spaces in the redeveloped shopping areas, the Market the limitations of the local transport network. New and Place has been remodelled to favour people over cars so improved education and vocational training facilities that most drivers choose other routes around the town. have improved the skills of the workforce, encouraging new and dynamic businesses on well designed sites in These alterations have enabled the market to return to the towns. the heart of the town centre and grow in turn drawing in even more shoppers and visitors.

Local people now consider the river as an asset to the A Vision of Frome in 2029 town. On the river banks around the Market Yard and the Westway Centre, the channel has now been softened and In 2029 Frome residents have access to a wider range of integrated with the redeveloped shopping area to offer a jobs locally which has led to a reduction in the level of pleasant setting for people to linger, enjoy a bite to eat or commuting out of the town. Commerce Park is now fully meet with friends. The wider river initiative, underpinned occupied and additional sites within the existing built by local groups, landowners and public bodies, has seen up area provide offices and workshop space allowing it emerge as the spine of a well connected open space employees to travel to work without the need to use a network which encourages more active lifestyles, travel car. Having secured a permanent home, the FETE project by foot and bicycle, as well as being wildlife corridors in is contributing to a better skilled local workforce. The their own right. More widely, the quality of open spaces improved and extended facilities at Frome College have in the town has improved through the use of a dedicated allowed new teaching specialities (including Further fund contributed to by new development schemes. Education courses) to emerge which equip young people with knowledge and skills that are valued by a range of local businesses. Local business is also more confident due to the help and advice now being offered by Business Support enterprises and work hubs.

Selwood Garden Village 11 5.2 Frome Town Council Vision

Frome Town Council (FTC) have published and had adopted a neighbourhood plan which draws attention to the goals of One Planet Living. The Council have also developed a Town Strategy which identifies goals for the town.

“The central theme underpinning the council’s approach will remain a focus on developing a sustainable town, but we have expanded what we mean by that. Everything we do and support will fall into three areas:

• Well being: a flourishing and active community of people and organisations working together. • Prosperity: a thriving business community, connected with each other and with the town, providing employment and prosperity. • Environmental sustainability: covering the attractiveness, variety and accessibility of the town’s green spaces and an increased focus on renewable energy, energy-efficiency, waste reduction, and community transport.

Well-being, prosperity and environmental are intrinsically interlinked. For example: we will look to focus business support in ways that enhance ethical, environmentally sensitive business practice, strengthening the business, well-being and environmental sustainability together. Similarly, many projects which enhance well-being also enhance green spaces, and a focus on green energy not only reduces emissions but also reduces costs and sustains regional economies.”

Provide connectivity Support and enhance To provide more employment infrastructure to link new education, healthcare, sport opportunities in Frome developments to the existing and cultural activity in Frome town facilities

12 NVB Architects 5.3 Development Vision 5.4 The Garden Village

The vision for the new development aims to be The vision defined above shares much with the Garden compatible with the Frome Town Council aspirations. City Movement and the recent definitions for Garden At a strategic level the aim is to produce a holistically Villages. The legacy of the Garden City movement is planned strategic new development, town extension now promoted by the Town and Country Planning which will provide the full range of facilities required Association. for the community to meet its own daily needs, whilst not directly competing with the facilities that the town The Government have supported the principles of currently offers and harnessing them for improvement Garden City development and this now includes support and use by new residents. In doing so the proposals will; for smaller developments. The DCLG Paper entitled ‘Locally-Led Garden Villages, Towns and Cities’ extended • Create new attractive and well-designed support to garden communities on a smaller scale. neighbourhoods which will contribute to community The prospectus identified that schemes of between well-being, improve with time, and create a sense of 1,500 – 10,000 dwellings might be eligible for central place. government funding in the form of priority access to • Provide infrastructure to support and serve the additional government funding to encourage and whole Frome community including the creation facilitate development. of employment opportunities to support wider community prosperity. • Provide high quality design which will support the goals associated with One Planet Living. • To help Frome become more sustainable through the creation of well connected neighbourhoods.

Help improve road and cycle Provide energy infrastructure Provide facilities and network in Frome to help support low carbon infrastructure to support and energy lifestyles. community activities and create healthy active neighbourhoods

Selwood Garden Village 13 6.0 THE PROPOSALS

6.1 Proposal Summary 6.2 Landscape Framework

The proposal is to comprehensively develop 161 hectares The development vision is realised through the creation of land south of the existing urban area of Frome to of a green infrastructure network developed out of the provide: landscape constraints and opportunities. The river valley through the site is conceived as a linear park in the same • Circa 1800 - 2200 homes at 30-35 dwellings per way as the Rodden meadows provide a park in the centre hectare; of Frome. • Circa 23 hectares of commercial land including serviced estate land similar to Commerce Park, New linear parks are proposed within the new employment hub space (shared office space and development which will link the valley meadows to higher quality office units integrated into residential enhanced woodland and green space around existing as parts of the site and as part of mixed use areas), lanes. These new park areas will connect up the principal and other types of employment units that require landscape assets in the site creating not only an attractive larger land parcels adjacent to the A361; network of amenity spaces but also an extensive wildlife resource. • New schools – we are currently in discussions with existing schools to determine the exact requirement; Overlaid on this will be a new blue infrastructure • A new Local Centre that will accommodate small managing water movement across the site. The use scale convenience shopping, an office ‘hub’, of swales and ponds will enable water run-off to be community meeting space and other uses as attenuated to reduce the risk of flooding downstream considered necessary (i.e. A-Class Uses such as in Frome itself. Within the green network the hillside accountants, estate agent, gym and restaurant/ gradients and orientation will be used to define the takeaway, etc.); geometries of building and block structure. Optimum use • Extensive parkland areas including new playing will be made of orientation to maximise solar energy use. pitches; Within the green network the hillside gradients and • Attenuation areas to accommodate surface water orientation will be used to define the geometries of runoff from the development as well as to alleviate building and block structure. Optimum use will be made current flooding issues in the town; and of orientation to maximise solar energy use. • New roads including a new roundabout junction off the A361 (Ski Jump Hill) and internal road network that will provide a new link between south Frome and the A361 to avoid the Blatchbridge area. Existing lanes will be downgraded to provide access only and pedestrian/cycle links. The new road network has been designed to provide a new bus loop service from Sainsbury’s, through the development and then back into South Frome along The Mount.

Area breakdown of site usage and Extract showing green infrastructure approximate housing numbers

14 NVB Architects 6.2 Landscape Framework 6.3 Movement Networks

The existing lanes are some of the most attractive spaces in the site. These will be retained for pedestrian and cycle use (other than restricted car use to serve existing properties where necessary). The lanes will be expanded to provide new routes to link up with the existing public paths following the valley to the east.

Footpaths will be extended through the green grid to link up with routes out to villages and into the town. It is expected that existing pedestrian and cycle crossing points on the bypass will be improved. Pedestrian and cycle links to the rail station will also be improved.

The existing B3092 road and the lanes that radiate off it are insufficient to support development of the scale of development envisaged, in fact it is considered inappropriate to accommodate the currently proposed allocations set out in the Part 2 plan. Therefore, a new vehicular road network is required.

As the bypass has sufficient traffic capacity the primary requirement to enable new development is a new link to the bypass which avoids the bridge and settlement around Blatchbridge. A new roundabout at the foot of the hill (ski-jump hill) close to the river is proposed and this will serve a spine road across site. The spine road will Sustainable Transport Routes (Cycleways, Footpaths, and be linked to the Marston Gate roundabout (in front of Trains) showing strong connections to community hub, Sainsburys) enabling a loop bus route through Culverhill train station Frome town centre and extended landscape. to be created.

A further secondary link is proposed to the north west of the site and the new spine road will terminate at a junction with Feltham lane. The land south of the river can be served by a new road enabling development whilst still protecting the Blatchbridge area.

Improved bus links would be created through the new network or roads improving circular routes between Sainsburys, the town centre, train station and new development.

Extract showing green infrastructure Personal Vehicle Routes showing new connection to bypass and reduce congestion on existing roads.

Selwood Garden Village 15 6.4 Use and Character

The vision aims to create an environment in which a Within the green network will be playgrounds, exercise rich and vibrant community can become established. A areas, benches and tables, allotments, wildlife meadows full range of uses and activities is envisaged including and woods, ponds, and a celebration of the orientation residential, employment, retail, cultural and social and views. Particular attention will be paid to addressing facilities. The balance between the component parts is the shortage of sports facilities in the town. yet to be finalised but the preliminary scheme allocates significant areas for employment and a village centre which will provide small scale convenience shopping, cafés/restaurant/pub, community meeting space and other employment opportunities compatible with a mixed-use centre.

The character of the area will be influenced by a focus on green space and healthy living. The preliminary masterplan allocates plenty of green space supporting a wide range of informal and formal sport and leisure activities.

Extract from application drawings showing proposed development

16 NVB Architects 6.5 Phasing 6.6 Offsite Improvements

The proposal is for this development to be phased over In addition to on-site works which will reduce existing many years. The rate of delivery would be developed in transport pressures, it is expected that this development consultation with landowners developers and the Local would support off-site improvements throughout Authority in order to optimise benefits. The following is south frome. It is proposed that these be explored with currently envisaged. the community through consultation that would be undertaken to support an Outline application. The key infrastructure required to minimise the impact of new development is the connection to the bypass. The first phase would therefore focus on this area at the southern end of the site. New development (residential and commercial) on the outer fringes of Frome (sites 1b 6.7 Energy Resources and 1c) may also be developed early to assist in 5 year supply, but should make suitable contribution to the The vision also aspires to a more sustainable Frome. The wider infrastructure. scheme will look to take advantage of the technological opportunities that are associated with a development Development and infrastructure would then expand on this scale, especially regarding renewable energy and northward to connect with land on the southern edge of water conservation and management. Frome (phase 2) Sustainable principles will be followed in developing Phase 3 would complete development and infrastructure individual strategies; mean, lean, green. Special attention to the west of the B3092 including commercial land to will be paid to orientation to maximise use of solar the south of the river. energy.

The final phases of development and infrastructure Other strategies to be investigated will include combined would provide predominantly housing to the east of heat and power (CHP) with district heating and use of B3092 including connections to the railway station, and hydroelectric power generated by the Frome Mount Estate.

Sample of small scale hydro electric scheme Sample of small scale hydro electric scheme (Tellisford Mill, Tellisford) (Tellisford Mill, Tellisford)

Selwood Garden Village 17 7.0 URBAN DESIGN PRINCIPLES

7.1 Engagement and local input

The delivery of the vision “new attractive and well- designed neighbourhoods which will contribute to community well-being” will involve engagement with the Frome community. Methods for achieving meaningful engagement will be explored with the Mendip District Council and Frome Town Council. The principles to be followed in developing the urban design are likely to be the following:

Catherine Hill (Frome) 7.2 Walkable neighbourhoods

The division of space into neighbourhoods will be largely informed by the existing landscape structure; topology and woodland cover. The green network of public social space will provide the framework for a walkable environment. Within this green framework, blocks will be defined by streets and sized to create a variety of character areas with a range of house types and tenures.

Officers Field (HTA Architects)

7.3 Distinctive neighbourhoods

A study of the existing neighbourhoods in Frome will provide an insight into how these areas work and what lessons can be learned. The new neighbourhoods should be distinctive and specific to their place. They should have a Frome character and respect its vernacular in terms of scale, layout and the materials used.

Best use will be made of the land available and the residential areas will display a range of densities, and a range of tenures. Dwellings within each neighbourhood will be designed to Lifetime Homes standards and will consider all age groups and abilities..

BE Housing (Alison Brookes)

18 NVB Architects 7.4 Affordable Housing

Addressing the problems of those who find themselves unable to access the housing market will be a high priority. Affordable housing will be interspersed throughout the development and will be provided through a range of types and tenures. The minimum provision stated in Mendip District Council policy will be achieved as a minimum.

Social Housing (Peter Barber Architects) 7.5 Permeable Neighbourhoods

Neighbourhoods will be created within a safe, healthy and well-designed public realm; the green network. This will support active lifestyles. Access to the green network will be made as easy as possible and the green network itself will enable easy access through the site and out into the adjoining town and countryside.

Hanham Hall (HTA Architects) 7.6 Local centre

The development will provide a local centre with employment, retail and community facilities. The centre will be located close to the school/educational facilities and collocated with appropriate and complementary residential and community facilities such as for the elderly. The centre will be compact with shared parking and supported by public transport. Within the centre will be community space and serviced offices.

Kings Cross Pavilion (Stanton Williams)

Selwood Garden Village 19 7.7 Green Space and Sports Provision

The landscape within the development will be well designed with respect to use, attractiveness and long-term maintenance. The sports facilities and outdoor pitches will be associated with educational and/or community organisations and provided with complementary support facilities to enable optimum use. Informal sports provision will be associated with the green network and will include fitness circuits and features for activities such as bouldering and parkour.

HAB Housing (Kevin McCloud) 7.8 Legacy and maintenance

The vision anticipates an environment that improves with time. The development will aim to provide a means for the public realm to be maintained and enhanced. This will involve discussions with the Frome Town Council and District and Councils. It may involve a Community Land Trust or similar park trust and it will explore opportunities for local residents to become involved in the care and development of their area.

Officers Field (HTA Architects)

Barton Park (The Environment Partnership)

20 NVB Architects 8.0 MASTERPLAN SUMMARY

8.1 Summary 8.2 Conclusions

Selwood garden Village will comprise: Selwood Garden Village will be a sustainable new neighbourhood set within a high quality landscape. • 63 hectares of residential development providing It will provide an ambitious injection of new housing, around 2,000 new homes around a village centre employment opportunity and social infrastructure to located near to the bypass. underpin robust land supply provision for the next decade or more. The local Frome community will be fully • 23 hectares of new commercial, retail and leisure engaged in the design process and initial consultations opportunities, which will be located to provide good across all 3 tiers of local government shows that there is access from new development and the town. significant support for a well-planned major extension of the town supported and led by appropriate new • A new community hub space creating a village centre infrastructure. Potential benefits are substantial and and community facilities. include:

• Healthcare facilities to complement existing • Providing development as a new neighbourhood provision within the town. with its own supporting infrastructure, meaning the pressure on facilities and infrastructure within other • Education facilities to meet the demands of new existing towns and villages will be reduced; development and provide complementary provision for existing institutions. • Providing a place to live, work and play in a new settlement which is compact in size, providing good • 72 hectares of green-space including an extensive footpath and cycle networks, links into the railway landscape riverside park, sporting facilities, and new network and an efficient bus/tram system, moving recreational areas. away from the need to use the private car;

• Provision of improved public transport links into the • Energy will be produced from a biomass / waste town to support the existing centre and to add to its plant generating electricity and supporting a district attractiveness. heating system, paving the way to a low carbon community; • Provision of improved walking and cycling routes particularly connections to the train station, Frome • Improving social infrastructure, such as schools, town centre, and outward to the wider landscape. community facilities, hospital facilities, day care facilities and sport and outdoor facilities; The works would be phased with early completion of the vehicular links to the bypass to minimise the • Provide new employment opportunities to increase effect of new development and to bring about positive the number of skilled workers in the local area, and improvements to the town more quickly. to provide greater numbers of economically active residents; and

• To make improved use of the existing rail infrastructure which will provide better links for the whole of the Mendip Area to the South East.

Selwood Garden Village 21 NVB Architects, Rook lane Chapel Bath Street, Frome, Somerset, BA11 1DN