Meeting documents

Comment

Response

This sounds a good principle but the map on display circled an area off centre of the existing, established Centre of Radstock which surely is the area around the shops and Victoria Hall. - Member of the public

The area highlighted shows fragmentation and a significant gap in the centre of the town - see Appendix 2.

Roads need major improvement as Radstock is already a bottle-neck. Car parking needs to be expanded to allow for increased population and visitors. Bus services need to be more commuter friendly and reliable. - Member of the public

The road layout will need to be considered in relation to the future form of the town. Car parking levels will be determined through transportation and planning policy. Transport policy aims to promote public transport improvements.

This is the wrong approach and imposing it here won't work. We need to concentrate on improving what we have already and work in an organic way to achieve improvements to the town's coherence and connectivity. The physical geography does not lend itself to the creation of a `new' centre. We need to firstly make best use of what we have and improve it/make new uses of it and only build on land that does not have value for something else. That way we keep the good things, have a sustainable approach and achieve the objectives of sustainable development and a coherent and connective centre.

The principles seek to build upon Radstock's existing strengths.

This sounds very much like the sort of rubbish produced by the John Thompson and Partners many years ago. Surely we should have moved on by now. - Member of the public

The John Thompson & Partners report summarised the results of the Radstock Community Planning Weekend. This has led to implementation of a number of projects such as refurbishment of town centre buildings and the Memorial Park.

Radstock has well established routes through it already and more roads are not wanted. The town should be a gateway to its treasure - a nature reserve full of very rare species that need protection. - Member of the public

The principles don't propose more roads.

Until the problem of all the roads splitting up the centre is tackled this will not be possible. - Member of the public

The road layout will need to be considered in relation to the future form of the town.

The existing area adjoining the Victoria Hall would provide an interesting town centre if traffic was removed and parking provided elsewhere. The land at the bottom of Frome Hill should be straightened and a large single roundabout built to ease traffic flow - Member of the public

Detailed proposals such as these could be considered within the broad framework of the principles.

Midsomer Norton is the main town. Radstock rose to nearly compete on basis of transport centre. Develop Midsomer Norton first and Radstock will follow. You cannot deal with Radstock in isolation to Midsomer Norton. - Member of the public

Work is underway in relation to regeneration across the area. However, Radstock has particular issues and development proposals are coming forward.

Dumping 250 houses and industrial units on the old railway land will not `regenerate' Radstock. Radco who already monopolies trading in the town, will still be on the opposite side of town so nothing will change except that an excess of commuters will move here making traffic worse. - Member of the public

The principles don't propose a specific amount of housing or make proposals for individual sites.

250 houses and industrial units being built on the old railway land will not `regenerate' Radstock. Radco, who already have most trade will still be on the other side of town therefore only traffic will change due to more commuters. - Member of the public

The principles don't propose a specific amount of housing or make proposals for individual sites.

Build a market hall type of building with car parking underneath on the old railway land. Keep the line of the railway clear for possible light transit system. - Member of the public

Detailed proposals such as this can be considered within the framework of the principles but are matters to be dealt with through the statutory planning system.

The principle of development of a coherent and connected centre that can adapt to change appears to make sense. However, the aim of the principle is to aid the development of a stronger heart and ability to adapt to change through establishing a physical shape and layout based on the pattern of buildings and spaces. It is easy to generalise by saying that successful towns usually have a clear centre but Radstock is pretty unique in its layout due to its history and topography and does not lend itself well to having a clear centre. In order for a town-planning approach to make a real difference to Radstock, it would have to be radical indeed (and also expensive) and address the aesthetic problems created by Radco and the Fortescue Road shops. Once of the aims of Norton Radstock Regeneration Company has been to create a new centre and I note that the Exhibition highlights land they wish to develop as the heart that apparently brings connectivity and coherence. NRR's plans for the Rail Land so far have not really addressed the issue of connectivity because of the location of the developed land, sandwiched between roads and watercourses. What they have done is to add bulk. Additionally, the major part of their linear site is essentially peripheral to the town.

Radstock has had a series of `centres' over time and has very particular assets and problems - I do not believe a town-planning based approach to be the most appropriate approach for Radstock, especially when the space, in what is essentially a multiple centre, is limited and dominated by roads and traffic. What is required is a pragmatic approach to the unique benefits and problems that are present in this town's central area, which would include developing some areas but not be driven by the creation of a `new centre'. I believe it to be dangerous to set in stone the creation of a physical `heart' as a solution to the problem and a starting point from which change will stem. An organic approach is needed in a place such as this. I believe that the principle should be to establish a coherence and connectivity in the centre by means of making best use of its existing assets and through attention to form, whilst allowing for future needs in responding and adapting to change. - Member of the public

These comments set out some important challenges which will need to be taken into account when seeking to implement the principles. The principles seek to build upon Radstock's existing strengths and don't specifically propose a `new centre'. Radstock's form has changed in the past. The current shape of the centre was formed for a particular purpose and following changes in the town's role has not been re-formed to enable future needs to be met. The principle is considered a valid one and is capable of striking a balance between building upon what already exists and change.

None of this seems possible with the existing road system. The dangerous double-roundabout currently dominates Radstock and is the distinctive focal point of the town! - Member of the public

The principles seek to promote a more appropriate physical form (shape and layout) for the centre. This will require consideration of the existing road layout.

Any new buildings should blend in with the original stone built heart of the town or its character will be ruined. No more Swedish sauna style monstrosities please i.e. the new school - Member of the public

The principles encourage high quality design.

Railway land has yet to be developed - public byways and (walking) paths should be retained. Poss. use for transport? - Member of the public

These specific facilities could be accommodated with the principles.

No explicit mention of the facilities needed for a community to function - Theatre/cinema space, community centre etc. - Member of the public

The principles promote a mix of town centre uses. Specific proposals for implementation will be determined by viability and the planning process.

This would be brilliant - we want shops, businesses, and community facilities NOT houses. A skateboard park would also be good - Member of the public

Support noted. However, the principles also encourage town centre living.

Facilities for some `civic life' already exist how much more are actually needed? There are other ways of contributing to the local economy; one which you have ignored is a heritage railway.

The principles include the town's heritage assets. Specific site and transport proposals are to be determined through the planning and Local Transport Plan processes.

We don't want Radstock turned into a modern town just like may others. Protect its heritage and history. Buildings need to be in keeping. Get rid of existing ugly buildings and replace with new ones more in keeping with the team rather than building new - Member of the public

The principles seek to retain and enhance Radstock's distinctiveness.

In order to maximise visitor potential founded on heritage and location it is important that the trend to a commuter town is stopped and that what we have is valued rather than despoiled by developers. - Member of the public

Then principles seek to promote sustainability and quality.

What I want to see as a distinctive focal point for the community is a Nature Reserve on the railway land with its full value to wildlife retained and improved. I would be proud to have this in my town. We need to make improvements to and best us of the many existing buildings we have for community facilities and secure better funding for existing physical and human resources. Civic life already has a focal point in Victoria Hall. - Member of the public

The principles include the towns green assets. However, the principles don't put forward proposals for specific sites.

Town functions cannot `evolve' they merely change. What is a `modern market town' and why should Radstock become one? Radstock already does a lot of the things stated above. - Member of the public

The principles aim to build upon Radstock's existing strengths.

A nature reserve with an outdoor education centre would bring visitors from afar as Radstock is such as special site with so many other facilities already. Hides for bird watching would greatly increase visitor numbers. - Member of the public

The principles include the towns green assets. However, the principles don't put forward proposals for specific sites.

Bring in the railway from Frome to Radstock to encourage visitors - the line is still there! - Member of the public

The principles don't put forward specific transport proposals. Any future proposals are to be determined through the planning and Local Transport Plan process.

Radstock should indeed remain distinctive. The addition of a large housing estate will not achieve this. Radstock is distinctive at present - partly because of its wildlife heritage this should not be destroyed. - Member of the public

Support noted. The principles don't put forward specific development proposals.

Radstock is not a market town; it is a neighbourhood retail centre with a dominant Radco. - Member of the public

Radstock has characteristics of a market town and the potential to further develop this.

Market towns still need police. When are we going to see police on the beat to protect those people who already live in Radstock? - Member of the public

This is compatible with the principles. However, the principles deal with physical regeneration.

Radstock was a thriving Market Town until the Council allowed the market to be sold and used for private retail - carpets and furniture. A proper market with a variety of stalls and affordable produce should be returned to the market building and the museum should be moved to the derelict land behind Fortescue Road. - Member of public

The principles do not put forward proposals for specific buildings and land.

Radstock's market made a thriving town until the Council allowed it to be sold. The market building should be restored to its original state and house a proper market with local stalls and produce and the museum should be moved to the derelict land behind Fortescue Road. - Member of the public

The principles do not put forward proposals for specific buildings and land.

Demolish Radco eyesore - Member of the public

The principles do not put forward proposals for specific buildings and land.

Unfortunately the town has `evolved' into a commuter town. Given that the area is unattractive to industry due to its poor infrastructure, the new principle seems to be way to go. This principle can accommodate the creation of a nature reserve (natural heritage) and a heritage railway (industrial heritage) on the Rail Land, either or both of which would provide a distinctive focal point to be proud of, complement the excellent Radstock Museum and promote greater interest in our town from visitors, tourists and educational establishments, thus maximising visitor potential as indicated in the principle. This would represent best use of an extremely valuable biological, cultural educational, recreational and attractive asset. The land is of national importance to biodiversity (supporting many nationally rare species in addition to many locally important species) and of interest educationally to Writhlington (Secondary) School, famous for its rare plant work and Bristol University. Its biological and educational importance will be lost forever if a commercially viable private development is placed upon it. Even NRR would admit that, I'm sure. A Nature Reserve or Heritage Railway (or both in tandem) is a big enough thing conceptually to engender feelings of Radstock identity from members of the various communities that make up Radstock as a whole. - Member of the public

Support noted. The principles do not put forward proposals for specific sites. The former railway land is allocated in the draft Local Plan for mixed use development. The mix and amount of development will be determined through the statutory planning process.

Again, this sounds great but is never going to happen while Radstock's road system is so impossible. - Member of the public

The principle on the form of the town aims to ensure that the centre can adapt and respond to change.

Business to encourage are small rurally inclined business, farm shops, a market weekly, home produce - Member of the public

Such activities would be compatible with the principles.

There is a good selection of small shops and larger Co-op supermarket with associated free parking. Free parking (Council) and WC facility should be retained likewise more recreational facilities. - Member of the public

These matters are too detailed for inclusion in the principles.

And, continue to support existing business, even if it isn't very pretty - Member of the public

The principles aim to support and build upon the town's existing assets.

Yes I agree - NOT houses

- Member of the public

Support noted. The principles support town centre living.

Would not `bases for visitors' be the many `pubs and small hotels' in the area? Arts based enterprise creates little general economic activity - or do you have other figures? - Member of the public

The existing visitor facilities are included. The potential for a contribution to regeneration of the town through arts based activity has emerged through consultation and examples for other towns demonstrate real benefits.

Where is the demand for arts-based enterprise, environmentally friendly business etc? If economic potential exists in these areas we should be able to see the demand. - Member of the public

The Old Bakery project indicated a demand for arts based enterprise. Small, environmentally friendly businesses are those that are compatible with a town centre environment. Proposed to broaden this to include reference to more general `service activity'. Demand is in part dependent upon the town's image and the facilities it provides in the future.

This is the only way to go but is not compatible with increasing population. Turning the vast bulk of rail land into a nature reserve and putting in an interpretation centre will be attractive to tourists and visitors and will boost the number of people visiting the museum as there will be another attraction to visit here (the lack of one is a problem to them presently. A heritage railway would also do this but it shouldn't clash with the wildlife needs. A sustainability centre will promote environmentally friendly businesses. Arts based enterprises can cash in on the `green' theme of the Nature Reserve as well as industrial heritage. - Member of the public

Support noted - however, the principles do not make proposals for the railway land.

Does the council intend to subsidise the above? If not and given that it hasn't happened yet, why will it? - Member of the public

Some elements embodied by this principle are in place (e.g. Radstock Museum). Future projects will need to demonstrate viability.

Yes small environmentally friendly businesses are fine but huge supermarkets are not wanted. We have the Co-op which is fine. These would develop well if the town promotes itself as a centre for green tourism, - Member of the public

Support noted. The principles do not suggest provision of a huge supermarket.

More jobs needed to stop commuting out to Bath/Bristol etc. - Member of the public

The principles seek to encourage more jobs in the town centre. However, the role of the town centre is limited in the extent to which it can reduce commuting - the main potential in relation to this exists across the wider Midsomer Norton/Radstock area.

There are numerous trading estates in the Radstock area already, more will increase traffic problems. Retail outlets (small) and parking are required. - Member of the public

The principles don't propose more trading estates. Small retail outlets and an appropriate amount of parking are compatible with the principles.

So long as we don't have a pedestrian area Fortescue Road is already a magnet for youths/gangs. We have had people come into shop saying they feel intimidated by the gangs that hang `round in the street. Making a pedestrian area would make this ten times worse!! They already play football in the road, dodging traffic. It will not be long before someone is attacked or injured or rose. You only have to look at other places. This would make this a `no-go' area. Our business which is in Fortescue Road and open til quite late in evenings would have to close early due to intimidation etc. Please do not do this. - Local retailer

The principles promote a safe town centre environment.

Whilst an improved public realm is embodied within the principles, specific proposals are not put forward for Fortescue Road or other streets.

The market must decide. The local population is less than 5,000. - Member of the public

Market activity can take place within a framework for future regeneration.

No one will want to visit a town if they don't feel safe. No one will want to live in a town they feel threatened in. - Member of the public

The principles include the need for a safe environment.

The disused railway land is an area of natural beauty and has an invaluable eco-system which supports many nationally rare species of animal and plant. The site should be made a nature reserve which would benefit residents, schools and wildlife and would attract visitors to the town. - Member of the public

Support noted. The principles do not put forward proposals for specific sites. The former railway land is allocated in the draft Local Plan for mixed use development. The mix and amount of development will be determined through the statutory planning process.

The disused Railway Land is an area of natural beauty and home to much wildlife. It has an invaluable eco-system which supports many national rare species of animals and plants. - Member of the public

Support noted. The principles do not put forward proposals for specific sites. The former railway land is allocated in the draft Local Plan for mixed use development. The mix and amount of development will be determined through the statutory planning process.

This is meant to support making the most of the life of the town centre and what makes it distinctive and sustainable. One of the distinctive features of our town centre is that the countryside comes right into it. Important elements of sustainability include conserving and enhancing wildlife and biodiversity resources and looking after the physical and mental health of residents. It is well known that opportunities to commune with nature and to feel connected to surroundings through greater understanding leads to better mental health. The principle itself seems reasonable given the lack of attractiveness of the town to industry because of poor infrastructure. The Rail Lands site is a distinctive community resource and asset (wildlife, recreation, education and industrial heritage) which could be enhanced and well integrated into the town. It would be a draw for visitors, especially if accompanied by an interpretation centre, café/restaurant, shops and arts-based workshops. Arts-based enterprises and environmentally friendly businesses would be very compatible with this. - Member of the public

These points are compatible with the principles

The principle set out should be clarified to refer to the town centre - the wider town and its hinterland may have the opportunity to create/support other employment and economic opportunities and the planning frameworks need to be flexible enough to accommodate such change - Norton Radstock Regeneration Company

The principles refer specifically to the town centre. Agree that the wider area is of significance in terms of the economy and employment.

Increased housing in Radstock will only add to the traffic problems of the town and will destroy the incredibly bio diverse area of Radstock Railway Sidings (I assume houses would go there?) - Member of the public

Provision of housing close to town centre facilities is a sustainable approach. Levels of housing provision in relation to the capacity of transport infrastructure is a matter to be determined through the statutory planning process. The details of any development of specific sites, including bio-diversity issues are to be considered through the statutory planning process.

Do not turn centre into a sprawling housing estate. Need youth facilities, cafes, sports centre as Norton can barely cope and a proper restaurant would make a change from all the take-aways - Member of the public

The principles encourage a mix of uses.

There is a shortage of building sites - infill (avoidance of using old mining areas?). Areas liable to flood etc. - Member of the public

Areas unsuited to development will need to be taken into account when developing detailed proposals.

This is being over emphasised in all the plans so far. Some more housing OK - lots more would be inappropriate - Member of the public

Note support for some housing. Levels of housing provision to be determined through the statutory planning process.

I DO NOT agree with this. In order to achieve the other objectives, the centre of Radstock should contain shops and parking and community venues, NOT HOUSING - Member of the public

A mix of uses is promoted by the principles. This includes housing to enable people to live close to facilities and services.

(1) Live town - good! (2) Allowing further travel to work - very bad! What are you doing to encourage use of public transport? - Member of the public

Support noted. The principles seek to establish a town centre for people that enables transport interchange.

We don't want more housing in the Centre. It will only increase traffic pollution and noise. There are better ways to put heart in the centre. - Member of the public

Provision of houses in the town centre is put forward in the interests of sustainability. The balance of housing in relation to other uses and transport is to be determined through the statutory planning process.

Increasing Town centre living will merely add to the problem by increasing the population and pollution. It will not enable the bulk of people to move from the surrounding hills. This proposal will destroy Radstock's historic structure. - Member of the public

Provision of houses in the town centre is put forward in the interests of sustainability. The amount of housing and conservation of the town's historic character will be determined through the statutory planning process.

Increased town centre living will increase congestion, pollution, out commuting and increase the domination of the centre by traffic. Out commuting is extremely high here. The only exception is accommodation for single people in the centre par of town and for older people near the centre. Bus company fares will not decrease is a load of commuters are placed in/near the centre. People will still go to work by car and shop elsewhere by car. - Member of the public

Provision of houses in the town centre is put forward in the interests of sustainability. The amount of housing and in relation to the capacity of the transport system will be determined through the statutory planning process.

The worst thing that could happen to Radstock is that we get more and more houses. This is what is causing our problems, why exacerbate them? - Member of the public

Provision of houses in the town centre is put forward in the interests of sustainability. The amount of housing and in relation to the capacity of the transport system will be determined through the statutory planning process.

No there is enough housing already and we need to protect the environment and biodiversity of Radstock site. Avoiding the flooding which could so easily happen and avoiding the loss of natural habitat for wildlife. - Member of the public

Provision of houses in the town centre is put forward in the interests of sustainability. Safeguarding of the environment and addressing any flood risk issues will be dealt with through the statutory planning process.

More housing will simply add to the traffic problems of the area. The continuing insistence of the planning authority to permit 4 bed detached housing beyond the means of local people brings in commuter and causes a blight in the area. - Member of the public

Provision of housing close to town centre facilities is a sustainable approach. The principles don't promote particular types of housing. Levels of housing provision and the type of any future housing are to be determined through the statutory planning process.

Yes - ideal opportunity for student (Bath University) residences. Likely no change. - Member of the public

This proposal is too specific for inclusion in the principles. However, the principles do encourage town centre living.

Town centre living will NOT enhance the town or benefit the community. People living there will probably be commuters who will not work or shop in Radstock and the only contribution they will make will be to traffic congestion and pollution. - Member of the public

It is considered that town centre living is a sustainable approach in principle. It will e for the planning system to balance housing, jobs and transportation.

Town centre living will not enhance the town or benefit the community or local businesses. It will bring commuters and traffic to the town who will travel both to work and shop. - Member of the public

It is considered that town centre living is a sustainable approach in principle. It will e for the planning system to balance housing, jobs and transportation.

Development of the town centre must not include more housing as this will destroy the town with increased traffic and pressure on already over loaded infrastructure. - Member of the public

It is considered that town centre living is a sustainable approach in principle. It will e for the planning system to balance housing, jobs and transportation.

Developing the centre will not make it a community as the commuters living there will just use Radstock as their `base' at evenings. They will still work, shop and socialise in the cities. Also new housing is so extortionately priced that local young people could not afford to live there. Also local employers do not pay the salaries needed to facilitate large mortgage payments. - Member of the public

It is considered that town centre living is a sustainable approach in principle. It will e for the planning system to balance housing, jobs and transportation. Planning policy requires provision of a proportion of affordable housing.

Build a pensioners village on the Radco site. Have houses at the top end leading to a nursing and residential care building fronting Somervale Road and Wells Hill with a gate entrance. - Member of the public

The principles don't put forward development proposals for specific sites.

Although people in central area would bring more life and safety to the town centre but there is a limit to the quantity of new houses that will provide benefit. Once you get into larger housing numbers, many, if not most new residents will commute by car (buses are expensive and don't necessarily go where you want them to go), causing further congestion and pollution and cancelling out the benefits of being close to the fairly low level of services that a town of this size can support in its centre. - Member of the public

Note support on potential benefits. The amount of any future housing provision and balance with transport and other uses will need to be determined through the statutory planning process.

Developing the town centre should not involve building houses which add to traffic problems and destroy an area which is locally and even nationally important for its biodiversity. - Member of the Public

Then principles promote town centre living in the interests of sustainability. The amount and location of any future housing is to be determined through the statutory planning process.

You will only develop community if there are things for the youth to do or it will just lead to more anti-social behaviour on a larger scale directly in the centre of town. - Member of the Public

The principles promotes a mix of uses and activity with opportunities for all sections of the community.

Clandown etc has tended to be developed - parking and access problems (some turning points?) - Member of the Public

Site specific proposals will need to be determined through the statutory planning process.

The last draft of the plan was a farce, reduction in parking meant the town centre would be inaccessible to all but the most local resident - Member of the Public

This presumably refers to a previous plan for the former railway land - the principles don't put forward site specific proposals.

I agree with this. Victoria Hall should be preserved for the community as part of this development as well as for other community facilities. There should parking to ensure facilities are accessible. - Member of the Public

Support noted. Site specific proposals however do not form part of the principles.

Interchange between buses is actually good! Would be better still if there was interchange with commuter railway. Space must be reserved for the railway and interchange -Member of the Public

The principles provide broad guidance. Specific transport proposals are to be determined through the statutory planning and Local Transport Plan processes.

Who could argue with more of better facilities? What are these to be? Surely the Regeneration Principles should state what these are to be and how they are to be made accessible to the bulk of the residents who do not live in the centre. - Member of the Public

The principles are high level. The detail of any specific proposals will be determined by viability and the statutory planning process.

What we need is facilities where people live. If you put them in the centre people will just drive to them as they do already. We can have good facilities by improving what we have already and using all present opportunities well. What about the role of St Nicolas' School, now empty? What about improvements to Victoria Hall? What about addressing the problem of adequate revenue funding for existing facilities and maximising community use of all our schools near to people homes? Member of the Public

The provision of those facilities which are better placed elsewhere will continue. However, some services and facilities are most accessible if provided in a town centre.

The `new' school is merely a replacement for older facilities and is only necessary because of the growing commuter population. If only Radstock was ever given excellent facilities it would make a pleasant change! - Member of the Public

It is considered that Radstock has some excellent facilities. The principles aim to build upon this.

People enjoy the footpaths and would enjoy accessing the site directly from the centre for the enjoyment of wildlife and green environment. - Member of the public

The principles include the town's green assets. However, the principles don't put forward site specific proposals.

Next joke. Radstock Hill Jams. It is a joining transport hub for Bristol, Frome, Bath and Wells. - Member of the public

The principles address the impact of traffic but focus on strengthening the vitality and viability of the town centre itself.

You cannot develop a town centre where people feel threatened by gangs of youths hanging around at night. - Member of the public

The principles embody the concept of a safe environment.

A new housing development will not be affordable for young people of the town and will only bring commuters who will go elsewhere to work, shop and socialise. - Member of the public

It is considered that town centre living is a sustainable approach in principle. It will e for the planning system to balance housing, jobs and transportation. Planning policy requires provision of a proportion of affordable housing. The principles don't put forward a specific housing development proposal.

On the face of it, this sounds quite reasonable but there is a danger of concentrating on using the centre to serve the various settlements away from it rather than ensuring that there are community facilities near people's homes in those settlements. The principle itself encompasses such things as making good use of existing buildings, including our schools. This encourages people to use facilities locally and on foot or by bike, rather than travel into the centre by car. It also strengthens community feeling in the settlements, where people feel that they have their own distinctive settlement identities and live in population sizes more suited to feelings of community cohesion. People in Haydon just up the road from the centre, refer to their settlement as Haydon Village for example. - Member of the public

Any new provision would need to consider need and existing provision.

Radstock would have `sense of place' if only the traffic could be sorted. The `transport interchange' certainly needs `facilitating'. Good IT links should not be a priority - safe streets should. - Member of the Public

Agree to amend principles to refer to traffic congestion. Support noted. IT links are considered important to the future of the town.

A community hall for plays and films. Open green spaces for the deer, badgers, foxes and squirrels. We have diverse and beautiful wildlife, leave space for it and mature trees

- Member of the public

This is compatible with the principles. However, the principles don't put forward site specific proposals.

Children's play area and walks should be retained - old miners pool cleaned up? - Member of the public

This is compatible with the principles. However, the principles don't put forward site specific proposals.

There must still be plenty of parking. Access by car is essential to enable local shops/businesses to thrive. Also any traffic must be able to flow through Radstock - daily gridlock will not help local businesses - Member of the Public

The principles emphasise priority for people. However, agree to amend to refer to traffic congestion.

Last sentence `history of fuel supply could be turned to town's advantage'. Rape oil, willow producing environmentally fuel - this would be rural. What plans are there for full transport interchange including railway? - Member of the Public

Fuel supply comments are compatible with the principles. Specific transport proposals are to be determined through the statutory planning and Local Transport Plan process.

Something must be done to alleviate traffic congestion. - Member of the Public

Agree to amend principles to refer to traffic congestion.

The new memorial park is not high quality, it is noisy and polluted! I fail to see how the streets and spaces cannot be connected. If it is to be safe and with a sense of place predominating how are you going to get rid of the traffic? - Member of the Public

The new Memorial Park is considered to display a high quality of design and materials. Traffic cannot be removed. Agree to amend principles to refer to traffic congestion.

A `sense of place' can be created by giving the town some sort of coherent theme in part. Such as `green' Radstock's place as a town in a rural setting should be emphasized and built on retaining the fingers of country side and green land that distinctively come into the centre and using rail land for nature and as a `green lung' - Member of the Public

This is compatible with the principles.

Sense of place predominating implies no change. Radstock already has this! - Member of the Public

Radstock has considerable character. However, this is diluted by the dominance of highways and poor modern development/alterations.

This is fine around existing streets and facilities. We have a wonderful natural environment which is what people increasingly want and appreciate. - Member of the Public

Noted.

A sense of place will not be achieved by building more housing. Whilst transport remains such a low priority for the planning authorities the area cannot be put under more pressure Member of the Public

Then principles promote town centre living in the interests of sustainability. High quality design in new buildings is promoted by the principles. The amount and location of any future housing is to be determined through the statutory planning process.

Radstock is Fortescue Road, what planet is this author on?

- Member of the public

This is not suggested by the principles.

Safe should be the way forward. Regular police patrols will do this. - Member of the public

The principles embody the concept of a safe environment.

If the railway land was made into a nature reserve and the museum was moved to a purpose built building behind Fortescue Road and the market building was restored to its original use then you would have achieved most of the above principle. - Member of the public

The principles do not put forward proposals for specific sites. The former railway land is allocated in the draft Local Plan for mixed use development. The mix and amount of development will be determined through the statutory planning process.

To achieve the above principle you must restore the town market, re-locate the museum to a specially purpose built building behind Fortescue Road and develop the old railway to a nature reserve. - Member of the public

The principles do not put forward proposals for specific sites. The former railway land is allocated in the draft Local Plan for mixed use development. The mix and amount of development will be determined through the statutory planning process.

Build a viaduct across Radstock for light transit system to link up with Midsomer Norton South station. Create a Park and Ride facility for Bath - Member of the public

The principles don't put forward specific transport proposals. This is a matter for statutory planning and transport policy.

The principle is reasonable but it does not go far enough. Although the text says that the principle aims to enhance the town as a place to walk, cycle, sit and meet, the principle itself doesn't promote walking and cycling as modes of transport or seek reduction in car use. This would clash, at least in part, with the aim of turning the centre into a `hub'. There is a danger that a transport link of great potential importance to Radstock in the future, the railway to Frome and the mainline, could be obliterated by development of the Rail Land. A Nature Reserve on the land and other environmentally-minded initiatives would be compatible with the aim of providing a `sense of place' in the envisaged small urban and green town in a rural setting (in line with the text of the document and its principles). Facilitating transport interchange is needed but there may well be scope for improving the present bus stop area through use of land behind the stops and/or part of the road (there would still be room for parking outside the shops and through traffic). - Member of the public

This is largely compatible with the principles. However, the principles do not include specific site or transport proposals - these are matters for the statutory planning and Local Transport Plan process.

Radstock is already distinctive, urban and green. New building is not what it needs. Sustainable energy supply and conservation are great principles and the river, green corridors and wonderful haven of railway lands all need to be conserved and cherished - Member of the public

Support noted. It is considered that some new development is needed to ensure the town centre is sustainable in the long-term.

Not distinctive - co-ordinated should be the word so new gels with old. Do not overpopulate. Do not decimate the trees for the sake of buildings - Member of the public

It is considered that Radstock is distinctive and this is recognised in its Conservation Area Designation. Population levels will be influenced through the statutory planning process. The town's green assets are recognised in the principles.

Possible use of new materials if blending in with older conservation areas

- Member of the public

This is compatible with the principles.

Yes - this sounds good. However do not introduce any new schemes that will increase congestion by restricting traffic flow. - Member of the public

Support noted. Traffic flow needs to be balanced against other requirements. Agree to amend principles to refer to traffic congestion.

Any redevelopment will disrupt wildlife; there is no certainty that compensation links to countryside - use the railway? - Member of the public

The impact of new development and the balance of benefit is to be determined through the statutory planning process.

Given the unique to the area and extreme wildlife value of the rail land there needs to be a principle to protect it and encourage the biodiversity by acting on English Natures recommendation to designate is as an SNCI rather that desecrating it with housing

- Member of the public

The principles include the town's natural assets. However, inclusion of site specific proposals is not appropriate within these high level principles.

The town's most distinctive green space is the rail lands, a site of national importance to wildlife! It is a green corridor providing for wildlife recreation and link to the countryside! These principles encourage rather than preclude its development and thus destruction. - Member of the public

The principles don't put forward site specific proposals. The impact of new development and the balance of benefit is to be determined through the statutory planning process.

This is a good principle as long as the buildings have excellent sustainable build features. Going for best in sustainability could also be a distinctive feature to build on and raise Radstock's profile and visitor attraction. Not enough has been made of the value and contribution of the value of wildlife to the town, its surrounds and to Bath and North East Somerset in the preamble to the principle. The national importance of the Rail Lands must be preserved at all costs and buildings put on land only where it is NOT needed to PRESERVE this IN SITU. - Member of the public

Support noted. The principles don't put forward site specific proposals.

There should be more acknowledgement of the need to replace ugly buildings to enhance the town. Due to the traffic Radstock will always be urban. The principles should be to save what green we have left. - Member of the public

The principles promote high quality building design and green assets.

The Radstock railway site is a wonderful natural resource which should be designated as a nature reserve in entirety. There are so many rare species of insects here which need protection. Wonderful birds abound. We do not want them to be disturbed. - Member of the public

The principles include the town's natural assets. However, inclusion of site specific proposals is not appropriate within these high level principles.

It will be interesting to see if the Planning Authority can control development to achieve this. The river and the areas that nature has reclaimed are irreplaceable. They should be maintained and not just as a corridor! - Member of the public

Noted.

This is a con to NRR scheme. - Member of the public

The principles do not relate to any specific proposals.

I think that restoring the old shop fronts has enhanced the town - more of this should be done and the awful Radco building should have an external makeover to complement the old buildings. - Member of the public

Noted. The principles don't make proposals for specific buildings.

Restoring more of the original features to the town will help with the above suggestion. The awful design of Radco should also be scrapped and redesigned to fit in with other buildings in the town. - Member of the public

Noted. The principles don't make proposals for specific buildings.

All buildings should blend in with existing buildings. Use solar power and gas from the redevelopment of the North Somerset coal fields by using oil pipe drilling techniques. - Member of the public

The principles don't make specific proposals for building and energy supply. If feasible these suggestions would be compatible with the principles.

This seems reasonable but provision for wildlife is threatened by the size of the development footprint so far envisaged on the Rail Land. Promotion of energy conservation can be achieved in part by fully utilising and improving existing buildings rather than replacing them with new ones, with all the embodied energy and the energy generated by transport of materials and construction that new build entails. In order to promote energy conservation we need high quality sustainable building design. - Member of the public

The principles don't put forward specific development proposals. Sustainable building design is compatible with the principles.

NRR welcome and agree with the principle but caution that commercial choices may need to be made between some of the principles listed and wider objectives the Council is seeking to secure as part of its policy framework. (e.g. affordable housing, road improvements, community facilities, workspace etc.) Over burdening development may prevent development and a list of Council priorities would be helpful - Norton Radstock Regeneration Company

Support noted. The principles are broad and high level. The balance on any particular project will be determined through the statutory planning process.

This is a good principle - Radstock needs to have more provision for young and old - but it need safe streets to achieve that which it does not currently have. - Member of the public

Support noted. Safety is included within the principles.

For this to be true you need to make sure there are things to occupy the newcomers, as stated earlier, not just to squeeze in as many houses as possible and expect all to be well - Member of the public

The principles propose a mix of uses in the town centre.

Social aspect of use of building - grants to museum etc. - Member of the public

-

Yes - this sounds good. - Member of the public

Noted.

Surely this would be better done where the people are i.e. Tyning, Writhlington, Westfield etc. Where will people park whilst availing themselves of opportunities presented in the middle of town if NRR/Bellway build on the existing car parks they are planning? - Member of the public

Then principles focus on the town centre as a place to provide opportunities for all. It is accepted however that some facilities are best provided outside the centre.

A nature reserve and sustainability centre would be free. They would give people the opportunity to be close to nature and gain greater understanding and therefore enjoyment and appreciation of the natural heritage of the town of Radstock.

- Member of the public

This is compatible with the principles. However, the principles don't make specific proposals such as a nature reserve.

Vacuous and over ambitious. It ignores the settlement pattern. The only part of the town centre which provides opportunity for entomologists is the railway land. Does this mean it will be preserved.

- Member of the public

The principles take account of the existing settlement pattern. The principles don't put forward proposals for specific sites.

The town centre should indeed cater for all sections of the community. This will be achieved by changing road layout to ease traffic flow and providing space for recreation and enjoyment of the Natural History. - Member of the public

The principles address the issue of the form and layout of the town.

Radstock cannot be dealt with in isolation - Member of the public

The principles are informed by consideration of the wider area.

You can make all the plans you want - until you control the streets you're wasting your time and our money. - Member of the public

The principles aim to create streets that are `owned' by the community.

This will only be achieved by encouraging and helping more `small shops' offering a variety of products like we used to have in Radstock. Radco has been allowed to monopolise trade/retail and has squeezed out al competition over the years. Also no `new blood' has been allowed into Radstock to create competition for Radco , therefore leading to lower prices for local consumers. Also new housing estates rarely offer any affordable housing for local people. - Member of the public

Some additional small shops would be compatible with the principles. The principles don't propose housing estates.

To achieve this, local, small shops and businesses should be helped and encouraged to offer a wider range of producers. Radco has also not allowed any competition for years. - Member of the public

Some additional small shops would be compatible with the principles.

This principle is a must. However, to concentrate all these opportunities in the centre at the expense of opportunities in the settlements makes it more difficult and expensive for some disadvantaged sectors of the population. However, some elements need to be central or just happen to be immovable. The preservation of the Rail Land for the true benefit of the people of Radstock, including fully utilising its potential as a `green element' which is a `special feature' of the town (Nature Reserve!), will provide a community resource which is free at the point of use and has a range of health and other benefits to the community. - Member of the public

The principles don't seek to concentrate all schemes on the centre. However, there are many services and facilities that are best located in the centre to provide good accessibility. The principles don't put forward proposals for specific sites.

Comment

Response

Keep all plans in the public domain - don't make decisions in secret - publish finances of all proposals. - Member of the public

The principles are in the public domain. The principles don't put forward any specific proposals. Development proposals are in the public domain through the planning process.

A nature reserve so close to the centre of town will bring in the green tourists along the cycle routes and other transport forms. It will bring further unique opportunities to the town for retail businesses. - Member of the public

The principles don't make specific proposals for sites.

Please note that I found it difficult to get to this "Public Consultation", open only 9-12am for a few days and hidden at the back of a Church Hall. The Church Hall door on the street was locked an we had to be directed to a back entrance past building works, which I would not have found without help from a passer-by.

Noted to inform future consultation events. The exhibition was open over weekdays and a Saturday.

I object to this format as I think many people will find it difficult to respond - where is the space for our own comments on this. It is designed to get answers you want for a cosmetic exercise after you have spent much money on planning for housing via NRR NO HOUSES ARE WANTED - A NATURE RESERVE IS.

- Member of the public

The comment form is attached at Appendix 5. The principles don't put forward site specific proposals.

These comments are general and do not apply to the specific item under which they are written. Regeneration Principles for Radstock should not ignore the nationally important railway land site which is constantly under threat from developers. They should stress the value of the rail heritage and mining heritage. They should address Radstock problems; traffic, house building, out-commuting etc. These principles do not do these things. I am therefore opposed to their adoption. They are also worded in a woolly way that could be seen as `Orwellian Doublespeak'. They could be stretched to fit the proposals being forward by NRR. The NRR/Bellway proposals will do great damage to Radstock as a town. They will exacerbate the problems and give Radstock a bleak commuter town future.

Any regeneration principles should clearly state that the building of 250+ houses in the centre of Radstock will destroy its character.

In general the principles presented and the background material are of poor quality. There are many unsupported statements mostly subjective. There are no facts and figures. This has been presented by the Economic Development Department. Why no facts or figures? It is this sort of rubbish that has held back the regeneration of Radstock for many years.

The principles relate specifically to the town centre and are high level. They seek to provide a basis for strengthening the town centre as a place to work and visit in order to reduce the need to travel. Levels of house building and strategic measures to address travel movements are properly dealt with through statutory land use and transport plans.

The heritage of the town is recognised in the principles.

Housing numbers are to be determined by the statutory planning process. The principles propose promotion of town centre living to support the town centre and reduce the need for travel. The principles are high level and do not relate specifically to any proposals by NRR.

The consultation material is attached at appendix 2.

As a business support organization with a well-established presence within the Midsomer Norton and Radstock area we are encouraged by the latest document outlining the principles for regeneration within Radstock Town Centre.

In general, the regeneration principles outlined appear to be sensitive to the Town's past, recognizing a rich history of productivity and sense of community. Building upon a strong sense of identity as vibrant place to live, work, stay, and shop is likely to afford support from current residents and businesses, whilst also attracting new interest in the area. The principles also appear to be inclusive, taking into account a broad spectrum of factors, such as how people, businesses, and modes of transport will play a part in the town's future, which will ensure that Radstock becomes a town of consequence once again, economically, and aesthetically.

In its capacity as the provider of Business Link services for Bath & North East Somerset and surrounding areas, a priority for Business West is the support of enterprise through the provision of information, advice, training and networking for potential, new, small, and growing and developing businesses.

Taking this into consideration we would like to express particular interest and support in the `Function' and `Economy, Uses & Activity' principles. Creating a modern market town, accommodating a mix of enterprise and compatible uses, and maximizing visitor potential must start with generating successful entrepreneurs who in turn can generate successful enterprises. With expertise in enterprise development, business start-up support, and excellent connections with local partners such as Norton Radstock College, Midsomer Norton & Radstock Chamber of Commerce and the Economic Development arm of the Council it is felt that Business West has an important role to play in the realizing of these particular principles.

Many of the businesses currently trading within Midsomer Norton and Radstock have benefited directly from the services available through Business West in Midsomer Norton, including retail, food & drink, IT, and arts-based businesses, all of which are crucial in today's knowledge and service based economy, and of course fundamental to the regeneration principles outlined.

The feedback we would like to provide at this stage is that the regeneration principles outlined appear to be thorough, insightful, and a good starting point for action. Creating a sustainable, socially responsible, economic hub for Radstock can only be of benefit not only to Radstock itself, but also to the surrounding areas. The opportunities and challenges outlined in the document are clear. Business West would now like to know more about the specific actions, timescales, and ways that we may be able to work in partnership with local organizations to ensure that these principles are transformed into real changes for Radstock and the surrounding areas.

- Business West

Support noted.

The SW RDA endorses the principles as outlined and have no additional comments to make - South West Regional Development Agency

Support noted.

What about Whitelands? - Chamber of Commerce member

The principles relate specifically to Radstock town centre.

There is no linking up with the plan as it stands with the Education Cluster revolving around Writhlington. Queries re duplication. Chamber of Commerce member

The principles relate specifically to Radstock town centre - education is referred to in the principle relating to community and service provision.

Is there a need for a Community Centre, Victoria Hall on the open market could be an attractive proposition for Business to help regenerate Radstock as a tourism and leisure centre. - Chamber of Commerce member

The principles include development of the town centre as a community and local service hub. The principles are high level and do not include specific proposals.

Transport problems should be the first priority to sort out. - Chamber of Commerce member

The principles address connection and the public realm within the town centre.

Enhanced change of role for Radstock from a neighbourhood shopping area to a Tourist Centre, acting as a Gateway to the Mendips, Whitelands could be developed into artificial Ski Project- Chamber of Commerce member

This is covered by the principles.

Revival of Arts Bakery Project welcome, but how would it be possible as a cast iron case costing many thousands in application failed to attract support of RDA. - Chamber of Commerce member

The principles include development of arts based activity but are high level and do not propose specific projects. Future projects will need to demonstrate viability.

Definition of site is wrong, it is a former mining town and not a former industrial site. - Chamber of Commerce member

The principles refer to Radstock as a former mining town.

The large amount of traffic may require a by-pass further out? - Member of the public

Current transport policy and proposals do not provide for a bypass.

Once houses are built over most of the site, it will not be able to evolve or "respond and adapt" over time. Your comment is totally vacuous! - Member of the public

The principles don't make specific proposals for any sites.

Many unsuccessful towns also have a clear centre! How can Radstock respond to change if its last rail link is lost to development. Coherent and connected is at odds with the reality of the A362 and A367. - Member of the public

The principles don't make any specific proposals regarding a rail link. The main roads will need to be considered in relation to the future form of the town.

Ignores town's mining heritage and related tourism potential. Chamber of Commerce member

This is specifically referred to in the principles on economy, uses & activity, and buildings & natural assets.

No mention of Radco's influence on town with probably more than 75% of people who visit Radstock are there to shop at Radco. Chamber of Commerce member

This is referred to under the principle on economy, uses and activity.

What are the previous consultations? -Chamber of Commerce member

Previous consultations include the Community Planning Weekend held in 1998 and consultation under the Market & Coastal Towns Initiative in 2004.

Apart from a vague reference to enabling "transport interchange", there seems to be no mention of solving the chronic traffic congestion that centres on the "Silly Isles". If Radstock is to become a vibrant centre that people wish to visit, it should not be seen as a traffic bottleneck.

I assume that parking (or a park and ride scheme) is catered for in the overall plan, but I can see no reference to it. - Chamber of Commerce member

The emphasis is on creating a town for people where a sense of place predominates. However, agree that the principles should be amended to refer to access.

Thank you for sending me the above. After reading the document I would like to inform you that Writhlington wholly supports these principles. - Head teacher Local Secondary School

Support noted.

Thank you for sending me the document on this subject. I do not find any problem with this document and think it is well written and well thought out.

Members of the NR Link Group will in their own right will have received from you the same document and will no doubt comment via their respective organisations.

So my comments are therefore personal. - Chair of Norton Radstock Link Group

Support noted.

It is important that the development is done in a way that promotes Community Safety and minimises the opportunity to commit crime. Equally important is the creation of a town where the leisure, commercial and economic infrastructure combine to provide a high quality of life for its residents (business and domestic) which can also minimise the need or desire to commit crime in the first place by providing real opportunities for self improvement.

Our input is reflected in the Regeneration Principles set out in your document. - Community Safety Officer

Noted.

There was considerable concern that the Town Council had not been notified of the proposed exhibition. Even Members who serve also on Bath and North East Somerset Council claimed not to have been advised.

It appears that there was very little local publicity for the consultation exhibition, that the exhibition was very poor and that no-one was in attendance to assist or answer questions. Consequently the exhibition appears to have been a failure and the few responses that you may have had cannot in any way be regarded as the view of the local community.

The published consultation document is considered extremely poor. It offers nothing that hasn't been brought forward previously, it skates over many important issues, misses many and clearly doesn't provide an understanding of some local issues. It does appear to attempt to establish the Norton Radstock Link group as the primary local consultation body when this is an unelected and unaccountable body created originally simply to co-ordinate town centre matters between Midsomer Norton and Radstock. It is not truly representative of the area.

The Town Council is the democratically elected statutory organisation that represents local community and should therefore be a key stakeholder and a primary consultee (with others such as the Chamber of Commerce). The document also seems to indicate an enhanced role for the Norton Radstock Regeneration Co Ltd without clearly saying so.

Members of the Town Council were incensed with the manner in which this exercise has been carried out. It was also considered that the submitted consultation paper served only to treat the local community with contempt and was therefore of little or no value. I have been asked to express the anger and disgust of local Councillors.

I understand that a strong protest has already been made to your Chief Executive by a local Bath and North East Somerset Councillor so I am copying this letter to him. -Norton Radstock Town Council

See covering report.

The consultation material is attached as Appendix 2.

Any amendments put forward through the consultation to address issues omitted or not fully addressed will be given full consideration. The principles do not refer to the Norton Radstock Link Group.

The Town Council were specifically consulted on the principles. The principles document refers to NRR only in stating that the Co. is about to bring forward development proposals.

The consultation aimed to build on extensive consultation already undertaken. Details are set out in the covering report

B&NES Biodiversity Action Plan:

Objective 3 of Post-industrial Sites Plan: identify key post industrial sites and bring them into favourable conservation management

Objective 8 use planning process to ensure no net loss of biodiversity results from development

Site is of exceptional ecological importance so principles should be included to:-

a) ensure no net loss of biodiversity

b) Act on English Natures recommendation that site is designated as an SNCI and to secure a long term management plan for the site and its surrounds.

c) Flag up the site as the most important post industrial site identified so far in the Post-industrial Sites Action Plan.

Adverse impacts can only be avoided by leaving the bulk of the former track bed and adjacent valuable habitat features intact.

Buglife believe the site to be of national importance for biodiversity and the loss of the important species found in January 2005 would be a risk to an England Biodiversity Strategy objective `Key brownfield biodiversity species conserved through site protection, mitigation and habitat creation'.

Site is a refuge site for other species.

Sites like these are afforded good protection in the Local Plan.

Site is of significant enough important to warrant a mention in terms of a strategic approach to conserving and enhancing wildlife and biodiversity in Midsomer Norton and Radstock.

Silver Street Nature Reserve in no way detracts from the importance of Radstock Rail Land.

It should feature as a `natural asset' to the town. This asset and brownfield site should be afforded protection from harm as a regeneration principle for the town - Cam Valley Wildlife Group

The principles refer to the natural assets of the town. However, it is not appropriate to refer to specific sites within these high level principles. The balance of development on specific sites is to be determined through the statutory planning process.

NRR has for some years suggested that there needs to be co-ordinated land use and transportation framework that goes further than just the boundaries of the NRR owned land which assesses how development can contribute to the wider socio-economic regeneration of Radstock. NRR acknowledge that the Principles document is useful as a step towards a formal planning document (Area Action Plan) and NRR would wish to support the Council in moving towards a more formal planning framework for the area. -

Norton Radstock Regeneration Company

Support noted. The principles seek to establish the basis for developing a co-ordinated physical framework.

NRR welcome the interest and the investment the Local Authorities, Market and Coastal Towns Partnership, Partner Bodies and Single Regeneration Budget Partnership have given to Radstock in recent years that has resulted in numerous projects being developed. As regeneration has been happening, additional principle to brand and market the town more effectively. - Norton Radstock Regeneration Company

This is a valid point. However, the principles relate to physical regeneration.

I was disappointed not to find any mention of self-building as a means of delivering answers to some of the challenges in this document.

At 2.3, there is a list of issues, namely;

Vulnerable economy, high levels of out-commuting, transport & communication - self building enables people to include the means of earning a living within the design of their dwelling, whether this is a work studio, or a home office, etc. How many developers would offer this as an affordable option?

Low skills & educational achievement - anyone who is enthusiastic about designing and building their own home will be learning about financial and project management, and various skilled and unskilled trades, and will have marketable skills and experience at the end of the process.

Affordable & intermediate housing needs - volume developers have to make a profit and move on, self-builders can build a better quality home, more cost efficiently than developers. They just need the plots to be available.

Re Buildings & Natural Assets; Self-builders are usually far keener on ecological and sustainable principles of building than any developer. They are also more innovative, and knowing they will be living in a house for many years to come, provides them with a greater incentive to be green, than any developer will feel, whose bottom line is his profit margin.

Equality of opportunity - what better way to address social and economic disadvantage than by encouraging self builders to form mixed communities, who know and trust each other because they have all had to work together to have their homes. Disabled and elderly people can commission suitable designs for their long-term needs, younger families can include granny annexes. Self-builders can be hands on to achieve maximum savings, or hands off where there is a physical infirmity or other inability to build oneself. All should have equal opportunities to acquire the house they need.

Why should all new housing be provided by profit hungry developers, who may grudgingly allow buyers to choose the colour of the carpets before they move in, when there are scores, maybe hundreds, of anxious would-be home owners who are willing to work hard for what they need, designed to their own specifications as they would choose? -

Bath & District Self Build Association

This could provide a valuable contribution in relation to any future housing provision. However, as a specific delivery initiative it is not appropriate for inclusion in these high level principles.

This would be compatible with the principles.

Noted. Self-build could be accommodated within the principles. However, the principles don't make proposals for particular types of house-building.

This is compatible with the principles.

Few people could disagree with the overall aim of creating a modern, traffic-free town with more facilities. If this requires relocation of the existing centre and replacing it with housing, then I shall be deeply concerned.

At present, the centre of Radstock is a focal point for businesses such as ourselves. We are convenient for bus services and local parking is but a short distance away. We have invested large amounts of money and effort in developing our business and a relocation of the centre would result in possible closure with loss of jobs.

The aim of increased housing in the centre would create more vehicles and add pressure to an already overburdened police service. - Local Retailer

Noted. There is no intention of relocating the existing centre - the principles aim to strengthen the existing centre.

No proposal to relocate the centre - the principles aim to strengthen the existing centre.

Housing numbers are to be determined by the statutory planning process. The principles propose promotion of town centre living to support the town centre and reduce the need for travel.

NESA is delighted to see the principles recognise the importance of arts based enterprise in stimulating economic development. There is certainly huge potential to encourage the development of both professionally based creative industries (e.g. artists' micro-businesses) and creative social enterprise initiatives within the regeneration framework. These will have a direct and obvious contribution to the local cultural economy.

To take a wider view, NESA believes that creativity, culture and the arts could be a powerful catalyst for change in Radstock, supporting key regeneration principles and helping to create a distinctive, dynamic and thriving town. Cultural projects involving artists and the local community have the potential to make a significant impact on:

quality of the environment with public art project supporting the creation of a physically distinctive town centre which helps to attract visitors and engenders local pride and confidence (the new structure for the miner's wheel provides an excellent example of public art celebrating the historical legacy of the town whilst helping to build a high quality contemporary image)

social cohesion - arts projects are a dynamic way of engaging the excluded, improving communications, breaking down perceived barriers and binding communities together

developing skills, raising aspirations and encouraging creativity and innovation

developing new and redundant spaces

attracting visitors to the town for a programme of high quality creative events and activities

A substantial cultural programme will need considerable investment but in the long-term Radstock will reap the benefit of establishing a vibrant sustainable economy, making the area more attractive for investment, promoting tourism and strengthening the social fabric

- North East Somerset Arts

Support noted.

Support noted - this is facilitated within the principles.

I think it is most unfair that this exhibition is apparently going on in Radstock this week, with no notice, hardly any advertisement and little explanation. I am unable to get to this exhibition as it is not running in the evenings, after work, so have no idea what audience it is intended for. There is no signage up at the church to advertise this exhibition. There was one tiny paragraph in the Somerset Guardian about it last week, after the exhibition had started, with no web link or email address. Hence my email to yourselves - perhaps you could pass it on to the appropriate place as the only contact address to write to with comments about the exhibition (should you be able to get there in the paltry one week it is running) is a postal address. Hardly 21st century. I look forward to NRR's plans being better publicised in the near future. This is far too little too late. - Member of the public

See covering report for details.

Copy of consultation material sent plus the web-link.

The principles are not NRR's plans.

People here don't think of Radstock as an Industrial Centre but as a mining centre - so does English Heritage. - Editor Local Newspaper

The principles refer to Radstock as a former mining town.

The future Radstock is presented in the Regeneration Principles document as a distinctive, sustainable, urban and green market town, which adapts to change, has a `sense of place' and is using its buildings and `green elements' as special features and assets for the community. I believe that these principles are appropriate for the town but am a little concerned over the interpretation that could be put on aiming for a 93modern94 market town. Today, Radco and the shops in Fortescue Road are out of place and considered by most in the town to be `eyesores' but they were `modern' once! The exhibition shows a new `heart' on the Norton Radstock Regeneration Company land, presumably connected with their proposals but the sum of the developments proposed so far by NRR would clash with the vision presented, most notably using its green elements as special features and assets for the community. It is difficult to see how any private commercially viable development on that land involving funding community facilities and retail opportunities would not do so - Member of the public

Support noted. The principles embody the concept of high quality buildings design. Detailed development proposals for sites such as the former railway land will need to be determined through the statutory planning process.