Meeting documents

1.1. The West of England Partnership consisting of Bath & North East Somerset, Bristol City, North Somerset and South Gloucestershire Councils and a range of social, economic and environmental partners have prepared and published two documents for consultation purposes. "2026 - The Vision for the West of England in 2026 and delivery priorities" (see Annex 1 or look at the West of England website at www.westofengland.org) focuses on a Vision up to 2026 for delivery of sustainable growth supported by successful investment to improve the quality of life and economic prosperity. "Your area : your vision" (see Annex 2 or visit website as above) puts forward possible development scenarios up to 2026 to help deliver elements of the Vision and to guide the development of homes, jobs, and transport and protecting what is most valued by local communities. Comments are invited by January 14^th 2005.

2.1. The Council Executive is asked to consider the West of England Strategic Partnership consultation documents "2026 - The Vision for the West of England in 2026 and delivery priorities" and "Your area: your vision - directions for change" and recommend to Council a response to the documents based on the issues raised in the report.

3.1. There are no direct budgetary implications in the recommendations. However, in the period to 2026 the preferred sub-regional spatial planning strategy will, if supported by the Regional Planning Body (Regional Assembly) and incorporated into the Regional Spatial Strategy, influence the level of infrastructure investment and development in the District.

4.1. The Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 requires regional planning bodies to prepare a Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS). For the South West Region the South West Regional Assembly is the regional planning body charged with this responsibility and a Regional Spatial Strategy for the South West is being prepared.

4.2. The Regional Spatial Strategy for the South West (RSS) consists of a vision and broad development strategy for the region for the period up to 2026. It will aim to protect what is highly valued about the region, at the same time making provision for sufficient new homes, jobs, retail and leisure facilities to meet the needs of the population.

4.3. Under the Act Structure Plans, which formerly provided the statutory strategic level planning policies for the area, will be replaced by Regional Spatial Strategies which will become part of the Development Plan. The Act also brings in a new system of Local Development Frameworks for providing local District level planning policies and proposals through the preparation of a series of development plan documents. From the commencement of the Act on the 28th September 2004 all development plan documents must be in general conformity with the RSS.

4.4. In preparing the RSS the Regional Assembly has identified six joint study areas, one of which is the West of England Principal Urban Areas (PUAs) of Bath, Bristol and Weston-super-Mare where studies have been commissioned to provide a sub-regional analysis to fill the strategic policy gap left as Structure Plans are removed from the development plan system.

4.5. The general scope of the studies set out by the Regional Assembly for the West of England Joint Study Area include:

4.6. The West of England Partnership has been formed to prepare this work and four sub groups - Planning, Transportation & the Environment (PT & E) (formerly the Joint Committee for Strategic Planning and Transportation); Economy and Skills; Housing; and Culture, Leisure and Tourism have been set up to carry out the necessary studies. The P.T. & E. Group have been largely responsible for the production of the sub-regional spatial planning strategy utilising officer resources from the Joint Strategic Planning and Transportation Unit (JSPTU) and the four UAs.

4.7. Early in 2005, work and ideas on a preferred strategy will be developed and by the end of March a preferred sub-regional spatial planning strategy will be recommended to the Regional Assembly for incorporation into the Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS).

4.8. The Regional Assembly will then prepare a `draft regional strategy document' for consultation through stakeholder conferences in the summer.

4.9. Subsequent stages will include a statutory consultation on the submitted RSS and a Public Examination (in 2006), which may be followed by modifications by the Secretary of State before he approves and publishes the RSS.

4.10. The programme for submission of the studies to the Regional Assembly is extremely challenging with the 31st March 2005 the deadline for the West of England Partnership to submit its recommendations for a sub-regional spatial planning strategy.

4.15. The full consultation document is at Annex 2 or can be viewed on the West of England Partnership website at www.westofengland.org but the key points which have emerged so far from the studies are:

4.16. Taking account of environmental resources and constraints (see map in leaflet) three spatial scenarios have been suggested to help focus thinking and highlight some future directions for development that may need to be considered.

4.17. The Partnership is not asking consultees to express a preference for any one scenario and does not expect the final strategy to be drawn from just one scenario.

4.18. In each of these scenarios the consultation document states that most development would take place within the existing built-up areas of the major towns and cities and on sites already committed including those in the emerging strategy for Weston-super-Mare. The maps show possible ways of locating the long-term greenfield development that may be needed outside the urban areas. Not all of these areas would be needed for development. They are in addition to sites with planning permission or allocated in local plans (which are not shown). They would include employment, transport infrastructure and other facilities as well as homes.

4.19. The Greater Bristol Strategic Transport Study will assist in testing the potential transport implications of development in these broad areas, and this will be considered in developing the strategy over the next few months. This study is also carrying out a public consultation at present and is due to report in the summer of 2005.

4.20. Maps in the leaflet show the scenarios and their impacts are briefly described. They are:

1.2. As indicated above work is continuing on the development of a preferred sub-regional spatial planning strategy. The Planning Transport & Environment Group still needs key pieces of information before reaching that stage and comments on consultation document cannot be comprehensive without such information:

1.3. However, there are a number of issues which can be considered at this stage including how the emerging sub-regional spatial strategy accords with Bath & North East Somerset's own strategies and objectives:

· Affordable housing

· Housing need

· Communities and residents

· Key workers

· Students

· Planning and Empty Homes

· Independent living

· Private sector housing conditions and private rented sector

· Homelessness

· Design and Environmental quality

1.22. The Council's current transportation strategy is contained within the Local Transport Plan which covers the period 2001 to 2006. The next five year transport plan to 2011 is currently being prepared jointly with Bristol, North Somerset and South Gloucestershire and is guided by the shared priorities agreed between these Council's and central Government. The priorities are congestion, accessibility, air quality, and safety.

1.23. The second five year transport plan will include at least two major bids for the sub region the first of which is the development of a comprehensive package of transport measures for the World Heritage City of Bath based on the agreed shared priorities. The second major bid centres around the development of strategic bus priority corridors mostly leading into Bristol but including peripheral and Bath based routes.

1.24. Looking towards 2031 the Council is awaiting the outcome of the Greater Bristol Strategic Transportation Study to provide potential strategic transport solutions for improvements to the transport network. The study and the options for improvements being considered are being tested against different land use scenarios related to the regional spatial strategy. Therefore until the results of this study are known it is not possible to predict what the transport strategy beyond 2011 will be.

1.25. Any urban extensions would need to incorporate full provision of educational infrastructure to meet the needs of residents. An urban extension of Bath may provide support for existing facilities in the City. For example, Members will know that a number of schools in Bath have been closed as a result of the falling number of children in the area.

1.26. Members may be aware of the Government aspiration for `extended schools'. These are school buildings and sites which accommodate a much wider range of services than is normally expected at a school. In other parts of the country school sites have been used as the centre for health, social services for all ages, public libraries, day-care, sports and leisure facilities, advice services and so on. Any substantial development requiring educational development will need to consider this approach.

1.27. As stated above a strategic sustainability appraisal will need to be carried out which will include environmental impact assessment. However, Planning Services have carried out a short initial assessment and the conclusions are summarised below.

1.28. A full study of the varied environmental constraints - landscape, archaeological and ecological - is needed before considering any allocation of a site for development. This will identify potential sites, site constraints and opportunities. Archaeological, landscape and ecological issues need to be resolved in response to development plan policy and planning guidance.

1.29. In the Whitchurch area there appear to be less environmental constraints with some opportunities for development.

1.30. Between Whitchurch and Hicks Gate (within Bath & North East Somerset) the area has significant environmental constraints with Stockwood Vale, its ridge and River Avon providing important landscape features.

1.31. South of Keynsham there may be limited opportunities but this is constrained by the distinctive and attractive Chew Valley landscape.

1.32. Between Keynsham and Saltford there could be opportunities provided the individual identity of the two settlements is retained.

1.33. The south west of Bath is heavily constrained with adverse impacts on the valleys to the south and west (Conygre, Pennyquick) and setting of the World Heritage site.

1.34. The Odd Down area may present very limited opportunities but impacts on the Cotswold Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and World Heritage site would constrain development.

1.35. Development opportunities at Radstock are heavily constrained because of impacts on the surrounding hills and historic setting of the Conservation Area. Likewise opportunities at Midsomer Norton are also heavily constrained by prominent hillsides, distinctive open and historic landscapes. Most opportunities lie to the south of Midsomer Norton.

1.36. This analysis sets out the environmental perspective but how these are assessed and weighed against social and economic aspirations is critical in identifying possible areas for development.

1.37. The special qualities of the natural and built environment and its importance in underpinning the economy of the sub-region need to feature explicitly throughout the consultation documents. For example of page 2 of the `your area: your vision' document under The Vision section and on page 2 of the 2026 document under delivery priorities.

1.38. The documents need to be informed by the recently published SW Environment Strategy, SW Biodiversity Implementation Plan and Conservation Strategy which all need to be taken into account. There is reference to a New Wildlife Park under delivery priorities in the Vision. Wildlife should be considered throughout and not just in one area.

1.44. Wherever development is located in the West of England it should improve the quality of life resulting in balanced communities providing local services and facilities and accessible jobs as well as affordable and general needs homes.

1.45. Various pieces of research have been carried out on this issue and work carried out by the University of the West of England in 1995 gave some indicative information on the facilities required and at what level of population they are required. The table in Annex 3 sets this out but an additional column has been added to indicate the number of homes based on an average household size of 2.3 persons per dwelling (Bath & North East Somerset average 2001 Census).

1.46. In some areas these facilities may be already available and accessible with capacity for new residents, but others will need to be provided e.g. local schools, shops, health facilities. Consideration will therefore need to be given to what level of development is needed to generate the provision of such facilities. For example 850 dwellings of 2 bedrooms or more are needed to support a one form entry primary school and 5,200 homes to support a secondary school (B&NES Education Service figures); a health centre (4 doctors) would need at least 3,9,00 homes to support it and superstore at least 10,900 homes.

1.47. In some cases new residents and jobs in an area may support and make existing facilities more viable. Therefore in considering urban extensions or development within existing urban areas it is essential that such issues are considered to ensure new communities are well served, and locally served. This will also help meet Community Strategy objectives.

1.48. Over 30 Members and officers attended a seminar on the sub-regional vision and spatial strategy on Monday December 13th. After presentations there was the opportunity for workshops to identify key issues, threats and opportunities relating to both the vision and spatial scenarios. The conclusions of the three workshops are set out in Annex 4.

1.49. The above discussion raises a number of issues which may form the basis of this Council's comments on the "your area: your vision" consultation document. However, as set out in para 4.27 there still remain further studies to be completed and without these comments can only be provisional.

1.50. The three scenarios can be broadly defined as South Bristol and North Somerset; North and East Bristol; and more dispersed.

1.51. The South Bristol and North Somerset option appears to meet with the spatial element of the Vision as it will encourage regeneration of South Bristol and development of transport infrastructure in Bath & North East Somerset. It would be likely to boost the economy and jobs and help support and provide new services and facilities. However, it could result in significant adverse environmental impacts changing the character of the area and its settlements and be contrary to some of the principal reasons for having a Green belt between Bristol and Bath. This scenario does not include Bath which is included in the North Bristol scenario.

1.52. Disadvantages of the North Bristol option are mainly related to congestion and the deficit in transport infrastructure but the area has been the focus of successful economic development and there are fewer environmental constraints. Focussing development in this area could help reduce the need to travel to work but would need considerable investment to overcome the existing transportation problems. The more dispersed scenario may help meet the needs of smaller towns but could increase travel demands and be expensive to implement.

1.53. More detailed issues related to the possible urban extensions within Bath & North East Somerset are set out below.

1.54. If Bath is to share in the economic growth outlined in the report then it will need employment land to support job generation and housing land to provide homes for workers. Whilst Bath Western Riverside and other sites already identified will go some way to meeting this need sustained growth is likely to result in the need for the city to expand. The exact level of growth required is still subject to further studies and will also depend to what extent Bath should/can meet the needs for housing of those currently commuting into the City from West Wilts, Mendip and from within Bath & North East Somerset.

1.55. One of the factors influencing the level of growth is the very high house prices in the City and need for affordable housing. Government restriction on the levels of affordable homes which can be sought on development sites will continue to make meeting this need difficult. It will be of limited benefit if most of any additional housing in or adjoining the City does not meet the needs of those working in the City or in need of affordable housing.

1.56. There are environmental constraints affecting the areas suggested in the consultation leaflet. The areas put forward are important to the setting of the World Heritage site. Development adjoining the Whiteway area would have adverse impacts on the character of the adjoining valley area and the topography does not lend itself to development, whilst at Odd Down there would be adverse impacts on the Cotswolds Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and general landscape. However the need to meet future economic development and housing needs suggests that further work is necessary to assess more fully what capacity, if any, these areas have to accommodate development without unacceptable damage to the environment.

1.57. The West of England Vision favours development to aid regeneration in south Bristol together with infrastructure improvements. It is unclear whether development in the Whitchurch area would aid regeneration of south Bristol apart from it contributing to the development of a south Bristol orbital route linking the Avon Ring Road at Hick's Gate to the A37 and Bristol International Airport on the A38 (see Vision - Connectivity and Accessibility - delivering priorities). Such a route would improve links to the airport from Bath and should reduce traffic impacts through the Chew Valley villages. However, it could have major environmental implications depending on the route chosen, and as yet this is also unclear.

1.58. Development in the Whitchurch area would have the advantage of being relatively close to facilities in the City of Bristol. However, without the appropriate levels of employment, development on the scale indicated could result in commuting to more distant sources of employment such as in north Bristol.

1.59. The environmental work so far carried out indicates that there is potential for development in this area although Stockwood Vale area to the east of the village is an important landscape feature which should be retained. The village of Whitchurch would inevitably lose much of its identity in this option and the impact on Queen Charlton is a further consideration. The capacity of the area to accommodate the levels of development suggested (up to 10,000 dwellings plus economic development and transport infrastructure) needs further more detailed assessment.

1.60. Development in this scenario would be likely to straddle the Bristol boundary.

1.61. Development here could contribute to the wider West of England objective of regeneration in south Bristol if the right transport infrastructure was put in place and provide development relatively close to the centre of Bristol. However, there are environmental constraints as the locally important landscape features of Stockwood Vale and prominent ridge impact on areas in Bath & North East Somerset to the south of the A4. In this context it would appear that the capacity for this area would be well below 5,000 dwellings.

1.62. Another consideration is the need to overcome traffic congestion problems encountered along this part of the A4 corridor.

1.63. In terms of the Green Belt the impacts are described above. It would start to consolidate development in the gaps between Bristol and Keynsham and could be considered to be contrary to the principles of the designation in this area.

1.64. In terms of employment regeneration Keynsham and Saltford would require substantial levels of investment to help correct the imbalance between jobs and homes of currently experienced (only 37% of the resident workforce live and work in town) and a significant further expansion of jobs would be needed to meet the possible levels of development suggested.

1.65. The demand for business in Keynsham has been modest in recent years and significant residential expansion would be likely to be dependent on commuting to more distant sources of employment. However development in the town could present opportunities to improve local facilities and services.

1.66. In terms of environmental impacts there does appear to be some scope for expansion although again further assessment is needed. A key issue is the impact on the principles of the Green Belt in the area including possible coalescence of settlements.

1.67. Current strategy for the town is to strengthen the economic base by providing land for additional employment uses. The demand for business locations at Norton-Radstock is modest but it retains a strong manufacturing base centred on the printing and packaging industries. Any major increase in population would be likely to lead to increased commuting to Bath or Bristol.

1.68. Should the Whitchurch urban extension be favoured and this resulted in the development of a southern orbital route around Bristol (see above) then such a route would improve access to the motorway system from Norton-Radstock if also linked to improvements along the A37. This could enhance economic prospects of the area and in the longer term create scope for further housing.

1.69. The levels of development suggested in the consultation leaflet could double the number of dwellings in Norton-Radstock. However, the environmental analysis indicates that growth of the urban in anywhere but to the south of Midsomer Norton would have adverse impacts on the surrounding landscape. Further assessments of capacity are needed.

2.1. At the moment the report does not set out firm recommendations. As stated in the report work is still ongoing and the result of this needs to be assessed before firm recommendations are made to the West of England Partnership. However, the decision should set out the concerns and issues raised in the report.

2.2. There will be other opportunities for the Council to influence progress toward a preferred sub-regional spatial planning strategy through the P.T. & E. Group; by giving advice direct to the Regional Assembly; through making representations at the examination of the Regional Spatial Strategy submitted to the Secretary of State.

2.3. If no comments are made there is a risk that the Council will not adequately influence the content of the spatial strategy to be recommended to the Regional Assembly by the West of England Partnership.

3.1. The rationale for the recommendation is set out in section 4.

4.1. The report is commenting on a Vision for the West of England and possible sub-regional spatial planning strategy scenarios produced by the West of England Partnership. The studies necessary to inform the Council's view on the strategies are incomplete. There will be further opportunity to reconsider this as the studies progress.

4.2. Scenarios in Bath & North East Somerset focus on urban areas. A possible alternative is more development in rural areas. This would be likely to result in unsustainable travel patterns and adverse environmental impacts.

5.1. The West of England Partnership is carrying out its own consultation exercise which is detailed in Annex 5. This has been supplemented by the four Unitary Authorities, and in Bath & North East Somerset has included:

· Impact of possible future urban extensions on the environment in the context of the Community Strategy objectives of

BE: distinctive

· What size threshold is a sustainable urban extension in the context of providing for balanced communities

· Need to create higher value jobs, building on innovation and creativity

· Enabling major developments which will unlock significant numbers of jobs

· Increasing educational attainment (particularly in Bristol) and improving skill levels

· Making sure the workforce can afford to live locally and can get to work in a reasonable time

· Negative Green Belt impacts

· Retaining and protecting the character of towns and cities is important

· Keynsham and Bristol could merge, causing loss of distinctiveness and traffic congestion

· Could provide jobs and infrastructure for Norton-Radstock

· Development at Bath supported

· How can we make better use of the docks at Bristol for freight transport?

· Improved public transport links to West Wilts