Local Plan 2036: Issues and Options Stage

Document Section 1. North Somerset Local Plan 2036: Issues and Options Document North Somerset Issues Q4. Do you agree with these or are there other challenges or issues which we have not included and how might the Local Plan address these? [View all comments on this section]
Comment ID 14590529//5
Respondent Persimmon Homes Severn Valley [View all comments by this respondent]
Response Date 10 Dec 2018
Comment

It is inappropriate to start with a premise that there is little scope for further growth due to the town being tightly constrained by Green Belt. There were over 7,000 homes built in Portishead between 2003 and 2012 many provided by Persimmon Homes and Charles Church.  Even though this included a number of new flats, 68% of the total housing stock in Portishead remains family homes of three or more bedrooms.  Families living in Port Marine and The Ashlands tend to be younger than average.  There is also a substantial number of children and young people living there. 

For example, in the Wards covered by Port Marine and The Ashlands, on average about 30% of the population is aged 0-15 compared with an average in North Somerset of 18%. A large proportion of these people will grow up in the town and will require housing in the future.

The most sustainable solution is to give them the opportunity to do that which will help retain employment in the town and support and benefit from the delivery of the railway line and new station. We note the intention is to consider residential development opportunities ‘particularly on previously developed land’.  This will inevitably lead to the continuing loss of existing employment sites in Portishead, conflict with the issue to ensure retention of sufficient employment opportunities with the town, adding unnecessarily to the need to ‘investigate opportunities for allocating land for employment on the edge of Portishead.’  However, given that there is an expectation that opportunities exist for employment land on the edge of Portishead, the principle of also investigating the opportunity for residential development also exists. 

This suggests a sustainable mixed use extension to Portishead, which would include homes, jobs, open space, a primary school and a local centre and support for rail and highway improvements should also be tested. The opportunity for this exists on land south east of Portishead controlled by Persimmon Homes Severn Valley to achieve this. In addition this land also provides the opportunity to accommodate a new station and car park as a far more cost effective developer and landowner supported solution than the much delayed MetroWest proposal should this prove to be unviable and ultimately undeliverable.  

Notwithstanding that this is not considered, there is an inconsistency in the way Green Belt issues are addressed in the Issues and Options document, where at Clevedon there is the opportunity to consider small scale Green Belt amendments for residential development, but at Portishead, small scale Green Belt releases are limited to allocations for additional employment land.

SITE PLAN OF LAND OWNERSHIP EXTENT AT PORTISHEAD ATTACHED.

Summary
A sustainable mixed use extension to Portishead which would include homes, jobs, open space, a primary school and a local centre would represent an option for growth in this area. The opportunity for this exists on land south east of Portishead controlled by Persimmon Homes.
Attachments