Issues and Options consultation response

This consultation is now closed.  To read the CALRAG response to this consultation click here.​​

A reminder of the West of England Joint Spatial Plan (JSP)

The deadline for submitting your comments to the JSP passed on January 10th 2018.  We are leaving these pages below for reference.

The Inspectors at the Public Examination (due to begin after the Local Election May 2019) will be looking at whether the JSP is

  • Legally compliant?  CALRAG response was that it was not and gave our detailed reasoning pertaining to planning policies - to see our full document click here

    • Community Involvement - 

    • Appropriate notifications -

    • Sustainability Appraisal - assessing social, environmental and economic factors.  

  • Sound?     CALRAG response was that it was not and again gave our detailed reasoning

    • Positively prepared - need for homes, jobs, services and infrastructure. 

    •  Click Key Churchill Issues for more information.

    • Justified:  This means that the plan is based upon a robust and credible evidence base.  If you think that the evidence doesn't support the choice made in the Local Plan or there are realistic alternatives then your comments relate to whether it is justified.

    • There is already an alternative:  There is a proposal by a major developer to build up to 4,500 houses immediately south of Bristol around the new South Bristol Ring Road in North Somerset.  

    • This area would have the infrastructure and jobs, local buses, the new Metrobus and the reopening of Long Ashton station with easy access to jobs and entertainment.  

    • This area is classified as Green Belt despite industrial units and the new South Bristol Ring Road having been built on this very land.  North Somerset prefers to urbanise rural North Somerset rather than build on poor quality green belt.

    • Effective: 

    • The BNP Paribas report more detailed summary notes: 
      Based upon the assumptions used within the viability modelling, it is only reasonable to conclude that:
      "The proposed Banwell SDL (Strategic Development Location) could only come forward if the authority accepted a significantly below policy requirement level of affordable housing and, even then, it would not provide any contribution towards any of the supporting infrastructure deemed to be required through the ‘Infrastructure Position Statement’. External sources of funding would therefore need to be identified for the delivery of the multi-million pound highways improvements, all social and community infrastructure, including two new primary schools and a secondary school, public transport improvements etc
      There is no reasonable prospect of the Churchill SDL being at all viable within the JSP plan period."

    • Consistent with National Planning Policy (NPPF):  Does it give clear and convincing reasons for doing something different? Again, we responded that it was not consistent with the NPPF including the new 2018 version of the NPPF.

    • Compliant with the Duty to co-operate?    We responded that we felt that at the time we were not in a position to answer this question.  ​However, North Somerset's refusal to reallocate Green Belt land could be seen as a negative impact upon Bristol as it is effectively strangling the city and allowing urban sprawl to leap-frog over green belt when South Gloucestershire and Bath and North East Somerset have chosen to allocate small amounts of Green Belt around Bristol for development.  North Somerset would need to reallocate only 2% of its Green Belt in order to save the Mendip Hills AONB and the good quality agricultural land here.  Politicians are now telling us that we will need as they have proposals to export our food to China!!  (Dr. Liam Fox MP in a recent [October 2018] talk in North Somerset)!​

    • Thank you for reading this far!