About this page
How this part of the Local Plan Options Document works
These site allocation pages contain the following sections:
Site background
- A broad description of the site, with map if appropriate
- An overview of development proposed or already in progress
- Relevant aspects of planning policy for this site
- The history and status of any planning applications for this site
Options for the new Local Plan
We may suggest one or more possible approaches:
- Keeping existing plans for this site as they are
- Making small changes to our approach, which may allow for changes
- Replacing the approach with something that is substantially different
- Identifying factors or events which may affect this policy in the future
Site analysis
A short summary of our assessment of the site so far
- Opportunities presented by the site
- Constraints (obstacles which might make it a poor site to develop
- Mitigations (Measures that would be needed to reduce any harm development would cause)
- Further information we'd need to make a more in-depth assessment of the suitability of the site
Policy context note
- Where decisions about this site may affect how we approach other sites (or vice versa), we will add a note to explain
Explore this site allocation
Select a section below to read more.
6.79 Two broad options for development have emerged and these are described in more detail below.
6.80 It should be noted this area has primarily been considered as a residential led development, with the opportunity for employment led regeneration within the existing and adjacent areas of Bristol. As set out in chapter 3, there is a need to plan for additional employment space within Bath and North East Somerset in order to help facilitate a more prosperous, sustainable and fairer economy and this location may have the potential to accommodate employment uses. Therefore, an issue to be considered for both options set out below is whether there should be a section of the development area within Bath and North East Somerset that is focused on the provision of employment floorspace. This would rebalance some of these development parcels and provide a greater proportion of employment and less housing development. A logical location for an employment element could be adjacent to the proposed Transport Interchange.
6.81 The principle difference between the two options is that the first option sought to respond more appropriately to the landscape sensitivity evidence by maintaining and enhancing a larger gap between the Hicks Gate area and Keynsham, and avoiding development up to the proposed transport interchange. There is a lesser quantum of development for this option.
6.82 The second option is proposing to increase the quantum of development. It would need to ensure that a sufficient Green Belt gap between the Hicks Gate area and Keynsham is retained.
Option A
Figure 36: Option A - Hicks Gate
Opportunities
- The delivery of a vibrant, well connected, low carbon community, within a high-quality, nature positive, urban environment that is in harmony with its attractive landscape setting. It will be an exemplar for sustainable living and working, providing new approaches to sustainable transport, with high levels of public transport and active travel use. It will have integrated green and blue infrastructure, rich in biodiversity, and unlock improvements to the quality and accessibility of the surrounding countryside and the strategic green infrastructure opportunity.
Constraints
- Located in the Green Belt.
- The A4 corridor is an important strategic transport corridor into Bristol and currently gets congested.
- Parts of the site are located in areas of landscape sensitivity – further assessment and consideration of appropriate mitigation required.
- Secondary school pupils within Bath and North East Somerset would need safe access to Broadlands in Keynsham.
- Delivery requires close co-ordination between B&NES council and Bristol City council. It will be crucial for the local authorities to collaborate to enable the preparation of a comprehensive masterplan to deliver a high quality place to live and work.
Mitigation required
- Measures to optimise the attractiveness and use of public transport and active travel, including delivery of the Bristol to Bath Strategic Corridor project including consideration of the location and accessibility of bus stops on the A4. Pedestrian and cycle crossings will be required over the A4 to alleviate severance issues.
- Significant green infrastructure and planting required throughout and along the edge of the development sites.
- Seek to make improvements, including enhanced access to the remaining Green Belt land, providing opportunities for outdoor sport and recreation, retaining and enhancing landscapes, visual amenity and biodiversity.
Further investigation or evidence
- Green Belt assessment required to assess impact of removing land from Green Belt, including cumulative impact when considering strategic removal across the district.
- Landscape sensitivity assessment and mitigation.
Option B
6.83 Hicks Gate Option 2 follows a very similar development proposition to the first option but is looking at a more extensive development area to the south of the A4. This is acknowledged to have more substantial impacts on landscape character. It would need to ensure that a sufficient Green Belt gap between the Hicks Gate area and Keynsham is retained.
Figure 37: Option B - Hicks Gate
Opportunities
- The delivery of a vibrant, well connected, low carbon community, within a high-quality, nature positive, urban environment that is in harmony with its attractive landscape setting. It will be an exemplar for sustainable living and working, providing new approaches to sustainable transport, with high levels of public transport and active travel use. It will have integrated green and blue infrastructure, rich in biodiversity, and unlock improvements to the quality and accessibility of the surrounding countryside.
Constraints
- Located in the Green Belt.
- The A4 corridor is an important strategic transport corridor into Bristol and can get congested.
- This option proposes more development than Option 1 in areas of landscape sensitivity – further assessment and consideration of appropriate mitigation required.
- Secondary school pupils within B&NES would need safe access to Broadlands in Keynsham.
- Delivery requires co-ordination between B&NES and Bristol City Council. It will be crucial for the local authorities to collaborate to enable the preparation of a comprehensive masterplan to deliver a high quality place to live and work.
Mitigation required
- Careful consideration of the location and accessibility of bus stops on the A4 to optimise public transport use by residents. Pedestrian and cycle crossings will be required over the A4 to alleviate severance issues.
- Significant green infrastructure and planting required throughout and along the edge of the development sites.
- Seek to make improvements, including enhanced access, to the remaining Green Belt land, providing opportunities for outdoor sport and recreation, retaining and enhancing landscapes, visual amenity and biodiversity.
Further investigation or evidence
- Green Belt assessment required to further assess the impact of removing land from Green Belt, including cumulative impact when considering strategic removal across the district.
- Landscape sensitivity assessment and mitigation.
Question 1: Your preference of site options
Do you support development at Hick's Gate? If so, which of the two options is preferable? Please give reasons for your answer.
Question 2: Land uses
What land uses do you think we should prioritise:
- Residential-led with associated infrastructure?
- A shift in the balance between residential and employment, providing a greater amount of employment space?
Please give reasons for your answer.