The Chair to advise the Committee of any items on which members of the public have requested to speak and advise those members of the public present of the details of the Council’s public participation scheme.
For those members of the public who have submitted any questions or statements, please note, a three minute time limit applies to each speaker and you will be asked to speak before Councillors debate the issue.
Minutes:
Councillor Ian Aldridge presented his report on Agenda Item 5, Voluntary and Community Sector Grants Annual Review 2019/20, which gave information on the West Somerset Advice Bureau as he was the Outside Body Representative for that organisation. His report had been distributed to the Executive prior to the meeting.
Mr Peter Brown made the following statement on Agenda Item 9, Land South of Manor Farm, Langaller, Masterplan and Development Guide:-
I am chair of a Joint Panel set up by the two Parish Councils most affected by Masterplan proposals for Monkton Heathfield; West Monkton and Creech St Michael. I had hoped that our first visit to this committee would have been in better circumstances…….. but we have serious reservations about the content of these masterplans and about the way in which we have been involved in the process to date. The gist of our comments is to ask you to defer the public consultation until we have had chance to meet with Councillor Rigby to explain our concerns.
The two parishes contain all of the Monkton Heathfield urban extension. Given the scale of development both PCs are concerned about the implications of the urban extension on local roads. Creech village sits on a well-known cut through between the A38 and A358 avoiding Junction 25; a minor road but it already carries as much traffic as the A378 main road to Langport, over 5000 vehicles per day. West Monkton parish has serious concerns about how traffic will move through the new developments to businesses in other parts of the parish, the potential for rat running on nearby lanes and the positioning of bus gates. Road safety is a major concern and off site works should be funded by Grampian conditions on any future planning approvals.
The first phase of the urban extension MH1 has been built out and the experience of living there should be fully understood and taken on board, before any detailed decisions about design and layout are taken for Manor Farm and MH2. We are not convinced that your officers and their consultants have understood the reality of living in a development like MH1. Issues such as parking need to be carefully thought through.
In summary our main concerns about the two master plans are
Manor Farm. See the map handed out. While we accept the need for small industrial units at this location, uses allowed should be limited to B1 and B2. B8 should not be permitted as this would lead to increased commercial traffic through Creech. Also the suggested link between the proposed industrial area and Hyde Lane is not acceptable and must be removed before any wider consultation. This proposal shows a distinct lack of common sense. Hyde Lane contains a primary school, the surgery and the recreation ground and is being traffic calmed by SCC. Just the sort of road you do not want to see an increase in business traffic on; particularly speeding vans. One other very serious issue not addressed adequately in the Masterplan concerns school places for children living on the estate. Where is the local capacity expected to be found?
Turning to MH2. While integrating MH1 and MH2 is supported, the proposal to remove the road link between the two roundabouts at Langaller with a circuitous route through the District Centre is not. The current road should be kept open and traffic calmed.
The urban extension means 4500 new dwellings need to be incorporated into our parishes. That’s a lot of change to manage! We experience the implications every day. From our point of view the parish councils will be around as public bodies long after these developments are built out, and we shall be at the sharp end of any community concerns arising. We also have in place adopted Neighbourhood Plans both with over 90% approval. We expect the policies and proposals in these plans to be fully taken on board in these proposals. We are not convinced that is the case so far.
My final point is in the form of a request to the District Council. We do not want to set out in opposition with you as you take these proposals forward. We want to work with you but that needs a clear commitment to joint working. My request is for real engagement by you with the joint panel at senior member and officer level, in advance of decision making by yourselves… one weeks’ notice is not good enough! As local councils we should be able to make real inputs at early stages in the development of these proposals in advance of further planned consultations. I reiterate my request to meet with Councillor Rigby before the consultation on Manor Farm is triggered.
Thank you. Councillor Peter Brown, Chair Creech St Michael and West Monkton Joint Panel.
Mr Alan Hall made the following statement on Agenda Item 9, Land South of Manor Farm, Langaller, Masterplan and Development Guide:-
As Vice Chairman to West Monkton Parish Council and to the joint committee and a resident of MH1 for last 5 years, there are major lessons to be learnt which cannot be ignored moving forward with the 2 planning presentation before you this evening.
The spine road through MH1 has caused controversy from day one, firstly it is not wide enough to have street parking and also a bus route. Although parking for some residents is in courtyard parking this is ignored. If emergency vehicles need to get though there will be problems at certain times of the day. Additional radius zones on some of the bends to allow buses through are being used as parking. Parking recesses along the pavement would solve some of the problems as has been done on other developments around Taunton.
The road network needs to be phased and adopted by SCC as soon as a phase is completed so that road signage, speed reduction signs and road markings can be put into place. For 5 years we have been lucky that no serious accidents have happened. Thus highlighting the need for tighter contracts with developers on phased completion. Road designs around a square in MH1, which is a children’s play area, although conforming to radius guidelines when assembled together as a chicane to reduce speed, drivers cut across the junctions forcing other drivers to brake. Look at Google earth to show the problem it highlights the track of tyre marks.
Rear parking courtyards are a “throwback to the 1960’s and, significantly under the POLICE “Secured by Design Guidelines” are discouraged for the following reasons – “They introduce access to the vulnerable rear elevations of dwellings where the majority of burglary is perpetrated. In private developments they are often unlit and therefore increase the risk of crime. Ungated courtyards provide areas of concealment which can encourage anti-social behaviour.” Resident’s vehicles from the flats are parked on the road all the way up to the A38 Langaller roundabout. As a whole, planning only deals with what is in front of them, here we have a different situation and I highlight this with this overall plan of the area which needs understanding by the planning/executive committee.
Design of the total road structure needs the local experts to be involved at early design stage and not end up with a pre designed plan with no input early enough to safe guard the community i.e. Parish Councils. The Parish Councils, representing the residents, have the local knowledge and expertise to work hand in glove with planning/developer and enable a concise thought out plan to move forward to scrutiny. I do not see what the reluctance is to have meetings very early on and not end up with a presented plan a week before it is presented to the executive.
The situation is that we have reached an agreement with Planning at the presentation on 20th January. and wish it to be duly recorded that Creech St Michael and West Monkton joint panel are to draw an overlay plan to the local road network that will work for all concerned, local current employers included, and still maintain the link for walking/cycling between developments and eliminate the rat running that is now occurring and safeguard Monkton Elm garden centre, Proctors farm and other local businesses. This is will take into account MH2 proposals and future planned developments.
Employment land development for Langaller site needs to be for start-up business only and not end up as the development allowed on MH1 where properties alongside this are fighting to keep the value of their properties. The size of buildings was well over the perception of the local community and should never have been allowed. The road access is designed incorrectly and vehicles have to go across to the wrong side of the road to be able to turn in to the site. The building size was not controlled and were allowed to be 1m higher than specified.
I urge you to take note of all the written submission sent into this assemble, as we have to deal with the consequences of your decisions.
Alan Hall, Vice Chairman West Monkton Parish Council
Mr Mark Besley made the following statement on Agenda Item 9, Land South of Manor Farm, Langaller, Masterplan and Development Guide:-
Good evening members of the Executive my name is Mark Besley, I am the highways officer for West Monkton Parish Council. I live at Prockters Farm and would like to represent local businesses (including the Monkton Inn pub, local farms and businesses at Prockters) who would be affected by the proposed highways design for Monkton Heathfield phase 2 development.
Mike Lind a director of Monkton Elm garden centre will speak separately regarding his concerns.
I would like to implore you, the Executive Committee to require that the Highways Authority and the Council reconsider the closure of the main road between the Cricket Club and Langaller roundabouts.
It’s very disappointing that the concerns already identified by the parish council regarding the road closure and communicated to the town council on the 25th of April 2019 have not been addressed by this Concept Plan (I have a copy of that communication here if any-one would like to see it).
At Prockters we have 15 independent businesses on site including which rely on access to their businesses by an adequate road system. The farm has 220 acres of land to the east that as the plan stands could only be accessed using unsuitable ‘estate type’ roads – we regularly transport hay, silage, manure, cattle and sheep using 30 foot tractor and trailers and articulated commercial 55 foot long lorries.
We also operate a car boot sale at Prockters (which has full planning permission) and regularly generates over 4,500 car movements between 7am and 2pm on a Sunday. The fields which hold the car boot sales are not in our ownership but we have an agreement that they will not be developed for at least the next four years.
The combined businesses at Prockters employ 55 people and contribute between £10–15,000 in business rates per year.
The effects of forcing Coaches, Milk Tankers, Agricultural Vehicles and Articulated Lorries accessing local farms and businesses and the thousands of visitors to Monkton Elms and Prockters has not been thought through by this plan. The District Centre has 90 degree bend and is marked as a ‘node’ or joining point and is likely to have a high pedestrian use.
My understanding is that there has been no traffic modelling carried out to see the effects of this highway design on car flows it seems incredible that no real analysis of traffic flows was made prior to the Plan being published – now is the time to get the Plan redesigned.
The aim of the pedestrianisation of the road is (as we have been told) to link the two phases of the development together – there is sufficient space as it stands for the existing road between the roundabouts to be made much more attractive and achieve this objective – traffic can be calmed considerably – the road made into a tree-lined open boulevard with pedestrian crossings and bus stops. Forcing all traffic through the District Centre will detract from the ‘Garden Town’ ethos of the development.
I think it’s fair to say that the community feel very let down by both developers and the authorities regarding MH phase 1 – assurances, indeed legal agreements have been reneged upon or diluted so that what has been delivered in MH1 bares little relationship to what the community was promised. Without going into detail now on MH1 the density of housing has increased significantly, employment land has not been delivered, retain units are likely to become residential, the social housing element has been significantly reduced, relief roads have not been built and Phase One local centre has been greatly reduced in size.
Members of the Executive Committee I would like to request that you insist that the highways design shown is changed and not just make a commitment to ‘look at the design’ – we are asking for your help as the Executive of this Council- the road should be kept open albeit changed in design and the wishes of the parish councils, local residents and local businesses respected.
Thank you.
Mr Steve Altria made the following statement on Agenda Item 9, Land South of Manor Farm, Langaller, Masterplan and Development Guide:-
LandSouth ofManor Farm,Langallerand MH2Masterplan- Theneed fora GrampianS106 agreementto addressexistingRoad Safety andTraffic Volumes. One ofthe lessonsof MH1is thatthe impactupon Creech St Michael (CSM)was notidentifiedor addressed.
Lastyear aplanning applicationwas unsuccessfullyappealed byGladmans Developersfor asite offLangaller Lane.The developersuggested improvementsaccepted bysec Highwaysas aresult ofthe 200 homesthey hadhoped to build. Yeta planneddevelopment of4500 housesadjacent hashad noproposals forthcomingto date toaddress theroad safetyissuesthat existinthe adjacentcommunities.
Therehas beenno assessmentor strategyon thetrafficimpactupon CSMfrom MH1, the developmentof theLand Southof Langalleror MH2. Certainlynot oneshared withthe jointpanel.
Itistherefore suggested thatthere hasbeen anover focuson thedevelopment siteand thelate involvementof localParish Councillorshave ledto thewiderimpactof thedevelopment andexistingresidents beingover looked.
HighwaysEnglandprovidedfigures as theymeasured trafficvolumes in2017in preparationfor theA358 duelling. Theseshowed 5,308vehiclesdaily! Sincethe ERRlhas beenopened thetraffic hasgrown throughCSM Village; sincethe ERRlopeningtraffic hasdoubled throughthe village.CSM hasan "A"road trafficvolumes yet there arehomes androad safetyissuesalong thevillage's length. There are4 bridgeswith poorsight lines,no, lowor narrowfootpaths, junctionsat sharpangles andno pedestriancrossing. All withan industrialestate inthe middlecomplete with twocompanies operating44 tonnecranes. Taking a walk,the length ofthe Village- eithersideof theroad isdangerous andfor a widebuggy useror personusing awheelchair meansliterally takinglifein theirown hands. Even twovans passingnecessitatetheir wing mirrorsoverhanging thepavements leadingto walkersbeinghit. Trafficat peaktimes is'noseto tail’. At quietertimes carsspeed throughwith littleregard.
Addressingthis oversightshouldbe toppriority. Forthis reason, a "Grampian"planningS106conditionis demanded inorder toensure thatthe developeraddress the roadsafety issuesin CSMand West Monkton (WM) ahead ofany buildingon eithersite.
InWM theParishCouncil isseekingclosing offBoome Laneat itsjunction withAdsborough Hillon theA38 toprevent rat running.
Bringingforward theLand Southof ManorFarm schemeor MH2to theExecutive ispremature. We'veno assessmentof thetraffic impacts. As youwill havelearnt tonighthaving a"backdoor" fromthe employmentland onto HydeLane therebypermitting trafficto usean evennarrower roadand toincreasetraffic inthe villagecentre. HydeLane hashomes alongsidebut alsoa primaryschool, anursery school, arecreationpark anda healthcentre andsuggestingthisdemonstrates alackof considerationfor existingresidents. Having thisexit wouldcut thesafe routeto schoolused bythe villagechildren walkingout toMonkton HeathfieldSecondary Schooland wouldrequire theChildrento crossit twicedaily. ATraffic ImpactAssessment acrossthe eastof Tauntonisrequired.
You'vehave heardthiseveningof someof thedifficultiesthe MH2proposals willcreate for bothresidentsand businesses. These needsaddressing and shouldhave beenaddressed beforenow; it'sinthe publicdomain.
Wealso suggestthe ERR2should bebuilt intotal aheadof theMH2 developmentto avoidadversely impactingon thetwo Parishes(including theexistingMH!Development). Thecurrent HIFbiddoes notprovide forit.We are unawarehow thiswill befully fundedahead ofthe buildout ofMH2.
In summary theirneeds tobe properengagement, furtherplanningdoneand theroad safetyissuesaddressed by wayof therequirement tohave aGrampianS106 agreement,the removalof theIndustrial Estateexitonto HydeLane, theA38 retainedbut calmedbetween CricketGround andLangaller andthe ERR2being builtout aheadof theMH2 development.
SteveAltria,Clerk,CSM andWM PCJointPanel (MonktonHeathfield Development).
Mr Michael Lind made the following statement on Agenda Item 9, Land South of Manor Farm, Langaller, Masterplan and Development Guide:-
Good Evening. Thank you for the opportunity to address you. My name is Michael Lind. I am a solicitor and the Managing Director of Monkton Elm Garden Centre, a family run business approaching its fourth decade serving residents of Taunton and neighbouring local communities.
I briefly wanted to address three points:
1. Our business and its role in the community
2. The impact of the proposed highways design for Monkton Heathfield phase
3. Confirm our intention to work with SWT Executive Committee to address these challenges
Our site has been part of the local community for more than 100 years. Currently, we are a ‘bricks and mortar’ business where customers choose to visit in their quest to find specific products or services. As a green, environmentally conscious business, we help keep Taunton’s gardens, schools and green spaces full of healthy flourishing trees and plants. We are helping Taunton to reduce its carbon emissions. Hands-on educational activities and events are run throughout the year and we also act a meeting space for local residents, care homes and individuals with special needs. Our restaurant provides a range of food and drinks all day – many of whom do so by bus or pedestrian routes from MH1.
We are (possibly) the largest employer in the area with over 120 loyal and long-serving members of staff. In some cases third generation family members work with us. Importantly, we also employ a number of older members of staff who normally find it challenging to travel great distances and hold down jobs. We also support and work with a number of local businesses and growers – we are proud to be part of a thriving Somerset business community.
Central to our ability to continue to serve our community and remain a sustainable and viable business is the essential requirement of appropriate access to the national road infrastructure. This impacts staff, customers and delivery access to the property.
Madam Chair and members of the Executive Committee: The proposed highways design plan for MH2, if implemented as is, will have a significant and detrimental effect on our business, the staff we employ, the customers who visit us as well as numerous local businesses and south west regional suppliers who are dependent on our viability. The effects are numerous but for the purposes of this evening, I will only focus on three:
Pollution. The proposed plans will increase journey time for staff, customer and delivery vehicle movements arriving from north of the garden centre, who will be required to go into Taunton and back up the A3259 to the garden centre. This will result in an increase of carbon emissions and resultant air pollution.
Congestion. Delivery vehicles, whether arriving from the south or the north, will be required to travel into Taunton and back up the A3259 to the garden centre. These vehicle movements will impact traffic volumes in and around Creech Castle, the Toneway Roundabout and Obridge, in addition to the residential zones created in MH1.
Employment. Monkton Elm will be more difficult to visit as a result of these plans. This will directly impact the viability of the business to continue to trade and employ staff.
Whether it’s once in a generation, once a year or every day, it is not enough to just build houses to meet government targets, we have to plan for and create sustainable, vibrant environments. Households generate demand for goods of all types from cars to coffee to plants to clothes, the design needs to accommodate these and also focus on how an established community centric business can contribute to your climate change policies.
The South West has just under 2.5 vehicle movements per household per day. For the projected 1,500 homes in Monkton Heathfield Phase 2, that amounts to 3,750 vehicle movements per day, not taking into account existing daily commuter movements from north of Taunton, deliveries/failed deliveries and return logistics which are set to increase significantly with the growth of online retailing.
We therefore request the Committee reviews the plan to pedestrianize the A38, particularly the section between the roundabout adjacent to the cricket ground and the Langaller roundabout at the base of the new Eastern Relief Road. It cannot be sustainable to funnel all the traffic through the new District Centre. We also seek the Council’s assurance that they will commission a comprehensive transport study to understand the wider infrastructure requirements to meet the needs of the proposed Monkton Heathfield Phase 2 developments taking into account the changes in consumer behaviour.
Monkton Elm has the capacity to continue to be part of a wider, environmentally sustainable solution, which can also help address some of the wider climate change needs of the local community:
· As a community meeting place
· Through the sale of relevant local products (reducing the need to unnecessary car journeys and encouraging carbon off-setting)
· As a local employer supporting over 120 families
Monkton Elm welcome the opportunity to engage with the Somerset West and Taunton Council together with other authorities, and the Monkton Heathfield Parish Council, to address the above and find a workable solution to the wider the challenges faced by the development of MH2.
Thank you.