South Somerset Local Plan Review 2016-2036 Preferred Options Consultation (Regulation 18)

Comment ID 1788
Document Section South Somerset Local Plan Review 2016-2036 Preferred Options Consultation (Regulation 18) Rural Centres Infrastructure Text Block View all on this section
Respondent CatWoman View all by this respondent
Response Date 18 Sep 2019
Attachments
Comment

For many years, there has been a low level of employment within Milborne Port and although this should soon improve to some extent due to the reopening of the Queen’s Head pub as Café Pineapple, the restoration of the Old School as a restaurant due to open in October and the new, much larger, Co op store, I feel the village should continue to pursue appropriate land development for employment.  I feel the land at the site of Remous Printing should continue to be designated as Employment Land.  In addition, it is close to the school and, if safe to do so, maybe it could be considered as a solution to school capacity problems.

It looks as though a sizeable amount of employment and business development in Milborne Port over the next 20 years will come from home-based businesses. Therefore, surely it would make sense for any housing development in excess of 10 dwellings, that at least 20 percent of these should be constructed with the functionality to be used partly as a business.  This could meet the environmental requirements by reducing the need for out-commuting?

The road infrastructure of Milborne Port is not good. It is frequently mentioned as being “unsafe” by local residents, and though there is rarely a technical analysis of why this is so, the point is widely and strongly felt.

Milborne Port has many ’bottlenecks’, especially near where the village roads connect with the A30. It is affected by a layout of both roads and houses from the 18th century and beyond, which is scarcely fit for purpose now.  

I strongly feel that any policy on future developments should fully acknowledge and address Climate Change and Sustainable Transport.   In addition, surely the network of pavements along the lines of the roads could be improved and made safer and evaluation be undertaken by formal assessment whether road widths within Milborne Port are adequate for the traffic utilising them, in particular for larger vehicles including agricultural (often with towed machinery), delivery vehicles,  waste management vehicles and emergency services.

The layout of the housing of Milborne Port, especially in the older parts of the village, means that roadside parking is inevitable, as no provision for parking off-road was made at the time of construction. The high reliance on vehicles for commuting means that Milborne Port is more than usually vehicle heavy compared to average settlements.

I do not think any future development in Milborne Port can sensibly be planned without consideration of the current utilities/facilities. The ability of the village to manage sewage with existing foul water and treatment infrastructure may be nearing capacity.  Water pressure has been a contentious issue in recent development applications and there have been conflicting messages regarding the water pressure applicable around the village.  The experience of the fire at Bazzleways versus the analysis of the functionality of the water provision since then, are contradictory.  Flood risk is also a huge issue for the area, mostly around the Gascoigne River.  This elicits concern regarding the impact of new construction not only at the sites being developed but also lower down. 

Regarding the School , I have heard that the village primary school has now reached capacity, subject to the construction of the housing developments at Gainsborough and the western half of the site north of Wheathill Lane. I understand that there is no further capacity to develop the size of the school at its existing site because the remaining outside area is required for safe monitored play.  This is already done in shifts, as the outside area does not have the space to accommodate all pupils at the same time.