ADVEARSE RESPONSE TO THE CONSULTATION ON THE DORSET PLAN 2025

ADVEARSE has been in existence since 2013 when it was set up to oppose the development at Vearse Farm. It remains active, working to ensure that the development there (known as Foundry Lea) delivers the best it can for Bridport. During these 12 years we have developed an extensive knowledge of the planning system and how it is applied in the Dorset context. Our comments relate to the situation we understand best – namely Bridport. We would however that they would be applicable to other Dorset communities.

We are aware of the detailed analysis by a working group has been submitted of each of the sites identified for Bridport. We fully support this submission. We, however, wish to make a number of general points. Our recommendations are in bold.

1. In no sense is this consultation document a plan. It is an immature long list of potential sites, largely proposed by the landowners, most of which have previously been rejected as unsuitable. Despite the length of the main document, there is no balance in evidence between the potential housing sites and any cumulative planning consequences on related infrastructure, services, and amenities. We had hoped that the national government had been more sophisticated in allocating the latest housing targets. We also had hoped that the new administration would demonstrate a greater commitment to the involvement of local communities in the drawing up of this plan. At the meeting at the Town Hall in Bridport, there appeared to have been acceptance from the planners that they could have approached this particular consultation better. It was also very evident at that meeting that there was little or no coordination between the transport and housing plans. A plan of this complexity and significance which is intended to last 17 years should be able to ‘join up the dots ‘ of all that goes into long term planning for a county.

· DC should set out how it will engage with meaningful consultation with its constituent localities in drawing up the next phase of the plan.

· We would expect to see clear evidence that Bridport Councillors have been involved as advocates for the local communities of the Bridport area and have shaped and influenced outcomes. Otherwise, individual residents and Bridport Town Council are commenting in parallel, potentially with duplication and no clear indication of relative weightings. This is hardly local government at work, rather it is a confusing free-for-all.

· DC planners should take full account of the detailed site by site analysis which has been submitted by the Bridport Working Group.

2. We accept that more housing will be built in Bridport over the lifetime of this plan. Although there has been attempt to reassure local people that this is a very early consultation and more will follow, we would warn urge Bridport residents to take part and set out their concerns. The development at Vearse Farm was imposed on Bridport because opposition began too late.

· We will be urging the Bridport community and neighbouring parishes to collaborate in producing coherent responses to the proposals.

3. We understand why the national government has set ambitious targets for house building. We, however, believe that the targets imposed on Dorset are arbitrary and in no way reflect local needs. This way of planning forces local authorities to identify green field sites which the large-scale builders will exploit. This has led to what CPRE calls ‘Building the wrong type of houses in the wrong place ‘.

· We urge local authorities such as Dorset to join together to challenge this target setting approach.

· We urge DC to engaged in robust discussions about the country wide targets and secure a more realistic target for Dorset.

4. The imposition of yet more large-scale development is at odds with Dorset Council’s own environment aims. West Dorset is predominantly rural and a beneficiary of the protection of the National Trust and its land ownership. Its founders showed that it is possible to preserve the most beautiful parts of the country for future generations. There are many across our whole country who would support our efforts to slow the creeping suburbanisation of West Dorset.

· DC should work with key environmental groups to produce a long-term plan which marries the need for development long with the preservation of our unique landscape for future generations.

5. Bridport has a well-developed Neighbourhood Plan. This has included thorough analyses of the housing need in Bridport. This should be the starting point for determining the number and mix of houses to be built in Bridport. A key priority is the need for social housing. Because of the poor public transport service this should be close to the town centre, and this would suggest that brown field sites should be considered first. We are disappointed that brownfield development is dismissed so lightly at Para. 8.3.2. for want of planning effort. We expect more of our Council’s officers.

· The DC plan for Bridport area should demonstrate that it has taken full account of the Bridport Neighbourhood plan, most especially its housing proposals.

· The DC plan must include proposals for significant amounts of social housing.

· The DC Plan must demonstrate that it has considered the significant of brown field sites which lie in the town centre.

6. We are at the early stages of a massive 760 house development at Vearse Farm. This will potentially increase the population of Bridport by 12-15%, yet we have seen little evidence of infrastructure, services and amenity adjustments to compensate. We would strongly urge that the impact of this should be absorbed and assessed before Bridport should take more development. Already serious concerns have been expressed about the need for employment opportunities for those drawn to live in new housing. Interestingly in the past 20 years DC or its predecessors has approved plans at St Michaels and Vearse Farm which included ‘employment land ‘. We have seen no sign of activity on either site. Additionally, the infrastructure of the town is under serious stress in terms of road and footpath networks, parking, medical services. The S106 agreement for Vearse Farm is already judged as inadequate in providing for these needs.

· We wish to see an impact assessment carried out on the Vearse Farm and strategies for dealing with the demands on the town’s infrastructure which have arisen as a result.

· DC should work with BTC to set out a long-term plan for improving the infrastructure of the town to take account of the significant increase in population.