North Somerset Council’s 2040 Plan could bring 1,100 new homes to Pill and Easton-in-Gordano, and they need your input. We’ve already submitted our parish council response through the consultation portal, whilst at first glance, it’s a complicated system with multiple-choice questions, please don’t let that stop you, as there’s a link on the portal page to an email address where you can send your support, objections or comments directly, skipping the forms. The link to the portal is https://n-somerset-pp.inconsult.uk/Reg19AddSites/consultationHome

We also invite you to read our full response letter below to see what we’ve said and get inspired for your own. We’ve based our response on our Neighbourhood Plan, endorsed by 81% support at referendum, and your feedback so far. The more of us who speak up, the bigger our impact—submit your views by 5:00 PM on 21 March 2025! 

Full Text of the Parish Council’s Letter to North Somerset Council

The Pill & Easton-in-Gordano Parish Council submits this response to the North Somerset Local Plan 2040: Consultation Paper on Additional Sites for the Regulation 19 Plan.

We address the proposed housing sites in Pill, Easton-in-Gordano, and Ham Green, guided by our adopted Abbots Leigh, Ham Green, Pill, Easton-in-Gordano Neighbourhood Plan 2020–2026 and significant resident concerns.

We acknowledge North Somerset Council’s (NSC) duty to deliver the revised housing target of 23,895 dwellings. However, we strongly oppose the disproportionate allocation of 1,100 dwellings to Pill and Easton-in-Gordano, representing 4.6% of the total. This is markedly unbalanced, as our parish’s 4,200 electors constitute just 2.3% of North Somerset’s estimated 180,000 electors. This burden threatens our Green Belt, overburdens our infrastructure, and endangers our community’s unique identity.

Note: Number of electors in North Somerset – ~180,000 vs. Pill and EIG – 4,200 (2.3%).

Context and Housing Challenge

NSC’s Local Plan 2040 addresses a shortfall of 8,620 dwellings from the July 2024 Regulation 19 capacity of 15,275, per the December 2024 NPPF’s mandatory standard method of 1,593 dwellings per year. 1,100 dwellings across five Green Belt sites are proposed for Pill and Easton-in-Gordano. Our Neighbourhood Plan, endorsed by referendum (81% support in 2021), supports modest growth of 150–200 dwellings by 2038, prioritising local needs, Green Belt preservation, and traffic minimisation—principles NSC must respect under the Localism Act 2011 and NPPF 2024.

Residents highlight an inequitable burden: our ~2,000 homes—roughly 2% of North Somerset’s ~100,000 total stock—are slated to absorb 1,100 new dwellings, or 4.6% of the 23,895 proposed across the district, more than double our fair share. Adding 1,100 homes would increase our housing stock by 55%, risking our village’s transformation into an extension of Bristol’s urban sprawl, eroding its character, and straining infrastructure like roads, schools, and healthcare—directly clashing with our Neighbourhood Plan.

Response to Proposed Sites in Pill/Easton-in-Gordano

We assess the five SHLAA sites against our Neighbourhood Plan and resident concerns:

1. HE20491 (includes HE202009): Land at Lodway Farm
   • Details: 12 ha, 160 dwellings, Green Belt near M5, noise assessment required.
   • PEIG PC Response:
     • Traffic: Adjacent to Marsh Lane and M5, this site worsens congestion on narrow roads handling 17,000 daily A369 vehicles (source: Neighbourhood Plan 2020–2026, Section 6.2). With 160 homes generating ~224 cars (1.4 cars/dwelling, South West average), it threatens safety at Lodway’s bottleneck and overloads the M5 Junction 19 roundabout, already congested at peak times, undermining our traffic minimisation goal.
     • Green Belt: Conflicts with our high-sensitivity landscape protection and lacks evidence of meeting NSC’s “grey belt” criteria: previously developed or low Green Belt value.
     • Health: M5 proximity raises noise and NO2 levels—elevated near Pill at 10.4 µg/m³ in 2023 (NSC 2024 ASR, Table A.2, DT11, p. 20)—impacting wellbeing. Residents fear insufficient doctors and school places.
2. HE206: Land east of Gordano Services
   • Details: 8.6 ha, 200 dwellings, Green Belt.
   • PEIG PC Response:
     • Prior Objection: This aligns with the Lands Improvement Holdings proposal—175–200 dwellings at Court House Farm—formally opposed by PEIG PC on 3 March 2025, due to Green Belt loss, traffic overload, and infrastructure gaps—objections we reaffirm here.
     • Green Belt: Adjacent to M5 Junction 19, it risks merging with Royal Portbury Dock, against our rejection of major growth. Residents condemn this as overdevelopment, eroding village character.
     • Traffic: ~280 vehicles exacerbate A369 and St George’s Hill congestion, piling more pressure on the M5 Junction 19 roundabout, which cannot handle current rush-hour loads. Our LIH objection noted 200–400 cars overwhelming narrow roads.
     • Infrastructure: No provision for schools or health services fails resident needs, as raised previously.
3. HE2015: Pill Green
   • Details: 45 ha, 600 dwellings, Green Belt between A369 and Pill.
   • PEIG PC Response:
     • Scale: 600 dwellings—a 30% increase over our current ~2,000 homes—far exceeds our 150–200 home limit. A 2018 parish survey for our Neighbourhood Plan showed only 4% of ~750 respondents supported large-scale growth, with 96% favouring smaller developments, reflecting fears it threatens our community’s survival and risks Bristol’s unchecked expansion.
     • Green Belt: A prominent, undeveloped site with no prior permission, its loss lacks evidence of “grey belt” status or exceptional justification. PEIG calls it “damaging and unsustainable.”
     • Infrastructure: ~840 vehicles gridlock A369/Pill Loop and would swamp Junction 19’s roundabout, already jammed daily; residents question absent plans for doctors, schools, and roads.
4. HE201097: Land at Pill Road
   • Details: 9 ha, 100 dwellings, Green Belt between A369 and Pill.
   • PEIG PC Response:
     • Green Belt: Unjustified incursion—no “grey belt” evidence. Residents view it as a gradual encroachment on our rural landscape.
     • Traffic: ~140 vehicles strain A369/Martcombe junction and add to Junction 19’s overload, clashing with safety goals.
     • Character: Adds to cumulative impact, risking cohesion.
5. HE201065: Land at Ham Green
   • Details: 1 ha, 40 dwellings, Green Belt with existing buildings.
   • PEIG PC Response:
     • Scale: Aligns with infill—15–30 dwellings—but Green Belt loss needs scrutiny.
     • Infrastructure: ~56 residents stretch services—Heywood Practice, 6,700 patients—NSC must prove capacity.

Wider Implications

• Disproportionate Burden: 1,100 dwellings (4.6% of 23,895) versus our 2% housing stock is inequitable, contradicting NSC’s town-first strategy. South West Bristol’s 4,000 and Long Ashton’s 3,009 homes amplify pressure on Junction 19, which National Highways notes handles ~100,000 vehicles daily at peak, with long queues despite upgrades, unable to absorb more.
• Infrastructure Deficit: No NSC plan addresses roads, schools, or health—residents demand feasibility evidence, especially with Junction 19 already stretched thin.

PEIG PC Position and Recommendations

• Opposition: We reject 1,100 dwellings, notably Pill Green and HE206 (LIH), for scale, Green Belt impact, and infrastructure gaps. Our Neighbourhood Plan, backed by 81% of residents who support a limit of 150–200 dwellings, opposes major growth.
• Adjustments: Support HE201065—40 dwellings—with robust mitigations like traffic upgrades. Exclude Pill Green and HE206 unless exceptional justification per NPPF emerges.
• Requests:
  1. Prioritise non-Green Belt sites across the NSC area.
  2. Limit new developments in Pill, Easton-in-Gordano, and Ham Green to 20–30 homes each, in line with the preference of our council and residents for sustainable growth and our Neighbourhood Plan.
  3. Provide traffic and infrastructure studies for Pill/Easton-in-Gordano. To this end, we have requested (email dated 10 March 2025) post-CAZ traffic monitoring on the A369 at Pill to assess current loads and inform the Local Plan 2040’s 1,100-home proposal.

• Engagement: We’ll discuss this at our next planning meeting on 11 March 2025, open to the public, and invite NSC collaboration for our 2026 review.

Conclusion

PEIG PC urges NSC to reconsider this inequitable allocation, prioritising sustainable non-Green Belt sites and respecting our community’s vision. We stand ready to work together to balance housing needs with local sustainability but cannot accept an unreasonable share of the challenge.