In the absence of any detail, i.e. what the hierarchy would look like under each scenario, it is difficult at this stage to comment upon a preference.

Our client’s land has not been promoted previously, albeit it would have been released as part of the large Ashton Vale development should that have come forward. We welcome the consideration of this land’s release from the Green Belt and set out the reasons why we feel this should be pursued by the Council in section 3 of these representations.

As the proposal for Banwell Garden village is based on a doubtful premise, it is I fear hard to take these proposed alternatives seriously.

The sections on Banwell and Banwell Garden Village contain a high degree of wishful thinking, in particular with regard to transport infrastructure and employment. Question 12, demonstrates that North Somerset Council has no concrete proposals to offer on employment. I do NOT support these proposals.

The section on Churchill and the 'Mendip Springs Garden Village' contain the same level of wishful thinking as those on Banwell, in particular with regard to transport infrastructure and employment. I do NOT support these proposals, which would place a significant area of rural land under tarmac.

The plan pays little attention to the issue of the proximity of its proposed 'garden villages' to the Mendip Hills AONB.

The approach to Option 3 is supported. This allows for individual settlements to be flexible to accommodate additional growth, but still carefully considered through the Development Management process.Sites such as the attached could deliver additional housing to support the sustainable growth of Portbury

The 3 proposed options are equally flawed as they give no serious consideration to the strategic use of poor quality green belt land.

I do NOT agree with proposals to alter settlement boundaries. I draw your attention to North Somerset Council's Landscape Character guidelines.

Site at Portbury