Object

Representation ID: 14326

Received: 14/12/2020

Respondent: Rosconn Strategic Land

Agent: DS Planning

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

The site is a later addition to the housing allocations, and it is not clear why the site was considered suitable for allocation.
The site is detached from the settlement, having no contextual link/setting to suggest that the site makes sensible addition to the village, which sets a inappropriate precedent for future development.
The site lies within the highest performing Green Belt Parcel and the Landscape Character Assessment identifies that the site has medium visual sensitivity. The allocation contradicts the Councils own assessment criteria, which states that development should preferably be on highly accessible land/performs well in Green Belt terms/provides defensible boundaries.
The site would be unsuitable for residential development given its position between the West Coast Mainline and possible HS2 line, resulting in an environment with noise, vibration and visual sensitivity.
The site would lie outside the defensible Green Belt boundary (West Coast Mainline), contrary to the principles of Policy BC1 Barrett’s Farm, which notes the need for strong defensible boundaries within Balsall Common.
It makes no logical sense to identify a defensible Green Belt boundary to mark the eastern most boundary of Balsall Common and then breach that boundary in endeavouring to justify allocating a further site (BC6) and create a weaker Green Belt boundary around that site.