Object
Solihull Local Plan (Draft Submission) 2020
Representation ID: 14606
Received: 14/12/2020
Respondent: Stephen Rouse
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
- The reasons for demolishing the existing Arden Academy and loss of so much green belt for housing has been justified by the evidence.
- The Council previously consulted on two options; one to retain the school (option 1) and the other to relocate it (option 2). There was no option to retain the school and improve the facilities.
- no any proper analysis been made available of the pros and cons of options 1 and 2. There is no evidence to demonstrate why the existing buildings cannot be extended and improved.
- If an improvement option were to be thoroughly tested and was shown to be a more viable solution, then there would not be the need for so many houses or such extensive and damaging loss of green belt.
- It has offered no evidence in relation to either the physical or financial viability of improving the Academy in situ. The justification for Policy KN 2, involving the allocation of a large site capable of delivering a new secondary and primary school plus 600 houses, is therefore totally inadequate and the Plan is not sound.
Evidence to demonstrate that improvement of the Academy in situ is not viable should be submitted alongside evidence to show how it compares to the viability and delivery of the relocated Academy. Without such evidence, the Plan is unsound and Policy KN2 should be deleted.
See Attached Document