Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 7737
Received: 12/03/2019
Respondent: Mr David Patterson
Disagree with the methodology of the site selection process. The 'amber sites' should not have been included in this supplementary consultation as they have been assessed by the Council and rejected. It is unclear how the Council have determined that they are 'less harmful'.
See letter and attachments.
Reference Sites 134, 205 and 308 (Amber Site A7)
Questions Nos 2, 34, 37 and 38
I am attaching a Summary and Response to the above questions. I add my name to this. In addition I am attaching three supporting copy documents:
* The Planning Inspectorate: Appeal Decision dated 19 April 2011
* Assessment of Green Belt Submissions, October 2011
* Agreement between Mar City Developments Limited and The Metropolitan Borough of Solihull
I confirm my strong objection to the removal of these areas from the Green Belt. Site 134 was the subject of a Planning Application (2010/2) which was refused. The Appeal which followed was dismissed at the Inquiry. Nothing has changed which would now justify the removal of these sites from the Green Belt.