Question 16 - Infrastructure Requirements at Hampton In Arden
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 6798
Received: 24/02/2019
Respondent: Mrs Sarah Bridge
Total overdevelopment
Total overdevelopment
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 7190
Received: 08/03/2019
Respondent: Hampton-in-Arden Parish Council and Catherine-de-Barnes Residents' Association
The Plan needs a more objective and detailed review of available infrastructure in the two settlements [of CDB & HIA]. The Primary schools and doctors surgeries in Hampton in Arden and Yew Tree Lane are full, whilst Catherine de Barnes has no provision. Any development on Site 6 will put extra pressure on Primary school and doctors surgery in Hampton in Arden. Infrastructure for Site 16 wholly inadequate as public transport, education/health/shopping facilities, drainage, roads, junctions and footpaths inadequate and if addressed would greatly reduce capacity.
See Letter
Support
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 7443
Received: 11/03/2019
Respondent: Mark Irvine
Agree
Agree
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 7752
Received: 12/03/2019
Respondent: Hampton-in-Arden Society
No meaningful analysis of the extent of supporting infrastructure in the two settlements.
Primary schools and doctor's surgeries in Hampton-in-Arden and Yew Tree Lane are already at capacity. Catherine de Barnes has neither.
Local trains only service Hampton village; bus services run through both villages but are at hourly intervals and do not run on Sundays. Taxibus service was withdrawn in 2016.
Need reference to the Neighbourhood Plan which contains agreed Policies, Objectives and Outcomes for the next 10 years.
Please find attached Hampton-in-Arden Society's response to the current draft local plan consultation.
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 7779
Received: 13/03/2019
Respondent: Mr Geoffrey Wheeler
Hampton in Arden has almost all the facilities offered by Balsall Common - main line station, far better bus service, good road access both north/south via the A452 but also east/west through Meriden and Solihull, shops and a surgery. The justification for protecting Hampton in Arden at the expense of Balsall Common is false.
Hampton in Arden has almost all the facilities offered by Balsall Common - main line station, far better bus service, good road access both north/south via the A452 but also east/west through Meriden and Solihull, shops and a surgery. The justification for protecting Hampton in Arden at the expense of Balsall Common is false.
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 7864
Received: 13/03/2019
Respondent: Mrs Debbie Moseley
Questions 16, 17, 18 and 26 within the plan. I fully support the arguments put forward of the joint working group from Hampton Parish Council and Catherine de Barnes Residents' Association response to the SMBC Draft Local Plan (\Parish Response to SMBC Draft Local Plan January 2019) submitted on 03.02.2019
Questions 16, 17, 18 and 26 within the plan. I fully support the arguments put forward of the joint working group from Hampton Parish Council and Catherine de Barnes Residents' Association response to the SMBC Draft Local Plan (\Parish Response to SMBC Draft Local Plan January 2019) submitted on 03.02.2019. I do not believe site 16 (Lugtrout Lane) should be included as an allocated site and objections are based on loss of Green Belt, loss of an effective rural gap & defensible boundaries and the inability of local infrastructure to handle the development. I strongly oppose development of site 16.
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 7868
Received: 13/03/2019
Respondent: Mr Andrew Moseley
Questions 16, 17, 18 and 26 within the plan. I fully support the arguments put forward of the joint working group from Hampton Parish Council and Catherine de Barnes Residents' Association response to the SMBC Draft Local Plan (\Parish Response to SMBC Draft Local Plan January 2019) submitted on 03.02.2019
Questions 16, 17, 18 and 26 within the plan. I fully support the arguments put forward of the joint working group from Hampton Parish Council and Catherine de Barnes Residents' Association response to the SMBC Draft Local Plan (\Parish Response to SMBC Draft Local Plan January 2019) submitted on 03.02.2019. I do not believe site 16 (Lugtrout Lane) should be included as an allocated site and objections are based on loss of Green Belt, loss of an effective rural gap & defensible boundaries and the inability of local infrastructure to handle the development. I strongly oppose development of site 16.
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8140
Received: 14/03/2019
Respondent: Mrs Felicity Wheeler
This area has similar facilities to Balsall Common but has been protected from additional development. Why?
This area has similar facilities to Balsall Common but has been protected from additional development. Why?
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8665
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Paul & Anne Wilson Ramsay
- Proposals for residential site 6 in Hampton-in-Arden is partly allocated within green belt land, excluding former ammunition depot (brownfield).
- No proposals given for additional places at local primary or secondary schools for children.
- No consideration has been given to main services to proposed housing, including electricity, gas, water supply, mains drainage, telecommunications.
- Some land areas may be located within a flood zone of the River Blythe, and should not be built on.
Proposals for residential site 6 in Hampton-in-Arden is partly allocated within green belt land, excluding former ammunition depot (brownfield).
No proposals given for additional places at local primary or secondary schools for children.
No consideration has been given to main services to proposed housing, including electricity, gas, water supply, mains drainage, telecommunications.
Some land areas may be located within a flood zone of the River Blythe, and should not be built on.
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8964
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Councillor Max McLoughlin
Strategically important location to facilitate success for HS2. Catherine-de-Barnes is on one of two main growth and transport corridors from Solihull to HS2 and should be recognised as such. Should be making a greater contribution to housing needs, with development to northern boundaries of village.
Further growth in proximity to HS2 will reflect the benefits that will accrue from future infrastructural improvements and help to alleviate disproportionate numbers proposed elsewhere in Borough. Would also help to insulate area from affordability issues arising from increase in house prices.
No. It saddens me to say that I find considerable fault with comments on Catherine-de-Barnes.
The village is a picturesque settlement that I spent a lot of time playing in and around as a child. The nature and character of the settlement has changed significantly since that time. Whilst there is much to be preserved about it, there are factors that will cause it to change more significantly in the future.
Firstly, with HS2 being established in the future, this will be one of the main corridors to the site from Solihull, with the other being via Damson Parkway. Successful development should take place along corridors of growth. Catherine-de-Barnes will either play a pivotal role in ensuring the success of the UK Central interchange, or it will be involved in ensuring it becomes a "park and ride" station.
Currently, the major factor limiting development towards the airport is the retaining of land for potential future expansion of the runway. I am against this happening but recognise that there will most likely need to be development to the northern boundaries of Catherine-de-Barnes as sites are brought foward. Whilst this might appear to be referencing the spatial strategy of the Plan, which is not open for comment in this consultation, it is necessary to reference it as it is laid out in the Supplementary Update.
There is considerable concern in other parts of the Borough that this area is afforded special status that others are not. The rejection of an extra care development was not as warmly received in areas that have taken disproportionate numbers of such developments. This has to be taken in light of the strategic significance of enabling growth to come from HS2. This part of the borough stands to gain more, with greater access and desirable properties for those able to afford commuting to London using HS2. As such it should also contribute in a proportionate amount to the benefit it will receive from future infrastructural improvements.
As such, Catherine-de-Barnes should be making a greater contribution to the housing needs of the Borough. This is not only for strategic reasons pertaining to HS2, but also in ensuring affordability can be achieved elsewhere in the borough. It is clear this location is going to be less able to make such a considerable contribution towards Affordable Housing. However, where it can provide a role is in an insulating capacity from affordability issues arising from HS2. HS2 is expected to push house prices up in the area. It is better that housing demand from HS2 is located in sustainable reach of the Interchange site. This is one of the few settlements that is in realistic access by active transport for HS2.
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9106
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Dr Linda Parsons
Why does Hampton in Arden have the statement that it should be protected from excessive development to protect its character when Knowle does not? Knowle should and deserves to have the same protection.
Why does Hampton in Arden have the statement that it should be protected from excessive development to protect its character when Knowle does not? Knowle should and deserves to have the same protection.
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9435
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Open Spaces Society
In terms of green belt enhancements Potential improvements should be seen in the context of the agricultural use of much of the land, and of the prevailing Solihull Rights of Way
Improvement Plan 2016 (ROWIP). Best possible standards and practice should be applied for the physical state of the path network. Registration of unrecorded access rights should be encouraged and expedited. The Local Plan should also define how funding derived from developers will be applied to the other aspects of enhancements to the Green Belt.
See attached letter. The Open Spaces Society is Britain's oldest national conservation body, founded in
1865. The Society's aim is to protect, increase, enhance and champion open spaces,
common land, village greens and public paths.
Consequently, sections 96 to 98 of the NPPF headed Open space and recreation are
seen of particular importance.
The questions addressed by the Society are those headed Do you agree with the
infrastructure requirements? for each area. These are Questions 3, 11, 16, 19, 22, 25, 29, and 31.
No equivalent question was asked about the UK Central Hub, so a comment has been made in response to Question 44.
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9664
Received: 09/03/2019
Respondent: Catherine-de-Barnes Residents Association
The Plan needs a more objective and detailed review of available infrastructure in the two settlements [of CDB & HIA]. The Primary schools and doctors surgeries in Hampton in Arden and Yew Tree Lane are full, whilst Catherine de Barnes has no provision. Any development on Site 6 will put extra pressure on Primary school and doctors surgery in Hampton in Arden.
Please accept that attached as Catherine De Barnes Residents Association to the Solihull Draft Local Plan Review Consultation . This response is the work of a joint working group comprised members of the RA and Hampton Parish Council.
Although almost identical to the response from Hampton Parish Council we have made a correction to para 6.8 where the word north has been replaced by south and there is an additional para.6.10 .
See letter
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9668
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: West Midlands Police
Agent: Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd
The absence of positive references to the need to provide Police infrastructure undermines the delivery of safe and secure development. There should be express reference to the need for financial contributions towards additional expenditure burden placed on WM Police as a consequence of the proposed growth. Seek engagement in preparation of Concept Masterplans and policy implementation and delivery once Plan adopted.
We act for the Chief Constable of the West Midlands Police (CCWMP) and are instructed to make representations on local development documents in respect of securing policy reference in such documents
see details in attached letter
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9736
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Heyford Developments Ltd
Agent: Harris Lamb
Capacity of existing infrastructure, such as schools, should not be used to limit ability to provide further development, as infrastructure, such as additional school capacity, can be part funded by development.
see letter
promoting land to the West of Diddington Lane HIA
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9774
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: William Davis Ltd
Agent: Define Planning & Design
Consultation document indicates that the settlement could support more development noting the range of existing facilities and high level of accessibility. On this basis do not agree with the inference in para 169 that development should be restricted so as not to overwhelm existing infrastructure due to additional demand generated from it. Development and infrastructure planning are integral to each other the purpose of the Local Plan being that development is delivered in conjunction with the appropriate level of infrastructure. It is clear that Hampton in Arden is a highly accessible settlement and contains a number of core facilities, and can support additional development that will itself secure the necessary infrastructure required to support new and existing residents and existing services and
facilities.
Please find attached our full representations to the above consultation that are submitted on behalf of William Davis Limited re: land at Station Road Hampton in Arden
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9888
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Packington Estate Enterprises Ltd
Agent: Arcadis
Settlement suitable for housing with its range of services, rail and bus services. Agree that former ammunition depot should be developed to create defensible boundary.
Acknowledge infrastructure requirements for the SLP Site24/DLP Site 6 and agree need for open space restricted to needs of new population, or contributions to assist upgrading/shortfall of existing facilities. Suggest CIL funding should be used for traffic calming and wider open space requirements in village.
Redevelopment of Site 6 which is brownfield and use has visual impacts, would provide substantial improvement and further enhancement unnecessary.
May consider provision of formalised footpath linking footpath alongside railway.
see letter
Support
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9915
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Generator (Balsall) & Minton
Agent: DS Planning
No objection in principle.
This is the response of Generator Group and Minton to the supplementary
consultation by Solihull Council on the Solihull Draft Local Plan January 2019. The
purpose of the response is to comment on the draft Plan and promote the site on land adj Harpers Field, Kenilworth Road Balsall Common for inclusion as a housing
allocation within the Plan. The response is by question order. Whilst we have
responded to each question, the detailed points in relation to our site are set out under question 39 and your attention is specifically drawn to this part of the response. It should be noted the site is developer owned and delivery of the site can therefore come forward early in the plan period
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9962
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Rosconn Stategic Land
Agent: DS Planning
No objection in principle
This is the response of Rosconn Strategic Land to the supplementary consultation by
Solihull Council on the Solihull Draft Local Plan January 2019. The purpose of the
response is to comment the draft Plan and promote three sites for inclusion as
housing allocations within the plan. The response is by question order.
The 3 sites are:
Land at Three Maypoles Farm Shirley
Land at r/o 2214 Stratford Road Hockley Heath
Land adj 161 Lugtrout Lane Solihull
The responses on the three sites to the Solihull Draft Local Plan 2016 consultation
are attached and which highlight the reasons why the sites should be allocations
within the Local Plan.
This document should also be read in conjunction with the Ecology Report and
Heritage Assessment in relation to land adj to 161 Lugtrout Lane, Solihull.
Your attention is also drawn to the attached Masterplan for land r/o 2214 Stratford
Road Hockley Heath.
Not withstanding that this is an informal consultation we consider that the document
should be accompanied by an up to date SA.
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 10002
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Stonewater
Agent: DS Planning
No objection in principle
This is the response of Stonewater to the supplementary consultation by Solihull
Council on the Solihull Draft Local Plan January 2019. The purpose of the response is
to comment the draft Plan and promote the site at the Firs Maxstoke Lane (west of
Meriden proposed allocation site 10) for inclusion as a housing allocation within the
Plan. The response is by question order.
The original response to the Solihull Draft Local Plan 2016 consultation is also
attached which highlights the reasons why the site should be an allocation within the
Local Plan (Site Ref 137).
see detailed comment in attached letter
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 10042
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Mr T Khan
Agent: DS Planning
No objection in principle
This is the response of Mr Taj Khan, Sid Kelly and John Green to the supplementary
consultation by Solihull Council on the Solihull Draft Local Plan January 2019. The
purpose of the response is to comment on the draft Plan and promote the site at 15,
59, & 61 Jacobean Lane Knowle for inclusion as a housing allocation within the Plan
and land north of Jacobean Lane being removed from the Green Belt and to support
the removal of land from the Green Belt to rectify anomalies and for consistency.
See detail response in attached letter and appendices
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 10084
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Minton (CdeB) Ltd
Agent: DS Planning
No objection in principle
This is the response of Minton to the supplementary consultation by Solihull Council
on the Solihull Draft Local Plan January 2019. The purpose of the response is to
comment the draft Plan and promote the site at Oak Farm Catherine de Barnes for
inclusion as a housing allocation within the Plan. The response is by question order.
The original response to the Solihull Draft Local Plan 2016 consultation is also
attached which highlights the reasons why the full Oak Farm site should be an
allocation within the Local Plan. We have also carried out our own Green Belt
Assessment a copy of which is attached
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 10534
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Severn Trent Water
Severn Trent Water response:
Results of our high level sewer capacity assessment highlights some possible risks - of the proposed development on the sewerage and surface water network.
For most developments we do not foresee any particular issues. Where we consider there may be an issue we would discuss in further detail with the Local Planning Authority. Once detailed developments and site specific locations are confirmed by local councils, we are able to provide more specific comments and modelling of the network if required. We will complete any necessary improvements to provide additional capacity once we have sufficient confidence that a development will go ahead.
High impact sites in Hampton in Arden:
- Meriden Road
- West of Corbetts Close, Hampton in Arden
- Nesfield Grove
see attached document