Question 18 - Site 24 - Oak Farm

In principle agree to it being a suitable site.
Housing density is too high if just using the brownfield part of the site.
Will need pedestrian crossing or canal bridge to access the village.
Is the proposed access still to be on Friday Lane?

This site is poorly served by both public transport and schools. If development is allowed on the brown field area only, then a smaller development of larger homes wold be more suitable.A pedestrian crossing on Hampton Lane will be even more necessary if houses are built there.

This area has not seen as much development as other parts of borough

I am writing with regards to the new Draft Local Plan Review - specifically in relation to Site 24, Oak Farm, Catherine-De-Barnes.

The plan proposes that this site will be used for 80 'medium to high density homes'. I would like to understand further what this entails. It seems a very large number of dwellings for the size of the plot. I imagine this means they will be packed in tightly together, or more than two storeys high, leaving no space for parking, cramming in as many residents as possible on the smallest amount of land. I do feel as though this would be very difficult for the village to accommodate. The village currently does not have enough amenities or infrastructure for this many extra people, as this development would be equivalent to more than a fifth of the current size of the village and therefore will increase it's total population hugely. (We currently stand at 388 households in the village, up to the end of Hampton Lane and to add another 80 would be vastly challenging for the surrounding amenities) Hampton Lane is an extremely busy through road and is getting busier year on year with the increase in traffic coming through when there are problems on the M42. A new development would certainly increase the number of cars in the area in rush hour. When Hampton Lane is at a standstill, the roundabout has queues in every direction and it is already difficult to turn in and out of smaller roads, this potential development would exacerbate this. I also believe the local primary school in Hampton in Arden is at capacity and Catherine-De-Barnes has no school. There is no other available parking, with Bickenhill Lane opposite Oak Farm already being lined either side with parked cars in the evenings. Whilst I appreciate that the Borough needs new homes, and this site constitutes a current Brownfield site, I would like to raise concerns over the number of dwellings and the density and would seek reassurance that they will not be overcrowded or more than two storeys high.

The other main issue I have concerns over, is the small field in the corner of the proposed plot bordering Hampton Lane and the Grand Union Canal. This small area of greenery is at the gateway to the village. Catherine-De-Barnes is currently classed as a rural village, despite the growing pressure of traffic and other motorway developments. This small area of open space, helps create a village feel, before motorists enter the residential areas, which now join up with Solihull town conurbation. Whist I understand that the plot under discussion is considered a Brownfield site, I feel this section of open green field, should not be considered with the rest of the site. This area of field has not been 'previously developed' and is not under the footprint of land that currently has buildings on. Therefore, I would ask that the council consider building appropriate dwellings only on the land that is currently developed, leaving this small section open for residents to enjoy and to help give the appearance that Catherine-De-Barnes is still a rural village and not densely packed with houses, blending in to the edge of Solihull.

See Letter

We are supportive, conditional on:
1. House density reduced to medium to low and kept to a maximum of 2 storeys, to fit with the visual amenity of the village
2. Adequate parking and facilities on site, to reduce further congestion in the village and serve residents needs
3. Vehicular site access only from Friday Lane, as already high traffic loading on Hampton Lane
4. Footpaths and crossings for pedestrians established into and in CdB, to increase safety and ease of access
5. Established trees protected and landscaping established on all site boundaries to create areas and corridors for wildlife

We are concerned about the density of housing being to great and are concerned about noise and light pollution, also we are very concerned about the visual impact of the proposed development.
Although we accept that there is a need for affordable housing in the village, the scale of development in the area has increased intensely and are concerned that we will loose the rural and village setting that it has.

It is possible that Oak Farm could be considered for development but not as Residential.
the existing infrastructure is totally inadequate to support Residential development and would completely compromise existing facilities and any notable increase in traffic would only add to the already heavily congested scenario currently experienced, particularly on Hampton Lane.
This site was rejected within the 2012 SHLAA for specific reasons which remain unchanged today.
'Natural' villages such as Catherine De Barnes, part of Solihull's distinct character, rely heavily on Green Belt status protection and development proposals of this nature will erode and destroy that valued character.

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

Please find attached Hampton-in-Arden Society's response to the current draft local plan consultation.

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.

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.

In addition to this site we believe that land at 145 Old Station Road should also be considered for housing development. The case in support is set out in the attachment.

Yes.
It is in a strategically advantageous location, which would benefit from access to Solihull Town Centre, the airport, NEC, Birmingham International, HS2 and Resorts World.
The masterplan is scant on information, but I appreciate that it is in its infancy. As the plan develops I am confident it will make a beneficial contribution to the borough and the village.

Please find attached a response to various aspects of the supplementary consultation

On behalf of our Client Mrs M Joyce, we now formally submit on her behalf representations in connection with the Draft Solihull Local Plan Review Supplementary Consultation.

The key question raised in the DSLPRSC is Question 39, which offers
an opportunity for our client to confirm she wishes her site to be included and the
reasons for that. In addition, this representation also addresses the following
questions: 2, 7, 14, 15, 17, 18, 23, 27, 28, 32, 33, 34, 39 and 44.

see letter attached

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

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.

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

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

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