Question 24 - Site 9 - Land South of Knowle
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9330
Received: 13/03/2019
Respondent: Knowle, Dorridge & Bentley Heath Neighbourhood Forum CIO
There remain too many outstanding issues regarding the justification for development in this area to be able to support this allocation in principle. The studies undertaken on behalf of the NF raise significant concerns about the scale of development,. Fundamental issues regarding the future of Arden Academy and the
impacts of this scale of development on local infrastructure have still not been addressed. If Arden Academy is not relocated, there is no real wider community benefit from such a scale of development and no justification for the release of the land to the east of the Academy.
I attach for the record the Forum's response to the Draft Local Plan Supplementary Consultation
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9385
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: CPRE Warwickshire Branch
Site 9 should not be allocated in the Local Plan Review.
Proposals to surround Knowle village with extensive housing to its north (Site 8) and south (Site 9) would undermine the Conservation Area's character and setting because Knowle would become a town in terms of population size and urban extent.
Impact on Knowle Conservation Area, most important in the Borough and other heritage assets. Would have the effect of developing open land to the north of the historic village and removing the countryside setting that remains to that side of Knowle. Turning settlement from village to more like a town.
Loss of Green Belt
see attached letter of response
Support
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9398
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Mr M Trentham
Support the allocation of Site 9.
Concern on the current state of flux regarding the relocation of Arden Academy. They must come up with a financially viable and policy compliant scheme, or stand back and let us get on with the default Masterplan. Relocation of the school is not a requirement but a private project.
The land is both suitable and deliverable and there will be contributions to on-site infrastructure.
Masterplans are out of date and misleading.
Option 2 is not a proceedable option at this stage.
Option 1 should be the only masterplan for site 9.
see letter of response re: Knowle sites
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9484
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Heyford Developments Ltd
Agent: Lichfields
Difficult to distinguish between Site 9 and Amber Site A5 Blue Lake Road, and latter will round off development alongside Site 9.
Blue Lake Road aligned with Site 9 in terms of accessibility.
Uncertainty over Site 9 due to different land ownerships and land parcels, which risks not delivering allocated housing numbers. All the land at Blue Lake Road now under control of Heywood Developments, is available now and can deliver housing within first 5 years of Plan period.
Please refer to attached documents.
Lichfields is instructed by Heyford Developments Ltd ('Heyford Developments') to respond formally to the Solihull Draft Local Plan Review supplementary consultation (January 2019 - March 2019).
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9503
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Ms Mali malika
Concept master plan -I support option 1 and not option 2 of the published options.
Reasons: Relocating the school to new site will:
- only displace traffic congestion to other sites.
- will require increased allocation of houses to make new school construction
- I support option 1 to fulfil need for new houses required in the burrow
I support option 1 and not not option 2 of the publised options.
Reasons:Relocating the school to new site will:
- only displce traffic congestion to other sites.
- will require increased alloaction of houses to make new school construction
- I support option 1 to fullfill need for new houses required in the burrow
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9511
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: The Knowle Society
Development here will do nothing except worsen an already busy road network.
Impact on ecology.
High density homes on the site of the existing School is unsuitable, given prevailing character of the area.
No definitive indication of how Arden relocation will be funded and redevelopment of Arden will create its own infrastructure problems.
However, redevelopment would help to meet other infrastructure requirement including additional medical and community facilities.
Option 2 is the only option for further examination in the next round of consultation and it would have to include a new junior or primary school.
the responses in the attached letter have been made by the Knowle Society
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9521
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: St Philips Land - Land at Smiths Lane Browns Lane & Widney Manor Road
Agent: Savills
Unclear how Site 9 has been assessed as a 'green' site and site 207 has not. Clarification is sought on this matter.
Site 9 performs similarly to site 207; however, Site 9 comprises multiple landowners / interests whereas site 207 is solely under clients control, providing more certainty and deliverability.
See attached documents
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9561
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Richard Cobb Planning
Proposed development of land should have been subject to proper sustainability studies especially in respect of traffic and employment. Most traffic from site will need to travel to the north and west and road system at present will not be able to cope. Additionally employment opportunities should be provided by allocation of land for business purposes.
Please find attached a response to various aspects of the supplementary consultation
Support
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9586
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Persons with an interest Site 9
Agent: Cerda Planning Ltd
Arden Triangle (Site 9) has been a consistent commitment by the Council throughout plan making in Solihull.
The evidence base which justified the proposed allocation within the earlier draft Local Plan re-enforces and re-supports the allocation of the site within the current draft Local Plan Supplementary Consultation. The update to the evidence base does nothing to undermine the Council's approach to propose an allocation of the site and indeed supports the proposes allocation.
Cerda Planning therefore support the allocation at the Arden Triangle (Site 9).
Representations on behalf of persons with an interest in part of the proposed allocation at Site 9 - Arden Triangle
Cerda Planning has been instructed to prepare Representations to the Draft Local Plan Supplementary Consultation, Reviewing the Plan for Solihull's Future dated January 2019.
The submissions have been duly made and submitted to the Council within the required consultation timescales.
In preparing these submissions, Cerda Planning have had regard to the draft Local Plan Supplementary Consultation and the draft Concept Masterplans.
Cerda Planning have taken a proactive and ongoing approach to the issue of Development Plan preparation for Solihull Metropolitan Borough.
Representations were lodged in February 2017 to the Draft Local Plan when it was issued for consultation. Cerda Planning subsequently lodged Representations to the Call for Sites which was issued by the Council in June 2017 both on behalf of the same interested party.
Arden Triangle (Site 9) has been a consistent commitment by the Council throughout plan making in Solihull. It is a site which was identified within the earlier draft Local Plan and again finds itself as a proposal allocation within this draft Local Plan Supplementary Consultation. The evidence base which justified the proposed allocation within the earlier draft Local Plan re-enforces and re-supports the allocation of the site within the current draft Local Plan Supplementary Consultation. The update to the evidence base does nothing to undermine the Council's approach to propose an allocation of the site and indeed supports the proposes allocation.
Cerda Planning therefore support the allocation at the Arden Triangle (Site 9).
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9627
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Grove Road Residents
Agent: Pegasus Group
The allocation is inappropriate and has not been adequately justified. The southern portion of the site is sensitive in both Green Belt and landscape character terms. Access arrangements from the South are also difficult and if pursued will have even greater impact on the sensitive landscape character of this part of the site and
impact on the setting of designated heritage assets. The Draft Concept Masterplan must be re-drawn to ensure that built development to the South extends no further than the existing public footpath linking Warwick Road with Grove Road.
Pegasus Group have been instructed by Grove Road residents to appraise and
respond to the Local Plan (LP) relative to the Arden Triangle site allocation (site
9). This site lies within the Green Belt and is immediately adjacent to the
settlement.
see attached letter
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9862
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Historic England- West Midlands Region
Historic England acknowledges the SMBC Draft illustrative Concept Masterplan which suggests how potential future development might respond to the affected heritage assets. It will be important that assumptions are underpinned by adequate evidence.
see attached document
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9923
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: 9970
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: 10010
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: 10050
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: 10092
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: 10327
Received: 02/05/2019
Respondent: Environment Agency
There are a number of ordinary watercourses (Cuttle Brook and unnamed) across the site, however our 'Flood Map for Planning' only shows the flood risk from watercourses with a catchment area greater than 3km2, mapping of the risk from the watercourse has not been undertaken and as such this is the only reason the site is shown to lie in low risk Flood Zone 1. The assessment of flood risk and easement from the ordinary watercourse should be agreed with the LLFA, however we strongly recommend that hydraulic modelling of the watercourse is undertaken as part of a Level 2 SFRA to inform of the developable area and capacity of this potential allocation. Regardless of flood risk, we recommend an unobstructed green corridor is maintained along the banks of the watercourse for the purposes of protecting and maintaining green and blue infrastructure.
Thank you for referring the above consultation which we received on 30 January 2019. We apologise we have been unable to respond prior to now, and hope that you are still able to take our comments into account as the plan develops.
We have reviewed the above consultation document which is dated January 2019 and note the inclusion of additional sites for consideration for allocation.
We welcome the inclusion of Flood Risk as a potential 'Hard' issue in the site selection criteria as identified on page 18 and 19. We further recommend that Water Quality is added to the footnote in this section, with particular referenced to River Blythe's SSSI status. Further to this page 29 looks at what is required for the Blythe in the future and protection and enhancement of water quality should be included. Please see attached letter for our advice with regards to your site allocations, which incorporates comments previously provided, and adds additional comments in relation to your new sites. These comments should be used in preference to those previously provided as they have been updated