Question 26 - Site 16 - East of Solihull
Support
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8983
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Councillor Max McLoughlin
Yes.
The masterplan should be credited for protection of Sports facilities and also for historic buildings.
It is also in a strategically significant location, in a growth corridor. With this in mind, it may be necessary to work on addressing infrastructure and public transport provision within the area.
Yes.
The masterplan should be credited for protection of Sports facilities and also for historic buildings.
It is also in a strategically significant location, in a growth corridor. With this in mind, it may be necessary to work on addressing infrastructure and public transport provision within the area.
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9176
Received: 14/03/2019
Respondent: Mr Julian Knight MP
Concerns over flooding, accessibility especially access from Damson Parkway, a busy 40mph through road, and whether Hampton Lane is able to cope with additional traffic as there are significant limitations on what carriageway works could be undertaken to improve capacity.
See Letter
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9274
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: IM Land
Agent: Barton Willmore Planning
This Site contains similar constraints to Site 1 in that is has multiple land owners and assembly issues as well as sports pitch provision. The Council should evidence that this Site is deliverable as well as showing that the sports pitches will be mitigated in line with the Revised NPPF (2019)
See Letters
Support
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9321
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Strategic Land and Property Team SMBC
Agent: Cushman and Wakefield
Release of this land would provide a sustainable location for the development of new homes to help the Borough achieve its housing requirement within the plan period.
The site is immediately adjacent to the existing settlement and clear, defensible boundaries can be established.
The release of the site is policy compliant and therefore justifiable to help SMBC meet their housing needs across the Borough.
The DLP recognises the need for infrastructure requirements to be fulfilled to ensure site deliverability. The main constraint was noted as the Listed Buildings to the eastern edge of the site. These can be sensitively managed.
See Letters 1-5
Support
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9338
Received: 21/03/2019
Respondent: Halford Holdings
Agent: Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd
Support the proposed allocation of our Client's site within Site 16 for housing which, together with the rest of the proposed allocation, is estimated could deliver in total around 600 dwellings within the revised plan period to 2035. Site has defensible boundaries, provides logical extension, is highly accessible, well served by sustainable forms of transport.
Concept Masterplan
Object to potential area of ecological assessment as no evidence.
See Letter
Support
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9562
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Richard Cobb Planning
Site should be extended east to Catherine de Barnes to allow for more growth in the Solihull central area. The development of further and would have no significant impact on the wider Meriden Gap beyond Catherine de Barnes to the east. Most of the land is poorly performing Green Belt with sports pitches etc and additional residential development should be allowed on such land including the Red Star Sport Ground - Site 412 which is not adequate in size for a proper sports facility
Please find attached a response to various aspects of the supplementary consultation
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9718
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Avison Young
Agree Council has adhered to an NPPF compliant approach in selecting Site 16.
Site 16 will allow Solihull to expand in proportionate manner.
Vision Document submitted with representation:
Will provide policy-compliant level of affordable housing
Reaffirm status of Site 16 as suitable, available and achievable.
Landscape sensitivity can be mitigated, no flood risk, no statutory or local wildlife designations, no known contamination, no significant impact to heritage assets.
Site enjoys good accessibility, within walking distance to bus services.
St Philips submitted Masterplan:
Would retain playing pitches, provide 600 dwellings, access off Pinfold Lane.
Site could be built out between 2022-2028.
see attached documents
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9864
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Historic England- West Midlands Region
Historic England acknowledges the SMBC Draft Masterplan which suggests how potential future development might respond to the affected heritage assets. It will be important that assumptions are underpinned by evidence and this is available to help interested parties consider whether the proposed response is appropriate.
Will be important for the Council to demonstrate that it has:
-taken sufficient account of the evidence base to avoid or minimise harm to the significance of the affected heritage assets
-attached great weight to the conservation of those assets and
-had due regard to the desirability of preserving the setting of those listed buildings
see attached document
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9925
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: 9972
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Rosconn Stategic Land
Agent: DS Planning
No objection in principle. However, the site boundary needs clarification so that site refs 143 and 339 are confirmed as green sites.
The SDLP 2019 supplementary document clearly confirms the new boundary and logically the additional land to be proposed for removal from the Green
Belt should be from Damson Parkway up to the Grand Union Canal to the north to provide a firm defensible and logical Green Belt Boundary along with the inclusion of all of the land between Damson Parkway and the proposed eastern boundary of the site.
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: 10012
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: 10052
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Mr T Khan
Agent: DS Planning
No objection in principle. Site 16 has been modified following the SDLP 2016
consultation to include land north of Lugtrout Lane up to the Grand Union
Canal. However, this revised site boundary north of Lugtrout Lane needs to
be clarified within the Masterplans document and the site assessment
document such that both Site Ref 143 and 339 are confirmed within the
allocation site and shown as green within the document (site Ref 143 appears
as amber).
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: 10094
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
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 10186
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: K Sunner
The site was rejected in the 2012 SHLAA for reasons that were correct at the time and are still equally valid today.
Infrastructure is inadequate.
The rural roads serving the proposed site, Lugtrout Lane and Field Lane are narrow and rural in character which makes them unsuitable for the increase flow of traffic the development would result in. Also the existing junctions either end of Lugtrout Lane do not have the capacity to handle the additional traffic that would be generated. There is no footpath along most of Lugtrout Lane.
Thank you for your email. I am writing with my objections to the inclusion of Site 16 in the Draft Local Plan. In particular the loss of Green Belt that will occur , there will be no boundary to protect the Green Belt and the fact that the local infrastructure would not be able to handle the development.
Primary schools and doctor's surgeries in both Hampton-in-Arden and Yew Tree Lane are already at capacity and Catherine de Barnes has neither.
Site 16 was reviewed in the SHLAA 2012 assessment and its suitability for development was rejected then for reasons which I feel were correct at the time and are still equally valid today.
The infrastructure is unable to meet the pressure from 600 new dwellings. There is no public transport along Lugtrout Lane and that along Hampton Lane is inadequate. The medical services in Yew Tree Lane and Hampton are at capacity and Catherine de Barnes has none.
The primary schools are also at capacity.
The rural roads serving the proposed site, Lugtrout Lane and Field Lane are narrow and rural in character which makes them unsuitable for the increase flow of traffic the development would result in. Also the existing junctions either end of Lugtrout Lane do not have the capacity to handle the additional traffic that would be generated. There is no footpath along most of Lugtrout Lane.
I therefore strongly oppose the development of site 16 due to the above.