Question 38 - Amber Sites
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9631
Received: 25/02/2019
Respondent: Mrs Wendy Wilson
Dorridge is one of the most sustainable settlements in the Borough in terms of public transport and local amenities. Amber site A5 Blue Lake Road should be allocated for housing.
See letter
Support
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9695
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Belle Homes Ltd
Agent: Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd
Site 345 575A-601 Tanworth Lane, Cheswick Green (A1) should be assessed as green and allocated.
Opportunity to infill land within built up area, utilising brownfield land and garden land.
Sustainable location, ideally located close to Cheswick Green village services, school and existing bus services, served by pavements.
No significant constraints, logical infill, no impact of green belt. Meets criteria for green belt review
SHELAA site assessment misleading, should be Category 1, no bad neighbour use or wildlife site, not backland development and only one dwelling requires demolition. Not included in Sustainability Appraisal.
Object to inclusion as priority 5 in site selection, as proportion brownfield. Should be priority 3 for brownfield area and 5 for remainder as lower performing green belt. No constraints so Step 2 should be green.
We write on behalf of our Client, Belle Homes Limited in respect of Land to the rear of 575a to 601 Tanworth Lane and Numbers 587 to 601 Tanworth Lane, Cheswick Green, Solihull B90 4JE. This letter is submitted in response to the current Draft Solihull Local Plan Review Supplementary Consultation (DSLPRSC
See detail in attached letter
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9730
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Mrs Jean Walters
Blue Lake Road site (Ref. A5) and Site 59 at Kixley Road (Ref A4) should not be developed.
Other Amber Sites should be developed, instead of Site 3 and Site 4 (except for SHELAA Site 130).
see letter attached
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9759
Received: 14/03/2019
Respondent: P T Harris
Amber site Ref A4 - Golden End Farm
Would spoil the only country lane left in the village.
Some consideration is required for wildlife, plants and the general wellbeing of people.
Suggest looking at the many empty houses already in the Borough.
Already thousands of homes built in Knowle over the last few years.
See Letter
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9866
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Mr Frank Arnold
Amber A5:
This would be a significant intrusion into the Green Belt.
The impact upon Kixley Lane, both during construction and after building. Residents of the the new development would being given access to the Canal walks with the
potential of destroying what has been an historically attractive entrance for dog walkers and Ramblers to various scenic walks.
The impact on the village of Knowle, where traffic and parking is already a growing issue.
Other infrastructure issues like schooling and access to Doctors - both of which are already overloaded.
As a resident of Kixley Lane, I would like to make the strongest
possible protest regarding the recent proposals for potential housing
development adjacent to Golden End Farm, which I believe has now been
categorised as Amber.!!
My reasons for making this protest are many. However, some of these are:-
This would be a significant intrusion into the Green Belt.
The impact upon Kixley Lane, both during and after building. ie. Any
access to the site using Kixley Lane during building would be extremely
dificult due to the narrowness of the Lane. At some point after building
there is the possibility of the residents of the the new
developmentwould being given access to the Canal walks with the
potential of destroying what has been an historically attractive
entrance for dog walkers and Ramblers to various scenic walks.
The impact on the village of Knowle, where traffic and parking is
already a growing issue.
Other infrastructure issues like schooling and access to Doctors - both
of which are already overloaded.
All of these issues need to be taken into account or else the whole
character of Knowle could be severely damaged.
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9886
Received: 07/03/2019
Respondent: Mr T Thomas
When the next LDP consultation takes place in under 15 years more land will be needed and should be taken into account in developing this plan. Current Amber and Red sites should be reconsidered in the light of this rather than the current short term view.
I do not agree for the following reasons:
1. The plan removes what is effectively the last green belt within the village, certainly the last in School Road.
When the next LDP consultation takes place in under 15 years more land will be needed and should be taken into account in developing this plan. Current Amber and Red sites should be reconsidered in the light of this rather than the current short term view.
2. School road is rural and already recognised as a serious problem for trafic and cyclist using it. 150 new homes together with traffic from the major Blythe Valley development using it as a "rat run"ill only make it far worse.
3.Site 25 as planned will increase the size of Hockley Heath by 12% according to figures in this LDP. Adding the sites to the north of the road adds another 50 houses making 19% growth. With the new housing completed last year by Waterloo housing and Spitfire brings his to 25% growth in the village putting unacceptable pressure on the local infrastructure.
Support
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9892
Received: 11/03/2019
Respondent: Solihull Ratepayers Association
Support all being included.
On site specifics members felt Land at Mount Dairy Farm should be subject to careful checking as to flood risk. Land at Tilehouse Lane, Whitlocks End was strongly supported for inclusion.
The Solihull Ratepayers Members Forum and AGM on 8th March considered a presentation on the Solihull Local Plan Review Consultation and the presentations of our views are set out in the attached letter
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9936
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Generator (Balsall) & Minton
Agent: DS Planning
There is no advantage in creating and labelling sites yellow, blue and subsequently amber. This merely creates an unnecessary stage in the methodology adding to confusion and unnecessary complexity.
Delete this element of the methodology and either allocate the amber sites or reject them. The sites would be commented on or not under omission sites in general.
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: 9982
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Rosconn Stategic Land
Agent: DS Planning
There is no advantage in creating and labelling sites yellow, blue and subsequently amber. This merely creates an unnecessary stage in the methodology adding to confusion and unnecessary complexity.
Delete this element of the methodology and either allocate the amber sites or reject them. The sites would be commented on or not under omission sites in general.
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: 10023
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Stonewater
Agent: DS Planning
There is no advantage in creating and labelling sites yellow, blue and subsequently amber. This merely creates an unnecessary stage in the methodology adding to confusion and unnecessary complexity.
Delete this element of the methodology and either allocate the amber sites or reject them. The sites would be commented on or not under omission sites in general.
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: 10063
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Mr T Khan
Agent: DS Planning
There is no advantage in creating and labelling sites yellow, blue and subsequently amber. This merely creates an unnecessary stage in the methodology adding to confusion and unnecessary complexity.
Delete this element of the methodology and either allocate the amber sites or reject them. The sites would be commented on or not under omission sites in general.
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: 10105
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Minton (CdeB) Ltd
Agent: DS Planning
There is no advantage in creating and labelling sites yellow, blue and subsequently amber. This merely creates an unnecessary stage in the methodology adding to confusion and unnecessary complexity.
Delete this element of the methodology and either allocate the amber sites or reject them. The sites would be commented on or not under omission sites in general.
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: 10158
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: L&Q Estates - Land at Bickenhill Road, Marston Green
Agent: Pegasus Group
see detail in appendix 2 included in letter
Please find attached a representation to the Solihull Draft Local Plan Review Supplementary Consultation, made on behalf of L&Q Estates. This representation relates to Land at Berkswell Road, Meriden, and comprises the following documents:
* Consultation Response Document
* Representations Report, dated February 2017 (Appendix 3)
* Vision Document, dated February 2017 (Appendix 4)
* Un-met Housing Need and Duty-to-Cooperate (Appendix 5)
Support
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 10172
Received: 14/03/2019
Respondent: Mr P Benton and Mr T Neary
Agent: Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd
Amber Site Reference 116; Land at and to the rear of 146-152 Tilehouse Lane, Whitlock's End.
See Letters
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 10184
Received: 14/03/2019
Respondent: Mr P Benton and Mr T Neary
Agent: Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd
Site 116 r/o 146-152 Tilehouse Lane, Whitlock's End (A3) should be assessed as green and allocated.
Existing housing/railway line/road provide strong defensible green belt boundaries. NE and SW boundaries well treed.
Sustainable location, near station and existing bus services, served by pavements. Close to nursery school/church/restaurant with further facilities nearby in Tidbury Green/Wythall/Grimes Hill/Major's Green/extended Dickens Heath.
No significant constraints, site available and evidence provided. Planning Appeal demonstrates well-contained, openness issues can be addressed.
SHELAA site assessment misleading, should be Category 1, and capacity unrealistic. Landscape Character Assessment irrelevant. Sustainability Appraisal performance contested.
Object to inclusion as priority 8 in site selection, as medium accessibility and part brownfield. Should be priority 3 for brownfield area and 5 for remainder as lower performing green belt. No constraints so Step 2 should be green.
See Letters
Support
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 10196
Received: 14/03/2019
Respondent: Alexander Rooney
Golden End Farm: Ref A4 / site 59.
Object strongly to possible allocation for housing as will increase pressure on local services, traffic and parking. Site is within highly performing green belt and should not be developed in preference to lower scoring parcels elsewhere in Knowle/Dorridge, eg south-west of Dorridge and north-west of Bentley Heath.
See Letter
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 10199
Received: 13/03/2019
Respondent: Mrs C Spelman MP
Amber site A4
Residents are concerned about proposals to develop the land and remove the site from the Green Belt. Kixley Lane is one of the last remaining old lanes in the village and they are seeking assurance that the openness of the Green Belt will be preserved. They are also concerned about the impact on local infrastructure and services with increased traffic and housing at this site.
letter raising concerns of constituents concerned about proposals in the local plan to develop land at Kixley Lane Knowle
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 10202
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Mrs Emma Jane Watson
Number of people: 48
Site Ref A4 - Petition signed by 48 local residents.
Demolition of top grade Green Belt land. (Site scores highly in green belt assessment report 2016. Other sites that scored significantly lower such as site 13 have retained their green belt status)
Impact on traffic on already busy roads and at the junction with Warwick Road and Kenilworth Road.
Infrastructure unable to cope with the increased population from all the additional sites that are to be developed in Knowle. Dorridge is better equipped to cope with an increase in population yet no sites are put forward for development.
petition signed by Knowle residents adjacent to Golden End Farm/Kixley Lane (ref: A4/site 59)
*objection to development of top grade green belt land -assessment of the site is incorrect
*impact on traffic at the junction with Warwick Road and Kenilworth Road
*Concern that infrastructure in Knowle will be unable to cope with the increased population from all the additional sites planned for development in Knowle
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 10336
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Christopher Fellows
This Call for Sites reference 101: Old Waste Lane, Balsall Common has low accessibility, is in lower performing green belt, with the Sustainability Appraisal identifying 3 positive (1 significant), 8 neutral and 6 negative (2 significant) effects. Site is given priority 7, yet is rated amber with commentary indicating site could come forward if wider alterations are made to green belt boundaries. Commentary contains errors on Green Belt Assessment and SA scores.
see full details in attached response
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 10351
Received: 14/03/2019
Respondent: Mrs Sheila Cole
Rowood Drive (ref A6)
Whilst I believe that the land on Rowood drive, earmarked for housing, needs to be used, I feel that by adding more housing you are exacerbating a large traffic problem. It has always been difficult to exit Rowood Drive at certain times of the day. Since the introduction of the bus lane in Lode Lane, this has become much more difficult. At times it can take 10 mins to exit the road!
By building 30 houses on that site it could add 60 more cars, making the traffic problem much worse.
Whilst I believe that the land on Rowood drive, earmarked for housing, needs to be used, I feel that by adding more housing you are exacerbating a large traffic problem. It has always been difficult to exit Rowood Drive at certain times of the day. Since the introduction of the bus lane in Lode Lane, this has become much more difficult. At times it can take 10 mins to exit the road!
By building 30 houses on that site it could add 60 more cars, making the traffic problem much worse.
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 10356
Received: 14/03/2019
Respondent: Mr Martin Guy
I object to the Amber site proposal Ref. A4/Site 59 Golden End Farm, Knowle.
This would severely impact the character of Kixley Lane and the canal which is an important feature of the historic town of Knowle.
Removal of green belt status, paving the way for development, severely impacts an important local amenity in Knowle.
I object to the Amber site proposal Ref. A4/Site 59 Golden End Farm, Knowle.
This would severely impact the character of Kixley Lane and the canal which is an important feature of the historic town of Knowle.
Removal of green belt status, paving the way for development, severely impacts an important local amenity in Knowle.
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 10432
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: The Knowle Society
Amber Site A5 - Whilst the site does not perform as highly in Green Belt terms, there will be adverse impact on local infrastructure including health, education and emergency services.
There will be increased traffic flow which will impact on traffic through Knowle village.
the responses in the attached letter have been made by the Knowle Society
Support
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 10433
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Mr M Trentham
Amber site A5 - This site is better in most respects than Site 8 and should be considered as a substitute, and included as Amber. It provides a sensible rounding off to the settlement.
see letter of response re: Knowle sites
Support
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 10434
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Mr M Trentham
Amber site A7 - The Widney Manor Road area, with boundaries as shown arounf the built development should be removed from the Green Belt thus making A7 redundant, as development Site 134 should then become Green.
see letter of response re: Knowle sites
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 10479
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Mr & Mrs Williams
Agent: Oakwood Planning Ltd
Site 59 Golden End Farm, Knowle (ref A4) is assessed as 'amber' but is within a parcel of highly performing green belt.
Site 413 Blue Lake Road, Dorridge (ref A5) is very large given the proposed green belt boundary of Grove Road and Norton Green Lane.
These representations have been prepared by Oakwood Planning on behalf of the owners of the property known as Woodford, Grange Road, Dorridge which is identified as Site 127 in the SHELAA/Site Assessments.
The comments predominantly respond to the Draft Local Plan Supplementary Consultation:
Site Assessments in respect of Site 127 and linked to that provide some comments on a number of the consultation questions posed in the Draft Local Plan Supplementary Consultation.
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 10573
Received: 10/03/2019
Respondent: Ms Jo Fuller
Amber A3
Extra pressure on roads around the site
These new homes will not be creating a community, they will be the start to the degradation of the on that already exists in Dickens Heath
Flood risk will rise - Less fields and more run off
(please see uploaded notes).
I object to the loss of sports facilities and the impact on the community (negatively impact the fabric of teams no longer being able to train, play and host matches). From a health and social perspective, this is unacceptable. The impact of new residents on overstretched roads and potential future flooding (less fields and more run off). The removal of open space and trees/plants will negatively impact the animal/ bird life as well as the environment for current residents. Without additional services (such as school places), this proposal is not sustainable