Question 35 - Washed Over Green Belt Settlements to be retained
Support
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 6536
Received: 30/01/2019
Respondent: Mrs Katie Wilson
Support for Site 18:
Green belt should remain otherwise all areas will merge into one toy town of tiny new builds on top of each other with small gardens and a drive out tonearest green rural area. There would be no space or character.
Green belt should remain otherwise all areas will merge into one toy town of tiny new builds on top of each other with small gardens and a drive out tonearest green rural area. There would be no space or character.
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 6727
Received: 19/02/2019
Respondent: Mr K R Baker
The overall situation (housing issues) has been prejudiced by the policy to categorise smaller settlements as 'washed over green belt'. Washed over green belt imposes unnecessary development restrictions that disallow these settlements being fully inclusive in places where movers and new entrants would prefer to live. The quality of this surrounding green belt land is generally poor from an agricultural standpoint and has limited economic benefit.
see attached letter
Support
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 7027
Received: 05/03/2019
Respondent: Michael Watkinson
Small ancient villages such as Berkswell are a natural part of the British countryside and are undoubtedly a part of the green belt.
Small ancient villages such as Berkswell are a natural part of the British countryside and are undoubtedly a part of the green belt.
Support
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 7075
Received: 06/03/2019
Respondent: Mr Bob Holtham
The washed over status gives the protection needed against inappropriate green belt development and limits further encroachment and sprawl.
The washed over status gives the protection needed against inappropriate green belt development and limits further encroachment and sprawl.
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 7478
Received: 11/03/2019
Respondent: Wendy Cairns
Berkswell Parish is right in the Meriden Gap and is being attacked by building on the border with Coventry and Warwickshire any loss of the protection to Berkswell Village and the smaller settlements in the parish in this washer over area would result in the final dissemination of the Meriden Gap. It is time SMBC recognised the strategic importance of this area ans its duty to guard against its erosion.
Berkswell Parish is right in the Meriden Gap and is being attacked by building on the border with Coventry and Warwickshire any loss of the protection to Berkswell Village and the smaller settlements in the parish in this washer over area would result in the final dissemination of the Meriden Gap. It is time SMBC recognised the strategic importance of this area ans its duty to guard against its erosion.
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 7499
Received: 11/03/2019
Respondent: Portland Planning Consultants
No - so long as the conditions referred to in the response to question 34 are sustained - namely the justification by reference to exceptional circumstances. A failure to demonstrate exceptional circumstances renders the Plan susceptible to legal challenge and thus ineffective, which in turn renders the plan unsound.
No - so long as the conditions referred to in the response to question 34 are sustained - namely the justification by reference to exceptional circumstances. A failure to demonstrate exceptional circumstances renders the Plan susceptible to legal challenge and thus ineffective, which in turn renders the plan unsound.
Support
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 7601
Received: 11/03/2019
Respondent: Solihull Ratepayers Association
Agree remain
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: 7953
Received: 14/03/2019
Respondent: Terry Corns
I agree that the dwellings in Grove Road should remain a "washed over" Green Belt and that the land to the north between Grove Road and Knowle centre should be retained as Green Belt to provide a clear boundary to the existing residential area of the village.
I agree that the dwellings in Grove Road should remain a "washed over" Green Belt and that the land to the north between Grove Road and Knowle centre should be retained as Green Belt to provide a clear boundary to the existing residential area of the village.
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8134
Received: 14/03/2019
Respondent: Gill Corns
I agree that the dwellings in Grove Road should remain a "washed over" Green Belt and that the land to the north between Grove Road and Knowle centre should be retained as Green Belt providing a clear boundary to the existing residential area of the village.
I agree that the dwellings in Grove Road should remain a "washed over" Green Belt and that the land to the north between Grove Road and Knowle centre should be retained as Green Belt providing a clear boundary to the existing residential area of the village.
Support
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8226
Received: 14/03/2019
Respondent: Mrs Helen Baker
I agree that the dwellings in Grove Road should remain a "washed over" Green Belt and that the land to the north between Grove Road and Knowle centre should be retained as Green Belt to provide a clear boundary to the existing residential area of the village.
I agree that the dwellings in Grove Road should remain a "washed over" Green Belt and that the land to the north between Grove Road and Knowle centre should be retained as Green Belt to provide a clear boundary to the existing residential area of the village.
Support
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8266
Received: 14/03/2019
Respondent: Mr Martin Archer
I agree that washed over status for Grove Road should remain.
I agree that washed over status for Grove Road should remain.
Support
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8272
Received: 14/03/2019
Respondent: Mr Adrian Baker
I agree that the dwellings in Grove Road should remain a "washed over" Green Belt and consider that the land to the north between Grove Road and Knowle centre should be retained as Green Belt to provide a clear boundary to the existing residential area of the village.
I agree that the dwellings in Grove Road should remain a "washed over" Green Belt and that the land to the north between Grove Road and Knowle centre should be retained as Green Belt to provide a clear boundary to the existing residential area of the village.
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8282
Received: 14/03/2019
Respondent: Mr David Power
I agree that the dwellings in Grove Road should remain a "washed over" Green Belt and that the land to the north between Grove Road and Knowle centre should be retained as Green Belt to provide a clear boundary to the existing residential area of the village.
I agree that the dwellings in Grove Road should remain a "washed over" Green Belt and that the land to the north between Grove Road and Knowle centre should be retained as Green Belt to provide a clear boundary to the existing residential area of the village.
Support
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8328
Received: 14/03/2019
Respondent: Mr Gregory Lowson
Grove Road should certainly remain washed over green bel for all of the reasons cited by the Knowle Society and in the Crestwood report. It preserves the character of the entrance into Dorridge and, without it, that character will lost as will the current separation between Grove Road and Dorridge. With the proposed arden triangle development Dorridge and Knowle will blur into one and loose their distinctiveness and character.
Grove Road should certainly remain washed over green bely for all of the reasons cited by the Knowle Society and in the Crestwood report. It preserves the character of the entrance into Dorridge and, without it, that character will lost as will the current separation between Grove Road and Dorridge. With the proposed arden triangle development Dorridge and Knowle will blur into one and loose their distinctiveness and character.
Support
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8496
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Simon Taylor
Yes, they should remain
Yes, they should remain
Support
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8600
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Mr Brian Hillman
Grove Road should remain washed over green belt and the land to the north between Grove Road and Knowle centre should be retained as Green Belt to provide a clear boundary 5to the existing residential are of the village settlement.
Grove Road should remain washed over green belt and the land to the north between Grove Road and Knowle centre should be retained as Green Belt to provide a clear boundary 5to the existing residential are of the village settlement.
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8901
Received: 14/03/2019
Respondent: Kler Group - Gentleshaw Lane
Agent: Cerda Planning Ltd
- It is the correct time to undertake a wholesale and detailed Green Belt boundary review as this can only be re-defined through a Local Plan Review.
- Opportunity to rationalise and re-define boundaries that were designated within the a very diferent planning policy context.
- It would not be logical to say that villages of any sort have any character which contributes to the 'openness' of the Green Belt.
- Apart from isolated dwellings and other similar limited exceptions, any concentration of buildings, structures, hard surfacing or boundary features should not be washed over as Green Belt.
see attached document
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8999
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Councillor Max McLoughlin
This section has not been delivered in an appropriate manner to elicit valuable contributions. The wording is confusing, and I expect there will be fewer responses, though with greater inconsistency.
If so, this will raise questions over the contribution that responses to this section make to the consultation. This can be addressed, in future, with an explanation that would adhere to the Crystal Mark standard of Plain English. Mapping alongside the questions is a simple addition that would elicit clearer and more indicative responses.
As per Q34, the question is not clear for respondents.
Support
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9014
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Mr Steve Coathup
Grove Road in particular represents a transitional thoroughfare between rural and urban environments which greatly add to the amenity and appeal of KDBH. To remove washover status would represent a threat of substantial development and the loss of this asset.
Grove Road in particular represents a transitional thoroughfare between rural and urban environments which greatly add to the amenity and appeal of KDBH. To remove washover status would represent a threat of substantial development and the loss of this asset.
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9125
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Mr Russell Blake
Green belt status should be retained in these cases.
Green belt status should be retained in these cases.
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9148
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Councillor M Wilson
I'm not sure a resident would understand this question. I'm struggling. Please explain.
I'm not sure a resident would understand this question. I'm struggling. Please explain.
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9400
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Mr M Trentham
I disagree with para 380 that "settlements.... contribute to the openness of the Green Belt". It may be that the layout of a settlement precludes the establishment of a logical boundary around it, and that may be a reason for maintaining washed-over status. Otherwise settlements should not be washed over. Infilling could result over time in the sensible removal of the settlement from the washed-over area as proposed by the Council for those areas in para 378. This is also the case described in Q36 below.
see letter of response re: Knowle sites
Support
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9544
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Richard Lloyd
yes - retain status
see letter
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9564
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Richard Cobb Planning
The settlements of Barston, Bickenhill and Berkswell should remain as washed over Green Belt if there is no proposal to release land for housing.
The settlement of Chadwick End which has a distinct north and south parts should be taken out of the Green Belt and a settlement boundary should be drawn around it
recognise the extent of opportunities for potential infilling development and safeguard the intervening land between the two parts.
Please find attached a response to various aspects of the supplementary consultation
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9646
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Mr & Mrs Williams
Agent: Oakwood Planning Ltd
The Council's approach is overly restrictive compared to the NPPF. The NPPF allows for limited infilling in villages and this should be the case throughout the Borough when housing is to be delivered and reliant on Green Belt sites. This is even more so the case if the Council intends not to allocate any Small Sites (see Q39 comment)
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.
Support
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9934
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Generator (Balsall) & Minton
Agent: DS Planning
The washed over status of the settlements should remain.
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
Support
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9981
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Rosconn Stategic Land
Agent: DS Planning
The washed over status of the settlements should remain
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.
Support
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 10021
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Stonewater
Agent: DS Planning
The washed over status of the settlements should remain.
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
Support
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 10061
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Mr T Khan
Agent: DS Planning
The washed over status of the settlements should remain
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
Support
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 10103
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Minton (CdeB) Ltd
Agent: DS Planning
The washed over status of the settlements should remain.
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