Question 36 - Washed Over Green Belt Settlements Review
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 7882
Received: 13/03/2019
Respondent: Persimmon Homes Central
Any review of other areas of the Borough washed over by Green Belt should be undertaken in accordance with 2019 NPPF (para 139).
Any review of other areas of the Borough washed over by Green Belt should be undertaken in accordance with 2019 NPPF (para 139).
Support
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8497
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Simon Taylor
- Believe areas surrounding Knowle and Dorridge with washed over status should be reviewed and I also believe the policy around the Meriden Gap should be looked at again. These are both on the basis that the openness of settlements does not in some cases add to the openness of the Green Belt.
- Whilst I agree with the general policy around the Meriden Gap in terms of the demarcation between Solihull and Coventry, I do believe there are significant areas that could be looked at in terms of housing development along the M42 corridor and surrounding Meriden itself.
I believe areas surrounding Knowle and Dorridge with washed over status should be reviewed and I also believe the policy around the Meriden Gap should be looked at again. These are both on the basis that the openness of settlements does not in some cases add to the openness of the Green Belt. Whilst I agree with the general policy around the Meriden Gap in terms of the demarcation between Solihull and Coventry, I do believe there are significant areas that could be looked at in terms of housing development along the m42 corridor and surrounding Meriden itself.
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8904
Received: 14/03/2019
Respondent: Kler Group - Gentleshaw Lane
Agent: Cerda Planning Ltd
- The washed over status should be reviewed in relation to the large area of existing development at Warwick Road, Pool Meadow Close and Riverside Drive. (This relates back to the Green Belt Assessment undertaken by Atkins in 2016 and specifically Refined Parcel 32).
- Widney Manor Road: suggest new boundary to the east of all development fronting Widney Manor Road including the sixth form college up to the Malvern Park boundary but excluding Lovelace Avenue.
- Warwick Road: new boundary from the entrance to Brueton Park adjacent to all development in Oldway Drive/Pool Meadow Close up to the M42 and then along the M42 to the Solihull Bypass, and the Bypass where it joins the existing boundary to the Marie Curie hospital.
- The comment regarding Refined Parcel 31 in the Atkins Green Belt Assessment under Purpose 1 is to be noted. It makes it clear that boundaries are defined by the A41 (bypass) and M42 and hence these boundaries are already recognised as clear boundaries to the proposed removed area.
- The large areas of trees around Riverside Drive do not need Green Belt protection as already protected under other designations.
- Land at Gentleshaw Lane should therefore be brought out of the washed over Green Belt given the inconsistencies embedded in the evidence base underpinning the current consultation.
see attached document
Support
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8949
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Mrs Kealie Ahmad
No transparency why these sites have been lumped together and it has been decided they are not of rural or open nature, and there is no comparison as to why other sites have not been lumped together because collectively if permission were granted they too would then not be rural. For example sites 123, 44,45,48,168,173,334 when taken together would then have the same benefits of those proposed. These sites have also been assessed wrongly and inconsistently when compared with each other, for example, 2 sites 100 yards apart have been assessed as very high and low wrt food availability.
No transparency why these sites have been lumped together and it has been decided they are not of rural or open nature, and there is no comparison as to why other sites have not been lumped together because collectively if permission were granted they too would then not be rural. For example sites 123, 44,45,48,168,173,334 when taken together would then have the same benefits of those proposed. These sites have also been assessed wrongly and inconsistently when compared with each other, for example, 2 sites 100 yards apart have been assessed as very high and low wrt food availability.
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9000
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.
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9110
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Dr Lucy Hillman
The washed over green belt status should remain for land either side of Grive road in Knowle, both the Arden triangle and the land behind extending down to blue lake. This helps to retain the boundary and does provide an open character and makes an addition to the openness of the green belt in Knowle and makes a clear boundary from the village and the green belt. Just because a developer or land owner wants to sell it for development does NOT make it less valuable green belt for the community. This land should be protected not developed.
The washed over green belt status should remain for land either side of Grive road in Knowle, both the Arden triangle and the land behind extending down to blue lake. This helps to retain the boundary and does provide an open character and makes an addition to the openness of the green belt in Knowle and makes a clear boundary from the village and the green belt. Just because a developer or land owner wants to sell it for development does NOT make it less valuable green belt for the community. This land should be protected not developed.
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9350
Received: 21/03/2019
Respondent: Halford Holdings
Agent: Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd
Whilst our Client supports the removal of the washed over Green Belt status of the
land east of Solihull both north and south of Hampton Lane, including all land in his
ownership, he firmly believes that the sites should be allocated for development and
removed from the Green Belt even if the settlement boundary is not adjusted
elsewhere. This is because the site meets all the national and local site selection
criteria, details of which are highlighted within this letter.
See Letter
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9367
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Summix (FHS) Developments Ltd
Agent: Framptons Planning
Concern over the way Fulford Hall Farm has been assessed within the site assessment report in relation to its contribution to the green belt and visual sensitivity. Significant errors in site assessment for Site 313. Step 1 should be priority 6 as accessibility high and moderately performing in Green Belt Assessment. Step 2 important judgements on green belt/landscape not based on robust evidence.
Assigning Broad Areas score of 3 for Purpose 3 in GBA is flawed/unsound and artificially inflates score. Evidence provided demonstrates site has limited impact on Purpose 3 and would not undermine remaining green belt.
Methodology to establish visual sensitivity in LCA muddled/poorly justified with no explanation how classification criteria assessed/judged. High classification based on ancient woodland not evident within site, whilst sub-urban influences in/around settlement ignored. Detailed robust evidence provided to show site well-contained, capable of accommodating development with limited visual impacts.
Please see attached representation
Support
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9401
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Mr M Trentham
YES The area which I refer to as the 'Oldway Drive Area' of concentrated residential development comprising Riverside Drive, Oldway Drive, Poolmeadow Close, Gentleshaw Lane, and Warwick Road. In all this contains just short of 200 dwellings, none of which is Affordable, and they do not contribute in any way to the openness of the Green Belt.
see letter of response re: Knowle sites
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9584
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Mr J Allen
Agent: Cerda Planning Ltd
Washed over status should be reviewed on land at the northern end of Knowle, Copt Heath much of which is comprehensively developed, has no open character and serves no logical purpose as Green Belt land. Specifically, the land to south of Grove Farm (Site 5) along with the houses which front Jacobean Lane and Warwick Road.
Generalised methodology of the Green Belt assessment means that all sites within a refined parcel are effectively 'tarred with the same brush.' Smaller parcels within them which may not possess the characteristics which are most prevalent within the wider parcel, are effectively scored incorrectly.
Cerda Planning has been instructed by Mr J. Allen of Grove Farm, Jacobean Lane, Knowle to prepare representations to the Draft Local Plan Supplementary Consultation, Reviewing the Plan for Solihull's Future dated January 2019.
These Representations relate to land at Grove Farm, Knowle. For ease of reference this site is known as 'No.5' in the Council's documentation
see attached letter
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9647
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.
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9935
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Generator (Balsall) & Minton
Agent: DS Planning
See responses to omission sites where Green Belt status should be removed
and sites removed from the Green Belt
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: 10062
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Mr T Khan
Agent: DS Planning
The land to the North of Jacobean Lane (including sites 68 and 324) should be removed from the Green Belt and the Green Belt boundary amended.
Properties on both sides of the Lane are distinctly similar and form part of the main fabric of Knowle. Properties to the north of Jacobean Lane are not isolated from the village or sporadic in nature. There is a distinct change of character between built development and open space/countryside which would be the more logical break between Green Belt and non-Green Belt and the edge of the village inset area.
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: 10104
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Minton (CdeB) Ltd
Agent: DS Planning
Green Belt status of Site 136 - Oak Farms, Catherin-de-Barnes should be removed and site removed from the Green Belt.
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: 10370
Received: 13/03/2019
Respondent: Mr Stephen Deehan
Site should be removed from the Green Belt.
see submission re: site 180 -Five Oaks School Road Hockley Heath
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 10556
Received: 14/03/2019
Respondent: The Home Builders Federation Midland Region
Any review of other areas of the Borough washed over by Green Belt should be undertaken in accordance with 2019 NPPF (para 139).
See Letter