Question 37 - Compensatory Provision for removal of land from Green Belt.
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8380
Received: 14/03/2019
Respondent: Joanna Johnson
We need compensation to protect Site 13 as a nature reserve
We need compensation to protect Site 13 as a nature reserve
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8388
Received: 14/03/2019
Respondent: Mr Darren Douglas
We do not see how the land at Widney Manor Road could provide any compensation provision, given its shape and size.
As openness is the most important attribute of the Green Belt, the loss of openness in this case would result in serious harm and would conflict with Policy C2 of the Solihull Unitary Development Plan (UDP) 2006, which deals with control of development in the Green Belt'.
Please see attached letter
Support
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8478
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Mrs Lyn Holtham
Why not start from a position where any current Green Belt site over say 2ha. being proposed for development or concept masterplanning should allocate 50% to be retained as open landscape and other acceptable Green Belt functions.
For instance on Site 9 the Masterplan shows an LWS which is only presently restricted to land with serious development constraints but this could be easily added to by the addition of further permanently accessible 'common' type use to retain amenity and encourage public use.
Why not start from a position where any current Green Belt site over say 2ha. being proposed for development or concept masterplanning should allocate 50% to be retained as open landscape and other acceptable Green Belt functions.
For instance on Site 9 the Masterplan shows an LWS which is only presently restricted to land with serious development constraints but this could be easily added to by the addition of further permanently accessible 'common' type use to retain amenity and encourage public use.
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8500
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Simon Taylor
As noted above, I do not believe certain area of land should be removed from Green Belt, but if they are then surrounding areas MUST be enhanced in terms of Green Belt status or to become Conservation Areas, so as to preserve the intrinsic character of settlements as per the Local Plan. Put simply, no further removal of Green Belt status should be allowed in the Blythe Area, to include all amber and red sites, as urban sprawl is a severe concern in this area (as highlighted by the allocation of sites map)
As noted above, I do not believe certain area of land should be removed from Green Belt, but if they are then surrounding areas MUST be enhanced in terms of Green Belt status or to become Conservation Areas, so as to preserve the intrinsic character of settlements as per the Local Plan. Put simply, no further removal of Green Belt status should be allowed in the Blythe Area, to include all amber and red sites, as urban sprawl is a severe concern in this area (as highlighted by the allocation of sites map)
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8538
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Joelle Hill
I would like to see the area formerly known as Allocation 13 become ring-fenced and protected from any future development. This site already has the potential to be enhanced from an ecological and bio-diversity perspective and could be viewed as an offset for other areas of lower value green belt that might be given up for development in the Blythe area.
I would like to see the area formerly known as Allocation 13 become ring-fenced and protected from any future development. This site already has the potential to be enhanced from an ecological and bio-diversity perspective and could be viewed as an offset for other areas of lower value green belt that might be given up for development in the Blythe area.
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8582
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Mr Robin Easterby
Please see attached letter
(Letter not attached on JDi. Email sent 09.05.19 to respondent, Robin Easterby via PSP email address. Email reply on 09.05.19 stating that he was unable to resend letter but..."I suspect you may already have seen similar contents from other objecting residents on Widney Manor Road as it was a standard letter recommended by the Widney Manor Action Group. Basically I object to the proposed development as it would fundamentally change the nature of the area, is green belt, and is an example of garden grabbing at its worst. The traffic along Widney Manor Road has dramatically increased since I moved into 136 and the proposal will only make matters worse.")
Please see attached letter
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8608
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Bill Young
The development of site 3 would create the narrowest green belt gap. The Meriden gap should be protected as pledged by the Major and the Leader of the Council
see attached letter
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8720
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Cov, Warks, Solihull Local Access Forum
Loss of well used footpath network around Barratt's Farm giving easy access to the countryside from Balsall Common East away from busy roads eg Truggist Lane, Waste Lane, Lavender Hall Lane
Is concerned about the loss of easy access to the countryside provided by the network of footpaths on Barratt's Farm. These footpaths form one of the most used footpath networks in the Borough forming a circular walk of between 2 and 4 miles which is ideal for walking, running and amenity enjoyment of the countryside.
The footpaths are easily accessed from Balsall Common East of A452 and are popular with large numbers of regular walkers who have easy access via the paths from quiet residential roads with little traffic.
I hope that this ease of access to the countryside for residents of all ages will remain and not be complicated or made impossible by having to walk on main roads without pavements such as Truggist Lane ( with its dangerous commercial HGV traffic), Waste Lane and Lavender Hall Lane which are both blighted by fast and, therefore, dangerous traffic.
Submitted on behalf of Michael Orlik, Chair - Cov, Warks & Solihull Local Access Forum:
I am concerned about the loss of easy access to the countryside provided by the network of footpaths on Barratt's Farm. These footpaths form one of the most used footpath networks in the Borough forming a circular walk of between 2 and 4 miles which is ideal for walking, running and amenity enjoyment of the countryside.
* The footpaths are easily accessed from Balsall Common East of A452 and are popular with large numbers of regular walkers who have easy access via the paths from quiet residential roads with little traffic.
* I hope that this ease of access to the countryside for residents of all ages will remain and not be complicated or made impossible by having to walk on main roads without pavements such as Truggist Lane ( with its dangerous commercial HGV traffic), Waste Lane and Lavender Hall Lane which are both blighted by fast and, therefore, dangerous traffic.
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8765
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Rainier Developments Ltd - Land at Fulford Hall Road
Agent: Barton Willmore Planning
Have set out how proposals at site - Land at Fulford Hall can respond to paragraph 138 of the NPPF:
Improvements to Environmental Quality
* Enhancement and strengthening of Green Infrastructure and wildlife corridors, e.g.
hedgerows.
* Net gain of trees, including planting new woodland to the north east of the site.
* Management of ancient woodland.
* Provision of public open space.
Improvements to accessibility of the Green Belt
* Improved access between Tidbury Green and the surrounding area to the east, including new footpath along Rumbush Lane.
Reduction in walking time between village and the Cricket Club (i.e. through the site and along Rumbush Lane); and between the houses to the south east of Tidbury Green and
the school and other facilities in the village.
* Provision of open space comprising either informal play or playing field or natural area of play with potential to foster outdoor learning.
* The potential to provide a further playing field adjacent to Dickens Heath Sports Club, if required.
Please see covering letter
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8788
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Rainier Developments Ltd - Land at Widney Manor Road
Agent: Barton Willmore Planning
The proposals will provide a direct link into the public right of way to the south.
Please see covering letter
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8805
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Rainier Developments Ltd - Land North of School Road
Agent: Barton Willmore Planning
The proposals (for site reference 416) will provide opportunity to link into the wider movement network and nearby public rights of way to encourage accessibility beyond the village into the surrounding countryside
Please see covering letter
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8826
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Rainier Developments Ltd - Land West of Stratford Road
Agent: Barton Willmore Planning
The proposals will provide opportunity to link into the wider movement network and nearby public rights of way to encourage accessibility beyond the village into the surrounding countryside.
As mentioned, we consider SHELAA Site 417 suitable for the provision of sports pitches. Provision of playing pitches to the north or west of the site would assist in the transition between the development and the countryside and would maximise the gap between the village and Blythe Valley and Cheswick Green.
Please see covering letter
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8844
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Rainier Developments Ltd - Land Fronting Waste Lane
Agent: Barton Willmore Planning
The allocation (site allocation 21) has the potential to reinforce the urban edge as set out in the Solihull Borough Local Character Guide and to enhance Green Infrastructure and habitat corridors where possible. There are also opportunities to link into the existing public right of way to the north.
Please see covering letter
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8864
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Rainier Developments Ltd - Land South of Park Lane
Agent: Barton Willmore Planning
Any proposals for our Client's site (Land South of Park Lane) will comprise a landscape-led masterplan and will enhance Green Infrastructure and linkages to the wider countryside.
Please see covering letter
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8900
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Mr Eric Homer
I applaud the removal of site 13 from the plan and this area should now be made into a formal public open space or even designated as a nature reserve due to it being an area of biodiversity and habitat of value, an important area for local wildlife in Shirley.
The development of sites 4, 11, 12 & 26 is contrary to the fundamental aim of Green Belt policy.
Sites 11 & 12 are the least controversial sites. If this land is removed from the green belt then compensatory provision should be made by protecting sites 13 and 26.
Q 37 - Compensatory Provision for removal of land from Green Belt.
I applaud the removal of site 13 from the plan and this area should now be at least made into a formal public open space or even designated as a nature reserve due to it being an area of biodiversity and habitat of value, an important area for local wildlife in Shirley. We have lost too many of these areas already.
However, the fundamental aim of Green Belt policy is to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open; the essential characteristics of Green Belts are their openness and their permanence. Green Belt serves five purposes:
a) to check the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas;
b) to prevent neighbouring towns merging into one another;
c) to assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment;
d) to preserve the setting and special character of historic towns;
e) to assist in urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land.
The development of sites 4, 11, 12 & 26 is contrary to the fundamental aim of Green Belt policy and is counter intuitive.
Of all the sites in and around Shirley sites 11 & 12 are the ones that I consider to be the least controversial. However, if this land is removed from the green belt then compensatory provision should be made by protecting sites 13 and 26.
Site 13 should be designated as formal public open space or as a nature reserve due to its significant amount of wildlife in the area and its biodiversity. The site has a number of eco systems that range from grass land to marsh and heath land, evergreen forest and mature deciduous trees and hedgerows. There is a network of drainage ditches and well-established farm ponds and also a sink area which is effectively bog land. This is very well utilized by the community and it is land that helps to foster a community, by being land that they are able to meet one another whilst walking over. It also plays a significant role in both the health and wellbeing of a great number of residents in the area.
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8908
Received: 14/03/2019
Respondent: Kler Group - Gentleshaw Lane
Agent: Cerda Planning Ltd
- Compensatory measures should be framed around the provisions of paragraph 141 of the National Planning Policy Framework.
- Sites being removed from the Green Belt should incorporate compensatory provision as part of the master planning approach.(ie. Site 9 - Arden Triangle).
- Public open space should be provided on site which meets the requirements not only for outdoor sport and recreation but also proves access to the area.
- Opportunities should be taken to enhance landscapes through for example retaining existing trees and hedgerows with measures to ensure long term stewardship though management companies or similar.
- Biodiversity enhancements should be made wherever possible. (Additional native planting or enhancements within the existing built up area ie. bird and bat boxes).
- Where land is damaged and/or derelict - bringing this back into beneficial use.
see attached document
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8935
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Mrs Linda Homer
I applaud the removal of site 13 from the plan and this area should now be made into a formal public open space or even designated as a nature reserve due to it being an area of biodiversity and habitat of value, an important area for local wildlife in Shirley.
The development of sites 4, 11, 12 & 26 is contrary to the fundamental aim of Green Belt policy.
Sites 11 & 12 are the least controversial sites. If this land is removed from the green belt then compensatory provision should be made by protecting sites 13 and 26.
Q 37 - Compensatory Provision for removal of land from Green Belt.
I applaud the removal of site 13 from the plan and this area should now be at least made into a formal public open space or even designated as a nature reserve due to it being an area of biodiversity and habitat of value, an important area for local wildlife in Shirley. We have lost too many of these areas already.
However, the fundamental aim of Green Belt policy is to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open; the essential characteristics of Green Belts are their openness and their permanence. Green Belt serves five purposes:
a) to check the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas;
b) to prevent neighbouring towns merging into one another;
c) to assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment;
d) to preserve the setting and special character of historic towns;
e) to assist in urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land.
The development of sites 4, 11, 12 & 26 is contrary to the fundamental aim of Green Belt policy and is counter intuitive.
Of all the sites in and around Shirley sites 11 & 12 are the ones that I consider to be the least controversial. However, if this land is removed from the green belt then compensatory provision should be made by protecting sites 13 and 26.
Site 13 should be designated as formal public open space or as a nature reserve due to its significant amount of wildlife in the area and its biodiversity. The site has a number of eco systems that range from grass land to marsh and heath land, evergreen forest and mature deciduous trees and hedgerows. There is a network of drainage ditches and well-established farm ponds and also a sink area which is effectively bog land. This is very well utilized by the community and it is land that helps to foster a community, by being land that they are able to meet one another whilst walking over. It also plays a significant role in both the health and wellbeing of a great number of residents in the area.
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8961
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Mr Stephen Harvell
We need compensation to protect site 13 as a nature reserve.
We need compensation to protect site 13 as a nature reserve.
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8969
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Paul & Anne Wilson Ramsay
Recommendation: where a specific site is adjacent to a site of Special Scientific interest a Section 106 agreement should be negotiated with the developer to improve access to SSSI e.g Grand Union Canal from Catherine de Barnes to Damson Parkway adjacent to Site 16 East of Solihull.
The same recommendation could apply to the protection of Heritage Sites and their setting e.g. Grimshaw Hall (Site 8 Hampton Lane, Knowle) and Field Farm and 237 Lugtrout Lane (Site 16 East of Solihull). Views of heritage assets and SSSI's from surrounding land should be taken into account.
Recommendation: where a specific site is adjacent to a site of Special Scientific interest a Section 106 agreement should be negotiated with the developer to improve access to SSSI e.g Grand Union Canal from Catherine de Barnes to Damson Parkway adjacent to Site 16 East of Solihull.
The same recommendation could apply to the protection of Heritage Sites and their setting e.g. Grimshaw Hall (Site 8 Hampton Lane, Knowle) and Field Farm and 237 Lugtrout Lane (Site 16 East of Solihull). Views of heritage assets and SSSI's from surrounding land should be taken into account.
Support
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9001
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Councillor Max McLoughlin
Improved access and protection for high usage areas of Green Belt.
Country park at former Site 13, with separate consultation and bidding process with prioritisation for offsite mitigations. Essential that significant compensation is directed to Shirley and Blythe as have been hit particularly hard by the Local Plan.
Improved access and protection for high usage areas of Green Belt.
An example being Country Park status for what was formerly Site 13. It will be necessary to run a separate consultation on specifically this aspect. There would most likely need to be a bid process, with prioritisation and costings for each program considered viable by the council.
Shirley and Blythe have been hit particularly hard by the Local Plan. They are also not receiving many of the infrastructural benefits associated with HS2, that more accessible locations will enjoy. As such it is essential that significant compensation is directed in this area of the Borough.
Support
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9047
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Jennifer Archer
I would welcome Site 13 to be included as a compensatory provision, and for the area to be protected in perpetuity. Site 13 could be established as a nature reserve. It has been enjoyed by local residents without restriction for in excess of 40 years. This freedom of access should be maintained and enhanced for future generations.
I would welcome Site 13 to be included as a compensatory provision, and for the area to be protected in perpetuity. Site 13 could be established as a nature reserve. It has been enjoyed by local residents without restriction for in excess of 40 years. This freedom of access should be maintained and enhanced for future generations.
Support
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9071
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Mrs Carla Meyer Davies
As a supporter of the removal of Site 13 from the draft plan, we as residents would like reassurance that this land stays out of danger. We as a community would like to see this site be protected as a nature reserve so that it can continue to be enjoyed by the community without the threat of the bulldozers moving in.
As a supporter of the removal of Site 13 from the draft plan, we as residents would like reassurance that this land stays out of danger. We as a community would like to see this site be protected as a nature reserve so that it can continue to be enjoyed by the community without the threat of the bulldozers moving in.
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9077
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Mr John Gibbs
Green belt areas were designated in order to prevent development on protected areas of open countryside, which are vital for the quality of our living environment. If development of green belt areas ride roughshod over this protection, then any compensation should be to grant even greater protection for remaining green spaces. An example of this could be to designate the previous proposed Site 13 as a nature reserve.
Green belt areas were designated in order to prevent development on protected areas of open countryside, which are vital for the quality of our living environment. If development of green belt areas ride roughshod over this protection, then any compensation should be to grant even greater protection for remaining green spaces. An example of this could be to designate the previous proposed Site 13 as a nature reserve.
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9142
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Gemma Welch
We need compensation to protect area that was known as Site 13 as a nature reserve and for use by the community.
WE NEED COMPENSATION TO PROTECT SITE 13 AS A NATURE RESERVE AND FOR USE BY THE COMMUNITY
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9277
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: IM Land
Agent: Barton Willmore Planning
Red site: 5 land at Grove House, Jacobean Lane
The concept masterplans (Appendix 3) for the Site show compensatory planting to enhance the canal as well as area large areas of Public Open Space.
See Letters
Support
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9353
Received: 21/03/2019
Respondent: Halford Holdings
Agent: Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd
SMBC has demonstrated exceptional circumstances exist for some land to be
released from the Green Belt to accommodate the Borough's own needs and a
contribution to the unmet needs arising from the wider HMA as it is clear that the
need cannot be accommodated simply by increasing densities and directing
development towards non-Green Belt land.
See Letter
Support
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9371
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Mr. James McBride
Agent: Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd
Supports the decision to review Green Belt boundaries to accommodate the
identified growth.
See letters 1-4
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9410
Received: 14/03/2019
Respondent: Mr K Millican
The development of site 3 would create the narrowest gap yet.
See Letter
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9418
Received: 14/03/2019
Respondent: Mrs J A Howles
The development of site 3 would create the narrowest gap yet.
See Letter
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9426
Received: 14/03/2019
Respondent: Mr S C Howles
The development of site 3 would create the narrowest gap yet.
See Letter