Hampton-in-Arden
Object
Solihull Local Plan (Draft Submission) 2020
Representation ID: 13752
Received: 14/12/2020
Respondent: Heyford Developments Ltd
Agent: Barton Willmore
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
We have concerns with the application of the Site Assessment methodology in terms of its transparency and consistency.
The site assessment of Site 418 is based on an incorrect site area and should be updated. The latest Vision Document proposes a capacity for around 292 dwellings rather than 901 dwellings. The Site Assessment process has not considered the ability for the issues identified to be addressed via a lower site capacity.
There are inconsistencies between the different evidence base documents used to inform the Site Selection process for Site 418, in relation to proximity of listed buildings and accessibility.
It is not clear in the Site Assessments what factors have been given greater weight and whether the ability to mitigate adverse effects has been taken into account consistently.
There is no justification why Site 418 is not coming forward alongside HA1 and HA2, based upon the Site Assessment methodology. Mitigation measures are not applied consistently to all sites. Mitigation measures related to accessibility for HA1 have been proposed within the policy, however mitigation measures for defensible boundaries for Site 418 were not similarly considered.
The Site Selection process should be reviewed for consistency and transparency to provide a justified evidence base for the draft Plan.
The process should consistently consider the potential for mitigation measures in the assessment of sites.
Issues relating to Site 418 should be addressed, including the incorrect red line boundary area and assumptions around dwelling numbers.
Hello,
Please find attached forms and a letter of representations on behalf of Heyford Developments in relation to their site at Old Station Road, Hampton-in-Arden.
Regards,
Object
Solihull Local Plan (Draft Submission) 2020
Representation ID: 13767
Received: 11/12/2020
Respondent: Ms J Williamson
Agent: Felsham Planning & Development
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Yes
The Council must balance its legal requirement to maintain a five year housing land supply against the requirement of green belt policy to prevent inappropriate development.
The site ‘145 Old Station Road, Hampton-in-Arden’ should not be part of the green belt. Development at the site would not compromise any of the 5 purposes of the green belt set out in the NPPF.
The site’s self-containment, boundary characteristics and relationship to the village, means that the site can be developed as an exception to planning policy, particularly when the presumption in favour of sustainable development is triggered.
Development at the site can be realistically delivered within a 5 year timeframe, helping the Council with its housing land requirement. There are no constraints which would prevent or delay development coming forward. There would be social and community benefits associated with the proposed development.
The site ‘145 Old Station Road, Hampton-in-Arden’ should be allocated.
Dear Sir/Madam,
Please find the attached objection to the Submission Draft Solihull Local Plan (October 2020) on behalf of J Williamson for site – 145 Old Station Road, Hampton-in-Arden.
Please do not hesitate to contact Philip Neaves on 07446 897144 should you wish to discuss this further.
Yours Sincerely
Object
Solihull Local Plan (Draft Submission) 2020
Representation ID: 13826
Received: 14/12/2020
Respondent: William Davis Ltd
Agent: Define Planning & Design
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? No
The plan does not provide a Spatial Strategy to clearly specify how development is to be guided, resulting in an illogical approach.
Calculating the housing requirement of Neighbourhood Area wholly on the basis of capacity is not robust and fails to consider the distinction between the specific housing needs of the area, and the ability of the area to meet that need.
Site S01 comprises the bulk of provision in the Hampton in Arden Neighbourhood Area. The site has land assembly issues which could impact upon delivery. Housing in this location will meet the need arising from Solihull town rather than Hampton-in-Arden and Catherine-de-Barnes. Development should be focused on suitable sites within the settlement of Hampton-in-Arden.
The Spatial Strategy should be re-drafted. Hampton in Arden should be given a favourable position in the settlement hierarchy.
The housing requirement should reflect housing need in the Neighbourhood Area, rather than the capacity of the area.
Site SO1 should not be considered as playing a part in meeting the housing requirement in the Hampton in Arden Neighbourhood Area. Land off Old Station Road, Hampton in Arden should be allocated.
Dear Sir / Madam,
Please find attached representations submitted on behalf of William Davis Ltd (WDL) in relation to their site at Land off Old Station Road, Hampton in Arden in response to Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council’s Draft Submission Plan Consultation. This submission takes the form of the attached multiple submission response form (Document Ref. 'Solihull R19 Plan Representations - Define Planning and Design obo William Davis Ltd - Land off Old Station Road, Hampton in Arden (083 MR 141220)' that sets out WDL’s position in relation to the Draft Submission Plan and the policies set out within, as well as the associated Vision Document that is referred to within those representations (Document Ref. '083 Land off Station Road, Hampton in Arden Vision Document RS').
I would be most grateful if you could confirm safe receipt of this email and its attachments by return email.
Kind regards
Object
Solihull Local Plan (Draft Submission) 2020
Representation ID: 13827
Received: 14/12/2020
Respondent: William Davis Ltd
Agent: Define Planning & Design
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? No
The site assessment and selection methodology has been inconsistently applied in identifying allocation sites.
Significant weight has been attributed to two issues in relation to ‘Land off Old Station Road, Hampton in Arden’ (Site Ref. 6), which is unfounded as these can be effectively mitigated against.
There has been considerable inconsistency with the Council’s interpretation and application of the matter of ‘defensible Green Belt boundaries’ between sites, jeopardising otherwise favourable site assessments.
Dear Sir / Madam,
Please find attached representations submitted on behalf of William Davis Ltd (WDL) in relation to their site at Land off Old Station Road, Hampton in Arden in response to Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council’s Draft Submission Plan Consultation. This submission takes the form of the attached multiple submission response form (Document Ref. 'Solihull R19 Plan Representations - Define Planning and Design obo William Davis Ltd - Land off Old Station Road, Hampton in Arden (083 MR 141220)' that sets out WDL’s position in relation to the Draft Submission Plan and the policies set out within, as well as the associated Vision Document that is referred to within those representations (Document Ref. '083 Land off Station Road, Hampton in Arden Vision Document RS').
I would be most grateful if you could confirm safe receipt of this email and its attachments by return email.
Kind regards
Object
Solihull Local Plan (Draft Submission) 2020
Representation ID: 13908
Received: 14/12/2020
Respondent: Mrs M Joyce
Agent: Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Yes
The proposed inset Green Belt boundaries for Catherine-de-Barnes (Policies Map) fail to exclude 'land to north of Lugtrout Lane/northwest, Catherine-de-Barnes' from the Green Belt.
The significant need for housing and the housing land supply shortage satisfies the ‘exceptional circumstances’ test for removing land from the green belt (as detailed in the NPPF).
The Plan should make provision for ‘safeguarded’ land in order to meet longer-term development needs beyond the Plan period.
Dear Sir/Madam,
I submitted these representations yesterday and have just notice that my email gave the wrong client name and so to clarify this particular set of representations are submitted on behalf of our Client Mrs M Joyce (our Ref 10444) in respect of the Draft Submission Solihull Local Plan currently out to consultation.
We should be grateful if you would confirm receipt of these representations and confirm that they will be submitted for consideration by the Local Plan Examination Inspector.
We look forward to hearing from you.
Kind regards,
Glenda
Object
Solihull Local Plan (Draft Submission) 2020
Representation ID: 13909
Received: 14/12/2020
Respondent: Mrs M Joyce
Agent: Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Yes
'Land at Lugtrout Lane, Catherine-de-Barnes' represents a ‘gap’ on the north side of Lugtrout Lane between existing development to the west and east. It is in a sustainable location, within walking distance of the village centre and there is a regular bus service providing access to Solihull Town centre.
The site represents a logical, limited and proportionate area for removal from the Green Belt. The land performs very low in Green Belt terms and is considered unnecessary to keep permanently open, and has strong physical boundaries.
Dear Sir/Madam,
I submitted these representations yesterday and have just notice that my email gave the wrong client name and so to clarify this particular set of representations are submitted on behalf of our Client Mrs M Joyce (our Ref 10444) in respect of the Draft Submission Solihull Local Plan currently out to consultation.
We should be grateful if you would confirm receipt of these representations and confirm that they will be submitted for consideration by the Local Plan Examination Inspector.
We look forward to hearing from you.
Kind regards,
Glenda
Support
Solihull Local Plan (Draft Submission) 2020
Representation ID: 13910
Received: 14/12/2020
Respondent: Mrs M Joyce
Agent: Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd
Land (SHELAA site references 2, 21 and 96) forms a logical, limited and proportionate area for inclusion within the inset to Catherine- de-Barnes.
The site has a low Green Belt Assessment score (2016 Green Belt Assessment). The land is partly brownfield and makes a very limited contribution towards the purposes of including land within the Green Belt. Development would not lead to ‘coalescence’ and the site would have very clear physical and defensible boundaries. The site compares favourably than HA2 ‘Oak Farm, Catherine de Barnes’.
There are no physical or legal constraints restricting development. Many of the landowners have promoted land for development along Lugtrout Lane.
The Plan should make provision to safeguard land.
A new paragraph below paragraph 639 should be included:
‘In addition to the proposed site allocation HA2 ‘Oak Farm, Catherine-de-Barnes’ that would fall within the settlement boundary, if the Green Belt boundary is amended as proposed, there is also land to the northwest of Catherine-de-Barnes (as shown on Enclosure 2 Plan number 2009910(M)-103) that would be considered appropriate for development as it would then fall outside the Green Belt. This area has been promoted for development by landowners and if the Green Belt boundary is changed the area would no longer be subject to Green Belt policy. Following the proposed amendments as defined on the Policies Plan Map, proposals in this location will be considered appropriate for residential development subject to development proposals satisfying local and national planning policy requirements.’
Or:
‘In addition to the proposed site allocation HA2 ‘Oak Farm, Catherine-de-Barnes’ that would fall within the settlement boundary, if the Green Belt boundary is amended as proposed, there is also land to the northwest of Catherine-de-Barnes (as shown on Enclosure 2 Plan number 2009910(M)-103) identified as safeguarded land for future development.’
The Policies Plan Map should be amended to exclude the area of land adjacent to and northwest of the settlement of Catherine-de-Barnes from the Green Belt or it should be identified as safeguarded land as shown on plan number 2009910(M)-103; with an approximate SHELAA capacity of up to 64 dwellings.’
Dear Sir/Madam,
I submitted these representations yesterday and have just notice that my email gave the wrong client name and so to clarify this particular set of representations are submitted on behalf of our Client Mrs M Joyce (our Ref 10444) in respect of the Draft Submission Solihull Local Plan currently out to consultation.
We should be grateful if you would confirm receipt of these representations and confirm that they will be submitted for consideration by the Local Plan Examination Inspector.
We look forward to hearing from you.
Kind regards,
Glenda
Object
Solihull Local Plan (Draft Submission) 2020
Representation ID: 14419
Received: 14/12/2020
Respondent: L&Q Estates - Damson Parkway
Agent: Pegasus Group
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Omission Site 195/528 should be allocated for residential development of 9 hectares consisting of a range of dwelling types and sizes including Extra Care residential development and affordable housing, together with public open space and private land. Site is accessible, close to significant employment areas, available, suitable and achievable.
Dispute conclusions of Site Assessment. Green Belt is moderately performing and clear physical boundaries can be provided, with landscape and green infrastructure to provide further containment. Site would have low impact on criteria in SHELAA and Sustainability Appraisal.
As a minimum, site should be safeguarded for future needs, but given urgent unmet needs should be allocated now
Site 195/528 east of Damson Parkway should be allocated for housing
Land at Damson Parkway - see attachments for full details