Draft Local Plan Review

No

Representation ID: 2049

Received: 17/02/2017

Respondent: Hampton-in-Arden Society

Object to housing site 6 as together with Site 24 in the SLP2013 the target number for the combined site would increase housing stock by some 25% and be unsustainable with current facilities, fails to meet accessibility criteria in Plan, fails to acknowledge contribution of several housing developments in the Parish that have been agreed/completed to overall housing number, and fails to provide compensating open space to replace that proposed in the SLP2013. However, would have no objection to sympathetic development of combined site incorporating significant open space which retains and enhances footpath access to village.

No

Representation ID: 2050

Received: 17/02/2017

Respondent: Hampton-in-Arden Society

Object to inclusion of housing site 16 as contrary to SHLAA assessment (reference 247) undertaken in 2012 which concluded that site should not be considered for development unless there are no suitable alternatives, it adjoins a busy commuter road subject to significant delays, lacks local infrastructure in absence of shops, surgery or schools, would bring urban area to within one field or 400m of Catherine de Barnes, and would result in loss of agricultural land and playing fields.

No

Representation ID: 3244

Received: 17/02/2017

Respondent: Hampton-in-Arden Society

Challenges should acknowledge the poor public transport serving rural areas and the benefits of improved services, the impact of the major developments proposed on quality of life, recreational facilities, the rural setting or key gaps between settlements. Challenge H should include an objective for a ramp/lift at Hampton rail station, and Challenge L a requirement for porous driveways. There is no mention of the role or impact on education, or the importance of traffic calming for health and well being. There is little evidence of impact mitigation whilst the relocation of the Municipal WRC would be totally inappropriate.

No

Representation ID: 3245

Received: 17/02/2017

Respondent: Hampton-in-Arden Society

Paragraph 83 refers to local facilities and services readily accessible on foot and bicycle, though bus services in Hampton have been withdrawn and no safe cycle route exists beyond Catherine de Barnes. The claims about continuing to protect the green belt and environment is not based on fact. Welcome commitment to secure the reclamation of the former ammunition depot in Hampton.

No

Representation ID: 3246

Received: 17/02/2017

Respondent: Hampton-in-Arden Society

The inclusion of land east of Solihull in Growth Option G Large Scale Urban Extensions is misleading as this land is wholly green belt and part of the narrow gap to Catherine de Barnes, not an extension of the existing urban area. Some limited infilling in the vicinity of Catherine de Barnes may not be precluded but to include it in Growth Option G is inappropriate.

Yes

Representation ID: 3247

Received: 17/02/2017

Respondent: Hampton-in-Arden Society

Welcome the commitment in Policy 4 (B) for rural exception sites to focus on affordable housing for people with a local connection to the Parish.

No

Representation ID: 3249

Received: 17/02/2017

Respondent: Hampton-in-Arden Society

There is no policy or action that will address the inconsistencies between sites 6 and 16 and the criteria in policy P7 and supporting paragraph 249 relating to highway congestion.

Yes

Representation ID: 3250

Received: 17/02/2017

Respondent: Hampton-in-Arden Society

Support the principles and policies in Section 9 and urge the Council to ensure that the commitments and criteria enshrined in policies P11 and P12 are met, particularly when dealing with major developments such as HS2 and plans to relocate the Municipal Waste Recycling Centre. Support the criteria in policy P14 for electronic communications networks, but highlight the continuing lack of reliable broadband service in Hampton and its consequence on employment opportunity.

No

Representation ID: 3251

Received: 17/02/2017

Respondent: Hampton-in-Arden Society

Policy P17 provides guidance on small settlements inset from the green belt, but is misleading as it suggests that the whole of the built up area of the villages is inset when this is clearly not the case.

No

Representation ID: 3254

Received: 17/02/2017

Respondent: Hampton-in-Arden Society

Wish to see similar approach to that adopted for the Tame Valley for the enhancement of the River Blythe valley incorporating mitigation of the effects of HS2 and provision for a community and wildlife asset, which meets aspirations under policies P18 and P20.