Draft Local Plan Review

No

Representation ID: 4832

Received: 17/02/2017

Respondent: Kler Group - Gentleshaw Lane

Agent: Cerda Planning Ltd

The proposed 50% requirement is excessive and could undermine the viability of sites, which in turn will deter private residential development, risking the provision of any housing of any kind, let alone affordable. It is welcomed that the council repeat their "flexible approach" to the implementation of this policy and their commitment to considering the suitability of sites and the amount of affordable housing through negotiation and on a site by site basis. Reserve the right to comment further following publication of the viability report but would like to record initial concerns with this 50% target.

No

Representation ID: 4833

Received: 17/02/2017

Respondent: Kler Group - Gentleshaw Lane

Agent: Cerda Planning Ltd

No formal agreement of how the unmet needs of Birmingham will be dealt with. Discussions with Birmingham policy officers have indicated that the direction of travel indicated by the Solihull Draft Plan and supporting documents, to provide land to accommodate 2000 homes is INCORRECT. Informally we have been advised that this number is considerably higher, and the council should be planning for a minimum of 6000 new dwellings.

Yes

Representation ID: 4834

Received: 17/02/2017

Respondent: Kler Group - Gentleshaw Lane

Agent: Cerda Planning Ltd

Generally agree, although some comments on individual allocations. Agree with SA methodology which explains how the distribution strategy has been formulated. Gravely concerned that the additional provision for the HMA shortfall is only 2000. No acceptable explanation has been offered as to why option C - provision of local need plus 4000 wider HMA option was discounted. Unconvinced that 4000 is high enough to adequately address the high unmet need from the wider HMA.
Whilst the methodology for the SA appears to be reasonable, the scoring system is complicated and it is considered that some non-allocated sites score better.

Yes

Representation ID: 4835

Received: 17/02/2017

Respondent: Kler Group - Gentleshaw Lane

Agent: Cerda Planning Ltd

Support the site allocation. It is a lower performing area of Green Belt.

No

Representation ID: 4836

Received: 17/02/2017

Respondent: Kler Group - Gentleshaw Lane

Agent: Cerda Planning Ltd

Concern about the impact on the function of Green Belt. There would coalescence between Dickens Heath, Whitlock End and Majors Green. It is also within a landscape character area of high sensitivity.

No

Representation ID: 4837

Received: 17/02/2017

Respondent: Kler Group - Gentleshaw Lane

Agent: Cerda Planning Ltd

Whilst in a sustainable location there will be impact on Green Belt and coalescence between Shirley and Dickens Heath.

No

Representation ID: 4838

Received: 17/02/2017

Respondent: Kler Group - Gentleshaw Lane

Agent: Cerda Planning Ltd

Whilst in a sustainable location there will be impact on Green Belt and coalescence between Shirley and Dickens Heath.

No

Representation ID: 4839

Received: 17/02/2017

Respondent: Kler Group - Gentleshaw Lane

Agent: Cerda Planning Ltd

Site allocation requires further clarification and explanation. Do not understand how it is possible to accommodate up to 100 dwellings on the site proposed. Would result in loss of green space.

No

Representation ID: 4841

Received: 17/02/2017

Respondent: Kler Group - Gentleshaw Lane

Agent: Cerda Planning Ltd

Not a logical site to redevelop as it is physically separated from the edge of Meriden. Narrow site frontage would make it difficult for development to have any street presence or positive contribution to the street scene.

No

Representation ID: 4842

Received: 17/02/2017

Respondent: Kler Group - Gentleshaw Lane

Agent: Cerda Planning Ltd

Main concern relating to this site relates to coalescence between Solihull and Catherine-de-Barnes.