Draft Local Plan Review

Search representations

Results for Kler Group - Gentleshaw Lane search

New search New search

No

Draft Local Plan Review

Alternative Site Suggested (Call for Sites)

Representation ID: 4843

Received: 17/02/2017

Respondent: Kler Group - Gentleshaw Lane

Agent: Cerda Planning Ltd

Representation Summary:

(SHELAA sites 104, 135, 241) - Limited constraints, bus stops located conveniently, railway station close by. Moderately performing Green Belt. There are more neutral and positive effects than negative and potential for the site to deliver additional housing.

Full text:

see attached documents

No

Draft Local Plan Review

Alternative Site Suggested (Call for Sites)

Representation ID: 4844

Received: 17/02/2017

Respondent: Kler Group - Gentleshaw Lane

Agent: Cerda Planning Ltd

Representation Summary:

SHELAA site 106 - the site can be developed for up to 55 new homes in a sustainable manner. The proposals will provide a strong defensible Green Belt barrier and would help to integrate the built form into the landscape and soften the transition from open countryside to built urban form that currently exists at the edge of the village. Development of this site would be less harmful to the Green Belt than the proposed allocation at P016, and is more responsive to its setting.

Full text:

see attached documents

No

Draft Local Plan Review

Alternative Site Suggested (Call for Sites)

Representation ID: 4845

Received: 17/02/2017

Respondent: Kler Group - Gentleshaw Lane

Agent: Cerda Planning Ltd

Representation Summary:

SHELAA site 107 - Disagree with the SA assessment of the site. It is located in an excellent position, close to the edge of Solihull town centre, and junction 5 of the M42, and within walking distance of many bus stops serving various routes. It relates much more closely to the adjoining built development than to the open countryside. Impacts on the Green Belt would be minimal; M42 and A41 already serve as an effective, physical barrier to the extension of the Green Belt. Its development would greatly assist the Council to meet the needs of housing within the HMA.

Full text:

see attached documents

Yes

Draft Local Plan Review

Q16. Do you believe we have identified the infrastructure[35] required to support these developments? If not why not? Are there any additional facilities you believe are required, if so what are the

Representation ID: 4846

Received: 17/02/2017

Respondent: Kler Group - Gentleshaw Lane

Agent: Cerda Planning Ltd

Representation Summary:

Believe that the infrastructure identified to support the proposed allocations are correct- funding from CIL or S106 contributions will assist the council in providing the right infrastructure to meet the needs resulting from new development.

Full text:

see attached documents

Yes

Draft Local Plan Review

Q18. Do you agree with the policies for improving accessibility and encouraging sustainable travel? If not why not, and what alternatives would you suggest?

Representation ID: 4847

Received: 17/02/2017

Respondent: Kler Group - Gentleshaw Lane

Agent: Cerda Planning Ltd

Representation Summary:

The policies will enable the steering of new developments to most appropriate, accessible locations to reduce the reliance on the private car and to encourage the take up of new sustainable modes of travel thereby not materially adding to the existing highway congestion. It agrees with the Council that the Policies can influence road safety through its control or influence on the design of new development and manage the demand for travel.

Full text:

see attached documents

Yes

Draft Local Plan Review

Q19. Do you agree with the policies for protecting the environment? If not why not, and what alternatives would you suggest?

Representation ID: 4848

Received: 17/02/2017

Respondent: Kler Group - Gentleshaw Lane

Agent: Cerda Planning Ltd

Representation Summary:

The policies are consistent with advice within the National Planning Framework and subject to the measures required by each of the proposed policies not having an adverse impact on viability, the policies would appear to be acceptable.

Full text:

see attached documents

Yes

Draft Local Plan Review

Q20. Do you agree with the policies for quality of place? If not why not, and what alternatives would you suggest?

Representation ID: 4849

Received: 17/02/2017

Respondent: Kler Group - Gentleshaw Lane

Agent: Cerda Planning Ltd

Representation Summary:

The policies are consistent with the NPPF.

Full text:

see attached documents

Yes

Draft Local Plan Review

Q21. Do you agree with the policies health and supporting communities? If not why not, and what alternatives would you suggest?

Representation ID: 4850

Received: 17/02/2017

Respondent: Kler Group - Gentleshaw Lane

Agent: Cerda Planning Ltd

Representation Summary:

Generally support the policies as they are consistent with the NPPF.

Full text:

see attached documents

For instructions on how to use the system and make comments, please see our help guide.