Draft Local Plan Review

No

Representation ID: 2119

Received: 17/02/2017

Respondent: Belle Homes Ltd

Agent: Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd

SHELAA site 1004.
The site meets the Council's objectives. Contribute less to purposes of Green Belt than all of the proposed allocations that are in the Green Belt.
More accessible, less impact on landscape character and would not impact on community facilities.
Could contribute to a dispersed pattern of growth, be delivered quickly and does not involve the loss of existing community facilities.
Include land south of Hampton Lane in addition to Allocation 16. This would provide a realistic alternative to the potential under-delivery of existing Solihull sites.

No

Representation ID: 2816

Received: 17/02/2017

Respondent: Belle Homes Ltd

Agent: Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd

Proportionate evidence not provided in support of the proposed allocations or rejection of other sites.
Evidence base is open to challenge, due to omission of sites within reports and mistakes in site assessments. Some crucial evidence base documents are still outstanding.
Object to the misleading assessment of their submitted site in the SHELAA, the omission of the site from the pro-forma in appendix C of the interim Sustainability Assessment.
There is no overarching commentary for each site.
All relevant information has not been considered. Decisions have been made which may subsequently be flawed.

No

Representation ID: 2817

Received: 17/02/2017

Respondent: Belle Homes Ltd

Agent: Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd

Policy P7 is too prescriptive and simplistic.
It has restricted wording which prevents a more flexible interpretation of sustainable development to include social and economic considerations.
Should be an 'unless justified by local circumstances' clause like previous Policy P7.

No

Representation ID: 2818

Received: 17/02/2017

Respondent: Belle Homes Ltd

Agent: Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd

Outdoor sport and recreation in the Green Belt cannot constitute very special circumstances if they are lost unnecessarily due to development being directed to their existing locations in the Green Belt.
Policy P17 incorrectly does not qualify when changes of use to accommodate outdoor sport and recreation uses could be regarded as 'very special circumstances', contrary to the spirit of NPPF paragraphs 87 to 89.
Changes of use to accommodate outdoor sport and recreation uses should be removed from the list of very special circumstances or the policy amended similar to that for the expansion of existing businesses.

No

Representation ID: 2890

Received: 17/02/2017

Respondent: Belle Homes Ltd

Agent: Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd

Site boundary of SHELAA site 1004 extended to included land at 601 Tanworth Lane.

No

Representation ID: 2894

Received: 17/02/2017

Respondent: Belle Homes Ltd

Agent: Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd

There are insufficient numbers with no agreement of numbers to meet HMA shortfall.
Question whether other local planning authorities in the HMA will agree to this considering their own capacity to accommodate further housing.
The Draft LPR needs to provide for greater clarity in the event that there is a need to accommodate more housing to make up for the HMA shortfall.
Need more housing allocations removed from Green Belt or boundaries amended to provide for safeguarded sites in the event that the allocations do not deliver as anticipated and to meet requirements beyond the plan period.

No

Representation ID: 2895

Received: 17/02/2017

Respondent: Belle Homes Ltd

Agent: Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd

There are too many large sites, concentrated in too few areas. This will disproportionately affect existing services and facilities and contradicts the Councils' guiding principle of 'designing and integrating new developments into existing communities'. A mix of different sized sites dispersed more evenly would be more in line with national economic, social and environmental sustainable development objectives.
Housing estimates appear over optimistic in some cases and viability is questionable, particularly for Solihull Town Centre.
Illogical that there are no sites in Dorridge having regard to facilities and transport connections.

No

Representation ID: 2914

Received: 17/02/2017

Respondent: Belle Homes Ltd

Agent: Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd

The proposed scale of development on sites 4, 11, 12 and 13
represents an over-concentration of growth in a small area which will cause the
coalescence of settlements and have a significant and potentially unacceptable
adverse impact on the existing communities and infrastructure as well as the
Green Belt and landscape.

No

Representation ID: 2915

Received: 17/02/2017

Respondent: Belle Homes Ltd

Agent: Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd

The proposed scale of development on sites 4, 11, 12 and 13
represents an over-concentration of growth in a small area which will cause the
coalescence of settlements and have a significant and potentially unacceptable
adverse impact on the existing communities and infrastructure as well as the
Green Belt and landscape.
No evidence for accepting loss of employment on this site. Capacity is over ambitious.
The scale of the proposed mixed use and housing development of this site is questionable. There is consequently a need to identify alternative sites to accommodate the potential shortfall arising from proposed Allocation 11.

No

Representation ID: 2919

Received: 17/02/2017

Respondent: Belle Homes Ltd

Agent: Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd

There is no defensible Green Belt Boundary. It represents a significant extension to Shirley's urban area reducing the green belt gap between the settlements of Shirley, Cheswick Green, Dickens Heath, Majors Green and Whitlock's End.
The proposed scale of development on sites 4, 11, 12 and 13
represents an over-concentration of growth in a small area which will cause the
coalescence of settlements and have a significant and potentially unacceptable
adverse impact on the existing communities and infrastructure as well as the
Green Belt and landscape.