Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation

Search Representations

Results for Richard Cobb Planning search

New search New search

Comment

Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation

Local Housing Need

Representation ID: 9551

Received: 15/03/2019

Respondent: Richard Cobb Planning

Representation Summary:

The methodology imposed at national level and using the 2014 based figures probably produces a higher figure than the latest projections (2016) indicate are necessary. The Council are yet to reach agreement with adjoining Councils in terms its contribution to the HMA shortfall, and unless the Council make additional provision in their Local Plan it is likely that the Council will not be able to fulfil its duty to cooperate. More housing land may need to be allocated in the green belt. The proposed rate of delivery is far above the highest that has been achieved in Borough and unlikely this can be sustained. The 2016 based projection from GL Hearn is more realistic. It is likely that some of the sites will not be capable of delivery because of ownership and infrastructure issues. The Council hasn't allocated smaller sites and is relying on a handful of larger sites which are unlikely to deliver the housing numbers. Failed to consider wider components of growth, omitting areas of employment such as in Balsall Common, Knowle and Dickens Heath. No provision is made to encourage employment sustainability.

Full text:

Please find attached a response to various aspects of the supplementary consultation

Attachments:

Object

Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation

Site Selection Methodology

Representation ID: 9552

Received: 15/03/2019

Respondent: Richard Cobb Planning

Representation Summary:

There are significant inconsistencies in the application of the methodology which undermine the integrity of the whole site selection process. The Council should consider reviewing the SA in line with criteria set out in the Governments sustainability scorecard. For example using this to analyse site 4, the site only scored 30% sustainability putting it in a red rather than green category. It is difficult to see how some of the sites fall into the green category when they clearly have high impact. The SA excludes some smaller sites. There are missed opportunities for some red and amber sites to come forward in lesser performing green belt locations. Provision should be made for employment for existing and proposed residents in Dickens Heath, Balsall Common and Knowle.

Full text:

Please find attached a response to various aspects of the supplementary consultation

Attachments:

Comment

Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation

Question 3 - Infrastructure Requirements at Balsall Common

Representation ID: 9553

Received: 15/03/2019

Respondent: Richard Cobb Planning

Representation Summary:

Before proceeding to allocate housing sites the LPA should look more widely at the individual settlement, how it functions and what problems currently exist. It is important to appreciate the extent of construction work taking place with HS2 as well as proposed by pass and A46 /A452 link road. Local Plan ignores sites on the western side of the village such as Grange Farm and smaller sites between A452 and Balsall Street East which could provide a southern / western link road. There would be pressure on the two primary schools. There is no additional provision for employment land and therefore no work opportunities in the community. Business development could be allocated along the side of HS2 and By Pass as well as sites outside the village such as New Mercote Farm. Provision should be made on one of the larger sites for a large food based store together with other shops, facilities and parking.

Full text:

Please find attached a response to various aspects of the supplementary consultation

Attachments:

Object

Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation

Question 4 - Site 1 - Barratts Farm

Representation ID: 9554

Received: 15/03/2019

Respondent: Richard Cobb Planning

Representation Summary:

No,this site is adjacent to both HS2 and the new by pass and both of those should be developed first before any new housing is allocated for the site.

Full text:

Please find attached a response to various aspects of the supplementary consultation

Attachments:

Object

Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation

Question 6 - Site 3 - Windmill Lane

Representation ID: 9555

Received: 15/03/2019

Respondent: Richard Cobb Planning

Representation Summary:

No. The proposal is a poor strategic decision, it being too far from the centre. There is significant ecological impact the development of this site. The Green Infrastructure map Habitat Distinctiveness 2016 shows that this is an area of High Habitat distinctiveness. These have not been referenced to the masterplans particularly with regard to the 30m buffer around woodland. Solihull's solution seems to be around off setting rather than preserving habitats. There are other smaller sites that have a higher sustainability scoring and a lesser ecological value than Site 3.

Full text:

Please find attached a response to various aspects of the supplementary consultation

Attachments:

Support

Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation

Question 8 - Site 22 - Travellion Stud

Representation ID: 9556

Received: 15/03/2019

Respondent: Richard Cobb Planning

Representation Summary:

The property called Stoneycroft has been submitted as additional housing land within the A452/Wootton Green Lane quadrant so the overall release of Trevallion Stud appears acceptable but even more so if land to the south at Grange Farm as well as north of Dengate Drive were also to be released as a large allocation west of Balsall Common. This would allow for proper provision for a large primary school and better centre for a large food store with parking and perhaps a western bypass or link road to pick up traffic.

Full text:

Please find attached a response to various aspects of the supplementary consultation

Attachments:

Object

Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation

Question 9 - Site 23 - Lavender Hall Farm

Representation ID: 9557

Received: 15/03/2019

Respondent: Richard Cobb Planning

Representation Summary:

No - This site should be allocated for business use not residential. It is close to the centre but sandwiched between two train lines with HS2 to the north and In either case the narrow railway bridge which would need to be improved.

Full text:

Please find attached a response to various aspects of the supplementary consultation

Attachments:

Object

Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation

Question 12 - Site 4 - Land West of Dickens Heath

Representation ID: 9558

Received: 15/03/2019

Respondent: Richard Cobb Planning

Representation Summary:

No, Dickens Heath has experienced considerable development until recently and cannot take much more development. More development is happening at Tidbury Green following recent Appeals. Just because there is a nearby railway station is not enough to justify further major development of Dickens Heath. Every other planning factor points to the unsuitability of Site 4 for development. The cumulative adverse effect of the range of evidence set out above make Site 4 contrary to a range of local and national planning policies. This Site should be demoted to a "red" site.

Full text:

Please find attached a response to various aspects of the supplementary consultation

Attachments:

Comment

Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation

Question 18 - Site 24 - Oak Farm

Representation ID: 9559

Received: 15/03/2019

Respondent: Richard Cobb Planning

Representation Summary:

No problem with redevelopment of the brownfield part of the Farm being allocated for residential subject to careful treatment of the frontage to the canal. But it would be disastrous for the remainder of the site being developed so urbanising the entrance to Catherine de Barnes from the East. The protection of that green edge to the village is critical for the protection of the rest of the Green Belt.

Full text:

Please find attached a response to various aspects of the supplementary consultation

Attachments:

Comment

Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation

Question 22 - Infrastructure Requirements at Knowle, Dorridge and Bentley Health

Representation ID: 9560

Received: 15/03/2019

Respondent: Richard Cobb Planning

Representation Summary:

Principle concerns are that the Arden triangle is likely to generate considerable additional traffic. The deletion of the Knowle Bypass was short sighted and should be restored to cater for the new traffic generated in the plan. Site 125 which was the old by pass route should not be released for housing but should be retained as an option route for a revived by pass. Centres of Knowle and Dorridge are already congested with little spare parking for shopping and in general. Dorridge Station has very little spare capacity. No provision for employment development is made.

Full text:

Please find attached a response to various aspects of the supplementary consultation

Attachments:

If you are having trouble using the system, please try our help guide.