Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation

Object

Representation ID: 9520

Received: 15/03/2019

Respondent: St Philips Land - Land at Smiths Lane Browns Lane & Widney Manor Road

Agent: Savills

Site 207 is adjacent to the settlement boundary, there are limited suitability constraints, the site is bound by roads which are a physical feature that could provide a new Green Belt boundary. Redevelopment of the site would not compromise the five purposes of the green Belt.
The site represents a location which supports the Council's strategic direction of growth.
Seek reassessment of site 207 to correctly be categorised as a Priority 5 site.
Site 207 should be included as an allocation.

Comment

Representation ID: 9521

Received: 15/03/2019

Respondent: St Philips Land - Land at Smiths Lane Browns Lane & Widney Manor Road

Agent: Savills

Unclear how Site 9 has been assessed as a 'green' site and site 207 has not. Clarification is sought on this matter.
Site 9 performs similarly to site 207; however, Site 9 comprises multiple landowners / interests whereas site 207 is solely under clients control, providing more certainty and deliverability.

Object

Representation ID: 9522

Received: 15/03/2019

Respondent: St Philips Land - Land at Smiths Lane Browns Lane & Widney Manor Road

Agent: Savills

Site 207 performs better than the proposed amber site of Land at Golden End Farm (Amber site A4). Both sites are adjacent to the existing settlement boundary and there are physical features bordering both sites that could create a new defensible GB boundary.
We therefore do not understand how this site has been included as an amber site but our client's site has not. We seek justification for the exclusion of our client's site.
Need more clarity on how sites have been assessed in the Step 2 refine criteria of the methodology.

Object

Representation ID: 9524

Received: 15/03/2019

Respondent: St Philips Land - Land at Smiths Lane Browns Lane & Widney Manor Road

Agent: Savills

We do not consider that the proposed approach is suitable and the Council has not provided any justification/evidence as to why they are proposing this alternative approach to affordable housing. We consider that the Council's existing approach to affordable housing is more appropriate

Object

Representation ID: 9525

Received: 15/03/2019

Respondent: St Philips Land - Land at Smiths Lane Browns Lane & Widney Manor Road

Agent: Savills

We do not consider that the proposed approach is suitable and the Council has not provided any justification /
evidence as to why they are proposing this alternative approach to affordable housing. We consider that the
Council's existing approach to affordable housing is more appropriate

Object

Representation ID: 9526

Received: 15/03/2019

Respondent: St Philips Land - Land at Smiths Lane Browns Lane & Widney Manor Road

Agent: Savills

We do not consider that the proposed approach is suitable and the Council has not provided any justification /
evidence as to why they are proposing this alternative approach to affordable housing. We consider that the
Council's existing approach to affordable housing is more appropriate

Object

Representation ID: 10437

Received: 15/03/2019

Respondent: St Philips Land - Land at Smiths Lane Browns Lane & Widney Manor Road

Agent: Lichfields

Whilst site 25 has not been tested against the Accessibility Study and Green Belt Assessment, its suitability can be compared with the scoring of site 38 Ashford Manor Farm, Stratford Road given its proximity. Site 38 is considered medium/high in accessibility and lower performing parcel in terms of Green Belt with a combined score of 5. However, the Site Assessment Commentary notes that 'it would be difficult to establish a logical and defensible Green Belt boundary.' Disagree as Site 38 self contained and bound by permanent physical features, and should be identified for housing allocation.

Comment

Representation ID: 10487

Received: 15/03/2019

Respondent: St Philips Land - Land at Smiths Lane Browns Lane & Widney Manor Road

Agent: Avison Young

Until publication of the Submission LPR and evidence, St Philips does not consider the Council has justified its assumptions on supply, or its position in relation to the HMA shortfall, such that there is a clear need to identify additional land to support the delivery of large-scale sites, and/or to include a review mechanism that will secure additional sites in the event of a failure to deliver. Moreover, the Council must identify areas of Safeguarded Land to meet longer term needs so as to ensure that the green belt boundaries to be set by the Local Plan Review will endure.