Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation

Search Representations

Results for Mr. James McBride search

New search New search

Support

Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation

Question 37 - Compensatory Provision for removal of land from Green Belt.

Representation ID: 9371

Received: 15/03/2019

Respondent: Mr. James McBride

Agent: Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd

Representation Summary:

Supports the decision to review Green Belt boundaries to accommodate the
identified growth.

Full text:

See letters 1-4

Attachments:

Comment

Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation

Local Housing Need

Representation ID: 9372

Received: 15/03/2019

Respondent: Mr. James McBride

Agent: Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd

Representation Summary:

Support proposed distribution, review of green belt boundaries, use of standard methodology, but concerned at lack of justification/agreement for contribution to wider HMA shortfall. Insufficient deliverable sites allocated to meet needs. Some green/allocated sites have significant questions over deliverability and compliance with national policies/sustainability considerations, meaning some 1,060 dwellings may not be delivered.

Full text:

See letters 1-4

Attachments:

Comment

Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation

Site Selection Methodology

Representation ID: 9373

Received: 15/03/2019

Respondent: Mr. James McBride

Agent: Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd

Representation Summary:

Step 2 refinement is contrary to NPPF. Not appropriate to introduce physical boundaries in otherwise open green belt areas. Methodology should set out preferred criteria for defining clear defensible boundaries. Some red sites ruled out due to lack of defensible boundaries, whilst some sites rated green have caveat that physical boundaries will be created. Methodology not consistently and logically applied across all sites.

Full text:

See letters 1-4

Attachments:

Object

Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation

Question 7 - Site 21 - Pheasant Oak Farm

Representation ID: 9374

Received: 15/03/2019

Respondent: Mr. James McBride

Agent: Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd

Representation Summary:

No clearly defined physical feature along eastern boundary, and site does not follow field boundaries. Reliance on bypass line problematic, no evidence that route/funding agreed. Line likely to be further east so could not provide boundary.
Low level of accessibility, Sustainability Appraisal identifies only 3 positive v 6 negative (2 significant) effects.
Only one third of site is brownfield, the eastern part of the site makes the highest possible contribution towards the Green Belt purposes.

Full text:

See letters 1-4

Attachments:

Object

Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation

Question 14 - Site 12 - Land South of Dog Kennel Lane

Representation ID: 9375

Received: 15/03/2019

Respondent: Mr. James McBride

Agent: Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd

Representation Summary:

Lack of a clear defensible physical boundary and concern that there will be pressure for further development to south, as shown on the promoter's masterplan submission for site 26. Site needs to be assessed consistently with other sites rejected for lack of physical boundaries.
Severely compromises Green Belt purposes a to c.
Site should be re-evaluated and doubtful that stated capacity is realistic.

Full text:

See letters 1-4

Attachments:

Object

Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation

Question 15 - Site 26 - Whitlocks End Farm

Representation ID: 9376

Received: 15/03/2019

Respondent: Mr. James McBride

Agent: Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd

Representation Summary:

Lack of a clear defensible physical boundary and concern that there will be pressure for further development up to the Stratford Canal, as shown on the promoter's masterplan submission. Site needs to be assessed consistently with other sites rejected for lack of physical boundaries.
Severely compromises Green Belt purposes a to c.
Site should be re-evaluated and doubtful that stated capacity is realistic.

Full text:

See letters 1-4

Attachments:

Object

Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation

Question 17 - Site 6 - Meriden Road

Representation ID: 9377

Received: 15/03/2019

Respondent: Mr. James McBride

Agent: Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd

Representation Summary:

The 'Draft Concept Masterplan' document, January 2019, acknowledges
that alternative premises would need to be found for the wood shaving operation to
enable the residential development of both sites. This is likely to be problematic
given the 'bad neighbour' characteristics of the use.
Site preparation works required for brownfield element questioning viability.
These significant doubts over deliverability mean site should not be allocated.

Full text:

See letters 1-4

Attachments:

Object

Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation

Question 23 - Site 8 - Hampton Road

Representation ID: 9378

Received: 15/03/2019

Respondent: Mr. James McBride

Agent: Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd

Representation Summary:

Many sites rejected where there are no existing physical features, yet there is no clearly defined physical boundary along northern edge of NW proposal and site does not follow field boundaries. Topography means site more visually intrusive in green belt and impacts on openness. Impact on Local Wildlife Site, TPOs, right of way and setting of Grimshaw Hall.
SE proposal occupied by Knowle FC so question over deliverability. Further land promoted with potential impacts on Grimshaw Hall. Land is highly performing in Green Belt Assessment.
No very special circumstances to justify sports hub in green belt.

Full text:

See letters 1-4

Attachments:

Object

Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation

Question 27 - Site 17 - Moat Lane/Vulcan Road

Representation ID: 9379

Received: 15/03/2019

Respondent: Mr. James McBride

Agent: Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd

Representation Summary:

Given that there are likely to be significant site preparation costs, it seems inappropriate for the site to be allocated for development for 200 dwellings without a
detailed viability assessment. Until this evidence work has been carried out, we
contend that the site does not satisfy the national policy requirements

Full text:

See letters 1-4

Attachments:

Object

Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation

Question 28 - Site 18 - Sharmans Cross Road

Representation ID: 9380

Received: 15/03/2019

Respondent: Mr. James McBride

Agent: Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd

Representation Summary:

Concern over permanent loss of community playing field facilities in an
area identified in Playing Pitch Assessment/Strategy, 2017, as being deficient in this area. Unused pitches need to be replaced if lost and no information provided to suggest an alternative site.
Contrary to the strategic objective of protecting and promoting healthy
sustainable communities.

Full text:

See letters 1-4

Attachments:

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