Solihull Local Plan (Draft Submission) 2020

Search representations

Results for Richard Cobb Planning search

New search New search

Object

Solihull Local Plan (Draft Submission) 2020

Policy S02 - Moat Lane Depot

Representation ID: 10796

Received: 12/12/2020

Respondent: Richard Cobb Planning

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

Appropriate provision has not been made in the Local Plan for sites for expanding religious, cultural or socal clubs that make up a balanced community. Such facilites are being frustrated by the Council in the lack of such provions which could include part of the Moat Lane depot site which is perhaps the only site in Solihull which is brownfield and close to the community. Such provision could include some housing and retention of some of the emplyment land in Vulcan Road which this proposal seeks to remove.

Object

Solihull Local Plan (Draft Submission) 2020

Policy P3 Provision of Land for General Business and Premises

Representation ID: 10805

Received: 12/12/2020

Respondent: Richard Cobb Planning

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

Arden Eco Park was submitted under the Call for Sites as an employment site as it is long established as such. However the site never been properly considerd by the LPA.

The site is strategically placed in the UK Central Zone and should be considered as a site for a Power from Waste development to service Arden Cross development area directly to the north.

That would be stategically located and make use of this brownfield site.

Object

Solihull Local Plan (Draft Submission) 2020

Policy P12 Resource Management

Representation ID: 10808

Received: 12/12/2020

Respondent: Richard Cobb Planning

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:


The Council have not seriously considered proposals submitted for this site as a site for employment purposes which is already well established.

The development of the Arden Cross site directly to the north has emhasised the need to make decisions as to the future development of the site. Arden Eco Park is already recognised as a site for waste management. Developing an Energy from Waste facility on this site would directly meet the needs of Arden Cross.

Object

Solihull Local Plan (Draft Submission) 2020

POLICY P13 Minerals

Representation ID: 10809

Received: 12/12/2020

Respondent: Richard Cobb Planning

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

Future use of Arden Eco Park for employment purposes and an Energy from Waste facility need to be considered properly and seriously, given the strategic location of this site. The frontage of the site is occupied by a large number of lawful businesses, and should be recognised for future development.

The designation of the Site as RIGS is not realistic in the Plan Period given that the clay extraction and restoration will have been largely compled and no working surface is likely to be visible.

Object

Solihull Local Plan (Draft Submission) 2020

Policy P17 Countryside and Green Belt

Representation ID: 10810

Received: 12/12/2020

Respondent: Richard Cobb Planning

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

Greater certainty for the four listed infill settlements should be given by properly defining the setllement boundaries

Object

Solihull Local Plan (Draft Submission) 2020

Policy P19 Range and Quality of Local Services

Representation ID: 10811

Received: 12/12/2020

Respondent: Richard Cobb Planning

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

Inadequte provision in made in the Local Plan for the growth of religious, social and cultural facilities.
Renewal Church wish to significantly expand but their proposals for adjoining land have been rebuffed by the Council and no resonable and sensible alternation has been suggested.

Support

Solihull Local Plan (Draft Submission) 2020

Introduction

Representation ID: 10911

Received: 14/12/2020

Respondent: Richard Cobb Planning

Representation Summary:

I support the principles of the Locall Plan in broad terms but do not consider that it addresses all the neccasessy issues in an objective and sensible way nor does it reflect the propery make up balanced comminities.

Object

Solihull Local Plan (Draft Submission) 2020

Challenges

Representation ID: 10912

Received: 14/12/2020

Respondent: Richard Cobb Planning

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

Local Plan does not properly recognise the strategically important Meriden Gap in the way that new housing allocations have been substantially located in that segment of the Borough. This is an important area of open countryside possibly destined to be a National Park area which should be generally protected from substantial development other than to meet the needs of the communities within it.
While there may be some merit in the Arden Cross development for economic reasons that should not be the thin end of a wedge to encourage release of so much additional land in the Green Belt.

Object

Solihull Local Plan (Draft Submission) 2020

Challenges

Representation ID: 10914

Received: 14/12/2020

Respondent: Richard Cobb Planning

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

Under Challenge J the Local Plan should also include the need to allocate land to accommodate facilities for the spiritual needs of the Community. Many expanding religious groups are desperate to find suitable sites that can accommodate their needs to serve their congregation and the wider community which they also serve in support of Solihull Council.

Land is not allocated or available in the Local Plan as most land is allocated for housing without proper thought as to what makes up a balanced community.

Object

Solihull Local Plan (Draft Submission) 2020

Challenges

Representation ID: 10916

Received: 14/12/2020

Respondent: Richard Cobb Planning

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

The Local Plan fails properly to consider sites for employment uses in expanding settlements of Balsall Common and Knowle. The emphasis of the Local Plan is largely only on Land Rover needs, some high tech development within Arden Cross . No provision is made for local employment uses which at a modest scale could be accommodated in those growth settlements. While some residents will have to travel distances by car to get to centres of employment, the provision of at least some land in those settlements would serve the needs of those who cannot or will not want to travel.

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