Solihull Local Plan (Draft Submission) 2020
Search representations
Results for Aldi Stores Ltd search
New searchObject
Solihull Local Plan (Draft Submission) 2020
Policy BC5 - Trevallion Stud, Balsall Common
Representation ID: 11093
Received: 10/12/2020
Respondent: Aldi Stores Ltd
Agent: Turley
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Generally support allocation BC5, but requires amendment to be sound. The Concept Masterplan shows land coloured red for an 'opportunity for commercial or mixed use development' which is insufficiently defined and potentially incompatible with housing. This land is brownfield and partly outside the Green Belt. The whole of the red land should be removed from the Green Belt and allocated for E Class use or residential development to enhance the entrance to the settlement, irrespective of the outcome of the adjoining housing proposal.
Land coloured red on SMBC Illustrative Concept Masterplan development Principles: BC5 Trevallion Stud- "Opportunity for E-class use or residential use development".
While we generally support Policy BC5 allocation, we consider that a proposed annotation on the SMBC Illustrative Concept Masterplan Development Principles drawing (page 37 of the Concept Masterplans Document) requires amendment to make it "sound".
We refer to the land coloured red on that drawing annotated in the key as an "Opportunity for commercial or mixed use development". We have concerns that the use of the word "commercial" is not sufficiently or clearly defined and that "mixed use" without qualification indicates potential acceptability in principle for future uses on this site which would be incompatible with residential development (eg general B-class uses). We therefore put forward below an alternative form of words for permissable future uses on that land.
We also consider that this site allocation (land coloured red) has merit in its own right and is required to make the Plan sound whether or not the Trevallion Stud residential allocation is ultimately adopted. The site is already partially outside the Green Belt and for the reasons set out by Turley in representations made on the previous draft plan, there is no sound basis to retain the remainder of the site within the Green Belt. The site is brownfield, in active use for car sales and repair use, is well bounded on all sides and makes no meaningful contribution to any of the five purposes of Green Belt set out at para 134 of the NPPF. The whole of the site coloured red should be taken out of the Green Belt, irrespective of the fate of the housing allocation to the north of it, and allocated as set out below, to provide the opportunity to enhance the northern entry point into the village through new beneficial development.