Solihull Local Plan (Draft Submission) 2020

The Council should commit to the inclusion of a series of reserve sites within the Local Plan Review identified to meet housing requirements in the event that the Government’s standard methodology continues to indicate that housing need is significantly higher than that set out within the submission draft plan.

The alternative would be to include a policy within the Local Plan Review requiring the commencement of a separate Site Allocations document, such work to be commenced no later than six months after the adoption of the Local Plan Review, to include a series of reserve sites and to be read in conjunction with the Local Plan Review including adherence to the development strategy.

One of the advantages is that the site allocations could deal with any deficiency in five year housing land supply, and where it was felt that Green Belt release was required, land could continue to be safeguarded and Green Belt policies apply until such time as any given site was required.

Dear Sir / Madam,

Please see attached Representations in relation to Regulation 19.

Please don’t hesitate to get in touch if you have any queries.

Many thanks,

Clare Garrad

Criteria 3 to Policy P16 should be replaced with the provisions of paragraphs 195, 196 and 197 of the NPPF; alternatively, a simple cross-reference within the policy to the provisions of the NPPF could also be appropriate.

Dear Sir / Madam,

Please see attached Representations in relation to Regulation 19.

Please don’t hesitate to get in touch if you have any queries.

Many thanks,

Clare Garrad

The Council should give much greater consideration to Green Belt boundaries and whether these should be redrawn, not solely in relation to the provision of positive allocations of land but instead to reflect the change in circumstances which justifies a review as to the extent land fulfils a Green Belt function.

Lavender Hall Fisheries, Berkswell is one such example whereby the lack of any change to Green Belt boundaries undermines the permanence of Green Belt and the robustness of policy seeking to maintain openness.

Dear Sir / Madam,

Please see attached Representations in relation to Regulation 19.

Please don’t hesitate to get in touch if you have any queries.

Many thanks,

Clare Garrad

We consider that Policy P17A is not required and simply undermines the overarching objectives and requirements of the Local Plan Review.

Dear Sir / Madam,

Please see attached Representations in relation to Regulation 19.

Please don’t hesitate to get in touch if you have any queries.

Many thanks,

Clare Garrad

The policy should be modified to expressly refer to the three CIL tests in regulation 122 of the 2010 Regulations, and furthermore make clear that developer contributions and infrastructure provision will only be required where each of the three tests are demonstrably met.

Dear Sir / Madam,

Please see attached Representations in relation to Regulation 19.

Please don’t hesitate to get in touch if you have any queries.

Many thanks,

Clare Garrad