Please note: You only need to register / login if you wish to make representations.

You can view the full details of a representation by clicking either on the Representation ID in the top right of the summary box or on the More Details... link at the bottom.

Representations on Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation - Question 23 - Site 8 - Hampton Road

Representation ID: 10452

OBJECT Mr Adrian McNicholas

Summary:

Grove Rd would be an improved 1st choice.

As the highest location in the area, I think the new estate will become too visible.

More details about Rep ID: 10452

Representation ID: 10326

COMMENT Environment Agency (Jane Field)

Summary:

A Main River (Purnells Brook, tributary of the River Blythe) bisects the site, however our 'Flood Map for Planning' only shows the flood risk from watercourses with a catchment area greater than 3km2, mapping of the risk from the watercourse has not been undertaken and as such this is the only reason the site is shown to lie in low risk Flood Zone 1. We strongly recommend that hydraulic modelling of the watercourse is undertaken as part of a Level 2 SFRA to inform of the developable area and capacity of this potential allocation. As a Main River, a minimum 8m easement should be provided from each bank in order to allow for essential channel maintenance. This will serve the dual purpose of protecting and maintaining green and blue infrastructure. Should you chose not to undertake modelling as part of a Level 2 SFRA, we will require modelling to be undertaken as part of a site-specific Flood Risk Assessment in support of a planning application, and development will need to be located outside Flood Zone 2 and 3, and the 100 year plus climate change flood extent. Any numbers allocated for this site will need to have sufficient flexibility to ensure they can respond to unassessed flood risk issues so that the allocation is not compromised by inability to deliver the required scale of development whilst also meeting flood risk requirements.

More details about Rep ID: 10326

Representation ID: 10306

COMMENT Gillian Griggs

Summary:

Concept Masterplan needs to take into account:
1.Levels and topography issues for both housing and sports pitches which are significant and sensitive
2.Densities, as high density inappropriate on whole of eastern parcel, and western part should be medium transitioning to low
3.Public open space and structural green framework required for both parts
4.Design Coding required and should take account of levels, green infrastructure, landscape and visual impacts and floodlighting, together with transportation and heritage impacts

More details about Rep ID: 10306

Representation ID: 10178

OBJECT Mr P Benton and Mr T Neary represented by Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd (Mrs Glenda Parkes)

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.

More details about Rep ID: 10178

Representation ID: 10091

COMMENT Minton represented by DS Planning (Ms Donna Savage)

Summary:

No objection in principle

More details about Rep ID: 10091

Representation ID: 10049

COMMENT the landowners at Jacobean Lane represented by DS Planning (Ms Donna Savage)

Summary:

No objection in principle

More details about Rep ID: 10049

Representation ID: 10009

COMMENT Stonewater represented by DS Planning (Ms Donna Savage)

Summary:

No objection in principle

More details about Rep ID: 10009

Representation ID: 9969

COMMENT Rosconn Stategic Land represented by DS Planning (Ms Donna Savage)

Summary:

No objection in principle

More details about Rep ID: 9969

Representation ID: 9922

COMMENT Generator (Balsall) & Minton represented by DS Planning (Ms Donna Savage)

Summary:

No objection in principle

More details about Rep ID: 9922

Representation ID: 9861

COMMENT Historic England- West Midlands Region (Mr R Torkildsen)

Summary:

The Grade I status of Grimshaw Hall will require due weight to be given to its conservation. Any consideration of an allocation will need to demonstrate that sufficient account is taken of the Plan's evidence base to avoid or minimise harm to the significance of the Hall. Due regard must be had to the desirability of preserving its setting.
Without publication of the Council's Heritage Impact Assessment of this site, Historic England are unable to consider whether the principle of development or such a proposed response would be appropriate or effective in avoiding harm and the delivery of sustainable development.

More details about Rep ID: 9861

Representation ID: 9700

OBJECT Landowners Wootton Green Lane represented by Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd (Mrs Glenda Parkes)

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.

More details about Rep ID: 9700

Representation ID: 9688

OBJECT Belle Homes Ltd represented by Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd (Mrs Glenda Parkes)

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.

More details about Rep ID: 9688

Representation ID: 9679

OBJECT Kendrick homes Ltd represented by Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd (Mrs Glenda Parkes)

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.

More details about Rep ID: 9679

Representation ID: 9656

COMMENT Mr & Mrs Michael & Marion Joyce represented by Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd (Mrs Glenda Parkes)

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.

More details about Rep ID: 9656

Representation ID: 9510

OBJECT The Knowle Society (Mr Andrew Marston)

Summary:

The site is unsuitable for development as it would create an unacceptable skyline on this approach to Knowle.
The contours of the site will result in a prominent development.
Using the canal as a defensible barrier could open up surrounding areas around the canal for development.
Harm to the setting of Grimshaw Hall.
Impact on Knowle Conservation area from traffic generated by the development, particularly around the Hampton Road / High Street junction.
Adverse impact on ecology and inappropriate loss of Green Belt.

More details about Rep ID: 9510

Representation ID: 9479

OBJECT Heyford Developments Ltd represented by Lichfields (Mr Jon Kirby)

Summary:

Heyford Developments strongly object to the inclusion of Site 8 as an allocated site, ahead of land under their control at Blue Lake Road, as:
* It has been incorrectly prioritised in the Site Selection Process;
* The loss of the land parcel to the north of Hampton Road facilitating the proposed new sports pitches and adjacent housing is unjustified in landscape and Green Belt terms; and
* It would cause unacceptable harm to the setting of Grimshaw Hall (Grade I Listed)
Land off Blue Lake Road would be less harmful and can provide appropriate mitigation for green belt loss.

More details about Rep ID: 9479

Representation ID: 9453

SUPPORT Hampton Road Developments Ltd represented by Savills (Mr Michael Davies)

Summary:

Support the inclusion of Hampton Road as an allocation. However, parts of the site identified as "potential area of development subject to heritage assessment" should also be included. The Council's Heritage Assessment should consider the technical work done in support of the site. Impact on the setting of Grimshaw Hall can be mitigated.
Acknowledged the Council's concerns over the impact of the development on the Green Belt, in particular the visual impact of the sports facilities. Consider the inclusion of green infrastructure would provide effective mitigation.
Unreasonable to describe accessibility to public transport as "currently low".

More details about Rep ID: 9453

Representation ID: 9397

OBJECT Mr M Trentham

Summary:

Site 8 is too much of a Green Belt intrusion between Knowle and Hampton. Football club site and old Thackers nursery are acceptable, but further along Hampton Lane towards the canal is not.
Amber site A5 would be a more appropriate as a replacement and would provide a sensible rounding off to the settlement.

More details about Rep ID: 9397

Representation ID: 9384

OBJECT CPRE Warwickshire Branch (Mark Sullivan)

Summary:

Site 8 should not be allocated in the Local Plan Review.
Proposals to surround Knowle village with extensive housing to its north (Site 8) and south (Site 9) would undermine the Conservation Area's character and setting because Knowle would become a town in terms of population size and urban extent.
Impact on Knowle Conservation Area, most important in the Borough and other heritage assets. Would have the effect of developing open land to the north of the historic village and removing the countryside setting that remains to that side of Knowle. Turning settlement from village to more like a town.
Loss of Green Belt

More details about Rep ID: 9384

Representation ID: 9378

OBJECT Mr. James McBride represented by Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd (Mrs Glenda Parkes)

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.

More details about Rep ID: 9378

Representation ID: 9345

OBJECT Halford Holdings represented by Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd (Mrs Glenda Parkes)

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.
.

More details about Rep ID: 9345

Representation ID: 9329

OBJECT Knowle, Dorridge & Bentley Heath Neighbourhood Forum (Mrs Jane Aykroyd)

Summary:

This allocation would be a large scale encroachment into the countryside and Green Belt extending well beyond the built limits and natural topography of Knowle. The topography and substantial changes in levels are not addressed in the masterplan. Without information on levels, infrastructure impacts (particularly highways/junction impacts/mitigation), impacts on Knowle Conservation Area and clarity on the GB and LWS boundaries, it is not possible to support this allocation and the draft concept masterplan. The issues raised by the NF Landscape Study and Masterplanning/Design and Design Coding Study need first to be addressed before any allocation can be supported.

More details about Rep ID: 9329

Representation ID: 9314

COMMENT Spitfire Bespoke Homes represented by Ridge and Partners LLP (Emma Greening)

Summary:

Whilst the ambitions of this site to provide a sports hub should be welcomed. There appears to be a number of questions over the size of buffer required between the site and nearby listed buildings. As a result, questions need to be raised over the whether it will be possible to deliver the number of dwellings set out in the masterplan.

More details about Rep ID: 9314

Representation ID: 9298

COMMENT Duchy Homes Ltd represented by Barton Willmore Planning (Miss Hiteshree Kundalia)

Summary:

Only two sites have been identified for residential development within and around Dorridge (Site 8: Hampton Road, capacity 300-350 and Site 9: Arden Triangle, capacity 600), both of which are large sites. There is no evidence provided on the deliverability of these sites, include the timescales for housing to come forward. However, smaller Sites such as our Client's, are more deliverable within the early years of the Plan. This will help to address the known affordability issues in Dorridge and the wider Borough.

More details about Rep ID: 9298

Representation ID: 9271

COMMENT IM Land represented by Barton Willmore Planning (Ed Pigott)

Summary:

this Site contains sports pitch provision which must be mitigated in line with the Revised NPPF (2019). It is also noted that this Site is in a similar location to the Site at Jacobean Lane and enjoys similar defensible boundaries. It is also within the same Green Belt parcel within the Council's Green Belt Assessment. The Council should utilise the same assessment for both sites. The allocation of Site 8 will also reinforce the canal as the edge of the settlement, which would be in line with the Site at Jacobean Lane.

More details about Rep ID: 9271

Representation ID: 9139

OBJECT Mrs Karen Allen

Summary:

I object to any incursion into the Green Belt. Part of the housing requirement for Knowle, Dorridge and Bentley Heath is related to the Wider Housing Market Area. There are plenty of derelict and brown field sites in Birmingham that should be used first to accommodate Birmingham's housing needs before green belt land is built on, this would also reduce Knowle, Dorridge and Bentley Heath's housing requirement figures. Solihull council should object strongly to WHMA. The roads and junctions that would serve this development are inadequate. Infrastructure is already under strain.

More details about Rep ID: 9139

Representation ID: 9138

SUPPORT Dr Paul Rylah

Summary:

While I have concerns over the extra traffic and pressure on the current infrastructure (schools, GPS, parking) I believe Knowle can absorb a development of this kind, and contribute to the clear need for extra housing, of all sizes and type. It would also be a great boost to the village to gain the addition investment in sports facilities - presuming the funding materialises.

More details about Rep ID: 9138

Representation ID: 9134

OBJECT Mr John Allen

Summary:

I object to any incursion into the green belt. Part of the housing numbers needed in Knowle, Dorridge and Bentley Heath relate to the 'Wider Market Housing Area' requirement. There are plenty of derelict land areas available in Birmingham and these should be used first to accommodate Birmingham's housing requirements before greenbelt land is built on. SMBC should make a stand on this issue.

More details about Rep ID: 9134

Representation ID: 9127

OBJECT Mr Kym Soni

Summary:

The concentration of development in Knowle is detrimental to the green belt, and thus, the quality of life for current residents. The additional traffic and pollution (air quality and noise) would blight the lives of residents.

More details about Rep ID: 9127

Representation ID: 9084

OBJECT Dr Linda Parsons

Summary:

Who says it is of medium landscape character and low visual sensitivity? No green belt should be used.
Knowle cannot take any more intrusion. The village would be destroyed by more houses and consequently more people and cars.

More details about Rep ID: 9084

Representation ID: 9029

OBJECT Mr Steve Coathup

Summary:

Together with the proposal to develop site 9, the additional traffic flow, and need for additional General Practice capacity will overwhelm the existing provision and infrastructure. Nowhere in the document is this recognised and represents a major flaw in the masterplan

More details about Rep ID: 9029

Representation ID: 8987

COMMENT Mrs Elizabeth Hulse

Summary:

I support the representations made by KDBH Neighbourhood Forum

I do not support the use of the land south of Hampton Rd for high density housing. All mature trees to be protected. Area abuts a wildlife site must be taken into consideration. Land to north has limited capacity due to its topography. Use of land for sports development will have unacceptable impact on the surrounding green belt, light pollution in particular affecting a very wide area. Extensive ground works will be required to overcome the natural topography which makes it unsuitable for sports development as envisaged.

More details about Rep ID: 8987

Representation ID: 8976

SUPPORT Councillor M McLoughlin

Summary:

Yes

More details about Rep ID: 8976

Representation ID: 8895

COMMENT Sport England (Mr Rajvir Bahey)

Summary:

SE consider that the proposed policy allocating the site should include the following requirements:
- allocate the sports hub site
- playing fields (playing pitches and ancillary facilities) should not be developed upon until replacement provision is made in line with the requirements of NPPF paragraph 97(b) and SE Playing Fields Policy.
- State that the construction of the playing pitches, floodlighting and changing facilities should accord with SE and relevant NGB guidance.
- require a ball strike assessment should cricket site be retained

Site identified as a location for 3G pitch which should be catered for in the policy

More details about Rep ID: 8895

Representation ID: 8876

OBJECT Paul & Anne Wilson Ramsay

Summary:

Objection to high density development of Knowle Fooball Club along Hampton Lane within existing green belt land.
Developers should guarantee that Sports Facilities should be completed prior to residential redevelopment of Knowle Football Club and Cricket Ground to allow club continuity.
Protection of Heritage Assets and setting of Grimshaw Hall; no encroachment shall be allowed on adjacent woodland.
No consideration has been given to mains services to proposed housing, including electricity, gas, water supply, mains drainage, telecommunications.
Some land areas may be located within a flood zone of Purnells Brook, and should not be built on.

More details about Rep ID: 8876

Representation ID: 8823

OBJECT Paul & Anne Wilson Ramsay

Summary:

Objection to proposals for Hampton Road site 8 in Knowle allocated within green belt land.
No additional school places proposed at Knowle Primary School or Arden Academy.
No additional medical facilities or GP surgery proposed.
No consideration has been given to main services to proposed housing, including electricity, gas, water supply, mains drainage, telecommunications.
No details provided of how the setting of Grimshaw Hall and surrounding woodland will be protected.
Satisfactory relocation of Knowle Football Club and Cricket Ground must be achieved prior to housing redevelopment.
Some land areas may be located within a flood zone of Purnells Brook.

More details about Rep ID: 8823

Representation ID: 8760

OBJECT Mrs Jill Collins

Summary:

The Warwick Road is currently heavily congested in the mornings and evenings. It could not cope with the traffic generated by 300+ homes on site 8 trying to join it from Hampton Road.
Parking in Knowle is extremely difficult now. There is simply no space to accommodate any more cars.
The small new proposed primary school would not be able to cope with all the children from the new houses on sites 8 and 9 - especially if the current Catholic primary school is closed and the site used for even more housing.

More details about Rep ID: 8760

Representation ID: 8644

OBJECT Mr Ken Currran

Summary:

Unsuitable site - will add congestion

More details about Rep ID: 8644

Representation ID: 8633

OBJECT Mr Andrew Freeman

Summary:

Site should not be included as in principle objection due to overriding importance of green belt, poorly performing in terms of Spatial Strategy/Sustainability Appraisal, categorisation questionable. Inadequate regard for countryside encroachment, landscape impacts, topographical constraints, traffic impacts including on Conservation Area, or infrastructure requirements. Green belt boundary poorly defined. Quantum of housing not justified by viability assessment. Poor accessibility. Sports development not defined or appraised for impacts, no comparative assessment of locations.
Concept masterplan need strengthening to refer to important features that may need to be retained/constraints, safeguard landscape/biodiversity, secure new planting/green framework, limit extent of development, consider densities and accessibility to sports facilities.

More details about Rep ID: 8633

Representation ID: 8626

OBJECT Mr Kar Karan

Summary:

Site poses significant environmental & geographical challenges

More details about Rep ID: 8626

Representation ID: 8615

COMMENT Mr Gordon OConnor

Summary:

I support and endorse the response of KDBH Forum.

More details about Rep ID: 8615

Representation ID: 8583

OBJECT Warwickshire Wildlife Trust (Mrs Annie Ottaway)

Summary:

We therefore strongly object to this site allocation as it doesn't appear that the LWSs can be retained. Local Wildlife Sites are of at least county value and should be protected as part of the planning process. They are core components of our ecological network/ Nature Recovery Network.

More details about Rep ID: 8583

Representation ID: 8565

OBJECT Kim Hulse

Summary:

The site encroaches on greenbelt and is identified as an important parcel in preventing unrestricted sprawl of urban areas.
The Hampton Road corridor gives Knowle it's rural setting.
There's a cultural & heritage impact on local listed buildings.
Views from the canal would significantly impact the rural nature and be visually intrusive.
Wildlife of Wychwood woods and canal (a proposed LWS), should remain connected.
Footpaths are regularly by locals appreciating being connected to the countryside.
The sports hub on higher land means lights and noise impacting residents and tranquillity.
An independent report recommended the site should not be prioritised.

More details about Rep ID: 8565

Representation ID: 8545

OBJECT Mrs Sarah Letters

Summary:

I object to building houses on green belt land, when there are brownfield sites within the borough that could be used instead.

More details about Rep ID: 8545

Representation ID: 8473

SUPPORT Mrs Lyn Holtham

Summary:

A better alternative to Site 9 with fewer traffic/congestion implications if the correct infrastructure solutions are found.

More details about Rep ID: 8473

Representation ID: 8468

COMMENT M Lopez

Summary:

The new houses that are already being built seem packed in to the area, with tiny gardens - it is altering the feel of Knowle.

More details about Rep ID: 8468

Representation ID: 8464

OBJECT SOS Limited (ms anne hem)

Summary:

bad decision for this site

More details about Rep ID: 8464

Representation ID: 8461

OBJECT mr Kan Karan

Summary:

bad site for development

More details about Rep ID: 8461

Representation ID: 8457

OBJECT Ms Mali malika

Summary:

not a suitable site- will add on more congestion

More details about Rep ID: 8457

Representation ID: 8452

OBJECT Mrs Laura Dunne

Summary:

There is nothing in the plan to say how this additional housing would be catered for by the existing village facilities. Would these new houses fall within the catchment area for Knowle Primary Academy which is already over-subscribed? If so then the developers should be expected to contribute to any development required by the school to accommodate additional pupils.
What additional infrastructure (parking, doctors etc) will be put in place to reflect the impact on the village of the additional housing so close to the village centre?

More details about Rep ID: 8452

Representation ID: 8406

OBJECT Mrs Faye Doble

Summary:

It should be evaluated as 2 sites.
South - adjacent developer owned land could provide additional amenity/sporting facilities and be more easily accessible and remain buffer to Grimshaw Hall.
North - good/neglected agricultural in Green Belt with wonderful wildlife. Footpath well walked/enjoyed by villagers. SE boundary is housing, but NW is Purnells Brook. Development runoff would increase flooding here. Development here violates Green Belt & Meriden Gap. Extra Traffic on Hampton Road would be congestion/pollution problem. Existing housing must remain village boundary. Should not round up to Wychwood Avenue which is Copt Heath Boundary.

More details about Rep ID: 8406

Representation ID: 8399

COMMENT Roger Atkinson

Summary:

Green belt land should not be built on - otherwise what is the point of designating it as green belt

More details about Rep ID: 8399

Representation ID: 8151

COMMENT Knowle Streamside Trust (Mr Alan Rebeiro)

Summary:

The Committee would wish to re-iterate its concern on the impact of large scale housing in proximity to the LWS in relation to environmental and ecological issues, and to potential impact upon Purnell's Brook. The Masterplan indicates the LWS is to be treated as POS to serve the proposed development and it is not acceptable as the development must meet its own needs and not utilise already protected wildlife sites. For clarity therefore the Masterplan should exclude the existing Wychwood Avenue LWS and note the recent addition to the draft NPPF "Identify, map and safeguard components of local wildlife-rich habitats".

More details about Rep ID: 8151

Representation ID: 8132

COMMENT Dr David Gentle

Summary:

There is opportunity to create a comprehensive sports hub with facilities for a range of sports and fitness centre. Suitable management and operation arrangements would secure guaranteed long-term availability for the public with full and comprehensive opening hours. Such a centre or centres could be secured from the development funding for sites 8 and 9. This will enable Solihull Council to take the lead in masterminding the development of KDBH as a whole rather than the future of the area being determined by the aspirations of two organisations that may put their own development first.

More details about Rep ID: 8132

Representation ID: 8047

COMMENT Naomi Sheard

Summary:

Hampton road is currently very congested. Developing these sites without further public transport options would exacerbate the situation.

More details about Rep ID: 8047

Representation ID: 7943

OBJECT Mrs E Hedley

Summary:

Green Belt Assessment needs revisiting as land performs better against purposes 3 and 4 than indicated. Development would be a significant encroachment into countryside and Green Belt. Impact on setting of Grimshaw Hall. Contest view that site accessible and has good access to facilities, as 1km or more from shops/school. The topography and changes in level have not been considered and the location of the sports site well beyond any reasonable access by public transport is not acceptable. LWS should be excluded from site in Masterplan. Please see the response from the KDBH Forum which I support and fully endorse.

More details about Rep ID: 7943

Representation ID: 7875

SUPPORT Mr Alex Wiseman

Summary:

Agree.

More details about Rep ID: 7875

Representation ID: 7790

OBJECT Mr Michael Doble

Summary:

The area of land to the north of Hampton Road forms part of the Meriden Gap which was specifically protected in the previous structure plan. The development of the football pitch would line up with the existing development within Hampton Road and would naturally round off development. The further encroachment of development into the former Thacker's Nursery and roadside field opposite Grimshaw Hall is not a rounding off but would encourage development of land to the north of Wychwood Avenue and potentially behind Grimshaw Hall.

Permitted space precludes a full objection to the proposals, so a letter will be submitted.

More details about Rep ID: 7790

Representation ID: 7709

SUPPORT Lucy Shepherd

Summary:

Although I live on wychwood, I do not object to a sensible development and think the proposal of sports and recreational facilities is a good one. I am concerned that public transport is made available, public rights of way are preserved and the feeling of space is kept so the site is not overdeveloped. Buildings should be low and floodlighting should be dealt with sensitively so as not to disturb wildlife in the wychwood nature reserve. The site makes sense for development over other greenbelt areas as it was formerly used as a commercial nursery and arguably extends existing estates.

More details about Rep ID: 7709

Representation ID: 7703

COMMENT Mel Starling

Summary:

Hampton Road is high performing greenbelt and not near any amenities
This site is abuts low density high quality housing.
The development will significantly affect the sky line. It rises up from Chantry Heath towards the canal. The horizon will be blurred by hundreds of houses toped off with flood lights

More details about Rep ID: 7703

Representation ID: 7373

COMMENT Golden End Farms represented by Delta Planning (Mr David Green)

Summary:

Before allocating this site the Council must satisfy itself that the site is deliverable. The scheme (including the Cricket Club) is controlled by 4 landowners and will require re-provision of the sports facilities before any housing can take place on the football/cricket club site. There has to be a concern that delivery will take time. At best much of the housing will be delivered in the later stages of the local plan period.

The site is not the most accessible to public transport. It must be carefully assessed for its impacts on the Grade 1 listed Grimshaw Hall.

More details about Rep ID: 7373

Representation ID: 7305

OBJECT Mr David Pickering

Summary:

Green belt land is precious and should be built on as a last resort only. Some of the reasons put forward for building on this particular site do not stand up to scrutiny. It is not rounding off, if red sites 214/215 represent incursion into countryside, so does site 213. Development would sandwich Purnells Brook wildlife site compromising its value

Any permitted development should be mixed and not high-density, including open spaces, and sensitive to the adjacent existing housing.

Any development should prioritise and facilitate cycle and bus usage and houses should be required to be highly energy efficient.

More details about Rep ID: 7305

Representation ID: 7276

OBJECT Mrs Jane Starling

Summary:

This is an unnecessary encroachment into green belt. It would not round off the settlement in a logical manner because Wychwood Avenue is mostly invisible from Hampton Road because of the wooded area and there are only 6 houses visible on Chantry Heath Cresent.

The draft masterplan suggests building medium density housing at the Chantry Heath end which is now pleasantly low density and low density housing near the new proposed sports hub. Who will buy expensive houses next to a floodlit sports hub/football ground with its associated noise and bad language?

Hampton Lane cannot support extra traffic and parking

More details about Rep ID: 7276

Representation ID: 7249

SUPPORT Mrs Adrie Cooper

Summary:

Provided the local people benefit by using the enhanced sport facilities

More details about Rep ID: 7249

Representation ID: 7226

OBJECT Mrs Julia Gilroy

Summary:

Site 8: Hampton Road should not be built on.The area is classic "countryside" easily accessed from Knowle village and includes important local wildlife sites & popular countryside footpaths
The proposed development threatens the "village" nature/ countryside feel of the area. Knowle doesn't have the infrastructure or capacity i.e. schools & health to accommodate the proposed extra housing. The road network is already highly congested at peak times & this proposed increase in dwellings will make this worse, increase pollution in the area & potentially increase vehicle accidents.

More details about Rep ID: 7226

Representation ID: 7073

SUPPORT Mr Bob Holtham

Summary:

Subject to clarity on the proposed traffic management of the Warwick Road Junction that will not gridlock the flow of traffic North/South.

More details about Rep ID: 7073

Representation ID: 7060

SUPPORT Mrs Claire Carter

Summary:

The Hampton Road site has already seen significant development. Recognizing the need for more development, I support the proposal on the condition that the developer makes a significant investment in Knowle Primary Academy. The school has already had to move to 3 form entry in 1 year group partly as a result of the current Hampton Rd site development. Any future development should be conditional upon significant investment in the school to provide new permanent classrooms to accommodate the increase in pupils moving into the area. I strongly oppose any development without significant community investment, especially in schools.

More details about Rep ID: 7060

Representation ID: 7034

OBJECT Mrs Ruth Paige

Summary:

While I fully support the addition of community sports provision (which is currently lacking in the area) and cannot support the building of even more homes. The area has already had an additional 88 houses built on the Wootton Close estate and with the lack of public transport (the only bus that serves near this area has just been reduced to once an hour) the increase in traffic the 300 homes would add would be excessive. There are already large queues to get from the bottom of Hampton Road onto the Warwick Road. It would have a hugely negative impact.

More details about Rep ID: 7034

Representation ID: 7012

OBJECT Mr David Lloyd

Summary:

Green belt and local amenity should be protected thus development is inappropriate.

More details about Rep ID: 7012

Representation ID: 6881

SUPPORT Mr Martin Murphy

Summary:

It is very important that the sports facilities are part of the plan

More details about Rep ID: 6881

Representation ID: 6859

SUPPORT Mr Tony Moon

Summary:

On reviewing the plans, this brownfield site , ticks all the boxes and offers the area a centre for sport, an additional comment would be to encompass other sports not currently available in the area.
The development should be controlled through the implementation of the neighbourhood plan.

More details about Rep ID: 6859

Representation ID: 6833

OBJECT Mrs Cathy Lynock

Summary:

I am a resident on Hampton Road and we have already seen a large housing development take place in the beautiful fields behind our houses. The football club and cricket club have been in existence since I moved to Knowle some 50 years ago. There was a television programme on not so long ago about the number of derelict houses in the UK - do something with these instead!

We need to keep our english countryside!

More details about Rep ID: 6833

Representation ID: 6814

OBJECT Mr Vincent Essex

Summary:

Simply building more houses in one of the most / if not expensive areas within the borough only makes it available for a select few and in reality does not achieve the Councils goal of additional affordable housing for all on the scale required.

More details about Rep ID: 6814

Representation ID: 6694

OBJECT Gillian Griggs

Summary:

This allocation would be a large scale encroachment into the countryside and Green Belt extending well beyond the built limits and natural topography of Knowle. The topography and substantial changes in levels are not addressed in the masterplan. Without information on levels, infrastructure impacts (particularly highways/junction impacts/mitigation), impacts on Knowle Conservation Area and clarity on the GB and LWS boundaries, it is not possible to support this allocation and the draft concept masterplan. The issues raised by the NF Landscape Study and Masterplanning/Design and Design Coding Study need first to be addressed before any allocation can be supported.

More details about Rep ID: 6694

Representation ID: 6638

OBJECT Mr Ian Kay

Summary:

It is difficult to comment without maps, however the B93 Facebook group claims that this update of the plan includes land adjacent to Kixley Ln. If so, this would be completely unacceptable, Kixley Ln is a beautiful 14th century relic and it, along with the footpath route to the canal pedestrian bridge should be kept in agricultural use.

More details about Rep ID: 6638

Representation ID: 6546

OBJECT Dr A Jickells

Summary:

This is Green Belt, does not constitute rounding off and should not be built on. Knowle cannot accommodate this development especially alongside Site 9, as there are too many houses and the traffic will use the junction with Warwick Road, worsening congestion.
Concept Masterplan
No details of how Purnell's Brook or the Streamside Trust nature reserve would be protected, and not all protected trees and hedgerows shown.

More details about Rep ID: 6546

Having trouble using the system? Visit our help page or contact us directly.

Powered by OpusConsult