Village Housing Options and Settlement Boundaries

Search representations

Results for Kingswood Homes search

New search New search

Object

Village Housing Options and Settlement Boundaries

Sites Review

Representation ID: 60627

Received: 15/12/2013

Respondent: Kingswood Homes

Representation Summary:

Objecting to the exclusion of site 13 (Land of Brome Hall Lane) as a preferred option site.
- believes the reasons for exclusion are not justified as is as close to the settlement as other preferred options, has no higher landscape value than other sites, and will have no greater impact on wildlife.

Object

Village Housing Options and Settlement Boundaries

Sites Review

Representation ID: 60772

Received: 15/12/2013

Respondent: Kingswood Homes

Representation Summary:

Site 13 and Foremans Cottage should be developed because:

Site 13:
-It is located no further from the village than preferred option Site 4.
-It has no additional landscape or ecological value above the other preferred options. The site has a road and service networks to support development.
-Adjacent residential development makes it a natural position for development.

Foremans Cottage:
-Offers a natural expansion with the provision of a historic tree line as a natural boundary.
-Foremans Cottage has been extended increasing the building density.
-A natural break between Foremans Cottage and the properties further down Brome Hall Lane exists.

Object

Village Housing Options and Settlement Boundaries

Kingswood

Representation ID: 61380

Received: 20/01/2014

Respondent: Kingswood Homes

Representation Summary:

-The housing numbers allocated to Lapworth have been underestimated as it offers a more sustainable location then other villages.

Object

Village Housing Options and Settlement Boundaries

Indicative Settlement Boundary

Representation ID: 61381

Received: 20/01/2014

Respondent: Kingswood Homes

Agent: Tyler-Parkes Partnership

Representation Summary:

-The approach taken to the realignment of the Settlement Boundary is not wholly consistent with the National Planning Policy Framework (Framework).
-Paragraph 85 of the Framework requires local planning authorities when defining Green Belt boundaries to, amongst other considerations, '...not include land which it is unnecessary to keep permanently open' and '...define boundaries clearly, using physical features that are readily recognisable and likely to be permanent.
-Suggestions are made for the inclusion of Foreman's Cottage and the Canal Office and Engineering Works in the Settlement Boundary. A map has been provided indicating the suggested boundary changes.

Attachments:

Object

Village Housing Options and Settlement Boundaries

Indicative Settlement Boundary

Representation ID: 61765

Received: 15/12/2013

Respondent: Kingswood Homes

Representation Summary:

Object

Village Housing Options and Settlement Boundaries

Sites Review

Representation ID: 61766

Received: 20/01/2014

Respondent: Kingswood Homes

Agent: Tyler-Parkes Partnership

Representation Summary:

The landowner of Foreman's Cottage suggests that it should be a preferred option for development because:
-The land is already developed andoccupied by a detached residential property and associated buildings.
-It is screened by mature trees and hedging. The property has very much been part of the village life and the character of the site is enclosed rather than open thus it would be inappropriate to retain within the Green Belt.
-Foreman's Cottage is part of a cluster of buildings. The buildings and their grounds are readily recognisable which were associated with the operation of the canal.

Attachments:

Object

Village Housing Options and Settlement Boundaries

Sites Review

Representation ID: 61767

Received: 20/01/2014

Respondent: Kingswood Homes

Representation Summary:

In ownership of discounted option (Site 13), which they wish to promote for development as:
-The landscape value is the same as the other preferred options.
-The land is well screened on all sides with mature trees and high hedges. Therefore it would not impact on the surrounding landscape.
-Seek to provide a low density, very high quality housing scheme which would have limited impact on the surrounding landscape.
-There is already housing either side of the field lending to a natural extension to the village.
-There is no wildlife present over and above that expected on the preferred options.

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