Good morning,


Having only recently moved to the area I was concerned to see the plans for the proposed Site 4 for Dickens Heath.
I would like to add my objection to this plan and to confirm that I agree with the details included in the email below which outlines those concerns.


Regards,


David Shute
5 Boundary Lane,
Dickens Heath,
B90 1TX



Dear Sir / Madam,

I am writing to object to the Proposed Site 4 in Dickens Heath. The plans inadequately address even the existing infrastructure problems and go no way to making the site viable for the burden of several hundred new homes on the overstretched local roads, parking and public transport services. The impact of blurring the boundaries of the village will damage its character, road safety and physical environment irreparably and the perceived ‘benefits’ are far outweighed by the costs.

At a time when we are all more reliant on safe outdoor spaces this proposal affects many of our local sports fields and will detrimentally affect both adults and children in the local area. The impact on both adjoining ancient woodland and the local wildlife sites is also unjustified.

It is highly irresponsible to continue to approve development in a flood zone, especially given the spectacular (and repeated) failure of your previous flood mitigation schemes in and around Dickens Heath which have not only flooded homes in the new developments but also caused flooding in areas never previously flooded. A simple visual inspection clearly demonstrates the area is prone to flooding and the clay soil restricts drainage.

The proposed mitigations across the piece, are, in many cases, unachievable which makes the plan far less sustainable than the alternatives which do not have any of the problems outlined here.

Finally, given the manifold problems with Site Four identified above the case for destroying high quality green belt in an area with creaking infrastructure above developing brownfield sites which are the government’s priority has manifestly not been made.

The proposed mitigations across the piece, are, in many cases, unachievable which makes the plan far less sustainable than the alternatives which do not have any of the problems outlined here.


Regards,

Helen Shute
5 Boundary Lane
Dickens Heath
Solihull
B90 1TX