f.a.o. Spatial Planning
LOCAL PLAN CONSULTATION RESPONSE
I would like you to understand that the consultation time offered by the council for the local population to acquire, digest, read, comprehend and react to the Local Plan is far too short. The entire plan contains over 10,500 pages with 30% being added on October 30th, the first day of the consultation period. To be given only six weeks to formulate a response is far too short a time.
It is acknowledged that the population of the U.K. is ageing but within Solihull, over 65’s make up 21% of the population and it has been said that they will number more than 50,000 by 2035.
Shirley has a 30% higher level of older people than the national average.
In recent years and indeed to date, Shirley has taken more than its fair share of retirement and care homes in comparison to the rest of Solihull. This has had a marked impact on Shirley as residents in these kinds of properties have particular needs and demands on local services, many of which are unable to cope at today’s levels of demand. Doctors are struggling, indeed at least one new care home is unable to find a local surgery at which to register its residents. Care services are well over subscribed in the area and south Solihull now has no primary care facility. Adding to the housing aimed at older people will only make matters worse. If these agencies are struggling now, what will be the impact of building even more homes in the area?
Of all the new housing proposed for the borough of Solihull more than 39% is planned to be in Shirley. This does not include the homes already completed such as those on what was the Powergen site and other windfall developments. If the proposed plans go ahead then much of the greenbelt land between Shirley, Cheswick Green and Dickens Heath will be lost forever.
Since the pandemic has closed so many shops and offices generally, I would question the need for so many extra new houses on virgin land. The empty / unused buildings could be repurposed for joint domestic / commercial use thus saving the greenbelt and keeping town centres alive.
No matter how much developers advocate that public transport is the way forward, and that narrow roads and little off road parking are a sign of the future, public transport in Shirley, away from the Stratford Road, is generally poor. The railway stations that serve the area are not easily accessed by road, pedestrian footpath or cycleway
Dickens Heath was built on the premise that the residents would be dissuaded by limiting the number of parking areas, garages and spaces not need to use cars and would instead, use public transport. The public transport in the area is so poor that most families in the village own at least two cars and there is a huge parking problem. The existing road system in and around Shirley is already far too congested. Access to the major routes such as the Stratford Road, the Alcester Road, the M42 and M40 are extremely busy now. Many more houses in the area would completely gridlock the road system.
Much of Shirley is built on clay and there is a considerable amount of local flooding, the newer areas of housing to be built have had to have ponds / pools incorporated in order to contain excess water, I understand this to be called SUDS (sustainable drainage system) and seems to be developer’s favoured way of overcoming the problem of flooding. These pools / ponds do not add to the attractiveness of a development being filled with reeds or similar and they are a danger, particularly to young children.
Speaking of children, there is one primary school planned in the development and not a single secondary school. The proposed homes will attract families and families mean children. Where are they meant to travel to for their education given the poor transport system already mentioned and the lack of access to get to bus stops or the stations? Schools, doctors, chemists, shops are more than a convenient walk away and generally will rely on existing narrow twisty country lanes many of which have no pedestrian footpaths. The distances involved are in many cases too far and too dangerous for mums with pushchairs and young children to negotiate. As there is only one primary school and no proposed secondary school many parents will have to transport their children by car. The only other alternative would be to cycle but the roads are too narrow and will have an undisputed inherent extra amount of traffic on them.
I understand that the average selling price of a new home proposed to be built on the various sites in Shirley will be over £340 000 meaning the developers will get a return of over £800 000 per acre, a far larger amount than they would make if they were to made to redevelop brown field or windfall sites which is what they should be encouraged to do as most of the required basic infrastructure is already paid for and in place.
I understand that people need homes but Shirley is being tasked with far more development than is fair or sensible, Chelmsley Wood is being regenerated, more homes could be built there where generally the infrastructure is already designed and existing, the new Arden development at the HS2 interchange can take more development of suitable homes not only the unaffordable ones that the developers are forcing on Shirley.
I feel that the Local Plan is being pushed through under cover of the pandemic with not enough time allowed for the general public to have their say. For the above reasons, I would like to register my objections to it.
Geoffrey Ward