use the sports provisions available at Old Yardleians RFC every day and the following ob sections about site 4 outside of Dickensheath
1. Site 4 BL1 Dickens Heath is in a high performing Green Belt area, which has not been taken into consideration in the Sustainability Appraisal. Central Government Policy is to protect the Green Belt and develop on Brownfield land first.
2. The Sustainability Appraisal tries to prove that this Site is sustainable when it clearly is not, owing to the numerous mitigation measures proposed to try and make it sustainable, some of which are unachievable.
3. The sports fields can be re-located but at some upheaval to the clubs and members, but why move them in the first place? Where would the land be found to accommodate so many pitches? Would it be preferable to find another site to build on? Also during the current issues surrounding the COVID crisis and the impact of having an unfit and unhealthy population would it be wise to build on sports pitches that provide health benefits to hundreds of adults and children every weekend. Surely it would be better for the council to add further provision to what is already available to promote healthy living and not take it away. What would the optics be for Solihull council if this were to go ahead?
4. The Council have not undergone a proper scrutiny of all other more sustainable sites in a sequential test that would have fewer constraints if the Sustainability Appraisal had been carried out correctly in the first place, before the site allocation, rather than trying to make the pre-selected site allocations fit the Plan.
5. This proposed development will be un-associated, both visually and physically, with the award-winning Village of Dickens Heath. The character and setting of the Village will be adversely affected and sense of community and identity compromised. There are strong, definable boundaries to the existing Village being the canal and the woodlands and ancient hedgerows. The proposal falls outside the Village’s built-up boundary.
6. Site 4 is surrounded by Local Wildlife Sites and Ancient Woodland. Although the Council state that to mitigate for the proposed development the area can be enhanced, they have not considered the very important connectivity of these important ecological sites. Indeed, Natural England have stated that “Ensure current ecological networks are not compromised, and future improvements in habitat connectivity are not prejudiced.”
7. Traffic & Village centre parking. The Traffic Study does propose some works to improve the congestion in peak hours but the situation will be further exacerbated by the huge number of new homes proposed in the Blythe area and South Shirley. The Council only propose to solve the Village Centre parking problem by controlling some on-street parking which will not solve the existing problem and will only be made worse with more development. The narrow, rural road network cannot take further development and is already overloaded.
8. The proposed development is not within a recognised walking distance from the Village Centre facilities, so further adds to the un-sustainability of the development. The Council state that a new footpath will be needed to the private road of Birchy Close to reduce the walking distance but this is legally unachievable. They suggest that a new bus route down Birchy Leasowes Lane could be provided but how will a bus exit the junction with Dickens Heath Road safely? At this junction the ancient woodland either side of this junction would inhibit any road improvement which has not been recommended. All the proposed footpaths are welcomed and should have been put in place many years ago to facilitate the extensions of the existing Village. The Village already acts as a commuter settlement with higher than average car ownership. Additional housing will only exacerbate the use of the car contributing to global warming.
9. Although the flooding report states that Site 4 is mostly in flood Zone 1, local residents have evidence that the sports fields flood nearly every year because of the increased rainfall due to climate change and the fact that this area is of bolder clay that restricts permeability. Even given the fact that a sustainable urban drainage (SUD) system is proposed, this all adds to the unsustainability of this site when other “Amber” sites have far less constraints. I have also seen that the flooding is not only confined to the playing fields. Tythe Barn Lane and also Tilehouse Lane flood due to the poor drainage. Any houses built on this area will be at risk of flooding and also making the existing problems worse due to the paving-over of large areas of the fields for build, roads and driveways.

10. There could be consideration shown to another local site that is currently not used and had previously applied for planning permission. The site that was Tidbury Green Golf Course should be considered as a site already developed and where there would be little or no impact on the surrounding community and sport provision. There would also be the ability to link the site with Witlocks End railway station which would be a much greener provision than more roads.