Response to Solihull Local Plan Review (Regulation 19) Consultation


SITE 101 ALLOCATION OF LOCAL GREEN SPACE

The land consists of two pony paddocks totalling 4 acres. These paddocks were originally larger open grazing fields fronting Old Waste Lane rented for grazing by my Grandfather which were compulsorily purchased by the Council for the road improvement at "Catchem's Corner" in the 60's. The road improvement left a strip of isolated land surrounded by the new Waste Lane and the latterly re-named Old Waste Lane. This land was bought by my Grandfather after the completion of the road improvement and has remained in family ownership ever since.

Land at Old Waste Lane maintains the original frontage and access points along Old Waste Lane with a new boundary and modern hawthorn hedge planted on Waste Lane. It is not connected to any other landholding.

My land was identified and put forward by SMBC for a permanent gypsy/traveller site as part of the The Gypsy and Traveller Site Allocations Development Plan consultations.
Its close proximity to the settlement of Balsall Common made my land suitable for consideration despite it being in the Green Belt. After my land was short-listed, I informed SMBC that it was not deliverable for that purpose and it was withdrawn by SMBC. My land remains available for residential development and representations have been made to the Draft Local Plan Review Consultation January 2017 and the Local Plan supplementary consultation March 2019.

As the owner of "Land at Old Waste Lane" known as Site 101 in the Solihull Draft Submission, I object to the designation of my land as Local Green Space on the following grounds of legal compliance and soundness:
• OWNER NOT CONTACTED The Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government on Local Green Space designation: Paragraph 019 Reference ID: 37-019-20140306 "A Local Green Space does not need to be in public ownership. However, the local planning authority...should contact landowners at an early stage about proposals to designate any part of their land as Local Green Space. Landowners will have opportunities to make representations in respect of proposals in a draft plan". SMBC have STILL not contacted me about designating my land Local Green Space. I only found out about it by chance seeing a post on the Balsall Common Facebook page AFTER my land had been proposed, voted on and allocated by Full Council on 30th October 2020. So, I only have this one opportunity to make any representations at this final regulation 19 stage of the Local Plan. When asked via Mr. Bhatti MP about this, SMBC responded: "The current representations on the Draft Submission Plan provides the opportunity to make comments on this proposal" and "All representations will be forwarded to the Inspector when the plan is submitted for examination, and the Inspector will consider whether the proposal is sound and legally compliant, as with all policies and proposals in the Draft Submission Plan". As of the 14th December 2020, SMBC have still not contacted me.
• CANNOT BE DELIVERED On 25th November 2020 SMBC eventually provided the following reasons for designating my land LGS: "The openness of the land bounded by Waste Lane/Old Waste Lane contributes to the rural, tranquil character at the entrance to Balsall Common which is of benefit in ensuring an attractive gateway to the settlement as well as being of benefit to existing surrounding residents and future residents." and "The designation of this land as a Local Green Space will contribute to the overall green space provision for this part of Balsall Common. "Paragraph: 021 Reference ID: 37-021-20140306 "Management of land designated as Local Green Space will remain the responsibility of its owner. If the features that make a green area special and locally significant are to be conserved, how it will be managed in the future is likely to be an important consideration..."Whilst in the past my land was managed as open grazing land with standard height hedges cut every year, for the last 30 years we have grown the hedges to provide shelter for the ponies and make the fields more secure. As it is my intention to continue to manage my land as enclosed pony paddocks and keep the hedges high as shown, it will not deliver SMBC's "openness / attractive gateway" to Balsall Common. As the only visible feature of my land is a modern, 100% hawthorn hedge planted by the council as part of the road improvement scheme it is also not sound to designate LGS. As the Pheasant Oak site is allocated, there is the opportunity to re-think the Green Space allocation within this site both to provide the attractive gateway to the settlement SMBC want, and contribute to the overall green space provision for this part of Balsall Common in the draft submission.
BELOW Approach to Balsall Common from the East on Waste Lane: Pheasant Oak (Left), Site 101 (Right)

• BELOW Same position on Waste Lane, looking left over Pheasant Oak allocation. BELOW same position on Waste Lane, looking right over Land at Old Waste Lane

• NO AMENITY VALUE My land is bisected by a diagonal cross-field PROW. In 2013 as a result of an unprecedented amount of complaints received by SMBC from Balsall Chairman Burrow (also Berkswell Parish Councillor, Lead of the Berkswell NP Steering Committee, resident of OWL and landowner/stakeholder in the BC1 allocation) it was decided that, despite no offence being committed under The Highways Act 1980, I would be prosecuted within 7 days if I did not take permanent preventative measures to protect the public footpath. This resulted in an immediate halt to grazing until I could afford the substantial amount of appropriate fencing. The complainant had asked SMBC to stop me grazing my land for the following reasons: Ponies standing in an intimidating manner in the field, ponies standing on the line of the footpath, hooves damaging the surface of the footpath, ponies blocking the line of the footpath, ponies standing at fencing near the footpath entrance with their heads over it which could lead to intimidation/contact with the public, ponies being fed near the entrance/anywhere near the line of the footpath with the possibility of hay being dropped or blown onto footpath, ponies sheltering under trees near the footpath, ponies being able to approach walkers, possibility of attack by ponies etc. On 26th January 2020, I informed SMBC that I was to resume the grazing of my land and the measures that I was taking to satisfy the conditions imposed. I am not aware of any complaints since and SMBC appear to be satisfied that I am now complying with their restrictions on my grazing, albeit, unwillingly due to the loss of grazing and expense I have incurred. Mr. Keaney, Head of highways has always been very helpful and we agreed many temporary measures before SMBC felt that a permanent solution had to be found.
• BELOW View of site 101 Land at Old Waste Lane viewed from footpath and only other view from the gateway on OWL showing measures required by SMBC:

• NOT DEMONSTRABLY SPECIAL Paragraph 100 of the NPPF states that “The Local Green Space designation should only be used where the green space is:
a) in reasonably close proximity to the community it serves;
b) demonstrably special to a local community and holds a particular local significance, for example because of its beauty, historic significance, recreational value (including as a playing field), tranquillity or richness of its wildlife; and
c) local in character and is not an extensive tract of land.”
SMBC have not shown any evidence to support the designation of my land as LGS on the grounds of b) "Demonstrably special to a local community and holds a particular
local significance" and therefore is not legally compliant or sound. The Neighbourhood Plan has not sought to allocate it. Indeed, the Council's justification for it being a proposed LGS is not sufficient for meeting the objectives of paragraph 100 of the Framework.
• UNDERMINES AIM OF PLAN Paragraph: 007 Reference ID: 37-007-20140306."Local Green Space designation should not be used in a way that undermines the aim of plan making". BC1 has now been extended to include the historical landholding of "Laburnum Farm", north of Old Waste Lane. By designating site 101, South of Old Waste Lane as Local Green Space proper consideration has not been given to the close-knit community of Old Waste Lane and the opportunity in the plan making process, to provide sustainable, organic growth centred around the lane, within the wider BC1 site. This would maintain the historic context and character of development in Old Waste lane.
• BACK DOOR WAY OF ACHIEVING PUBLIC OPEN SPACE After the Draft Submission Plan was published in October 2020, I was contacted by phone by Mr. Norman Childs who is a neighbour and active member of Barratt's Farm Neighbourhood Action Group (BFNAG). Representing the views of Balsall Parish Chairman Burrow and the wider group, Mr. Childs informed me that "they" didn't appreciate me asking questions on the facebook post (where I found out about the LGS allocation). He then said that BFNAG had originally wanted to include my land in the "Central Park" in the BC1 site but, as they could not justify it, they had gone for Local Green Space for now. I was told that "they" could still make it part of the "Central Park" once the LGS was designated "If that's what you want". Although I have asked SMBC for clarification about who put my land forward for LGS, as of 14th December 2020, despite being repeatedly reminded by Mr. Bhatti MP, I still do not know who actually put my site forward. Nowhere can I see that it is either legal or appropriate for Local Green Space to be used as either a "holding position" or as a "back door" way of achieving Public Open Space.
• WILL LEAD TO FURTHER ENFORCEMENT Should my land be designated Local Green Space in the adopted plan and considering the above, I expect my land to be subject to further action to achieve what Parish Chairman and supporters actually want. As SMBC already agree with Parish Chairman Burrow that the grazing of my land is inappropriate without the extensive fencing and other measures to protect the footpath surface and walkers, I expect that the designation of LGS will lead to enforcement to remove my grazing rights to protect the amenity of the LGS spoiled by the presence of ponies and the necessary fencing. As the only viable green field use of my land is for grazing, this would leave my land useless and open to further unwanted action only made possible by the designation of LGS.
• SITE SHOULD BE RESERVED The draft Submission Plan retains other sites put forward that have not been allocated for development so that they may be put forward at a later date should some sites not be deliverable within the timescale of the plan. Site 101 should be retained for the same purpose. It is already acknowledged in paragraph 541 of the Draft Submission Plan in that site BC1 has multiple owners that could complicate deliverability. As the latest allocation of BC1 now extends to all land north of Old Waste Lane with its multiple owners and complicated agreements between them and other interested parties, this is even more important.
For the policy to be legally compliant and sound my land at Old Waste Lane (site 101) should not be designated as Local Green Space for the reasons above.


Policy BC1 Barratt’s Farm, Balsall Common - Allocation of land historically known as "Laburnum Farm" North of Old Waste Lane.

This policy is not considered to be sound for the following reasons:

• NOT DELIVERABLE Land north of Old Waste Lane involves 5 undeveloped parcels of land with different owners. The main landholding's owner has appeared publicly at a meeting promising Barratt's Farm Neighbourhood Action Group (BFNAG) that they will not build on their land in their lifetime.
• NOT DEVELOPABLE Land North of Old Waste Lane is dependant on the main landowner for access onto the "relief road". Without this, no land north of Old Waste lane historically known as "Laburnum Farm" can be developed. With the significant number of complicated landholdings, their reliance on each other for access and "claw-backs" to take into account, the whole of the "Laburnum Farm" part of BC1 may not be financially viable.
• UNDERMINES THE AIMS OF THE DRAFT SUBMISSION PLAN Mr. Childs of BFNAG also informed me that the main landowner, also has a legal veto over another landholding. Balsall Parish Chairman Burrow (also Berkswell Parish councillor, Lead of the Berkswell NP steering committee, Old Waste Lane resident and landowner/ stakeholder) is aware of this and by supporting/leading consultations for this allocation, is putting the delivery of BC1 at risk. By also putting forward my Site 101 for designation as Local Green Space, Parish Chairman Burrow is more likely to deliver no delivery of any development in the whole area surrounding Old Waste Lane. In addition, Land north of Old Waste lane in BC1 is even less likely to be delivered when there is no site left available for development South of Old Waste Lane (Site 101).
For the policy to be legally compliant and sound, Land north of Old Waste Lane in BC1 should not be allocated until assurances can be gained by SMBC that the land will be available for delivery within the timescale of the Draft Submission Plan. In addition my land, Land South of Old Waste Lane Site 101 should not be designated Local Green Space.


As the owner of land at Old Waste Lane, I have only been given this one opportunity to make representations against the designation of my land as Local Green Space at the very last minute of this Regulation 19 stage of the local plan. I would be grateful if the Inspector could consider the points I make above.