No

Draft Local Plan Review

Representation ID: 1543

Received: 16/02/2017

Respondent: Mr Paul Southall

Representation Summary:

Road infrastructure in Dickens Heath and South Shirley area is inadequate for additional 2000 plus houses as current housing levels already challenging existing infrastructure. Whilst public transport provision important, majority of people in rural areas use cars, road network south of A34 generally narrow, access in and out of Dickens Heath is very poor, many households having grown children at home will have more than 2 cars. Housing levels should be reduced and infrastructure improved, it is not sufficient to suggest that cycling and buses will solve all the problems. Increased car parking at railway stations will be required.

Full text:

the draft plan outlines the need for housing for older people. Having listened to a discussion on radio 4 about general housing issues, I formed some concerns. What consideration is given to the wider needs of older people. They may not require as many rooms in a house but they do not wish to live in 'matchboxes'. Is social cohesion considered. If older people move to a new home it is often more difficult for them to meet people living around them. Not everyone that is old wants to play bingo. If all elderly people are bunched together is the plan to 'ghettoise' the old? These large building firms charge large sums for the upkeep of buildings. [I have a friend paying about £2000 per year in fees for a flat she owns].
The proposals do mention the need for schools, what about provision of doctor surgeries and other health care?
Little is said about road access. The roads in Dickens Heath are very narrow, enough provision was not made for traffic in the centre. It is already nightmarish driving there, signage is extremely poor. Now you are planning even more houses. Traffic along Dog Kennel Road is already difficult in the mornings and evenings. The roundabout by Porcelanosa has already been identified as above capacity. Access to Blyth Valley Business Park has suggested a road to Creynolds Lane, surely more than one way of access is required. Why should a road via Hockley Heath not be used?
The draft proposal mentions the challenge of Climate change and flooding. This area has suffered from flooding in the past. With in excess of 2000 houses insufficient care has been accounted for. The field below Light Hall farm going towards the fishing club ponds is wet all year round currently. When you walk along the field near the hedgerow at the bottom you are actually in water now, what about the effect of all the extra buildings and roads and drives?
Currently the land around Light Hall Farm is home to bats, badgers, buzzards, owls and a wide range of birdlife [ woodpeckers , tree creepers, nuthatches, long tail tits, etc.. How can this biodiversity be safeguarded?
My concerns have outlined plans to the current proposals, history of recently built housing demonstrates that builders submit planning which is approved and then at a later date the builders amend the plans and increase the density of housing. When we buy an expensive item such as a car we are provided with definite specifications, why is it deemed acceptable that house buyers buy with one specification which is then changed with no consideration to the initial plan?