Solihull LPR Site 16

As a resident of Lugtrout Lane, I wish to voice my concerns over the possible building of 650 new homes according to the LPR ref. Site 16. I recognize that SMBC have to provide a solution to the identified housing shortage, but I ask you to review your intention to include this particular site in the plan on the grounds listed below.

1) Building on Green field land.

2) Potential loss of prime agricultural land

3) Loss of accessible recreational sports facilities which seems contradictory to Challenge J Improving health and wellbeing for everyone (page22 Draft Local Plan)

4) The field is within the Meriden Gap an area that you have recognized is under considerable development threat and should be protected where possible. It is possible to meet your own commitment by not promoting this site for development.

5) Whilst you recognize that most of the bordering roads will need upgrading I do not believe this will go anywhere to resolving the ongoing traffic issues that this area is constantly subjected to: widening roads does not reduce traffic. Promoting a site of 650 dwellings will ultimately result in potentially 6000 + traffic movements per day. The continual expansion of JLR facilities will result in increase in traffic particularly on Damson Parkway and Lugtrout Lane, which will be exacerbated by the movements to and from dwellings. Policy P8 suggests that the Council is unlikely to support developments where the increased delay to vehicles is severe.

6) Upgrading two of the roads mentioned namely Lugtrout Lane and Field Lane has the potential of completely changing the character of the rural local area, a feature which SMBC continually promote as a reason why the Borough is so popular.

7) The plan also recognizes that certain facilities need increasing, namely schools, public transport and local health services. The plan seems to contain no guarantees that the increased provision will be provided. Schools and local surgeries are already over -subscribed. At present bus services in the area do not meet "Policy P7 Accessibility and Ease of Access " requirements for new developments in terms of frequency. Currently operators have shown little interest in improving them.

8) Policy P19 Range and quality of Local Services promotes developments will need to be sensitive to local character and enhance public realm and suggest that a development of this size in this locality fails to meet this criteria.

9) By allocating this site for development SMBC are breaching one of its own objectives namely that shown on page 21 Challenge E Protecting key gaps between urban areas and rural settlements. The field you have selected is 1 of 2 that separate the settlement of Catherine-De Barnes from Solihull. By allocating this site the distance between Solihull and Catherine-De-Barnes is eroded by 50%.

I do hope you will consider the points raised when you discuss the proposed plan.