Site 8/9

Summary of my objection:

1. The Green Belt was designated as whole - and not as 'parcels' of land which can be nibbled away.
2. Many of these Refined Parcels are owned by developers and speculators.
3. The scoring of these parcels - by Atkins, a major Engineering Company - is subjective and does not even take into account one of the major Green Belt aims - which is to encourage the recycling of derelict and other urban land.
4. RP39 / Arden Triangle has been scored only moderately (compared to other local RPs), yet it has a strong rural outlook with much wildlife. It is an attractive green entry into Knowle and very close to the Historic centre.
5. Present owners of RP39 and Arden Academy set to gain financially if this land is developed.
6. Building on this area of Green Belt will irrevocably change the character of the area with the sprawl of new housing, and will increase pressure on already stretched local amenities.
Objection in detail with references:
1. I understand from the Department for Communities and Local Government in its National Planning Policy Framework (2012), that Green Belt land was designated with the "fundamental aim ... to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open; and that "the essential characteristics of Green Belts are their openness and their permanence."

2.3. Taking into account this last statement, I strongly believe that this designation was applied to the Green Belt in this area - AS A WHOLE. Dividing it into 'Refined parcels' and scoring these land parcels on the larger aims of Green Belt make a mockery of the original aim of the Green Belt:
* These parcels have been artificially formed, often by land developers or speculators.
* If some are 'scored' as 'not performing highly', the inference is that they are not as 'valuable' as other parcels within the Green Belt, suggesting they are more suitable to be built on.
* None of the parcels are scored on one of the Green Belt aims - which is to assist in urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land

The logical conclusion from this is that land that is now part of the Green Belt will be nibbled away in these 'refined parcels'.

I did note however that in the Green Belt Assessment Report prepared for Solihull by Atkins in 2016, that "it is not the intention of this Assessment to rank the identified Refined Parcels ... against each other. Parcels which perform highly against one purpose yet do not perform against another should not be considered any less important in their role and contribution to Green Belt land in the borough."

4. With this in mind, I take particular exception to the scoring of Refined Parcel 39 - otherwise known as the Arden Triangle. It would appear from the report to score only moderately - and yet this is largely rural land with special wildlife - eg bats, herons, buzzards, kestrels. It has a beautiful and elevated open outlook - taking in Knowle Locks and the sweep of land dropping over towards Temple Balsall.
Compared to other local 'Refined Parcels' it has less development (eg former nursery on RP36. It is also significantly closer to the Historic core of Knowle than RP36.)
Given its natural incline, it currently presents a very attractive, green and rural entry into Knowle centre from the South. Just the sort of aspect that fits with the Green Belt purpose 'to preserve the setting and special character of historic towns".

5. I suspect that this parcel of land has been identified as preferred to being developed, (DLP Proposal Map 2016) more because it financially benefits the parties to whom it presently belongs - and because it fits in with the grand schemes of the local Academy to rebuild its entire school and attract more revenue.
6. I do not believe this to be of benefit of the local community as has been inferred, as the sprawl of new housing will irrevocably change the character of the area and increase pressure on the already stretched local amenities. In addition, facilities such as the MIND garden - a beautiful green resource - are at threat.