We are writing in response to the advertised "Draft Local Plan Review Consultation (Dec 2016) and the proposal to construct 150 new houses on the land adjoining Holly Lane and Frog Lane in Balsall Common.
After reviewing the Draft Local Plan, the Town and Country Planning Act and the Planning Practice Guidelines we have several issues that we feel have not and currently are not being considered in the proposed development of the land.
1. Frog Lane is a Greenfield site and there are a considerable number of Brownfield locations around Balsall Common which had a better score for development within the plan. Why have these not been considered ?
2. It is understood that the land currently being used as a playing field is actually owned by Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council (SMBC) and leased to the Heart of England School and is now to be sold off without even discussing this with the School. This, at best raises suspicions as to SMBC's position and honesty with the public over the development and in the worst case actually appears to be a covert / surreptitious action to development without full consultation.
3. In the consultation held in November 2016 at St Peter's Church in Balsall Street East there was only a presentation for some 100 or so dwellings and these were not going to encroach upon the current land being used as playing fields. As of the end of November 2016 beginning of December 2016 the plan has been amended to include the land being used as playing fields and a significant increase in the number of proposed dwellings to be developed.
4. The current fields, whilst being owned by SMBC are a valuable public amenity, well used by local football teams, families and dog walkers whilst all other public amenities are located on the other side of the village. Government guidelines stipulate that they should be preserved and protected at all costs. We would have thought that this was of even greater importance in the current times of increasing obesity and health issues amongst people.
5. Solihull Connected (SMBC's latest transport strategy publication) acknowledges that the south of Balsall Common is the most congested part of the village with Balsall Street East (B4101) being a main thoroughfare between Knowle and Coventry. The addition of further traffic to this route (potentially 150 cars minimum from 150 houses) raises the risk of a road traffic accident or indeed a fatality (perhaps a young child on the way to school !) to a significant level.
6. The current proposed development is approximately 1.5 miles from the centre of the village, Doctors, shops, railway, etc., which, according to Government planning guidelines renders it unsustainable and appears to have received very little consideration in the decision process.

Whilst we appreciate that the local council has a responsibility to build new housing within its boundaries, it is also incumbent upon them to ensure that this requirement is fulfilled with due respect to the planning guidelines, sustainability studies, green belt requirements, etc.,.
The report therein identifies a shortlist of potential sites to the North of Balsall Common under growth option G which are eminently more suitable than Frog Lane / Holly Lane.
For example, Barratt's Farm (as identified on Page 144 under in Appendix C, Schedule of allocated Housing sites), a 57 hectare site with potential for 800 dwellings.
These sites offer the potential to develop a significant number of dwellings (including affordable housing) and infrastructure / amenities through the implementation of Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act (1990) and the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) Sections 203 and 204.
In the context of the above it is important to note that there are more constraints to development of the Frog Lane site and it would appear to have a poorer score for accessibility to the town centre so one can only assume that the primary objection to Barratt's Farm is the greater infrastructure / amenities development required for the increased number of the population and therefore schedule and costs.
It also noticeable that there is no provision within the plan for development within the confines of Dorridge, which has superior access to shopping facilities, amenities and schools whilst maintaining direct access to London and Birmingham.
In summation, whilst the "Draft Local Plan contains lots of references to report and studies it singularly fails to provide solid justification for the selection of the Frog Lane site above others. Development for developments sake simply to meet government targets is not the way forward for local communities and we, as residents who will be severely impacted, deserve an objective assessment, consultation and a response that answers the many questions posed.