In the next 10 years or so, building 1,755 new houses within a short distance of Balsall Common centre will mean a 45% increase in the existing 3,900 homes in the area. It also seems likely, since more land has been identified than is required by the current plan, that further housing development will take place after the initial phase.

My wife and I believe that these new homes will cause a significant change to Balsall Common and it will become more akin to a commuter town than a village.

Assuming that the Government's Affordability target will be applied to the new houses it is likely that a higher proportion of lower-cost properties will be built than at present. This will obviously attract younger families than at present. The population in Balsall Common is also likely to contain a higher proportion of young people because during the next 10 years the relatively high proportion of older people currently living in the area (ourselves included!) will either no longer be alive or will be in care homes.

We believe that the availability of lower cost homes and influx of younger families will lead to a major change in the demography of the area.

Far from being a threat to the current way of life (as may be seen by some in the community) we believe that the Local Plan presents an ideal opportunity to develop the essential infrastructure that a well-balanced and vibrant future community will require.

Key infrastructure elements, many of which are currently below par and will need improving, include schools, transport, shops and leisure facilities.

Balsall Common Schools
Balsall Common Primary School (BCPS) and the Heart of England School (HoE) are both high quality academies but we believe are unlikely to have the capacity to support the expected increase in the number of children. Both schools are completely hemmed in by residential housing and have no room to expand.

In particular, BCPS has been extremely overcrowded for many years and it would be highly undesirable to try to add more pupils. (The head teacher said recently that to comply with current educational standards BCPS would need to have another 10,000 sq metres of usable space. Several years ago Cllr Peter Lea also famously remarked that if BCPS was a zoo, the Council would close it down!)

In our opinion the proposed two-entry form Primary School on the new Barratt's Farm development will be inadequate to meet increased nursery and primary demand.

We feel that the sums to accommodate between 45% and possibly up to 60% more children in the area simply do not add up.

A further factor is that road-side parking for the BCPS and HoE schools, plus drop-down and pick-up by parents, is a source of unending misery for the surrounding residents. It also causes major congestion on the east-west and north-south commuter routes through Balsall Common, especially during the morning rush-hour.

One option would be to relocate both the BCPS and HoE schools and release the combined area for building. The two schools currently occupy approximately 6.5 hectares of adjacent land which we understand is owned by the SMBC and could be worth up to £24m. Using a density of 24 homes per hectare, the joint site would accommodate upwards of 150 new houses. Given assurances that adequate access roads would be provided, we are sure that local residents would be happy with this option. It would also remove a major cause of congestion in the wider Balsall Common area.

Ideally the two new academies would be built on land adjacent to the green belt with proper provision for traffic access, drop-off points and parking. It is essential in planning any new schools that onsite parking is provided for teachers and visitors. A possible location would be the Barratt's Farm site with access from the proposed new bypass. The question of course is the likely cost of this solution and the timescale.

We understand that the BCPS Governors and Head Teacher have proposed a halfway-house to the above option which would involve building a new five-form entry Primary School on the Barratt's Farm site and releasing their current the land and buildings to the HoE School for use as a sixth form annex. As local residents, we are not in favour of this option because we feel that over time the sixth form annex will develop into a fully-fledged six form college which would be open for long hours each week day and possibly at weekends. This would result in even more traffic, parking and congestion problems than at present. Additionally, it would open the possibility of anti-social behaviour among groups of 16 to18 year-olds congregating in various areas of the otherwise peaceful Kemps Green estate. Primary school teachers have also said that they feel that a five-entry form school would be too big and very intimidating for young children.

We feel that a better solution would be to build a new three-entry form Primary School on the Barratt's Farm site but continue to run the existing BCPS school and nursery with a reduced number of children. Ideally the HoE school would be relocated as well, leaving the rest of the land available for housing. Either way, we believe that a small Nursery and Primary school should remain on the eastern side of Balsall Common to cater for younger children in the immediate area.

No matter which option is taken it is highly recommended that moves to build a new Primary School are made straight away because whilst it has been said that house building on the Barratt's Farm site will have to wait several years until the main HS2 work is over, it is likely that the development of the other sites, for example, Ridding's Hill and Frog Lane will start much earlier.

Transport
It is likely that a younger Balsall Common community will be much more attuned to using public transport than the current older population. They will demand better and faster local transport, including links to main-line trains and the airport for work, shops and leisure.

Much has been said about the proximity of Berkeswell Station as a good reason for expanding housing in the Balsall Common area, but in truth it is unlikely that the current two or three trains per hour will be adequate. Having single lines in each direction and the need for the local trains to be interspersed with faster London trains, means the service cannot be expanded without major cost.

As a matter of urgency, much enlarged parking facilities should be provided at Berkswell Station, but whilst the local train service currently gives reasonable access to Birmingham, Coventry and the Airport it does not address access to other parts such as Solihull centre, and in our opinion will not suffice in the medium and long term.

We feel that a much better solution would be to start development of a comprehensive tram network throughout the Solihull Borough, linking all major centres, including the airport and new HS2 station, as well as places further afield such as Kenilworth and Warwick. This would provide rapid, frequent and relatively cheap access to work, shops and leisure.

In our opinion such a network would totally revolutionise the area and should be seriously considered. The tram services between Birmingham and Wolverhampton are a good example of what can be achieved in relatively few years. For example, to have a tram very six minutes and be able to get from a place like Bilston, directly into Birmingham City centre in less than 20 minutes is proving very popular and is re-energising these areas.

We agree that the proposed Balsall Common bypass will greatly relieve traffic through Balsall Common centre, but feel that it should be a dual carriageway and have bridges at the more heavily-used intersections instead of roundabouts. Hallmeadow Road should be widened, with slip roads provided for the Medical Centre and what will be the enlarged Ridding's Hill Estate. As above, it is essential that more parking is provided at Berkeswell Station because the eastern side of much of Hallmeadow Road is currently taken up by all-day station parking.

Roads on most of the recent estates built in Balsall Common are far too narrow.
In many cases there is also inadequate off-road parking for residents. When planning the layout of the new sites, where possible it should be ensured that off-road parking for two cars per household is available. Also that roads are wide enough to allow kerbside parking and access for service and emergency vehicles. This particularly needs to be the case where homes are close to schools, community centres and shops.

Local Shops
With one or two exceptions, local shops and other services in the Balsall Common area are woefully lacking. In the short term, urgent attention should be paid to improving parking in Balsall Common centre. It would also be very advantageous to allow one of the major supermarket chains to build a centre on the outskirts of the area.

Leisure Facilities
In our opinion there is a great opportunity to provide better leisure facilities and make the Balsall Common area much more attractive, especially to younger people.
Arrangements should be made for a sports hall and an indoor swimming pool in the proposed new Primary School to be shared with the local community outside of school hours.

On the periphery of Balsall Common the SMBC and Parish Councils should work together with other authorities to provide public access to the River Blythe and various lakes in the area. These should be landscaped and opened up with footpaths, cycle paths and picnic areas, and nature reserves should be created.
In our opinion there is little point in having wonderful green belt land nearby if it can't be seen, appreciated and protected. One suggestion would be to enlist support from organisations such as the National Trust and Woodland Trust.

In summary, we feel that emphasis should move away from simply building a prescribed number of houses, to planning what type of community will be in the area in the future and therefore what kind of accommodation, schools and other facilities will be required to make Balsall Common and the surrounding area a really attractive place to live.