To whom it may concern,

I wish to respond to SMBC's Draft Local Plan and, in particular, to the section on their intentions for Balsall Common - Barratt's Farm development.

I appreciate the need for additional housing in the borough and that Balsall Common will be expected to accomodate it's fair share of these. However, careful thought must be given to the preservation of the Green Belt in the Meriden gap to prevent further urban sprawl narrowing the areas of open land between Coventry, Solihull and Birmingham.

This is particularly an issue in the proposals for Site 1 - Barratt's Farm. Paragraph 96 of the Draft Plan states that the planned developments will enhance the Green Belt. How can this be the case when Barratt's Farm is the narrowest point of the Meriden Gap - only just over a mile wide at this point. Coventry have already made plans to build up to the Solihull Borough Boundary in Berkswell whilst Warwickshire are already building additional housing at Burton Green. SMBC's plans will further erode the Meriden Gap. Once land is released from the Green Belt (Paragraph 97) it can never be reclaimed and the benefit of the Meriden Gap will be lost for ever. SMBC's plan suggests the need for a strong defensible eastern boundary to the Green Belt which in effect narrows it. There are alternative sites for building rather than narrowing the gap at this point. Section 15 and Paragraph 405 for example show Sites - No.76 and No.212 at Cornets End Lane which could provide a new settlement without narrowing down the Meriden Gap.

Interestingly, there is no mention of the emerging Neighbourhood Development Plan for Berkswell - something we have worked hard on to maintain and preserve the rural character of this area. Meriden's NDP and Hampton-in-Arden's NDP have been taken into consideration but not Berkswell's. Why not? The Riddings development is a prime example of how housing can be built so that rural character can be kept and the resulting traffic impact can be minimized by thoughtful road planning. The open park spaces are a great (and vital) amenity which are well used and bring together older and newer housing areas and people.

Relating to Paragraph 95 - The Concept Master Plan states an intention to develop a tract of open space running through the majority of Barratt's Farm to achieve the 'Riddings Hill' type of development. There doesn't appear to be clear evidence in the plan that this will be the case. The 'low density housing' proposals and the 'potential area for development' on the 'SMBC's Illustrative Emerging Concept Plan' (page 14) will completely fill the area between older and new housing - nothing like the exemplary Riddings Hill development. The proposed 'by-pass' runs right through the middle of this 'Tract of Open Land' too lessening it's recreational use. Unavoidable perhaps - more open parkland could be included in the development area to the west of the bypass to offset this.

Relating to Paragraph 95 - The Concept Master Plan also states the intention of incorporating the long-established use of playing field/recreational space into the broader aspect of informal and formal recreational facilities. Why then, for the Barratt's Farm proposal, has it earmarked the playing field behind the Catholic Church on Meeting House Lane as and area for 'low density housing'? On a personal note, this field (Very recently the Catholic Church has fenced it off) has been extensively used, for many years, by village residents for recreational activities - football, etc. I have lived in Balsall Common since 1996 (23 years) - my children (and many other local children) have grown up using and enjoying it. A real worry for me is that if the low density housing were to be built on the playing field, where would the access point to the site be. Suggestions I have heard show access through Oxhayes Close. This would be highly dangerous both for vehicles, pedestrians and residents. The junction between Oxhayes Close and Meeting House Lane has a very restricted line of sight making it extremely unsuitable for an increase in traffic. Detailed traffic analysis would need to be done on the junction?

Looking at the emerging concept plan for Barrett's Farm, it is insufficiently developed to enable a clear assessment to be made by myself as a resident. I find it difficult to fully assess it's impact and I have many concerns which it fails to address. I suggest that it is essential that any building work should be kept on hold until HS2 construction in the area is complete and the major access points (Station Road and Waste Lane) to the bypass constructed. With the massive disruption HS2 is likely to bring to this area it should be possible for SMBC to prioritize building in other areas within the Borough before development here. Any piecemeal development of Barratt's Farm must be avoided until a stronger concept plan for the whole site is in place.

It would make sense for all development on Barrett's Farm to only use access points onto the proposed bypass. Matching the Riddings Hill development and routing the bulk of additional traffic away from the con-jested Village Centre.

If the whole area proposed to be released from the Green Belt were to be developed fully it could result in over 2000 homes (stated in the SMBC 2013 Local Plan) being built on Barrett's Farm alone. A huge increase in cars in the village and overwhelming pressure on village infrastructure not to mention pollution worries.

Enhancements to the Village Centre are mentioned in the Plan but a thorough analysis of the impact of new housing on the centre and village as a whole needs to be undertaken to look at the effect of increasing the population of our village by 50% before committing to additional housing.

Finally, what is SMBC's justification for selecting Balsall Common for much of the Council's housing needs?