Question 5 - Site 2 - Frog Lane

The Frog Lane site is south of the village, exceeds into green belt which may cause further expansion later on. The housing would also be too far away from the village amenities, schools, transport etc

The land is an isolated parcel with an access onto Frog Lane is a narrow country lane and there is arequirement for traffic to negotiate a blind corner in order to access the junction onto Balsall St East.
My historical knowledge since the early 50's are of frequent road ollisions at this blind corner including both vehicles and livestock.etc. Frog Lane also opens onto the junction with Holly Lane and a here again The junction is on a substantial bend. Both access points would niot safely sustain the volume of traffic which would inevitably occur with the proposed development.

Frog Lane is of particular amenity value for the local community.

Balsall Common already has a clear and long established defensible boundary in Balsall Street/Balsall Street East

At a time of huge structural change the proposed addition of almost 50% of housing stock will kill the remnants of this community.

The infrastructure plans are very sketchy and no commitment whatsoever is provided to address the very poor connectivity with the rest of the borough.

The community is taking the pain of development and should receive 100% of community infrastructure levy

Balsall Common is being asked to provide more than 25% of the build capacity for the borough with less than 5% of the population

The plan offers no specific actions to improve integration of Balsall Common within borough and regional context.

Development is withing green belt and there is no clear need for relaxation of green belt rules.

Development is disproportionate to size of settlement and to share of borough population.

Plan is supposed to avoid adding population in areas without transport infrastructure and local employment. Balsall Common is specifically identified as lacking in local services and in local employment. No plans are given for new business premises

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the above. My opinion remains as I intimated to you many months ago that Balsall St and Balsall St.East should be the boundary of development in the western side of this village.
If you let frog Lane go then Oakes farm and land north of it will go too.
I repeat my opinion ,shared by many, that development this far out from the centre of the village is unsustainable. All that it is near is the overcrowded Primary School.
For that reason I and others suggested brownfield sites closer to the centre as an alternative but you have simply included them as well taking out housing in other areas. If that is the response to" if not there where" then there is no incentive to assist.
The concept plan mentions a green area at the north end of Frog lane but the present residents of Balsall St East were at one time promised a bund or green corridor behind their houses. I would suggest this is preferable and would provide a walkway through to the playing fields.
I will comment further in due course.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the above. My opinion remains as I intimated to you many months ago that Balsall St and Balsall St.East should be the boundary of development in the western side of this village.
If you let frog Lane go then Oakes farm and land north of it will go too.
I repeat my opinion ,shared by many, that development this far out from the centre of the village is unsustainable. All that it is near is the overcrowded Primary School.
For that reason I and others suggested brownfield sites closer to the centre as an alternative but you have simply included them as well taking out housing in other areas. If that is the response to" if not there where" then there is no incentive to assist.
The concept plan mentions a green area at the north end of Frog lane but the present residents of Balsall St East were at one time promised a bund or green corridor behind their houses. I would suggest this is preferable and would provide a walkway through to the playing fields.
I will comment further in due course.

Is this area sufficiently protected from noise and pollution from aircraft to and from Birmingham? It seems that development on this south facing slope will be very prominent in the landscape. But I accept that Frog Lane does offer a natural and defensible green belt boundary for the future. The local junior school would be under pressure, but if the new school on Barratts Farm has 3 form entry, there may be capacity released.

We were disappointed to see that the plans for this site had not been advanced since its previous publication, however clarity re the retention of the HL Playing Fields and Allotments was welcomed. Below is a list of areas for further consideration:

- The masterplan indicates that the density of housing proposed within the development masterplans is out of character with the existing prosperities. This particular road (and side of the road) has the lowest density of housing within the Built Up Boundary Area. The masterplan needs to be adjusted to reflect the character. In addition there are no bungalows proposed within this scheme. A bungalow is potentially being demolished to make way for this new development. It is therefore reasonable to expect that this type of accommodation which is suitable for both the elderly and disabled is made available within the masterplan with ideally more properties of this type made available within this scheme

- Pedestrian and vehicle access to this site remains inadequate. Emergency services access to the site is not sufficient (as confirmed on Page 20 of SLP Site Allocations - Masterplans). It is unrealistic to expect residents to walk through a playing field (even if a pathway is provided) and/or via a long and at times isolated pathway (dark winter months (even if lighting is provided) to access Balsall Street East (with existing limited street lighting). There is no indication of cycle access to this site and there is no indication of how traffic will be restricted from parking near to and along the only access point to this proposed site

- This site provides very low accessibility to ammenities

- The willow tree positioned on the front garden of the property to be demolished for the vehicle access contributes to the character and ecology of the area. An indication of how this prominent native tree will be retained would be welcomed by the community. In addition, the existing hedgerows and trees within the rear property of this property and the field adjacent provide valuable habitat for the birds identified by residents and listed below:

-sparrowhawk
-buzzard
-pheasant
-quail
-wood pigeon
-cuckoo
-barn owl
-tawny owl
-heron
-swift
-great spotted woodpecker
-green woodpecker
-meadow pipit
-wren
-robin
-nightingale
-blackbird
-song thrush
-great tit
-long tailed tit
-blue tit
-nuthatch
-treecreeper
-jay
-magpie
-rook
-crow
-tree sparrow
-chaffinch
-greenfinch
-goldfinch
-bullfinch
-hawfinch


- The existing hedgerows and trees within the rear property to be demolished and the field adjacent provide valuable habitat for the wildlife listed below:

-foxes
-rabbits
-badgers
-hedgehogs
-deer
-bats

- The field behind the property to be demolished has been dormant for a significant period of time. This has enabled wildlife to flourish in this area. It should be preserved and protected. The masterplan for this area indicates it will become a "Grassland SI". Access to this area by the public should be prohibited. Concerns have been raised as to how this area of ecological significance will be protected from:

- traveller encampments
- fly tipping
- human interaction
- dogs
- criminal activity

Any of the above will have a detrimental impact on this area and therefore render the future "Grassland SI" redundant

Furthermore, in the event of the development of this field a firm proposal from SMBC re. how the area will be managed and maintained must be provided to residents in advance of this development proceeding with further opportunity for consultation provided

The three significant oak trees which will flank the access to this development proposal do not currently have TPOs. SMBC must put TPOs in place prior to the development of this site with clear expectations re. how and who will be responsible for their maintenance and survival

Currently there are several agricultural gates which provide direct access from Frog Lane to the proposed development site. These must be secured to prevent incursions from traveller encampments and to secure the new and existing properties from crime within this area

- The Frog Lane area currently suffers from regular bouts of ASB and drug dealing and the fencing of goods. This is an isolated section of the parish and if development is to occur there needs to be significant consideration as to how this problem can be tackled and resolved. Frog Lane is not a sufficient road to host two-way traffic. In the event of this development going ahead the road needs to be closed to traffic through the implementation of a no-through road point. This would make the access to residential/commercial properties on Frog Lane possible via Balsall Street East but would remove the issue of the blind corner and the threat to life currently posed to cyclists, pedestrians, walkers, runners, equestrians. Access to the Holly Lane Playing Fields and agricultural fields would then be gained through the Frog Lane/Holly Lane junction. By doing this SMBC have the opportunity to preserve the rural aspect and recreational use of this lane for the benefit of the community. This lane is used as part of the annual Balsall Common Fun Run. Many runners within this community use this lane as part of their regular training runs in preparation for the annual event

- Due to the open aspect of the rear gardens on Balsall Street East existing properties will be subject to a significant change in their privacy. Currently properties along this road have fencing arrangements constructed from low rise timber and posts. Development on this site will expose their privacy and compromise their security. In the event of development taking place on this site the security and privacy of existing residents must be paramount and a scheme in agreement with all its residents must be in place before permission for development is granted by SMBC. Policing in this area is woefully inadequate.

- Issues surrounding pedestrian/vehicle access to Balsall Common Primary School and Heart of England Academy must be resolved prior to the development of this site to prevent risk to life. Current road/pedestrian conditions present a daily risk to life. Pedestrian access to the schools via this development site must be revised. Current proposals promote the use of cars to gain access to these sites. A direct pedestrian access from the development site via the service road on Balsall Street East must be provided within this scheme in order to make it viable

- Housing developed on this site must be constructed from the highest possible noise insulation materials to avoid the inevitable sleep disruptions from planes arriving and departing from Birmingham Airport via this area. This will ensure a decent quality of life for new residents in this area.

- Within this area "Development should be set back from the immediate locality and development within view or within the zone of significance influence must be of high architectural value" (Page 17 of SLP Site Allocations - Masterplans). Residents are angry that the former property of Silver Birches on Frog Lane was granted planning permission to be demolished and replaced by a 2 storey 6 apartment property in 2017. This decision in the eyes of residents clearly flouts the statement made (Page 17 of SLP Site Allocations - Masterplans) and serves to promote a level of mistrust and faith amongst residents towards SMBC and their meaningful commitment to maintaining the character of this area Solihull Council do not care about preserving the Local Character of this area and bend the rules re. Proximity to heritage sites to suit their housing targets. This has been proved through your publication of this masterplan!

- Conditions re a party wall agreement needs to be put into place and enforced by Solihull Council before any work on the demolition of the bungalow on Balsall Street East takes place. Residents of 20 Balsall Street East have already undergone significant distress and have had to fight for Solihull Building Control to regulate the inapporpiate development of Silver Birches Frog Lane with little if no support from SMBC.

Bounded infill.

Given the need for additional housing, the site appears suitable.

Support

Ideal for a small community development it is close to the main schools and reasonable distance to th ecentre and close to bus routes

It is considered this site is poorly related to employment facilities and very intrusive into the openness of the Green Belt.

This site is in the Green Belt and I do not believe sufficient exceptional circumstances as required by the NPPF have been justified.
I am also concerned that although the Concept Master Plan only shows development on the western half of the site, the eastern half including the playing fields and the allotments have also been released from the Green Belt. This would mean this area would have little protection against development applications in the future.

Methodology.
I do not agree if Balsall Common station is counted as equal to Dorridge.
Infrastructure
We need infrastructure. Green spaces, sports facilities, parking,improvements to very limited.centre.

Site 1 Barrett's Farm
I reluctantly agree to its inclusion.
Site 2 and 3
I do not agree to their inclusion as they are do far from amenities.my neighbour has to get a taxi to the shops.also they have considerable worth as greenfield and wildlife havens.
Trevallion Stud and Pheasant oak Farm.
Yes to being included as
Used as part brownfield.
Concept plans. Good idea but need much more work especially in guarding development from existing gardens

6. Richborough Estates is fully supportive of the proposal to remove land at Frog Lane, Balsall Common from the Green Belt and allocate the site for housing purposes (Site 2). This emerging allocation is also recognised in the recently published draft Balsall Parish Neighbourhood Development Plan. There is no doubt that, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework, Balsall Common is a sustainable location for growth, development would be directed towards a settlement inset within the Green Belt and the settlement is well-served by public transport.

7. The capacity of the Frog Lane site is assessed to be circa 110 dwellings and the draft Concept Masterplans document echo what was originally proposed by Richborough Estates.

8. However, Richborough Estates has taken the opportunity to update the Promotional Brochure for 'The Oaks' previously submitted to the Council in July 2016. The up-dated Promotional Brochure (January 2019) refines the proposal and reflects the ability to provide vehicular access from Balsall Street East via another property that is controlled by Richborough Estates. This alternative access reduces the length of highway needing to cross the field which is proposed to be retained for biodiversity benefits. The biodiversity benefits would provide the type of compensatory improvements to environmental quality and accessibility sought by the Framework when land is released from the Green Belt.

9. A landscape-led approach to the master planning of the site remains as a key principle with the existing boundary vegetation being retained. The accessibility and sustainability credentials of The Oaks are not altered as a consequence of the updated Concept Master Plan. There remain no policy or insurmountable physical constraints to the development of the site as illustrated in the Promotional Brochure.

10. Although it is noted that reference is made to the potential need for a second access because of the capacity being over 100 dwellings, this is not required because there is scope to provide an emergency access or, as indicated in the draft Concept Masterplan document, a design for the access from Balsall Street East which allows for emergency vehicles.

11. There would be the opportunity to provide for a range of dwelling types and sizes at a density that respects the adjacent pattern of development and the site's location on the edge of Balsall Common. Due to the strongly defined boundaries, housing on the site would not be visually intrusive within the wider landscape setting of Balsall Common when viewed from the surrounding countryside.

The density of housing proposed is too great and out of character with the existing mature housing development.
Sport and recreation facilities at Holly Lane Park should be developed with changing/toilet facilities and off road carparking using the existing wide verge on Holly Lane. Frog Lane should be widened and footpath created, with traffic calming in the area of blind double bends.

I am writing to you upon being informed about recent plans to build housing up the land surrounding Frog Lane, Balsall Common. I am a resident of Balsall Street East, a road which backs onto the fields of Frog Lane. The idea that this green space could be filled with new builds brings no joy to my life and rather fills me with sadness and concern for the future of my life in Balsall Common.

I feel compelled to voice my opinion on behalf of individuals who cannot voice their own, Balsall Street East is home to many elderly people who I have been assured wish to live a quiet life.

Balsall Street East is a busy enough road and cannot host the increase of traffic that would come with more housing. I personally know many young families who reside on the street, their children do not deserve to live besides an ever-increasingly busy street. Already, cars drive over the 30 mph speed limit and I believe that more houses would encourage drivers to take liberty in their excessive speeds on the surrounding roads. In addition, Balsall Street East is the main point of access for the children of Balsall Common Primary School, a school with a population of over 600 children. The building of new houses and the subsequent increase of traffic will therefore effect these children too. I hope you will naturally understand that the negative effects of the increase of traffic on a fast road is not something that me or the community would like to witness.

Building on all available land means that the British countryside is losing to yet more ugly houses.
If you look at the town itself, which is currently quite grotty, there is more opportunity for (better) development - above/behind shops/unnecessarily large car park by Co-op. Instead of choosing the easy option of building on blank canvas, you should use more imagination to maximise the use of the existing town. There is a need for more accommodation but building hundreds of individual houses sounds very inefficient. If you need to tackle the housing deficiency, build more flats in the town centre.

I am concerned that the Concept Master Plan only shows development on part of the site being released from Green Belt. This gives little protection from future development on the playing fields and allotments.

Way too large for the village

Frog Lane as it currently exists very clearly marks the southern boundary of the surrounding Green Belt. The construction of 110 houses adjacent to the lane will change the rural nature of the area forever by greatly increasing traffic, noise, loss of visual amenity and will turn Frog Lane itself into a rat run. The lane is currently very popular with walkers of all ages who will no longer be able quickly and easily to access open countryside from surrounding houses. Once this land is lost, it will be too easy to permit further development into the surrounding countryside.

Moving the Green Belt boundary is the thin end of the wedge.
Balsall Street East is already a natural boundary and should remain so.
Area far to small to accommodate 110 house, the access is very ambiguous (as it states in the plan, may need 2) and the roads around the area are all far to small for approx 170 cars.

*Frog Lane development is a Green Field site on the Southern boundary of the village so approving planning permission will set a precedent and promote additional erosion of the green belt to the South of the village.
*The Frog Lane site directly contradicts the Balsall Common residents feedback from the local NDP Survey where 77% of residents agree Balsall Street East should be the Southern most boundary to the village.
*Development is too small to deliver value - at only 110 homes will not solve the housing shortage problems in the village and only add to the congestion challenges in the immediate vicinity of Frog Lane. The negative impact on the greenbelt and local road network significantly outweigh the value the small development will deliver for Balsall Common and SMBC.
*Proposed main entry/exit on Balsall Street East will add increased pressure on the already high local congestion and cause further disruption and pollution on Balsall Street East. There are a high volume of children walking to and from school on Balsall Street East and the increased pollution will be a direct threat to their health.
*Development is on the wrong side of the village and too far away from the railway station and shops forcing the potential residents to drive everywhere, further increasing congestion and pollution.
- Site is on the top of a hill and the highest point in the area - surrounded by open countryside and public footpaths. Approving this site for development will blight the countryside for miles around

Pockets of green belt should not be built on because they can be. This will erode the character of the area. Better to have fewer, larger development sites that can support infrasructure improvements. This site contributes a low number of housing, delivers no infrastructure but decimates the character of one of the few country lanes left in BC. It will set a precendent for development on the Balsall Street boundary. Balsall Street East is already very congested due to school parking; road safety issues as the access road would be on a bend.

The Ecological Assessment (Jan 17) identifies areas of woodland and meadow grassland that are of significant ecological value along with species rich hedgerow and veteran trees.
The concept plan proposed by Pegasus and Richbrough Estates retains the some of the meadow grassland, but dissects the field with the access road. The SMBC concept plan shows the access road to one edge of the meadow grassland which would allow better management of the space as one unit. We therefore support the SMBC concept plan.

The main issues here would be proximity to the central amenities and further overload on the primary school. With a second school planned near the Barratts Farm development this will place extra strain on an already stretched facility

This is actually a prime site for rebuilding three purpose-built schools. A nursery and infant school, and then a junior/secondary campus. With proper traffic flow management and access to each, traffic congestion could be drastically reduced, and would comfortably still form the hard boundaries outlined here. Traffic roundabouts could be installed at the junctions with Balsall Street to manage the traffic properly. The existing sites could be sold and the combined sites would allow slightly more houses (over 140) than this site would allow. It would also allow for them to be built before HS2 is completed.

Yes, in principle.
There are good and not so good elements to the plan. Starting with the good. Preservation of the playing field is to be credited, as is the preservation of the allotments. Loss of either would be problematic on health and community grounds. It is also to be credited that there would be habitat improvements made to potentially both a grassland and wetland habitat.
That taken into account, there are issues with other elements. Single points of access are problematic for emergency services and due to potential disruption for residents in the area if any works are done to the access road. They also preclude public transport provision, though on a site of this scale it should not be detrimental in this regard. A second point of access, if feasible, would be desirable to overcome the primary issues of concern though.
However, the existing access road would appear to intersect the grassland habitat. Roads are one of the most disruptive elements to habitats. It cannot be ignored that this would severely disrupt the performance of the habitat. That is not to say irreconcilably. Plans would have to demonstrate how this is achieved as they emerge and go through the planning process.

Please see covering letter

Please see covering letter