Question 12 - Site 4 - Land West of Dickens Heath

The sports fields re location is not acceptable. This will mean moving a critical facility even further away from existing housing, requiring more journeys, and removing the accessibility from families without transport.

With regards to the train station, this facility is already oversubscribed, with residents from the existing dwellings unable to park (the train station is a long walk from the outskirts of Dickens Heath) the 3 trains an hour are over loaded and passengers are paying high train fares to stand in packed trains, more houses will only make this problem worse.

The eradication of green belt that is specifically to reduce urban sprawl is not reasonable. The shops in Dickens Heath could be a 30 minute walk from some of these houses, and it is unlikely these resident will walk to the village centre. Main street in Dickens Heath cannot accommodate the existing footfall as there is insufficient parking (largely due to all the flats that were originally built on main street being built without allocated parking therefore requiring residents to use the parking that would otherwise be used by visitors to the village centre) The shops are struggling to survive as people from outside the village do not visit as there is no parking. Adding more housing to the outskirts of the village, without addressing this issue is not acceptable.

As the County Councillor for Wythall which is right next to the proposed site I would ask that serious consideration is given to the unsuitability of the surrounding roads to accomodate these houses. Already narrow adjacent residential roads are blocked by overspill parking from Whitlocks End Station. The bridge over the railway adjacent to Whitlocks End station is unsuitable, dangerous and narrow and the junction of Haslucks Green Road and Peterbrook Road has constant accidents due to its tight bend and excessive speeds. Peterbrook Rd is narrow and already getting dangerous levels of traffic as is Haslucks Green Rd.

The area simply cannot cope with more houses.
road infrastructure is diabolical and the local station cannot cope with the number of people looking to park there.
Dickens Heath has far outgrown it original ideals that were sold to residents..
Parking is atrocious, properties are flooded on a more regular basis due to inconsiderate buildings, plus the lack of police resources means crime is on the rise.
How about build some amenities rather constantly building inappropriate housing..
The government wants houses for first time buyers, but all you see built is 4/5/6 bedroom houses as they sell for more money.

Increasing the size of Dickens Heath is not feasible, the original and infrastructure of the road system and layout would not cope with increased capacity or use. Neither would the village centre and parking.

First and foremost the infrastructure and flooding situation in Dickens Heath is already a massive issue, without adding more homes.
The sports fields are well used and an integral feature of the existing community and beyond. We don't have an adequate play area for children. The loss of any of these club sites will be felt.
It's all very well building a new primary school but what secondary schools will be able to facilitate the increased numbers of students. People have brought houses in the area so that their children are within the catchment of specific secondary schools.

SOlihull Council states in its policies that it provides equal provisions for its young residents across the borough. We don't have a suitable play area, now the sports fields are threatened. Any new facilities being suggested are being squashed into other spaces-one of which is being crammed into an already tiny school (with its own road issues) Yet more housing, which will bring more children are being encouraged to a "family" area which is st risk of just becoming one giant housing estate with nothing or no where for the youth to go.

I live on Tythebarn Lane near Akamba and the proposed site. There are major traffic congestion problems on Tythebarn barn lane at the moment in and out of the Dickens Heath village more houses in the plan with more cars will make it impossible to get out of my drive to get out of the village uthe infrastructure in the village has been overwhelmed as it is more housing will just make it worse. Moreover there is a need to replace the sports field like for like as this is a key facility for the community.

I live on Tythe Barn Lane. I have lived in the village for fourteen years. To date it appears that the latter stages of the development of the village have been undertaken with little or no regard to the need to improve the local road network. I have little confidence in the ability of the authority to manage any future development and attendant increase in traffic. A recent upsurge in standing traffic (which must be solely attributed to the recent developments) has have resulted in a significant deterioration in air quality. Especially in the vicinity of a primary school. In addition the loss of mature and well regarded playong field with no real guarantee of a like for like replacement makes one question the authorities commitment to it's younger residents who are often vilified . Taking a source of recreation away from this group without fully replacing it is wholly irresponsible.

As one of the first residents in Dickens Heath having moved to Tythe Barn Lane in 1998 and lived at the current address for over 20 years, I strongly object to the allocation of Site 4 for residential development of 350.

Site 4 would not be in a sustainable location and would create substantial car traffic. While it would be close to Whitlock's End railway station, the rail service at that station facilitate access to Central Birmingham and Stratford-upon-Avon. No service is provided between said station and Solihull Town Centre, for which there is only a slow bus service or across the Borough to UK Central. There would no direct access from Site 4 to the services and facilities in Dickens Heath village itself, as there would be no direct road or cycleway to the village centre.

If Site 4 is included in the Local Plan, there would be a major loss of sports grounds and playing fields. The Green Belt which would be lost to Site 4 contains a variety of different types of sports facilities. The proposed replacement sports facility on Site 4 between Tythe Barn Lane and the Stratford Canal would not adequately replace the many sports clubs' requirements. There are already many objections to the loss of the several current sports fields and facilities; these are used by people from a large area of the Conurbation and surrounding towns.

We have enough upcoming talent if we keep the pitches. We do not need imported players with weird names and one-name names if we retain and nurture home grown talent. This will simply not happen if we have two pitches as per the latest LDP.

In addition to the loss of sports and recreational land there is the issue of traffic congestion. Already there is severe congestion in the village. I know because I live on Tythe Barn Lane and for over 20 years, I have witnessed a huge spike in traffic, a lot being cut through, as they wish to avoid Shirley High Street. Coupled with school run traffic and legally parked resident's vehicles, the proposed LDP will see further pressure on the road and linking roads as it is not suited for the current volume of traffic. Quality of life will be screwed full stop.

Once the new developments in nearby Tidbury Green are completed (a total of 400 new homes) as well as that in nearby Wythall, these will add to the existing problem. Furthermore, new allocations in nearby Cheswick Green will impact on Dickens Heath Road, Tanworth Lane and Dog Kennel Lane. No further developments hould be permitted until existing issues have been addressed. It is essential we look at how the existing infrastructure can cope before adding to the problems.

My major concern about the proposed development is its impact on local roads . The route to and from Tilehouse Lane via Tythe Barn Lane is already very congested at rush hour times . At these times it is extremely difficult to get out of the village notably from Three Acres Lane which is very difficult to navigate at scihool drop off times. Parked cars in Tythe Barn Lane create obstructions close to the traffic calming and a gridlock often occurs. Narrow roads and traffic calming will not be able to cope . Need more info on proposed highway improvements

Wellbeing and open space for existing residents. Protecting wildlife. Large traffic increase making it even more unsafe for Majors Green residents. No safe place to cross, narrow footpaths, sharp bends so lack of vision. Increasing difficulty in cars exiting Rushleigh Road/Cambria Close. Planned cycle and pedestrian paths unlikely to be used as too dangerous and people in general would rather drive. Junction of Haslucks Green/Tilehouse is busy at peak times and is dangerous(numerous accidents. Whitlocks End station and canal bridges unlikely to cope with traffic. Flooding in Tythebarn Lane. Train service already inadequate at peak times.

There is never sufficient parking at Whitlocks End Station therefore the argument about being in close proximity is seriously flawed as is the intention for residents to walk/cycle to shops in Dickens Heath as people tend to stop at these shops on way to/from work etc and there is insufficient parking. Also the infrastructure cannot cope with more traffic through Dickens Heath in the mornings/evenings and as a cut through when there are problems on the M40/M42. The wildlife area you are proposing is facing the road and needs to be further away to protect the muntjac from being killed.

Dear Gary Palmer/ Planning Team,
Thank you for your response and updated proposal regarding the new spatial allocation plans for south Shirley Blythe Valley area 2019

First i would like to say thank you and i welcome the decision to remove the controversial Allocation 13 from the draft local plan. The new proposal of Allocation 26 looks like a far better proposal.
Regarding the new Allocation 26 if this development does go ahead my only concern would be that this site is developed tastefully and reflects and blends in with the areas rural location taking in to account the area is rich in native wildlife,so any development would also be nature and environmentally friendly. Also i would hope that the Historic Bridleway (Peacock Lane) is left undisturbed along with the English Heritage site of Whitlock End Farm. Also my self and other local residents would hope that the new development of Allocation 26 is contained and does not spread any further towards existing Baxters fields or any further towards land towards the Dickins Heath canal so that this new Allocation 26 site does not further encroach other existing communities of south Shirley of Baxters & Woodloes Road south Shirley communities or destroy further greenbelt towards Dickens Heath Community so as to prevent a coalescence of communities as set out in the governments NPPF. paragraph 80 function of greenbelt.

Regarding other Allocations in the south Shirley Blythe Valley area noting Allocation 4 Dickens Heath and Allocation 12 Dog Kennel Lane i know there is still some serious concerns that these proposed amounts of housing development sites of land are still far too large and may cause some serious local infrastructure problems along with excessive pollution especially as we know Bromsgrove District Council have large Allocations along the Whitlocks station side which if they go ahead may lead to a serious problem for existing local communities. My thoughts on this is that you could consider reducing the size of these developments so that they do not over load the south Shirley Blythe Valley Villages.

After looking at looking at the proposed greenbelt land developments for the solihull borough it has been noted that the Blythe Shirley south area is still bearing the brunt of excessive development of 41% while knowle is 17% Dorridge & Hockley Heath is 7% Meriden 1% & Bickenhill 31% ???
This obvious percentage of greenbelt loss for South Shirley Blythe Valley is still unbalanced and unfair and i would again ask Solihull Council to look again at this and spread the developments more fairly across the borough especially as we know we are taking on some of Birmingham Councils Housing shortfall and from what i understand Birmingham Council are still dragging their feet in clearing up the large amounts of Brownfield sites that are still available I would ask that Solihull Council can continue to press Birmingham Council to get its act together and clear up the Brownfield sites before anymore of Solihull greenbelt is sacrificed as i still think Brown field sites of Birmingham should be developed first before we lose our precious urbs in rure .

The traffic coming through from DH to the train station at Whitlocks end is a nightmare at the best of times adding 400 more homes to the area most of which will be two car families will create chaos if a new highway infrastructure is not thought through properly. The five different sports fields your proposing to develop on MUST be provided for, it is essential we encourage sport or the NHS will continue to be overloaded with obesity caused problems. Parking also at the proposed new sports fields must be large enough to accommodate high volumes of traffic.

I am very grateful that Allocation 13 has been removed from The Plan but very disappointed that a new site (Site 26) has been introduced.


Iknow Allocation 13 had a number of issues that really meant it should not have been in the draft plan in the first place. But an equally important issue is the over development of Green Belt land in the Blythe Valley Villages Area wh ich is still far too high .

Site 26 needs to be removed or reduced considerably to avoid the flooding, infrastructure and lack of amenity issues. Similarly Sites 4 and 12 should be removed or considerably reduced to avoid the same issues.


With the large number of homes being built in the HS2 area and part of the Blythe Valley Business Park being used for housing, together with the 2,600 plus homes built on the A34 corridor over the past two years, there is no need for such large scale destruction of Green Belt land in the Blythe Valley Villages area of Shirley, Cheswick Green, Dickens Heath and Tidbury Green.


Using part of site 11 for Car Showrooms instead of housing is really very bad planning and I believe that if all of site 11 had been used for housing, then, coupled with the developments mentioned above there really would be no need whatsoever for sites 4,12 or 26 to go ahead.


I think any independent inspection of the Plan will conclude that the current proposals are not only unfair but also very unreasonable

I wish to object to the above because of the incongruous effect of housing and an urban style sports centre in this area , particularly when there are more appropriate sites of a lower grade of Green Belt. The increase in traffic will create excessive congestion and put more pressure upon parking at the station and in surrounding roads. The impact upon the character of the landscape would be detrimental. Additionally, the ancient woodland of Tithe Barn Wood needs a protective buffer which will reduce the available area. The development will have an adverse impact upon the ecology of the area and legally protected great crested newts, badgers and bats will be harmed. Furthermore, the site is one of clay which will make flooding worse. Finally, I believe 90% of respondents to Dickens Heath Parish Council survey objected to Site 4 and the area around Tidbury Green has already been subjected to exponential and inappropriate development.

Since the increase of housing within DH/Tidbury heights, road traffic has increased, most days causing a standstill at school times at the 2 local schools. With more houses planned to be built will increase the number of new pupils. I foresee a fatal accident waiting to happen, with the amount of traffic already going through these areas, more parents dropping off/picking up their children with little parking on offer.

Tythe Barn Lane struggles generally on a day to day basis with the traffic that goes through here, how on earth would this road physically cope with 350 new houses! Open space, sports facilities.

The current houses in the village including the building of affordable housing will bring down the prices of houses currently in the area. We moved to Tidbury Green, due to it being a lovely village with the green belt land, open spaces and sports. We have invested a lot of money into our property and feel this will have a negative impact on ours and many others around us. Crime has increased drastically and without a local police station, this isn't going to get better it will put even more strain on the police force.

The infrastructure i.e broadband and mobile phone reception is also horrendous and many of the new houses are also struggling. Services are unfit for purpose especially in this day and age and no answers to when this will improve.

We as residents of tidbury green object to proposals of site 4. The infrastructure in place for schools and travel are not sustain able with an addition of 350 houses. With lowbrook lane development and tidbury heights development , and impacting on green belt land , site 4 going a head would take over yet more green belt land which is against government policy and impact on infrastructure with no improvement measures

We as residents of tidbury green object to proposals of site 4. The infrastructure in place for schools and travel are not sustain able with an addition of 350 houses. With lowbrook lane development and tidbury heights development , and impacting on green belt land , site 4 going a head would take over yet more green belt land which is against government policy and impact on infrastructure with no improvement measures

Dear Sirs,
>>
>> I strongly object to further building in this area, you may have reduced the number of houses down from 700 to 350, but this is still 350 more properties than this area can stand or actually wants.
>>
>> I object for the following reasons:
>>
>> 1. This area already has the highest car ownership in the borough. Each property comes with at least 2 new vehicles, which will be at least another 700 vehicles on our roads, that is without considering visitors to these houses. Roads which are already getting more and more congested especially at 'rush hour". The roads are already unsuitable, without even completion of the Fulford hall site, or the new site on Lowbrooke Lane. So what are they going to be like with all this extra housing?
>>
>> 2. The impact on the Green belt, we bought our property here because we felt secure by the Green belt status. We bought into a village surrounded by fields, which is fast becoming a town, and an extension of Shirley. It will just end up as one big concrete site.
>>
>> 3. I do not think the council have considered or thought through the impact on existing households, all this new buildings impact on the character of the area we live, ancient hedgerows and the important Tithe Barn ancient woodland.
>>
>> 4. All this building will impact the ecology of the area, with potential to loose or damage protected sites for badger setts, bats and great crested newts.
>>
>> 5. 90% of Dickens Heath residents objected to site 4, so why is this site even still being considered? As a council do you not listen or even respect your council tax payers?
>>
>> 6. There will be extra demand on Whitocks End station which is already overcrowded, leading to parking problems, congestion and pollution.
>>
>> Finally, as a village we have had more than our fair share of disruption, and building. Remember this was Green Belt, please start building in other more suitable areas in the borough, and leave us in peace.

I am writing to voice strong objections to the reduced proposal of 350 homes at the above site. I have lived in this area for 40+ years and we have been saturated with houses, buildings etc etc, over the years, and another 350 is not acceptable for the following reasons.

1. Developing this site for housing, sports centre etc will not bring any benefits to this community. I suggest you pursue sites in the Solihull area, and leave us alone.

2. Impact on the function of high performing green belt status of land will be lost which is contrary to government policy. There would be coalescence between dickens heath village, Whitlocks end, majors green and brooms grove district.

3. Extra people/traffic will exacerbate congestion through dickens heath village, on the A34 and surrounding roads.

4. Extra demands on overcrowded local rail services + inadequate parking.

5. Loss of sports grounds/recreation areas fort 9 clubs. Contrary to government policy.

6. Loss of attractive dickens heath which is surrounded by green belt.

7. Impact on landscape character within an area of high sensitivity.

8. Tithe barn wood most significant ancient woodland in Solihull and would need suitable semi-natural buffer which will reduce areas of development.

9. The development would have a significant adverse impact on the ecology of the area, inc. wildlife sites and protected species etc.

10. Sports fields flood and would cause extra flooding problems.

11. 90% of dickens heath parishioners have already objected to sites 4.

12. Extra demand for places at dickens heath school.

13. A's already mentioned tilbury green and dickens heath have taken far more than their faIr share of development over the last years.

See attached letter

see attached letter

The area is an expansion of an already expanded area of Dickens Heath where existing facilities eg parking, Dr surgery, local shops etc can not cope with these new extensions. The Dickens Heath development is already in my opinion too large for these facilities. The new development over the past 18 months has very little green garden or border areas. The area of this proposed development will cause chaotic traffic in an already congested area. We will lose the 'village' feel that is so important (and is already compromised with recent development). No consideration has been made of more relevant brown belt land. And there is no realistic compensation and alternative for the lost of the sports facilities that this proposal offers.

We object to the proposal of building 350 homes on the grounds of the fact that the local infrastructure is not suitable to support additional houses. Key concerns are traffic congestion, previous flooding in this area, schooling and medical services. Please see attached document for further information to support this.

Lose of community facilities. Loss of wildlife. Infrastructure not able to cope (no new roads or additional parking at whitlocks end). Flooding risk. This area already totally ovwrdeveloped. Air quality concerns.

Having reviewed all the sites, I feel site 4 is the best one to be included and developed. I live adjacent to site 4 and do not have objections it being developed. My only concern is that Birchy Leasowes Lane is unsuitable for any access to site 4. This has to be along Tilehouse or Thythe Barn Lane as it looks to be. It is the closest to the station and walking distance to Dickens Heath...it makes natural extension to the current Dickens Heath development.

I should like to object to the above because of the adverse effect of housing and, in particular, an urban style sports centre in this area , particularly when there are more appropriate sites of a lower grade of Green Belt. The increase in traffic will create yet more congestion and put more pressure upon parking at the station and surrounding it. The impact upon the character of the landscape would be detrimental. Moreover, the ancient woodland of Tithe Barn Wood needs a protective buffer which will reduce the available area. The development will have a damaging impact upon the ecology of the area and legally protected great crested newts, badgers and bats will be harmed. Additionally, the site is one of clay which will make flooding worse. Finally, 90% of respondents to Dickens Heath Parish Council survey objected to Site 4 and the area around Tidbury Green has already been subjected to excessive and inappropriate development.

It is hard to conceive that consideration is being given to further develop an already over developed area with an inferior infrastructure. The effect on the Green Belt and Wildlife would be devastating in itself not to mention the loss of the sports facilities which fall into this site area.
Also it is a known fact that the sports fields are liable to flooding so building on this land will only exacerbate the problem and create flood potential for the existing homes in the area.
The area in question will not sustain any further development without an adverse effect on all of the existing infrastructure.

Outline objection issues relating to the further development of Dickens Heath at Site 4

1. Adverse impacts of developing this Site for housing and urban style sports centre would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits of providing houses near a railway station when there are other sites in the Solihull area that are of a lower grade of Green Belt with lesser adverse impacts and are in a more sustainable location.

2. Impact on the function of high performing Green Belt status of land will be lost which is contrary to Government Policy; there would be coalescence between Dickens Heath, Whitlock End, Majors Green and Bromsgrove District.

3. Extra people/traffic will exacerbate congestion through the Dickens Heath Village, on the A34 and surrounding roads especially at peak times.

4. Demands on already crowded local rail services and inadequate parking at the station and Village centre.

5. Loss of sports grounds/recreation areas for 9 clubs which is contrary to Government Policy.

6. Loss of the village character that currently makes it attractive. The award winning design & concept of Dickens Heath is of a new village surrounded by Green Belt with no part more than 800 m / 10 mins walk from village centre - Site 4 housing proposals are beyond this circle. Any proposals to make a footpath onto Birchy Close would be strongly resisted by the residents. Therefore the location of Site 4 is unsustainable: not linked to Dickens Heath (no physical connection by road or cycleway or footpath) and outside the 800 m circle from the village centre. There are existing natural boundaries to the Village - canal to east and north, line of woodland (Ancient woodland, LNR) on west side and this proposal will be out on a limb detracting from the character of the Village.

7. Impact on landscape character; within an area of high sensitivity.

8. Tithe Barn Wood is a most significant Ancient Woodland in Solihull south of main urban area. The ancient woodland is likely to require a suitable semi-natural buffer which, together with the ancient hedgerows, will reduce the areas of development.

9. The development would have a significant adverse impact on the ecology of the area, which has 4 Local Wildlife Sites, affecting the

ecological connectivity of the area. Also potential for loss of habitats that support legally protected species including great crested newts, badger setts and bat roosts.

10. The sports fields are liable to flooding most years and would exacerbate the flooding problem to neighbouring properties. The Site consists of deep boulder clay which does not drain well and dwellings would need to be built on deep piles.

11. 90% of respondents to the last Dickens Heath Parish Council survey objected to Site 4.

12. The Akamba Garden Centre should be retained.

13. Demand for places at oversubscribed Dickens Heath School

14. Dickens Heath and Tidbury Green has already taken its 'fair share' of development during the last Local Plan allocations.

15. Objection to creating a footpath / cycle way along all or part of Birchy Close to provide access from the new development to the Village facilities.

The roads and parking at stations are already insufficient for the number of people living here. It will become unbearable if more houses are built. We are a village. We do not want to use all of our beautiful countryside to build on and create more problems.