Question 12 - Site 4 - Land West of Dickens Heath

Traffic volumes are high already and with proposed development will cause more risk to unsafe roads as they currently stand. Current roads are not appropriate for current levels of traffic and pedestrians are already at risk. Recent development of Whitlocks End Train station car park have caused an increase in traffic volumes. I have already observed students being hit by car wing mirrors as they walk along the roads.

This area is at high risk of flooding as per previous high precipitation observed. What is the plan to allow for this and to ensure that the water is managed correctly.

Site 4 - West of Dickens Heath
Further to my response submitted in December 2017, I am submitting further information and points as such a major housing allocation close to our Parish that will have a significant adverse effect on our Parish. They are on both the principle of the Site 4 allocation and the SMBC Illustrative Emerging Concept Masterplan.
The only reason for the choice of this site for new housing is its location close to Whitlocks End railway station but detailed analysis shows that it is not sustainable and should be considered as a red not a green site in terms of sustainability analysis. The combined significant adverse effects given below from developing the land west of Dickens Heath makes the proposal wholly inappropriate in terms of sound planning practise, and both national and local planning policies.
On the negative side, Dickens Heath has increased from the original design of 850 dwellings to approximately 1,800 units today. However, the roads and infrastructure have not been improved to accommodate this increase plus the vast number of dwellings given planning permission in the general area in the last few years. The Site lies outside Dickens Heath village and has no direct physical connection to it. Given the parking problems in the centre, the rural narrow roads and historic hedgerows, it will be difficult to make sufficient road improvements to take much more traffic. In addition, Site 4 is a high performing Green Belt site; there are the most Local Wildlife Sites surrounding than any other of the proposed allocations being 4 in all with protected species inhabiting the Site; there are ancient hedgerow; the land is liable to flooding as the sub-soil is deep boulder clay that does not allow adequate percolation; the site is not within walking distance from the facilities in the Village Centre; there would be a loss of character and identity as Site 4 is outside the confined boundaries; the Site is in an area of landscape sensitive to development; there would be a loss playing fields with no alternative proposals submitted.
No other proposed site in the Draft Local Plan has such adverse effects if developed and should therefore be removed from the proposed allocation for development.
Dickens Heath has experienced considerable development until recently and cannot take much more development. More development is happening at Tidbury Green following recent Appeals. Just because there is a nearby railway station is not enough to justify further major development of Dickens Heath. Every other planning factor points to the unsuitability of Site 4 for development. The cumulative adverse effect of the range of evidence set out above make Site 4 contrary to a range of local and national planning policies.

I therefore strongly urge Solihull Council to:
* delete from Site 4 the land between Birchy Leasowes Lane, Tilehouse Lane, Tythe Barn Lane, and the private road Birchy Close Dickens Heath, from the emerging Local Plan Review for the many reasons given above, and
* retain the field between Akamba, Tythe Barn Lane and the Stratford Canal for up to 100 dwellings as a sustainable extension of Dickens Heath.

The Solihull Ratepayers Members Forum and AGM on 8th March considered a presentation on the Solihull Local Plan Review Consultation and the presentations of our views are set out in the attached letter

Main objection: the infrastructure around this site is already at breaking point .Haslucks Green Road is already over loaded with cars and there are numerous accidents by Whitlocks End Station where Haslucks Green Road meets Tilehouse Lane. There is often a queue of traffic along Haslucks Green Road before the bend by Whitlocks End Station, you have to take your life in your hands if you are walking in any direction from the train station.
Trying to be seen by a local doctor is also very difficult, this will also get harder, particular a problem for the elderly and unwell.

There is no justification for expanded Dickens Heath anymore!!! It was conceived as a village and should remain so! Site 4 has recreational uses that should be maintained, the site owners are just capitalizing on land grabbing with no thought about creating a sustainable community, SMBC are supporting as it is the easy option and completely disregard public opinion and local councillors opinions. Minor tinkering of the road network will not alleviate peak hour traffic jams or help the declining air pollution caused by so many cars standing in stationary traffic

Although I support these developments . Existing roads are already very busy and traffic on Bills lane etc would be increased.

See Letter

* Other sites in the area which would have a lesser impact and are of lower grade green belt in a more sustainable location.
* Additional people/cars would exacerbate existing traffic jam/pollution in an already congested area.
*Loss of 9 sports grounds/facilities which is contrary to government policy.
*Site not close to Dickens Heath facilities would encourage more traffic coming into village for its services, with no available carparking.
*Site would have a direct impact on Ancient Woodlands, 4 wildlife areas affecting the routes that the wildlife take.
* 90% of DH residents objected to this development in a survey.

Without drastic improvements in infrastructure then I must object on behalf of my residents to both Site 4 and Site 26. Detailed comments and images are in the attached document.

Swopping sports centres for housing, there are far better sites with lower grade green belt which could be used instead. Coalescence with Whitlocks End, Majors Green, Bromsgrove District Council, which also means we lose the character of DH village. Thought it had to be within 80metres or 10mins walking distance to facilities of DH - this is not. Impact on landscape, ancient woodlands and wildlife sites will be ruined, buffers required to protect these, and connectivity would be huge. Survey of DH residents 90% objected to further development. Loss of wildlife/greenbelt in area being consumed by housing

I wish to object to the inclusion of Site 4 for development

I wish to object to the development of Site 4 west of Dickens Heath

I wish to object to the development of Site 4, west of Dickens Heath

I am so concerned of the number of new houses that are being planned for building in the near future.
I have resided at 510 Haslucks Green Road for almost 40 years and during that time the road has become more like a race track and find it very difficult to enter or leave my drive with the amount fast traffic, if the proposed houses that are being considered built where is traffic that will also arise as the road cannot cope with what has grown over the last number of years
The speed on the road is dangerous

this conflicts with the urban form of Dickens Heath on an unsuitable location, generating additional traffic on already congested roads. The loss of sports grounds with no sites being put forward,

Dickens Heath has already reached its limits, further development would create urban sprawl. It should be noted that trains from Whitlocks End go to Birmingham/Stratford, the majority of residents would drive to school/work. Improvement would need to be made to already congested and dangerous surrounding roads of neighbouring authority. Development would damage the ecological balance of the area with loss of wildlife habitats and ancient hedgerows. Flooding , already a problem in the surrounding area would increase due to over development of land

There is not the infrastructure to support this, particularly the road system. Already small roads often with traffic control that are extremely busy. Getting on to the M42 at peak times already very, very slow.
"Highway improvements" are undefined and I feel only new highways will help. To suggest that bike lanes are going to solve any congestion is ridiculous given our climate. Dickens Heath has limited facilities so for supermarkets people will have to drive.

I do not agree that site 4 should be included as allocated site due to the lack of infrastructure at present.
There has been a substantial increase in new homes in Dickens Heath, Wythall and Tidbury Green in recent years Traffic on Tilehouse Lane and Haslucks Green Road has increased tremendously, the junction of these two being extremely difficult and dangerous to negotiate by car or on foot particularly at peak times. Congestion on these roads and the parking at Whitlock End station is at saturation point so cars are being parked on both sides of Fords Road causing obstructions.

The access to the station from Rosebriars is one of the most dangerous roads in the area without any safe crossings or adequate footpaths. As a frequent user I have to use the car for a 300Mt journey.Walking or cycling is unsafe. The proposal to make Tythe Barn lane a safe route is no use to Majors green residents.

The railway bridge road is far too narrow for the traffic and pedestrians with many very near misses from bus & Lorry wing mirrors.

The whole area infrastructure requires an independent safety consultants review.

6. Richborough Estates is supportive of the removal of land to the west of Dickens Heath and its allocation for residential purposes (Site 4). The location of the site on the edge of a settlement already excluded from the Green Belt reflects the National Planning Policy Framework's locational requirements. Further, it is evident that the land west of Dickens Heath is in a location which meets the Framework's policy that consideration should first be given to sites that are well-served by public transport. The allocation is located adjacent to Whitlocks End railway station which has 3 services per hour to Birmingham and Stratford-upon-Avon. There is also an existing bus service to Shirley and Solihull which can be augmented.

7. Richborough Estates remains committed to working with the Borough Council, Dickens Heath Parish Council and other stakeholders to bring forward the land west of Dickens Heath for development in the most appropriate manner. There are refinements to the draft Concept Masterplan which would be beneficial to place making and accessibility, including links towards the village centre of Dickens Heath, the railway station and traffic calming measures.

8. Even without the refinements, it is noted that based upon the draft Concept Masterplans document the indicative capacity is stated to be around 350 dwellings. Taking the areas shown for housing, and accounting for lower and medium densities, the capacity of the allocation could realistically be circa 600-650 dwellings. If land is to be removed from the Green Belt then it is both logical and sensible to ensue that any development makes effective and efficient use of the land. We would encourage the Council to re-visit and review the stated capacity of this site on this basis.

9. As part of continued positive and proactive working with Solihull MBC, Richborough Estates will seek to discuss the future sports provision in the Borough, to ensure that there is an equivalent or better standard of provision for local sports clubs and the public. The delivery of these facilities will be agreed through future discussions with Solihull MBC and other stakeholders.

10. To inform this approach the Council should identify a clear strategy for delivering sports provision aligned to the growth proposed in the plan, recognising the fact that land could be allocated for such purposes in the Plan. The wider capacity of neighbouring allocations should be considered in the round, and the prospect of allocating the former 'Site 13' land south of Shirley should also be explored given Solihull MBC's ownership.

Haslucks Green Rd in the past 10 years has the traffic of "A" rd rather than a minor country rd .In the 200 yd section between Drawbridge to Tythe Barn at least 20 plus repairs to water pipes and collapsed drains in past 2 years.Infrastucture of this rd completely unsuitable for increased traffic.Whitlocks end train station increased parking 5 years ago and already at capacity resulting in more parking in local side roads.Takes me 10 to 15 minutes at peak times just to get off my driveway safely. Exhaust pollution at peak times health hazard already.

Please see attached document March 2019 Tythe Barn Lane Dickens Heath Site Deliverability

I would like to register my concerns and objections to the current draft local plan.
Shirley and Blyth Valley has now 38% of the proposed housing which is more than the lions share and will link many areas together i.e. Cheswich Green, Dickens Heath, & Tidbury Green. All will become just another hugh conurbation with no identity.

I believe the council has based it's calculation on the 2014 Office of National Statistics figures and there is a clear case that the 2016 figures could be used which shows a lower calculation.
There has been no consideration of increase of traffic on the current road system and public transport system, the Mott Macdonald plan was not obtained. The council state that public transport will be improved, however if there is no public transport now how can that be improved.
There is already a lack of local GP's and pupils are already travelling far and wide due to lack of schools in the appropriate areas. There are no plans in the current draft for extra GPs and schools.
With the current proposals the council would need to build 885 homes per year, a target that has never been obtained.
Site 4 an extension of Dickens Heath, proposed as it is near a station. Dickens Heath which won best village was based on all houses being within a 10 minute walk to shops, this is something which is already null and void. Site 4 states that improvements will be made to the infrastructure however roads cannot be improved as there are ancient hedgerows, which again the council appeared not to have done their homework. The council has asked for alternative sites, if being near a station is all that is required, have the fields to the east of Widney Manor Station been considered. Widney Manor Station is much better linked.
Site 26 I have no objections providing that the level of housing is kept as per the plan however the increase in traffic on Bills Lanes would need the Mott Macdonald plan being obtained prior to any permissions being granted.
However with this development then site 13 is the mitigation against the loss of green belt and would be beneficial for the community if this was designated a Village Green/ Nature Reserve.
What is quite frightening is that the HSR report into the historic past of Blyth Valley has not been acknowledged by Solihull Council, A report that was widely available and already printed. A Report that could have considerable bearing on future housing.

see attached representation

It is ludicrous to think of these sites and get rid of the foot ball grounds and the wildlife facilities. What on earth will the
youngsters of today find places for recreation or do we just allow them to roam the streets with knives causing havoc.

This area has a lot of sports fields that are widely used by the local community, moving them will put even more traffic on the already congested roads. Dickens Heath was supposed to be a small new village, it now in danger of sprawling into existing settlements, Tidbury green, Majors green, Cheswick Green and Shirley, making this one large urban sprawl.

I strongly object to site 4 dickens heath,there would be be the congestion traffic, noise pollution,

This area provides as you say a check on the unrestricted sprawl yet you are choosing to build on it. You are also removing much needed sports facilities. Where will these be sited? you have not commented on any extra parking spaces which will be required as you try to get hundreds of new households to use the train service to Stratford or Birmingham. This will equate to hundreds of new commuters all trying to use the already gridlocked roads. You expect many will walk or cycle to their destinations. They will not as it will be too dangerous.

The Tythe Barn Lane / Tilehouse Lane junction already experiences congestion in the AM and PM peak hours. Similarly, the main junction out of Dickens Heath is crippled during the AM peak and would be overwhelmed with any additional development scenario.

In close proximity to the allocation site is Tyburn Coppice Ancient Woodland. Any development on the site of the rugby pitch would potentially result in an adverse impacts to ancient woodland, which is irreplaceable habitat and affords great protection through the NPPF.

Without strategic highways improvements to junctions named above, I do not support this site allocation.

I object due to the increased traffic this will cause in an already busy area. The pavements around Whitlocks Station are not safe for pedestrians to walk to the station nor would it be safe to cycle to on such busy roads. The station already can't cope with the amount of cars that wish to be parked there.
Public transport in terms of buses is not adequate as the services are sporadic at best and only operate hourly. The infrastructure can't cope with more housing development.