Question 12 - Site 4 - Land West of Dickens Heath
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8936
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Mrs Shobhna Patel
I am a resident of 10 Rosebriars. It is unacceptable to build so many homes on our doorstep. Infrastructure of the the roads and other public facilities is poor and does not support the constant increase in traffic. Heavy goods vehicle use these narrow roads which inhibits passage of cars. Roads in the surrounding areas are already overused.
Our house is at an accident prone black spot and have already had cars ram into our fence and thus increasing our insurance cost. we already do not feel safe. this will increase carbon foot print and subject residence with toxic fumes.
I am a resident of 10 Rosebriars. It is unacceptable to build so many homes on our doorstep. Infrastructure of the the roads and other public facilities is poor and does not support the constant increase in traffic. Heavy goods vehicle use these narrow roads which inhibits passage of cars. Roads in the surrounding areas are already overused.
Our house is at an accident prone black spot and have already had cars ram into our fence and thus increasing our insurance cost. we already do not feel safe. this will increase carbon foot print and subject residence with toxic fumes.
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9057
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Mrs Carla Meyer Davies
Objection to Site 4:
- This development will essentially join Dickens Heath to Shirley.
- Again roads and schools will have added pressure, not to mention loss of many sports clubs.
This development will essentially join Dickens Heath to Shirley. Again roads and schools will have added pressure, not to mention loss of many sports clubs.
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9059
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Charlotte Weston
Destruction of ancient woodland and local wildlife sites is unacceptable, and it is crucial these are retained. It would be disappointing if existing football and rugby clubs were demolished. These are key community assets and support health outcomes - losing this would be detrimental to the local community.
Significant concerns over Persimmon given their poor build quality, incompletion of communal areas and hidden charges. Given government are reviewing their ability to participate in the Help to Buy scheme due to concerns - I would expect the council not to accept a proposal from Persimmon.
Destruction of ancient woodland and local wildlife sites is unacceptable, and it is crucial these are retained. It would be disappointing if existing football and rugby clubs were demolished. These are key community assets and support health outcomes - losing this would be detrimental to the local community.
Significant concerns over Persimmon given their poor build quality, incompletion of communal areas and hidden charges. Given government are reviewing their ability to participate in the Help to Buy scheme due to concerns - I would expect the council not to accept a proposal from Persimmon.
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9214
Received: 14/03/2019
Respondent: Jean Hobbs
Housing is essential we know but the influx of more cars and with building, more lorries to our narrow country lanes, just adds to the congestion that is here already.
Whitlocks End station carpark is already full, and the narrow roads and very narrow footpaths, make it difficult to walk safely in the area. Surely before any more planning is given, infrastructure should be at the top of the agenda, or will it take more accidents before this is taken into consideration.
Housing is essential we know but the influx of more cars and with building, more lorries to our narrow country lanes, just adds to the congestion that is here already.
Whitlocks End station carpark is already full, and the narrow roads and very narrow footpaths, make it difficult to walk safely in the area. Surely before any more planning is given, infrastructure should be at the top of the agenda, or will it take more accidents before this is taken into consideration
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9232
Received: 14/03/2019
Respondent: Phil & Theresa Thurston
The site boundary area is wholly negative in terms of a sustainability analysis
Dickens Heath has grown massively, but road network has not been improved to accommodate increase in homes. Site has no direct physical connection to Dickens Heath. Due to parking problems the rural narrow roads and historic hedgerows will be difficult to make sufficient road improvements.
Site is a high performing green belt site. There are more surrounding LWS than any other allocations
Land is liable to flooding (deep boulder clay)
Site is not within walking distance of village centre, there would be a loss of character and identity.
Site is in an area of landscape sensitive to development. There would be a loss of playing fields with no alternative provision. No other proposed site in the Draft Local Plan has such adverse effects if developed and therefore Site 4 should be removed from the proposed allocation for development.
I would like to bring on formal record my challenge to the proposed Local Development Plan, for Site 4 (Dickens Heath, Whitlock End, Tidbury Green).
The site boundary area is wholly negative in terms of a sustainability analysis, in terms of sound planning practise and recognised local and national planning policies.
The Dickens Heath development has grown significantly since its original design of 850 dwellings to approximately 1,800 units today. However, the roads and infrastructure HAVE NOT BEEN IMPROVED to accommodate this increase, and the addition of a vast number of other 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.
I am particularly concerned that Site 4 is a high performing Green Belt site; here there are the most Local Wildlife Sites surrounding than any other of the proposed allocations, with many protected species inhabiting the Site; there are ancient hedgerow; the land is liable to flooding as the sub-soil is deep boulder clay (which we have had real evidence of with horrendous events last year in the vicinity) 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 therefore Site 4 should be removed from the proposed allocation for development.
We trust our concerns will be heard accordingly.
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9241
Received: 14/03/2019
Respondent: Dickens Heath Parish Council
In principle the Parish Council welcomes reduced housing numbers but has objections over site 4 that is strongly opposed by the community.
Scheme would have to respect woodlands, hedgerows & openness which characterises the area. Views dependent on details of the final scheme.
There is clear obligation for the re-provision of permanent sports pitches for local clubs within the area, as existing facilities offer good access, public transport links and parking, to better safeguard the future of the clubs with improved community facilities while retaining a pleasant approach to village.
Concept Masterplan
Welcome reduced house numbers on site 4 and replacement of site 13 by site 26 on reduced scale.
See attached letter
Support
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9269
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: IM Land
Agent: Barton Willmore Planning
This Site proposes the redevelopment of the existing sports pitches associated with Highgate Football Club and the Old Yardleians Rugby Club. The current land use also contains a Local Wildlife Site and designated Ancient Woodland as well as historic hedgerows.
As such, the Council should ensure their assessments are fair, robust and objective and the site is sequentially acceptable when weighed against others. It is also noted that 'future work is required in connect with replacement of all of the displaced pitches.'
See Letters
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9386
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: CPRE Warwickshire Branch
Site 4 should be reduced to the land between Tithe Barn Lane and the Stratford Canal west of the Whitchurch Lane area of Dickens Heath (c.100 dwellings). The rest of Site 4 should be omitted from the Local Plan.
Objection based on:
Residents objections in Dickens Heath PC survey
Disproportionate housing allocation in Blythe ward
Impact on Green Belt
Conflict with urban form of Dickens Heath new village
Unsustainable location (low accessibility to services)
Increased traffic will worsen peak-hour congestion
Limited scale of replacement of sports pitches
Impact on Local Wildlife Sites
Impact on historic landscape and important hedgerows
Allocation chosen due to is its location close to Whitlocks End railway station. The allocation does not accord, or can be made to accord with the spatial strategy and sequential approach adopted in the Local Plan Review. Analysis of the sustainability and constraints of this Site are flawed and inaccurate. not consistent with the paragraph on how settlements have green belt separating them, because this proposal will reduce the gap to one field only which is not green belt. Other sites in the Borough with a lower Green Belt scoring are more suitable for development.
results of Dickens Heath residents survey found (over 90%) that the residents of Dickens Heath are strongly opposed to the proposed allocation of Site 4. Excessive housing proposed compared with elsewhere in the Borough, so does not contribute to geographical distribution. This is an excessive burden placed on such a small area without the ability to improve the road network accordingly. Allocation does not accord with government policy on green belt. The Council has not fully examined the infrastructure requirements that would justify and mitigate altering the Green Belt in this location. There would be an adverse impact on the function of the Green Belt, as there would be coalescence between Dickens Heath, Whitlock End and Majors Green. Development of Site 4, not within recognised walking distance (800m) of the Village Centre and outside the strong natural boundaries of the Village would be contrary to the original objectives of the settlement. Former farmsteads will be affected by the proposal. Dickens Heath should therefore be identified in the Local Plan as having a particular character and design and that there should be limits to its continued growth in terms of numbers and direction; the Village should be protected and conserved as a "new village," together with its character and setting in the countryside. Original concept of village was based on accessibility to reduce use of private car this proposal is not sustainable and is not accessible. Cost of developing land may be unsustainable. Flood risk has not been properly established. Proposal would not meet the objective of reducing the need to travel. Site 4 would depend on the use of narrow rural roads which still currently retain the character of countryside, major road improvements would be necessary. This will require the removal of established and important hedgerows and mature trees which greatly add to and enhance the character and setting of the Village on its western side. Road network was not intended for more traffic. development would conflict with ecological objectives. This Site 4 is within a landscape character area of high sensitivity to development.
see attached letter of response
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9558
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Richard Cobb Planning
No, 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. This Site should be demoted to a "red" site.
Please find attached a response to various aspects of the supplementary consultation
Support
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9575
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Bloor Homes
Agent: Savills
Support the inclusion of Site 4 West of Dickens Heath as an allocation. Although located in a moderately performing parcel of Green Belt, the site is opportunely located in very close proximity to Whitlock's End Train Station as well as being within walking distance to key facilities and services to make it sustainable.
It is unclear how this site parcels 176 and 126 in the Site Assessment Document are 'green sites' when site 192 immediately adjacent site has been scored 'red'. Further clarification is sought as Site 192 performs equally well.
Please see attached representations and a detailed promotion document on behalf of my client, Bloor Homes, in response to the Solihull Local Plan Supplementary Consultation document.
Land East of Tilehouse Lane Tidbury Green
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9602
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Dickens Heath Residents Association
Welcome reduction in housing numbers at Site 4, but objection to this site based on residents' feedback and lack of information to address existing traffic and infrastructure issues.
Very widespread strong objections by the village to Site 4 Masterplan proposals.
No confidence that proposals will ease existing traffic and parking issues.
Loss of original Dickens Heath Village concept.
Note Council's laudable intentions to protect landscape features.
Residents opposed to relocation of long established sports grounds for Old Yardleians Rugby Club, Highgate United FC, and Leafield FC. Clubs have significant local support.
Alternative provision must be adequate standard within Site 4.
Ref. Solihull Draft Local Plan Review - Supplementary Consultation January 2019
The Dickens Heath Residents Association welcomes the reduction in planned housing numbers on site 4 and deletion of site 13 with its access onto the B3102 Tanworth Lane Traffic Islands.
However based on the feedback from residents and the lack of information on addressing the existing traffic and infrastructure issues plus very widespread strong objections by the village to the Masterplan proposals to site 4 West of Dickens Heath we are objecting to the inclusion of this site.
In terms of the questionnaire we would respond to the relevant Questions as follows.
Scope of the consultation and overall assessment - while this indicates the objectives of the review when viewed in context it does not address the concerns raised by residents over existing well known traffic congestion issues and an inadequate rural highway network.
Dickens Heath Residents Association therefor strongly object to the Masterplan proposals for site 4.
A petition is being submitted to Solihull Council by Councillor Hawkins indicating some 1150 residents have lodged objection to site 4 in addition to a significant number of Emailed objections submitted to the Parish Council. We have also attended recent meetings at which the proposals have been presented and discussed and noted the level of objection and lack of any public support for the proposal at site 4.
Q 4 Blythe Infrastructure - its indicated highway improvements are only likely to be needed and off-street parking improvements at Dickens Heath only may be needed which does nothing to reassure residents that if site 4 were to be approved and included the council would provide the necessary infrastructure.
On sports and recreation lost provision is indicated as would be replaced but there are no sites indicated in the site 4 Masterplan.
The residents association regard it as a key priority that any future redevelopment ensures the existing sports grounds are retained within site 4
Q12 Site 4 Land West of Dickens Heath - while noting the councils laudable intentions to protect landscape features residents cannot be expected to support the inclusion of site 4 by writing a blank cheque for the proposed housing numbers given the experience of the totally inadequate highway infrastructure provided for the original Dickens Heath village as against its concept plan.
While it is understood that issues of highways and parking will be brought forward it is not possible to envisage how any satisfactory highway scheme could be implemented that would address both the proposed housing and ameliorate the existing congestion issues.
In respect of relocating the long established sports grounds for Old Yardleians Rugby Club, Highgate United FC, and Leafield FC these clubs have significant local support and the Residents Association would require alternative provision to an adequate standard within site 4.
The Residents Association is strongly opposed to an alternative more remote location into green belt countryside elsewhere.
Q14 Site 12 Land South of Dog Kennel Lane - this is adjacent to our Parish and impacts onto the main Dickens Heath traffic access. This site if included would need significant traffic attenuation measures.
Q34 Washed over green belt settlements - the Residents Association support the policy proposals at Whitlock's End and Cheswick Green subject to careful assessment of flooding issues at Cheswick Green sites.
Q38 Amber Sites - the Residents Association support the review and inclusion of all the Amber Sites as proposed.
Q40, 41, 42 & 43 Affordable Housing Policy - the Residents Association supports the retention of the existing unit number policy for measuring affordable housing provision.
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9611
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Worcestershire County Council
The Solihull Draft Local Plan sets out proposed development on the west of
Solihull covering the Dickens Heath and Shirley areas, which are referenced as
the Blythe Area and listed for future development as site 4 (West of Dickens
Heath - 350 dwellings), site 11 (The Green - 640 dwellings), site 12 (South of
Dog Kennel Lane - 1,000 dwellings) and site 26 (Whitlock's End - 300
dwellings). These sites are of particular interest to WCC's Children, Families and
Communities directorate due to the locality of the sites and the current and
potential migration of pupils between Worcestershire and Solihull.
Worcestershire County Council (WCC) welcomes the opportunity to comment on the above consultation, and provides the attached officer-only comments. We are currently seeking endorsement of these comments by WCC's Cabinet Member with responsibility for Economy and Infrastructure, and will provide confirmation of this endorsement as soon as possible.
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9637
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: David Wilson Homes
Agent: Barton Willmore Planning
Site 4 - West of Dickens Heath poses particular concern. Well-used existing sporting pitches cannot be re-provided on-site and will require alternative provision. Alternative sites would still need to meet Green Belt tests, e.g. for floodlighting.
SHELAA Site 209 performs much more highly in comparison, no LWS, no Ancient Woodland, no playing pitches, no hard constraints, and no soft constraints that will affect development.
We are instructed by our client, David Wilson Homes Ltd, to submit representations to the supplementary consultation on the Draft Local Plan Review in relation to their interests at their site at Tidbury Green Golf Club (known as Arden Green).
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9725
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Mrs Jean Walters
Number of significant adverse effects to developing Site 4.
Only reason for selection of site is proximity to Whitlocks End Station.
Dickens Heath village has increased from original design of 850 dwellings to approx. 1800 today. Roads and infrastructure have not been improved to accommodate vast increase in dwellings.
Difficult to make road improvements due to narrow rural roads, hedgerows and parking problems in village centre.
Protected species on site.
Land is heavy boulder clay and liable to flooding.
Loss of village character and identity.
Lanscape sensitive to development.
Loss of playing fields with no alternative proposals submitted.
Would support inclusion of SHELAA Site 130 only.
Agree Akamba site should be retained.
Significant objection by local residents.
Disproportionate scale of development in Blythe ward.
Loss of Green Belt, which Government has committed to protecting.
Lower performing Green Belt should be chosen instead.
Site would not be accessible location to Dickens heath village services.
Loss of wildlife habitat of high ecological value.
Loss of historic landscape.
see letter attached
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9767
Received: 14/03/2019
Respondent: Terry Clayson
Will destroy the good balance between housing and open space. The whole environment will become a concrete housing estate and car park. Traffic congestion is already problematic and this will worsen resulting in health problems. The pollution, disruption, reduction in public open space and the effect on the environment and people's quality of life will be immense. This conflicts with the Plan's health and supporting local communities policies.
The infrastructure, including local services like schools, libraries and health facilities are already overloaded and will not cope with additional development.
The area is prone to flooding.
See Letter
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9778
Received: 14/03/2019
Respondent: Mrs Brenda Clayson
Will destroy the good balance between housing and open space. The whole environment will become a concrete housing estate and car park. Traffic congestion is already problematic and this will worsen resulting in health problems. The pollution, disruption, reduction in public open space and the effect on the environment and people's quality of life will be immense. This conflicts with the Plan's health and supporting local communities policies.
The infrastructure, including local services like schools, libraries and health facilities are already overloaded and will not cope with additional development.
The area is prone to flooding.
See Letter
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9897
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: David Wilson Homes
Agent: Barton Willmore Planning
Site 4 proposes the redevelopment of existing sports pitches which are well used without appropriate plans in place for the re-provision of this local facility.
It is noted that the identification of a Local Wildlife Site within the site hampers re-provision within the site itself and therefore alternative options will need to be pursued.
We consider that these alternatives should be considered, especially as alternatives within Green Belt, which may, for example, include floodlighting, will have to be carefully considered against the Green Belt 'tests'.
Understand loss of these facilities, with no real alternatives proposed, is causing particular local concern.
see letter land South Broad Lane Berkswell
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9911
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Generator (Balsall) & Minton
Agent: DS Planning
Would result in coalescence between Dickens Heath, Whitlocks End and Majors Green. Site is highly visually sensitive in landscape terms. Development would be an ill-thought out addition to the west of Dickens Heath and have no relationship to the original concept or masterplan.
Masterplan makes no reference to how the site would complement or enhance Dickens Heath and it is acknowledged that further work is needed to identify links to the Village Centre.
Site 4 has been dismissed as an allocation numerous times.
No identified sites for the relocation of Sports pitches.
No evidence of highway impact of the development.
This is the response of Generator Group and Minton to the supplementary
consultation by Solihull Council on the Solihull Draft Local Plan January 2019. The
purpose of the response is to comment on the draft Plan and promote the site on land adj Harpers Field, Kenilworth Road Balsall Common for inclusion as a housing
allocation within the Plan. The response is by question order. Whilst we have
responded to each question, the detailed points in relation to our site are set out under question 39 and your attention is specifically drawn to this part of the response. It should be noted the site is developer owned and delivery of the site can therefore come forward early in the plan period
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9958
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Rosconn Stategic Land
Agent: DS Planning
Would result in coalescence between Dickens Heath, Whitlocks End and Majors Green. Site is highly visually sensitive in landscape terms. Development is an ill-thought out addition to the west of Dickens Heath and has no relationship to the original concept. No reference to how the site would complement or enhance Dickens Heath.
No identified sites for the relocation of Sports pitches.
No evidence of highway impact of the development.
Ironic to note site 13 comments and the importance of maintaining a gap between any urban extension and Dickens Heath when the impact of site 4 would be considerably more devastating.
This is the response of Rosconn Strategic Land to the supplementary consultation by
Solihull Council on the Solihull Draft Local Plan January 2019. The purpose of the
response is to comment the draft Plan and promote three sites for inclusion as
housing allocations within the plan. The response is by question order.
The 3 sites are:
Land at Three Maypoles Farm Shirley
Land at r/o 2214 Stratford Road Hockley Heath
Land adj 161 Lugtrout Lane Solihull
The responses on the three sites to the Solihull Draft Local Plan 2016 consultation
are attached and which highlight the reasons why the sites should be allocations
within the Local Plan.
This document should also be read in conjunction with the Ecology Report and
Heritage Assessment in relation to land adj to 161 Lugtrout Lane, Solihull.
Your attention is also drawn to the attached Masterplan for land r/o 2214 Stratford
Road Hockley Heath.
Not withstanding that this is an informal consultation we consider that the document
should be accompanied by an up to date SA.
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 9998
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Stonewater
Agent: DS Planning
Would result in coalescence between Dickens Heath, Whitlocks End and Majors Green. Site is highly visually sensitive in landscape terms. Development would be an ill-thought out addition to the west of Dickens Heath and have no relationship to the original concept or masterplan. Masterplan makes no reference to how the site would complement or enhance Dickens Heath and it is acknowledged that further work is needed to identify links to the Village Centre.
Site 4 has been dismissed as an allocation numerous times.
No identified sites for the relocation of Sports pitches.
No evidence of highway impact of the development.
This is the response of Stonewater to the supplementary consultation by Solihull
Council on the Solihull Draft Local Plan January 2019. The purpose of the response is
to comment the draft Plan and promote the site at the Firs Maxstoke Lane (west of
Meriden proposed allocation site 10) for inclusion as a housing allocation within the
Plan. The response is by question order.
The original response to the Solihull Draft Local Plan 2016 consultation is also
attached which highlights the reasons why the site should be an allocation within the
Local Plan (Site Ref 137).
see detailed comment in attached letter
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 10038
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Mr T Khan
Agent: DS Planning
Would result in coalescence between Dickens Heath, Whitlocks End and Majors Green. Site is highly visually sensitive in landscape terms. Development would be an ill-thought out addition to the west of Dickens Heath and have no relationship to the original concept or masterplan. Masterplan makes no reference to how the site would complement or enhance Dickens Heath and it is acknowledged that further work is needed to identify links to the Village Centre.
Site 4 has been dismissed as an allocation numerous times.
No identified sites for the relocation of Sports pitches.
No evidence of highway impact of the development.
This is the response of Mr Taj Khan, Sid Kelly and John Green to the supplementary
consultation by Solihull Council on the Solihull Draft Local Plan January 2019. The
purpose of the response is to comment on the draft Plan and promote the site at 15,
59, & 61 Jacobean Lane Knowle for inclusion as a housing allocation within the Plan
and land north of Jacobean Lane being removed from the Green Belt and to support
the removal of land from the Green Belt to rectify anomalies and for consistency.
See detail response in attached letter and appendices
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 10080
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Minton (CdeB) Ltd
Agent: DS Planning
Would result in coalescence between Dickens Heath, Whitlocks End and Majors Green. Site is highly visually sensitive in landscape terms. Development would be an ill-thought out addition to the west of Dickens Heath and have no relationship to the original concept or masterplan. Masterplan makes no reference to how the site would complement or enhance Dickens Heath and it is acknowledged that further work is needed to identify links to the Village Centre.
Site 4 has been dismissed as an allocation numerous times.
No identified sites for the relocation of Sports pitches.
No evidence of highway impact of the development.
This is the response of Minton to the supplementary consultation by Solihull Council
on the Solihull Draft Local Plan January 2019. The purpose of the response is to
comment the draft Plan and promote the site at Oak Farm Catherine de Barnes for
inclusion as a housing allocation within the Plan. The response is by question order.
The original response to the Solihull Draft Local Plan 2016 consultation is also
attached which highlights the reasons why the full Oak Farm site should be an
allocation within the Local Plan. We have also carried out our own Green Belt
Assessment a copy of which is attached
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 10126
Received: 01/04/2019
Respondent: Councillor K Hawkins
Number of people: 1150
Petition objecting to Allocation 4 of the LDP Review:
Online petition signed by 1150 people.
Site will see the development of 350 homes, will be built on land that incorporates three sports clubs, with several playing pitches (rugby and football) The proposals show the replacement of just two playing pitches - this is contrary to SMBC's Planning Policy P20, which require at least a re-provision or replacement of such recreational facilities.
In addition , the already gridlocked roads of Dickens Heath Majors Green and Shirley will not be able to accommodate the extra traffic this development will bring.
Petition objecting to Allocation 4 of the LDP Review
Online petition signed by 1150 people
This site , which will see the development of 350 homes , will be built on land that incorporates three sports clubs, with several playing pitches (rugby and football) The proposals show the replacement of just two playing pitches - this is contrary to SMBC's Planning Policy P20, which require at least a re-provision or replacement of such recreational facilities.
In addition , the already gridlocked roads of Dickens Heath Majors Green and Shirley will not be able to accommodate the extra traffic this development will bring
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 10144
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Andrew Harfoot
Only justification is location close to Whitlocks End railway station but detailed analysis shows it is not sustainable. Should be red not green given sustainability analysis.
Developing land west of Dickens Heath makes proposal wholly inappropriate in terms of sound planning, and both national and local planning policies.
Site lies outside Dickens Heath village and has no direct physical connection to it.
Site 4 is a high performing Green Belt site & the land is liable to flooding.
There would be loss of wildlife, character and identity in Dickens Heath, and a loss playing fields with no alternative proposals submitted.
I strongly oppose the proposed SITE 4 proposal.
Rationale;
Wildlife seen roaming freely in the fields opposite Norton Lane to include, badgers, hedgehog, deer and other smaller mammals, where will they go?
Irresponsible building seen on other local sites (Tidbury Heights) on a clay based soil can only lead to further flooding for Norton Lane
Failure by anyone to invest in anything but housing. Where are the additional roads, byways, hospitals, dentists, emergency services, etc. going to come from to deal with the increase in demand.
Perhaps the new breed of individual does not require this level of service & security and hospitals etc are a thing of the past?
How will the increase in noise and light pollution be managed to ensure no disruption to local wildlife and living?
In addition, i include the following already stated.
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.
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 10207
Received: 26/03/2019
Respondent: Sheetal Sharma
The proposed site is one of only two entry and exit roads to Dickens Heath and has restricted access due to narrowing for on coming traffic . Tythe Barn Lane is laden with traffic due to people using it as a main artery through to Whitlocks End station where many park and ride to Birmingham and onto Shirley and Birmingham by road.
Roads are prone to flooding and become impassable.
Dickens Heath has already ensured significant development.
Lack of parking provision in the village centre will be made worse.
Loss of green space.
I'm absolutely shocked that the council is even considering further development in Dickens Heath. The proposed site is one of only two entry and exit roads to Dickens Heath and has restricted access due to narrowing for on coming traffic . Tythe Barn Lane is laden with traffic due to people using it as a main artery through to Whitlocks End station where many park and ride to Birmingham and onto Shirley and Birmingham by road.It is also prone to flooding and in the latest rains I saw people with canoes up and down that stretch and was myself unable to use the road due to the waters.
I appreciate that you are needing to find space to build new housing but since I moved here in 2002 , Dickens Heath has had to endure a great deal of development, most recently over towards Birchy Leasowes and Tidbury Green as well as the development at Cheswick Green which has resulted in more congestion as residents there now use the facilities in Dickens Heath.
We are slowly being strangled by the traffic ,trying to take my poorly daughter to the Dr's recently ,I was unable to park at all anywhere near the town centre. I am good friends with the hairdressers on the High St and they too are struggling as clients are starting to go elsewhere as they are unable to park to use the facilities on the High st.
My children love opening their curtains and seeing the fields and the ponies on their way to school in the morning. Please please could you consider the impact this will further have on the quality of our lives.
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 10217
Received: 12/03/2019
Respondent: Sheila Kelly
Please leave us some green land.
All our green area has been depleted to such a great extent
250 houses Dickens Heath.
Please leave us some green land.
All our green area has been depleted to such a great extent
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 10222
Received: 14/03/2019
Respondent: K J Hastie
Site 4 West of Dickens Heath
Both the proposed developments in these areas will fundamentally alter the nature of majors green by increasing the traffic Volume far beyond the infrastructure can cope with. It is already far too great at present. The erosion of the green belt area is completely unacceptable and should not be allowed. these developments alter the area and change the environment that residents have enjoyed for years we did not chose to live in a built up area and should not have this visited upon us I object strongly to what is proposed
local draft plan site 4 west of dickens heath and whitlocks end farm
Both the proposed developments in these areas will fundamentally alter the nature of majors green by increasing the traffic Volume far beyond the infrastructure can cope with .It is already far too great at present. The erosion of the green belt area is completely unacceptable and should not be allowed. these developments alter the area and change the environment that residents have enjoyed for years we did not chose to live in a built up area and should not have this visited upon us I object strongly to what is proposed
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 10321
Received: 02/05/2019
Respondent: Environment Agency
The site falls within Flood Zone 1, however there appears to be an ordinary watercourse near the western boundary of the site with its source at Betteridges Barn and then it is culverted under the Sport Pavilion Ground and Tythe Barn Lane. As our 'Flood Map for Planning' only shows the flood risk from watercourses with a catchment area greater than 3km2, mapping of the risk from the watercourse has not been undertaken and as such this is the only reason the site is shown to lie in low risk Flood Zone 1. The assessment of flood risk and easement from the ordinary watercourse should be agreed with the LLFA, however we strongly recommend that hydraulic modelling of the watercourse is undertaken as part of a Level 2 SFRA to inform of the developable area and capacity of this potential allocation. In addition, this area has known flooding issues and Solihull MBC as the LLFA are investigating potential options to reduce flood risk within Dickens Heath. As a result the LLFA should be allowed to comment further regarding this as any development in this location could provide flood storage and should help reduce flood risk downstream. We recommend that a Level 2 SFRA is undertaken to consider how development in this area could alleviate existing flood risk issues. Regardless of flood risk, we recommend an unobstructed green corridor is maintained along the banks of the watercourse for the purposes of protecting and maintaining green and blue infrastructure.
Thank you for referring the above consultation which we received on 30 January 2019. We apologise we have been unable to respond prior to now, and hope that you are still able to take our comments into account as the plan develops.
We have reviewed the above consultation document which is dated January 2019 and note the inclusion of additional sites for consideration for allocation.
We welcome the inclusion of Flood Risk as a potential 'Hard' issue in the site selection criteria as identified on page 18 and 19. We further recommend that Water Quality is added to the footnote in this section, with particular referenced to River Blythe's SSSI status. Further to this page 29 looks at what is required for the Blythe in the future and protection and enhancement of water quality should be included. Please see attached letter for our advice with regards to your site allocations, which incorporates comments previously provided, and adds additional comments in relation to your new sites. These comments should be used in preference to those previously provided as they have been updated
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 10396
Received: 29/01/2019
Respondent: Mr Tristram Oliver
- Object to Site 4
- Provision for the three sports clubs won't be adequate, losing a large part of the community.
- There are currently at least ten pitches and the new plans would only give back two.
- Clubs will have to disband as they just won't have the facilities or space.
- Further development will only add to existing flooding issues.
- A lot of local wildlife will also lose their habitat along with a large number of mature trees.
Site named allocation 4 shouldn't be part of the plans. The provision for the three sports clubs won't be adequate losing a large part of the community. There are currently at least ten pitches and the new plans would only give back two. Clubs will have to disband as they just won't have the facilities or space. Further development will only add to existing flooding issues. A lot of local wildlife will also lose their habitat along with a large number of mature trees.