Question 15 - Site 26 - Whitlocks End Farm

Bills Lane is congested already.

There appears to be no real plan for the movement of traffic arising from the new dwelings. Dickens Heath road and Bills Lane are already congested, and are not designed to support increased traffic.

the proposal appears to be urban sprawl and will conjoin Shirley with Dickens Heath, removing the defined village status that Dickens heath has.

Green belt that scores highly, should remain green belt and not be removed because the there is a need, other sites should be considered.

As with Site 4 the infrastructure is not fit to support these additional houses. Already this area is very congested and with a further 350 houses from Site 4 the traffic will converge and be added to site 26 on a busy junction to create a logjam all the way into and out of Shirley. As in many areas local roads are overwhelmed with increasing traffic and infrastructure suitability is a determining factor. Vehicles heading to B'ham will be forced onto Haslucks Green Road and access the narrow Drawbridge Rd and Peterbrook Rd to utilise back routes to the City.

With the existing building in Tidbury Green, the proposed building of Site 4 and Site 12, it appears that the planners have not fully comprehended the massive impact the 2000 + properties would have on the area. The expansion of Dickens Heath and Tidbury Green has already had a major impact on increase of traffic, more crowded trains, more cars parking in narrow residential roads around Whitlocks End and Shirley stations. There is too much of a concentrate of planned homes in such a small area. Whitlocks Farm is an area of openess and wildlife. Can Shirley itself cope?

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 .

Thank you for dropping Site 13. However, Site 26 remains an inappropriate development area for the following reasons:
- proportionality - south Shirley is already taking the brunt of development from Shirley to the M42
- environment - the Christmas tree farm assists with carbon offset and Is an important wildlife area
- spatial separation - the urban edge is too close to Dickens Heath. It must be remembered that the context is from a virtually uninterrupted urban sprawl from Birmingham to this site. The distance is insufficient
- inappropriate use of Green belt

My objection is . 1 moving traffic to Bills Lane and Haslucks Green Road , they are congested as of now.
2 The house building in this area as already reached its limit.
3 Spread the Housing requirements around Solihull

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 register my concerns regarding the proposed plan for site 26. Regarding the sustainability of the infrastructure:
Roads. The current road infrastructure is barley adequate for existing traffic, with both Bills Lane and Shakespeare Drive both regularly at a standstill during peak morning and afternoon periods. The proposed 'Future Access points' will also exacerbate the issues, with the one access point being on a hill and opposite an existing road (Neville road) which already proves difficult to navigate and regularly causes near accidents.
Rail. The current rail infrastructure is already overcrowded during peak periods, with both the Whitlocks End and Shirley station car parks at capacity, the further influx of commuters will increase both the overcrowding as well as on street parking.
Flooding. The land for site 26 is at an elevation above Bills Lane and whenever there is heavy rain the spill off cascades down the lane to collect at the railway bridge. Any removal of the soak away effects of the fields and trees will undoubtedly increase the level of flooding at the bottom of Bills lane/Haslucks Green road.

The lack of any major employer locally will mean that commuter traffic be it in cars or train will increase, as we have seen with Dickens Heath, the current infrastructure cannot cope.

Yours
John Ryland
Bills Lane.

This should not be housing! This should be used to extend parking facilities at whitlocks end station-I can't park now and I get there at 7.50am. How will I travel to work in Birmingham??

Area completely overdeveloped! Infrastructure needs looking at first (roads, parking, schools, train station parking, doctors). Also concerned about air quality.

Make more parking at whitlocks end station instead! Area completely overwhelmed with new developments already

The present traffic flow along Bills lane makes access off Langcomb Road very difficult at peak periods in fact some 2 years ago a fatal accident took place when a vehicle turning right onto Bills lane was hit by a speeding motorist.Furthermore the number of times vehicles have hit the fencing at Gilbert's Farm on the very sharp bend adjacent to Section 26 must now run into double figures.

Loss of wildlife natural habitat areas not being compensated for
Bills Lane & Haslucks green road are already heavily congested roads and major accident sites.

Dear Mr Page
Re:- Allocation 26 for new houses to be built on land of Bills Lane
Firstly, we would like to take this opportunity to thank you for removing Allocation 13 from the proposed sites under the Local Growth Plan to enable the local community to continue to benefit from the recreational green space and also to protect the large amount of wildlife in the area.
We have now been informed that a new allocation number 26 has been proposed which is in effect on the edge of Allocation 13. Whilst we understand that the Council is obliged to meet its growth targets for housing developments, we must strongly object to this proposal for the following reasons:-
* Infrastructure - During busy times of the day, the road systems are heavily congested with traffic where Bills Lane is used as a thoroughfare for traffic from Wythall, Hollywood, Redditch, Longbridge and other areas in both the Worcestershire and Birmingham areas to gain access to the Stratford Road. Using one of the other two alternative routes such as Burman Road or through Dickens Heath is not an alternative as these routes also struggle to cope with the present volumes of traffic. In the mornings queues develop down Shakespeare Drive from traffic coming from Bills Lane to access the Stratford Road. Similarly in the afternoon/evening queues develop in Shakespeare Drive from traffic trying to access Bills Lane on the homeward bound journey. Another 800 cars competing to undertake this journey would cause extra congestion and chaos not to mention the impact on other facilities eg. Doctors and schools. We are now seeing an increased traffic flow from the development at Tidbury Green. Once the allocation of 400 houses has been completed this will result in c 800 extra cars using Bills lane and the lane through Dickens Heath in addition to the vehicles from the development at Lowbrook Lane which has just started. These two lanes cannot cope now with any increase in the volume of traffic let alone once the Tidbury Green/Lowbrook developments have been completed. Therefore any futher allocated developments which would increase traffic down these two lanes would just cause absolute chaos not to mention the increased noise and pollution to the residents of "Dickens Heath Village". The proposed roadway to this development has its access route on Bills Lane and would cause a great deal of congestion.
Cont...

* Environment. The proposed development encompasses an area rich in wildlife and birdlife with a large population of muntjac deer and is also a feeding ground for the badgers from the local setts. For the last 40 years the cuckoos have returned to the area and use both the area which was called Allocation 13 but also the land which is under allocation 26 as their breeding ground. We need to protect this legacy for future generations. Since the 1980's the cuckoo numbers have declined by 65%. This breed is now on the RSPB red list as being in danger of dying out. As one of the last strongholds in the Solihull areas, we need to protect the land for the cuckoo and the host nests as well as the other wildlife.

To summarise, we understand the need for housing growth but this needs to be done in the right areas where the road network can cope. With the two housing developments in progress detailed above, this corner of Solihull cannot cope with any further increase in volume of traffic and we have given up substantial pockets of green areas for development in this area. Surely, any further development must now be sourced out to other areas under the council umbrella?



Yours faithfully

KG Bushell/Miss HE Cooke

The use of this land is destroying precious green belt land, which has been acknowledged as such in the submission. Also, all routes from the south into Solihull are extremely congested already. Houses should not be added until the infrastructure is in place to cope with the additional traffic.

I understand the need for SMBC to partly compensate for the loss of Site 13 but most unhappy that you openly state - Quote "Shifting the focus of vehicular traffic movements away from the congested Dickens Heath Road to Bills Lane/Haslucks Green Road" Unquote. As I live in Majors Green I regret that you are simply moving a percentage of your congestion from SMBC to Bromsgrove District Council area, i.e. through Majors Green which is already congested due to developments in Tidbury Green and Dickens Heath. Substantial changes to the highways infrastructure will need to implemented.

Development of this site will have an adverse affect on the local roads which are already straining under the increased traffic from the development of Dickens Heath. Access to the site is on a 90 degree bend which has seen multiple accidents over a number of years.
The land is designated as green belt and should not be developed on under any circumstances. There has already been substantial loss of such lands with other developments to the detriment of the environment and outdoor enjoyment available in the borough.
The national planning policy framework was updated last summer and one of the key changes was that if green land was to be developed there should be some form of compensation in the area.There is no obvious evidence of this in the revised local plan document where compensation is to be made generally or for specific sites.
We object in the strongest terms to the development of the proposed land as it represents a significant and permanent loss to the local community with very little, if any, benefit to the existing residents.

I object because infrastructure plans to cope with significantly increased traffic hav'nt been declared. Majors Green (Bromsgrove district) borders Solihull at the very dangerous bend and junction between Haslucks Green road and Tilehouse Lane, near Whitlocks end Station. I live in Rosebriars, a cul-de-sac which is very close to the dangerous bend. There have been many accidents and on 2 recent occasions, cars have left the road, ending up in my neighbours rear garden, which backs onto the bend. What are you going to do? Housing developments are fine, but please take responsibility for significantly increasing danger in Majors Green.

Following the removal of Allocation 13 the inclusion of this site is acceptable subject to assurances i.e.
Site 13 is protected as nature reserve/public open space in line with National Planning Policy Framework and need to offset loss of high grade greenbelt
road improvements are made in full consultation with local residents

The worry is that there could be future encroachment from Site 26. Former Site 13 provides the break of greenbelt between this part of South Shirley, Dickens Heath and Cheswick Green. Subject to these resrvations regarding the protection of former Site 13 this would appear suitable trade off.

We do not have the infrastructure to support this at all. The roads can't handle the traffic now so how are they going to cope with the extra loading.

This land should be left alone.

New housing in this area will lead to the loss of green land, an increase in congestion on our roads and strain on our infrastructure.

As a resident on Haslucks Green Road in Majors Green, I have to object about the potential increase in traffic which will be forced to go through our village due to extra housing on Site 26. The already congested "Country Road" creates havoc getting off our driveway. Haslucks Green Road has become a "City Road", unsafe to walk through, noisy and polluted.
"Shifting traffic movements from Dickens Heath Road to Bills Lane/Haslucks Green Road" will simply bring traffic to a standstill. Infastructure desperately needs looking at. Thank you

Concerns about safely moving my car of the drive of my house onto Haslucks Green road with the current volume of traffic. Developments that are being progressed by SMBC have a huge impact on BDC residents e.g. the decision to interrupt traffic flow on Dickens Heath road resulting in increased traffic flows on Haslucks Green road and Tilehouse Lane - what arrangements are in place to ensure liaison between SMBC and BDC?
Any subsequent increase in traffic from plot 26 which will access/egress Bills Lane will require a pedestrian crossing to provided in Haslucks Green road Majors Grn.

I live in Major's Green and the infrastructure around is at bursting point. We cannot take on extra vehicles without an obverse effect on the country roads. There needs to be an alternative road(s) put in place to take the traffic away, many use the roads at great speed as Rat Runs.

As you intend sending the traffic through Majors Green from this development please consider that the infrastructure here cannot cope with any more volume. The roads are little more than country lanes and we are now the commute route from Tidbury Green and Solihull Lodge resulting in residents being unable to get off our drives because traffic is backed up and stationery. The fumes are overwhelming and it is becoming difficult to walk in the area and children walking to school are dodging traffic to cross the road. Please consider infrastructure before destroying our village.

Concerned about the impact of additional traffic on the safety of pedestrians due to the dangerous narrow pavements from Haslucks Green Road to Whitlocks End Station . Due to the increased volume of traffic it is very difficult to cross the road safely at Tilehouse Lane / Haslucks Green Road .
Increased risk of flooding inMajors Green due to the development of additional housing the canal flooded over into gardens last year.
Reduction in the green belt with the development of more homes at plot 4 will reduce the green belt buffer between Bromsgrove and Solihull
Concerned about the reduction in the Green belt and the affect on wildlife , in particular the cuckoo which returns every year to the Christmas tree Farm.
The Additional traffic which is to be shifted onto Haslucks Green Road and surrounding roads raises concerns about the poor infrastructure int the area. Any increase in traffic from plot 26 will further endanger pedestrians due to narrow /lack of pavements on Bills Lane ,Haslucks Green Road, Peterbrook road to Aqueduct Road and Drawbridge road. Dangerous to cross over Haslucks Green road or turn right at Rushleigh road .

I have lived in Majors Green for 58 years since birth. I am most concerned about the major impact that these new builds will have on the area. Our 'country lanes' are already congested at peak periods especially due to the other developments in the area. I have seen our roads come under increasing pressure over the years. We cannot cope with anymore. Extra traffic will cause more noise and pollution and risk to pedestrian safety. You have a duty to protect our Green Belt and Environment.

The proposal to reroute traffic onto Bills Lane and Haslucks Green Road is not acceptable these Roads already are heavily and excessively congested and to add to this is nonsense, im afraid that the Developers of Dickens Heath should have taken into consideration the village roads infrastructure at the time of planning and building not some years after the event and to then to send it elsewhere is absurd

Bills lane will be the only access for traffic. As the name suggests this is a two lane country lane with no pavement on one side for parts of the lane. It has become a rat run. During the morning and evening rush hour pedestrians cannot cross the road.

Access to this site is off a narrow mostly blind road that has seen many accidents.