Question 15 - Site 26 - Whitlocks End Farm

The trees on these fields help with the air quality, more cars and less trees, has the air quality been checked in this area. Bills lane is a busy road with poor visibility that is already prone to accidents.

This should not be considered. Bills Lane is already a dangerous rat run for Dickens Heath and Tidbury Green developments and any more traffic along it and Hasluck's Green Road will cause the gridlock seen in all the other roads in the area. The bend along Bills Lane where this site is proposed is already a hazardous junction and more roads opening on to it would be a cause for concern. This area with its wealth of trees and open spaces is a haven for dog walkers and ramblers alike and provides an invaluable buffer between Shirley and Dickens Heath.

Bills Lane and Haslucks Green Road are already busy roads and more housing will exacerbate this problem causing more traffic accidents. Public transport from Dickens Heath and from around Whitlocks End in terms of buses is sporadic at best and not regular enough to be of much use to most commuters. The car park at Whitlocks Station already cannot cope with the amount of cars that wished to be parked there causing more parking in the surrounding roads. The infrastructure cannot cope with more housing development.

Bills Lane and Haslucks Green Road are already busy roads and more housing will exacerbate this problem causing more traffic accidents. Public transport from Dickens Heath and from around Whitlocks End in terms of buses is sporadic at best and not regular enough to be of much use to most commuters. The car park at Whitlocks Station already cannot cope with the amount of cars that wished to be parked there causing more parking in the surrounding roads. The infrastructure cannot cope with more housing development no matter what improvements are suggested.

I object to this proposal on the grounds of increased traffic on roads that currently struggle with the exsisting amount of traffic through Bills lane onto Haslucks green road and through Majors Green.This will just direct traffic from the suburban spaw of Dickens Heath onto the surrounding areas of Shirley and Majors green.if this proposal is granted then it will set a president for future applications from the owner of the Christmas tree farm for a future 1000 homes.
There will also be an impact of parking in local roads because of low capacity at the station.

Site 26 will significantly reduce the green boundary between developments (300m is hardly a space). Quantity of houses disproportionate in Shirley and using farm land. The bridle path at site 26 is used daily for exercise, walking, dog walking and enjoying what little countryside there is. Haslucks Green Road is one of the most congested roads in Shirley. Bills Lane at peak times also congested. The railway bridge has height restrictions for goods vehicles hence no buses. Congestion in Bills Lane also occurs at Woods Farm during the Christmas season. Accidents occur frequently at the Bill Lane bend.

I wish to object to site 26 due to a lack of infrastructure for more homes in this area and also because the weight of traffic on Haslucks Green Road and Tilehouse Lane has increased massively since I made this same comment on the DLP in January 2017. For this reason I strongly object to shifting vehicle movements from Dickens Heath onto Bills Lane and Haslucks Green Road. The rail station car park at Whitlocks End is currently full so commuters are parking cars in Fords Road and surrounding roads so this as a major problem at present.

Whilst I acknowledge the need for additional housing unless the surrounding infrastructure is improved at the same pace problems will inevitably arise. This development will drive further additional traffic through and already busy area including but not limited to neighboring major's green.

My opposition to site 26 is the extra traffic it will generate combined with site 4 of 350 houses that would as a minimum put 650 extra cars around the area. but given that most households have two cars that would boost the number 1250 car. I live on Haslucks Green Road in Majors Green
the traffic now is putting pressure on that road to a high degree, in my oppinion it is not acceptable.

See letter

See Letter

Bills lane is a narrow road whith a low bridge sharp bend and a very limited access to stratford road to add a 300 housing a state whith the posabilty of a further 600 cars is madness

Please find attached Tidbury Green Parish Council's response to the Draft Local Plan Supplementary Consultation, along with the appendices referred to within our response.

This site is approximately ¾ mile from Site 12 so should be treated in isolation, having its own neighbourhood play space and other facilities.

The Option 3 plan is difficult to read and the suggested road layout similar to one for Toy Town

The site area should be reduced to 21Ha, as indicated on the SMBC Concept Master Plan, and providing only 300 houses. Bills Lane could cross the site and join the proposed new road between Whitlocks End Station and the A34.

Currently the Whitlock's Farm has been given over to the Christmas trees for a number of years, if this cannot continue (though if the proceeds of selling for development are not forthcoming it may hopefully continue) it should replaced with indigenous species, rather than destroy trees that have a positive effect on the environment. There have already been homes added along the bridle path that have had a deleterious effect on the ability to enjoy walking dogs due to the dancer of traffic. In addition, it has already meant increased traffic access to Bills Lane.
Bills Lane already struggles with he volume of traffic at the junction with Haslucks Green Road and at the junctions of Shakespeare Drive and Burman Road, all used at rat runs to the Stratford Road or access to car parking at either Shirley Station or Whitlocks End. The queues tail back considerably leaving current residents of the Badgers estate suffering the brunt of this when trying to use the only exit from the estate, There is now almost constant traffic noise coming from Bills Lane with late night speeding. Increased road safety risks there already having been a fatal accident due to speeding vehicle. There will inevitably be an increase in traffic consequent to other proposed developments in Cheswick Green, Dickens heath, Tidbury Green. The suggestion that there should be a focus of vehicular traffic movements away from congested Dickens heath Road to Bills Lane/Haslucks Green Road is plain ignorance of the volume of traffic already using Bills Lane and the chaotic congestion at expanding peak times at junctions. It will impact on surrounding roads as vehicles try and avoid congestion.

The existing trees clean the air, reduce the excess water collecting at that location, provide a natural environment to existing wildlife.would amount to urban sprawl on a large area of Green Belt.
Site 26 will leave a narrow gap between Dickens Heath and Shirley creating urban sprawl, the prevention of which is one of the purposes of the Green Belt as stated in the NPPF. It is disingenuous to use the problems with the Dickens heath development as grounds for proposing Site 26. Dickens heath has gone beyond the original intention. It now has some 1800 dwellings (and increasing) but the original design was for only 700 dwellings. The impact of this level of population on the local road system, which has had no road improvements to compensate for this additional growth, is significant. Outside the village built-up boundary, the roads are primarily narrow country lanes.It suggests that attention should be diverted away from the Shirley area and focussed elsewhere in the Borough. It has already impacted ob Bills Lane volume of traffic. Having resided off Bills Lane for 30+ years, the impact has been remarkable and significant.

In combination with the newly expanded Site 12, it will end up enclosing the area covered by Site 13 on 3 sides. The narrowing of the gap and enclosure of Site 13 presents a threat to future development of the land at Site 13 which provides invaluable green infrastructure to may residents of Shirley and beyond.It is vital that site 13 is protected as a nature reserve. Surrounding it on 3 sides will have an impact on the natural environment and existing wildlife and air pollution.
The land is already noted as GreenBelt parcel that scores highly and the trade off is misplaced with Shirley bearing a disproportionate amount of housing development and having an unfair burden of nearly 40% of new homes provided.

See Letter

I strongly object to this site being developed on.
It is stated that moving traffic from Dickens Heath to Bills Lane and Haslucks Green Road as a plus point. In reality these two roads are already heavily used and if all of the proposed houses have to exit via. Bills Lane this will result in heavy congestion on these roads. It also erodes the gap between Shirley and Dickens Heath even further. This area of green belt should be maintained to offset the lack of other green spaces within Shirley.

Already enough housing proposed for Shirley area without adding site 26.

Site 26 displaces warehousing and outbuildings for Christmas tree business, where do these go?

Western end of Bill's Lane retains rural aspect, it is narrow, unsuitable for additional traffic and deserves protection.

Area already recognised as short of open space - Neville Road Village Green (backing onto Bill's Lane) created 2011 to assist and must not be sacrificed to access new development.

Two road accesses to area 26 apparently required. If estate goes ahead, both should come off gyratory required to tame dangerous 90 degree bend in Bill's Lane.

I object to this latest proposal as it is no better than the original proposal of Allocation 13.
The original plan was for 600 houses and the area touched on to Dickens Heath Road/Tanworth Lane at one end and Bills Lane/Haslucks Green Road - an assumption would have been that approximately 50% of traffic would exit/enter one end, and 50% would exit/enter at the other putting more traffic onto already congested roads - this latest Allocation 26 proposal will now only affect Bills Lane/Haslucks Green Road end with 300 houses - therefore the traffic impact will be no better for Bills Lane and Haslucks green road which is already overloaded with traffic coming from Dickens Heath. This point is touched on in the plan in the word "shifting" and acknowledging that Dickens Heath Road is already congested - 'Shifting the focus of vehicular traffic movements away from the congested Dickens Heath Road to Bills Lane/Haslucks Green Road.'

I do not see this current proposal as sustainable due to the high volume of houses in one focused area.

Despite changes to the initial plan I gather that Shirley South is still to receive 38% of proposed new housing in the Solihull borough, which remains disproportionate and unacceptable given the size of the borough.
The effect on the local area by way of flooding and environmental issues is in no way fully understood and not addressed in the proposal from what I can understand. This area suffered massive flooding in April of 2018. If housing is built on the natural land and flood plains the results could be much worse than previously.

I will also refer to a point I made in my initial objection of the 38% of housing in Shirley is that new housing allocation should be developed to compliment current and new infrastructure. In the case of HS2 which is referred to in the current plans, this will be running to the North of the borough and not stopping anywhere near to these proposed Shirley developments - therefore more congestion would be caused by people driving to the proposed HS2 station as there is inadequate public transport to that area of the borough.

I was a very strong supporter for the removal of Site 13 despite living on the B4102 close to the Green and Dog Kennel Lane. I felt that if this site had been developed we could no longer trust the council's proposals about development because of the detrimental effect to Dickens Heath and the original concept for that development. Site 26 raises alarm bells because this site still forms a potential build line, when you look at the map, that would see Site 26 connected to site 12. This cannot happen and all efforts should be made to ensure that this can never happen.

I recognise that SMBC need to build more houses but I object strongly to the number of houses being built on the Bromsgrove District boundary in particular those either side of Majors Green which is already has overcrowded roads. I am disgusted that in your Consultation
Document you state that Site 26 replaces Site 13 which will move the traffic away from Dickens Heat Road to Bills Lane and Haslucks Green Road. The 300 houses you are intending to build are in SMBC area hence you need to improve the infrastructure to move the traffic away from Majors Green.

This development would cause great problems to the local roads and both local railway stations as the infrastructure is not there to be able to sustain the number of new houses being proposed and the number of vehicles that will be added to the local roads within the district. The local schools would not be able to accommodate the number of new pupils that could move to the area and again public transport within this borough has never been able to cope and trying to adding more cars along both Haslucks Green Rd and Bills Lane will cause major jams.

Local roads cannot cope. It is inappropriate to as stated in the plan to "shift the focus of traffic to Bills Lane and Haslucks Green Road. It is already extremely busy on these roads, living on Haslucks Green Road it is increasingly difficult to even get onto the highway at rush hour.

We moved to Majors Green in January 2017 to experience a more idyllic lifestyle with views of the countryside. The properties are priced accordingly because of this privilege and the development will no doubt have an impact on local property prices. There has already been a lot of building development in the Dickens Heath area and Shirley Park Gate bringing increased pollution and health implications. There are three local football clubs which stand to be affected by the proposed building where there are regular matches played by younger leagues are we not being encouraged to keep children more active. More and more parkland and recreational areas are being taken away. Sadly my initial impressions on moving here was how the Roads did not seem adequate to cope with the volume of traffic going through the area with the already overcrowded and very built up Dickens Heath plus the traffic from the surrounding Shirley areas. Our property is situated on a particularly bad bend of Haslucks Green Road our neighbours have told us of the accidents that have occurred over the years and since moving here we been unfortunate to witness many RTAs which have resulted in the erection of Bollards, sharp bend warning signs and the introduction of an anti skid surface. Making the Road look like a danger zone! We can often hear the speeding traffic and sometimes wait with baited breathe expecting to hear a crash the roads are dark and narrow and the speeding signs are not adhered to! This will only be heightened with the increased volume of traffic should the proposal go ahead approx 750 houses x an average of 2 cars per household could be 1500 extra cars adding to the daily traffic plus visitors to the area. The car park is already full daily at Whitlocks End station and the public transport is inadequate in Dickens Heath to get commuters to Solihull the residents will have to use their vehicles or go on foot which brings it own risks with the darkened roads and narrow footpaths or no footpaths in parts. By allowing this proposal to go ahead you are putting the safety of all the local residents in more jeopardy!

Avoiding urban sprawl is the purpose of Green Belt, which this development goes against, joining Dickens Heath, Tidbury Green and Majors Green.
Destroying Green Belt irreparably damages the area and therefore quality of life for current and future residents.
Suggesting that the development would shift the focus on vehicular traffic movements away from Dickens Heath Road to an area which is equally, if not more congested on Haslucks Green Road is unacceptable. Traffic frequently queues from the corner of bills lane to the Stratford Road.

As per comments on questions 12 and 14 of this consultation, I fundamentally object to sites 4, 12 and 26 being included as allocated sites, due to the inequitable scale of development in this area versus other areas. Furthermore, site 26 should not be included as it is a recognised Green Belt Area with a high rating to prevent urban sprawl. Development of this site simply exacerbates urban sprawl and removes any determinable barrier between Dickens Heath and Majors Green, which is in direct contraction to the Local Plan objectives and does not retain the intrinsic character of both settlements

I am concerned that the infrastructure of the area is just not good enough for these proposed developments. The roads throughout the area are narrow. There is queuing traffic throughout Dickens Heath every morning Monday to Friday as early as 7.00am.
Haslucks Green Rd with its sharp bents is already a dangerous road. Tilehouse Lane, Tythe Barn Lane - also busy and narrow.
Yet again Green Belt Land is being proposed to be built on, yet there are brownfield sites throughout the West Midlands.
Loss of trees and wild life habitat - many owls in the area.

Traffic is our main issue with this proposal. The entrance to the site will be onto Bills Lane which a narrow, busy road. This empties out onto Haslucks Green Road part of which is narrow country Lane if the traffic turns left in order to get to the M42/M5 this road is already extraordinarily busy for a narrow road in the day. Also if site 4 is given the goahead traffic from that site will be using the same roads. The junction at Bills lane and Haslucks Green Road is already very congested at peak periods.

Please see covering letter

I would like to register my concerns and objections to the current draft local plan.

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.Shirley and Blyth Valley has 38% of the proposed housing which is a higher percentage than any other area and would link surrounding areas together i.e. Cheswich Green, Dickens Heath, & Tidbury Green. This will turn into an urban mass with a lack of open space which is a requirement for health and well being.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.There are no plans in the current draft for extra GPs and schools
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..Site 4 an extension of Dickens Heath, proposed as it is near a station. The council has asked for alternative sites, if being near a station is a requirement, have the fields to the east of Widney Manor Station been considered. Widney Manor Station is much better linked. Dickens Heath which won best village was based on all houses being within a 10 minute walk to shops, this is something that no longer can be claimed . 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 appear to have neglected.
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.