Question 26 - Site 16 - East of Solihull

Hi, any new builds should be sympathetic to existing residents living in the area, looking at this plan making Pinfold Road a cut through would make the road even more of a problem with parking. Also building a road so close to the back of existing gardens, cutting into one of the last green belt areas in Solihull, would have noise / light pollution. Finally I don't think the impact of so many new houses on the existing road networks has been taken into account, the already congested neighbouring roads and traffic junctions struggle with existing volumes of traffic.

With further reference to the Solhull Council Revelopment Plan. I note that land between Hampton Lane and Lugtrout Lane is planned for the development of around 650 homes.

My query is this:

1. Current schools in the area are at over capacity for pupils. You will have to build new schools. Where are all the teachers going to come from when the current system has a serious shortage of trained teachers and the government has to introduce cash inducements to attract people to the profession.
2. How are local roads (Lugtrout Lane, Hampton Lane) going to cope with the extra traffic. This applies to all the areas earmarked for development. Solihull's roads are continually gridlocked with the current traffic levels. There is not enough land available to build new roads and public transport in the area is currently inadequate.

3. Lugtrout Lane/Hampton Lane is part of the Meriden Gap. Any new housing development in this area will be detrimental to the area.

1) The two plans 96&97 have some significant differences which could cause confusion eg. a) The access from Damson Parkway moves by 50 feet on each plan. b) Our property has been obliterated by trees in the plan on page 97 which is really insensitive.
2) Local amenities such as doctors and schools can not cope with current demand.
3) Traffic congestion at key times is terrible with Lugtrout Lane used as a cut-through due to additional congestion on Hampton Lane.
4) Concern for current wildlife bats, deer, birds.
5) ASB/Security concerns in open copse area if boundary not secured.

Firstly, removing this site from the green belt will reduce the desirable green gap between Solihull and Catherine de Barnes.

Secondly, the roads surrounding site 16 are frequently congested with traffic, and could not cope with the cars associated with 600 new dwellings.Field lane is too narrow to be useful.

This greenbelt is mostly high performing agricultural land. It provides a buffer between urban Solihull and Catherine de Barnes. The current strongly defensible boundary of Damson Parkway would be breached. The proposed boundary to the east ( Field Lane ) is not a boundary to development between the canal and Lugtrout Lane. The proposed concept does not retain the notable wildlife habitat between Hampton Lane and the agricultural land or provide a wildlife corridor to the remaining Green belt. Field lane rural character will not allow meaningful traffic. Traffic on all boundary roads is currently excessive. Traffic measures are required.

My property backs on to existing fields (Pinfold Road). The fields are Green Belt and I find the term 'lower performing' shocking. I'm a nature lover, in the last few months I have personally seen in the fields, the coppice between the fields and my garden the following,

1) Deer both Muntjac & Roe
2) Badger
3) Foxes
4) Cattle
5) Squirrels
6) Mole hills
7) Barn Owl on lovely evening
8) Heard a Tawny Owl
9) Sparrow Hawk often visiting looking for small birds as prey
10) Jays
11) Kestrel
12) Woodpeckers both Green and Greater Spotted
13) Song Thrush
14) Fieldfare
15 Gold Finches, Blue Tits, Great Tit, Robbins ....

The people claiming it is lower performing, what did they see, what were they actually looking at. Will all of these animals and many more still be in the area when the fields are gone and a myriad of properties appear.

I notice from the initial plan that the green space area is in a position that is surrounded only by new property. I would have thought it was incumbent on any planner to at least try and lower the effect on existing properties so putting the green space at the rear of the Pinfold Rd properties would have the least impact on existing land owners. I'm concerned that this doesn't appear to have been considered.

The properties in Pinfold Road that back on to the fields have a small coppice between the rear gardens and the fields. However this coppice is very narrow and the will only partially block the view to any new development in summer and the start of autumn. All other times there is clear line of sight through to the field, especially from rear 1st floor windows. Also the initial plan shows a road heading south from Parkway up to near coppice, this would result in annoying car light pollution on the rear of some of the properties. I already suffer from the powerful lights (recently installed) on the front of the hospital pointing in the direction of my property. This would need to be considered

The road network around Damson Parkway, especially near the traffic lights and down to Parkway Hospital is already badly congested and frankly dangerous at peak times. Several owners of properties on Pinfold Road have complained about the junction in and out of the road, often complaining about the dangerous behaviour of drivers. Our response to complaints is usually along the line 'it's not been busy when we were there' !!!! Nobody has ever seen anybody checking at peak times. If 600 properties are build that would be around another 1200 vehicles, how does the road network cope. Parkway is already too busy, Lugtroute lane was never designed for much traffic.

The plan diagram shows that the Orchard might be incorporated in to the plan, this is shocking news for the owners of Pinfold Rd (actually a close), especially as some were not even aware of this because the council didn't see fit to let all owners know about the plan, there are only 18 houses how hard could it have been to let everyone know! We are concerned that using the orcahrd may result in 1) the close (road) being extended in to a new development in the Orchard 2) A new path/cycle route may use the close. Everyone bought property in the close because it is a nice quiet spot in an already chaotic area. We don't want to become a thoroughfare for a new estate and all the problems such a noise, disturbance, rubbish ..... that would bring with it.

Finally how will surrounding facilities such as doctors cope. I contacted my doctors and they weren't even aware of any plan to build 600 homes close ! Who is managing this plan, surely they should have chatted with medical centres to ascertain the impact on them. As it happened my medical centre said they wouldn't be able to cope.

We would agree and support the Councils draft allocation of Site 16 as a suitable, sustainable site for Urban Extension. The proposal to move the Green belt boundary to The Grand Union canal north of Lugtrout Lane provides a defensible boundary. The proposed inclusion of land on northern side of Lugtrout Lane would allow for those site to be developed at an earlier stage to the phased release of the Damson Parkway site, in a sustainable manner to provide high quality, low density housing.

Ok

Coldlands Colts is a community club which has been in operation for 37 years and currently supports over 150 children playing grass roots football. The club is located on the corner of Field lane and Lugtrout lane which is currently shown as being retained within the plans for the area 16 development, however the clarification notes within the Local Plan Review document indicate that the club may be relocated. We are broadly supportive (subject to not being moved) but do have some reservations which we would like you to consider. These reservations are given on the attached supporting document.

Having lived in Pinfold Road for 50 years I always thought this site was green belt land???.However should development go ahead I wish to request that Pinfold Road remains as a cul-de-sac with no access by vehicles or pedestrians to any development on Site 16. Also that the orchard at the end of the road is kept as a green space in view of the wildlife and wild bird population present.

Finally what road improvements are planned to accommodate traffic from the new homes on already heavily congested local roads ??.

ITs important to reain and promote the sports pitches ( eventhough these are not currently used.

The land at the rear of Pinfold road is a habitat for wildlife including foxes, badgers, deer which will be destroyed by the proposed development.
Damson Parkway is an extremely busy traffic route, it is very difficult to walk across the road from Pinfold to Yew Tree particularly with young children due to the volume and speed of the traffic - building more houses will increase the traffic in the area and make this situation worse, aswell as increasing the already lengthy queues of traffic on Damson Parkway.
There is not enough capacity at Yew Tree doctors or local schools.

See Letter

Proposed Mitigation:
If adopted, the southern boundary of site 16 should be placed at Hampton Lane, so existing property owners are not constrained from development by green belt designation at the same time as adjacent land is redesignated for housing.
Development should be restricted at the periphery, to provide significant undeveloped buffer strips to retain open aspect and minimise impact on existing dwellings.
Field Lane is not a suitable access road for proposed development, and widening would result in permanent loss of rural byway and ancient hedgerow. Access should be from Damson Parkway only.

I have lived for the past 25 years in Pinfold Road directly adjacent to the proposed site for redevelopment. It has always been classed as Green Belt land with a very old orchard and meadow. The land has been untouched for a number of years and is full of wild life such as badgers, foxes, a number of deer, owls and many other species of birds and insects. It would therefore be a shame to destroy such a valuable site and for it to be lost forevever

Site 16 was originally rejected within the 2012 SHLAA for reasons which remain unchanged today. The infrastructure required to support a development of this size is totally inadequate and remains unchanged.
Hampton Lane in particular, is already severely congested even during weekend periods and the impact that further traffic will have will completely change the character and relationship that Catherine De Barnes currently enjoys with Solihull Town Centre and surrounding areas.
The character of the area as a whole and the Green Belt status currently in place will be completely destroyed and become yet another urban sprawl.

Please accept that attached as Catherine De Barnes Residents Association to the Solihull Draft Local Plan Review Consultation . This response is the work of a joint working group comprised members of the RA and Hampton Parish Council.
Although almost identical to the response from Hampton Parish Council we have made a correction to para 6.8 where the word north has been replaced by south and there is an additional para.6.10 .


See letter

I am a resident on Pinfold Road for nearly 10 years, my property backs onto the Farm (not backing on to Hampton Lane gardens). I moved into the street due to the greenery surrounding the property and it being the ideal place to bring up a new and growing family. To build on this green farm land and the Orchard (at the end of the road) shows great disrespect, not just to the land/wildlife/village but to the surrounding residents who have invested their lives/money to live in those particular surroundings. It seems as though no thought has been given to the residents of Pinfold Road who will suddenly be surrounded by new 'affordable' housing, tarmac and not to mention the years of disruption we will be faced with (contractors, dust, hammering...). The new access road planned to go down the back of my garden would result in traffic noise, something we don't have right now. The access allowed to the new development will also see an increased footfall through the street, which will result in increased crime for sure. The street has had many issues with sewer blockages in the past, this will also increase for sure, with potential flooding as a risk. The increased housing will mean, further schools/medical centres/dentists and other support facilities being required - how is this manageable? The amount of traffic that runs down the main roads is already at bursting at rush hour, the increased residents will surely see the place come to a standstill

Also, there is a storm flood pipe that runs under my property, surely this will be affected and because of this, I have vested interest in what is going to happen.

Is there an option for SMBC to 'buy-out' our property or are we going to get some form of compensation?

Please find attached Hampton-in-Arden Society's response to the current draft local plan consultation.

1.The impact of potentially an additional1200 cars hitting the already inadequate surrounding road junctions at peak times.
2..Building on a working farm and an old Orchard is an Environmental Sacrilege. The current wonderful wildlife will be destroyed forever
3. What consideration has been given to potential upward of an additional 1200 patients registering with the two local GP clinics , which are already at full capacity ?
4. I would strongly urge planners to look again at the impact a new road behind the existing properties in Pinfold road.will have on existing residents.

Questions 16, 17, 18 and 26 within the plan. I fully support the arguments put forward of the joint working group from Hampton Parish Council and Catherine de Barnes Residents' Association response to the SMBC Draft Local Plan (\Parish Response to SMBC Draft Local Plan January 2019) submitted on 03.02.2019. I do not believe site 16 (Lugtrout Lane) should be included as an allocated site and objections are based on loss of Green Belt, loss of an effective rural gap & defensible boundaries and the inability of local infrastructure to handle the development. I strongly oppose development of site 16.

Questions 16, 17, 18 and 26 within the plan. I fully support the arguments put forward of the joint working group from Hampton Parish Council and Catherine de Barnes Residents' Association response to the SMBC Draft Local Plan (\Parish Response to SMBC Draft Local Plan January 2019) submitted on 03.02.2019. I do not believe site 16 (Lugtrout Lane) should be included as an allocated site and objections are based on loss of Green Belt, loss of an effective rural gap & defensible boundaries and the inability of local infrastructure to handle the development. I strongly oppose development of site 16.

This area is historically green belt and traffic on Lugtrout lane is already dangerously fast. Lugtrout lane is narrow with no footpath in parts and drainage ditches are on both sides of the road
Field Lane has always been narrow and not built for the additional traffic such a large development will bring.
Traffic in the surrounding areas is bad enough without putting more on local roads.

Far to big a development on green belt land also where are the additional schools and Doctors to accommodate the extra residents. It will be overdeveloped in my opinion if it goes ahead it should be far smaller. We don't have a lot of green belt left locally a lot has been lost to the JLR development and also plans for road changes off solihull road and Catherine de Barnes lane to the A45 where more green belt is being lost.

I have lived in Pinfold Road for the last 48 years. My concern is about the pressure to build on Green Belt land which in this case includes an Ancient Orchard and a Meadow.The ecology of this area has been evolving undisturbed providing the perfect environment for Animals, Birds, Insects,with a rich Flora and Forna.
Please consider this valuable asset. With careful management it's survivable will reward us all for years to come.
Housing on this plot will put a great strain on Doctors, and Schools. The increase in traffic will have a drastic effect on our already busy roads.

Please see attached document
Kier Living own the majority of 'Land at the Rear of 74 - 108 Coleshill Heath Road', as it is referred to within the Solihull Strategic Housing and Employment Land Availability Assessment 2016 ("SHELAA")
(site ref. 193). This site has been promoted through the Call for Sites process (with a submission made in January 2018) and through the initial Regulation 18 consultation.

Please find full document attached.

Cushman and Wakefield (C&W) have been appointed by the Strategic Land and Property Team of Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council (SMBC) (acting in the Council's capacity as land owner) to submit this representation in support of the allocation of Site PO16 Land East of Solihull and its release from the Green Belt as part of the Draft Local Plan Review Supplementary Consultation (2019).

There is a traditional orchard (ref: SP1680) identified on Natural England's Priority Habitat Inventory, accessed via magic.defra.gov.uk/magicmap which has been identified as a notable habitat within the concept plan document landscape assessment section. As a priority habitat, traditional orchards should be retained within development proposals.
The orchard is to the east of the rejected Pinfold Nursery LWS which has been identified as being of high ecological value due to the semi-improved grassland.
The Developer Masterplan proposes to retain the orchard but not the grassland and SMBC's concept plan identifies the need for ecological assessment before a decision is made about the development potential of those field parcels.

The allocation contains playing field land occupied by Coldlands Colts Boys FC which is proposed to retained or re provided elsewhere. The SMBC illustrative emerging concept masterplan retains the playing pitches which is supported. Sport England are supportive of the retention of the site and this should be reflected in the policy allocating the site. The opportunity to extend the site should also be explored.

If it is decided that the site is to be re-provided Sport England and the Football Foundation would welcome a discussion to understand the location and the potential impact on the adjacent clubs; Hampton FC and Glades FC.

If the playing field is to be re provided the policy allocating the site should state that the playing fields (playing pitches and ancillary facilities) should not be developed upon until replacement provision is made in line with the requirements of NPPF paragraph 97(b) and Sport England's Playing Fields Policy.

Objection to development of Site 16 East of Solihull between Lugtrout Lane and Hampton Lane located within existing green belt. Protection of two Heritage Assets (Field Farm and 237 Lugtrout Lane) and their setting is essential. Developers should guarantee that Sports Facilities (Coldland Colts Boys FC) shall be relocated prior to residential development or retained. No consideration has been given to mains services to proposed housing, including electricity, gas, water supply, mains drainage and telecommunications. Negotiate Section 106 agreement with developer to improve Site of Special Scientific Interest along Grand Union Canal from Catherine de Barnes to Damson Parkway.