Question 10 - Green Belt Changes

Green Belt land must be protected - especially the Meriden Gap.

We believe the boundary line for the village should remain as Balsall Street East

Other Green Belt Changes

10. Do you have any comments to make on potential changes to the Green Belt boundary east of the settlement (Balsall Common) that would result in the removal of the 'washed over' Green Belt from those areas not covered by a formal allocation?

We oppose removal of 'washed over' designation because it is useful in restricting the scale and density of redevelopment in Green Belt areas surrounding large towns and cities. near large populations. . In low-density settlement areas, or dispersed settlement, the 'washed-over' designation ensure that Green Belt policy is maintained. This provides for limited infilling in a developed frontage, where new houses are permitted of a size and height of the existing development. But elsewhere new houses should not be significantly larger than those they replace.

In the area east of Balsall Common, removal of Green Belt status proposed for land south of Old Waste Lane and Waste Lane will remove the current level of control over development. This would result in unstructured, random development as individual sites are promoted for development.

The majority of the land in this parcel is broad area 4 and is scored at 12 in the Atkins Strategic Green Belt Area Assessment (2016). Only a very small area RP56 is found to make a limited contribution to the Green Belt. Therefore proposing to remove this land from the Green Belt goes against the AGBR that broad area 4 which states " The area covers a large part of Birmingham and Solihull to the West and Coventry to the East......The area performs highly against all 4 purposes and makes an equal contribution to the preservation of the Meriden Strategic Gap and the setting and character of the Berkswell Conservation Area".

See Letter

See Letter

See Letter

See Letter

See Letter

See Letter

see attached document

See Letter

Please find below my feedback on the Solihull MBC Local Plan Consultation.
Comments on Site 1 - Barrett's Farm Development

I would like to emphasise the importance of considering appropriate access and the careful management of speed, traffic and parking problems on Balsall Common roads before any further development in and around the village proceeds, particularly at Barrett's Farm.

Since I moved to Balsall Common three years ago, I have been shocked and worried by the significant increases in the volume, acceleration and speed of traffic on Meeting House Lane and Station Road.

The so-called traffic calming measures on my road are completely useless, especially from Blessed Robert Grissold to the shop end of Meeting House Lane. The speed bumps are almost completely flat (please see attached photographs) and do nothing to slow the speed of cars racing to and from the village centre or using my road as a 'rat run' through Balsall Common. In fact, traffic accelerates on this part of the road, I think because drivers seem to want to drive as fast as they can going into or coming out of the slalom, where they know they will be forced to slow down for a short period.

In the last two years, two of my cats have been hit by cars and killed on Meeting House Lane and Station Road. This has been incredibly upsetting and quite a shocking statistic when you consider that I have had many cats as part of my family for 33 years in various locations around the country (including on a road off the A38 leading into Bristol city centre) and never experienced any of them being involved in accidents until I moved to Balsall Common. I am so concerned about the safety of animals on my road that I have felt compelled to ask my parents to look after my remaining cat at their house in another part of the West Midlands.

This may not be considered a big issue to people who are not animal lovers but I can assure you that it is a great source of distress to me and others in Balsall Common who care about animals. I would hope, however, that everyone in Balsall Common and at SMBC will care about the safety of the many Balsall parish runners, dog walkers, children walking to and from school, and various others that use Meeting House Lane to walk down every day, often in the middle of the road because of the lack of any/proper pavements in many places on the road.

Recently, I was driving very slowly down my road and still had to swerve to avoid runners using one side of the road and a parent with a child in a pushchair on the other side of the road (where there are no pavements). This sort of incident is a frequent occurrence. If I was one of the people that use my road to speed down as a cut through, I think that there could easily have been an accident. I am saddened that my elderly neighbour is afraid to walk down our road to go and see her friend because of this problem with traffic and lack of proper pavements/traffic calming.

The point that I am making is that the current speed and volume of traffic is untenable and we need SMBC to do something about it before considering any further developments in Balsall Common, including development at Barrett's Farm. It would be irresponsible and dangerous to do anything else.

My strong recommendation and plea is that SMBC considers the following:
* Blocking off Meeting House Lane to vehicular traffic, either at the village end (where the new shared space is proposed to start) or after the Catholic Church so that, in effect, it becomes two cul-de-sacs for vehicles. If the latter option was taken, one end of the road could be used for access to the tennis club and the other for the church, making it a fair distribution of traffic. This would prevent people inside and outside of the village using it as a rat run. I have been quite frustrated to learn from two colleagues at work who do not live in Balsall Common that their live satellite navigation software directs them to come down Meeting House Lane when driving in/through the village (e.g. from the motorway to the University of Warwick, and when driving from the University of Warwick to the Indian restaurant on the Kenilworth Road).
* Making the speed limit on Meeting House Lane and Station Road 20 miles per hour and installing proper traffic calming measures (e.g. more aggressive speed bumps, more slaloms, one way traffic etc).
Comments on infrastucture required to support additional housing in Balsall Common
I definitely support redeveloping the village centre but I would ask that the measures proposed above (regarding speeding on Station Road and Meeting House Lane) are implemented first so that more and more people don't use Meeting House Lane as a short cut to the village centre or to park on during any disruption when the redevelopment is happening. I would also support a bypass being created and routed to the Barrett's Farm development, should this go ahead.

I currently experience significant problems with village shoppers parking on the double yellow lines near my house, on the single yellow lines during restricted periods, on the pavement and across my drive. This means that I would certainly welcome improved parking in the village but I would also implore Balsall Parish Council and SMBC to put up signage for the existing car park behind Tesco. Visitors and newcomers to the village often do not know the car park is there. I would also ask that SMBC sends parking enforcement officers to Balsall Common on a regular basis to encourage drivers to start parking legally, safely and considerately when accessing the village centre.

I definitely support the creation of a bypass to help deal with the significant problem of commuters from outside of Balsall Common using the village as a short cut instead of local A roads and motorways.

I would also like to see an additional school being provided. I would make a suggestion that this could be a Catholic primary school given that there is a thriving Catholic community in Balsall Common with the parish church very close to the proposed Barrett's Farm development, the nearest Catholic primary school in the Solihull MBC area is over three miles away and the Council cut the bus service provided to this school.

There definitely needs to be a more regular and later running bus service in Balsall Common. I would also like to see more regular and later running train services and a larger car park at the train station. The station and roads near the station cannot cope with existing demand for parking, let alone if there are over 1000 more homes in the area.

I am keen to see many more signposted public footpaths and walking routes, as well as cycle paths and more pedestrian crossings. I would like to see the Kenilworth Greenway extended and access improved so that people in the village can more easily and more safely cycle to areas like Kenilworth, Berkswell, the University of Warwick, Knowle, Barston etc. It's very sad that it's not very easy to access the greenway in certain parts (e.g. having to haul a bike over a stile). I'm also keen to see safer pedestrian routes in and around the village to encourage more people to walk to the village centre.

Comments on the selection of sites in the green belt
I support a boundary for village development and protection of the green belt. I would like to see this policy strengthened to emphasise a commitment to always using brownfield sites or previously developed green belt sites when these are available in the area. The policies of a Conservative council should reflect the commitments of the West Midlands Mayor and the Government to protect the green belt.

Comments on the overall amount of housing being proposed for Balsall Common
I am still dismayed by the fact that the village of Balsall Common is one of few areas - and one of even fewer small communities - being expected to shoulder the brunt of the burden of additional housing in Solihull, and that the number has increased despite many residents objecting to the previous level of housing proposed in previous consultations. Surely there should be a more even distribution across the borough and all areas should be expected to take a reasonable share of additional housing, taking into account their current size and character and the impact that development will have? I think it is very sad that a village in a beautiful area is being turned into a town when there are other areas of the borough unaffected, and when we are already having to deal with HS2.

Comments on the timing of development and HS2
I would implore SMBC to ensure that large scale housing developments do not begin until after HS2 is completed. To do anything else would be to destroy Balsall Common and make the lives of people living here a misery for years.

Comments on the type and style of development
It is vital to retain the rural feel and character of Balsall Common if it is to remain a desirable place to live. That's the reason that many people like me choose to live here.

It's vital that natural habitats, wildlife and biodiversity are protected to highest level possible and that developers are forced to take their responsibilities in this seriously. The nature in and around Balsall Common is one of the village's most attractive qualities and I often enjoy walking the public footpaths in and around Barrett's Farm - it's important that natural features of any development site are retained and protected.

Developments should definitely be small in size overall and within small clusters of housing that are not identical. We don't want Balsall Common to look like a mini version of Milton Keynes or for developments to create a suburban sprawl.

See Letter

I am e-mailing to give you my opinion on the draft plan as I am a resident of Balsall Common.
I have looked at the plan and I have attended the consultation days put on by Solihull council.

I appreciate that there is a shortage of housing, especially affordable housing, and that Balsall Common and Berkswell need to have it's share of new builds; however I am very concerned about the numbers proposed in this area and the impact they will have on the local community and the environment.

Much of the proposed building will be on green field sites which will be detrimental to local wildlife and to how the local community are able to access that land, which improves their health and well-being.

I understand that three brown field sites were put forward as alternatives for some of the green belt, but the council has just chosen to build on those as well.

I am concerned that the current facilities in Balsall Common will not be able to meet the needs of so many new people into the village, particularly the health centre and the village centre.

I am aware that you are planning to build a primary school, which will be essential.

I am worried about what the plan will be for access, particularly into the Barrett's Farm development. There has long been a proposal for a through road from Hall Meadow Road and that would seem to be the best and safest option for the access to this site. Other proposals to provide access via Meeting House Lane would simply not be safe or viable. There is no opportunity for pavements either side, and it is also very narrow already, particularly at the chicane by the tennis club, where there is often already frequent road rage in regards to whose right of way it is. Added to this, Meeting House Lane is also very beautiful and it would be a shame for the village to lose it's character.

Finally, I am concerned about the disruption to the village, bearing in mind the difficulties that HS2 is going to cause for a long time to come. I would hope that this would be borne in mind when discussions take place as to when the building should start. I would also hope that the building plan would be seen as a whole and not in different sections so that there is structure so that the village can cope, and the building can take place safely and with sensitivity to the locals who already live here.

see letter

See details in attached letter
Berkswell Parish Council considers that the issues are important and worthy of deep consideration with an honest attempt by SMBC to conduct a suitable and sufficient review of the draft plan proposals.

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).

We write on behalf of our various Clients, who jointly own land described below:
Proposed Allocated Housing Site 22 - Trevallion Stud, Wootton Green
Lane, Balsall Common CV7 7BQ
Also including consideration of land west of No. 32 Wootton Green Lane Site
Reference 160
see detail in attached letter

See Letter

See Letter

See Letter

See Letter

See Letter

See Letter

See Letter

See Letter

See letter

See Letter

See Letter

See Letter