Policy KN2 : South of Knowle (Arden Triangle)

I fully support this policy. It will provide much needed community wide facilities and opportunities for all ages. The new facilities for learning are much needed since the present infrastructure is over 60 years old.
This policy will to add to the regeneration of the local community and business and is a once in a life time opportunity.

I believe that Knowle currently has around 4,000 homes. The current proposals would see this increased by at least a further 1,000 homes. This is an increase of in excess of 25% and considerably more than that anticipated elsewhere in Solihull. It also needs to be considered against the growth in population which the area has seen in the recent past. The local infrastructure is unable to cope with the current volume of use at peak times with the current population. There are a number of road bottlenecks particularly the High Street and Station Road causing considerable traffic congestion. The shopping facilities and related parking provision within Knowle are again sufficient for the current population level but would require considerable enhancement to cope with such an increase in usage. It is difficult to see how this could be accommodated within the current footprint.
There is not a significant pool of employment opportunities within Knowle and most of the residents travel elsewhere for work thus leading to the peak time issues with regard to road congestion. Additionally the capacity at the local railway stations is limited with all available car parking largely full by 8am.
The green belt which surrounds Knowle is a significant local amenity which is used and enjoyed by many residents for activities such as exercise and dog walking. I think many local residents have grown to appreciate these areas during 2020 and they should be safeguarded rather than destroyed. The green belt also serves as a key separation of development and any loss should not be taken lightly. Any reduction in the green belt would be a great loss both to the rural feel of Knowle and to the quality of life of future residents.
We are all encouraged to cut down on consumption of fossil fuels and environmental emissions. It is likely that significant further development of Knowle and surrounding villages will serve to increase such impacts as there would be additional journeys to employment bases. The development of further housing accommodation should be better coordinated with the expected commercial development within the Solihull area.
In conclusion I believe that the green belt and open spaces should be protected in order to prevent urban spread and provide open space for recreational use. Through 2020 such areas have been increasingly used and appreciated by local communities and should be safeguarded for future generations rather than built on. Accordingly I believe that the proposed developments in the Arden Triangle and along Hampton Road are inappropriate and should not be adopted within the final version of the development plan.

Inappropriate development of local open space which should be appreciated rather than destroyed.

Look at alternative brownfield sites first

If developments must go ahead in parts of Knowle, make sure that any proposal has density numbers in keeping with Knowle and Dorridge

The percentage of affordable housing should not exceed 25%

the mix & size of dwellings should be in keeping with the local current mix

In line with Andy street and recent government changes in brownfield developments, I believe Solihull should reconsider building on many areas in the greenbelt especially the Arden Triangle - as since the changes due to Covid and working practices, the local plan may now already be outdated and no longer 'consistent with national policy'

Many more 'reasonable alterative sites' have been proposed by over 2800 residents who voted on the The KDBH Forum Residents Survey., who rejected the Arden Triangle proposal, in favour of less damaging locations for additional development in more sustainable locations.

think it is covered above

I have always felt that the secondary school need replacing which the council should be providing. Some new homes are needed but they need to fit into the area and on a much reduced scale as this is a village and already extremely congested. The plan generally doesn't take advantage of any brown fill sites or unused buildings anywhere in the area which should be considered first before valuable green areas are ruined. It doesn't make plans for any local renewable energy or future proofing transport, deliveries etc.

The new school is absolutely vital to ensure local children and young people have an equitable access to learning in premises that are safe and fit for purpose.
The area also requires more affordable housing to allow younger people to move in.
The current age profile of the area is older, which already is likely to increase the pressure with local services. Therefore no more care homes should be built.
More cycle lanes and promotion of sustainable transport is required

I support the plans because Arden Academy desperately needs new buildings and facilities.
Some of the older buildings are not fit for purpose.
A brand new school would be much more energy efficient and the plans also solve lots of other issues such as lack of parking at the school and traffic congestion on Station Road.

1. With reference to the Site Analysis Plan, Barn End, which is a Grade 2 listed building, is not indicated as such. In addition, major oak and ash trees alongside the development on the Grove Road boundary are not indicated.
2. The Landscape Assesment plan indicates a link between habitats, i.e Local Wildlife Sites. Originally Grove Road was going to be permanently closed to achieve this, but this does not now appear to be indicated.
3. The SMBC Concept Plan indicates two access points on Grove Road, yet the description mentions two. The BDS Concept Plan also indicates two access points, and the southern most access points don't take into consideration lack of visibility, existing trees and height differences between road and development site.
4. The Plans should indicate the retention of the rural character of Grove Road, it's screening from the development, and the treatment of it's junction with the A4141

There are some anomalies between the masterplans with regard to access onto Grove Road, Knowle, Site KN2

I massively support the rebuilding of Arden Academy for the following reasons:
· It will provide a purpose-built educational setting to replace the out-dated, ageing fabric of the existing Arden Academy, much of which is increasingly expensive to maintain and service, energy inefficient, has poor infrastructure and a lack of community facilities;

· It will deliver improved and modern infrastructure that will support education and increase opportunities for pupils at all stages of their learning, as well as providing better sport, leisure and learning facilities that can be used and enjoyed by the wider community;

The longer that Arden continues to operate in their old buildings, the longer the children and staff are having to put up with the effects of working in such an outdated estate. No significant new investment or repairs can been made while the prospect of this new building remains. The new building should be approved and started without further delay.

I would like to see the loss of this area compensated locally with much more ambitious habitat creation. Just retaining some existing features doesn't go far enough and I would like to see the developers and planners exercise some real ambition within the planning. Some of the current intensive arable land in the area could be allowed to develop into rough grassland succeeding into scrub and woodland. This would help compensate nature for the loss to these developments.

I am disappointed that this plan whilst providing required housing and education provision has not taken the opportunity to adequately compensate or mitigate lost wildlife habitats in the area. This large area would have been home to a wide range of wildlife and would have been a refuge for some species in an area of housing and arable farming. The loss of this area from the green belt could have been compensated by utilising some of the land or adjacent farmland to create habitats of high wildlife value and provide at least biodiversity parity or even gain.

I think this plan will help all parts of the community. In particular, it will help meet the educational needs of primary and secondary students in the area. The current Arden academy is in very poor repair and is very expensive to maintain, and also environmentally unfriendly. School traffic will be moved away from Station road which can get very congested. Travel to and from school will be safer for students and staff.

The housing development plans will help provide a range and mixture of housing types, including for younger and older people.

I think the environmental considerations are good.

Great plan we need a school that is safe and a new school (Arden) with greater space to protect the pupils and staff are better protected from possible future virus epidemics .

The density of the development should be reduced to no more than 450 dwellings. This would give more room for green areas, parkland and walking/cycling routes to reduce the environmental impact and improve the mental and physical health of the residents and neighbours.
The access beside our house into Arden school should be blocked to road traffic to avoid congestion in Milverton Road, whilst the pedestrian access of the same should be retained as this is a recognised footpath.
The dwellings should also not exceed 2 stories in height within the immediate vicinity of our back garden , and be sufficiently away from our boundary so as not to otherwise block out the light and affect the enjoyment of our property.

Proposed development of 600 dwellings is inconsistent with SMBC spatial strategy. The scale is inconsistent with stated size necessary for the original development planned for 450 dwellings, which is itself still to be proved.
With this size of development there could easily be an extra 1100 cars causing pollution and congestion along Station road/ Stripes Hill , into Knowle village, and into Milverton road from the existing footpath access . The proposed site is within the immediate vicinity of our back garden and this will affect the health of my severely asthmatic son.

This whole site is not suitable for housing development and resides within the green belt. Remove this site KN2 from the Local Plan. Rebuild the Arden Academy School and include a primary school facility within the existing grounds.

In the event that the above is not agreed then refer to and adopt the set of representations submitted by the KDBH Neighbourhood Forum CIO.

The Council has failed to provide any viability assessment for this green belt site. The Council has not paid any or any sufficient regard to the made KDBH Neighbourhood Plan which carries statutory weight.

The proposed housing density is inappropriate and too high for the character of the existing Knowle village. The topography of the site is not appropriate for the proposed scale of housing. In addition, no provision has been made for health facilities and no community benefits are put forward as required by the residents as a condition of providing housing on the site.

I understand the need for new housing in the area, but also the desperate need for a new school and premises for Arden Academy. With more families moving to the village there is a huge need for extra community facilities in the area, in order to support the growing population. I support the plans as long as the include the promise of new school buildings for Arden.

There is significant need for a new high school and the project will fund this. Without the project I fear Arden will continue not to be fit for purpose in the years to come.
Additional benefits of a new primary school and leisure facilities will benefit the area.

I support development in this location. All the required houses should be built here and not on Hampton Road and Knowle Football Club. KN2 is nearer the centre of the village, the schools, existing bus routes and Dorridge and Widney Manor railway stations. The existing roads and pavements are wide. Children and parents could easily walk from this development to schools. A roundabout could be built at the bottom of Stripes Hill to provide easy access to this development. This development would be screened by the houses in Station Road and Arden School if it is not demolished.

A more detailed and robust traffic flow study needs to be undertaken mapping the probable car user behaviour as a result of the new housing and relocation of the school prior to the grant of planning permission.

Comments relate to Para 724 - it is wishful thinking to believe that the relocation of the school and no vehicular access to it will reduce traffic along Station Road. it will remain more convenient to drop children off next to the walk ways. Where will the cars go after dropping the children off on the Warwick Road entrance? The high density housing adjacent to Station Road can only increase the traffic flow along it and the Warwick Road through the village for work and shopping in Solihull or Birmingham.
The current bus service is both infrequent and unreliable. It will need to be significantly improved if it is to reduce the use of private cars. It is appreciated that it is a chicken and egg situation that people will need to use the service for economically viable services to be put in place; currently the service is poor and future provision cannot be guaranteed.

Needs expert traffic consultation
Significant reduction in density
Protection of traditional and green space
Safe journey to school for this many pupils. Current pavements are very narrow and no safe cycling route

This will create significant traffic problems in Knowle as only way in from Solihull and M42 is Warwick Road. Density of housing is far higher than existing density. Knowle attracts families because of good schools.
Scale of development is far too high.
Current Arden School location is good for pupils, but is so rundown, it does need rebuilding.
Building a bigger school also increases traffic problems due to children coming from outside the area.
Not safe for the children to get to school with the increase in traffic.
Existing facilities such as doctors insufficient for level of housing

 Substantially reduce the number of houses on the site by identifying brownfield sites or locations with good transport links.
 Distribute affordable housing into smaller huddles over several sites.
 Reinstate the Knowle relief road.
 Site school near Downing Close as previously planned.
 Use investment to expand primary medical care facilities.
 Consider new uses for some existing school buildings.
 Investigate and ‘firm up’ financial implications of site.
 Clarify management issues to ensure public access to sport and fitness facilities.

Too many houses in relation to size of Knowle - will overload roads, retail, parking, medical.
Plan based on aspirations of 2 organisations- little primary evaluation of community need.
Site too far from Dorridge Station - leads to pollution, congestion and parking issues.
Siting of School not central to B93 - difficulty of access from Dorridge and Bentley Heath.
Site is 'wrong' side of Knowle - traffic for M42 and Birmingham has to go through Knowle centre.
Affordable housing is all together - issues of social inclusion and quality of environment.
Financial and viability issues problematic.

DO NOT BUILD 600 DWELLINGS ON THE EXISTING SCHOOL SITE

I DONT WANT THIS AND STRONGLY OBJECT TO THIS

I live opposite Arden Academy and I do not want 600 dwellings built on the existing school site.
I fear moving the school, along with the development will devalue my property
There will be considerable disruption and noise during the development and once it is completed thereafter with habitants going about their daily life and accessing their properties.

I do not believe there has been a long enough consultation period. It makes no sense to demolish a first class school with profit being made by property developers at the expense of the general public, and Solihull ratepayers.

600 new homes will cause traffic chaos and environment destruction of the much needed and precious green belt.

I DO NOT WANT SCHOOL TO BE DEMOLISHED OR 600 new homes to be built.

I live opposite Arden Academy and I do not want 600 dwellings built on the existing school site.
I fear moving the school, along with the development will devalue my property
There will be considerable disruption and noise during the development and once it is completed thereafter with habitants going about their daily life and accessing their properties.

2. Development of the site should be consistent with the principles as shown in the concept masterplan, which include:
i. Retention of important landscape features and the setting of heritage assets (to include the existing green corridor created by the old line of Knowle bypass);

The longstanding, reserved line of Knowle bypass has over a period of 50 plus years created an established green corridor which is vital to wildlife in the area. This should be considered and maintained in any proposed development as supported by the Council's strategy for wildlife ways through the borough.
Reference Page 101 of the Draft Infrastructure Delivery Plan 5.1 Natural & Semi-Natural Green Spaces which deals with these issues specifically: Enhance existing green corridors and Encourage the incorporation of green infrastructure in new developments.

Stop the excessive building on green belt land - and use brown belt land instead

Opposition:
Use of greenbelt land
Lack of infrastructure improvement - Road, public transport and parking. Increased traffic congestion on Knowle High Street plus excessive strain on Grove Road (including vastly increased pedestrian footprint)
Increased population creating further stretching of already fully booked two local GP surgeries with no provision to support in plan.
Increase in school places required predominately because of excess building in the village over the last ten years, and accepting pupils outside of catchment

Less housing as the strain of more cars from these new homes plus making the school entrance less accessible will lead to accidents.
The character and environment matter.

The school plan is based upon the funding from the development of a further 600 homes. Knowle is a village and allowing for this and the Hampton Road development is excessive development. The infrastructure even with provision of traffic lights etc will not cope with the excessive traffic - based on most households have at least 2 cars. The land where the work is taking place on stripes Hill has been subject to trees being removed and a fire which has left it an easier path for development. Whilst I agree the school is dated the build of 600 houses upon wildlife is also morally wrong. You will loose the character of knowle just for the money.

Fully support this proposal - a new school is much needed. The proposal provides opportunities for the whole community and its legacy will last way beyond the time my children will have at the school (if its done in time)

The policy should reference the significant archaeological potential of this area and highlight that, prior to the submission of any planning application, a detailed archaeological assessment, including evaluative fieldwork, should be undertaken. It should further advise that results of the assessment should inform the development of a strategy, if appropriate, to mitigate the potential archaeological impact of the proposed development and that this strategy may include designing the development to avoid impacting any archaeological features present which are worthy of conservation.

This will help to ensure that any planning application is submitted with sufficient archaeological information to enable a reasoned and informed planning decision to be made.

As highlighted in the 2018 Archaeological Assessment undertaken by the Warwickshire County Council Archaeological Information and Advice team on behalf of SMBC*, this site has significant archaeological potential. This potential, and the need for further archaeological assessment in advance of the submission of any planning application is not referenced in this policy. As the results of the assessment may influence the final form of the development across this area, it should be.

*WCC Archaeological Information and Advice, 2018. 'Archaeological Assessment to Inform the Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council Local Plan'. Warwick: WCC Archaeological Information and Advice

reduce the need for students to walk up and down station road. give them a school they deserve. the sustainable design is impressive.

My daughter attends the school and I believe this will benefit the students, teachers and the whole community for generations to come.

To provide a much needed new school with excellent facilities that will benefit students and the wider community. My children would benefit from this school in future years, they currently attend holiday camps at the existing school and the facilities aren't appropriate for the needs of children in the community.

1. Removal of site from Plan pending further investigation for alternative brownfield sites .
2. Extension of time for enquiries, investigation and reports.

1. In my opinion I consider the plan to use the green belt to be in breach of the Government National Planning Policy Framework Document Section 13 'Protecting Green Belt Land' in particular Paragraphs have not been met in part or full or taken into consideration and are numbered:
133, 134 c, d, e , 136, 137, 138,139, 140,143, 144, 145.
2. In what I consider further breach of NPPF the Council have not adequately demonstrated, investigated, and exhausted the use of Brownfield sites available in the borough as per their 2019 Register https://www.solihull.gov.uk/blr numbering 209 HA and up to 3524 dwellings the Local plan uses just 7 HA (140 Dwellings) of brownfield land as opposed to 340 HA of Green Belt.
3. I consider the Knowle Transport Study dated October 2020 to be missing vital data and other information that was due to be updated in March 2020 but was cancelled due to COVID and therefore is inadequate and to quote the words of the Mark Andrews Solihull Head of Planning in his email reply to me dated 7th Dec 2020 “I should stress though that for the purpose of the Local Plan we must demonstrate that the proposed development could be developed and any impacts it generates could be mitigated in a reasonable way” I do not believe this test has been met.
4. The minimum 6 week consultation period was too short and given the unprecedented Global Pandemic and 4 weeks of this period was a National Lockdown imposed by the Government due process and the ability to engage in person or public was severely impeded and therefore due process could not possibly be achieved for myself or any residents my wholly reasonable requests for an extension of time were refused.
5. I still await full and adequate responses to my further enquiries and just today 14th Dec 2020 (last day for representations) I received a partial reply from Mark Andrews who was absent due to ill health, was there no one else available in his absence or was the Planning Dept disrupted due to the Global Pandemic, further evidence for the need for an extension of time for everyone including the Planning Dept?
6. I await answers to my enquiries relating to possible Conflict of Interest by Solihull Council and reasons why this was not declared and made very clear to the Public at the outset of this process. In my opinion this site has been promoted on economic grounds without due consideration to the Green Belt loss, Conservation High Street, the Village atmosphere, climate change impact and the Community as a whole.