Q2. Do you agree with the Borough Vision we have set out? If not why not, and what alternative would you suggest?
No
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 942
Received: 10/02/2017
Respondent: Mrs Maria Morris
It doesn't make it clear where the relief road for Kenilworth road lies, at which points it will provide relief - this is very important for traffic and the character of the village.
The village should have central green spaces incorporated into any new development.
It doesn't make it clear where the relief road for Kenilworth road lies, at which points it will provide relief - this is very important for traffic and the character of the village.
The village should have central green spaces incorporated into any new development
No
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 959
Received: 10/02/2017
Respondent: Mr Richard Drake
Balsall Common centre is already congested and difficult to use. It needs a major rethink
Balsall Common centre is already congested and difficult to use. It needs a major rethink
No
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 972
Received: 12/02/2017
Respondent: Peter Wreford
Vision for Balsall Common, is insular. The influence of North/South traffic on A452 is being added to by increased West /East flow and employment towards Coventry and new JLR site at Fen End. The proposal to divert traffic / build bypass should be shown on the plan as it is pivotal to how the settlement develops. A much larger BC is not a big issue for me, provided done sympathetically with appropriate school and recreational facilities.and roads.
Vision for Balsall Common, is insular. The influence of North/South traffic on A452 is being added to by increased West /East flow and employment towards Coventry and new JLR site at Fen End. The proposal to divert traffic / build bypass should be shown on the plan as it is pivotal to how the settlement develops. A much larger BC is not a big issue for me, provided done sympathetically with appropriate school and recreational facilities.and roads.
No
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 980
Received: 11/02/2017
Respondent: Mr James Lupton
A more ambitious vision is required for Balsall Common that covers development of the centre and transport infrastructure. Traffic problems will beset the village whilst HS2 construction and the new house building is taking place. A better road solution is urgently required.
A more ambitious vision is required for Balsall Common that covers development of the centre and transport infrastructure. Traffic problems will beset the village whilst HS2 construction and the new house building is taking place. A better road solution is urgently required.
No
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 981
Received: 11/02/2017
Respondent: Colin Davis
more pie in the sky words. i dont believe letting developers knock down large houses in the mature suburbs to infill the back gardens with extra houses with tiny gardens, or worse all those too expensive to buy retirement apartment blocks is a form of regenerating and enhancing a leafy surburb . if the transport strategy is just to make driving a worse experience and force through cycle lanes then it will never work. by your own admission Solihull has an aging population who are unlikely to start cycling they need safe and reliable public transport
more pie in the sky words. i dont believe letting developers knock down large houses in the mature suburbs to infill the back gardens with extra houses with tiny gardens, or worse all those too expensive to buy retirement apartment blocks is a form of regenerating and enhancing a leafy surburb . if the transport strategy is just to make driving a worse experience and force through cycle lanes then it will never work. by your own admission Solihull has an aging population who are unlikely to start cycling they need safe and reliable public transport
No
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 991
Received: 11/02/2017
Respondent: Ms Lisa Inkpen
Balsall common centre needs to be mentioned for improvement to cope with the increased housing.
Balsall common centre needs to be mentioned for improvement to cope with the increased housing.
No
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 994
Received: 11/02/2017
Respondent: Mrs Caroline Drake
Balsall Common centre should be included
Balsall Common centre should be included
No
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 996
Received: 11/02/2017
Respondent: Dr Richard Anderson
The vision fails to fully mention enhancement of EXISTING arrangements.
*It focusses far more on NEW development.
*The centre of Balsall Common should be enhanced to make it much more appropriate to its PRESENT size and nature.
The vision fails to fully mention enhancement of EXISTING arrangements.
*It focusses far more on NEW development.
*The centre of Balsall Common should be enhanced to make it much more appropriate to its PRESENT size and nature.
No
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 1022
Received: 11/02/2017
Respondent: Mr Stephan Jones
There is no vision for Balsall Common town centre improvement. The current arrangement results in a standstill mornings noon and evening S. It requires a significant overhaul to limit cars through the use of a nearby park and walk access scheme or similar. Doing nothing is not a viable option
There is no vision for Balsall Common town centre improvement. The current arrangement results in a standstill mornings noon and evening S. It requires a significant overhaul to limit cars through the use of a nearby park and walk access scheme or similar. Doing nothing is not a viable option
No
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 1042
Received: 12/02/2017
Respondent: Mr David Ellis
Under point 73 reference is require to ensure that essential infrastructure is in place for local residents as well as local businesses
Under point 73 reference is require to ensure that essential infrastructure is in place for local residents as well as local businesses
No
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 1055
Received: 12/02/2017
Respondent: Mr Callum Hall
I think more clarification is needed on relieving additional traffic, as this means both existing and additional traffic caused by the new housing.
The vision should be aimed at providing additional housing using facilities that are already available and minimise impact on the village itself. For example, building housing in proximity to the dual carraigeway north of the village (the north exit being the major in/out route) minimises the impact on the village itself.
I think more clarification is needed on relieving additional traffic, as this means both existing and additional traffic caused by the new housing.
The vision should be aimed at providing additional housing using facilities that are already available and minimise impact on the village itself. For example, building housing in proximity to the dual carraigeway north of the village (the north exit being the major in/out route) minimises the impact on the village itself.
No
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 1063
Received: 13/02/2017
Respondent: Mr Kevin Thomas
Whilst agreeing the spirit of vision in paragraph 86, the narrative implies that the centre of the village is currently thriving when in reality it already faces significant challenges in terms of parking and loss of commercial properties to residential build thereby further restricting meaningful expansion. Many of the properties are old with a poor selection of facilities available when compared to Knowle or Dorridge. Overwhelming expansion of Balsall Common can only.worsen this.
There is also no reference to Green belt between Balsall and Coventry which is already highly pressurised and risks being decimated by the proposals
Whilst agreeing the spirit of vision in paragraph 86, the narrative implies that the centre of the village is currently thriving when in reality it already faces significant challenges in terms of parking and loss of commercial properties to residential build thereby further restricting meaningful expansion. Many of the properties are old with a poor selection of facilities available when compared to Knowle or Dorridge. Overwhelming expansion of Balsall Common can only.worsen this.
There is also no reference to Green belt between Balsall and Coventry which is already highly pressurised and risks being decimated by the proposals
No
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 1074
Received: 12/02/2017
Respondent: Mr Paul Joyner
The vision for Balsall Common is fantasy. There is nothing to suggest that the current choice of location of developments will provide the outcome of the vision. I see a vision of a reduced quality of life, increased pollution, increased pressure on social services, a combination of HS2, bypass, and housing development turning the east side of the village into a concrete and noisy thoroughfare, with reduced natural habitat and a village centre unable to cope with demands of the additional population.
The vision for Balsall Common is fantasy. There is nothing to suggest that the current choice of location of developments will provide the outcome of the vision. I see a vision of a reduced quality of life, increased pollution, increased pressure on social services, a combination of HS2, bypass, and housing development turning the east side of the village into a concrete and noisy thoroughfare, with reduced natural habitat and a village centre unable to cope with demands of the additional population.
No
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 1091
Received: 14/02/2017
Respondent: Mr William Cairns
Managed growth is your stated aim but for Balsall Common I see little in the proposal that takes into account the close on 30% increase in dwellings. Furthermore the intention is to use green belt land in the strategically important Meriden Gap that is the only remaining feature to the prevent the urban sprawl from Birmingham/Solihull towards Coventry. Proposals also from Coventry City Council indicate a further narrowing of the gap. You should consider brownfield and PDL sites around the settlement of Balsall Common as priority, you have chosen to ignore these, why?
Managed growth is your stated aim but for Balsall Common I see little in the proposal that takes into account the close on 30% increase in dwellings. Furthermore the intention is to use green belt land in the strategically important Meriden Gap that is the only remaining feature to the prevent the urban sprawl from Birmingham/Solihull towards Coventry. Proposals also from Coventry City Council indicate a further narrowing of the gap. You should consider brownfield and PDL sites around the settlement of Balsall Common as priority, you have chosen to ignore these, why?
No
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 1094
Received: 16/02/2017
Respondent: Solihull Mind
The inclusion of the land where we deliver our Organic Horticulture/Conservation/Sports project for people with mental health problems (see attached description and photos) in the Arden Triangle development will undermine two of the Borough Vision priority areas. The loss of the service will reduce the Borough's aim to 'Improve Health and Well-being' and also 'Building Stronger Communities' as it involves both health promoting activities; and also engages with Solihull residents (see attached petition) not only through their direct access for themselves/family or friends, but also as volunteers and more widely at our popular twice annual plant and pop-up shop sales.
The inclusion of the land where we deliver our Organic Horticulture/Conservation/Sports project for people with mental health problems (see attached description and photos) in the Arden Triangle development will undermine two of the Borough Vision priority areas. The loss of the service will reduce the Borough's aim to 'Improve Health and Well-being' and also 'Building Stronger Communities' as it involves both health promoting activities; and also engages with Solihull residents (see attached petition) not only through their direct access for themselves/family or friends, but also as volunteers and more widely at our popular twice annual plant and pop-up shop sales.
Yes
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 1109
Received: 12/02/2017
Respondent: Mrs Emma Harrison
Important to provide affordable housing in Solihull area.
Important to provide affordable housing in Solihull area.
No
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 1219
Received: 13/02/2017
Respondent: Mrs Judith Thomas
Whilst agreeing the spirit of vision in paragraph 86, the narrative implies that the centre of Balsall Common is currently thriving when in reality it already faces significant challenges in terms of parking, loss of commercial properties to residential thereby restricting meaningful expansion, and old properties with a poor selection of facilities when compared to Knowle or Dorridge, and overwhelming expansion can only worsen this. There is no reference to green belt between Balsall and Coventry which is already highly pressurised and risks being decimated by the proposals.
Whilst agreeing the spirit of vision in paragraph 86, the narrative implies that the centre of the village is currently thriving when in reality it already faces significant challenges in terms of parking and loss of commercial properties to residential build thereby further restricting meaningful expansion. Many of the properties are old with a poor selection of facilities available when compared to Knowle or Dorridge. Overwhelming expansion of Balsall Common can only.worsen this. There is also no reference to Green belt between Balsall and Coventry which is already highly pressurised and risks being decimated by the proposals
No
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 1233
Received: 17/02/2017
Respondent: Friends of the Earth (Cities for People)
There is too much emphasis on the flawed HS2 proposals. There needs to be more focus on intensifying developments by increasing densities and a wider mix of affordability and tenure to accommodate people of all ages and abilities.
There should be more acknowledgment of the agricultural aspects of land use within the borough, including the need to be able to grow more food locally. It is welcome that soil quality is part of the evidence base.
There is too much emphasis on the flawed HS2 proposals. There needs to be more focus on intensifying developments by increased density and a wider mix of affordability as well as tenure and also to accommodate people of all ages and abilities.
There should be more acknowledgment of the agricultural aspects of land use within the borough. Mention should be made of the need to be able to grow more food locally. It is welcome that soil quality is part of the evidence base.
No
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 1252
Received: 13/02/2017
Respondent: Mr Dan Salt
Solihull's proposal for Balsall Common contradicts its Plan. It is disproportionate in scale versus the current settlement size, eroding hierarchy and balance. 1150+ homes built on ecologically important Green Belt and furthermore terribly reducing the Meriden Gap is not managed nor low impact development. The distinctiveness of the North and East of the village with healthy access to ancient woodland is removed in totality and residents once on the edge of the settlement, by choice, will find themselves living in the middle of the settlement. There is no space to channel more traffic through without the same destruction.
Solihull's proposal for Balsall Common contradicts its Plan. It is disproportionate in scale versus the current settlement size, eroding hierarchy and balance. 1150+ homes built on ecologically important Green Belt and furthermore terribly reducing the Meriden Gap is not managed nor low impact development. The distinctiveness of the North and East of the village with healthy access to ancient woodland is removed in totality and residents once on the edge of the settlement, by choice, will find themselves living in the middle of the settlement. There is no space to channel more traffic through without the same destruction.
No
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 1259
Received: 13/02/2017
Respondent: Mr Stuart Woodhall
Allocation 13 does not add to the North Solihull regeneration programme in any way
Allocation 13 does not add to the North Solihull regeneration programme in any way
No
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 1313
Received: 14/02/2017
Respondent: Mr Roger Monkman
As far as Balsall Common is concerned there seems no plans to improve the centre. Another 1,000 houses will mean a quarter increase in the number of people using it. There needs to be more shops and more car parking with particular thought applied to the main roundabout on the Kenilworth Road. There is room to expand the shopping centre on the opposite side of the road to the present centre.
As far as Balsall Common is concerned there seems no plans to improve the centre. Another 1,000 houses will mean a quarter increase in the number of people using it. There needs to be more shops and more car parking with particular thought applied to the main roundabout on the Kenilworth Road. There is room to expand the shopping centre on the opposite side of the road to the present centre.
Yes
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 1327
Received: 09/02/2017
Respondent: Ellandi LLP
Agent: Williams Gallagher Town Planning Solutions
Welcome reference to Chelmsley Wood as a focus for regeneration and growth and policy protection afforded which subject to wider amendments to the Plan will support investment strategy for Chelmsley Wood shopping centre. There are development opportunities throughout the centre which should be identified in the Plan as part of the masterplan/investment strategy. The whole of the town centre should be defined as primary shopping area to ensure that retail proposals can come forward withjout unnecessary sequential and impact assessment requirements.
see representation on behalf of Ellandi LLP
No
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 1347
Received: 14/02/2017
Respondent: mrs jacqui gardner
Your vision does not mention how the current Balsall Common village centre will support the additional families which will have been housed there.
Your vision does not mention how the current village centre will support these additional families.
No
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 1348
Received: 15/02/2017
Respondent: Mr Michael Fairbrother
The disproportionate allocation of Solihull's housing needs to Balsall Common does NOT meet the objectives of the vision as outlined for the residents of Balsall Common. It is therefore basically unfair as the village has had far more than its fair share of housing development over the last 20 years. The natural environment which we enjoy today is neither being protected or enhanced - it is being systematically destroyed. Rather than graft more housing onto an already overloaded infrastructure which is totally unsustainable the logical approach would be to create a completely new "town" elsewhere in the borough.
The disproportionate allocation of Solihull's housing needs to Balsall Common does NOT meet the objectives of the vision as outlined for the residents of Balsall Common. It is therefore basically unfair as the village has had far more than its fair share of housing development over the last 20 years. The natural environment which we enjoy today is neither being protected or enhanced - it is being systematically destroyed. Rather than graft more housing onto an already overloaded infrastructure which is totally unsustainable the logical approach would be to create a completely new "town" elsewhere in the borough.
No
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 1352
Received: 14/02/2017
Respondent: David Holtom
The improvement of Balsall Common centre needs to be addressed to cater for any significant population increase.
The improvement of Balsall Common centre needs to be addressed to cater for any significant population increase. Existing schools are at capacity as is the health centre. There doesn't appear to be any plans for catering for the intersest and well being of the young in the Balsall/Berkswell area - an existing problem.
No
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 1406
Received: 15/02/2017
Respondent: Dr Christine West
Paragraphs 73, 74, 75 do not seem to have been considered for Balsall Common. Increasing the village size as proposed will weaken the integrity of the community, losing the village spirit, the healthier lifestyles mentioned will not happen with the hugely increased number of cars, especially from Site 1, recent research shows clearly the damage to physical and mental welfare from traffic pollution and loss of green spaces.
Many points made in paragraph 86 will be destroyed in Balsall Common, by using Green Belt land there will be loss of fields, trees and open countryside.
73, 74, 75 do not seem to have been considered for Balsall Common. To increase the village size as proposed will weaken the integrity of the community, losing the village spirit. The healthier lifestyles mentioned will not happen with the hugely increased number of cars, especially on Barratts Farm. Recent research shows clearly the damage to physical and mental welfare from traffic pollution and loss of green spaces.
86 - Many points made in the plan will be destroyed in Balsall Common. By using Green Belt land there will be loss of fields, trees and open countryside.
No
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 1417
Received: 15/02/2017
Respondent: Mr Andrew Burrow
Vision for Balsall Common given in paragraph 86 fails to mention that the centre must be improved to make it fit for the larger number of residents planned, provide additional car parking and bring it to a modern standard with an improved balance between pedestrians and vehicles.
I note the vision for Balsall Common given in paragraph 86. However, it fails to mention that the centre of Balsall Common must be improved to make it fit for the larger number of residents planned, provide additional car parking and bring it to a modern standard with an improved balance between pedestrians and vehicles.
No
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 1453
Received: 15/02/2017
Respondent: Yasmine Griffin
The borough vision fails to address improvements to Balsall Common village. Instead in placing additional housing on greenbelt land the area will loose its natural assets. The fields of Barretts farm where much of the housing is planned at present provide a sanctuary for residents and local birds and wildlife. This area of greenbelt between the current housing and the HS2 route requires additional planting in order to provide a buffer from HS2 to the local community not additional housing. HS2 is already causing destruction of the countryside, footpaths and cycle routes. Further housing would worsen the situation.
The borough vision fails to address improvements to Balsall Common village. Instead in placing additional housing on greenbelt land the area will loose its natural assets. The fields of Barretts farm where much of the housing is planned at present provide a sanctuary for residents and local birds and wildlife. This area of greenbelt between the current housing and the HS2 route requires additional planting in order to provide a buffer from HS2 to the local community not additional housing. HS2 is already causing destruction of the countryside, footpaths and cycle routes. Further housing would worsen the situation.
No
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 1475
Received: 15/02/2017
Respondent: David Knowles
In relation to "significant new development on the edge of Knowle" in paragraph 84, the scale of housing development proposed for Knowle is disproportionate and unacceptable, and there has been inadequate consideration of reasonable alternative patterns of distribution across the Borough.
The views expressed in the KDBH Neighbourhood Plan Residents Survey must be acted upon when finalising the plan for the Borough Vision.
In relation to "significant new development on the edge of Knowle"
I believe the scale of housing development proposed for Knowle is disproportionate and unacceptable.
There has been inadequate consideration of reasonable alternative patterns of distribution across the Borough.
The views expressed in the KDBH Neighbourhood Plan Residents Survey must be acted upon when finalising the plan for the Borough Vision.
No
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 1488
Received: 16/02/2017
Respondent: Mr Keith Tindall
Does not include a vision for infrustructure improvements necessary to cope with very large housing developments being proposed.
Does not include a vision for infrustructure improvements necessary to cope with very large housing developments being proposed.