Q22. Do you agree with the Policy P21? If not why not, and what alternatives would you suggest?
Yes
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 77
Received: 27/12/2016
Respondent: Mr D Deanshaw
on the whole agreed. BUT "pooling" of contributions is important. Balsall Common will remain an attractive place provided it gets its fair share - not more, not less. in the past funds from land sales have been spent elsewhere, as have commuted sums which should be spent in the village - at this rate it will become a small town and should be treated as such.
on the whole agreed. BUT "pooling" of contributions is important. Balsall Common will remain an attractive place provided it gets its fair share - not more, not less. in the past funds from land sales have been spent elsewhere, as have commuted sums which should be spent in the village - at this rate it will become a small town and should be treated as such.
Yes
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 118
Received: 10/01/2017
Respondent: Councillor D Bell
The objectives are commendable but we need to ensure that each site produces infrastructure for the settlement. Schools,all weather pitches, better parking and where possible roads that bypass the centre and moves the traffic past.
The objectives are commendable but we need to ensure that each site produces infrastructure for the settlement. Schools,all weather pitches, better parking and where possible roads that bypass the centre and moves the traffic past.
No
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 143
Received: 11/01/2017
Respondent: Mr Matthew Stewart
S106 does not work, affordable housing that has been developed under s106 is often re-sold or rented at full market value
S106 does not work, affordable housing that has been developed under s106 is often re-sold or rented at full market value
Yes
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 215
Received: 13/01/2017
Respondent: Mr Geoffrey Wheeler
I agree with the policy but am not optimistic that it will be enforced.
I agree with the policy but am not optimistic that it will be enforced.
Yes
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 249
Received: 15/01/2017
Respondent: Mrs Felicity Wheeler
But must be enforced
But must be enforced
Yes
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 302
Received: 15/01/2017
Respondent: Mr Charles Ayto
Yes.
see attached letter for full text . Generally supportive and the letter comments on each of the 23 questions.
Where I generally agree with most of the points highlighted in the consultation I do not agree with them all and post my concerns and suggestions.
No
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 347
Received: 22/01/2017
Respondent: Balsall Common Village Residents Association
The wording is too vague and must be strengthened to be meaningful.
The first sentence reads 'Developers will be expected to...',and this should be strengthened to read 'Developers must...'
Furthermore, providing infrastructure and mitigation measures in a 'timely' manner, is too nebulous and open to interpretation and abuse. This must be strengthened.
We question the effectiveness of this policy, and ask how it will be monitored and enforced?
The wording is too vague and must be strengthened to be meaningful.
The first sentence reads 'Developers will be expected to...',and this should be strengthened to read 'Developers must...'
Furthermore, providing infrastructure and mitigation measures in a 'timely' manner, is too nebulous and open to interpretation and abuse. This must be strengthened.
We question the effectiveness of this policy, and ask how it will be monitored and enforced?
Yes
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 452
Received: 26/01/2017
Respondent: Mrs Kathleen Price
I agree that tree are many areas to address such as schools, healthcare provision, shops, parking. I hope by now these areas have been acts upon and draft plans made. Solihull hospital should be offering 24hr A&E. A town growing in such a capacity needs better care and policing.
I agree that tree are many areas to address such as schools, healthcare provision, shops, parking. I hope by now these areas have been acts upon and draft plans made. Solihull hospital should be offering 24hr A&E. A town growing in such a capacity needs better care and policing.
No
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 493
Received: 29/01/2017
Respondent: Ms Judith Tyrrell
I don't believe measures to mitigate impact will materialise,and if they do are unlikely to benefit Balsall Common. The physical, social and green infrastructure to the south east of Balsall Common is being built over with little idea of any "infrastructure and mitigation measures", let alone in a timely manner i.e included in the Local Plan! I don't believe the cumulative impact of developments has been accounted for - particularly he works site proposed for HS2 in Balsall Common.West
Contributions secured through planning obligations may be pooled to address need or cumulative impacts arising from more than one development proposal.
I don't believe measures to mitigate impact will materialise - and if they do are likely not to benefit Balsall Common. The physical, social and green infrastructure to the south east of Balsall Common is being built over with little idea of any "infrastructure and mitigation measures" - let alone in a timely manner - i.e included in the Local Plan! I don't believe the cumulative impact of developments has been accounted for - particularly he works site proposed for HS2 in Balsall Common.West
Contributions secured through planning obligations may be pooled to address need or cumulative impacts arising from more than one development proposal.
No
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 705
Received: 03/02/2017
Respondent: Mr David Roberts
The words are great! I've yet to see much benefit to community in my locality of CILs or Section 106 payments on developments recently undertaken!
All these challenges are "catch all" how can you request coherent answers when you already canvassed answers last year (Issues and Options consultation Nov 2015) my answers were largely ignored.
see attached letter and scanned annotated hard copy local plan pages
No
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 777
Received: 14/12/2016
Respondent: West Midlands Police
Agent: Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd
Disappointed that reference to the West Midlands Police has been removed from the supporting text for Policy P21. The proposed supporting text in the Draft Local Plan Review does not include the Police within the list of those bodies the Council will be
working in partnership with. Whilst it is accepted partnership working is 'not
limited' to those listed, the Chief Constable formally requests that reference
continues to be made to the West Midlands Police in the supporting text for Policy
P21, similar to the wording in the adopted Local Plan.
see attached letter from Tyler Parkes on behalf of the West Midlands Police Chief Constable
Yes
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 898
Received: 07/02/2017
Respondent: Richard Evans
22-YES
RESPONSES 1-YES
2-YES
Spatial Strategy
3- The size of the proposed developments around rural villages appears out of proportion to the size of the villages themselves. This is particularly exemplified in Balsall Common. The proposed by pass that would create an area of land between it and the A452 that would eventually be filled in with future housing developments.
The alternative options would be to concentrate future housing developments closer to the local areas of employment-JLR, Airport, NEC, Motor Cycle Museum, Birmingham Business Park and Hams Hall. There are sites available around Bickenhill, the junctions of the M6 AMD M42,Melbecks Garden Centre and even perhaps the site that was proposed for the new National Football Stadium before the new Wembley got the nod.
There are also areas around Water Orton and Coleshill which could be considered Sustainable Economic Growth
4-YES
5-YES
6-YES
7-YES
8-See previous answer to 3 9-YES
10-See previous answer to 3 PROVIDING HOUSES FOR ALL 11-YES
12-The principle of 50% affordable housing is laudable but judging by past local developments around Balsall Common this is never realised. The current Elysian Gardens Development is a case in point. The proportion of larger 2-5 bedroom detached houses always seem to dominate these development I suspect so the land owners and developers and landowners can maximise their profits.
13-No opinion
14-NO-Why should we have to take on a proportion of Birminghams number of development in the HMA. If you travel by train in from Berkswell to New Street their are plenty of unused brown field sites to be seen, are these not an option as green belt is cheaper to develop.
15-NO-Refer to answer to question 3.The main reason for the size of the "Barratts Farm" development appears to be to get funding from the developers to fund the proposed bypass to relieve congestion on the A452.As mentioned before this will inevitably lead to further infill development. The infrastructure of the village barely copes as it is, parking in the "thriving village centre" is already positively dangerous. Cars reverse out from both sides of the roads and there are frequents bumps and pedestrians being knocked over, I suspect a future fatality is inevitable.
16-As identified the infrastructure within Balsall Common is small. There is a lack of capacity at the primary and secondary schools. They are already over subscribed and have lack of space to expand into. Re-siting them would take them out of their central position where most pupils can walk to. If that were to happen additional school runs would be inevitable adding to the traffic congestion.
It is identified in the report that parking at the train station is inadequate, Hallmeadow road has become the unofficial overspill(part of the proposed bypass)
Extra parking is proposed but where. The only land by the existing car park is not being considered for the housing development because of recurrent flooding. As detailed in the report the number of car to house ratio at 1.6 is the highest in the borough so compounding the problem. As a regular cyclist I can assure you that adding cycle lanes on already narrow roads will not work.
The village centre is quoted as "thriving" in your report, the only useful development recently has been the addition of the Costa store where local people can meet up over coffee and socialise.
An obvious opportunity that has been lost is the development of the disused office block and
parking area for housing by the Co-op. This would have been an obvious site for a public funded facility for recreation and social needs-i.e. citizens advice, meeting area for the elderly/vulnerable and planned activities for the teenagers. Instead as before it has gone to the more profitable housing option. The village centre as it is has nowhere to expand to, and if moved would completely change the individuality of Balsall Common.
The only existing facility within the village that could cope with an increased local population is the new health centre. With an increase in patient number there will follow increased funding and an ability to employ more doctors and associated staff. The village badly needs a public funded development as previously mentioned that could provide recreational and social facilities
for the whole age range. The existing youth club is barely used for lack of activities leaving the streets and the park for the kids to fill their free time.
If the proposed developments do go ahead-3 in Balsall Common far more thought needs to be put into the impact they will have on theses small rural communities. The whole purpose of developing the concept of greenbelt and the greenbelt acts was to stop the creepage of large towns/cities into rural areas so they can keep their own unique character and charm. Increased urbanisation of the countryside between the cites of Birmingham and Coventry flies in the face of this agreed and accepted philosophy
17-YES
IMPROVING ACCESSIBILITY AND ENCOURAGING SUSTAINABLE TRAVEL 18-YES
PROTECTING AND ENHANCING OUR ENVIRONMENT.
19-YES
PROMOTING QUALITY OF SPACE
20-YES
HEALTH AND SUPPORT OF LOCAL COMMUNITIES
21-YES AND NO-There is an historic under funding of health care between Birmingham and Solihull as reflected by our local CCGs overspend and the combined Birmingham CCGs underspend. Perhaps this issue needs to be addressed at a Governmental level but it grates somewhat when we are expected to provide additional housing sites to make up for Birmingham's shortfall.
DELIVERING AND MONITORING 22-YES
ANY OTHER COMMENTS
23-I refer to my previous comments about the purpose of greenbelt and attach a document which I think is self explanatory.
No
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 968
Received: 10/02/2017
Respondent: Mr Richard Drake
Any money received for homes built in Balsall Common must be spent for the benefit of the residents of Balsall Common.
Any money received for homes built in Balsall Common must be spent for the benefit of the residents of Balsall Common.
No
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 1012
Received: 11/02/2017
Respondent: Mrs Caroline Drake
All money received for developments in Balsall Common should be spent for the direct benefit of Balsall Common residents
All money received for developments in Balsall Common should be spent for the direct benefit of Balsall Common residents
No
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 1016
Received: 11/02/2017
Respondent: Mr Stephan Jones
All CIL payments, new homes bonuses and profits from council land sales should directly benefit the area where the houses are built only
All CIL payments, new homes bonuses and profits from council land sales should directly benefit the area where the houses are built only
No
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 1043
Received: 12/02/2017
Respondent: Dr Richard Anderson
I consider that the policy is inadequate.
P21 does not specifically state that all CIL payments, new homes bonus, or profit on the sale of Council land for housing be spent in the areas where the housing is to be built.
This is quite WRONG, and the policy should be AMENDED.
I consider that the policy is inadequate.
P21 does not specifically state that all CIL payments, new homes bonus, or profit on the sale of Council land for housing be spent in the areas where the housing is to be built.
This is quite WRONG, and the policy should be AMENDED.
No
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 1051
Received: 12/02/2017
Respondent: Mr David Ellis
The wording is not string enough. The first sentence reads 'will be expected to'. This is too 'woolly' and should be enforceable by replacing these words with one simple but mandatory word 'MUST'
I agree with the statement regarding infrastructure and mitigation measures being provided in a 'timely manner' but the interpretation of this is open to debate. How eill thus be monitored and enforced?
The wording is not string enough. The first sentence reads 'will be expected to'. This is too 'woolly' and should be enforceable by replacing these words with one simple but mandatory word 'MUST'
I agree with the statement regarding infrastructure and mitigation measures being provided in a 'timely manner' but the interpretation of this is open to debate. How eill thus be monitored and enforced?
No
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 1052
Received: 12/02/2017
Respondent: Mr David Ellis
The wording is not strong enough. The first sentence reads '...will be expected to'. This needs to be replaced by one simple mandatory word 'MUST'! I agree with the statement re infrastructure and mitigation measures but question the meaning of 'timely' in its current context. This expression is open to debate as to its meaning. How will this be monitored AND enforced?
The wording is not strong enough. The first sentence reads '...will be expected to'. This needs to be replaced by one simple mandatory word 'MUST'! I agree with the statement re infrastructure and mitigation measures but question the meaning of 'timely' in its current context. This expression is open to debate as to its meaning. How will this be monitored AND enforced?
No
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 1065
Received: 12/02/2017
Respondent: Mr Callum Hall
You do not state that CIL payments, new homes bonus or profit from sale of Counsil land for homes should be spent on the areas you are building houses. This should be the case, as these are the areas that are being affected.
You do not state that CIL payments, new homes bonus or profit from sale of Counsil land for homes should be spent on the areas you are building houses. This should be the case, as these are the areas that are being affected.
No
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 1089
Received: 12/02/2017
Respondent: Mr Paul Joyner
As stated previously - the delivery of HS2, bypass and 800 homes on the Barrats lane site in Balsall Common will be a logistical and phasing nightmare, submitting existing residents to many years, if not decades of continuous development on their doorsteps
As stated previously - the delivery of HS2, bypass and 800 homes on the Barrats lane site in Balsall Common will be a logistical and phasing nightmare, submitting existing residents to many years, if not decades of continuous development on their doorsteps
No
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 1130
Received: 12/02/2017
Respondent: Mrs Emma Harrison
Planning decisions have to take into account other factors rather in addition to policies in this plan, including but not limited to emerging issues, socio-economic factors, value for money considerations and prioritisation among different needs, impact of any decision on other areas and ensuring that all implications of proposed developments are fully understood and can be properly addressed.
Planning decisions have to take into account other factors rather in addition to policies in this plan, including but not limited to emerging issues, socio-economic factors, value for money considerations and prioritisation among different needs, impact of any decision on other areas and ensuring that all implications of proposed developments are fully understood and can be properly addressed.
No
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 1131
Received: 14/02/2017
Respondent: Mr William Cairns
Any CIL monies arising from developers in a local area should be spent on that local area. An attempt by Solihull Council to retain monies and spend elsewhere is in effect taxing one area to support another. It is effectively compensation for where the damage to the environment has been caused and where the payments can have best effect to offset the negative impacts of those developments. The money must stay in the community where it has been generated.
Any CIL monies arising from developers in a local area should be spent on that local area. An attempt by Solihull Council to retain monies and spend elsewhere is in effect taxing one area to support another. It is effectively compensation for where the damage to the environment has been caused and where the payments can have best effect to offset the negative impacts of those developments. The money must stay in the community where it has been generated.
No
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 1141
Received: 12/02/2017
Respondent: Peter Wreford
Policy should be amended to require developers to contribute to overall infrastructure requirement of the community in which they are developing - if the scale of development proposed drives a need for additional road / bypass infrastructure as well as additional school places, then full cost of all additional infrastructure should be levied across all of the proposed sites in the Local Plan for that locality. CIP should be assessed based on the future development value of the sites, not that at the date of planning application. SMBC should establish an entitlement to CIL based on actual site values achieved.
Policy should be amended to require developers to contribute to overall infrastructure requirement of the community in which they are developing - if the scale of development proposed drives a need for additional road / bypass infrastructure as well as additional school places, then full cost of all additional infrastructure should be levied across all of the proposed sites in the Local Plan for that locality. CIP should be assessed based on the future development value of the sites, not that at the date of planning application. SMBC should establish an entitlement to CIL based on actual site values achieved.
No
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 1147
Received: 16/02/2017
Respondent: Solihull Mind
Under this section there is a recognition that to deliver the Local Plan there is a need to work in partnership with Voluntary sector organisations such as ourselves; we are hopeful that this can happen by understanding the positive impact of our Horticulture, Conservation and Sports project and works with us to maintain the service.
Under this section there is a recognition that to deliver the Local Plan there is a need to work in partnership with Voluntary sector organisations such as ourselves; we are hopeful that this can happen by understanding the positive impact of our Horticulture, Conservation and Sports project and works with us to maintain the service.
No
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 1154
Received: 13/02/2017
Respondent: Mr Kevin Thomas
Given the major impact on local infrastructure, all monies received by SMBC from the development should be reserved solely for use in the locality impacted by the development.
When designing the infrastructure plan, it should be acknowledged that Balsall Common will already be extensively impacted by HS2 construction works in the period 2018 to 2026.
This needs to be considered when designing infrastructure plans and phasing of development build.
As a minimum there should be no commencement of any Barratts Farm development work until such time as the HS2 works are completed
Given the major impact on local infrastructure, all monies received by SMBC from the development should be reserved solely for use in the locality impacted by the development.
When designing the infrastructure plan, it should be acknowledged that Balsall Common will already be extensively impacted by HS2 construction works in the period 2018 to 2026.
This needs to be considered when designing infrastructure plans and phasing of development build.
As a minimum there should be no commencement of any Barratts Farm development work until such time as the HS2 works are completed
No
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 1230
Received: 13/02/2017
Respondent: Mrs Judith Thomas
Given the major impact of Site 1 on local infrastructure, all monies received by SMBC from the development should be reserved solely for use in the locality impacted by the development. When designing the infrastructure plan, it should be acknowledged that Balsall Common will already be extensively impacted by HS2 construction works in the period 2018 to 2026.
Given the major impact on local infrastructure, all monies received by SMBC from the development should be reserved solely for use in the locality impacted by the development. When designing the infrastructure plan, it should be acknowledged that Balsall Common will already be extensively impacted by HS2 construction works in the period 2018 to 2026. This needs to be considered when designing infrastructure plans and phasing of development build. As a minimum there should be no commencement of any Barratts Farm development work until such time as the HS2 works are completed
No
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 1246
Received: 17/02/2017
Respondent: Friends of the Earth (Cities for People)
There is much to support here but it could be much stronger, and there should be an analysis of the use of this policy to mitigate the plans that are being approved. Will the unintended consequences of development out weigh the mitigations proposed and if so should the development not be allowed in the first place.
There is much to support here but is could be much stronger. Also there should be an analysis of the use of this policy to mitigate the plans that are being approved. Will the unintended consequences of development out weigh the mitigations proposed and if so should the development not be allowed in the first place.
No
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 1323
Received: 14/02/2017
Respondent: Mr Roger Monkman
Development funds accumulated from the sale of land should be ring-fenced so that Balsall Common and not other areas under development, benefits from its own environment restructure.
Development funds accumulated from the sale of land should be ring-fenced so that Balsall Common and not other areas under development, benefits from its own environment restructure.
No
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 1359
Received: 14/02/2017
Respondent: mrs jacqui gardner
Policy does not specifically state that all CIL payments will be spent in the areas where the housing is built. I think the council should categorically state that the CIL payments received will DIRECTLY benefit the areas where the housing is built.
the policy does not specifically state that all CIL payments will be spent in the areas where the housing is built. I think the council should categorically state that the CIL payments received will DIRECTLY benefit the areas where the housing is built.
No
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 1408
Received: 15/02/2017
Respondent: Mr Michael Fairbrother
SMBC should ensure that all or most of the CIL payments, new homes bonus, profit on sale of land etc is spent in the settlements where the homes are built.
There has to be rigorous oversight of developers as they will minimise their outlay on infrastructure and walk away.
SMBC should ensure that all or most of the CIL payments, new homes bonus, profit on sale of land etc is spent in the settlements where the homes are built.
There has to be rigorous oversight of developers as they will minimise their outlay on infrastructure and walk away.