13 Shirley - South of Shirley

see written response attached

I wish to formally register my objections to the latest draft version of the local plan.

Whilst recognising the urgent need for additional housing due to the failure of successive central governments to ensure sufficient housing was built to meet the needs of a growing population and the ever changing demographic make up of the population and the additional demands this places on the national housing stock, your latest draft plan appears to be ill thought through in respect of local infrastructure and the ability to develop roads, hospitals etc which would be required to support a greatly increased local population. The plan is also widely biased in respect of building on green belt land. This potential "over development" of the green belt also appears to be contrary to the latest indicators being given by central government.

The proposed support to Birmingham City Council does not to me appear to be justified based on the vast swathes of derelict and undeveloped land within the City of Birmingham which could be regenerated to provide a modern living environment within the inner city and other ex industrial areas.

The focus on building on the Solihull green belt appears to be the "soft option" for both planners and developers.

My key objections are as follows:

1. The plan appears to be disproportionate across the borough with approximately 41% of the proposed new builds being in the Shirley/Dickens Heath locality

2. The plan does not align itself to the latest guidance from Central Government as reported in the national press. Solihull has a lot of large properties occupied by older residents who could be encouraged to down size releasing large properties free to be converted to multiple dwellings. Solihull as a whole offers numerous opportunities for "infilling". Whilst each development is possibly considered small a challenging overall target could be adopted. My perception is as a council you have resisted such developments in the past. Such developments also offer a more balanced impact on the local infrastructure and facilities.

3. Whilst I acknowledge your detailed plan for infrastructure improvements are not yet developed it is obvious to the "layman" that the local roads and other facilities are already at peak capacity at certain times and the availability of parking at local railway stations is already insufficient before several thousand new houses are built.

4. Logically the 2000+ houses proposed for the Shirley/Dickens Heath area are likely to equate to at least 3000 additional cars using the local roads (I acknowledge the potentially improved roads) which will all result in a reduction of our air quality. Great emphasis is placed by the medical profession on the need for fresh unpolluted air, recreational space and the participation in sport and leisure activities. Your proposals will severely impact the lives of many local residents by reducing recreational and public amenity space, the destruction of many popular countryside walks, the loss of up to nine sports pitches used by all age groups and the destruction of the local Christmas tree farm which presently benefits the local area by naturally absorbing carbon dioxide and purifying the air we breathe.

5. All of the existing open green belt land also supports a variety of wildlife some of which I believe to be protected species (bats and voles to my knowledge). Your plan does not address this issue. Your plan also includes land where there are numerous well established oak trees, which also form part of the hedgerow, and offer homes to other wildlife species. I cannot find any detailed reference to this in your proposals and surely as planners you have duties in this respect.

6. Your plan, and observations from meetings I have attended, appears to make great play of HS2 and the benefits this will bring to both the region and the locality. It has been stated that we need to seize the opportunities and the additional housing forms part of this strategy. However, your plan does not reflect on the practicalities regarding the limitations of the existing local infrastructure and any potential improvements you can make. The journey to the HS2 terminal area is already a "nightmare" and can only get worse with further development. The M42 between junctions 4 and 6 is already at capacity for large parts of the day and I believe one of the busiest stretches of motorway on the national network which is unlikely to be further widened. Additional housing feeding this stretch of motorway can only result in further gridlock and will adversely impact on the image of Solihull as a place to come and do business.

To sum up my objections in a few words your proposals will have a significant adverse impact on the quality of my, my families and all other residents lives in terms of:

- our health and well being both physical and mental due to reduced air quality and increased noise pollution
- loss of amenity space
- extreme impact upon the local environment
-making Solihull, and in particular Shirley, a less attractive place to live, visit and promote due to the plan disproportionately focusing on Shirley/Dickens Heath

I would also like to make the following observations:

1. The land which it is proposed to build on in allocations 4, 11 and 13 is generally of poor "agricultural" quality. However, that in allocation 12 is of a better quality and is presently used to grow crops. How can this change of use be justified?

2. Most of the land in allocation 13 is presently used by the local Christmas tree farm. Whilst this is a relatively recent development as a resident of Langcomb Road, backing onto this site, the growth of the trees has significantly improved the historic flooding situation we used to have in our back gardens. The building of houses on this site will undoubtedly impact us and result in the flooding returning.

3. South Solihull is at the higher end of the housing costs range. Many local young adults wishing to get a place on the property ladder have to move away being unable to afford the local prices. I note that a number of other councils make provisions in their plans and planning approvals process that a significant proportion of new build houses must be both affordable and allocated to those presently on the councils electoral roll (at least one of the buyers). I can not see reference to this in your plan ( I believe it may bring you more support). Is this something you intend to address?

I strongly recommend your proposals are revisited focusing on:

-A more balanced allocation of development across all areas of Solihull
- Recognise that Birmingham Council has the ability, admittedly through hard work and the investment of more time, to address their own issues without Solihull being called upon to "bail them out".
- More focus on the impact the size of the proposed developments will have on existing inhabitants in particular their physical and mental health
- Recognising that some times the more difficult options (brownfield and infilling) should be tackled rather that the soft green belt
- Recognition of the recent well publisised guidance from key central government figures about building on green belt

Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to comment on your proposals.

Draft Local Development Plan- South Shirley

As residents of Blackford Road we are concerned about the draft consultation proposals in this and surrounding areas.

In recent years this area has already seen the development of Dickens Heath and at present the two phases at Cheswick Place. During the morning & evening rush hours, Blackford Road has become very busy with Tamworth Lane and Dog Kennel Lane all now regularly having tailbacks of traffic. Stratford Road is also almost at a standstill in the morning, from Cranmore Road to Monkspath Hall Road.

The proposed further development of 2550 houses will only serve to increase the strain on the infrastructure causing other problems including air and sound pollution.

This area should not loose anymore green space which benefits the community and our health. The green corridor with access to the canal and countryside beyond should be retained.There should also be green belt between South Shirley and the built area of Dickens Heath.

It would be preferable to see a fairer distribution across the Borough rather than 2550 houses, in addition to those already in the process of construction, being built in such close proximity to Shirley South.

Objection to proposed plans for Shirley
Dear Sir/Madam

We strongly object to the proposed development between Bills Lane and Tamworth Lane:
This area is extremely rich in wildlife, which any building development would destroy forever. There are several ponds here, which contain great-crested newts, that are a protected species. Plus they provide breeding habitats for dragon flies, damsel flies etc.
The meadows are abundant with wildflowers in the spring and summer. Plus the hedgerows are ancient hedgerows, which is evident from the variety of species growing within them. Furthermore there are many mature oak trees that provide much needed habitats for hundreds of insect species.

We have sighted many important bird species in this green area that are in decline in much of Britain. These include cuckoos, which we hear every spring; lapwings; ravens; barn owls; starlings etc. We have also seen and heard tawny owls, bramblings, red wings, buzzards and kestrels, with greater spotted woodpeckers and green woodpeckers also nesting in the trunks of the mature oak trees.

Of course these meadows provide a valuable and much needed home for foxes, badgers( with their setts protected by law), hedgehogs (that are becoming scarce) and muntjac deer. This green belt land is also an essential ecological link, or wildlife corridor between existing green spaces in Solihull to the countryside to the south. To build on these meadows would have a catastrophic impact on the wildlife that I have mentioned and resulting in their disappearance forever!

We go running several times a week along the canal towpath (where we see kingfishers) and we run around the meadows. So we are able to see first hand what a significant site that this is for wildlife. It is also of paramount importance to other Shirley residents like us, who enjoy this green belt land for walking, running, dog walking, bird watching, family outings etc.

Of course there would be horrendous transport problems too: As we live just off Bills Lane we know how busy, particularly at rush hour time, Bills Lane can be. It is dangerous for me when I cycle to and from work ( in Monkspath Hall Road) as there is so much traffic. The pavements are also dangerous to walk on as they are particularly narrow on the section of Bills Lane that we live near. By building over 1,500 houses here could well mean 2000 more cars in our local vicinity! This would cause complete chaos and disruption to these already extremely busy roads.

Furthermore this proposed development would be a massive impact upon our local services, for example our doctor surgeries, schools and hospitals, by having several thousand more residents needing to use them. All of which are over stretched as it is.

Lastly Solihull council seem to be determined to destroy the green belt around the Shirley and Tidbury Green area. Solihull Council definitely need to rethink and find suitable alternative sites, not wipe out forever this well loved and well used green belt area that we local Shirley people are fighting to protect.

Allocation 13

My worries concerning the building of all these new houses are..
More cars
Overcrowded schools
Drs surgeries unable to cope
Loss of greenbelt
Loss of playing fields
Loss of nature
There are probably many more reasons against but I can't see a reason to support the building of so many houses.

Development on Allocation 13

I am a resident of Neville Road and am very distressed about the draft local development plan between Whitlock's End Farm and Dickens Heath Road, Allocation 13.

Having a young family who thrive off outdoor life, enjoying nature and educating our young, as well as healthy living through both exercising and walking, I am deeply concerned for the large amount of development being concentrated in our local countryside and the loss of Green Belt in the Shirley area and the narrow strip of open space that will separate Shirley from Dickens Heath which is also extending towards Shirley. I am a regular dog walker and keen runner and use the local fields and bridal path for all purposes to exercise and walk the dog on a very regular basis, as well as enjoying our weekly family walks from Neville Road to the proposed allocation 13, having our very own green belt land to enjoy, was the very reason why we bought our house.

We have lived in this area for many years and are a regular user of the walkway from Bills Lane crossing into the fields behind Langcomb Road and the Woodlands Estate and know this has been extensively used by many residents in the area for recreation purposes throughout the year. We have a beautiful chocolate Labrador who we socialise on a regular basis in this area with many other dog walkers, who also do the same.

I understand that the council have to find housing sites but feel very strongly that it would be wrong to build on the area of public amenity land and its access corridor that is currently fenced off and request that this area is retained for the benefit of existing and future local residents.

Shirley is already heavily built up and has a low level of open space that is usable and convenient for public recreation and I'm very concerned about how the large number of new homes will add to existing traffic congestion, plus noise pollution that comes with it and a massive increase co2 emissions, of which as a nation we are trying to reduce, not increase. Our doctors and local schools are already filled to capacity, access to these are already tight, how on earth would they be able to cope with a massive influx of people you are proposing to bring to the area? It would only outstretch services even more than what they are currently, which would surely drop standards of care all round.

There is also the factor of losing valuable green areas for wildlife live in this area so of which are quiet rare. This would truly be a great loss to the community and town that we all call home.

Please can you keep me informed with any future developments regard this matter.

see attached letter re: Dickens Heath

I would like to register my objection to the proposed housing development in the area known as Allocation 13.

I have lived in Shirley for ten and a half years and enjoy the semi-rural location of my home and fear that with this proposed development of Allocation 13, along with Allocations 4, 11 and 12, we will be losing important green spaces which not only enhance the area but provide open space for residents to enjoy.

The proposed development of 600 houses for Allocation 13 will leave a huge detrimental effect on the local area such as follows:-

There are 4 proposed development sites that border Shirley - surely any developments should be spread across the borough rather than having 41% in one area.

The loss of vital green space - this is a benefit to the local community and provides health benefits such as green open space, ie a vital lung to the area. Allocation 13 is used for both leisure and dog walking and gives access to local countryside and nearby canal. This area is also home to our local wildlife such as owls, bats, muntjac deer and foxes.

Congestion - The A34 Stratford Road, M42 and surrounding routes are already heavily congested and the proposed 600 homes for Allocation 13 will add an unbelievable amount of extra traffic, not to mention pollution which could lead to an increase in respiratory illnesses. I live off Bills Lane and during morning rush hour I could be waiting on occasions for a minimum of 20 cars to go past before I could pull out onto the main road. With the additional traffic this will be even worse and will just lead to tail backs on all surrounding roads. As anyone who uses this road already knows there is always congestion around the junctions where Burman Road and Shakespeare Drive meet Bills Lane. Though no doubt you will probably conduct a traffic survey at a much quieter time during mid-morning and come to the conclusion there is no such problem. I would ask that any traffic survey of roads near to the proposed site take place during rush hour to see exactly how much traffic there is at present and you will see that we will end up with roads that won't be able to cope with the extra vehicles that will result from the additional homes.

Transport links - There is already an unreliable bus service to this area of Shirley and adding extra homes will just result in an increase in traffic. Although there are two railway stations nearby - Shirley and Whitlocks End - neither of them have sufficient car parking spaces for the current number of users so how will they cope with additional users.

Pedestrians - If Allocation 13 goes ahead and the access road does join Bills Lane this will be dangerous for pedestrians as there are several points along that road where there is only footpath on one side which is also very narrow in places. Additional traffic from the new homes will be dangerous for anyone trying to cross the road, especially on winter evenings which surely must be a health and safety issue.

Health and Education - Local schools, nurseries, doctors surgeries and our local hospital at Lode Lane are already unable to cope with the number of residents in the area and with this additional residential population our vital services will be at breaking point. Solihull hospital only has a Minor Injuries unit and due to downgrades in services there we have to use Heartlands hospital which is already over-stretched. We would need to see an increase in services at Solihull in order to keep up with local demand from these new homes. Additional schools and doctors surgeries will be required because existing facilities are already full.

Unfortunately, it really feels like Shirley has previously been the forgotten area of Solihull with funds preferring to be used in poorer areas such as the north of the Borough, however, we now just appear to be a dumping ground for developers to ruin our area.

Can I please ask that you seriously reconsider the proposed development areas and look at other options which have better transport links with more direct access to the motorway and the A34.

I wish to register my objection to the mass building of new houses in the south of Shirley and in particular building on Allocation 13.

I have been living in Shotteswell Road for the last 20 years and the traffic over this time has got worse and worse. The congestion in the morning is ridiculous and a half hour journey takes over an hour. The constant stream of traffic from Dickens Heath means it is very difficult to even leave Tanworth Lane! All these new houses will presumably have cars and the roads will just not be able to cope with the increase in traffic. Also more cars means more pollution which will affect the health of people living in this area.

Another reason for my objection is the already over stretched health care system. Getting an appointment at the GP has become increasingly difficult. Recently I tried to be seen by the doctor and rang at 8.00 am on two consecutive days only to be told all appointments had gone. This is why A and E departments are flooded with people. How are doctors surgeries going to accommodate all the extra patients that new housing will produce?

My particular objection to building on Allocation 13 is that this is an area rich in wildlife. We regularly see owls, foxes, bats, sparrow hawks, jays, woodpeckers and many different types of finches in our back garden. It would be absolutely criminal to destroy all their natural habitat. The residents around this area have enjoyed having this wildlife in their gardens for years and they do not deserve to have it taken away from them. Many people use this area for walking, exercising and walking their dogs. We are told to get out and be more healthy but you plan to take this beautiful area away from them. It essential to the health and wellbeing of Shirley residents. The motto of Solihull is 'Urbs in Rure'. We will have no rural area left if this plan goes ahead.

I urge you to look at other areas to build on or at least to scale down the development to a more reasonable level. You will be ruining a beautiful area that people have enjoyed living in for many years.

Objection re Allocation 13

Please take this email as an objection about the proposal to build residential dwelling on allocation 13 in South Shirley. Whilst I understand the need to fulfil housing quotas and targets, South Shirley has lost a significant % of its green areas to residential housing developments with more and more being planned in the future.

Shirley has gone from being one of the poorer relations in the Solihull borough to, through mainly the development of Parkgate, a thriving, buzzing community that we as residents feel proud to live in. It has, so far, managed to create an environment that feels both cosmopolitan in places but also semi-rural in others with the perfect mix of housing, shops, restaurants and greenery. It would be such a shame now to ruin what has become a much sought after location to live and work in.

Save plot 13
Hello there I live on wakelin road in Shirley. I am completely gutted that I am wrighting this I saved so hard to move into this Nice quite area where my children can.play happy.Now my children childhood could be taken away from them yes we can go park but thats not the. Point my childen love playing on the field and letting there. Imagination run wild. It wont be my house that gets ruined has anybody ever stops and thought about the wildlife what about their home they can't talk but we can for them I really think you need to think long and hard about this before destroying land you cant get back feel really let down by my own people who dont care about where we live cant you see how many people dont want it does there opinion matter to you????????????????? No is the answer otherwise you listen to us

see attached letter re: allocation 13

Objection to allocation 4 and 13

I am registering my objection to the proposed housing development. The loss of 9 football pitches and 2 rugby pitches is disgusting. The loss of our only direct access to countryside. We may as well live in Birmingham City Centre, what will be the difference? We chose to live in Shirley for a reason. where will our children play? where will the numerous football clubs re-allocate sensibly to? Where will our children ride their bikes? Where will we walk our dogs? Where will the wildlife go?

Having lived in Shirley for over 30 years I have witnessed many areas of greenbelt swallowed up - this is our only bit left!

The impact of these proposed houses will have a huge detrimental effect on Shirley and Dickens Heath and our intolerable strain on local services, Schools, Doctors and increase the already congested reads in the area.

Please re-visit the potential other areas in the borough that 'can' absorb some of this capacity. Surely Shirley cannot be the only area possible for 41% of the new housing that the borough has to build? Why lump it all in one small place that is already bursting at the seams?

If approved this will devastate a tranquil area and will bring misery to many families, and not just local families as for many years this area and Bridle Pathway has become recognised as a tranquil place of Beauty and a nature walk. Not to mention the cyclists, dog walkers, horse riders, etc...

Finally - and very worryingly - the many football clubs and rugby clubs that will simply be demolished leaving our children without clubs or open spaces or fitness. I believe they are all to be moved to the nearby 'Shirley Town' - which is laughable, considering we already struggle to fit in training and matches with the already overstretched population of children in Shirley. I cannot see a way in which you can extend Shirley Town and with the proposed amount of extra housing coming to the area, it will only bring with it more children. It will NOT work. Our children will definitely suffer if this goes ahead. The future of Shirley will change If this goes ahead, and certainly not for the better.

Yours sincerely

Allocation 13 before

Dear Sir/Madam,

I,am very concerned with the building that is going to effect the area of the fields that are located off Woodloes Road Shirley. This will have a great effect on
The area and the community.

Regards

Email and Poem

My name is Dylan Steele and I am 19 years old. I currently live in Australia (where I emigrated to in 2009 after 11 years living in the Shirley area) but am part of a Facebook group which I am sure you are aware of by now given the sudden bombardment of emails pertaining to Allocation 13. However, I unlike the rest of the group members am not here to moan/complain. Life is too short for negativity and complacency. And in all fairness I don't really see the effect of 100 emails all saying the same thing which you are probably reading, sending the same reply to all, and then deleting. So instead I have taken a slightly different angle at my approach in emailing you. Several years ago I was asked to write a poem about a fond childhood memory (school project) and I wrote about my experiences walking the dogs with my grandpa in the fields which have adopted the rather inappropriate name "Allocation 13." After hearing the news which spread across social media I instantly thought of my poem and searched through my laptops archives to find it. I have altered the poem slightly to suit the current scenario and fixed grammar mistakes because my 13 year old self can't spell. But I just want you to understand how much even a 13 year old thinks of those fields. You see adults give their "reasons" as to why they don't want Allocation 13 built, they argue with their minds. Children however argue with their hearts. I am no longer classified as a child but I want you to forget that and just think of 13 year old me from here on in. I have included my poem in this email and I do hope you have the time to read it. Just to finish, Allocation 13 does not effect me in any way being over 10,000 miles away. But at the same time it effects me in every way. I hope you understand.

allocation 13

I am writing to express my approval of the proposed housing on allocation 13.
My reasoning for this is predominantly the increased cost of housing in the area combined with the sheer amount of people looking to purchase property. I am aged 27, people my age are currently looking to buy property, I feel this age is steadily increasing due to this imbalance between the amount of property available as well as battling against the price increases.
I am aware that there have been expressions of disapproval, petitions even. My response to these views is that the housing surrounding this area is predominantly new, had new builds not been built here the large majority of these people would be in a similar situation to myself as well as many in my generation; consequently I see this as a selfish view.
I have grown up in there area, and have found that despite the increase in new property it has been done tastefully and I still find plenty of green areas to walk my dog and cycle without feeling invaded by a 'concrete jungle,' to name tow paths and canals and easy access to Earlswood lakes as a few of these.
I trust that the proposed planning will go ahead and highly demanded property in the area will become available

Many thanks

Allocation 13 - 600 houses

I am writing in regards to the housing building plan set by local Government. Though I understand the need to more housing, it is not acceptable that over 40% of the planned building are going to be in our area - already suffering from massive increase in traffic and transport in particular. My surgery on Stratford road already is stretched to the limit and it was hard for me to find school for my daughter as schools around the area are over subscribed.
As you are certainly aware this area suffers immensely from lack of government funds for our schools and the situation is taking its tool as children like my daughter who has different needs no being able to get what they need from their school - increasing the number of pupils will have a detrimental impact on our local schools.

As for the benefits mentioned on the Review, it is hard to see any benefit to HS2 as Shirley will be one of the worse places in the borough to get to the new station, when it eventually be ready. Till then A34 and M42 areas will be even more congested.

I hope other people have something to say and this time it won't be like the Parkside development when we woke up to see our Shirley Park destroyed and our beautiful 300 years old Oak trees cut off in such a snick way. More clarity is needed and the council needs to make sure the community around here is fully aware of the reality and impact of the council's plans.

I am looking forward to your comments,

Save Allocation 13

I am writing to express my concern over the proposed "developments" in Shirley, which will destroy our Green Belt, leading to a loss of wildlife and nature. It will impact upon schools and doctors and traffic on the road where we live. All the members of my household, are strongly opposed to this development. It will not be a development as such, as it will have a detrimental effect on our community.

I hope my views will be taken into account, I want to preserve the green belt and our area for future generations and for my children and I am opposed to the building of the proposed houses.

Yours faithfully,

Solihull Planning department- Allocation 13 proposals

Dear Sirs,

I have lived here for the last 35 years and I am writing to express my concerns over the proposal to flood the green-belt area of Shirley South with housing developments.

The following are a number of points that I would like to be considered before this proposal is considered in more detail:

* It is unfair for Solihull to be expected to shoulder the burden of the inability of Birmingham to provide new housing.
For instance one only has to look around the view from the train into the city to see that there are many brownfield sites that could be utilised for them to fulfil their quota.
Just two examples are land at Tyseley has been empty for the last 10 years at least and at Digbeth there are large ground-level car parks while the multi-stories lie unutilised.

Birmingham needs to be made to fulfil their quotas.

* If there are to be new housing developments then they need to be localised so that there is good and available access to communication routes.
Therefore it would seem logical to consider areas with good access to the motorway network and the proposed HS2 route.

The proposed developments do not do this.

* South Shirley does not have good infrastructure in either roads or social and health provision to support more housing.
You will be aware that the local Health trust have removed the A&E facility at Solihull Hospital and that major injuries now need to be routed elsewhere.
It would be logical to site new developments within a reasonably accessible time-frame from major health-care centres.
At peak times the roads around here are so busy that one often has to rely on the goodwill of drivers to cross roads such as Bill's Lane or Hasluck's Green Road to be able to safely cross them.

It is ridiculous to even contemplate that the area could even begin to cope with the numbers of proposed houses.


With Particular reference to Allocation 13:

* This is a hugely-valuable area of greenbelt land which currently separates the sprawl of Shirley with that of Dickens Heath.

* It is used and enjoyed by many for recreational walking/ jogging /cycling and dog-walking.
As a walker of dogs myself I have been aware over the years just how many people use this beautiful country area.
Indeed there are some people who come from afar to walk their dogs here and the numbers have certainly increased since the large area of Shirley Parkland was sold off for development.

* The area is rich in wildlife and it is a pleasure enjoyed by very many residents to get out into the country to hear birdsong and breathe the fresh air.
Furthermore it is a huge advantage to us all that we do not have to get into our cars to do this-it is just a short walk away for so many of us.


I believe that it would be criminal of Solihull Council (who are supposed to look after their residents to take this away from us and destroy this oasis of nature.

Yours sincerely

Allocation 13

I would like to object in the strongest possible terms to this allocation of 600 houses.
Firstly I do not appreciate a card from the council was only posted through my letterbox on Thursday February 10th, had the council only just decided on this location?
I live and work in the local area the traffic is already impossible.
Again Solihull council feel the need to wipe away any green land there is locally.
What about the wild life?
I work in Dog Kennel Lane the traffic in peak times is impossible, are the council planning to widen all the roads in this area?
Are pedestrian crossings going to be put in?
How is the sewage system going to cope?
What about drainage?
Why is this area being targeted with so many homes?
A development of this size will spoil the local area.

It's disgusting why don't you build these houses in Solihull park?

Object object object!!!

Allocation 13
Dear sir/madam,
Please be aware that I strongly object to your plans for allocation 13. I don't think the roads will support any of the planned estates and there won't be enough school places to supports the extra families. The doctors struggle now to give you an appointment so what will happen if this proposal goes ahead!?? It's ludicrous! It won't be affordable it'll be over priced just like dickins Heath.
Not happy

Objections and Comments on Allocation 13 (without prejudice)

I write to register my objection to the development of Shirley South.
Allocation number 13.

The effect will completely change the character of the area from a semi-rural location to an urban sprawl.

Under the governments white paper "Fixing our broken housing market" it states that " Green Belt boundaries should be amended only in exceptional circumstances when local authorities can demonstrate that they have fully examined all other reasonable options for meeting their identified housing requirements".

There are numerous options still yet to be explored exhausted and investigated.

The document also states that new housing allocation should be developed to compliment current and new infrastructure. In this case HS2, this will be running to the North of the borough and not stopping anywhere near to the proposed developments.

The Shirley area is already subject to a huge amount of congestion which affects the whole of the Stratford Road from the M42 junction and all arterial routes, including Dog Kennel Lane, Tanworth Lane, Shakespeare Drive, Blackford Lane (which has structural issues), Haslucks Green Road and Bills Lane.

The addition of hundreds of new homes will compound congestion and traffic to a catastrophic level.

In terms of other public transport, the local rail stations are not fit for purpose, being very small and not large enough to serve the additional requirements of these large scale developments. There is inadequate parking at Whitlocks End, Shirley, Earlswood and Solihull Stations.

In addition to the problem of infrastructure, the area is not set up to facilitate a large number of potential new families. It is already virtually impossible to get children into the secondary schools of choice. What will happen to the catchment area of schools in the borough. In my particular area, residents have been bounced back from Alderbrook and Tudor Grange over the years by the Monkspath and Hillfield developments and latterly Dickens Heath. If this development were to go ahead, there would need to be provision for either school extensions or new schools. This again would require more space to be taken up.

The infrastructure won't allow for these additional families, lack of school places, unable even now to get a doctors appointment as it is. Solihull hospital has been downgraded over the years and no longer has a paediatric department, the closest hospital being Heartlands. The trip to Heartlands is an absolute nightmare in traffic and can take over an hour.

In terms of Allocation 13. This is an area that has over the years become a very popular recreation and amenity area, popular with families, dog walkers, ramblers etc.

The area has a number of eco systems that range from grass land to marsh and heath land and even evergreen forest. There is a network of drainage ditches and well-established farm ponds and also a sink area which is effectively bog land. The area is very wet and for the most part of the winter is very boggy and forms a flood plain due to the very high water table and the constituent soil composition.
This results in heavy flooding across most of this low lying area. Many of the houses that back onto the fields in Langcomb Road experience flooding in their back gardens on a regular basis. A phenomenon that has reduced to an extent following the intensive planting of Christmas trees in the field adjacent to the gardens.

The network of ditches and ponds provides a varied eco system and I have seen frogs, toads and newts, along with Muntjac Deer, Cuckoo, Woodpecker and birds of prey. In addition in the meadowland and the marshy areas there are numerous wild flowers.

In addition part of the area was granted to the stewardship of the Laker Centre on the completion of the Woodlands Estate. I am led to believe that the Layca Committee purchased the fencing around this area and also contribute to its upkeep. I would argue that the whole of area 13, by custom and practice over the last 40 years is by default a very important amenity area. One only has to look at the well-worn footpaths. This is indeed the lung of Shirley, the place to which people from many surrounding areas come to breath. Also, I am led to believe that any developments that affect a local communities quality of life should be offset. I feel that Allocation 13 should become a recognised conservation and public amenity area serving Shirley South. Shirley Park is woefully small now part of it has been developed and dog owners now are restricted to a tiny fenced in dog area.

I am also concerned about the nature of housing in this area. It is a well-known fact that houses in the South of the Borough command extremely high prices. I do not believe that the houses built will be affordable by the young people. They will be 3, 4, 5 bed houses with a small contingent of affordable houses that will probably be bought up by wealth buy to let landlords and exacerbate the issues with high rents etc.

The government have stated that housing should concentrate on high density smaller, affordable homes, such as terrace, mews and flats. The footprint of these is much smaller than large detached houses.

Slightly further south of allocation 13 the loss of a number of sports fields will deprive the local community of the opportunity of recreational activities and again reduce open space, this gives further argument to Allocation 13 being designated a conservation and amenity area.

In addition, the government states that the housing contracts should go to smaller companies using innovative methods, and promote self build and housing associations. Is this in the plan?

Alternatives to developing green belt sites are numerous and I am not convinced that all possibilities have been exhausted.

Please bear these valid points points when making your final decision.

Allocation 13

I wish to register my disgust at the proposal to build yet more residential properties on this much valued and beautiful part of Shirley.
We have suffered greatly with the development of Dickens Heath.
This piece of land is beautiful and is home to much valued wildlife and provides local people with a chance to walk and enjoy its peaceful surroundings.
This part of Shirley is already awash with people and cars and I fail to see how another 600 homes is going to be of any benefit to anyone apart from the developers.
Green belt means what is says and should not be ignored!

Solihull Local Plan Review 2017 Proposed Housing Allocation 13

Dear Council Members
I am contacting you to register my alarm and dismay concerning the draft local plan for the proposed Housing Allocation 13 South of Shirley. I am pleased and impressed that even though you are not bound by requirement to consult with local residents that the opportunity is available to us. I also hope that you are sincere when you state that will listen to the strength of feeling and very real concerns that we have about the use of Allocation 13.
Firstly let me say that I acknowledge the growing need for new affordable housing and recognise obligation that Solihull MBC has to provide additional housing under current requirements. However I have strong objections concerning the proposals for the use of the land you have named Area 13 which I will expand upon.
The loss of this public amenity area would be a catastrophic loss for the residents of the local area. Local residents are using the field from 6.30 in the morning to 11:00 at night, I aware of this as my house is opposite the access gate. The use of Allocation 13 is varied people walk, run and exercise their dogs. We are encouraged daily from various sources to take exercise as it's important to healthy minds as well as healthy bodies. I regularly walk in the fields with friends and family members because it is a beautiful area and I have never been to the fields and not met another local resident walking and enjoying this spot. Local wildlife I have seen and heard includes cuckoos, voles, moles, bats, newts and muntjac deer. In your own leaflet 'Reviewing the Plan for Solihull's Future' it states that you want to maximise the benefit of HS2 whilst protecting our environment. Planning to build houses in Area 13 does not do this. As it stands currently Shirley does not have a good provision of open space and parkland. If Allocation 13 was built upon this would mean the loss of not just greenbelt fields but the loss of an open green space that is used and held in the hearts of the local people. I can't press this point enough. In addition under the government white paper "Fixing our broken housing market" it states" Green Belt boundaries should be amended only in exceptional circumstances when local authorities can demonstrate that they have fully examined all other reasonable options for meeting their identified housing requirements." I would press the planning department to look again at possible brownfield sites in the borough.
Living opposite the fields I would like to mention the very real surface water we experience year round on the grassed areas and in our gardens. I understand this is due to the local water table and the soil we have which has a high clay component. Further development would only exacerbate this existing problem.
Earlier in my comments I stated that I understand that there is a need for housing in the Solihull borough to this end I would ask that the new housing is not ie 41% centred on just the Shirley area. This would put further strain on the local infrastructure particularly the transport system around the four sites outlined for Shirley which would all feed into the same routes. This would increase travel delays, congestion and standing traffic at peak times which would exponentially increase the production of greenhouse gases and further impact on the environment.
In the Draft Local Plan the council asks for residents views to help Solihull to 'grow and develop into the place we would like it to be. ' Building on all four sites planned for south Shirley especially Allocation 13 I feel goes against this stated aim.
I wish for my objections and those of the many others that have contacted you in connection to Allocation 13 to be considered when the next version of the plan is produced.

Allocation 13

I am writing to register my objection to the proposed Allocation 13 for residential use.
Having lived on Badgers Estate since first built in 1976 my family and I have enjoyed this beautiful, invaluable piece of oasis, full of wild life, hedgerows, flowers etc.
Living so close bats are frequent visitors; our neighbour even had them nesting in his loft.
Please, YOU must reconsider.

I would like to object to the proposed development plan Allocation 13.

I live opposite the fields and regularly walk and enjoy this very beautiful area threatened by the building of 600 homes on the fields.
I understand 41% of the proposed new homes will be built in the Shirley South area this seems unfair to the local community as well as the impact on local infrastructure. I have grave concerns on how this will affect the character and landscape of this well loved area.
Please consider my objection when the draft local plan is reviewed.

Objection to the development of allocation 13 ( Shirley South ) without Prejudice

I'm writing to you to with a formal objection to the Solihull draft plan

The facts are that Solihull is a reasonable large Borough but 41% of the total housing proposal is earmarked for Shirley this is out of proportion and the allocations should be more evenly spread across the borough to befit all and the inevitable strain on already overloaded infrastructure more evenly distributed.
The large allocation in Shirley South does not benefit HS2 either as it's all located the opposite side of Solihull meaning the A34, A41 or M42 must be used to access this high speed rail link station.
The Federation of master builders study finds that smaller developments of around 100 houses are ensure variety and diversity

I also see no robust investigation of brownfield sites, other counsels across the UK have made much better use of these and should be considered as best practice.

Green belt
The Loss of Green space and amenity areas which has a direct impact on the welfare of people

I quote "Celebrating what is special about Solihull "
(Solihull council Green belt Strategy review 2014)

The housing minister Gavin Barwell has also gone a record
" building on Green belt is not the way to solve the shortage of homes "
(Evening standard 5th Feb 2017)


Road access & Infrastructure

Bills lane is narrow and constrained by houses on both sides with traffic calming already in place
which means Solihull council already recognise the road has safety issues with a 7.5T weigh limit.
The traffic pinch point at Burman road / Shakespeare drive junctions with constant ques at peak times
Tamworth lane is also grid lock now from early morning again with not many options to widen or improve traffic flow as this also constrained on both sides by houses and also has traffic calming
The plan has no details of what Infrastructure improvements if any would be made to address this very real issue. The comment of "details will be given at the next stage" is unsatisfactory
If as private residents were seeking planning for an extension we would not be permitted to supply half the information and expect planning to be granted


Parking at Train stations
Shirley and Whitlocks End stations are already beyond current capacity
Parking restrictions have already being put in place by Solihull council on surrounding side roads at Shirley due parking issues.

Increased Flooding

Seven Trent installed a large new storm water pump station in Neville road a few years to mitigate flooding risk
This will have a standard 10% flex the development proposal will be way above this allowance
A Flood Risk Analysis study should be conducted and results should be published
SFRA December 2014 P16 Sec 2.3.2 - LPA to ensue new developments do not increase the flood risk elsewhere

I feel the plan needs to be completed re done to allocate small sites across the whole borough, studying the call for sites there are plenty of options that have been ignored this may no suit the developers who what to "stack em high and sell em cheap ( ish ) "

I don't believe anybody underestimates the problem of housing but the counsel have duty to ensure we don't look back in years to come and regret the decisions that were made ( 1960's high rise flats )

We have been asked to suggest possible alternatives but for me it's the counsels role to find a fair solution that takes in the view of the people who voted them into office and pay Counsel tax

On that note one suggestion which has been discussed locally is to relocate Lighthall School to Dog kennel lane and then develop the old school site for housing.
On the face of it this looks sensible as it would allow easier access for the school runs as it lins directly to the A34 and take the congestion away from Hathaway Rd / Shakespeare drive

Allocation 13 - Objection

Dear Sir/Madam

For all the reasons everyone else has stated and more, understand this, 600 houses are not needed in this area even less so to have them built on our wonderful green fields!

I totally object to this particular allocation and I strongly suggest you reconsider this proposal.

Regards,

appeal to allocation 13

To whoever it may concern

I would like to make a formal appeal to the proposed development at allocation 13 Shirleys infrastructure is not able to cope with this proposal and disruption would be unacceptable. The fields are sacred to many people who walk dogs and walk through the wonderful fields I have 2 children and have spent hours in The fields at the back of our house ( 76 Binley Close, Shirley)

Allocation 13

s a resident in Shirley I'm shocked and concerned about the amount of houses you are proposing to build on green belt.
Both my child walk to lighthall everyday confronted with an extremely large volume of traffic and the dangers of crossing bills lane, Haslucks green road ( rat run) and other roads. With the proposed houses i can't imagine what the roads will be like around those areas.
The local park has been reduced and is not really suitable for safe walking of a dog off lead and now more countryside and public land is going to be lost!!
I'm regular walker on the bridle way canal and the fields by woods farm were the proposed 600 houses are to be built. While walking there you could be in the middle of the countryside which is part of what Solihull is known for. The motto of Solihull is Urbs in Rure (Town in Country).
That will need to be changed !!!
Dickens Heath will be joined to Shirley as will majors green!!!

In 2013 voted the best place to live - again this will be the last time Solihull wins that- not only is it facilities its the closeness of the beautiful countryside that attracts people to live in Shirley.
The wildlife needs to be preserved for future generations to be able to hear the woodpeckers and see the other wildlife so close to your house is again one of the reason people love Shirley.
How come all the allocation for houses is in Shirley ?
Gps schools hospitals are already over stretched due to the increase in population will you be providing more money for them ? - especially our poorly funded schools that have to rely on parents raising money for sometimes normal things that the school can't afford!!
Please think carefully about our wildlife, children and public safety and the quality of life of the people that already live in Shirley.

I understand more houses need to be built but not on GREEN BELT - protect our green belt.
From a very concerned resident.