13 Shirley - South of Shirley

Objection to proposed development on fields adjoining Woodlands Estate
I wish to formally register my objection to the new housing estate to be built adjoining Woodlands Estate.

I live on Badgers Estate, surrounded by the rat runs of Shakespeare Drive, Bills Lane and Haslucks Green Road which all feed on to the permanent traffic jam called Stratford Road.

The residents of Badgers Estate have a particular problem in that the only access we have is Bills Lane ( Please note LANE), a country lane whch has no pavement on one side and no pedestrian crossing the whole length of the lane We have no option but to cross Bills Lane to be able to walk safely on a pavement. Between 8a.m and 9.30a.m this can involve a 10 minute wait for a break in the traffic, at the time when mothers are walking small children to school, usually with a toddler in a push chair too, older children are trying to cross on their own. Between 5p.m. and 6.30p.m we have the same problem, but with the added complication that it is a badly lit laneand therefore more dangerous. We have already had one fatallity at the junction of Langcomb Road recently, and two others in the past.

Your proposal to build 600 news homes will put (assuming two car families) up to 1200 more cars on to Bills Lane and Shakespeare Drive Are the residents of Badgers Estate to be trapped in a concrete, petrol laden jungle, particularly as you will be building on the only green space we have left?

I have no desire to be a NIMBY, and understand that we all have to take our share of the burden, but 41.46% seems to be a rather large share to inflict on Shirley South. I understand from one of your councillors that Dorridge is taking no new development, though it is surrounded by large areas of green belt, exactly like the green belt that will be taken from Shirley South which has far less to lose. Something feels a little unfair about that.

Finally, I understand that the proposed sites for development have been recommended by land developers, may I remind you that land developers have only one consideration - profit - they have no concern whatsoever about the impact on the lives of people affected by their development.

Protection of public amenity land
I understand that new builds have to happen but the proposed area in Shirley is essential for wild life, trees, fruit bushes. I have observed numerous birds, animals, including hedgehogs in the area by Woods farm.
If houses are being built on this land, are we able to accommodate already full schools, doctors surgeries etc?
Does this have to be all farmland or can you consider leaving some Greenland .

See attached letter

Solihull Local Plan Review
Consultation Submission

I refer to the following areas proposed for housing development:

1. Proposed Housing Allocation 4 West of Dickens Heath
This development will result in the loss of a significant number of playing fields and sports amenities that are close to south Shirley and Dickens Heath. Research shows that "Regular physical activity reduces the risk of developing cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes, dementia and some cancers by at least 30%." The UK Government has a clear policy (https://www.gov.uk/government/news/get-active-to-get-healthy) to encourage people to take regular exercise to reduce the possible impact of obesity with its attendant impact on not only the health of our nation but the cost to the NHS in treating obesity. These open spaces and sports and leisure facilities should not be lost whilst the health of our population is declining.

2. Proposed Housing Allocation 12 South of Dog Kennel Lane
This development will considerably reduce the open countryside between Shirley and Dickens Heath. This is contrary to the NPPF which seeks to retain individual communities and to resist coalescence of villages. In para 83 the plan talks about "The network of strong and vibrant communities across the Rural Area will have been sustained with a range of local facilities and services that are readily accessible on foot and by bicycle and that are appropriate to the scale and hierarchy of the settlement" whereas the plan seeks to extend many communities and leave only a small strip of dividing land.

3. Proposed Housing Allocation 13 South of Shirley
This development will considerably reduce the open countryside between Shirley and Dickens Heath. This is contrary to the NPPF which seeks to retain individual communities and to resist coalescence of villages.

In Para 87 there is no recognition of the new development at Lowbrook and Tidbury Green Farms for 387 houses in Tidbury Green. The plan review should recognise the reality of house building that has taken place in and around Dickens Heath. Since 1989 when approval was given for 700 houses to be built in Dickens Heath the area has seen approval for over 1500 houses plus the expansion of Dickens Heath from 700 to over 1500 houses, with the attendant loss of green space and little or no increase in amenities or leisure facilities.

Whilst the Borough has a vision to "retain its sense of identity both in its urban and rural area (including appropriate protection of the Green Belt); and the quality of the environment that make it a special place." It is difficult to reconcile that statement with the level of house building that has and will be taking place at considerable cost to the green belt (Site 4, 12 and 13 are all in the green belt.).

Conclusions
The Local Plan Review should seek other ways to meet its housing needs other than extending urban areas by pushing their boundaries into the green belt, and should not build on existing sports and leisure facilities that are close to urban areas unless there is a clear replacement and extension plan.

Please take this email as our strong objection to the new housing estate you propose to build on fields adjoining Woodlands Estate and the surrounding area.

We understand your need to build new houses but Shirley will have no green areas left, we will only be left with Shirley Park. Those fields are used by ourselves and many other dog walkers and is a beautiful area.

You have plans in place for 2550 new homes in south Shirley which seems a huge amount. The traffic is already at a standstill in the mornings trying to get towards the M42 on the Stratford road. Adding so many more houses will just cause even more chaos to the area.

This concentration of a development in such a small area will have major implications in terms of our local infrastructure, schools, health services and wider facilities.

We kindly request that Housing Site 13 South of Shirley be retained for public use. This public amenity area is well used amongst the local community and is especially important for an area that has such a low provision of open space and parkland. Please reconsider other areas which are more logical infill sites and not used by the public.

Protection of the local amenity land in Shirley
We kindly request that Housing Site 13 South of Shirley be retained for public use. This public amenity area is well used amongst the local community and is especially important for an area that has such a low provision of open space and parkland. Please reconsider other areas which are more logical infill sites and not used by the public.

see attached letter

Proposed Housing Allocation 13 South of Shirley
I have resided in Shirley South for over forty years and have witnessed a steady decline in what used to be a wonderful semi rural area. An increase in traffic and noise, pollution and a collapsing infrastructure, not to mention the added pressure on schools and medical services alike caused by increased housing/population has had a derogatory impact on the area. The proposed housing allocation 13 plans for more housing would put even more pressure on the area and put an end to one of the last few green belt facilities in the area which is shared by the public and wild life alike. Any further infill would also create a "conurbation" with Hall Green.
I am protesting against any future development/s in the area on behalf of the existing residents of Shirley South.

Local plans for Woods Farm

I have recently seen the plans for new houses at Woods Farm, B90

Apart from the fact there are too many houses going to be built why are you not building on brown belt land before you use up our wonderful Green belt land.

This area is loved by locals and walkers and will really spoil the small piece of greenery we have in the local area. We are already gong to be losing Old Yardleians rugby site in a few short years to make way for even more housing.

The roads around Dickens Heath are horrendous.

If you really must build on this land (as I feel local opinion will fall on deaths ears) can you please think quality and not quantity. Allow for parking of families and not just one or two car spaces as children are staying at home longer so really (even without allowing parking for visitors) any new house should be allocated 4 parking spaces.

I would also home you are building further schools and medical centres as the local areas are fit to burst!

Planned housing development in Shirley (13)
Although I did write a while ago I felt so strongly and upset by the plans to develop the fields in Shirley that I had to write once more.

I have lived at 16 Sandfield Close Shirley since May 2010 I have been very happy here as there is so much wildlife and many mature trees.
I can't bear the thought that all of those creatures who have lived here in generations since time immemorial will be swept away. There are cuckoo, heron, rooks, owls, kingfisher, finches, newts, dormice, wood mice, bats, toads, frogs and minnow. The insects are too numerous to list .
I am so worried that the trees will be cut down and the big pond which is surrounded by oak trees drained. Also the bog area that lies just beyond the football field which is home to many toads, frogs and newts and is a natural flood absorber.

Please set aside the land for the wildlife and save the trees! We need this last green lung area as much as all the creatures that inhabit it do.

see attached letter

Objection - Solihull Draft Plan - Allocation 13
I wish to lodge my objection reference the Solihull MBC draft plan and in particular allocation 13. The scale of the land currently included will ruin the local area on many fronts. The area will not cope with an additional 600 dwellings, it barely functions now.

There are insufficient school places to date and there does not appear to be any local school that is going to be able to expand to take more pupils. Tidbury Green Primary is too far for parents to walk, no footpaths. Dickens Heath Primary is also too far and restricted for further expansion due to the current site. Woodlands Infant is also surrounded by current housing and I fail to see how that school will expand. Cheswick Green Primary already has its own housing developments to cope with. I can only see that a new build school is the answer and where is that going to go?

Local roads are already dangerous, Bills Lane is an accident black spot with cars regularly coming off the road. We have also had a local man killed on this particular road within the last 2 years, the current traffic calming does not work. I am already concerned about getting out of my road and onto Bills Lane everyday. How is more traffic from more houses going to help this. Tanworth Lane also appears no better with traffic speeding out of Dickens Heath, again roads already dangerous and overloaded with vehicles.

The site entrance and exit, I would like further details of where this is planned. there does not appear to be any safe site for this. I would like details of what the plan is and how you are going to improve an already traffic congested area.

Wildlife in the area will be decimated if this plan goes ahead. There are a number of different owls and other birds that live on this land. The hedgerows are well established and are home to many other local types of wildlife. I fail to see how this can just be allowed to be destroyed for new homes. You cannot just keep taking parts of Green belt, there will be nothing left by the time my children have families of there own.

We are already waiting for weeks to get a GP appointment at our local surgery. We do not have a fully functioning Accident & Emergency, what we have is already struggling with people volume.

This draft is not put forward with any proper planning, it is all just reaction to housing pressure. Solihull MBC should be fighting the Government on our behalf against this pressure.

Please ensure my objection is put forward in response to your draft plan.

I wish to object to Solihull MBC draft plan allocation 13.

My main reason for my objection is the size of the proposal of the development. I do not believe we have the infrastructure to cope with such a proposal and other sites in the borough should be considered to spread out the number of dwellings suggested.

I live in the B90 area and we do not have the road capability, the school places, the medical support ( currently we do not have a 24/7 A & E and attempting to getting a Doctors appointment is enough to make your illness worse ! ) to name a few of my concerns. My wife and I are amongst the vast amount of people who regularly use the fields for walking and the area will lose an important part of the countryside, should the proposal go ahead.

I realise the pressure the council face in regards housing developments but I urge you to consider spreading out the sites throughout the borough and not going ahead with such a large proposal.

Please can you include my objection as part of your draft plan consolation.

Proposed Woodlands Housing Estate.
I would like my objection noted against this development.

I feel that Solihull council is failing its residents. Not only is it taking away more green areas which is very sad to say the least, let alone the wider impact on the local environment.

It is also putting more pressure on local services such as schools and doctors surgeries.

Where will the children that reside in these new houses be educated? Are there plans to build new schools? Blossomfield and Knowle had to have swell years introduced due to over subscription. Mill Lodge due to the new housing estate next to that school exceeded the government recommendation on class numbers and the local doctors surgery is no longer accepting new patients. My concern is that if you continue to just build houses with no schools or medical care then already stretched will be unable to cope.

seer attached letter

see attached letter and map of woodlands estate

Proposed Housing Allocation 13, South of Shirley
We would like to raise an objection to the proposal above.

We have lived in Langcomb Road, backing on to one of the proposed sites for over 30 years and have enjoyed the fact that we back on to open, as we thought, Green Belt land.
It is quite disturbing that should houses be built on the fields at the back, currently taken over by Christmas trees, there would be a possibility of our garden flooding and generally getting wetter than it can be due to all driveways and roads that would need to be built. The loss of the trees that take up a lot of this water would accelerate this problem. We already understand that the water table was disturbed when Dickens Heath was built.
Also we were led to believe that Solihull were totally against Shirley linking up with Dickens Heath but that would be what the outcome would be. We quite frequently walk over the pathway, through the farm to Dickens Heath, enjoying the peace and quite of the open countryside.
What would happen as well for the youngstersf with the proposed scrapping of the many football clubs in the area. Surely this is an amenity which keeps the young people off the roads giving them an interest and an activity to enjoy.
How are we going to cope with the extra traffic. Surely Bills Lane cannot cope with any extra. There are always incidents of cars not coping with the bend and ending up in the fencing.
Shakespeare Drive, Tanworth Lane and Stretton Road can all become bottle necks at the moment with traffic trying to make their way to the Stratford Road. Traffic also is congested down the Stratford Road towards the retail park and onward to Cranmore Business Park.
Has thought been given to schooling although possibly this is not a concern due to the number of children from outside the Borough who are allocated places in our schools.
Why should this 41% of proposed housing across the Borough schedule for this area. Surely a more even spread across the Borough would be a solution. Are there no areas in Meriden, Hampton in Arden or Knowle and Dorridge which could be looked at?

Proposed housing, allocation 13, Shirley South.
I am writing in protest to the proposed plans for this area. I am horrified that this has even been considered.
Having lived on Binley Close for 14yrs I know the fields well & the amount of people (all ages) that use them. It's is not a redundant area. Plentiful too is the wildlife encompassing Tawny Owls, Barn Owls, Kingfishers, Woodpeckers, Cuckoos, Buzzards, Sparrow Hawks, various more common smaller birds, Field mice, Badgers, Moles, Bats & Otters near the water areas. The area is a lovely space & is looked after by those that use it because it is appreciated. It is ABSOLUTELY NOT abandoned/vacant land.
Taking into account what is being developed in Dickens Heath & Cheswick Green there will be no 'green respite' & the villages will become one 'concrete jungle'. This is a very sad state of affairs.
You can include deer in the list of wildlife!!

Proposed new homes site 13 South of Shirley estates
I am contacting you to object to the new housing estate planned for site 13 South of Shirley estates.
These fields are in constant us by residents in the area and it would be a great loss.
I do appreciate that more housing is needed in Solihull but It feels that these large housing schemes seem to be concentrated on this side of Solihull. A large estate in Solihull Lodge, Parkgate , further development in Dickens Heath, new houses in Cheswick Green, new houses to be built in Tidbury Green, all within a few miles of each other.
Would it not be wise to wait until these developments have finished to see the impact on schools, health services, traffic etc. before even more houses and associated families come into the area?
The appeal of this side of Solihull is that it is semi rural and this is slowly being lost.

RESIDENT COMMENTS - SITE 13 SHIRLEY SOUTH
Dear Solihull Council Spatial Planners

As a local resident I strongly support the need/importance to keep safe the local amenity land/corridor for public access along with the remaining fields adjacent to the canal to identify the break between Shirley and Dickens Heath as well as the existing bridle paths and canal walkways, as outlined by the Solihull Ratepayer group.

see attached letter

call to protect amenity land south Shirley for people's leisure and dog walking.

As an addition to the objection that we emailed yesterday we realise that we forgot to mention the wild life.
Our back garden, which backs on to the field with the Christmas trees in is a haven of wild life. We have visits all the time from Lesser Spotted Woodpeckers (who nest in the trees at the back), Green Woodpeckers, Jays and we have seen small deer in the back field. On our fence yesterday was a Sparrowhawk and the Buzzards circle above all the time.
We also have visits from the local Heron (trying to feed on our fish) and all the usual and at some times unusual garden birds.
What will happen to all these? Will they add to the statistics of the ever decreasing population of birds to be found in gardens and deny local children from being aware of what could be around them

l am emailing you on behalf of my young family to give our objections to your proposals to build a large housing estate on our local fields in south Shirley.

We have lived in the local area for three year and one of the main attractions to this area was the easy access to local open spaces. So as you can imagine, we are very, very sad and upset to learn of the Solihull's proposals.

Whilst we appreciate that the council has been directed by central government to have a five year housing plan, we feel that the sheer volume of the new housing development that is proposed near us is far too high. Therefore we would like to question why other areas seem to have "ring fenced " and be exempt from such a huge volume of development.


l shall firstly discuss

1. TRAFFIC


If we look at the current road network, our local roads struggle every morning with congestion. Tamworth lane is extremely busy at rush hour and on any one week day morning, communters can be queueing past the entrance for the allotment to pull out onto dog kennel lane. lt is common sense that building a large new housing estate WIll create MORE congestion. Almost every dwelling will have at least one car and probably two or three. lf we multiple these figures by the number of houses proposed surely this is just going to cause more traffic, more pollution and more accidents on the road!



AIR POLLUTION
Has any thought been given to increase air pollution?
Shouldn't the government be looking at aiming to decrease local air pollution???


2. PRESSURE ON LOCAL SERVICES

GP SURGERIES : We already struggle to get an appointment at our Medical (GP) surgery. Where are all the proposed new residents going to register for medical services? surely our surgery would not have the capacity to take any more patients without it having a detrimental affect on its current client group. So will local residents suffer ?

EDUCATION :
Our children attend woodlands primary school. The reception year is oversubscribed and again the school does not have the funding to expand and to take more children. Where will all these new residents children attend school or does the council have plans to build services especially for new residents?


3.WILDLIFE

Has any thought been given to the affect on our local wildlife?
It is truly shocking to think of all the animals and creatures that live in our local fields losing their natural habitats and/or dying out locally because of this proposal.

how will we educate our children about being responsible, caring adults who care and RESPECT local wildlife, if we let the council build on the only local fields we have , wildlife will disappear ? Is the council proud of its plans to kill local natural habitats?


This is 2017 , we know how much damage man has done to the earth already , please don't do it here !




4. MENTAL HEALTH

Lastly I want to talk about the mental health of the residents of this area. There is a lot of research that talks about the benefits of exercise and outdoor activity on ones mental health.


Public heath England , lmproving access to green open spaces (2014) states " There is significantly and growing evidence on the health benefits of good quality open green spaces. The benefits include self-rated health, lower body mass index, improved mental health and longevity. " The paper states " local authorities play a VITAl role in protecting , maintaining and improving green space". It is evident that if residents have good mental health and well being the demand for health services will be lower hence less pressure on the NHS.


lf all the proposed site is cleared and made into a concrete jungle, all the local residents , children and their pets may well suffer from poorer mental health.
Why cant we as adults protect this area for the next generation?



PROPOSAL:

We appreciate that Solihull housing has to submit a draft plan to the government of their local five year housing plan and if you do not, developers have more right to appeal. So whilst I oppose this plan to build IN MY BACK YARD AND WOULD LIKE TO STOP ALL PROPOSALS TO BUILD HERE, I recongise this is unrealistic.

Therefore I propose that the council reconsiders exactly where they are going to build.

l would like to see the first two fields that face the housing on the woodlands estate to be left alone in their natural state. So the natural beauty of the area can be maintained, wildlife can continue to live there in their current undisturbed state and local residents, their children and dogs can continue to enjoy the fields.

Furthermore, I am aware that the laws on GREEN BELT LAND are changing to suit government policy but if we look at the original aim of the policy to"CONTROL URBAN GROWTH AND TO PREVENT URBAN SPRAWL by keeping land permanently open, and consequently the most important attribute of green belt is their openness". Surely this proposed development would be urban sprawl, would not be welcome by the current residents and would ruin a beautiful area of open space and countryside. So we can protect the area for future generations of our children and their children and wildlife.

Thank you for taking the time to read this letter and l do sincerely hope that whoever reads this letter, can relate to the issues I have raised on a human level, not as a council employer or councillor but as a person with who can appreciate why these issues are of great importance to the residents of this local area.

my last plea PLEASE DONT BUILD ON OUR LOCAL FIELDS, PLEASE RE THINK THESE PROPOSALS

my children are very upset about this prospect, don't ruin this lovely area,

l look forward to hearing from you

Please keep the public green space around Shirley

Can I respond to your plans for proposed development of housing on Land at the end of Woodloes Road on the Woodlands Estate in south Shirley.
I am a resident of this estate and we were active members of the now defunct Neighbourhood Watch.
The proposed plans to build houses on the fields from Woodlands to Bills Lane needs to be extensively re-though. Okay we realise there is a housing shortage in Solihull but to think of building a development in this area is ludicrous.

1. That land is extensively used by residents and other people in the larger area to walk their dogs, do exercise, have a great interest in wildlife etc, and basically have a safe space to enjoy the area we live in. It is better for animal lovers to take the their animals in those fields rather than have them running around the streets causing worry to children and oap's that live in the estate and fouling footpaths.
2. The road that runs through the estate (Stretton) is fast becoming a rat run for drivers to get to Tanworth Lane and further to Dickins Heath etc, the congestion on some mornings reaches back from Tanworth Lane to Baxters Road we have difficulty getting of our drive an occasions. Tanworth Lane can get totally blocked some morning because of the flow of Traffic along the top end of Tanworth Lane from Dickins Heath right down to the Stratford Road via Dog Kennel Lane and other roads.
The infrastructure around the estate and its exits from the estate is not capable of taking any more traffic and by building more housed is only going to make the matters worse. The parking is getting ridiculous where people are parking on Stretton Road itself and a busy bus route doesnt help the situation, Ime amazed we haven't had a major accident on Stretton Road because of people parking on a bus route this will onl get worse !! . We want that land for the use of our residents and their children if the grass was cut more often it would be used a lot more than it is at the moment.
We have to put up with travelers sites etc taking land and now this disgusting thnk of the residents for once in your lives

I am horrified to learn of the proposed new development off Tamworth Lane. As a person who has children at Woodlands School and use the area for commuting and also Running this is such a shock. The roads are almost always gridlocked around there and the waiting times to see a doctor are already horrendous. I have chosen to live in this area which resource wise is already stretched, add another 3000 people to the area how on earth are our roads and facilities going to cope. Surely a development of this size should at least bring with it better facilities not to take away and diminish what we already have.

Please reconsider this plan.

Woodloes Road - Proposed new housing development
I am writing with regard to the proposed new housing development at Woodloes Road.

I cannot believe that this has been put forward. People, like myself, have bought property in this road because of the outlook that we have. It's a beautiful area and all that will happen is mass overcrowding. Are more schools going to be built to take account of the extra families in the area? Children love to play on the green open area along Woodloes Road which is a lovely open space. People of all ages walk their dogs through the fields. I, myself, go for plenty of walks through the fields and along the pathway out on to Bills Lane. This will all disappear. I don't want to walk through a housing estate!

I know that development has to go ahead but surely there are plenty of areas that can accommodate this without overcrowding our estate. We already struggle for parking! I have heard mention that there is room for development in Dorridge? So why can't it go ahead there?

I hope for all the residents of Woodloes Road and surrounding roads, this development does not go ahead.

The proposed housing on site 13 (South of Shirley) will deprive the local community of the only area in Shirley where it is still safe for dogs to be exercised off-lead on public land, as well as affecting a much appreciated wildlife area. Combined traffic impact from sites 4,12 and 13 (which all have high green belt scores) will make A34 Stratford Road between Marshall Lake Road and M42, already extremely congested, nightmarish. Coming so soon after the halving of Shirley park for development, it feels as if Solihull's motto should be changed from "Urbs in Rure" to simply "Urbs".