13 Shirley - South of Shirley

Proposed Development - Allocation13

I am writing to object to the proposed development. You are in no doubt familiar with many of the arguments put forward against these plans, officers from the council having attended a number of public consultation events. For the record, I would like to outline my particular concerns.

There is no doubt that traffic congestion will increase. At "rush hour" it is almost impossible to turn onto Bills Lane from Langcomb Road. What studies have the council commissioned to monitor the traffic flow and, more importantly, what measures will be put in place to reduce the impact of more traffic?

The shortage of affordable housing makes the news on a regular basis. While some greenbelt land could be used for development, the emphasis should be placed on recommissioning brown field sites. Surely your planning department will have attempted to secure the services of a forward thinking and innovative architects who will not only design modern, comfortable housing that will have good environmentally friendly credentials, but will take the opportunity to make urban dwelling more attractive. Or is it the case that green belt sites are just an easier proposition, requiring less ground preparation?

I use Shirley rail station on a regular basis, and parking places are at a premium. This impacts on the surrounding streets where commuters are now parking during the day. (Sometimes Neville Road is almost impassable). What extra parking provision has been put in place to service the needs of extra commuters? It would make sense to place a new development nearer to the site of the proposed HS2 terminal. This would mean that the anticipated influx of commuters would be able to walk to the high speed link instead of having to make an unnecessary car/bus journey before accessing the H2S hub.

There follows the attendant problem of additional pressures being placed public services. It should be noted that the Accident and Emergency department at Solihull Hospital has been downgraded. Instead of expanding the existing services in preparation for the inevitable population increase, the solution appears to take ambulant patients to The Queen Elizabeth or Heartlands hospitals on even more congested roads. This is far from satisfactory.

Haslucks Green Road between Bills Lane and The Drawbridge public house is prone to flooding. There have been a number of accidents where vehicles have left the road due to wet conditions. If Allocation 13 goes ahead, won't this mean that "run off" from paved surfaces will ultimately run downhill to this portion of road? What assurances do we have that this building activity will not exacerbate an already serious problem?

No one can predict the future. The terms of Brexit have yet to be hammered out and economic growth and the money supply have been miscalculated by the BOE and other institutions. Most of the properties in the development will be starter homes. In the catastrophic event that interest rates return to their usual levels of 4-6% and there was a contraction in the jobs market post Brexit, this might pose a number of problems. The scenario that I am concerned with is if the project is started but the money supply slows, this might leave unfinished builds in various stages of completion. This is what happened in Ireland following the banking crisis. The result is that there are still unfinished housing estates ten years after the event. These ghost estates are attractive to squatters, the travelling community and provide easy pickings for contraband building material. What guarantee that it will be the developer's, and not Solihull Council tax payers, that will pick up the bill for site security if such a scenario plays out?

New Homes draft plan Shirley

As a resident on Langcomb Road I must write to object to these plans on many grounds.

Any building work would cripple the road network around here which is already busy at peak times down Bills Lane and Haslucks Green Road during school run and work rush hour times.

Also green belt land was one of the reason we moved here so to see fields carved up for housing and having the potential for being overlooked and also security issues is very worrying. There is also significant wildlife there and this would affect that.

Please formally record my objection.

I appreciate your response.

Allocation 13

Please receive my objection to the proposed use of allocation 13. The attraction that led me to purchase my home in this area over 30 years ago was to get away from congested estates like the one proposed and it's fair to say in doing so myself and many just like me have paid a premium house price for the privilege. For projects of this size I'm sure we would suffer many years of disruption in the most inconvenient of places. Shirley has regenerated enough for the time being!

see attached letter

Allocation 13

With reference to housing Allocation 13 we would like to express our strong objections.

Opinion is that the area is already over populated and extra building would create more problems than it solves.

Road traffic and local services would be greatly over used.

This number of houses would create more problems than it solves. Traffic congestion and extra strain on local services should be the start of any discussion.

Objections and Comments on Allocation 13

The majority of this is copied from someone else, but my views are exactly the same.

I object to the development of Shirley South. Particularly Allocation number 13 which is designated green belt land.

Shirley South is to receive approximately 41% (are you serious?) of the new housing in the borough. This is disproportionate and unfair. The effect will be to completely change the character of the area from a semi-rural location to an urban sprawl.
Under the government 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". I believe that there are numerous options yet to be explored and have yet to see the exhausted list of alternatives that have been 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.

I live on Stroud Road, I am a cyclist and car driver and can personally tell you 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. In addition, the main route out of Dickens Heath to the Miller and Carter is like a racetrack. As are some of the local rat runs such as Stretton Road which constranly has drivers coming along the road at ridiculous speeds, in an area with two schools and a large elderly community.
The addition of thousands on new homes will compound congestion and traffic flow to a catastrophic level and also increase rat run traffic.

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.

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 has become a is 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, I am not qualified to identify them but I feel you should carry out an in-depth wildlife and ecosystem survey at the correct time of year before a decision is made

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 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 build 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, both in smarter use of land and also locations

Allocation 13

As a resident of the Badgers Estate in Shirley, Solihull I would like to register my concerns over the forthcoming development in relation to the above. My objections are:

1. The size of the build. I realise we will have to have some new builds in the area but why can't we have these spread more evenly across the whole borough? Eg. rural areas nearer to HS2

2. The population in Shirley will be left with virtually no green belt - the Council have already built in our park - how is this taking our well being into consideration?

3. The infrastructure is already at capacity thanks to the Dickens Heath development, how much more do you expect Bills Lane, Haslucks Green Road etc. to take?

4. Both Shirley and Whitlock's End railway stations car parks are packed to capacity.

5. How do you propose stopping even more landlords from buying property which ends up empty like so many existing properties in Dickens Heath?

These are just 5 of my concerns but there are more particularly over the infra structure - we have to live here and it is becoming increasingly undesirable

Solihull Draft Local Plan

I wish to record my objections to the proposed sites for housing at Tythe Barn Lane and Shirley South identified as Site A and Site B.

Solihull's development at Dickens Heath has had a massive effect on the traffic using the narrow roads through Majors Green and any development on Site A will add to the traffic on these already overcrowded roads. Site A would mean that Solihull was developing right up the boundary with Worcestershire and the green belt. I would have thought a more logical difrection for development for Dickens Heath would be to take in the land on the other side of the Stratford on Avon Canal bound by Tanworth Lane, Braggs Farm Lane, Lady Lane and Dickens Heath Road, and then continue over the other side of Tanworth Lane to the land bound by Tanworth Lane, Blackford Road, Creynolds Lane and Stratford Road. This would make access to the considerable better roads and the motorway network much easier and would give a much better traffic flow.

As said my main concern is the effect the proposed development will have to the roads and infrastructure or Worcestershire and particularly Majors Green. Solihull seem to be proposing these developments for their own benefit and with a complete disregard for the effect on and cost to their neighbours.

Solihull's motto is said to be Town in the Country but this proposed development, right up to the Worcestershire boundary, is in complete contradiction to that.

Opposition to development on green belt in Shirley (specifically area 13)

I object to the building of new housing developments in Shirley and most specifically area 13. The roads around Shirley especially Haslucks Green Road (on which I live) are gridlocked for a large part of the day, GP services (in which I work) are at breaking point with wait times for a routine appointment at 2 weeks. Decent schools are over subscribed with local kids being forced to travel further from home ( contributing to the road issues) . Why not use brownfield sites or failing that get the infrastructure right first THEN the houses

Solihull Draft Local Plan Review - Allocation 13

I am writing to register my objection to the development of Shirley South. Particularly Allocation number 13 which is designated green belt land.


Plans show that Shirley South is to receive approximately 41% of the new housing in the borough. Why? This is disproportionate and unfair.


Under the government 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".


I understand that there are numerous options yet to be explored and would be interested to know why these other options are not suitable?

The document also states that new housing allocation should be developed to compliment current and new infrastructure. If this is the case HS2 will be running to the North of the borough and not stopping anywhere near 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. In addition, the main route out of Dickens Heath past the Miller and Carter is a constant flow of traffic, as are some of the local roads such as Burman Road, Bills Lane an Shakespeare Drive.
With the addition of this huge number of new homes this will compound congestion and traffic flow to an eventual standstill.

With regard to 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. There are no spaces available at Shirley Station after 7am.

I am also very concerned that the area is not able to facilitate the large number of potential new families. This influx of new residents would be detrimental to our schools, doctors and dentists which are already full to capacity. Therefore this would mean that there would be a need for either school extensions or new schools, which would require more of our green land taken away.

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 difficult and can take over an hour in traffic to get there.

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

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.
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.


I feel that Allocation 13 should become a recognised conservation and public amenity area serving Shirley South. Land has already been taken away from Shirley Park with a previous need for housing which has left a reduced amount of green space for residents to use. We need areas for general exercise to keep fit and healthy.

I am sure there are many alternatives to developing green belt sites and I am not convinced that all possibilities have been exhausted, both in smarter use of land.


I would be grateful if you could consider my objections when making your decision.

Objections to allocation 13

I am 31 years old and live at 41 Baxters Road, Shirley. I object to the proposals for allocation 13 and further development in Shirley. I appreciate there is a need for more houses but believe Shirley is taking on an unfair proportion of the allocation compared to other areas of Solihull. It will create further congestion on a;ready busy roads, both residential streets and arterial roads as well as the local motorway network. Also local amenities such as public transport, infrastructure, schools and doctors surgeries will be adversely affected by the influx of new residents. Further to this the health and well being of the Shirley community will be impacted upon with the loss of green and open spaces for leisure and recreation, with already lost parkland such as the Parkgate development at Shirley park. The expanse of this infilling on green spaces surrounding Shirley will unnecessarily increase urban sprawl towards Dickens Heath.It seems the possible eco friendly development of brown filed sites is less considered or the allocation is not being proportionally spread across the borough.

Appeal against building on Housing Site 13 South of Shirley

I would like to add my concerns to the no doubt many others you have received regarding plans for new houses to be built within Housing Site 13 South of Shirley. I have lived in Shirley with my husband and young sons for a number of years, having moved here from Hall Green for the greater access to the green space that this corner of Shirley provides. I understand that new homes are needed in the borough but I am opposed to such a large development on a well used green space by local residents. I would be extremely disappointed if any new houses were built on this land and will fight against any plans to do so. With the re-development of the Power-Gen site soon to start, Shirley needs better infrastructure, more schools, more Doctors and other services before any new developments should be considered.

I would like to raise our objections to the Local planning proposal that effects us directly as we back on to area of Woods Farm Christmas trees where plans for circa 600 new houses are being considered.

The surrounding roads near to the proposed area are already heavily congested and we are convinced that this will grind Shirley to a gridlock with the additional cars that the proposed new houses will bring to the area.

The trains that commute from Whitlocks End to Snow Hill Station are already full to capacity (seats are a premuim at times - Mainly Standing Room Only) during peak times as are the car parks at each station
so again this is another valid reason for lodging our objection as the rail network will not cope with the additional rail passengers the proposed new houses will bring to the area.

Not only are you considering buiding houses on Green belt land which will effect a vast number of people who use the land for recreational and social purposes, the additional plans to build more houses on land near to Whitlocks End Station which will see the closure of 4 Football Clubs and 1 Rugby club will be a recipe for disaster.

It goes without saying that anti social behaviour and crime rates will definitely increase as the expanded youth community that the new houses will bring look to entertain themselves with existing youth community who have seen their opportunities to play sport disappear.

Whilst we appreciate the increasing population will require new houses we strongly believe that for the reasons detailed above other sites especially brownfield sites need to be exhausted before you consider building on the beautiful green belt land to the back of our house.

Hi, I'm a resident of Shirley and am writing to object to the proposed allocation 13 development.

The development will have a detrimental effect on our local community in many ways but my main concern is the effect it will have on educational and healthcare facilities.

Can you please tell me if there any plans to extend the already stretched schools system in the area when the new homes are built and also are there any plans to build new doctors surgeries to facilitate the new influx of residents?

I also us the rail network from Shirley to travel to Birmingham everyday, at peak times you very rarely can get a seat, again, is there a plan to make this situation better if the population increases?

I'm not seeing a lot of positives for the existing community with the intended plans.

I would just like to register my disapproval of Allocation 13 in the Shirley, Majors Green area.

In recent years the area has lost many acres of greenbelt land. It is so sad to see it go. It's a joy to be so near to the countryside and I don't want to see any more go when surely there are other options. Aside from this, the local area is already under strain with congestion on Roads, school places and GP facilities.

Objection to allocation 13

I am writing to object the further planning permission that is tasking place on woodlands and badgers estate. The reason of objection is because within the spring/summer season I like to take walks with my dogs. It would be a sacrifice to loose the green belt land as there are other facilities available before we touch green belt.

I wish to object to the planning of houses being built in the woodlands and badgers estate.
Objection to allocation 13

This area has been used for many years for dog walking, picnics, children playing and animals habitats! As a mother of a young child would like to keep a safe place for my child and many other people's children to play in the summer. The grass land is a great asset to our community as there are not many places left when people can walk freely and trust that their children and animals are safe away from busy roads.

Objections and Comments on Shirley allocation plot 13

I 100% agree with what Shirley Heath has put. We won the battle years ago when they wanted to build a football stadium and will most certainly try our best to win this battle too. If there wasn't many people coming into this small country we would not have this housing crisis. I mean how many people per square mile in this country compared to other much larger countries than ours.
We can't just keep taking away our green belts. What's going to happen once they are all gone????


I am writing to register my objection to the development of Shirley South. Particularly Allocation number 13 which is designated green belt land.

Shirley South is to receive approximately 41% of the new housing in the borough. This is disproportionate and unfair. The effect will be to completely change the character of the area from a semi-rural location to an urban sprawl.
Under the government 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".
I believe that there are numerous options yet to be explored and have yet to see the exhausted list of alternatives that have been 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. In addition, the main route out of Dickens Heath to the Miller and Carter is like a racetrack. As are some of the local rat runs such as Stretton Road which constranly has drivers coming along the road at ridiculous speeds, in an area with two schools and a large elderly community.
The addition of thousands on new homes will compound congestion and traffic flow to a catastrophic level and also increase rat run traffic.

I drove down Marshall Lake Road today into the centre of Solihull and it took 35 minutes to travel just over a mile, the new traffic lights have made the situation worst the routes into the town centre are already creaking.

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 veirtually impossible to get your child into the secondary school of your 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.

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 has become a is 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, I am not qualified to identify them but I feel you should carry out an in-depth wildlife and ecosystem survey at the correct time of year before a decision is made

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. On 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 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 build 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, both in smarter use of land and also locations

Thinking outside the box, flat areas of car park such as NEC and airport could be converted to multistory and the land save could be developed right on the door step of HS2 and also to compliment the recent resort World Complex.

This would alleviate pressure on south to north traffic flow. In addition, this would be the use of brownfield sites.
In addition to this, the proposed JLR site on Damson Lane, is purely a financial gain for the company to reduce freight costs. Why not build houses in that area instead. That would mean that the houses were in the right area. That is north of the town centre on the main arterial route of the A45, which has been developed to handle a large amount of traffic. The cost of JLR distribution is not the taxpayers concern. Or alternatively, why not build on the Land Rover Sports field as a trade off with the company, very few employees actually use the sports field.

There is also the possibility of buying larger houses in Solihull which have huge gardens and developing small estates with mews or flats as opposed to the exclusive developments that are cropping up along Blossomfield Road

Along with these ideas I have come up with a number of alternative areas which are more suitably located and are smaller pocket developments as per the governments' requirements. They are for the most part also in more affordable areas of the borough, see below

Land Pockets between
A452 / A45 / M42
A452 / Coleshill Heath Road / M42
Bickenhill Lane / B4438 / Westerly direction
B4438 / M42 / A45
Hampton Lane / A41 / M42

Finally, I am led to believe that the borough is to take an additional 2000 houses from the Birmingham Allocation. This is regardless of the fact that there are many brownfield sites and public open spaces that should be used before greenbelt as per the previously mentioned government document. I would urge you to push back to Birmingham City Council on this matter.

As an example I walked along Fazeley Street last week, I saw a number of brownfield sites being used as cheap car parking and also overgrown areas with rubble etc and a large grassy area devoid of natural life Public space). Can you please ensure that Birmingham City Council fully research and address all of their brownfield sites before Solihull rolls over and gives away our green belt.

Please bear my points in mind when making your decision.

objection allocation 13

I am writing to register my objection to the development of Shirley South. Particularly Allocation number 13 which is designated green belt land.

Myself and my husband use allocation 13 ourselves come spring and summer with family members who live in the fercinty of the affected area.
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. In addition, the main route out of Dickens Heath to the Miller carter baxters road, baxters green, and sandfield close. is like a racetrack. As are some of the local rat runs such as Stretton Road, which constranly has drivers coming along the road at ridiculous speeds, in an area with two schools and a large elderly community. using short cuts round the local community of baxters road and baxters green as short cuts.
The green belt land is used for recreational use. dog walkers and families. spring and summertime these fields are used by families with children for playing and investigating wildlife. There is wildlife over the fields ie cuckoo's, woodpeckers, owls, newts and the list could just go on.
The addition of thousands on new homes will compound congestion and traffic flow to a catastrophic level and also increase rat run traffic.
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 veirtually impossible to get your child into the secondary school of your 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.
Shirley South is to receive approximately 41% of the new housing in the borough. This is disproportionate and unfair. The effect will be to completely change the character of the area from a semi-rural location to an urban sprawl.
Under the government 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".
I believe that there are numerous options yet to be explored and have yet to see the exhausted list of alternatives that have been investigated.

I am writing to register my objection to the development of Shirley South. Particularly Allocation number 13 which is designated green belt land.

Myself and my wife use allocation 13 ourselves come spring and summer with family members who live in the fercinty of the affected area.
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. In addition, the main route out of Dickens Heath to the Miller carter baxters road, baxters green, and sandfield close. is like a racetrack. As are some of the local rat runs such as Stretton Road, which constranly has drivers coming along the road at ridiculous speeds, in an area with two schools and a large elderly community. using short cuts round the local community of baxters road and baxters green as short cuts.
The green belt land is used for recreational use. dog walkers and families. spring and summertime these fields are used by families with children for playing and investigating wildlife. There is wildlife over the fields ie cuckoo's, woodpeckers, owls, newts and the list could just go on.
The addition of thousands on new homes will compound congestion and traffic flow to a catastrophic level and also increase rat run traffic.
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 veirtually impossible to get your child into the secondary school of your 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.
Shirley South is to receive approximately 41% of the new housing in the borough. This is disproportionate and unfair. The effect will be to completely change the character of the area from a semi-rural location to an urban sprawl.
Under the government 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".
I believe that there are numerous options yet to be explored and have yet to see the exhausted list of alternatives that have been investigated.

As a resident of the Shakespeare Manor Estate I wish to voice my strong objections to your proposals to build new homes on sites designated as Allocation 11; 12; 13 and 4, which amount to 41% of the total Borough Council's proposed building plans in the Draft Local Plan.
I am not a NIMBY, merely a concerned resident who recognises the threat to the current infrastructure of roads, transport, schools and medical services in this area.
I am also aware that these proposals come on top of current developments taking place in Dickens Heath and Cheswick Green, not to mention planned Blythe Valley developments!!
I am particularly concerned about the impact on current residential roads which were not designed and cannot sustain significant increases in commuter traffic. Many are already 'rat-runs' for Dickens Heath and beyond.
I hope that due consideration will also be given to the need for an increase in local services including public transport, educational and medical services provision? With some 2,550 houses planned for South Shirley the logistics are mind-blowing! Let's assume that in 2,550 houses there will be an estimated a minimum of 850 school-age children.
It would appear that the sites in Shirley are a convenient 'cop-out' when it comes to arguing the demands from HS2 developments to the north-east of the Borough. The proposals are disproportionate and should be re-evaluated.
yours faithfully,

Ref: Letter in The Solihull News 10/02/17 "Housing plans are a cause for concern" & information generally circulating in area.

Based on this information being correct.

My wife and I are deeply concerned that you are considering development Shirley and green belt around us, with more than 6,000 homes over the next 20 years.

Recognising that the council has to meet government targets, all we are asking is that the developments are spread fairly over the Solihull Area.

The 41% in the plan, in just 4 x new developments near us being advised, seems hardly fair.

No doubt this list of concerns have already been logged with you:

* Added congestion to already busy roads, also resulting in higher levels of pollution and suggested links with related chronic conditions such as Parkinson's Disease, which my father who lived in Shirley died of
* Pressure on local doctors & dentists, never mind the pressure on struggling Hospitals
* The need for more schools and the knock on effect it will have on catchment area's
* Refuge: As it is we are at the extreme end of the Borough in relation to the refuse site at Bickenhill, resulting in a 1.5hr return journey down the M42 with all the congestion that it causes: Compounded with the fact that the Bickenhill site offers limited out of hours access and Shirley Residents cannot use Birmingham sites just a few miles away in Kings Norton and Tyseley
Would not it be beneficial anyway, for the environment, if a reciprocal arrangement was made with Birmingham Council for either residents to use each other sites
* The effect's on the natural wildlife, and flooding with large area's covered with buildings and tarmac
* Would Shirley be a desirable place to live in the future, with the increase in pollution, traffic and pressure on local services, with no green fields for general well being - We think not.
We are under the impression that based on the number of developments that have already taken place in the Shirley Area over the last few years and the proposed future developments, that Solihull Council have already decided that the Health and Welfare of the residents of Shirley is expendable.

Would not it be logistically sound, to have several smaller sites evenly spread over the Borough, as area's like Knowle, Dorridge, Bentley Heath, Bickenhill, are equally located conveniently to get onto the motorway system.

This would prove that Solihull Council do care about the people of Shirley and the future generations to come.

We would welcome your response.

To date I have not received any official information outlining the councils plans or reasons for new house building to meet central governments demands. However, I understand the figures quoted are 2,550 houses on 4 sites in four principle locations.
Having been a local resident for many years I can just about remember the village of Shirley, with its main street, a single road used only by horse and cart. Look at the whole area now, when shall we be applying for City status, " The Shirley and Solihull City".
I view the proposed building expansion programme to be horrendous, certainly not to the benefit of existing residents.
The first thing that comes to mind is the build up of traffic on existing roads, I'm still trying to come to terms with the existing overload of traffic from Dickens Heath village. The local infrastructure, shops, doctors, schools, parking will be inadequate to service an additional 8000 new residents, unless they all go to work during the day and return like a flock of starlings to roost at night. The only advantages that I see is extra employment for labour in the short term and some £4,000,000 extra in rate income (I wonder if we might get a rate reduction for all the trouble?)

We must not lose sight of the fact that life is for living. People have a need for a little open space, a walk in the country, a breath of fresh air and not be faced with continual traffic and noise.

No I would not adopt a selfish attitude and stand in the way of progress but, this is not progress but a means to an end until the next crises. Our local council have every right to tell central government enough is enough and go back to the drawing board and find other more suitable areas to house a growing population.

I wish to formally object to the four proposed construction sites in South Solihull.

Whist I understand Solihull Council has an obligation to build new homes in the Borough, I genuinely believe the the four sites are unsuitable.

The proposed sites will undoubtedly have a massive negative impact on our local community, not only will it destroy the beautiful green space space we all enjoy, it will add pressure to the already congested roads with the local area. Furthermore schools and doctors surgeries would not be able to cope with the increase in population.

FAO: Policy and Spatial Planning. Solihull SMC.

The reasons why we oppose the plans to build new houses on local green belt land are as follows:

1. We lose this green belt land forever. It changes the semi rural aspect of the area. We need all our green spaces!

2. They're unfair - 41% f houses in Solihull's plan are in 4 sites that neighbour our community.

3. They will have a negative impact on our community: aside from the loss of green space around and near our homes (and the benefit to community well-being that that brings), the propsed housing would create transport problems along an already busy and overcroded Haslucks Green Road, Bills lane, Tamworth Lane, Blackford Road and many of the roads that run between them. It could also have a detrimental affect on schools and doctors.

4. It won't help HS2: the draft Local Plan Review makes a lot of reference to the benefits to the borough from the HS2 interchange at the airport. However, Shirley will be one of the worst places in the borough to get to the new station. Areas to the east and North of the borough are more easy and natural access points that won't need to contend with the congested A43 and M42.

We would like our views as local people taken into consideration to cancel or at the very least severely scale back this all of this local plan. Allocation 13 should be in particular scrapped.

Proposed plans for new houses in Shirley

Whilst I agree with the building of new houses, which are very much needed, the proposed plan to build 2550 new homes in four sites so close together is not a good idea.
The schools will not cope, nor the doctors surgeries. The roads will be a nightmare, with all the extra traffic.
What will it be doing to our green belt? it will be a concrete jungle.
Please reconsider this proposal, surely there are brown sites which should be used before the green belt.
A disgruntled tax payer.

I am appalled that you are considering building on this beautiful piece of
green belt land on Shirley. - Allocation 13

The roads do not sustain the current levels of traffic, adding to this
problem is ludicrous! The Statford road is already at a stand still at peak
times and trying to move from Shirley towards Solihull at times if futile!

There are not enough school places or Gp's to cope for the additional
people.

The plans will take away land that is currently used by myself for
recreational purposes, exercising my dog and family.
We walk or cycle to these areas and welcome the fact that we can leave the
car at home. I thought there was a focus on getting people moving and being
healthy, you will be taking this valuable resource away from us if this
plan goes ahead!

If you agree this plan you will be devastating this beautiful part of the
borough.

Please reconsider!

Yours hopefully

Mass building in shirley and local areas.

Sirs.I write in support of the many objections you will have received with regard to council planning applications to develop as many green areas as possible in and around Shirley, Chiswick Green ,Blyth Valley rather than sharing required development over the whole of the metropolitan borough. anyway the council lack of foresight will ultimately create many problems associated not only with health care,when all these housing plans which do not include GP surgeries ,even if they did , they cannot be manned,because of the lack of Medical Professionals.We read daily in our newspapers hospitals cannot cope , A&E departments being closed down,staff shortages everywhere.
Local roads overloaded with ever increasing traffic on roads not fit for purpose.
In spite of the fact ministers are coming under increasing pressure from members of parliament, Solihull Council continue to plod on with there building ambitions .We need more MPs like Andrew Mitchell who wants to adhere to tory manifesto pledge
to protect the Green Belt..

I am sending this email about the many houses that are to be built in Shirley area, there seems to many on so little land and the roads and leafey lanes can not cope with this a mount off traffic will there be new schools to cope with amount off children and doctors. There will be no green fields left to enjoy.

Green belt devastation Whitlock's end, Shirley Heath Light Hall Farm

Although I recognise that it is pointless to complain I am nevertheless
doing so about the destruction of green belt land around Shirley.

An alternative plan would be to fill in the space between Solihull and
Coventry along the A45 corridor, in and around the NEC and beyond.

Why is it pointless? Planners ignore the views of residents (though they
call it 'taking residents' views into account'} as they have done with
respect to Parkgate, the Powergen site the relocation of the library, the
Sainsbury site and KFC all of which contribute to making Shirley a less
pleasant place in which to live.

Already the roads are crowded, Tanworth Lane Bill's Lane, Shakespeare Drive
and the Stratford Road but planners are never there early in the morning or
at school/work going home times - the traffic surveys they carry out are
mostly done in work time hours where the problem issues are not evident.