No

Draft Local Plan Review

Representation ID: 2201

Received: 11/02/2017

Respondent: Professor Derek Sheldon

Representation Summary:

Site 18 Objection.

Understand that land is only to be used for sporting purposes and SMBC would not sell freehold.
Loss of sporting facilities. Existing shortage of pitches in Solihull. Should be replaced with equivalent accessibility and quality.
At least 1700m from town Centre and 1km from train station. Contrary to NPPF.
Solihull Arden Club were unaware of Oakmoor/Cerda Call for Sites submission. Proposal should be withdrawn.
Will increase volumes of traffic; already heavily congested area.
Serious impact on highway, pedestrian and cyclist safety, especially schoolchildren.
High density will destroy local character; overshadowing and loss of privacy for existing dwellings.

Full text:

In relation to the above subject I am writing formally to object on a number of issues related to the Housing Development being proposed.
1. It is my understanding that this proposed development goes against SMBC planning policy where formal minutes in 2013 (supported by all political parties) clarify that in this case the land is used for sport only and SMBC would not sell the freehold or lift the covenant whereby the ground should only be used for sporting purposes. This implies the proposed housing development is totally inappropriate. So why is this development included in this LDP?
2. Such a planning development will generate the serious loss of sporting facilities, when there is already a shortage of pitches in Solihull. I believe SMBC has a statutory duty to ensure lost pitches are replaced with facilities of equivalent accessibility and quality.
3. The Oakmoor/Cerda proposal has indicated access from/to Sharman's Cross Road. The site is at least 1.7km from Solihull town centre and 1.0km from the station. This flies in the face of the National Planning Policy Framework where there is a requirement for such developments to have access to local amenities within 0.5km/10 minutes walk. On those grounds alone the proposal is not appropriate.
4. The Oakmoor/Cerda representation filed an application in 2016 for the whole of the Rugby Club/Solihull Arden Club site to be included in the LDP for Solihull. Yet SAC Directors and members are incensed about such a proposal as they knew nothing about it. I understand that the SAC Management have made it clear to SMBC they were not party to the application. This application therefore has no legal standing and should be refused on those grounds alone.
5. How can such a proposed development from SMBC include within it the land and established buildings of a successful private tennis/racquets club? It should not have been based on the assumption of the Oakmoor/Cerda "kite flying" plans going ahead. Such a proposal should not have been placed in the public domain as this has caused unnecessary distress and serious concern for both club members and neighbours. The proposal should be withdrawn by SMBC at this stage and not until the Solihull Arden Club management ever give it their formal approval.
6. Such a development is unrealistic as it would increase volumes of traffic (moving in/out of the site onto Sharman's Cross Road) on what is already a heavily congested road with local school traffic and general traffic to and from Solihull town centre at peak times. Consequently this would have a serious impact on highway safety, pedestrian safety (including unaccompanied children walking to/from surrounding schools) and cyclist safety on what is a designated cycle route.
7. The proposed development of 100 houses will effectively destroy the character of the whole neighbour of Sharmans Cross Road, Welcombe Grove and Winterbourne Road. The density of housing proposed looks to be at least 5 times the density of adjoining residences. This is a totally inappropriate over development and completely out of scale and character with the area - inevitably with such density level buildings will be more than 2 storeys high leading to overshadowing and a lack of privacy of existing properties.