No

Draft Local Plan Review

Representation ID: 2283

Received: 11/02/2017

Respondent: Laurie Neal

Representation Summary:

Site 18 Objection.

Housing development is necessary for progress but detrimental to put it here.
Existing traffic problems, particularly on Streetsbrook Road, Blossomfield Road and surrounds. Incessant queueing.
New development will adversely affect:
Schools and colleges in the area, cycle route users, pedestrians using these amenities and Touchwood, pollution levels.
Negative impact on local character. Too intensive. Loss of trees.
Need for green open spaces and sporting facilities. Applications to use this land for sport have been blocked by current owner.
Additional pressure on schools and medical centres.
More hard surfacing will exacerbate existing flooding and drainage issues.






Full text:

Proposed Housing Application 18

I am writing in connection with the proposed development plan on the Sharmans Cross Site which I believe will have an adverse and serious affect on the area in which I,my family and others happily live. (my family residence is 37, Arley Rd , Solihull, B91 1NJ).
I have sought information about the proposals for this area whichI understand includes the provision of a large number of private dwellings (100 approx has been mentioned).
My deep concerns are set in the context of my personal background which is as follows:-

a) I and my family have resided in the Borough since 1981 so I am very familiar with all areas of Solihull and the growth of the Borough in that time. I understand that development is necessary for progress - but not where, as here, it is to the detriment of the whole.

b) I, and my family, have also obviously grown up in the Borough and used all its facilities over that 35 yrs period and are acutely aware of the need to provide sporting areas within any residential area as well as green open spaces, which we currently enjoy on this site. My 3 children were (and still are)all keen sportsmen (as am I) and we have all used the sporting facilities available here over the years in one capacity or another.

c) I have been a practising lawyer since 1979 and my eldest son likewise(since 2010) and I am not naive enough to not appreciate the pressures currently placed on local Councils to find and provide additional and affordable housing.
BUT I wish to raise a number of objections to this development as below:-

1) Only today am I reminded of the huge traffic problems already affecting this area of the Borough particularly on the Streetsbrook Rd and Blossomfield Rd approaches to the town centre (and associated roads) as I have tried to carry out a short journey involving a navigation of the town centre and its envirens. The queues are incessant (even on a weekday) and to, (at a stroke), add another 200 cars approximately as a minimum in that same area would be madness and detrimental to all those using the roads and other facilities/services in the area.

i) There are a number of local schools and colleges already well established in this area with a large number concentrated in Blossomfield Rd and Sharmans Cross Rd.

ii) There are already well established cycle routes likewise in the same area the users of which would be adverselty affected.

iii) Large numbers of pedestrians use these amenities in addition to the nearby very popular Touchwood Shopping Centre (currently being further expanded).
Not only would all these parties be adversely affected but the assocoiated increased pollution levels would be of further detriment to the appeal of the area and to the use of the area by residents and visitors alike.

2) The current sporting facilities in the Borough are at a premium and under constant threat of being lost. This must not be underestimated as once lost they are "forever lost". There is a large demand for such facilities in Solihull and to my knowledge these are not currently being met by the Council.
Here there are currently unused facilities. I have made enquiry and this reveals that applications to use the football/rugby pitch facilities have been rejected/blocked by the present owner of the land which is quite frankly obscene when this is clearly being done, not for the good of the Borough and its residents, but to satisfy the personal financial ambitions of the developer, by thwarting any Sport England involvement, influence or effect.

I feel very strongly about this as Sport England's very existence in this country, and their remit, was to prevent just this sort of abuse and reduction of our sporting facilities taking place and I would not like to think that the democratically elected members of my local council, there to protect the interests of the Borough and its residents in the broadest sense, are, or could be, in any way complicit in this.
A permanent loss of such an important sporting facility particularly in such an otherwise well populated residential area would be a serious "assault" upon, and yet further diminution of, an already insufficient amenity within the Borough.

3) Solihull's current amenities and service provision for its residents is under pressure (I refer to the pressure on medical centres and schools) due to its popularity as a place to live. A further introduction of so many additional users on one site would be unsustainable.

4) The development would be "out of kilter" with the present design and appearance of the area in that the present housing is well established in a well vegetated, tree orientated area with low density housing and open spaces. This development would be too intensive and unnecessary in that context.

5) I have, finally, serious personal concerns over the drainage in the area and the consequential risk of flooding. This could affect my own residence as well as others nearby.
The soil is of a very high clay content and doesn't drain well. I have just had some work undertaken in my rear garden and was advised that due to the area being particularly low and having a high water retention, I should have additional land drains put in which I have.
This is without taking into account the huge concrete content of new buildings which would clearly only exacerbate this problem being only a few hundred yards away "as the crow flies".
I would be grateful for acknowledgement of my representations and objections and in the light of my serious concerns please keep me advised as to developments in connection with this LDP and any applications in respect thereof.

I look forward to hearing from you,