No

Draft Local Plan Review

Representation ID: 2731

Received: 13/02/2017

Respondent: John R Smith

Representation Summary:

Object to housing Site 18 as high density is completely out of keeping with surrounding area, results in loss of green space asset for local residents with recognised health and well-being benefits for all time, additional traffic will cause accessibility problems to Sharmans Cross Road, overwhelm current road infrastructure with traffic congestion notwithstanding affordable element, increase risk to pedestrians and cyclists, especially children going to/from school, will require major road improvements at Streetbrook Road junction, schools, medical services and drainage infrastructure will not cope without expensive improvements, damage wildlife and adjacent Pow Grove, so does not meet planning guidelines.

Full text:

Proposed Housing Allocation 18

I wish to oppose the Local Development Plan for the building of 100 houses on the Rugby Ground site in Sharmans Cross Road, Solihull.

The proposals for such a high density of houses which is approximately 5 times the density of adjacent housing would be completely out of keeping with the surrounding area and take away from Solihull residents the beneficial effects of this green space asset. If this open space is taken away it will never be replaced, countering the recognised benefits of retaining sports ground and parkland within town and urban areas for the health and well being for the community now and for generations to come.

Additional road traffic from the proposed development would create accessibility problems to Sharmans Cross Road and overwhelm the current road infrastructure system in the area, causing road traffic congestion and increase the risk to pedestrians and cyclists ( especially school children from Sharmans Cross Road Junior School ). It would almost certainly require major road work improvements at the junction of Sharmans Cross Road and Streetsbrook Road. It is difficult to see how the allocation of " 50 affordable houses " on the site might restrict anticipated car park demand when any houses in this location are likely to attract premium prices and therefore owners able to afford to own more than at least one car per household.

Other aspects of infrastructure such as school places, medical facilities and storm water and sewerage systems would not cope without hugely expensive ( to Solihull Council ) improvements and alterations to the already stretched existing services.

The impact of the proposal on wildlife in the area and adjacent Pow Grove would be extremely damaging and further destroy the character of the area.

In conclusion, I would suggest that the plans for this site do not meet accessibility, sustainability and suitability for planning guidelines.