No
Draft Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 3086
Received: 15/02/2017
Respondent: Mike Golder
Object to housing Site 18 as contrary to policy to restrict use of land to sport and inappropriate given interest in increasing active participation to improve health and ease pressure on NHS, would exacerbate peak time traffic congestion on Sharmans Cross Road and Streetsbrook Road which is greater now than when policy confirmed in 2013, increased dangers to children walking to/from school from accidents and pollution, density and house type will be totally out of character with surrounding area, and will not improve desirability of Solihull with only gain to the developer.
Proposed Housing Allocation 18
Dear Sir/Madam.
Once again I find myself writing to the council with regards to the proposed development of the sports ground on Sharmans Cross road. I understand that the developer proposes 100 dwellings for this site. This is very reminiscent of a proposal in 2013 when SMBC formally minuted that these grounds could only be used for sport and would not sell the freehold. Since that time there has been increased interest by both central and local government in increased participation in sport to improve the health of the nation and ease the pressure on the NHS. It therefore seems inappropriate to even be considering such a proposal as this.
However the developer is obviously keen to realise some return on their investment in the old rugby club and hence this further application. Perhaps SMBC should encourage the developer to put the land to the use it was meant for, i.e. a sporting facility. Perhaps this would not generate the profit they require.
Traffic Congestion. On a practical note, traffic congestion during both the morning and evening rush hours on both Sharmans Cross and Steetsbrook road is considerably greater than it was in 2013. This development if allowed to go ahead would increase that, with the attendant dangers to children at the Primary school. (pollution and accidents)
Suitability. It would seem likely that in order to fit this number of houses onto what is quite a small site that housing density or house type will be totally out of character to the surrounding area. again I suspect this is the developer wanting to maximise their profits at the expense of the environment.
Solihull regularly features well in surveys for the best place to live in the UK. I know it is difficult for council members to juggle demand for more housing and the environment. Generally I think SMBC manage pretty well. Often new developments improve the town and it's desirability. e.g. Parkgate, Touchwood, Dickens Heath and the removal of the old Powergen building. (whatever goes in there will make it better). However vested interests from developers should be resisted when the only gain is to that developer. I see this proposal as just one of those and therefore encourage the council to reject it again, and hope that this will be the last time such a proposal takes up valuable council time.