No

Draft Local Plan Review

Representation ID: 3372

Received: 16/02/2017

Respondent: Dr Jonathon Chard

Representation Summary:

Site 18 Objection.

Out of character with area. Density 5 times higher. Affordable/social housing change to residential character.
Accessibility of development does not comply with Policy P7.
Increase in traffic.
Risk to safety of schoolchildren, other pedestrians and cyclists.
increase in parking issues.
Increased flood risk.
Insufficient local services, e.g. schools and primary healthcare.

Full text:


I write in reference to the inclusion of allocation 18 (Sharmans Cross Road) in the Solihull Local Development Plan.

I object strongly to this proposal on the following grounds:

1. It is an inappropriate development that will change the character of the area
The proposed development will be at least 5-6 times the density of housing in the immediate surrounding area (e.g. Winterbourne Road and Welcombe Grove). This will completely change the character of this well-established, high quality residential area, which is highly prized for its trees and green spaces. The inclusion of affordable housing (which will probably be met through social housing) is a complete change to the residential character of the immediate area.

2. Accessibility of development
I understand that the proposal for 100 homes includes one parking space per property. This requires that the site is defined as accessible according to Planning Policy P7, which in turn requires that the site must be within 800m of local amenities such as the station and town centre. The site is, in fact, at least 1000m from the station and approximately 1700m from the entrance to Touchwood Court, which therefore requires that two parking spaces per property must be provided. To satisfy this requirement for the proposed 100 properties will require multi-storey development which will be completely out of character with the 2-storey residential nature of the area.

3. Increased traffic levels
Traffic on Sharmans Cross Road and Streetsbrook Road is severely congested at peak times (7:45 - 9:00AM), typically with tailbacks along Streetsbrook Road from Lode Lane roundabout to Prospect Lane roundabout and for several hundred yards along Sharmans Cross Road. This development will add significantly to this congestion, potentially leading to total gridlock at peak times. No upgrade of the Sharmans Cross Road/Streetsbrook Road junction would alleviate the problem as traffic is already at saturation level at peak times.

4. Risk to the safety of schoolchildren, other pedestrians and cyclists
Sharmans Cross Road is a walking route for many local school children, both junior and secondary. It is also a walking route for pedestrians to Solihull town centre and station. The pavement on the side of the road of the proposed development is a designated cycle route. The proposed entrance to the development will force pedestrians and cyclists to cross a busy traffic flow, threatening their safety.

5. Parking chaos
Sharmans Cross Road suffers from chaotic parking during school drop-off and collection times and sporting fixtures. Woodside Way and the rugby club car park are used as daytime parking by Solihull workers and rail users. It is likely that Solihull Arden Club will lose around 75 parking spaces within the rugby club ground as a result of the development. This will lead to an untenable parking situation that will increase parking on all roads in the surrounding area, further adding to congestion and safety concerns.

6. Increased flooding
Sharmans Cross Road floods at times of peak rainfall, making the environment unpleasant and extremely dangerous for pedestrians, cyclists and motorists. The increased storm flow resulting from the proposed development can only worsen this situation.

7. Insufficient local services
All local schools and primary healthcare services are already oversubscribed. The increased demand resulting from the proposed development will only worsen this situation, leading to an unacceptable degradation of their quality of services.

For these reasons, I conclude that allocation 18 is inappropriate and should be removed from the local plan.

Please acknowledge the receipt of this objection letter and keep me informed of the progress of this element of the LDP.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Yours faithfully,