I am writing to express my multiple concerns in relation to the proposed housing development on Sharmans Cross Road. As a home owner Winterbourne Road, we back onto the site. My objections are as follow:-

Sporting Facilities
This is one of five sports grounds at risk in the LDP. As there is a shortage of pitches in Solihull, SMBC has a statutory requirement to ensure lost pitches are replaced with facilities of equivalent quality and accessibility. Sport England has found that Solihull is in the 3rd quartile nationally for over-16 participation in sport three times per week and continues to fall in the national league tables

As the manager of a under 10's football team (Solihull Moors) I am greatly concerned at the loss of sporting facilities. Currently we travel over 6 miles, taking around 30 minutes for training, so I know from first-hand experience how hard it is to secure good sporting facilities. I also appreciate how having access to local sporting facilities facilitates a vast number of social, physiological and health benefits.

As I understand it, there have been multiple enquiries to lease holders to use the site for sport e.g. football training and it feels as if there is a reluctance to answer enquiries with regard to use of the rugby pitch for sports, or reasonably price the lease for facilities. If correct, this really seems to be an underhanded approach by the holders.

In fact, item 1.2 of the Cerda planning document states that the application has "improved sporting provision". I believe the land housing the rugby pitch has a covenant stipulating that the land should be used for sporting purposes. SMBC formally minuted in 2013 its policy with regard to the use of the grounds only for sport and that they would not sell the freehold. We would like reaffirmation of this policy which implies that this development is inappropriate for inclusion in the LDP. One previous application for this site has been refused and another withdrawn. It appears to me the developers are attempting to circumnavigate this covenant, by moving the tennis club onto this land to 'satisfy' this requirement, whilst allowing the land which houses the current tennis club to be developed. It would leave a rather unpleasant taste in the mouth if SMBC allow the developer planning permission on these grounds.

I do not understand how reducing the amount of land, which could accommodate numerous different sports and which could be used in a hugely beneficial way, for children and adults alike, is an "improved sports provision". Further, I fear allowing the land to be lost, sends a message to both children, adults and the volunteers that sport, and the benefits it brings, are unimportant to Solihull, and consequently we would experience a reduction in sports participation and in the number of volunteers who co-ordinate sports in the community.

Local Amenities - As a father of 2 young children (aged 11 & 10), I am concerned about the lack of amenities to service an increased community/population as a result of 100 houses being built i.e. school & college places, doctor, hospitals etc. The current services are already stretched beyond the limit.
Within the plan there is no precise definition of the criteria for access to doctors surgeries and schools but the clear implication is that in general they should be in walking distance. The site fails on all these criteria with no surgeries within 1500m and bus access not being direct. The nearest Primary school is over 1500m away and the Junior School is oversubscribed so some children somewhere would be driven long distances to school. Secondary schools are also oversubscribed and over 1500m away.

Flooding - We already experience issues with flooding on Sharmans Cross Road and in the gardens running along Beaminster Road. The drainage systems are not equipped to cope with additional usage from an additional 100 families. We have since purchasing our home, had to add additional drainage in the garden to deal with rain water.

Additional traffic and issues with parking - I am concerned from a safety perspective (my children walking to school) and also the increase congestion and gridlock in the morning and evening.

Accessibility
The Cerda planning document details a number of item relating to accessibility. The developers - Oakmoor - in their submission specifically state that the distance to the Station is 700m when in fact it is 1000m to 1100m depending on which route you use.
Oakmoor also state that the Town Centre is 1km walk when in practice it is 1700m from the centre of the site to Touchwood

Public transport - accessibility also requires there to be frequent (defined as every 15 minutes) bus services to e.g. the station and the town centre. Oakmoor suggest this criterium is met by bus services nos. 3, S3 and S3W. These provide a half hourly service M to Sat and hourly on Sundays.

Suitability - The development will destroy the character of the neighbourhood. 100 houses is effectively 5 times the density of property on Winterbourne Rd. This is unacceptable overdevelopment of the site, and will be both out-of-scale and out-of-character in its appearance compared to existing development in the vicinity. 50 houses within the development will be "affordable homes" which are likely to be housing association properties. It is inevitable that buildings will be more than 2 stories (possible 4 to 5) leading to loss of light, loss of privacy and overshadowing

Therefore I believe with that on these grounds it is inappropriate for inclusion in the LDP.