No

Draft Local Plan Review

Representation ID: 3481

Received: 16/02/2017

Respondent: Ms Susan Holden

Representation Summary:

Site 18 Objection.

Land should be retained for sporting use. Site not been well promoted by existing owners.
Lack of sporting facilities in the area.
Add to existing traffic issues, particularly at peak times and school run.
Additional pollution.
Loss of wildlife.
Loss of community asset.
Increase to flood risk.
Loss of open space for recreation.
Local amenities already overstretched, e.g. GPs and Solihull hospital.

Full text:


LDP - Proposed Housing Allocation 18RE SHARMANS CROSS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.

Dear Sir/Madam,

I am writing concerning the above proposed development for which I would like to outline some of my objections. I hope that you will take them into consideration when making your decision regarding the irreversible conversion of the land previously dedicated to sports but not, it seems, supported by council for this purpose. I understand that the current developers who have bought the land have not been supportive towards promoting its use for sports for obvious reasons.

Firstly - the traffic problem. It is a very real problem. There is already a very significant amount of traffic in the immediate area. Morning and evening traffic is already deadlocked around the island at the Sharmans Cross Pub. Clearly these proposals will further exacerbate the problem. Access from Sharmans Cross Road onto Streetsbrook Road is also problematic despite two outlets. The traffic which accumulates around the school, next door to the proposal, will mean that additional weight of the extra traffic entering and exiting the proposed access site will create danger, stress and frustration for the local community and the surrounds. Increased traffic will also provide greater risks to pedestrians. and the safety of infants attending the local school (which will also demand further development and stretch resources as a consequence) is of a particular concern. Pollution is a very concerning factor.

Secondly, there still exists the need for sports facilities, not just tennis, which is also part of a government program. The area is not at all well served with sports grounds and this development could easily and at minimal cost, be reinstated as a sporting facility to benefit all Solihull inhabitants.

Thirdly - social, moral, spiritual and environmental welfare. Building on the proposed scale will have a detrimental effect on the local wildlife - there will be inevitable loss of its natural habitat and therefore threat to its existence. The general environmental ambience of the area will be lost under concrete and this is a concern to those of us who feel that our morale and spiritual welfare is enhanced by the open space. Sharmans Cross Road is susceptible to flooding therefore covering the natural ground with concrete and Tarmac will further exacerbate the situation. The Lucas Sports Ground and the fields around Sharmans Cross senior school have already been built on and although Prospect Park survives, the field next to the Arden Club feels more secure, private and should indeed be renovated for the purpose in which it is already designated i.e. Sports. This is a much needed facility in the area. I use the land as it exists. I don't see why recreation should be less important than housing allocation as a stressed society is not a healthy one. Houses are now being built on the surrounding green belt area, therefore turning inwards and over-crowding the town is of no value to Solihull residents.

As a conclusion, all the amenities in the area are totally stretched already. The Health Care in the area is stretched with doctors appointments having waiting times of up to six weeks. Solihull Hospital is already under funding cuts and schools in the area are oversubscribed and students are bussed in as well as parents taking to the roads to bring them in . My mother, with whom I live, currently waits for three months for a hospital appointment , often with appointments being postponed or delayed, however, getting the initial GP appointment for referral in this area has already taken weeks.

I do hope that you will take into account the views of myself and the vast number of local residents who agree with these views.
Please reject the current planning permission request.

Many thanks for your consideration. I look forward to your reply.