Object

Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation

Representation ID: 7339

Received: 10/03/2019

Respondent: Mr Mick Westman

Representation Summary:

Incorrect to state that PA refused solely on affordable housing grounds, as partly on loss of sports facilities. Compensation only necessary due to Oakmoor setting rental levels too high and allowing buildings to deteriorate.
Long period of decline in sports facilities in Borough, contrary to awareness of health/well-being benefits of sport/green spaces, which DLP continues. Contrary to policy/covenant to retain sports use.
Environmental impacts; density out of character, increased traffic/pollution, impact on congestion, dangers to pedestrians/cyclists/children. SMBC should retain site as sports ground & establish a working group of residents/interested sports clubs to develop a sports facility.

Full text:

I am a long-time resident of Solihull, and I am writing to express my concern about the proposed development of the Old Rugby Club, Sharmans Cross Road, Site 18 the in the draft local plan supplement - Plan site 245. This proposal will have significant environmental and social impact on the surrounding area and the residents of Solihull,

As per point 271, in the draft plan this site is in a largely residential area close to Solihull Town Centre. It is incorrect that the "previous planning application was refused solely because the proposals did not provide sufficient affordable housing", As one of the people who successfully objected previously the planning application was rejected due to the potential loss of sporting facilities. It is therefore disingenuous for the planning department to now suggest that the previous decision therefore "indicates that the principle for the development was considered acceptable". This shows a total disregard for the feelings and well-being for the people impacted by this proposal.

As for point 272. SMBC claim that "Whilst the former sports ground has been disused for a number of years, compensation for the loss of playing pitches will be required." This position has been manufactured by the current Land owner Oakmore Estates who, following an agreed purchase agreed with SMBC of some of the land impacted by this proposal, have put rental prices for the sports land at a level beyond ANY local sports club to £60,000 per annum. This has been further exasperated by the loss of changing facilities which Oakmore allowed to fall into disrepair. The fact that SMBC recognise that compensation will be required suggests that somebody will be impacted which of course is the people of Solihull! This is unacceptable.

As a resident of Solihull, and former youth football coach I have witnessed a long period of progressive loss of sporting facilities across the borough which includes the loss of changing rooms in public parks and a reduction in the scale of use of parks pitches. This policy of continued loss of sports land in the borough has seen Solihull fall to the 3rd quartile in the national league tables, from 50th to 75th spot, for participation in sport 3 or more times a week.

Awareness of the needs for physical and mental wellbeing is at an all time high with the government's Children and Young People's Green Paper calling for local authorities to support good mental health for local populations, strengthening individuals and communities, creating healthy places and addressing the wider determinants of health such as access to green space.
Good mental health is essential for children, young people and their families to be able to thrive. SMBC should be supporting this policy. Instead Sharmans Cross is one of five sports grounds at risk in the LDP. As there is already a shortage of pitches in Solihull, SMBC has a statutory requirement to ensure lost pitches are replaced with facilities of equivalent quality and accessibility.

In 2013 an SMBC all party committee meeting affirmed as "POLICY" that they would not sell the freehold of the Sharmans Cross sports ground or lift the covenants regarding the sites use as being for sporting purposes and as ancillaries to sport. I am not aware that SMBC officers have reviewed this policy and therefore 'demand' that the policy be retained". To not do so would be a dereliction of duty.

I am also concerned with the environmental impacts of this proposal.

Density - The development will destroy the character of the neighborhood. 100 houses are effectively 4-5 times the density of property on Winterbourne Rd where I currently live. This is unacceptable over development of the site and will be both out-of-scale and out- of-character in its appearance compared to existing development in the vicinity.

Increased traffic and associated pollution - The development will have a serious effect on highway safety and the convenience of road users, including:

Increased volumes of traffic moving in/out of new site, most likely turning right out of site towards town, increasing gridlock on Sharmans Cross Rd which is already dangerous, Streetsbrook Road, and the inevitable increase of traffic on side roads.

Danger to pedestrians, unaccompanied children going to/from Sharmans Cross Junior School and secondary schools. Note many local children cross the fields in order to gain access to Alderbrook Road and onward to Tudor Grange, Alderbrook and St Peters secondary schools. This is considered safer than walking around the local road network.

Danger to cyclists, as this is a designated cycle route.


The health and wellbeing of Solihull residents and its visitors are of upmost importance. This proposal removes a vital sports facility that the council has previously agreed to protect. I therefore object and ask that SMBC remove the Rugby Ground from the Draft LDP. That SMBC Honour the policy agreed in 2013 and retain the sports ground for its intended purpose. That a working group be created between SMBC, residents and interested sports clubs to develop a sports facility at Sharmans Cross that supports the health and wellbeing of all people living in Solihull and surrounding areas.