Object

Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation

Representation ID: 9229

Received: 14/03/2019

Respondent: Mrs Elizabeth Foster

Representation Summary:

Permanent loss of sports facility
Use of land - SMBC should stand by policy that this land should be used for sport only, retain existing sports facilities especially as shortage in Borough.
Sustainability- site does not meet accessibility criteria laid down in NPPF which requires developments to have access to local amenities
Increased traffic and associated pollution, hazard for children.
This is a designated cycling route and increased traffic would create a danger to cyclists
Parking issues- especially at school pick up times
Flooding
Schools and Medical Centres would be stretched
Density is out of keeping with the area

Full text:

I wish to state my objection to the proposed development at Site 18.

Permanent loss of sports facility - it is known that there is shortage of five sports grounds in Solihull and the SMBC has a statutory obligation to ensure that where facilities are lost these should be replaced with those of equivalent quality and accessibility.
Sport England has identified that Solihull is in the 3rd quartile nationally for over- 16 participation in sport three times per week and is continuing to fall in national league tables.
To allow the loss of this sports field would be an exacerbation of these issues and a breach of the covenant placed on the land.

Use of land - SMBC formally minuted in 2013 its policy that this land should be used for sport only and that the freehold would not be sold by them.
This policy should be reaffirmed by SMBC and the site withdrawn from the LDP.
One previous application for this site has been refused and another withdrawn.

Sustainability - this site does not meet the criteria laid down in The National Planning Policy Framework which requires developments to have access to local amenities within 800m/10 minutes walk whereas this site is 1700m from Solihull town centre and 1000m from the train station.

Increased traffic and associated pollution- this proposed development would have a serious effect on road safety and the convenience of road users:
Increased volumes of traffic onto an already busy and, at peak times, congested Sharmans Cross Road, particularly at its junction with Streetsbrook Road would increase the pollution and increase the pollution as a health hazard to children walking to and from school and other residents, some of whom may already suffer with lung conditions.
This is a designated cycling route and increased traffic would create a danger to cyclists.
Children going to and from local schools, particularly those attending Sharmans Cross Junior School, will be put at increased risk of injury from additional vehicles using Sharmans Cross Road.

Parking - during peak times, which includes school pick up and drop off as well as sporting fixtures at Arden Club and the football club adjacent to Sharmans Cross School, is already a congestion issue and with tight/cramped parking included in the new development plans this would only be exacerbated. Arden Club would lose approximately 75 parking spaces; another negative impact on sports facilities in our poorly provided for borough.

Flooding- heavy rain always causes flooding in Sharmans Cross Road; gardens surrounding the proposed development site are well known to suffer flooding too. To build, as proposed, would remove what natural drainage there is in the location.

The build density is entirely out of keeping with this neighbourhood, creating 4/5 times that of neighbouring Winterbourne Road. This is an unacceptable overdevelopment, creating density out- of-scale and out-of-density to the vicinity.
The proposed development would destroy the natural habitat for many birds, the bats and the badgers all known to have been resident in this space for many years. Some relying on the mature trees which are subject of Tree Preservation Orders.

Schools and Medical Centres - both are over subscribed and this proposed development would result in increased demand to the detriment of all residents.

I request that this email is accepted as my official objection to the proposed development at Site 18.