18 Solihull - Sharmans Cross Road

LDP - Proposed Housing Allocation 18
I object to the proposed Development Plan in respect of the development of the existing Rugby Ground adjacent to Sharmans Cross Road.

My Objections are as follows:-

1. Use of Land
SMBC stated unequivocally in 2013 that the use of the land was for sport only. This rule should be restated by SMBC and the land put back into use for sport by amateur clubs and groups wishing to use it. The facilities were well attended when used in the past.

2. School and Medical facilities.
The current overstretched School and Medical services will be further stretched by the building of 100 new properties with their additional residents. This will have a detrimental effect on the provision for existing residents.

3. Traffic and associated pollution.
Sharmans Cross road is a national cycle way, a bus route and a major road to and from the Stratford road. This road is at capacity level during peak periods already, particularly on school days where many children and parents are obliged to cross and re-cross this road. This development will add substantially to traffic pulling out from the proposed new side roads and increase the serious danger and pollution to cyclists and pedestrians including the 360 children attending Sharmans Cross school and the many others who also attend other local schools.

4. Environmental Reasons.
This land is a 'green' lung for Solihull, containing wildlife and many mature trees. The loss of this facility for local people is immense and must be taken into account in any decision.

5. Flooding.
Sharmans Cross Road is frequently blocked by local flooding and this proposed development will simply make the frequency and impact worsen. With the additional loss of ground to soak up water there is bound to be a detrimental effect on the amounts of water run-off into natural ground.

6. Loss of sporting facilities in this area.
SMBC has a statutory requirement to replace lost pitches with ones of equivalent quality and accessibility. The current rugby ground at Sharmans Cross cannot be replaced in any way with a similar local facility.

7. Misleading statements made in the Draft Local Plan Timetable document.
In the Draft Local Plan Timetable document, (http://www.cgra.org.uk/documents/draft_local_plan_timetable.pdf), the statement is made that 'Sports Ground is currently unused'; this statement is misleading as there are many amateur and local sports clubs and persons who would wish to utilise the land for sporting purposes but are prevented from doing so even though the land is designated for sports use only.

LDP-Proposed Housing Allocation 18
I strongly object to the building of 100[50] affordable homes on Sharmans Cross sports ground.
The road is already busy even more so during the school runs and rush hour.
The road is subject to flooding.
It will be totally out of character to its environment.
Pressure on local services is already evident witness the parking at Sharmans pub.
Where does it end the concreting of green spaces I could go on but you know the rest.

Re: LDP - Proposed Housing Allocation 18.
I write to oppose the above scheme as I do not think it suitable for the neighbourhood. Losing the rugby ground means even more green, open space will disappear locally. This is on top of losing the sports field on Prospect Lane, the playing fields of Sharmans Cross Girls School, the playing fields of Sharmans Cross Boys School, all to housing. Despite the tendency to build more homes in what were people's gardens, there is still a leafy, suburban feel to the area. You never know what you have lost until it has gone.
I also oppose the scheme because it will overload the local infrastructure. Another 100 homes means another 100 to 200 motorcars adding traffic to already congested roads

LPD - Proposed Housing Allocation 18
I wish to register my objection to the development of 100 houses on the rugby ground on Sharman's Cross Road on the following grounds :

I feel that the density of this proposed building plan is out of kilter with the character of the surrounding area and will have a negative effect on the appearance and general feel of the area.

An increase of 100 dwellings will dramatically increase the road traffic in the area and will result in more traffic pollution. Traffic on Sharman's Cross Road is already chaotic and this will only lead to an increase in the gridlock that already exists at certain times. Due to the school there are also a lot of young children in the area and increased traffic volumes and exasperated motorists pose additional safety risks to them. Parking in this area is already a problem and is chaotic at school drop off and collection times. The new proposed development will only add to the existing difficulties of street parking.

This area is already prone to flooding and building over open land will only add to this. In addition the loss mature trees and disturbance to wildlife will be of major detriment to the environment. It will also put pressure on already oversubscribed amenities in the area such as schools and medical centres which will have a knock on effect to present residents and result in inferior services.

Your policy for the use of this ground only for sport and that the freehold would not be sold was minuted in 2013. Could you give reaffirmation of this policy, as this implies that it is inappropriate to include this land within the Local Development Plan. A previous application for this site has been refused and another withdrawn.

LDP Proposed housing allocation 18
As members of Solihull Arden Tennis Club we wish to object to the above proposals for the following reasons:

1. The proposal of 100 houses will be detrimental to the character of the neighbourhood and will affect the Club amenities.Moving the existing Tennis Club to a different area is illogical financially and logistically.
2. The amount of extra traffic together with increased pollution within the surrounding neighbourhood and in close proximity to the local Junior School, together with the extra parking that will be generated over and above the existing will lead to gross overload.
3. The loss of sporting facilities from the site into a housing development will be a loss to the area and will never be replaced.
4. The site is inappropriate for housing development, over the last 6 years applications have been withdrawn and refused, again a refusal to these latest proposals is appropriate and necessary.

Dear Sir/Madam,

I am writing to object to the application by CERDA on behalf of Oakmoor (Sharmans Cross) Ltd for the residential development of Rugby Ground/Tennis Club just off Sharmans Cross Road. I have involved in the potential development of this site over the last 9 years and have faced the same problem throughout, namely that Oakmoor submit an Application which is full of serious inaccuracies and when these are pointed out the statement is made that it is not our skill or responsibility to check the detail

I trust that in this instance the inaccuracies will be vetted, particularly since the inaccuracies appear to imply that different SMBC policies are being met when they are not.

CERDA/OAKMOOR LDP APPLICATION SEPT 2016.

1. The front page states that the application was made 'ON BEHALF OF OAKMOOR (SHARMANS CROSS) LTD AND ARDEN LAWN TENNIS CLUB LTD'. The Board at the Club were not even aware an application had been made until November/December.
Careless at the very least.

2. Picture on front page is at least 7 years old. Sloppy at the least.

3. Front page error regarding application repeated.

4. Para2.5 page 3. 'The site has been derelict'. A half truth - the pitches are in excellent condition, and could be used immediately after marking out. This is important because e.g. Solihull F.C need pitches from Next season for 8 teams.
The pavilion, changing rooms and nursery units were progressively vandalised because no security was provided for the empty buildings. They were demolished under pressure from local residents, the Tennis Club and the Council. Oakmoor never tried to seriously protect the buildings or to let them out at all.

5. TPOs apply to far more trees than the southern and western boundaries with e.g. all the trees down the Tennis Club Rugby Club. Boundary covered as well a few individual trees. These trees could easily be awkward in the. Development of the site with the Tennis Club moving within the site.
A Planning issue which will be made worse with all trees in the course of having TPOs on them.

6. Para 2.8. The station is not 700m away but 1000m to 1100m away depending on
the route you take. Solihull town centre is c1700m away and not 1000m
This is very much a Planning issue with regard to accessibility/sustainability and density. School, and surgeries are over full, and more than 800 m away (i.e. walking distance). .SX Road is not an accessible site.

7. Para 3.3 refers to support for support for a previous scheme involving a package of support for the Rugby Club. It states that Sport England supported the scheme. This is incorrect - they did not oppose it which is very different.
In addition they do not disclose why they withdrew at the last minute from the Appeal of the SMBC refusal. Is it possible that this related to the value of the Council owned freehold and the sport only covenant.

8. Paras.5.4/5.5 perpetuate the same false impression of the distances to the station and Solihull town centre. The distances and the supposed 10 minute walking times are complete fictions from the centre of the site.
This appears to be a deliberate attempt to portray the accessibility of the site in a way that simply is not correct.

9. Para5.7 'not fit for purpose in 2009' is stated without any context. The Rugby Club aspired to the 2nd tier in England which require facilities and ground capacities which simply did not exist at the Rugby Ground. For lower levels of soccer and rugby they were more than adequate.

10. Para 5.8. The loss of a rugby pitch.......but there is sufficient provision in the area to serve the needs of the local population.' There is provision for 2 pitches and absolutely no evidence to support the contention there are ample pitches to support the needs of the local population. To the contrary there a demand for pitches which is not being met. The council's obligation to have an up to date survey of provision and demand of pitches and sports amenities is not in place so statements like this simply cannot be made. The Bees had to leave the Borough to meet the demand that they had.

11. Paras5.11/5.12. The facilities that have been outlined have not been confirmed as agreed but appear to involve significantly more space than the current Tennis Club. With 2 covered courts an extra squash court,150 car parking spots additional other facilities, crèche, players Bar etc etc etc. this, contrary to the application means that there would be less space for the 100 houses than for the original.

12. Paras.13/5.145.15
From 11 just above it is very very clear there will be less space for 100 properties than for 87 in the previous application. Density will be greater. The applications suggestion to the contrary cannot be correct. Their estimate of the houses per hectare must be regarded with suspicion at the very least.
There is then the statement that "30-35 properties per hectare would be consistent with the form of development in the local area". Again their quoted level will not be the actual level. Their estimate of the space available for residential is exaggerate so their comparison base is false. The relative density of estates surrounding the site give a range of 2 to 5 times the space per property depending which area you take.
This whole estate will be totally out of keeping with the surrounding neighbouring residential properties.

13. The move of the Tennis Club would of necessity have to take place before Any residential development could take place. This means onto the Rugby Ground. Currently no defined plans are available and no discussion have taken place regarding the facilities to be offered with the Board or the membership. There is the question of leasehold land and freehold land. No one even knows if the Board or the members will agree with the move and swap of land. Is this site really immediately available ? I think not.

14. Para5.15. Talks about the sports and community facilities providing the focal point of the development with the residential development extending around them. This sound a very altruistic and optimistic view. Sports Clubs with social amenities are noisy places. Other clubs experience when residential development takes place near to their centre of activity is not good with complaints and difficulties.
This presentation is over optimistic about dense property base in close proximity to the Tennis Club.

15. Since the last application for this site there has been a major increase in traffic during peak hours and school pick-up times on Sharmans Cross Road,Streetsbrook Road and all surrounding roads. This application takes no account of this. As all the other objections have shown this is a major major problem particularly with the vehicular exit being nearer to the Streetsbrook Road junction. It took me 25 minutes recently at 7-50 am to get through Solihull from 23 Sharmans Cross.
This problem is quite incorrectly played down in this application , together with no reference to the walking/cycling route on SX Road, or the danger to all the children going to SX junior school.

16. Para5.22/5.23
Yet again the Application is out of touch. With less activity on the site there had been a significant increase in wild life bats are a regular feature of summer evenings and badgers and faxes are also regulars. there are TPOs on central trees on the site and far more than just the South and west side.

17. Flood risk and drainage.

This area is heavily based on marl. This put major pressure on the surface water systems and they regularly cannot cope. Flooding is prevalent on SX Road despite work by Severn Trent. Gardens are regularly flooded in all surrounding areas. the Rugby pitches have special drainage by En Tout Cas. It acts as a sponge but dry on the surface . Once this whole area of6 acres is largely covered there will be a very substantial extra pressure on all surface water drainage. Climate change in the last 8 years has already made things a lot worse. This development could make a bad situation a lot worse. I doubt Cerda have any understanding of the scale of this problem.



LOSS OF SPORTS FACILITIES .S

SX Road is only one of 5 sports grounds at risk in the LDP. In the Review document there is little reference to sport as such with a few platitudes about if there is no surplus of pitches other of like or better quality with suitable access will need to be found i.e. created. This is pie in the sky. What it means in blunt terms is driving sports grounds further and further away from the central areas of population. It does not appear that there is any advocate or funds to to truly encourage the growth of sporting participation in Solihull's.

All of this is evidence by our performance nationally in participation in sport 3 times a week in Evidence produced by Sport England. These show that in the 330Boroughs in England we are declining at twice the national rare and have dropped from being around
175 to over 200 in the last 3 years and declining fast. It is a disgrace. But what can you expect when virtually none of our public park pitches have changing rooms or dedicated. Toilets and no facilities for girls/women. What do visiting teams think of Solihull. Only the private sector provide the facilities of quality,

What then of the Rugby Ground. The freehold is owned by SMBC and has 74 years to run on the lease. It is Covenanted to only be used for sport. The freehold land owned by Oakmoor is covenanted to only be used for the ancillaries to sport i.e. car parking, bowls greens, pavilion, and changing rooms. The current SMBC policy is that the freehold will not be sold, and the covenant will not be lifted but those policies can be changed be political decision . If they are, and the land becomes part of the LDP it will be another nail in the coffin of sporting active in the Borough.
One further point - on why the ground has not been used for 6 years. Oakmoor have never promoted it as available for sport, have sort charge exorbitant rents and have evaded all approaches by sports clubs to use the ground. They appear to have been determined to prevent the ground being used despite signing an undertaking that it would be used for sport when they took over the lease.

The same principle applies to all of the Sports grounds under threat in the LDP. If they are included there will. Be fewer facilities in the wrong places and less participation in sport. That in turn means a less physically and mentally fit population.

I object to the application for the No18 site to be included in the LDP for all of the above reasons.

LDP - Proposed Housing Allocation 18
I would like to object strongly to the proposed building of about 100 houses on the land off Sharmans Cross Road.

As an Olympian, I am distressed to see more sports areas being turned over for housing. In my opinion, and backed up by Sport England, we need more facilities in the Borough, not less. I understand there is already a shortage of pitches around the Solihull area. I believe any sporting pitches/facilities which are turned to other use must be replaced.

I am also concerned about the inadequate local facilities in the area with reference to schools and medical care. Not too long ago, a school in Sharmans Cross Road was closed down and houses built on that site. If additional housing was built on the proposed site, there would be even more children in the region, and Schools in the area are already full. Likewise , the medical surgeries are also full. This would lead to a drop in the standards in these amenities. For instance, larger classes in Schools and longer waiting times at surgeries.

Finally the extra traffic in the area would aggravate the flow on an already busy road and cause more danger to the children walking to Sharmans Cross School.

LDP - DEVELOPMENT OF RUGBY GROUND/SHARMANS CROSS ROAD (Proposed Housing Allocation 18)
LDP - RUGBY GROUND/SHARMANS CROSS ROAD/HOUSING ALLOCATION 18

I would like to oppose the above proposed development on the following grounds:-

1. POW GROVE: I am particularly concerned that the mixed broad leaf wood (SINC) known as Pow Grove (Grid Ref. SP136795) and owned by SMBC should be protected from any possible erosion that a housing development threatens. There is also a right of way from Welcombe Grove through the wood and I am concerned about how this would be managed?

2. LOSS OF PITCHES: As the LDP also identifies other sites in central Solihull for possible development the need for pitches for the increased population should be a consideration.

Proposed Housing Allocation 18

I am writing to register my objection to the proposed development of 100 houses on the rugby ground on Sharmans Cross Road as part of the Local Development Plan.
There are a number of reasons why I feel this proposed development is inappropriate and list the main ones below -

- the loss of valuable sports ground at a time when participation in team sports and physical activity are are important for health and wellbeing
- loss of a green space including mature trees enjoyed by local residents
- inadequate facilities such as schools and doctor surgeries
- existing traffic density in Sharmans Cross Road and adjoining roads is very high already - this development would only make it worse
- Flooding is a problem in Sharmans Cross Road - this proposed development would only make it worse
- my understanding is that Solihull Council own the freehold and designated it for use as a sport ground and therefore it should not be use for housing

Proposed Housing Allocation 18

I am writing to express my multiple concerns in relation to the proposed housing development on Sharmans Cross Road. As a home owner of 42 Winterbourne Road, we back onto the site. My objections are as follow:-

1) Local Amenities - As a mother 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.

2) 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.

3) 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.

4) Sporting Facilities - I understand the Rugby pitch has a stipulation which requires the site to be used for sporting purpose. I also understand that there have been multiple enquiries to lease holders to use the site for sport e.g. football training. The holders either do not take the enquiries, or price the site unrealistically, so as to avoid the use. This really seems to be an underhanded approach by the holders. I understand with this stipulation that these grounds are inappropriate for inclusion in the LDP.
My son plays for Solihull Moors (under 10's) and my concern is that grounds for sport will disappear with these plans for building. We really need to invest in our youth to ensure a healthy lifestyle. Taking away facilities does not support this philosophy.

LDP - Proposed Housing Allocation 18

I reside at 59 Sharmans Cross Road and write to express my objections to this proposal.

Suitability - the proposal will result in the overdevelopment of this site, destroying the character of the neighbourhood. The proposed density well exceeds that of existing properties in the area, in the case of Winterbourne Road by five times.

Increased traffic and pollution - there already exists an issue with traffic volumes in the area and these affect all roads around the proposed site; the development can only add to the volume and exacerbate the existing issue.
The increased traffic will be a danger to pedestrians and to cyclists; this is a designated cycling route.
Pollution from traffic is a recognised negative on the health of everyone and increased traffic will further add to the pollution of the area.

Parking - Sharmans Cross Road is a bus route and in general a busy road. When it is drop off or pick up time at the school or their is any kind of extra curricular activity parking is heavy. Sports fixtures have the same affect. The completion of this proposal will exacerbate the parking issue.

Flooding - this is already a problem and can only worsen if the site is built upon.

Permanent loss of a sports facility- at a time when obesity is a national concern and there is a need for all to be more active, the loss of this sports pitch facility is unacceptable. Solihull is in the 3rd quartile nationally for participation in sport by those over 16.

Design and appearance - this area is a known habitat for birds, badgers and bats; disturbing the habitat will be detrimental, as will the destruction of mature trees, some of which have preservation orders. Trees assist with countering pollution and should not be removed.

Schools and medical centres - these are already oversubscribed in this location and additional residential properties will further, adversely affect the service to existing local residents.

Sustainability- the National Planning Policy Framework requires developments to have access to local amenities within 800 metres or a ten minute walk whereas this proposal would be 1700 meters from Solihull Town centre and 1000 meters from Solihull Station. The criteria is therefor not met.

Use of land - SMBC minuted in 2013 that their policy with regard to this land, which is the subject of a covenant, should be for the use of sport only and further that the freehold would not be sold. I am aware that one previous development application has been refused and a second withdrawn. I would like SMBC to reaffirm the policy stated in 2013 to be reaffirmed.

LDP-Proposed Housing Allocation . 18

I hereby object to the proposed building of 100 houses on rugby grounds on shamans cross road.
My objections are listed below in priority order:
1) Availability of over subscribed schooling for those 100 houses and for the local area. It is overly apparent that local amenities are being stretched by the invasive developments and burgeoning housing market of Solihull, to which there has been little effort to balance the necessary schooling which is so admired by other borough's. increased Any further development will add to this issue.
2) Traffic Volume increased.
The traffic during mornings and evenings is excessive (7:45 to 9:00 takes approx 10min to travel 0.5 miles) and with a development that has no other means of access other than an already overloaded shamans cross /danford lane / streets Brook Road will increase this leads to:
-increased accidents
-Increased Air and Noise pollution
-Danger to Cyclists

I was very disappointed to discover there are plans to build new houses on Sharmans Cross Road.

The potential new builds will add to higher levels of pollution, due to an increase in traffic. If every household has two cars, this may result in 200+ extra vehicles (plus visitors). As a person who suffers from asthma, added road pollution is very worrying, not only for myself, but for local wildlife, too.

This also adds to another related concern of road safety. I currently cycle down Sharmans Cross road and the road can at times be quite perilous (especially as this road is a designated cycle route). I worry that with added properties of the scale being discussed, that the road will become very dangerous and render me unable to enjoyable and safely cycle down Sharmans Cross Road.

This point also affects school children at Sharmans Cross Junior School. Whilst this does not directly affect me, I worry that the school children's safety will be greatly jeopardised. Adding more properties (on the scale being discussed), will inevitably add to loss of school children's safety.

Finally, it is my understanding that, under law, developments must have access to local amenities within 800 meters. I gather the potential new site is 1,700 metres from the town centre and over 1,000 metres from the nearest train station, so technically plans to build on this site are unlawful.

I hope these points reach you well.

LDP- Proposed Housing Allocation 18

A development of 100 houses on the rugby ground on Sharmans Cross Road

I am writing with regard to the above planning proposal by Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council (SMBC). I live close to the proposed site and know the area very well. I have lived in Solihull for almost 20 years and at my current address for almost 4 years. My son attends Solihull Arden Club once a week for squash lessons and has a paper round that covers the surrounding roads. I wish to object strongly to the development of these houses in this location.

Already, with the expansion of the Touchwood shopping centre and three large secondary schools in close proximity, the volume of traffic around this area is considerable. Long queues of traffic form along Streetsbrook Road and it can be extremely hazardous at the junction of Streetsbrook Road- Sharmans Cross Road -Dorchester Road - Stonor Park Road. Adding 100 additional houses will, without doubt, mean the addition of over 100 cars competing for road space in an already congested area. Traffic is particularly bad at the obvious peak rush hour times (8-9am/ 5-6:30pm) but is also congested at the end of the school day (3-4pm) and Saturdays, due to shoppers heading to Touchwood.
The increased traffic is also a danger to children making their way on foot to and from school and for many, like my son, making their way to the Arden Club.

Squeezing 100 houses into this site is out-of-scale with the surrounding roads and this overdevelopment will mean it is less likely for local residents to enjoy their outdoor space. People will be less likely to cycle around the area; I would be reluctant to allow my children to continue to cycle on the roads if traffic further increased.

I hope that my objection is considered by the Planning Department when this application is decided.

LDP - Proposed Housing Allocation 18

I was so disappointed to hear that such a proposal is even being considered at this time.

I travel daily on sharmans cross road and the traffic is regularly gridlocked in the morning, with parents bringing their children to school in sometimes dangerous circumstances. To add more traffic to this area is really quite ludicrous.

As a parent the availability of medical centre appointments for my children are often near impossible to secure, and they complain of over subscribement. I can't imagine how poor the service will become if numbers increase.

Such a development will no doubt destroy the character of our beautiful neighbourhood too. Loss of light and loss of privacy come hand in hand with these types of build.

And finally I understood that SMBCs policy in recent years was that the land was only for sport and that the freehold would not be sold. So surely such a proposal is inappropriate anyway?

I sincerely hope that common sense will prevail and that these development plans will be swiftly and appropriately discarded.

In relation to the above subject I am writing formally to object on a number of issues related to the Housing Development being proposed.
1. It is my understanding that this proposed development goes against SMBC planning policy where formal minutes in 2013 (supported by all political parties) clarify that in this case the land is used for sport only and SMBC would not sell the freehold or lift the covenant whereby the ground should only be used for sporting purposes. This implies the proposed housing development is totally inappropriate. So why is this development included in this LDP?
2. Such a planning development will generate the serious loss of sporting facilities, when there is already a shortage of pitches in Solihull. I believe SMBC has a statutory duty to ensure lost pitches are replaced with facilities of equivalent accessibility and quality.
3. The Oakmoor/Cerda proposal has indicated access from/to Sharman's Cross Road. The site is at least 1.7km from Solihull town centre and 1.0km from the station. This flies in the face of the National Planning Policy Framework where there is a requirement for such developments to have access to local amenities within 0.5km/10 minutes walk. On those grounds alone the proposal is not appropriate.
4. The Oakmoor/Cerda representation filed an application in 2016 for the whole of the Rugby Club/Solihull Arden Club site to be included in the LDP for Solihull. Yet SAC Directors and members are incensed about such a proposal as they knew nothing about it. I understand that the SAC Management have made it clear to SMBC they were not party to the application. This application therefore has no legal standing and should be refused on those grounds alone.
5. How can such a proposed development from SMBC include within it the land and established buildings of a successful private tennis/racquets club? It should not have been based on the assumption of the Oakmoor/Cerda "kite flying" plans going ahead. Such a proposal should not have been placed in the public domain as this has caused unnecessary distress and serious concern for both club members and neighbours. The proposal should be withdrawn by SMBC at this stage and not until the Solihull Arden Club management ever give it their formal approval.
6. Such a development is unrealistic as it would increase volumes of traffic (moving in/out of the site onto Sharman's Cross Road) on what is already a heavily congested road with local school traffic and general traffic to and from Solihull town centre at peak times. Consequently this would have a serious impact on highway safety, pedestrian safety (including unaccompanied children walking to/from surrounding schools) and cyclist safety on what is a designated cycle route.
7. The proposed development of 100 houses will effectively destroy the character of the whole neighbour of Sharmans Cross Road, Welcombe Grove and Winterbourne Road. The density of housing proposed looks to be at least 5 times the density of adjoining residences. This is a totally inappropriate over development and completely out of scale and character with the area - inevitably with such density level buildings will be more than 2 storeys high leading to overshadowing and a lack of privacy of existing properties.

LDP Proposed Housing Allocation 18

I am writing to oppose a proposed development of 100 houses on the rugby ground in Sharmans Cross Road, a site surrounded by houses of a far less density. The development
Will result in a considerable increase in traffic from the site on to Sharmans Cross Road and Streetsbrook Road, both of which are gridlocked during rush hours, increasing the danger to pedestrians and school children at both secondary schools and Sharmans Cross Junior school.

There is unlikely to be sufficient car parking space for Solihull Arden Club unless part of this Site is set aside for this purpose.

The Site has been designated to be used for sporting activities for which Solihull MBC has a Statutory requirement to provide such facilities and Solihull continues to fall in the national league tables. The government is pressing for more sporting participation for health reasons.

Schools and medical services are not capable of dealing, satisfactorily, with further
demands.

The site of woodlands used by wildlife and is known as a habitat for bats and badgers.

I trust the Council will agree that the site should be retained for sporting purposes and not Developed for housing

Local Development Plan - Proposed Housing Allocation 18
I wish to make the following objections to Proposed Housing Allocation 18

1. The development is not in keeping with the surrounding area and will change its appearance and nature. There will be too many homes on too small a space: to fit 100 homes, including 50 affordable ones, into the space under consideration, an entirely different style, size and type of dwelling will be required. Some of these may well be multi-storey and will impair current residents' enjoyment of their homes. These will have reduced light and reduced privacy; they will suffer from noise pollution and be overlooked.

2. Traffic congestion is already a major problem in this area. Increasing the number of homes will cause even greater chaos at busy times both on Sharmans Cross Road and adjacent roads. Those accessing local amenities or their work will be adversely affected. The numbers of families who need to access premises on the Solihull Arden Club side of Sharmans Cross Road (primary school + wraparound care, orthodontist, tennis club, football club) will increase, giving rise to a greater risk of accidents, particularly at the start and end of the school and working days.

3. Pedestrians, including school age children walking to and from primary and secondary school, will have reduced highway safety.

4. Cyclists using the existing cycle route will have reduced highway safety.

5. 100 new homes will generate a need for parking spaces; there are already insufficient spaces for the area at certain busy times. (see point 2) . The possible reduction in the number of spaces at Solihull Arden Club would cause drivers to seek on street parking and further exacerbate the problem.

6. Increased pollution will result from the additional traffic.

7. Local schools are heavily oversubscribed in the area. 100 new homes will increase the pressure for places in schools and lead to dissatisfaction among local families; in addition there may be a negative impact on the service offered.

8. GP facilities are heavily oversubscribed in the area. 100 new homes will increase the pressure on services offered with a potentially negative impact on healthcare.

9. The loss of a green space will cause environmental damage and reduce the public's enjoyment of the local area. There are many mature trees on the site, some with Tree Preservation Orders, which support wildlife and have an impact on biodiversity; removing the green space will have a detrimental effect on this. Such mature trees take hundreds of years to grow and cannot be replaced. Several oak trees form the boundary between Solihull Arden Club and the gardens of Winterbourne Road.

The vast array of insect life found in the Oak tree means that this tree of all British trees supplies the most food for birds such as tits and tree creepers. .... the oak tree provides a harvest for many wild creatures. ... pigeons....squirrels, mice, badgers... .
( http://www.oldknobbley.com/woodland_ecology/trees/trees_oak_english.php)

10. Sharmans Cross Road is sometimes flooded during heavy rainfall with ensuing traffic chaos. Many residents suffer flooding of their gardens in wet weather ( Sharmans Cross Rd and Winterbourne Rd). Further development will exacerbate this problem.


11. According to The National Planning Policy Framework, developments must have access to local amenities within 800m or 10 minutes' walk. Solihull Station is 1000m and Solihull Town Centre 1700m away from the proposed site, both of which are too far to meet the sustainability criteria.

12. A rugby pitch will be lost. Several sports grounds are under threat in the Local Development Plan; SMBC has a duty to ensure that lost pitches are replaced so that they can be used by the local community. Participation in sport in Solihull is disappointing when compared with national averages, particularly given the demographic of the area.

13. In 2103 Solihull MBC agreed not to sell the freehold of the land in question and to preserve the use of the original sports grounds for sport. I would like to be assured that SMBC will adhere to this decision and resist developers' repeated attempts to influence its overturning.

14. National Lottery Funding has been used to provide sports facilities at Solihull Arden Tennis Club. I would like to be assured that SMBC will endeavour to promote the retention of these facilities so that they can be used for their intended purpose: to encourage participation in sport.

Proposed Housing Allocation 18
I strongly object to the proposed development of 100 new houses on the rugby ground in Sharmans Cross Road.

Traffic congestion
Every working morning I already struggle to drive out of my own road due to the traffic at a standstill down Streetsbrook Road and the adjoining roads, including Sharmans Cross. Added traffic due to new homes would not only increase this gridlock and frustration, but add to the associated pollution and road pothole damage. I'm also concerned for pedestrian safety as my own daughter must cross these roads on her way to school, as do many other primary and secondary school children.

Deterioration of the character of Solihull
This high density housing plan is completely unsuitable and out of characher with the Solihull surroundings. Building 100 homes on a site of this size is up to 5 times as dense as current adjacent properties.
Loss of sports ground and use of its land
There are not enough sports grounds in the area for us to lose this one! Plus SMBC's own policy (minuted formally in 2013) is to use the grounds only for sport, and not to sell the freehold.
More parking issues
Driving down Sharmans Cross is already precarious at times, due to the volume of cars parked by the side of the road. More housing, and therefore traffic, will exacerbate these problems, as will the loss of parking spaces at the Arden Club.
Flooding
Sharman Cross road floods after heavy rainfall. Covering land close by with even more concrete can only make this worse.
Please do not allow this application to proceed.

Re: LDP - Proposed housing allocation 18
Proposed development of Solihull Rugby Club

I would like to make an objection to the proposed development of 100 dwellings at the above site for the following reasons:

Development is inappropriate for the area
* Unacceptable overdevelopment and out of scale for the land available. This would equate to 5 times the density of other properties in this area such as those on Winterbourne Rd.
* The development would be out of character for this area
* There are no flats or town houses in this area
* It is likely buildings would be more than 2 stories high which would result in overshadowing and lack of privacy

Increased traffic and parking issues
* Accident will increase
* Traffic turning into and out of the proposed development and the increased traffic will pose a danger to pedestrians in general but particularly to school children
* The junior school is only a few meters away from the entrance to this proposed development. There will be cars turning into and out of the entrance whilst large numbers of children walk to school or are dropped off by car
* Danger to cyclists on a designated cycle route
* Increased traffic and parked cars will pose a danger and an inconvenience to the emergency services that use Sharmans Cross Road on a daily basis
* Road side parking will hinder the flow of busses on this bus route
* Lack of packing facilities for the development of houses and apartments will result in overflow street parking on the main road of Sharmans Cross Rd and other surrounding residential roads
* Traffic in this area is already a problem at peak times. Traffic on Sharmans Cross Rd is busy from 7.30-9.30 but extremely between 7.45 and 9am.
The proposed development will contribute to this bottle neck. Adding to the delays and leading drivers to seek alternative routes in the area causing 'rat runs'
* Loss of approximately 75 parking places for Arden Tennis club will add to this considerable problem

Ecology
* The loss of mature woodland, (some trees with preservation orders) will result in the loss of flora and fauna in this area
* The bat population will be destroyed as will the habitat for a vast range of wild life such as insects, small mammals, foxes, badgers etc at a time when we should be doing our upmost to protect what wild animal life and plant life we have left

Flooding and Pollution
* Water drainage is already a problem for this area with Sharmans Cross Road experiencing flooding on a regular basis
* This is particularly true of the area around the school and entrance to the proposed development
* Building on this site will result in further rain water not being soaked away into the ground
* The sewage drainage to homes on Sharmans Cross Rd can be challenging at the best of times, adding to the number of homes dependant on the sewage system will exacerbate this problem. This may result in a considerable health risk

Loss of amenity land
* These sports grounds are a unique and an important amenity
* The land has a covenant on that requires the land is used only for sport and recreational purposes
* SMBC minted in 2013 that they would not sell the freehold to sporting grounds
* The loss of this land to sport and recreation will create pressure on other sporting facilities in the area
* Solihull continues to fall in the national sports participation league and is shamefully now in the 3rd quartile nationally for over 16 participation in regular sporting recreation. Health experts are rightly concerned about children and adults not taking sufficient exercise which can lead to obesity and a multiple of heath issues
* Loss of parking facilities to the Arden Tennis Club will result in drop in members if they are unable to park, this will lead to a decline of the club, which is an important amenity for tennis tournaments, and the club will likely fold due to lack of members.

Schools and medical facilities
* These vital facilities are already oversubscribed. Further development will put an intolerable strain on current services which local residents already have some difficulty accessing

Sustainability
* The National Planning Policy Framework states that any new developments must have access to local amenities within a 800m or 10 minute walk
* This criteria is not met in this case, the proposed development is outside that distance. Solihull town centre being 17000m and the rail station being 1000m away

Previous rejection
* A previous application for building 87 dwellings on this land has already been rejected by Solihull council and another withdrawn
* This application is for 100 dwellings.

These are just some of the reasons that I strongly object to this proposed development As far as I am aware the reasons for refusal of planning have not changed.
Therefore I strongly urge you to reject it outright

I thank you for your consideration on this matter.

Proposed Housing Allocation 18

I would like to make objections and observations re the Solihull LDP Proposed Housing Allocation 18 Sharmans Cross Road, Rugby Club Ground

Increased number of vehicles
Proposed 100 properties would have a great impact on the increased number of vehicles using Sharmans Cross Road - at all times, not just 7.30am/9 30 am and again
at the school finish times or peak evening travel times.

As the proposed access/exit onto Sharmans Cross Road , particularly when turning RIGHT towards Streetsbrook Road and again turning RIGHT
towards Solihull town centre will cause major traffic congestion. This traffic problem is already very noticeable at peak traffic times.

Parking
Many side roads around this development already has many cars parked all day, with many workers parking and walking into Solihull.
Some even get bikes out of the boot and ride off.

What additional no parking restrictions would be placed on Sharmans Cross Road to alleviate one way traffic at busy times
Red Double Lines would be the answer.

Would the Police or Traffic Wardens or PCSO's be patrolling to enforce this?

Additional Infrastructure Required
What additional infrastructure is planned by SEVERN TRENT for this increased volume of residential properties.

Flooding
Sharmans Cross Road already has flooding during heavy rain causing manholes to lift and sewerage to flow along paths opposite the existing entrance to old rugby club.
(walk my dog (whatever the weather) and have seen this on several occasions !!!!!)

During heavy rain, the drains outside Sharmans Cross School are unable to cope with flood water volume and the road is completely under water

Permanent Loss of Sporting Facilities
Has Sport England agreed or been informed of this change of use.

Required - Additional Education Places and local access to Medical Facilities
Sharmans Cross Junior School/ Streetsbrook Infant School was deemed to be FULL and unable to take any further pupils either on the waiting list or start school
When my grandson returned from abroad March 2016 Solihull Education Department informed us Jack would have to seek a school placement OUTSIDE SOLIHULL
We live within walking distance of both these school.

100 residential properties - 50 suggested to be affordable housing - what additional local school places are planned locally for this development
Affordable housing (to me) suggests younger families requiring education and additional medical facilities.

I await with interest the outcome of Solihull PDP Proposed Housing Allocation 18

Proposed Housing Allocation 18

Please note my objection to the proposed development of 100 new houses in Sharmans Cross Road


Parking is already very disruptive in Sharman's Cross Road - this proposed development will affect safety and congestion.

We have too few sporting facilities already this will lead to a further loss. Sprite England have noted Solihull's very poor position in the rankings.

Traffic in that area is already gridlocked at certain times of the day with resultant high pollution. This will have a detrimental effect on highway safety and a real danger to pedestrians.

The density of the proposed development will destroy the character of the neighbourhood leading to a loss of light and privacy

Flooding is already a real issue for Sharman's Cross road. Clearly the development will make this worse.

We need to protect the many mature trees with Tree Preservation Orders.

Our schools and medical centres are already over subscribed and this will lead to reduced service for existing residents.


Listen to your residents and do not allow this application to proceed.

see letter

Proposed Housing Allocation 18

To whom it concerns:

I recently attended a meeting of the Sharmans Cross Action Group and was amazed to learn
that developers are again applying for planning permission to build 100 new homes on the
land formerly used by the Bees rugby club just off Sharmans Cross road.

I should like to object to this application on several grounds, firstly I was under the impression
that this land is covenanted in that it should only be used for sporting purposes; I was therefore
very surprised that developers had acquired the land. If as I understand that SMBC are the
leaseholders of this land why are they even contemplating such a venture. Since the developers
first acquired the land they have been approached several times by local football groups wanting
to rent a pitch on this land. The developers have requested an astronomical fee for such useage
therefore denying the use of the land for sporting purposes. It would seem their plan is to say that
since they acquired the land that it has not been used for sporting purposes, that is because they
have out-priced all the local clubs which seems very underhand to me.

I think that Solihull needs this land to be used for sporting purposes as there is a shortage of
pitches in Solihull. Sport England has found that Solihull is very much under represented nationally
for over-16 participation and continues to fall in the national league tables.

The area around Sharmans Cross road is already very heavily congested and the addition of
100 new homes would be a tremendous burden in view of the extra traffic this would involve. There
is a junior school near to the proposed development and this would be an added safety problem
during going to and from school for the pupils and their parents. This road is also a designated cycle
route and therefore cyclists would be more at risk with the extra traffic

Schools and medical centres in this area are already over-subscribed and the increase in further
demand would lead to a degradation of services for local residents. Furthermore the proposed
development is 1700 metres from Solihull town centre and 1000 metres from the railway station
which is in excess of the access requirements as out-lined by the National Planning Policy
Framework.

I submit this e-mail in the hope that my objections will be noted.

LPD Proposed Housing Allocation 18

I wish to place on record my objection to the proposed redevelopment of the Rugby Ground on Sharman's Cross Road. My reasons are:

1. The loss of a leisure amenity at a time of when facilities of this kind are in decline. It would be lost forever. The greater the population with more leisure time, the greater the need.
2. Increased traffic on the road which serves a nearby Junior School. The junction with Streetsbrook Road is highly dangerous with current usage.
3. The proposal ignores the pressure placed on the intake at the school which would need to expand losing some of the play areas.

I therefore do not thing this is a good idea.

LDP-Proposed Housing Allocation18

I write to express my objection to the proposed housing development on the rugby ground at Sharmans Cross Road for the following reasons.

The area currently bounding this proposal is regarded as being of a very high standard both for the spaciousness around all the dwellings and the abundance of trees many of which have TPO's instigated by this Council to protect for the future .

It is utterly hypocritical therefore to encourage crushing new houses into tightly packed areas and in so doing create a lifeless oasis which with the loss of trees and habitats of our fauna will ruin the overall area completely..

The other serious aspect must be the effect on traffic volumes and with it increased safety risks for all roads adjacent and especially to the junior school in Sharmans Cross.
Access and egress from this development will create additional traffic chaos especially at rush hour and during school times.

Building on this green field site should not be allowed.

Proposed Housing Allocation 18

I object to the proposed development of 100 new houses in Sharmans Cross Road.

There are already too few sporting facilities so this will result in further loss. Sport England indicated Solihull is very poor position in the rankings.

Traffic and parking are already huge problems at certain times in Sharman's Cross Road - this proposed development will make it worse impacting safety and causing even more congestion.

The character of the neighbourhood will be deteriorated leading to a loss of light and privacy. Trees under TPOs must be protected.

Flooding is a problem - Clearly the development will make this worse.

Please do not allow this application to proceed.

Proposed Housing Allocation 18

I have strong objections to the proposed development of 100 new houses in Sharmans Cross Road.

Solihull's neighbourhood character will be adversely impacted resulting in a loss of light and privacy. Trees under TPOs must be protected.

Flooding in the road is already an issue - the development will simply make this worse.

We need more sporting facilities, not less, do not let this development result in further loss. Sport England indicated Solihull is very poor position in the rankings.

It is already dangerous for pedestrians at times in Sharman's Cross Road - traffic and parking causing chaos - this proposed development will make it even more dangerous.


This application must not proceed.

Proposed Housing Allocation 18

I wish to register my opposition to the inclusion in your Local Development Plan (LDP) of a proposed development of 100 houses on the rugby ground located off Sharmans Cross Road.

As a local Solihull resident, I believe this development would be inappropriate for the following reasons:

1. Unsuitability. The scale and density of the proposed development are wholly inappropriate for this neighbourhood of mature, single dwelling family homes and will most certainly negatively impact residents through an unacceptable increase in:

a) noise, traffic and pollution in already busy local residential streets resulting in increased danger to pedestrians, cyclists and road users alike.
b) parking chaos as a result of insufficient provisioning and compounded by demand from members of Solihull Arden Club and local schools pickup and dropoff and sporting fixtures.
c) overlooking and lack of privacy for existing residents.

All of the above factors will have a direct and negative impact on quality of life, safety and well-being of local residents as well as users of the existing sporting facilities. Additionally, I do not believe local amenities would adequately support this size of development.

2. Use of land. As a taxpayer and long-term resident, I find it objectionable that Solihull Council would renege on promises that the rugby ground would continue to be designated for sporting use only and that the freehold would not be sold. Solihull residents need sporting facilities and the current leaseholder, Oakmoor, has acted reprehensively in not allowing local area sports teams to access the sporting ground. I believe the Council would not be acting in the best interests of the residents in allowing a development of this scale on this particular site leading to a permanent loss of sporting facilities.

3. Flooding. I believe there are already issues with flooding on Sharman Cross Road and a large development of 100 houses will surely worsen this problem for adjacent properties.

In conclusion, I wish to be kept apprised of any further discussions/meetings regarding this application in order to be given the opportunity to reiterate my opposition to it progressing through the planning stages.

proposed housing allocation 18.

I am writing to express my concerns and dismay regarding the proposed development of 100 houses on Sharmans Cross Road.

I am concerned that these new houses will be out of character for the area and I understand that 100 houses is effectively five times the density of houses currently present in this area. There will be an increased amount of traffic and I am particularly concerned regarding danger to cyclists and pedestrians, especially given the fact that there is a Junior school on Sharmans Cross Road. With more houses comes more cars and the need for parking in an already congested area especially near the school - we already feel the effects of this on our road - which is several roads away. With more houses also comes more people, which will put pressure on already oversubscribed schools and medical facilities. My son currently attends Streetsbrook nursery and although it is our catchment school, we have concerns he will not get into reception and can imagine this situation will only worsen if this development proceeds.

Finally I will be very disappointed if SMBC reneges on its 2013 policy with regard to the use of the grounds only for sport and in which it was stated that they would not sell the freehold. I feel that this policy should be reaffirmed which would therefore imply that this development is inappropriate for inclusion in the LDP.