18 Solihull - Sharmans Cross Road

Proposed Housing Allocation 18

As a resident of Blackthorne Close, Solihull, I would not be as affected by this proposed development as those living in its immediate vicinity. However, I strongly object to the proposal for the following reasons:

* Sharmans Cross Road and surrounding routes are already too congested, with traffic gridlocked at certain times of day because of street parking and increased volume connected with Sharmans Cross Junior School. As recently as Friday, 10 February, my husband was stationary in such a traffic jam on Sharmans Cross Road. Given that most households own at least two cars, surrounding roads, and Sharmans Cross Road in particular, could not possibly accommodate 100x2 emerging from the proposed development and the chaos that would ensue. Already, high volumes of traffic make progress into Solihull tortuous in rush hour and even back in 2009, when I worked at Solihull Hospital, it took me half an hour to get there. Now, Streetsbrook Road rarely "frees up" before 9.45 a.m.

* The Council is currently reviewing street parking in the Blackthorne Close/Woodlea Drive/Sharmans Cross area as existing restrictions are ineffective and need updating. On all roads in this area, but particularly on Sharmans Cross Road, parking is a significant and, in some cases, dangerous contributor to the traffic jams and near accidents.

* More traffic makes both vehicle and pedestrian accidents more likely, particularly at the somewhat dangerous junction of Sharmans Cross, Streetsbrook and Stonor Park Roads. Indeed, I was recently the innocent party in a nasty road accident, which wrote off my car, on my way into Solihull.

* Of course, the increase in traffic pollution is also a major consideration, something of which I am acutely aware as I am asthmatic and have had far more respiratory problems living here than I ever had in south-east London!

* What about local medical services and the effect on them? Where is the extra provision going to be made in both existing primary care services and at Solihull Hospital? It already takes a fortnight to see a GP and a further wait for an appointment is unacceptable. I very much doubt that current NHS funding can create any additional facilities and staffing.

* Presumably, the development is most likely to attract young families. Is there sufficient capacity in local schools to cater for extra children? I doubt it as my neighbour's child was refused a place at Streetsbrook Infants because it is already full.

* It is not unusual for Sharmans Cross Road to flood when there is heavy rain. Is it really a fit site for further homes, and what effect will the development have on existing sewerage systems?

* When I first moved to Solihull from London in 1975, I very much appreciated the nature of the area, such a contrast to London suburbia, so much less traffic, easy access to local countryside and a town with an interesting mixture of independent shops. However, continual development has destroyed these advantages such that the town is now much more like a London suburb, has largely lost its character and is certainly no longer an "Urbs in Rure"! The Sharmans Cross area does, however, remain one of the more pleasant and unspoilt residential areas close to the town, with a variety of characterful and individual properties and many much appreciated beautiful trees. A new development, possibly not unlike the appalling bland architecture of developments such as the "village" of Dickens Heath, would be totally out of keeping, especially as I understand some of the new properties are likely to be more than two stories high.

Proposed Housing Allocation 18

I am writing to lodge my objection to the proposed development of the former Solihull RFC pitches behind Sharmans Cross Road. Whilst I think this land should be used, I believe the density of the proposed development will leave the local road network and facilities under extreme stress and the school unable to cope. I regularly travel into and around Solihull and Sharmans Cross road in particular during rush hour. Sharmans Cross Road is already completely blocked by traffic all the way from the junction with Streetsbrook Road to the school. My daughter lives on Sharmans Cross Road so it makes it very difficult to get in and out of her property. If there are yet more cars for the proposed 100 homes pulling out directly into this traffic it will place the safety of the children walking to school at increased risk. The road is already busy and dangerous.

The impact of paving over of such a large area of green land can only increase the already high risk of flooding occurring and Sharmans Cross Road is already frequently covered by over six inches of water up by the school. It would be more beneficial to the community to use the the land for in sporting capacity and I understand that Solihull Council formally minuted in 2013 that they would not sell the freehold of grounds used for sport. It appears to me if this proposal goes ahead Solihull Council are going back on what they have said. With minimal investment, this area could be turned into a resource for children and sports in the area - rather than paving it over and adding yet more properties that are completely out of keeping with the area.. I understand there were very good reasons for denying the application previously in in 2009 and I wholey object to it and believe it should be denied now

Proposed Housing Allocation 18

I am writing to object to the building of 100 dwellings on the site of the rugby field off Sharmans Cross Road principally for the following reasons:-

Substantially increased volume of traffic in the immediate area and surrounding environment. There is already very heavy traffic at peak times flowing in and of Solihull town centre causing hazards to cyclists and pedestrians.

The amenities such as medical centres, utilities like water, electricity & gas will all be over stretched and lead to strain more than at present.

The development will erode the character of the town which is much appreciated for it's environmental character and green living space.

Therefore, I trust this most inappropriate development application will be refused on the grounds of, inter-alia, the above.

I am writing to express my concern about the proposed housing development on Sharmans Cross Road.

There is woodland that runs along the back of the Arden Tennis Club, the rugby club, the football club and the Sharmans cross Junior School playing fields. I know the proposed development only concerns the tennis and rugby clubs but my point is this: because of where I live, I know for a FACT that at least two very special species of bird use that woodland - tawny owls and woodpeckers as they come into our garden and then return to the woodland. Whilst neither of these species are specifically protected the ever shrinking green space in the area thereby reducing their habitat would be an appalling shame.

On a more practical topic we struggle to get an appointment at our gp surgery as it is (Northbrook Health Centre, Northbrook Rd, Solihull). There just isn't the infrastructure in place to cope with all the extra people that this potential development would attract at not only doctors surgeries but schools, colleges, hospitals etc.

My son does a paper round on his bicycle. With all the extra traffic etc I wouldn't be confident of his safety, especially when you consider that Sharmans Cross Road is a major bus route. It's going to be gridlock there in the mornings - it's bad now but with all the cars trying to turn right out of there to get to streetsbrook road it would be a nightmare. With the junior school on that road it would only be a matter of time before someone was hurt, injured or killed.

You do need to be aware of the flooding issue on that road which is only going to get worse if any development goes ahead.

It's the wrong place, safety of the existing residents, their children and local wildlife is at stake here and nothing anyone can say to me will convince me otherwise.

I would therefore ask that you put my strong objection to this proposal on file.

I have read with interest your draft local plan which is currently out for consultation.
I should like to raise an issue regarding the proposed Sharmans Cross plan for the creation of 100 new homes as marked.

Traffic Congestion
Currently there is start/stop traffic from approximately 07:45 till
09:15 every weekday morning on: Sharmans Cross Rd, Streetsbrook Rd and Stonor Park Rd. There is a particularly dangerous junction where Sharmans Cross meets Streetsbrook, with four junctions within 75 yards (Sharmans Cross (2)), Stonor Park Rd and Dorchester Rd).

Sharmans Cross Road additionally suffers from cars parked during along the road during most of the day, resulting essentially in one-way traffic caused by school run needs and access the the various service businesses in Sharmans Cross Rd. Causing a danger to traffic, cyclists and pedestrians.

The addition of 100 extra homes needing access to the new development will create additional vehicular traffic thereby worsening the current congested and potentially accident prone situation.

Regarding traffic causing pollution, extra vehicular traffic brings with it extra pollution - I see this mentioned as a challenge within the draft plan. If you could please articulate your solution and position on this.

Therefore I view that the development should not proceed on that basis if this fails to meet your Policy P8 requirement. If you feel that you are able to satisfy the requirement would you please do so before committing to this plan.

Please advise when or if you will be producing an analysis of the traffic requirements of this new development.

It appears in general that the council is hell bent on producing a housing plan without any regard or solution for the associated problems that will be caused. This I believe will have the effect of making Solihull a less desirable place to call home, both short term and into the foreseeable future.

Local Development Plan - Proposed Housing Allocation 18

I am a member of Solihull Arden Club and would like to express my objections to the above LDP for the following reasons:
1. Arden Tennis Club Ltd holds the freehold to the land on which the Arden Club is built. Moving the Club onto leasehold land means that the Club has lost its asset.
2. Building anywhere on the proposed LDP would mean loss of Sports Facilities, contrary to the policy of Sport England. Solihull is low down the list nationally for over16 participation in sport. Solihull MBC should be providing more sports facilities, not reducing them.
3. If the land on which Arden Club is situated is built on, members are likely to go elsewhere, possibly making the Club unviable, due to loss of membership fees.
4. The Club is likely to lose approximately 75 parking places, resulting in increased road parking on Sharmans Cross Road and congestion. Building houses anywhere on the proposed site will result in increased congestion along surrounding roads; Streetsbrook Road is already gridlocked from 7.45 till 9.00 each weekday morning.
There will be increased danger to cyclists on the designated cycle route.
5. Building next to the Club will increase noise and car pollution to the Tennis members and neighbours.
6. The drainage is already under pressure: loss of open land for drainage is not acceptable.
7. Trees with TPOs would be lost, as would habitat for wildlife.

I urge Solihull MBC to reject the LDP - Proposed Housing Allocation 18

Proposed Housing Allocation 18

In response to Government requirements to deliver affordable housing, Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council (SMBC) is including in its Local Development Plan (LDP), a development of 100 houses on the rugby ground on Sharmans Cross Road.

Having being a resident of Solihull for over 25 years and a keen believer in local sport for local people I find it extremely worrying that the council are yet again considering developing the former Solihull Bees ground in Sharmans Cross Road. Even more concerning is that this application appears to include the land currently occupied by Solihull Arden of which I am a member and which came as a TOTAL surprise.

I object to the proposal on the following grounds;

1. Suitability - As a resident of Winterbourne Road (No 39) the development will destroy the character of the neighbourhood. The previous proposed development 6 years ago at 80 homes was too much. 100 houses is effectively 5 times the density of property on Winterbourne Rd. This is totally unacceptable and an over development of the site. This will be both out-of-scale and out-of-character in its appearance compared to existing development in the area I live. As this is an increase on previous development proposals I believe that any plan will have to include properties in excess of 3 stories which is unacceptable and would be clearly visible from my property above the houses opposite.
2. Permanent loss of sporting facilities - Both of my children have benefited from the facilities on the current grounds. This is one of five sports grounds at risk in the LDP. My understanding is that Solihull, SMBC has a statutory requirement to ensure lost pitches are replaced with facilities of equivalent quality and accessibility. It is difficult to see how this will be achieved when nearly all of the 10 proposed sites occupy sports land.
3. Use of land - As previously indicated I objected to previous objections and played an active part in the appeal in 2013 where SMBC formally minuted its policy with regard to the use of the grounds only for sport and that they would not sell the freehold. I 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.
4. The developers - Oakmore state in their submission that the distance to the Station is 700m. As I live in Winterbourne Road the fact is it is at least 1000m depending on which route you use. Oakmore also state the Town Centre is 1km walk when in practice it is 1.7Km to Touchwood. This of course assumes that anyone walking to the station / centre would do so via the current pedestrian access to the Arden Club which IS NOT suitable for this level of regular traffic.
Planning Policy P7 stipulates that accessibility is a key issue. For a site to be defined as 'accessible' it has to have certain criteria met which means car dependency is reduced. Oakmore are suggesting that they are meeting this criteria but in order to do so they would need to create an access to the site off Winterbourne Road which would be in the IMMEDIATE vicinity of my property. I find this approach is less than transparent.

Please confirm receipt of my objection BEFORE the deadline on Friday 17th February 2017.

Proposed housing allocation 18

I am writing to register my objections to the proposed housing development of 100 houses off Sherman's cross road. My objections focus on future traffic flows, the ability to absorb 100 more households into the current facilities in the area and the loss of sporting facilities which Solihull council have previously indicated their support to keeping.

Shamans cross road, without additional housing, which I would submit will add 200 more cars to local roads, is already at times dangerous due to traffic and parking. Buses already have to mount the curb to get passed parked cars, additional traffic joining shamans cross road from the new housing will only make this worse, as will the additional school traffic flowing from the proposed new homes ( regardless of what school they go to they will still have to travel along the road and this is most likely to be in cars and not on foot)

The loss of sporting facilities when we are being told that how important fitness is to our health and well being is totally wrong when there must be sites to build new homes which do not take away sporting facilities. Additionally the Solihull council physical activity and sport strategy 2014-19 is to provide and sustain high quality and accessible physical activity and sports facilities. The importance of maintaining the site for sporting activity is further supported from the SMBC minutes of 2013 where the policy to use the grounds for sport and not to sell the freehold allowing other use should also be noted and forms part of my objection to this development

Further it is my submission that local medical centres and schools cannot cope with an additional 200-500 more residents to the area that this development will bring.

Proposed Housing Allocation 18

I write to express my strong objection to the development of 100 houses on the rugby ground on Sharmans Cross Road.

Even at the present time, the traffic in Sharmans Cross Road and Streetsbrook Road is unacceptably high especially during the rush hours, and there is no doubt that the development of new houses will lead to further congestion on our roads.

I have young children who use the roads to walk home from school and I fear that they will be exposed to increased danger with the extra traffic and congestion.

I bought my house at Solihull for a high price, and the price was justified because of the less congested appearance of the area. However the development of a further 100 houses in my neighbourhood is likely to affect the value of my property adversely and I think this is unfair on me and the other home owners.

I hope you will consider these concerns and put a stop to the plans for development of houses on Sharmans Cross Road.

Proposed Housing Allocation 18

To whom it may concern, I am writing to express my concerns and raise my objections to the proposed development on Sharmans Cross Road.

Primarily I am deeply concerned about the increase in traffic in the local area that further housing would definitely bring. In particular the junction of Sharmans Cross Road and Streetsbrook Road is extremely busy which would almost certainly be intensified with further housing in the locality. In addition with schools in the local vicinity e.g. Sharmans Cross Junior School where traffic is already extremely busy at certain times, further development would compound these issues further.
Increased traffic would also be a danger to cyclists as the there are designated cycle routes in this area and pedestrians.

Secondly the loss of this area to housing would reduce the number of sporting facilities in Solihull. Such areas are vital for the health and welfare of future generations and should be preserved.

In addition further housing will also bring an additional strain on services such as schools, doctors and medical facilities in the locality.

I am also concerned about the effect on the environment and wildlife in the area. The area contains a large number of trees with Preservation Orders and building work would severely disrupt much of this.

I would like this application to be rejected in order that Sharmans Cross in Solihull remains a pleasurable place to live. I am happy to discuss any of my concerns in further detail should you wish to contact me.

Proposed Housing Allocation 18 Objection

I wish to formally object to the proposed Housing Allocation 18 which to my understanding is in the region of 100 new dwellings . I think squeezing this many properties into such a small plot is preposterous and well out if proportion to the surrounding homes.
I live live very close to the junction of Sharmons / Streetsbrook / Stonor Park and Dorchester Rd and quite frankly at the moment this is a much congested junction at the best of times . Adding another 100 dwellings will more than likely add 100 plus cars which will happen if this proposal is sanctioned ; not withstanding the additional added pressure on local services .
I used to play on this old sports field and know what the total layout of the site is and as I appreciate there is a shortage of new properties feel that this site should have no more than 30 - 35 properties at the most.

Proposed Housing Allocation 18

I write with reference to the possible development of 100 houses on the rugby ground at Sharmans Cross Road and wish to register my objection to this development.
Over the past 30 years I have lived and brought up a family in the Solihull area the latter 20 years living in Winterbourne Road. My children have been lucky enough to have good sport facilities on their door step and have both excelled in sport, my son in particular playing at county and England school boy level. I find it hard to believe that in an age when we have so many obese children and with their heads stuck in a computer that you hare considering taking away another sporting facility.
This land has stood idle for the last few years because of greedy business men. We know of many football clubs who have tried and failed to rent the ground because of extortionate rents 60K plus. Why is this allowed?
Sport England have found that Solihull is in the 3rd quartile nationally for over 16's participation in sport three times per week and continues to fall in the national league tables this should not happen in an area like this. We should be encouraging all those who want to play sport not taking facilities away.
I believe SMBC minuted in 2013 its policy to the use of the Sharmans Cross land for sport and they would not sell their freehold . I would like reaffirmation of this policy which implies this development is inappropriate for inclusion in the LDP.
Another reason why this development should not go through is due to the increased traffic and pollution. All the roads surrounding this development are grid locked at certain times of the day. Sharmans Cross Rd, Streetsbrook, Dorchester Rd, Blossomfield Rd are all jammed early morning and from school pick up times in the afternoon. How would these roads cope with another 150 plus cars. The roads surrounding this proposed development are totally unsuitable for such an increase in traffic. There would be increased danger to pedestrians, school children and cyclists, a serious effect on highway safety.
As a resident of Solihull, living close to this development I wish my objection to this proposal to be noted.
Please confirm receipt of my objection.

see attached response

see letter

Ref: Proposed Housing Allocation 18

As a resident near the junction with Winterbourne Road I am writing to express my objections regarding the proposed housing development on the old rugby ground on Sharmans Cross Road, Solihull.

My objections are:

1. The development will destroy the character of the area. The housing density proposed is approximately 5 times that of the houses in the Winterbourne Road, Beaminster Road and Dorchester Road area which to me means that the site will be over developed. All the houses in this area are 'owner occupier' whereas I understand that 50% of the proposed development will be 'housing association'

2. The additional traffic, perhaps 200 resident's vehicles, plus deliveries and visitors etc. will lead to increased traffic problems on Sharmans Cross road which is already congested at times with parking by parents delivering and collecting children from the school. The junction of Sharmans Cross Roaf and Streetsbrook Road is already extremely busy and dangerous at peak times and this situation is made worse by the 2 other roads (Stonor Park Road and Dorchester Road) which are very close to it.

3. The potential loss of about 70 parking spaces for the Arden Club will result in parking and the resultant further congestion on Sharmans Cross Road and Winterbourne / Beaminster Road (from where people will be able to access the new site via the footpath from Winterbourne Road to the existing Arden Club facilities).

4. Although I no longer have children of school age I understand that the local schools are already over-subscribed and this development will only exacerbate the situation. The closest doctor's surgery (Northbrook Road) is certainly over-subscribed and it is extremely difficult to get an early appointment when necessary.

5. My own garden floods during heavy rain and increased housing development is likely to worsen the situation.

6. I understand that, in addition to access to the development being from Sharmans Cross Road, the developers (Oakwood) have approached the owner of one of the two houses adjacent to the footpath leading from the Arden Club grounds to Winterbourne Road which is opposite the end of Beaminster Road. I assume that this is because they propose to demolish this house and create an additional access to the site. Were this to be the case, Beaminster Road (which is currently only used by local traffic for Beaminster and Winterbourne Roads) would see a substantial increase in traffic from the development. More significantly, a lot of traffic would probably divert off Sharmans Cross Road (to avoid the busy/dangerous junction with Streetsbrook Road) and go through the new development and down Beaminster Road to join up with Dorchester Road (and visa versa in the opposite direction). Beaminster Road is quite narrow and when cars or delivery vehicles are parked outside houses the traffic often has to weave around them. There are also a lot of young children living in the three roads who would be put at risk when riding bikes or going to and from school etc. Dorchester Road already suffers from high numbers of vehicles (I have regularly counted up to 20 queuing cars when I am walking the dog in the morning) using it to avoid Streetsbrook Road leading up to the traffic lights with Ashleigh Road / Station Approach and the roundabout at the junction with Blossomfield Road.

18 Sharmans Cross Road

I have received your letter about the Proposed Housing Allocation 18 at Sharmans Cross Road
and I have seen the information and studied the plans. There are various concerns that I have
about these.

There is already a Tree Preservation Order on trees on the land between Arden Tennis Club and
houses no.28 to no.36 in Winterbourne Road. T.P.O. No 174. dated 31st March 1989.

I understand that this land should be for sport. SMBC minuted in 2013 that the use of the grounds
was only for sport and that they would not sell the freehold. There is a shortage of pitches in
Solihull, less than the national target and loosing this land would be a loss of sports in the central
town area. The rugby club field is not used at the moment because the rent wanted from the
developers is too high and so clubs are discouraged. The Arden Lawn Tennis Club is a vibrant,
active club with all the facilities it needs and adequate parking and so no cars are left on nearby
roads. It is on freehold land and so has access to assets for building projects. This would be lost if
it was moved to leasehold land. Houses built too near ALTC would suffer from flood lights and
noise from the club.

The amount of housing suggested in this area would be very dense and probably require flats to
make up to a hundred dwellings. This would be totally out of character with the surrounding houses
in the area.

Living in this area I am concerned about all the extra cars turning into Sharmans Cross Road. It is
already a nightmare with cars parking near the school at the beginning and end of the day, with
buses and cars trying to get through.There is no extra capacity in local schools, no infant school
near by, and already overcrowded medical centres. Buses don't run often and the train station is
25-30mins walk away. This would put more cars on Sharmans Cross Road and to the junction with
Streetsbrook Road, already a dangerous junction with queues at busy times.

Proposed Housing Allocation 18

I am most concerned that this development will ad to the already dangerous traffic situation that I witness daily at school arrival and departure time. The arrival of the orthodontist next to the school a few years ago ensures that there are vehicles parked on Sharmans Cross Road from 8 am through to 6pm Monday to Friday.
It is now common practise for vehicles to mount the pavement on the even numbered side of the road and travel past several house without slowing down. It is only a matter of time before a child is injured as mothers compete for pavement with vehicles. Obtaining a medical appointment can currently take several weeks and can only get worse.
Sharmans Cross Road requires less traffic not more if it is not to come to a standstill at rush hours.

Proposed Housing Allocation 18

My objections are related to the infra-structure necessary, vital, to support any such development, indeed to proceed with Proposed Housing Allocation 18 without SMBC positively addressing the infra-structure issues would be grossly irresponsible.

The infra-structure necessary includes local medical facilities. Local surgeries are already oversubscribed and further demands would simply degrade the current level of service to local residents. Where are the plans for additional local surgeries within 1 - 2 kilometer range of the development?

Is there availability of places in local schools, at all levels from pre-school to six form? Is there a dearth of places available to cope with an increased demand from families in such a development or is this proposed development not designed for families? How many new schools are planned for and their locations?

Sharmans Cross Road is a busy local thoroughfare and bus route with a junior school and sports clubs. The road is very busy during peak times and when the sports clubs are in use. Parking during these times restricts the width of the road to at best a single track with considerable hold ups caused by buses and lorries competing with cars for the reduced space available. The pavement is a designated cycle route, however, with many vehicles parking on the pavement, pedestrians and cyclists compete for the reduced space. Rarely a day goes past without a number of emergency services vehicles using the road with the potential for delays during busy times. Any significant increase in traffic would simply exacerbate the problems on an already very busy, and potentially dangerous, road. Although the road has a junior school there are no traffic calming measures which means drivers can and do exceed the speed limit.

At peak times the junction of Sharmans Cross Road/Streetsbrook Road/Stonor Park Road/Dorchester Road is very busy resulting in long queues. Streetsbrook Road traffic is usually backed-up from the junction with Station Approach. Any increase in local traffic, inevitable with the proposed development, would exacerbate the problem. Any suggestion that all the residents would use public transport or walk is fanciful.

Sharmans Cross Road is susceptible to flooding, manifested at the junction with Streetsbrook Road. A development, of the scale proposed, would worsen the problem.

Other points, not necessarily infra-structure, include:-

I reasonably assume that any such development would require an Environmental/Ecological Survey. I have seen badgers, and other wild life, in the area and assume their habitats would be protected as required by an Environmental/Ecological Survey.

In 2013 SMBC had a minuted policy supported by all political parties that they would not sell the freehold or lift the covenant that the ground should only be used for sporting purposes. These are still in place. I seek confirmation that these policies for the old Rugby Ground will remain in place.

SMBC has a statutory requirement to ensure lost pitches are replaced with facilities of equivalent quality and accessibility. Perhaps SMBC would care to provide details of their plans in place to provide the replacement facilities.

Regarding the submission, reference 16/109, dated September 2016, by CERDA Planning, on behalf of Oakmoor (Sharmans Cross) Ltd and Arden Lawn Tennis Club Ltd. It is my understanding that the directors of Arden Lawn Tennis Club Ltd have stated publicly that they were not party to this submission. As a result of that statement surely the submission should be disregarded?

I reasonably assume that access to, movement within and exit from the development in a forward gear would apply to Amey refuse/recycling collection vehicles. If parking is on road as opposed to frontage or garages then this vital Council service may be impaired to the extent of being impractical.

Proposed Housing Allocation 18

We wish to add our strong objection to the proposed development of 100 houses on Sharmans Cross Road:-

It would certainly be obvious that the increased traffic would cause massive hold ups and especially at school drop off and pick up times. The safety of children being a top priority whether they are being driven, cycling or walking to the school entrance gates on Sharmans Cross Road.

It would appear that the volume and style of the proposed development would be totally out of character for the area and as there is such a shortage of available sports grounds, facilities and pitches in Solihull this plot should be kept for those purposes. This development would require the removal and cutting down of long established mature trees and growth - therefore destroying open space which has been enjoyed by many over the years.

Our local schools and medical surgeries are presently at bursting point and full to capacity and it would be impossible to accommodate all the extra numbers that a large housing development would require.

Once again, I strongly object to this proposal being put forward and hope Solihull Council do not approve this application.

I write to register my strong objection to this site being included in the LDP. The submission from Cerda Planning/Oakmoor is just another rehash of planning applications previously refused on overwhelming evidence of the unsuitability and availability of this site.

I have many grounds for these objections, but the principal ones include:

Loss of open space and sporting facilities - Solihull has seen a huge loss of open spaces and sports facilities located within the local communities over the last thirty years or so, during which time its population has grown rapidly. Its level of recreational open space and sporting facilities is now critically low, and this proposal will destroy yet another treasured open space whilst increasing the localities population. In terms of availability, a key point is that the majority of the site is covenanted for sporting use, and 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. So why is it repeatedly being put forward for development when its availability has already been debated, decided and refused.

Loss of a nature rich site -The site also hosts diverse flora and fauna with natural areas of vegetation adjacent to a woodland providing homes for a wide variety of wildlife. The area is also home to many species of wild birds including those that are not so common which I have seen regularly, such as woodpeckers, hawks and falcons. The area is also home to bats which are a delight to observe on a summer evening.
The scale of the intrusion of building works is sure to alarm and displace this wildlife , and the encroachment of this intense development will have a serious negative impact on the bio-diversity of the area.

Suitability and density of development - The development will destroy the residential character of the neighbourhood. The one hundred houses proposed is effectively 5 times the density of surrounding properties on Sharmans Cross, Winterbourne and Welcombe Grove. 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.

Access and traffic issues - the increase in traffic generated by the development will cause serious overloading of the already busy junctions of Sharmans Cross Road, giving increased queue lengths at rush hour both at the grid locked Solihull Road Junction and the Prospect Lane Island. The level of pollution for residents on these main roads will also increase.
The additional junction is almost opposite Woodside Way, so the added complexity in the traffic flow at this point increases accident risk.
The road includes a junior school and there will be a significant increase in risk to the pupils and parents making their way to school, particularly those on foot or cycling.

Complete lack of adequate parking - the development will give rise at a conservative estimate to an additional 160-180 additional vehicles. The development itself is unlikely to provide enough parking capacity and cars will inevitably line the roads of the development and spill onto Sharmans Cross road itself, again adding another increment to the traffic dangers. The area also already has to cope with day long parking for Solihull workers.
Also the existing site provides overflow for Solihull Arden Tennis club, and the loss of overflow parking for the Tennis Club will add hugely to the parking problem, with residents and club users being put at loggerheads fighting for parking space.

Drainage and Flooding - Sharmans Cross road does suffer from an inadequate drainage, and is prone to flooding. The drainage requirements of these additional dwellings will add to the overload the drainage systems.

In summary, please be in no doubt as to the strength of my feelings and opposition to these proposals. I will certainly take all actions legally available to prevent any development of this open space proceeding.

Proposed Housing Allocation 18

I record my objections to the above Proposed Housing Allocation.

The density to reach 100 "dwellings" is in excess of 5 times the existing local density.

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.

It is inevitable, to achieve the density, that some dwellings will be flats, probably 2 or 3 floors leading to loss of light, loss of privacy and overshadowing.

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/Streetsbrook Road/Stonor Park Road/Dorchester Road junction, inevitable increase of traffic on side roads.

Danger to pedestrians, in particular unaccompanied children going to/from Sharmans Cross Junior School and secondary schools.

Assuming this proposed development is designed for families, there are no surgeries, with vacancies, available within a reasonable distance.

Do the local schools have places available for a development of this scale?

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. I would like reaffirmation of this policy which implies that this development is inappropriate for inclusion in the LDP.

Accessibility requires there to be frequent (defined as every 15 minutes) bus services to e.g.the station and the town centre. Oakmoor suggest this criteria is met by bus services nos. 3, S3 and S3W. These provide a half hourly service Mon to Sat and hourly on Sundays.
Regarding the submission, reference 16/109, dated September 2016, by CERDA Planning, on behalf of Oakmoor (Sharmans Cross) Ltd and Arden Lawn Tennis Club Ltd. It is my understanding that the directors of Arden Lawn Tennis Club Ltd have stated publicly that they were not party to this submission. As a result of that statement surely the submission should be disregarded?

Proposed Housing Allocation 18 - Sharmans Cross Road

Re: Proposed use of Sports Pitches at Sharmans Cross Road for Housing.

I would like to express my objection to the above proposal for the following reasons;

1. There is a current need (which will only increase as the housing density of Solihull increases) for sports pitches, I believe that the pitches concerned at this site would have been utilised many times over if the current leaseholder was not holding out for planning permission. These are excellent quality pitches which are not easily replaced.
2. The density of housing which is proposed is totally out of character with the area and the local infrastructure would need significant and costly upgrading to cope
3. POW Grove, which is a SINC next to the proposed site, would potentially be seriously adversely affected by any development here

LDP - Proposed Housing Allocation 18

The application to build 100 houses on the ex rugby club and Solihull Arden Club (S.A.C.) grounds was submitted by Oakmoor Ltd and Arden Lawn Tennis Club Ltd. (A.L.T.C.L.) It should be noted that the Freehold to the land on which S.A.C is located is owned by A.L.T.C.L., not S.A.C.. The Directors of A.L.T.C.L. were not party to this submission. Oakmoor have acted in an underhand if not illegal manor in this respect.
Although on the surface the offer of building a new club and facilities for S.A.C. on the Leasehold rugby club land might appear tempting to some, the value os would in no way compensate for the value of the A.L.T.C.L. land. To move from Freehold land to Leasehold would be, in the longer term, financial suicide for the club as they would be left with no land asset to support any future bank loan type requirements.
As a member of the club for more than 30 years, I object to the Oakmoor proposal for the two reasons stated above.

I have tried and failed to access the online response facility for responses to the Draft local Plan despite having registered for the purpose and am using this route which is indicated as a simpler method of contact to make the following
points:

LDP - Proposed Housing Allocation 18

I am writing on behalf of Silhill Football Club members, most of who live in Solihull, to comment on the Draft Local Plan which has recently been the subject of consultation. We own the freehold of the club premises and two full sized football pitches at Sharmans Cross Road and have been at this location since the mid-1920s. We also lease a full-size pitch at Hockley Heath Pavilion on a seasonal basis and a small-size pitch at Bentley Heath CofE School for two younger teams. In all we have 5 adult teams and 5 youth teams. Solihull Moors Girls u15s also use one of our adult pitches for their home fixtures. We are well aware of the significant demand for better quality small-size sports pitches in Solihull, not just from our own club.

We were concerned to learn of the relaxation of the planning guidelines with regard to the protection of sports pitches within the current Local Plan and objected to that. Our concerns are heightened by the concerted, damaging proposals to identify sports pitches throughout the borough for development. In the case of the former Solihull Rugby Club pitches and associated land, adjoining Solihull Arden Club at one side and our own club at the other, we are doubly concerned. This site is in an area of residential development where the few sports pitches that remain are a key aspect of the health and well-being of all the population and once lost will be gone forever. This is an unnecessary policy move and is counter to other policies for the area which seek to promote healthy activity and personal responsibility.

Flooding already is a major concern in the area and the proposed development is likely to worsen that. The drainage for the sports fields is often inadequate and developments are very likely to cause further problems of extreme water-logging.

We have noted that no real attempt has been made to keep the rugby pitches in use or to involve other sports and that contact to the organisations involved in the land has been ignored. We understand that Sport England may not be able to lodge an objection on current use grounds given the time which has elapsed since the land was used for rugby and believe that these two factors are clearly connected.

Oakmoor/Solihull Arden Club Land at former rugby club on Sharmans Cross Road LDP proposed housing allocation 18

I write to cite my objections to the proposed land development at the above site. I own and live in Woodside Way and have done so for over 26 years. We live at the Sharmans Cross end and therefore only a short distance from this proposed development.
My objections include the following;
1. As I understand it the plan is for 100 homes. There is already a traffic congestion problem not only on the junction of Sharmans Cross Road with Streetsbrook Road but also at peak times at the junction of Woodside Way with Sharmans Cross Road. This is exacerbated by the fact that the Sharmans Cross end of Woodside Way is in effect a one way street due to the parking of cars by people either using the station or working in Solihull. The council has been contacted about this problem numerous times over many years and has failed to take any action by way of a yellow line. If this development were to go ahead, and I think the number of cars would be at least 2 per household, then the strain in these junctions would be intolerable and unsafe. There is a school nearby and the access is also used by people using the tennis club. There is a likelihood also that because of the likely congestion that drivers would try to use Woodside Way as cut through and again this would be dangerous because of the effective one way street.
Is this area also not a designated cycle route?
2. Would not Solihull Arden lose a significant number of parking spaces? This again would increase dangerous parking on both Sharmans Cross Road and Woodside Way.
3. We were present at the extremely well attended meeting of the Sharmans X Action group in relation to this application. It was very disappointing to be hear that various attempts had been made unsuccessfully by local sporting groups to use the land owned by Oakmoor despite the fact that I understand that this land has been designated for sporting use and that Oakmoor did write to SMBC in
2007/8 stating that the ground would be used for sporting purposes. The Council in 2013 did minute its policy that this land would be used for sporting purposes only. The Council has already refused one application for this site and another has been withdrawn.
The provision of sporting pitches in Solihull is poor on a nationwide survey. There are 5 applications before the council of this nature and this will seriously deplete the stock of available sites. Once this land goes for housing it is gone and cannot be reclaimed. Surely there is no point in building many extra houses if there are reduced facilities to support the new residents. Sporting facilities are extremely important especially for the young and should not be solely available by way of private clubs.
4. There is a high risk of flooding in the event of this development. The old Streets brook runs along the end of our garden and the local gardens are very prone to flooding in wet weather. With climate change and the high density of the proposed development this situation could only get worse.
5. The NPPF requires developments to have access to amenities within 800 metres/10 minutes walk. The site is 1700 metres from Solihull town centre and 1000 metres from the station so these criteria are not met.
6. There is a very high density proposed on this site. I understand more than 5 times that of adjoining roads. This will not only totally change the nature of the area but will put excessive strain on roads, local health services and schools. To fit in such a high density some properties will inevitably be over 2 floors thus resulting in a loss of privacy to current residents
7. There will be an increased risk of pollution from stationary cars waiting in queues to firstly get onto Sharmans Cross Road and then onto Streetsbrook Road. This area is used by cyclists and children and parents walking to the local primary school.
Can you please acknowledge receipt of this objection and keep me fully up to date with any developments.

Development of 100 Houses on Sharmans Cross Road Solihull

I am writing to you to express my concerns with the proposal for a development of 100 houses on the rugby ground on Sharmans Cross Road, Solihull.

There are numerous reasons why this application should not be granted permission to proceed:

1. The pollution issue is a real concern, in fact evidence of this is obvious in looking that the residues left on plants on Sharmans Cross road (Black deposits)
2. This is a school road, the additional traffic and pollution is not good for this school.
3. A particular concern is the continued loss of sporting facilities. With sport being such a high profile push in all areas. This cannot be an acceptable decision.
a. Also any attempts to get greater use for sport from this facility, appears to be blocked through lack of engagement by lease owners.
b. We should be encouraging all young people (and others) to engage in sport, without facilities this cannot happen.
4. My understanding is that SMBC had made commitments and has a policy stating that these grounds would only be used for sport, has this policy changed.
5. The area already has a high level of traffic, an additional 100 houses will significantly add to this issue, especially at peak times.


Please reconsider this application and take into account from above just a few of the issues this would create.

LDP-Proposed Housing Allocation 18

I wish to object to the proposed development of 100 houses on the rugby ground Sharmans Cross Road.

I believe that the site is not large enough to accommodate 100 houses of a size and type which would maintain the character of the houses in the surrounding area.

In addition the increased volume of traffic will cause significant congestion and represent a safety hazard feeding onto what is a very busy road.

LDP - Proposed House Allocation 18

As a member of Solihull Arden Tennis Club (SAC), I am objecting to this LDP proposal for the following reasons:
Pollution/Traffic
* Sharman's Cross Road is already gridlocked during peak times, therefore, additional housing/cars would only exacerbate this problem. The adjacent school and football ground would also be affected and safety standards compromised.
* The proposal for 2/3 storey houses would decrease light and privacy to SAC members and residents, as well as concerns with regards to the preservation order on the beautiful trees and local wildlife.
* The LDP would also reduce 75 car parking spaces belonging to the SAC which is unacceptable.
* As I learnt at the recent Residents' Meeting, it is also proposed to incorporate community facilities within the SAC which I also object to as this would lose the SAC identity as a private members club.
In conclusion, I sincerely hope that the LDP will be rejected as it has been twice before.

Reference: LDP - Proposed Housing Allocation 18 (adjacent Sharmans Cross Rd)

As a local resident and member of Solihull Arden Club, I wish to object to the inclusion in the Local Development Plan of a proposed development of 100 dwellings on the site of the rugby ground off Sharmans Cross Rd for the following reasons:

1. Use of land - The current SMBC policy, that the land (previously used for rugby) should be restricted for sporting use, should be reaffirmed and the freehold retained with this in mind. Solihull is short of sports fields and rates poorly, nationally and comparison with its peers, in terms of participation in sport. Removal of the threat of housing development would facilitate the return of the land to active use for sporting activities. The good geographical accessibility of the site would be particularly advantageous by minimising travelling for participants.

2. Increased traffic congestion - The vast majority of additional traffic from the proposed development would travel via Streetsbrook Rd or Damson Lane/Prospect Rd. Peak time congestion on these roads is already spiralling out of control with no meaningful prospect of relief. Additionally, the immediately adjacent Sharmans Cross Rd suffers from peak time congestion due to Sharmans Cross School with associated danger to pedestrians.

3. Suitability of proposed development - The proposed 100 homes on such a small site represents unacceptable overdevelopment that is out-of-scale and out-of-character with the surrounding mature suburb.

4. Overload of local facilities - Local schools and medical facilities are already oversubscribed. Further development would merely worsen the problem.

Proposed Housing Allocation 18

I wish to oppose the Local Development Plan for the building of 100 houses on the Rugby Ground site in Sharmans Cross Road, Solihull.

The proposals for such a high density of houses which is approximately 5 times the density of adjacent housing would be completely out of keeping with the surrounding area and take away from Solihull residents the beneficial effects of this green space asset. If this open space is taken away it will never be replaced, countering the recognised benefits of retaining sports ground and parkland within town and urban areas for the health and well being for the community now and for generations to come.

Additional road traffic from the proposed development would create accessibility problems to Sharmans Cross Road and overwhelm the current road infrastructure system in the area, causing road traffic congestion and increase the risk to pedestrians and cyclists ( especially school children from Sharmans Cross Road Junior School ). It would almost certainly require major road work improvements at the junction of Sharmans Cross Road and Streetsbrook Road. It is difficult to see how the allocation of " 50 affordable houses " on the site might restrict anticipated car park demand when any houses in this location are likely to attract premium prices and therefore owners able to afford to own more than at least one car per household.

Other aspects of infrastructure such as school places, medical facilities and storm water and sewerage systems would not cope without hugely expensive ( to Solihull Council ) improvements and alterations to the already stretched existing services.

The impact of the proposal on wildlife in the area and adjacent Pow Grove would be extremely damaging and further destroy the character of the area.

In conclusion, I would suggest that the plans for this site do not meet accessibility, sustainability and suitability for planning guidelines.