18 Solihull - Sharmans Cross Road

LDP - Proposed Housing Allocation 18

I am writing to object to the proposal to build 100 houses on the rugby ground on Sharman's Cross Road. I am very concerned about the density of the housing on this site, and what this would mean for local traffic (particularly from an intersection with Sharman's Cross Road) and for associated pressure on local services - such as schools and GP practices. I'm also concerned that this level of housing would inevitably lead to more on-street parking in the surrounding area causing additional danger to pedestrians and other road users, and delays to traffic.

I am saddened that the proposal will mean the loss of yet more sporting facilities in our town - as the father of 2 young boys this would mean fewer available facilities close to home.

LDP - Proposed Housing Allocation18

With regards to the above proposal, I feel I must place on record my objections.
In recent years there has been a lot of concern about various proposals to develop this site by residents living in the area. In particular, some of my concerns are as follows:-
Some time ago at great expense a pumping station was installed at the road junction of Beaminster Road and Dorchester Road in order to prevent houses in Arley Road becoming flooded with sewage. Therefore one of my concerns is that any additional loading on the existing drainage system may have some undesirable consequences down the line that could take years to sort out.
I also understand that the Developers are hoping to create an exit from the development site, by acquiring a house/s adjacent to the path that leads into the tennis club to allow traffic from the 100 houses to use it thus, avoiding going onto Sharmans Cross Road and in effect make Winterbourne and Beaminster Road a 'rat run', like Dorchester Road has now become a short cut from Streetsbook Road heading into Solihull town, this is a result of an increased traffic volume.
Beaminster Road and Winterbourne Road are quite narrow and with increased traffic along them, it would make these roads hazardous because of any parked vehicles on them, which will prevent simultaneous two-way traffic and in addition, resident's cars which are emerging from their drives may result in traffic accidents.
One only has to look at the present problems that occur in Beaminster Road and Dorchester Road at any time there is a function at Tudor Grange complex i.e. Firework night. On these occasions it is almost impossible to get ambulances or fire engines up the roads if required.
All the roads in this area would be unsuitable for the construction vehicles during the construction period especially Sharmans Cross Road with the school and amount of children in the vicinity. This would also be a problem with increased traffic flow if the construction were to go ahead.
The junction of Sharmans Cross, Streetsbrook, and Dorchester Road is a difficult junction at the best of times and any increase in traffic will only make this a bigger problem and increase the number of accidents that have occurred there.

Proposed Housing Allocation 18

I wish to register my objection to the proposed housing allocation 18 and planning application.

It would be unsuitable for such an intense development to occur in this location as the density is out of keeping with the character of the neighbourhood, which consists of detached and semi-detached houses.

The traffic in Sharmans Cross Road, and surrounding roads, including Solihull town centre is already at grid lock point at certain times. I live in Sharmans Cross Road and work in Homer Road in the town centre. I have experienced it taking me an hour by car to get home on occasion, which is outrageous when the distance is just a mile. I have a bike but am extremely reluctant to use it for work as the traffic is far too bad for me to feel confident enough to cycle on these roads, which have little effective provision for cycling. I walk from time to time but it is uncomfortable breathing the heavy traffic fumes.

Solihull cannot cope with the traffic levels as they are currently, it will destroy further the quality of life within Solihull if more traffic, be it cars or public transport is added to the already congested roads.

The traffic around Sharmans Cross Junior school is a major problem. I have witnessed cars, buses and lorries mounting the pavement to get around oncoming traffic. Pedestrians on the pavement and cars reversing from drives onto the road are put in considerable danger.

The additional housing would also put even more pressure on already oversubscribed schools and medical centres with the locality.

Given the ever increasing volume of deliveries from internet shopping, the additional traffic to cover a further 100 households would be overwhelming.

Sharmans Cross Road has problems with flooding in heavy rain and it would be short sighted to worsen this problem with increased development.

Given the problems with traffic pollution in the area, it would be inadvisable to remove valuable green spaces from near the centre of Solihull.

I would like to know that Solihull Council will not renege on their agreement in 2013 to uphold the covenant that the grounds should only be used for sport and they would not sell the freehold.

Amongst other species, there are badgers, foxes and bats (all having been sighted in sharmans Cross Road by myself) living within the area and these will all lose valuable habitat should this development be instigated.

It would seem short sighted to lose valuable facilities very close to Solihull Town Centre. Once land is built on, it will be lost forever and the green open spaces and tree lined roads which characterise this area and attracts people into the town will be lost.

I am emailing to object to the development of 100 houses on Sharmans Cross Road.

My reasons for objecting are as follows:
* Sharmans Cross Road is already a very busy road, especially in peak periods. The junction of Sharmans Cross and Streetsbrook road is particularly hazardous with traffic joining from multiple directions. I have serious concerns as to whether the road could cope with any additional traffic and the impact it would have on the area.
* Linked to the above, there is considerable on-street parking on Sharmans Cross, especially at school drop off/collection times for the local junior school. Additional traffic would exacerbate the existing pressure on that road, causing further bottlenecks and congestion
* We should particularly be mindful of the additional traffic given the location of the school, with children crossing. If building work was undertaken on this site, that would also increase danger to the children and their families driven by construction traffic
* Local schools are already over-subscribed - if this development was to go ahead, what investment are your proposing to increase school places?
* Medical centres are also over subscribed. We are registered with the practice on Northbrook road, where you can wait for over a month for a non emergency appointment
* This land has been designated for sport only and the council has previously made this commitment. As a parent, I would be very disappointed at the further loss of sporting facilities in the area when we are all trying to ensure our children have healthy, active lives
* The proposed size of this development is excessive and completely out of proportion with the local area.

PRoposed Housing Allocation 18

I wish to make you aware of a number of strong objections that My husband and I have with regards to the proposed development as a resident of Sharmans Cross Road:

1/ Traffic will increase drastically with the addition of such a large development which in turn will have an impact on parking on Sharmans cross road especially with the loss of 70 odd car parking spaces within the Arden Club.

2/ The traffic will put more pressure on the junction of Sharmans Cross Road with Streetsbrook Road / Stonor Park Road/ Dorchester Road. I have witnessed several near collisions at this juncture already.

2/ 100 dwellings in such a close proximity is not in keeping with the character of our beautiful neighbourhood. I do not feel that the development will fit in with the scale and proportion of surrounding properties.

3/in 2013 SMBC formally agreed that the grounds would be used for sports only and that the freehold would not be sold are they now renaging on this, at a time when obesity in this country is at its highest levels?

4/ I have regular visitors from foxes, hedgehogs in my garden, my worry is that the natural habitat of the local wildlife will deminish especially as mature protected trees will be cut down to make way for this development.

Flooding on Sharmans cross road is an increasing problem, a development of this size can only increase this problem going forward

Proposed Housing Allocation 18

I write to object to the above proposed scheme on the following basis :-.

1. Loss of land available for sporting facilities at a time when obesity is acknowledged as a growing nationwide problem.

2. Was not this parcel of land specifically earmarked for leisure activities? If so how is it that this site is now likely to be considered as a housing development especially as there is a covenant on this land.

3. The building of 100 houses would inevitably be totally out of character with other houses in the vicinity since the density would be so much greater than the existing houses. The inclusion of "affordable houses" would further mark out this site as completely "odd ball" and it would likely include three storied properties.

4. There will be a substantial increase in the number of vehicles entering the busy Sharmans Cross Road, more particularly at peak traffic flow times. This road is already strained both at Streetsbrook road junction and at the Prospect Lane/Danford Lane junction.
Traffic entering Sharmans Cross from the new development will create a particularly dangerous hazard for children making their way to school on that side of the road, on foot or by bicycle.

5. The availability of parking spaces on the site will certainly not be enough for the vehicle requirement. Parking will be sought in nearby roads. On a typical "working day" some 14 vehicles are crammed into the top section of Woodside Way,This situation made worse in recent months by 3 vehicles from Sharmans Cross Road permanently parked, presumably due to insufficient space on their owners' drives or possibly just for convenience in obviating the need to "shuffle"cars around on home territory. This "off-site" parking phenomenon will surely increase given the probable shortfall of spaces on the new development. Vehicles entering Woodside Way from Sharmans Cross Road have but a split second in which to decide to proceed along the road or to wait for oncoming traffic - in so doing they leave little room behind them for other vehicles that may be following. It is potentially fraught with danger if a following vehicle should be brought to a halt but yet still partly on Sharmans Cross.

6. The drainage problems experienced in Sharmans Cross Road are I'm sure well known to the Council members, so I ask the question - Will not this problem inevitably be worsened by this development ?

Proposed Housing Allocation 18

We have lived at our current address for almost 6 years. We both work in the local area and chose Solihull as the place we wanted to move to to bring up our two children aged 6 and 3. We are also members of the Solihull Arden Club.

I have recently reviewed the Solihull Draft Local Plan (DLP) and was alarmed to see proposed housing allocation 18 for 100 homes at Sharmans Cross Road.

In response to Q15 in the DLP I do not agree that building 100 homes at Sharmans Cross Road is appropriate and my strong view is that it should be removed from the proposal allocation in the final version of the plan. I object to the site's inclusion for the following reasons:

1. Increased traffic

The roads around the proposed site cannot cope with the additional traffic that 100 new homes would bring. At rush hour times and other busy periods during week days and at weekends, it is virtually impossible to turn right out of Dorchester Road onto the Streetsbrook Road, for example. Similarly, it is almost impossible to turn right out of Sharmans Cross Road onto the Streetsbrook Road.

100 new homes would bring at least 100 if not 200 (with 2 cars per household) of additional traffic. This would have a serious impact on highway safety and increase the risk of accidents to pedestrians (in particular, children walking to Sharmans Cross junior school and other local secondary schools), cyclists (I understand that the Streetsbrook road is a designated cyclist route) and other road users. I have witnessed accidents on both of the junctions I mention above and I am very concerned about the dangerous impact of increased traffic in the area.

2. Permanent loss of sporting facilities

I understand that Oakmoor Developments has made joint representations with Arden Lawn Tennis Club Limited to the Council (September 2016) as to why the development should be included and why it supports what the Council is trying to achieve. To be clear, as a member of the Solihull Arden Club we have not been consulted with in relation to the proposed development and whilst I appreciate that this is an internal issue for the club, it is important that the Council is aware of this issue as the representations set out in the September 2016 document do not take into account the views of the club's members. I also attended a meeting on 30 January 2016 at the Solihull Arden Club where a director of Arden Lawn Tennis Club made it clear that no officers of the company had been party to the document setting out the representations.

The proposal includes the sale of the Solihull Arden Club site to Oakmoor and the club being relocated to the rugby pitches. I simply do not understand the rationale or the need for this other than Oakmoor wishing to maximise profit from the proposed site. The members of the Arden Tennis Club would gain a new facility but:
* the previous site of the Solihull Arden Club would be covered with houses and this land could not be used for sporting purposes going forwards;
* the new Arden club would be built on part of the rugby pitches but the rest of that land which could currently be used for sporting purposes by the wider community would be built on. This would destroy what could be used for community sport for all generations for a variety of sports for years to come;
* the development would result in cramped parking as the club would lose approximately 75 parking spaces - this adds further to the concerns set out under 1 above;
* it removes the potential for any development of the Solihull Arden Club and any other integrated sports facility offering on the whole site in the future (for example, as in Hampton in Arden which forms a fantastic and key focal point for all members of the local community - cricket, hockey, tennis etc).

3. Health and supporting local communities

Oakmoor mentions in its representations that the site has been derelict and subject to vandalism for at least 6 years. My understanding from a recent meeting I attended of the Sharmans Cross Action Group is that Oakmoor has rejected any requests from local sports teams to use the site and where they have had conversations, there have been extortionate demands for rent for the use of the two pitches.

Section 11 of the DLP deals with Health and Supporting Local Communities. One of the key points made is that any developments will be expected to promote, support and enhance physical and mental health and well being. It goes on to say that healthy lifestyles will be enabled by "supporting the retention and protection of facilities which promote healthy lifestyles such as open space, including public rights of way to open space, playing pitches and allotments".

Maintaining the land at Sharmans Cross Road as sporting pitches falls squarely within the above objective. The rugby pitches are one of five sporting grounds at risk in the DLP. The Council's Health and Wellbeing strategy 2016-2019 has as one of its priorities tackling childhood obesity and one of the ways to tackle this is to increase the uptake of physical activity amongst children. Having sport pitches in the local area which can be used by local youth and adult teams is key in achieving this. The local state primary schools lack green space for the children to take part in sporting activities and having sports pitches which the children could use is vital in getting them engaged in sport from a young age.

The Council minuted in its 2013 policy that the grounds would only be used for sport and the freehold would not be sold. This implies that the site was and still is inappropriate for inclusion in the local development plan.


4. Suitability

Building 100 houses on the site would be approximately 5 times the density of the houses on Winterbourne Road. The development would destroy the character of the neighbourhood. This is an unacceptable overdevelopment of the site and would be out -of - character with the existing housing in the vicinity. I understand that the previous planning application including houses of 3 stories which is totally out of keeping with the rest of the neighbourhood. This would inevitably result in loss of privacy and light.

5. Sustainability

I understand that the National Planning Policy Framework requires developments to have access to local amenities within 800m/10 minutes walk. The representations made by Oakmoor (September 2016) state that the site is located within 700m of Solihull Railway Station and approximately 1km from the town centre. I walk to the station for my commute and to the town centre on a regular basis and both of these measurements are understated. The station is at least 1km from the site and the town centre (Mell Square) more likely to be 2km (even the John Lewis entrance to touchwood is further than 1km).

5. Schools and Medical centres

Having two children of primary school age, I am very aware of the shortage of primary spaces. Similarly with GPs, whilst efforts have been made at our local surgery to increase the availability of appointments, this is still far from perfect and it is very difficult to get routine appointments. Amenities such as these are already oversubscribed and the proposed development would further impact on this without bringing benefits to the wider community (with the retention of what could be a fantastic sports facility in the form of the rugby pitches).

6. Conclusion

Putting 100 houses on this site is not, in my view, an appropriate way of contributing to to the housing need in Solihull. Whilst I understand the need for development in the borough (and there are a number of much higher volume sites available in the borough), this should not come at the price of sporting facilities which could benefit the wider community as a whole (which in itself would help the Council deliver its other key objectives of promoting health and well-being in the borough). In addition, the development should not be shoe-horned into a site which is not appropriate for development because of the detrimental impact it will have on the local area as a result of:
* increased traffic which with it brings significant highway safety issues;
* pressure on local services which are already oversubscribed;
* the overdevelopment of the site.

LDP -Proposed Housing Allocation 18

We would like to object to the proposed housing development as we believe the area should remain as a sporting facility for the surrounding community.

We think that whilst the government want to increase areas for housing it is more important for green spaces to remain protected for the enjoyment of children and their families as this helps to create a safer neighbourhood to live in. Children in particular need local open spaces to meet friends and enjoy safe sport.

To build 100 homes on the site would destroy the character of the area and block out light for many current home owners. The proposed area is an environment which has many mature trees with preservation orders and is a habitat to many woodland creatures, why destroy it now?

We already have problems with traffic on the Sharmans Cross Road and if this development was to be passed then it would only increase noise and pollution . During peak times in the morning and evenings surrounding roads are already chaotic and at times dangerous not only for motorists but for pedestrians and cyclists too.

I am writing to object to LDP-Proposed Housing Allocation 18. I strongly object to this proposed plan to build 100 houses and relocate the tennis club being put forward as part of the local development plan. My reasons are as follows:-

1. There is a covenant on this land stating it should be used for sporting facilities. As there is a shortage in our borough of land for use by amateur football teams and rugby teams , I think this covenant should be upheld by the council as it did several years ago when Oakmoor previously proposed a building development on this site. I understand they have since refused to rent the land to amateur teams.

2. With 100 proposed houses being built on such a sized plot of land, it will mean some of the properties will be 3 stories high and will overlook houses in the vicinity and will be completely out of keeping with properties in the area.

3. Access of traffic on to Sharmans Cross Road will cause more gridlock of traffic which is already happening during rush hours and school times. The junction of Sharmans Cross Road/Streetsbrook Road is already a dangerous junction and extra cars will only aggravate the situation.

4. Parking on the adjoining road of Woodside Way is now unacceptable. Fourteen cars are parked there most weekdays which ,makes driving in and out of this road dangerous and also we cannot exit our drive safely as they restrict the view completely of any oncoming traffic. Residents have already complained to the local highways department, without any success. The road is used for overnight parking by residents of Sharmans Cross Road and I am sure this will increase if this building proposal is allowed to go ahead as there will not be enough parking spaces designated for the volume of new homes and Woodside Way will be used for overflow parking for residents and visitors to this new development.

5. The local Doctors and schools are already oversubscribed and will struggle to cope with an increase in demand.

6. The houses in Sharmans Cross Road opposite this development and also our back garden have problems with excess water and flooding in their back gardens and any extra building will only add to this problem.

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

I am writing to object to the proposed development plan. With my wife I have lived in Woodside Way, 200 yards from the proposed development, for 26 years and therefore have considerable local knowledge.
My objections centre on the deleterious effects of the increased population density and loss of sporting facilities.
1. Children in the proposed area have no infant school within 1 mile and older children have, currently, no places available at any level
2. Local GP surgeries have no spare capacity for extra patients.
3. The area is poorly served by local transport.
4. Traffic congestion is severe, at present,particularly between7.30 and 9.30 AM with a bottleneck at the Sharmans Cross Rd. and Streetsbrook Rd. junction. The extra cars will exacerbate this and increase further the air pollution caused by slowly moving traffic.
5. Parking on nearby roads especially Woodside Way, which has been rendered effectively a one way road because of commuter parking at the Sharmans Cross end, is already a problem and the proposed development would only make this worse.
6. The further loss of sporting pitches is to be deplored particularly when the boroughwide provision of pitches is already poor. Once pitches such as these are lost they will be unable to be regained. These pitches are particularly close to the centre of Solihull and easily accessible to many people.
7. 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.
Can you please acknowledge receipt of this objection,

see letter and various appendices supporting site land - between no. 39 and 79 Earlswood Road (The Paddock) and The Orchard, 79 Earlswood Road, Dorridge

LDP - Proposed Housing Allocation 18

I am writing to object to the proposed development of building 100 homes on land adjacent to Sharman's Cross Road.

I have been a resident of Winterbourne Road for over 20 years and feel this development will not be consistent with the character of the area. I am also concerned for the well being of my elderly neighbours, many of whom have lived in these homes since they were built. I would be on the opposite side of the road to this development but the upheaval, traffic and trauma would greatly affect my neighbours.

I am particularly concerned with the additional traffic this development could create. Traffic currently in and out of Dorchester Road and Streetsbrook Road is already very heavy and any additional housing will automatically greatly increase this problem. I feel this would be a health and safety issue for our local school children accessing the already oversubscribed Sharman's Cross Junior School - again, has consideration been given to how and where the children of the proposed new site would be educated.

When we moved into Winterbourne Road we were attracted to the local tennis and rugby clubs close by and feel strongly that this land should once again be developed as sporting facilities for the community.

Finally, I am told a number of these homes will be allocated as housing association 'affordable homes'. As a parent of 4 young adults I am well aware my children will not possibly be able to afford homes near to my own. However, I am also well aware my children will not be eligible for any of the 'affordable homes' being made available on this new site.

LDP - Proposed Housing Allocation 18

I wish to object to the planning application that has been made in respect of the Oakmoor housing development intended to be carried out behind Sharmans Cross Road.

My particular objections to the application that I would like to draw your attention to are as follows:

Increased pressure on already pressurized schools in the catchment area
As has been featured in The Times newspaper only very recently, Solihull has now the highest number of rejected applications per school place in the country. By building this development, and with half turned over to 'affordable housing' targeted presumably at younger people with families, this will only lead to further increases in school application rejections. There is only one infant and one primary school in this catchment area and I can see no provision provided to increase the number of places at either of these schools. Additionally, around Sharmans Cross school at school start and finish times, this area is very congested, and is a particular danger to pedestrian school children and cyclists. By building this development nearby, the traffic chaos at school pick up & drop off times will only increase, as well as add to the congestion at the Streetsbrook road junction at busy times.

Loss of sporting facilities
My understanding is that there is a covenent on this land that this land should only be used for sporting purposes. The leasehold was sold to Oakmoor on the formal understanding and agreement that this would continue, and that the land sold only at a price based on the land used for sports only. This covenant I understand was ratified further by Solihull council in 2013, by all political parties. There is a great demand from local sports teams to use this pitch but Oakmoor have priced teams out of the market with sky high rent demands of £60,000/year. This land is designated recreational and was created for that purpose - it was not designed for, nor indeed the lease sold with the intention for a private property developer to profit from squeezing high density housing into an already developed urban area with already stretched local ameneties and services.

I trust that this planning application does not meet planning guidelines and therefore will be refused.

Please accept this email as my objection to the above proposed development.

I am very concerned about the existing levels of traffic in the area and in particular from around 7.30 a.m. (in School term times) in the morning the traffic queues from before the junction with Beaumont Grove all the way into Solihull and this can add up to 15 minutes onto journey time. The position is even worse if there is adverse weather conditions. There is in particular a bottleneck in the area where the Sharmans Cross Road and Stonor Park Road meet the Streetsbrook Road. To place another 100 homes close to this area is only going to make the existing traffic problems much worse and also have a detrimental pollution impact on the environment.

In addition to the above congestion please also be aware that at further down the Sharmans Cross Road around the junction with Woodlea drive for about 30 minutes before and after school times the road gets parked up and very busy with parents taking their children to and from school. I have always felt that this area is an accident waiting to happen as the measures to protect parents and children crossing the road are inadequate. A lot of people speed down that road.

I further raise concerns on the additional pressures that will be placed on the Streetsbrook Road heading towards Birmingham from mid afternoon onwards as this road tends to back up from the St Bernards Roundabout back past Woodlea Drive. You have already received concerns from our us and our neighbours about the dangerous practise of some drivers using the slip road on which we live as a cut through to get further along the traffic cue. Some of these drivers use excessive speed and I fear for local residents as it is and in particular those who have small children. Further increases in house volumes in the local area will only increase these traffic pressures and the safety risks.

I should be grateful if you would take my above objections into account in your deliberations regarding the proposals for the development.

LDP - Proposed Housing Allocation 18

With regard to the Local Development Plan of a development of 100 houses on the rugby ground on Sharmans Cross Road, as a local resident I strongly object to the proposals. I have a number of issues which concern me, the main points being:

1. Loss of sporting facilities and green land - as Solihull continues to grow, the sporting facilities should grow with it and not be reduced. This proposal is a further loss of green land and reduced recreational facilities in the centre of Solihull. I understand that there is a sporting covenant on the former rugby club pitches which should be honoured, especially as I understand there is demand for use of the pitches by the neighbouring football club.

2. Scale & Density - The proposed development of 100 houses is an unacceptable overdevelopment of the site which is completely out of character with the surrounding area and inappropriate for the location.

3. Traffic issues / Access & Egress - The area is already busy with traffic and the addition of a significant number of dwellings will compound the situation. This will increase danger to pedestrians and cyclists especially around the morning 'rush hour' and at the Sharmans Cross Junior and Secondary Schools start and finish times.

4. Parking - this is already an issue at school drop-off and pick-up times. Also side roads and the old rugby club ground are being used by local businesses and train station users. This situation will only get worse with the cramped new development proposed.

5. Flooding - This is already an issue in the area as I have highlighted in previous letters to the council. The situation will only get worse with the proposed development.

6. Solihull Arden Rackets Club - The club (of which I am a member) currently enjoys an agreement for parking with the rugby club. The loss of this parking for the rackets club would cause serious difficulties which would compound the above mentioned traffic and parking issues. In addition I fear that a housing development would change the present 'open & healthy outdoor' feel of the club to an 'enclosed overlooked & cramped' environment which could result in the loss of many of its members and ultimately the closure of the club. This would then compound the loss of green land and further reduce the recreational facilities in the centre of Solihull.


In summary I consider the proposed development not in the interest of Solihull or any of the residents and I urge the council to reject this proposal.

I wish to register my concerns regarding the proposed development for Sharmans Cross Road 18.

Whilst the developer has stated that there is no interest in using this sporting facility he has systematically engineered this state of affairs by demanding unreasonably high rents which he judges will be unaffordable to local sports clubs.

Solihull SMBC is rightly proud of the success of the borough but should feel a sense of shame at the poor provision of sporting facilities for the over 16s. If this proposal goes ahead it will make the situation worse. In 2013 SMBC formally recorded that it was their policy to retain the use of this land for sport and that they would not sell the freehold. Previously an application for this site was refused and subsequently the developer withdrew a second application.

This proposal is for a high density development which almost certainly would imply some three story buildings which has been ruled out previously for other developments in this immediate area.

Again in the previous application for this site it was pointed out that Sharmans Cross Road is subject to flooding during heavy rain which would be made worse by this proposal.

Sharmans Cross Road is frequently subject to long queues of traffic from 7.45 to 9.15 am attempting to join the queue on Streetsbrook Road into Solihull town centre which would be made much worse with the addition of cars from the proposed development of 100 houses.

Sharmans Cross Road is a designated cycle route along the pavement on the same side of the road as this development and is used by unaccompanied children both cycling and walking to Sharmans Cross school.

Parking is already a problem on Sharmans Cross Road particularly at school times and there seems a strong likelihood of spill over from these proposed 100 houses. Buses have problems caused by the parking at these times.

Both schools and medical centres are already oversubscribed

LDP - Proposed Housing Allocation 18

I am writing to you to object to the proposed housing allocation for the Old Birmingham & Solihull Rugby Club/Solihull Arden Tennis and Sports Club on Sharman's Cross Rd.
I have recently moved into the area from another part of Solihull it to be an idyllic place to raise a young family. With the introduction of the proposed development I believe that this will have a detrimental effect to the area because of the following.

1) Increased Traffic
Our children still walk to school and we have noticed that during the peak periods the traffic from 0715hrs to 0900hrs the Sharman's Cross Junction with Stoner/Dorchester Rd and Streetsbrook Rd is extremely busy, they walk further down the road so they can cross at a safe place. The extra traffic would increase the difficulty in crossing the road.
2) Pedestrian Safety
The road system just about copes with the peak periods but you find that passing traffic, in order to gain access to Streetsbrook Rd, tend to take chances to squeeze into the flow of traffic, which again causes grid lock both ways towards Solihull and Birmingham. There is a distinct possibility that the two queues of traffic could meet, tail to tail.
3) Vehicle Parking
With modern society, it has been noticed that on average most households have 2 motor vehicles per family until the children are old enough to drive and then it increases to 4 vehicles, add the visiting partners and this is increase to 6. When the developers are trying to squeeze in 100 properties on a small piece of land this will increase the street parking problems that the area already has during the peak school run periods, at present it is difficult to pass with cars parked by the junior school.
4) Schooling
The primary and secondary schools in the area are already oversubscribed and in granting the permission for the development this would mean that the local authority would have to either increase the admissions to the schools or build another, both adding to the problem.
5) Local Amenities
The local shops and health care facilities struggle to cope with demand as the parking at Sharman's Cross precinct regularly spill
6) Pollution
Extra traffic associated with the new house will create more pollution affecting the welfare of both the residents and the local wildlife.
7) Wildlife
We have noticed since we have been here that there is an abundance of wildlife especially during the early mornings and dusk periods. Ranging from rabbits, foxes, badgers and bats taking the habitat away will reduce the number drastically.
8) Character of the Area
The introduction of 100 extra house to the area will drastically alter the character of the area, changing it from an established 1930-1950's style. There would be a necessity to add buildings over 2 stories high as the land space is limited therefore reducing the light in the area overshadowing properties in the local area
9) Sporting Facilities
Part of the area is used by Arden Sports club which offers a good variety of Racket sports, Gym and health spa along with the function area. Parking for this will be reduced again adding to the street parking problems in the area. On busy club evenings the members park their vehicles in the area previously used by the Rugby club already.With Silhill Football Club playing on the field next to the old Rugby ground, it would be more in line to allow them to have access and keep the area designated to sport as per the minuted SMBC meeting in 2013 with regard to the area being used for sports only and not selling the freehold. The area is also used for exercise by both young families, kicking a ball around, exploring the wooded area and dog walkers also use the area.

I would be very concerned if the development was to happen, although appreciating there is a need for affordable housing, I believe that the above reasons highlight that this particular area could not cope with the increased number of houses and families within such a small area, creating more problems for the community as a whole rather than solving the short term housing requirement.

Proposed Housing Allocation 18

I am writing to you to object to the proposed housing allocation for the Old Birmingham & Solihull Rugby Club/Solihull Arden Tennis and Sports Club on Sharman's Cross Rd.
I have recently moved into the area from another part of Solihull it to be an idyllic place to raise a young family. With the introduction of the proposed development I believe that this will have a detrimental effect to the area because of the following.

1) Increased Traffic
Our children still walk to school and we have noticed that during the peak periods the traffic from 0715hrs to 0900hrs the Sharman's Cross Junction with Stoner/Dorchester Rd and Streetsbrook Rd is extremely busy, they walk further down the road so they can cross at a safe place. The extra traffic would increase the difficulty in crossing the road.
2) Pedestrian Safety
The road system just about copes with the peak periods but you find that passing traffic, in order to gain access to Streetsbrook Rd, tend to take chances to squeeze into the flow of traffic, which again causes grid lock both ways towards Solihull and Birmingham. There is a distinct possibility that the two queues of traffic could meet, tail to tail.
3) Vehicle Parking
With modern society, it has been noticed that on average most households have 2 motor vehicles per family until the children are old enough to drive and then it increases to 4 vehicles, add the visiting partners and this is increase to 6. When the developers are trying to squeeze in 100 properties on a small piece of land this will increase the street parking problems that the area already has during the peak school run periods, at present it is difficult to pass with cars parked by the junior school.
4) Schooling
The primary and secondary schools in the area are already oversubscribed and in granting the permission for the development this would mean that the local authority would have to either increase the admissions to the schools or build another, both adding to the problem.
5) Local Amenities
The local shops and health care facilities struggle to cope with demand as the parking at Sharman's Cross precinct regularly spill
6) Pollution
Extra traffic associated with the new house will create more pollution affecting the welfare of both the residents and the local wildlife.
7) Wildlife
We have noticed since we have been here that there is an abundance of wildlife especially during the early mornings and dusk periods. Ranging from rabbits, foxes, badgers and bats taking the habitat away will reduce the number drastically.
8) Character of the Area
The introduction of 100 extra house to the area will drastically alter the character of the area, changing it from an established 1930-1950's style. There would be a necessity to add buildings over 2 stories high as the land space is limited therefore reducing the light in the area overshadowing properties in the local area
9) Sporting Facilities
Part of the area is used by Arden Sports club which offers a good variety of Racket sports, Gym and health spa along with the function area. Parking for this will be reduced again adding to the street parking problems in the area. On busy club evenings the members park their vehicles in the area previously used by the Rugby club already.With Silhill Football Club playing on the field next to the old Rugby ground, it would be more in line to allow them to have access and keep the area designated to sport as per the minuted SMBC meeting in 2013 with regard to the area being used for sports only and not selling the freehold. The area is also used for exercise by both young families, kicking a ball around, exploring the wooded area and dog walkers also use the area.

I would be very concerned if the development was to happen, although appreciating there is a need for affordable housing, I believe that the above reasons highlight that this particular area could not cope with the increased number of houses and families within such a small area, creating more problems for the community as a whole rather than solving the short term housing requirement.

Proposed Housing Allocation 18

I write to register my objection to this site being put forward for development. My strong objection is based on the its effect in losing recreational space and sporting facilities within our local area. I'm also concerned about the increase in traffic and pollution.

It's a valuable recreational space and sporting facility
Having played for several of our local football teams over the past 12 years I know there is a critical shortage of pitches and open space for matches and training in our local area. We cannot afford to allow a developer to 'sit ' on pitches and refuse them to be used for the specific purpose that the lease was granted, let alone lose it permanently to housing development.
We desperately need this space for sports pitches and it must be retained. SMBC has formally minuted its policy with regard to the use of the grounds only for sport and that they would not sell the freehold. The current leaseholder must be forced to deliver this sporting facility to the local community.

It's a delightful nature rich site
I live close to the site and it am pleased to regularly experience its diverse flora and fauna and natural areas of vegetation adjacent to the Pow Grove woodland. Its home to a wide variety of wildlife including foxes, rabbits, hedghogs to say nothing of many species of wild birds. This includes many that are not common, that I regularly see, such as woodpeckers, hawks and falcons. In the summer evenings we also enjoy watching the bats fly back and forth.
It will be a crime to lose this natural area and displace all the wildlife, the community will be much the poorer for it.

Traffic increase, gridlock and pollution..
During peak periods both ends of Sharmans Cross road are gridlocked. To get to Solihull you have to sit in a hundred yard queue to the complex junction with Streetsbrook Road. To go the other way you have a long queue to the island at Danford/Prospect lane. These queues are pouring out exhaust pollution. The proposed development will create another long 'feeder' queue from the side road of cars trying to get in to the Sharmans Cross Road queues. It already often takes me half an hour to get from my house out to the by pass and motorway, a distance of only 2 miles or so, the additional cars will make it worse.

This site should not be included in the LDP. The submission from Cerda Planning is a replay of a applications previously refused on overwhelming evidence of the unsuitability and availability of this site.

Proposed Housing Allocation 18

I wish to register my objection to the proposed development on the rugby ground in Sharmans Cross Road for the following reasons.

1. Any development on this site will cause a considerable increase in traffic and pollution in an area, which is already highly congested at
peak periods.

2. Access into and out of the site onto Sharmans Cross Road will cause gridlock, especially at the junction with Streetsbrook Road. As
the amount of traffic will have already increased by the development of the old Woolmans Nursery site in Solihull Road.

3. I consider there could be a potential danger to pedestrians, especially unaccompanied school children travelling to Sharmans Cross
School. Parent parking already already causes chaos as this is also a main bus route.

4. This development will undoubtedly put further pressure and already oversubscribed school and medical services.

5. It is understood that previous applications to develop this site have either been refused or withdrawn as this is a designated sports
ground and should not be used for private development.

Concerns about the loss of sports ground at Sharmans Cross

I wish to voice great concerns over the possible loss of the sports area at Sharmans Cross next to the Arden Club, at a time when we should be looking at more ways to get our community more interested in a healthier life style. Although not an immediate resident (I live by Tudor Grange school), and I know more houses are needed in Solihull, the reversal of previous promises made makes me worried about what else may be reversed in the future. In 2013, there was a policy supported by all parties not to sell the freehold or lift the covenant that the grounds should only be used for sports purposes. Therefore, please confirm that our councillors will honour these promises and ensure these policies for the old Rugby Ground will remain in place.

The added traffic will cause congestion and affect a wide area at rush hour, as the development at West Warwicks has proven. So, please protect the few green spaces we still have in Solihull central area.

Proposed housing development on former Solihull RFC ground

Dear Sirs, I write to express my concern at the proposition to build a housing estate on Sharman's Cross Road.
I have lived here for forty years & have been an active member of Solihull Arden Squash Club for all that time.
My son played rugby for Bham & Solihull 1st XV for several years, indeed he began his successful rugby career
there as a 7yr old. The 'public open space' has been & still is most important to us. Surely there is a shortage of
football & rugby pitches in the centre of Solihull & wasn't this area designated for that & nothing other than that?
Getting to the squash club at certain times of the day is already a nightmare, can you imagine what another 100
houses each with two cars would add to the traffic problem. We do not have the infrastructure to cope with such
an influx. Please, please don't concrete over our town, leave us some grass where people can exercise & enjoy
sport in an area designated for just that & nothing else.

Proposed Housing Allocation 18

I wish to raise a couple of points with regard to the proposed development of 100 houses on Sharmans Cross Road - the old rugby club.

Firstly, I believe that the number of houses that has been suggested is simply too many both for the actual site and the area in general. Although I have sympathy for the argument that we do indeed need more housing in the area, 100 houses on the site would result in an unacceptable increase in the amount of traffic not only on Sharmans Cross Road itself, but also at its junction with Streetsbrook Road and Danford Lane/Prospect Lane.

Generally, each household tends to have at least two cars, so with 100 houses on the site increased traffic would put too much pressure on surrounding roads.

There are schools in close proximity which would also add to congestion at various times.

Secondly,100 houses on the site would undoubtedly affect the surrounding woodland, not least in Pow Coppice. The wildlife in the coppice is varied and numerous and not only includes birds, but badgers and foxes. My concern is that 100 houses would damage the varied wildlife in the area.

LDP-Proposed Housing Allocation 18

The above proposal for housing development on the Arden Tennis Club in Sharmans Cross Road is subject to various problems--not only for local residents but the public who use this road.

Already SCR is subject to severe traffic congestion at rush hour
morning and evening. Vehicles exiting or entering the new
proposed site will cause chaos, particularly those turning across a busy road and Bus Route to go to Solihull.

The road where it meets Streetsbrook Road is subject to heavy flooding and has been for our years. Our houses and gardens in Winterbourne Road are subjected to flooding as the land falls from the Tennis Club area towards our property. A housing development of the nature proposed will add to this.

Parking in this area has to be strictly monitored and will be worse if extra vehicles both from the Tennis Club and new housing
cars use the road. At present Winterbourne and Beaminster
roads have to be controlled between 9am--11am and2pm--3pm as workers in Solihull used to park all day . Four cars would arrive, park and four people would proceed to Solihull in one car, the others left all day.

Side roads off S C R already suffer from this congested parking every day.

Surely sports facilities like the Rugby Club ground should be preserved for Solihull. A few years ago, the same developer was refused permission to develop this area as Solihull Council
decreed that it be used for sport only. What has changed?

We the local residents and rate payers will continue to oppose the proposed development.

Local Development Plan - Proposed Housing Allocation18

As a local resident of many years, I write to you illustrating my real concerns surrounding the proposed development on the Rugby ground situated on Sharmans Cross Road, Solihull.

This is the second occasion in the last six years that attempts have been made to develop a site owned by Solihull Council that has always been used for a sporting purpose.

The current owner of the old Rugby Club clearly bought the premises in order to develop the land that was the rugby pitches, having no intention to continue with it as a sporting facility.

It is now up to the council to make sure that the owner does not achieve his goal. He has now come with a new proposition in trying to persuade the Tennis Club to move to the site where the Rugby pitches are, so that he may now place the houses on the site of the current tennis club. What this actually means is that Solihull, voted the best place to live a short while ago, will in effect loose an important site that should be used for a sporting facility. Solihull is still one of the best places to live in the country and we should ensure that we do not loose these sporting facilities in Solihull.

I also wish to raise that the proposition will increase the volume of traffic on Sharmans Cross Road to such an extent that it will cause a danger to pedestrians in the area and in addition a danger to cyclists, as I understand that this is a designated cycle route.

I am a keen cyclist myself, and the current facilities are woefully inadequate, and yet considering this development can only make matters much worse and dangerous.

The development will also increase the parking in Sharmans Cross Road which is not adequately wide enough to support any additional parking facilities in this area.

I also wish to point out that the immediate and surrounding area of this site is subject to raised water levels. Many of the houses were built on land around Alderbrook and has always been subject to high levels of water around Welcombe Grove, Rollswood and Arley Road.
To place what would be two acres of concrete forming this new development would only serve to raise the water levels around this site further.

Solihull Council must listen to there local communities and should ensure that land that is primarily for sporting purposes should not be lost, particularly when there are adequate brownfield sites around the Borough that could be used as an alternative.

LDP - Proposed Housing Allocation 18

TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN

I am a very long standing member of Solihull Arden Club and, as such, wish to express my objections to the proposed LDP for the following reasons -

1. Arden Lawn Tennis Club Ltd holds the freehold of the land on which the club stands and if, as has been intimated, we will be asked to exchange it for a piece leasehold land on which a new club will be built, we will become asset less - is this a fair and sensible idea?
2.The proposal to build 100 houses on the club's present land has been described as being 'dense' by a top house building company and as such the noise and drainage issues that will arise will be grossly unfair to the local residents with whom we currently enjoy excellent relationships.
3. As Solihull is low down the list of 16+ residents who partake in sporting activities we should not be even considering losing any sporting land especially as it is contrary to Sport England Policy of retaining all such land, this must be a key consideration in making your decision.
4. Parking spaces are already at a premium most weekday evenings/nights and indeed during daytime hours with all the activities that currently use the club facilities, as well as daytime member usage, any reduction in parking spaces will result in parking problems on Sharman's Cross Road. Again, causing problems for our neighbours and could even be a danger to many of our young users.
5. It is highly likely that, as there are four other rackets clubs within the borough, many members would leave Solihull Arden rendering this prestigious club unviable, should this proposal go ahead.
6. The plans state that amenities, such as transport are within the required distance from the club, this is not true. The train station is significantly further away than stated, doctors surgeries are full to capacity as are the nearby schools and indeed will require parents to transport children by road, again causing more traffic problems in the area. The local shopping centre is also further away than indicated.
7. Sollhull MBC have always been very strict in retaining trees that have TPO's on them and thus helping keep the borough green and the wild life happy. This proposal will mean losing many of the TPO trees, which is against that which we, as Solihull residents, have always admired about our borough council.

Finally, I wish to strongly object to the LDP, proposed Housing Allocation 18 and to ask SMBC to rejection it without further consideration.

LDP - Proposed Housing Allocation 18

I am writing to record my objection to the inclusion of the site at Sharmans Cross Road being including in the LDP.

I am a member of the Solihull Arden Club and a local resident living on Dorchester Road.

According to Council document this land has a covenant that restricts its use to that for sports use only and it is therefore totally inappropriate to be considered for inclusion in any non-sports related development and therefore the LDP.

The following details have all been extracted directly from the SOLIHULL METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY

Any non-sports related development is in direct conflict with the councils commitment to providing sports facilities to its citizens and will inhibit the delivery of the objectives of the councils health and well-being strategy. Providing alternative pitches elsewhere will incur travel which again is working against other council strategies.

SOLIHULL METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY

Under the promoting healthy communities theme, it is set out that planning policies should be based on robust and up-to-date assessments of the needs for open space, sports and recreation facilities and opportunities for new provision. Specific needs and quantitative and qualitative deficiencies and surpluses in local areas should also be identified. This information should be used to inform what provision is required in an area

As a prerequisite the NPPF states existing open space, sports and recreation sites, including playing fields, should not be built on unless:
< An assessment has been undertaken, which has clearly shown the site to be surplus to requirements.
< The loss resulting from the proposed development would be replaced by equivalent or better provision in terms of quantity and quality in a suitable location.
< The development is for alternative sports and recreational provision, the needs for which clearly outweigh the loss.

In order for planning policies to be "sound‟ local authorities are still required to carry out a robust assessment of need for open space, sport and recreation facilities. We advocate that the methodology to undertake such assessments should still be informed by best practice including Sport England‟s Towards a Level Playing Field (TALPF) and PPG17. Despite the latter being replaced by the NPPF it still offers relevant guidance on undertaking a needs assessment; which can be enhanced by our own expert understanding and knowledge in this area.

A Sporting Future for the Playing Fields of England
It is Sport England‟s policy to object to any planning application, which will result in the loss of a playing field, unless it meets one of five exceptions as defined in A Sporting Future for the Playing Fields of England. Protection of playing fields was further enhanced in 1998 with Circular 9/98 (replaced in 2009 by Circular 02/09) which stipulates that where a local authority is minded to grant planning permission against Sport England‟s advice on land owned by a local authority or used for educational purposes, then the application should be referred to the relevant Government Office for possible „call in‟.

As a statutory consultee for the loss of playing fields, Sport England is a key partner. Regional planning officers should be kept informed of developing projects/schemes and can provide essential guidance and advice throughout the process, not just at planning application stage.

It is likely that for some sports, particularly football, that the provision of new pitches and facilities will be required in the future to support the predicted future demand.

Sport Future development trend Strategy impact
Football The needs of the game will change significantly from the 2013/14 season with the implementation of the FA Youth Development Review. As a result, pitch demands in the Borough will change. This could also see changes in the seasonal demand of pitches (youth football). Consider re-allocating leases to Charter Standard clubs with a large number of teams.
Assist as appropriate, clubs to identify facility development opportunities.
Work with clubs in relation to their pitch demands as a result of the FA Youth Development Review.


Management objective (t) - Adopt a Community Asset Transfer Policy
The Council should adopt a policy, which supports community management and ownership of assets to local clubs, community groups and trusts. This presents sports clubs and national governing bodies with opportunities to take ownership of their own facilities; it may also provide non-asset owning sports clubs with their first chance to take on a building.

Site KKP ref Management Issue to be resolved Recommended actions Tier Priority
Sharman‟s Cross Road 55 Solihull Borough Council Site provides one senior rugby union pitch which is not currently available for community use (although there is space on site to accommodate two senior rugby union pitches), sports pavilion (comprising four changing rooms) and car parking. The pitch should be brought back into community use to help address the current and future shortfall of rugby union pitches in Solihull.
Alternatively, any mitigation for the loss of playing field should seek to fund improvements to sites with rugby provision in the Central Area to help increase playing capacity and thus help to address the current and future shortfall of rugby union pitches.



Sharman's Cross Road, Solihull
The site was used by the senior teams of Birmingham and Solihull Rugby Club (prior to the club going into liquidation) and comprises one senior rugby pitch (although there is space on site to accommodate two), brick built pavilion (comprising four changing rooms) and car parking. The pitch is owned by Solihull Borough Council and the access road and car parking at the site was owned by the Club but sold to a housing developer in 2009/2010. The housing developer has submitted a planning application to build a retirement village on the site.
At present, there is no community use of the site. However, there has been demand expressed locally for usage of the site. It is understood there is a covenant on the land for sporting use.


I request the council confirms it has;
1. completed all of the above assessments
2. that Sport England as the key partner has been fully consulted and what their decision was
3. If the council intends to go against Sport England's advice the application will be referred to the relevant Government Office
4. The council can explain why land it owns that has a covenant restricting its use to that of sports usage can be "purchased" by a property developer and not revert back to the council for allocation to the next sporting club that needs the land to deliver its clubs plans and development
5. that the council will not renege on its previous policy of not selling the freehold for sites where grounds are only for sport
6. that the council is committed to its statutory requirement that any lost pitches are replaced with facilities of equivalent quality and accessibility

I am aware that over the last few years a number of sports clubs have enquired on the availability of the ground for their use to deliver sports to the community but the developer has either refused to engage in any dialog or suggested astronomical lease costs

I represent Solihull FC which is based at the Silhillians Sports Club in Solihull where we have 26 youth football teams but next season will exceed the capacity of the site and need additional pitch capacity to facilitate the growth of the club. We are a charter standard club and expect to need a home for 6 - 8 teams that cannot be accommodated at our current location. These teams will include open age adult football which we don't currently have but have been asked to concentrate on this offering by Birmingham FA when we submitted our 5 year football development plans and I expect we can work with the FA to gain financial support for the site development.

I have the backing and support of the existing local residents that fully support the site remains available for sports use

I also wish to register my concern for the other 4 sports grounds that are included in the proposal and are at risk from the LDP

Objection to LDP - Proposed Housing Allocation 18

To Whom It May Concern
Ref:
Reviewing the Plan for Solihull's Future Solihull Local Plan Review Draft Local Plan
http://www.solihull.gov.uk/Portals/0/Planning/LPR/Draft_Local_Plan_05.12.16.pdf
LDP - Proposed Housing Allocation 18
Sharmans Cross Road Solihull
I strongly object to the above mentioned planning proposal.
Accessibility
First of all the proposal by Oakmoor - The Developers is not compliant with Planning Policy P7
'accessible'.
The developers - Oakmoor - in their submission (on the website) specifically state that the
distance to the Station is 700m when in fact it is 1000m or more. In addition to this with the
SMBC policy to move the Station to Monkspath Hall Road car park which is well over 1500m.
Oakmoor also state the Town Centre is 1km walk when in fact it is 1700m from the centre of the
site to Touchwood.
Clearly this site is further away than the 800m requirement to be defined as accessible.
Furthermore existing Public Transport provisions do not meet the 'accessibility' criteria. Oakmoor
suggest this criteria is met by bus services nos. 3, S3 and S3W. In fact these provide a half hourly
service Monday to Saturday and hourly on Sundays. It clearly does not meet the 'every 15minutes'
/'frequency' criteria.
Also there are surgeries within 1500m and no direct bus access. The nearest Primary school is
over 1500m away, the Junior School is over subscribed as a result some children would have to
be driven long distances to schools further away. Secondary schools are also over 1500m away
and also oversubscribed.
Clearly this site is too far away from Solihull Train Station and Town Centre, public transport
provision is not frequent and other facilities are not in walking distance. So this proposal fails all
these 'accessible' criteria:
1. DISTANCE/WALKING TIME
2. PUBLIC TRANSPORT
3. OTHER FACILITIES
Sustainable / Suitability
I also strongly object to the proposed site capacity of 100 houses. This is a very much higher
density than currently in the immediate surrounding area. The high density suggests that
development will include more than 2 stories buildings. This is not in keeping with the local area.
This leads to loss of privacy, loss of light and overshadowing.
This proposal clearly fails Policy P15 Securing Design Quality. It is not sustainable.
(ref:
http://www.solihull.gov.uk/Portals/0/Planning/LPR/Draft_Local_Plan_05.12.16.pdf#page=114)
All development proposals will be expected to contribute to, or create, high quality places and spaces which have
regard to local distinctiveness to achieve high quality, inclusive and sustainable design. Proposals will be expected to
meet the following key principles:
* Conserves and enhances local character, distinctiveness and streetscape quality and ensures that the scale, massing,
density, layout, territory (including space between buildings), materials and landscape of the development respect the
surrounding natural, built and historic environment;
This proposal is totally unacceptable. It is too densely populated, not in keeping with the area. It
fails local policy. It is totally inappropriate and not suitable for this site.
It should be rejected.
Increased traffic
The current traffic on Sharmans Cross Road junction with Streetbrook Road is already gridlocked
in the morning (from 7:45am to 9:00 am). The development in this proposal will lead to an
increased amount of traffic moving in/out of the site. In the morning the increased traffic will most
likely be turning right towards Streetbrook Road increasing the gridlock on the road. The
increased traffic and pollution will have a serious effect on highway safety. It will increase the
danger to pedestrians in particular it will endanger school children going to and from Sharmans
Cross Junior School. Furthermore this area is a designated cycle route; the increased traffic will be
a danger to cyclists.
This proposal will have serious negative effect on highway safety - Increase traffic, increase
pollution, increase road gridlock, danger to pedestrians and danger to cyclists. I strongly object to
this proposal.
It should be rejected.
Permanent loss of sporting facilities
This proposal will also destroy perfectly good playing pitch on the site. This will have a negative
impact on the health and wellbeing of the local residents. It clearly fails Policy P18 Health and
Wellbeing.
(ref:
http://www.solihull.gov.uk/Portals/0/Planning/LPR/Draft_Local_Plan_05.12.16.pdf#page=123)
Policy P18 Health and Wellbeing.
* Supporting the retention and protection of facilities which promote healthy
lifestyles such as open space, including public rights of way to open space,
playing pitches and allotments;
The loss of existing sports facilities where there is already a shortage is detrimental to the
community. This proposal cannot go ahead.
It must be rejected.
Parking
This proposal will lead to increased street parking on Sharmans Cross Road. Street parking is
already chaotic during peak times with the school and sporting ground. This proposal will
exacerbate congestion and safety due to the increased street parking.
This proposal creates danger for Pedestrians and Cyclist alike and should be rejected.
Use of land
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. This development with its destruction of the sport ground
should not be included in the LDP.
With so many objection points and so many negatives this development will bring, it cannot and
must not go ahead.
I urge you to reject this development proposal.

LDP - Proposed Housing Allocation 18

I would like to raise my concerns / objection to the inclusion of the Sharmans Cross Road housing allocation as part of the LDP.

I recently moved to Solihull from Hodge Hill - B36 8JQ - upon the birth of my son who is now almost 4 years old and will be starting reception very soon. I purchased a house on Sharmans Cross Road because the housing density is far less than around Hodge Hill where overextension was becoming endemic and I felt it was no longer a suitable place to raise a small child. Two particular concerns were the overextension of properties so that the people density was double what it had been when I grew up there; and the removal of gardens and green spaces to make way for additional car spaces which in turn raised the volume of cars, which in turn made driving conditions atrocious.

I am therefore very concerned that after having made Solihull our home to avoid these issues we might face the exact same issue once more. Let me explain.

Issue 1. The major traffic congestion.

At present my daily routing involves leaving the house at 8.20 with my wife and son in the car. Often the traffic jam from the direction of Solihull town centre goes past my house - I would say twice a week. I need to wait to be let out, then I drive down towards Solihull station, drop my wife off, and drive to Blossomfield School to drop off my son. I then drive back home to work (I have a home office). The round journey takes from 8.20 to around 9.10 each morning to cover a round trip of about 2 miles.

Sharmans Cross Rd is a traffic jam going towards the station, but returning and driving towards Blossomfield there is then a serious lack of any parking so 3 lanes f traffic build up. This is already incredibly dangerous and I have had several near misses with large cars that drive into oncoming traffic in order to obtain a space. Once at Blossomfield there are no spaces at all and after drop-off much of the traffic from the school turns onto Solihull Rd and then down to Sharmans Cross Rd.

In short I would estimate that between 7.30 and 9.00 in the morning and again at around 3.15 to 4pm in the afternoon the road is effectively locked up as a thoroughfare and again from 5.30 to 6.30pm particularly towards Solihull Rd.

The traffic gets worse when there are sports fixtures as the cars have to park on the south side of Sharmans Cross Rd but if there were houses built on the proposed site this would actually be one of the main places for local parking and I suspect Sharmans Cross Rd would in effect become a no-go zone for traffic, with drivers needing to divert because of gridlock.

2. Noise pollution

An aspect of living on Sharmans Cross Road has been that there is far more road noise than I anticipated. I am writing this at 5pm on a Tuesday night and the constant stream of traffic is far worse than I had realised when I bought the property. I had to move my son from a front to a back room to prevent him being woken up particularly in the mornings by the constant sound of cars. Even when there is not gridlock on the road it's clear that Sharmans Cross Rd is already very much at capacity for traffic making its' way from Shirley into Solihull town centre and back.

3. School environment

For me one of the main reason to move to Solihull is the choice of schools. Solihull is an investment - it is not a cheap place to buy a property in and to do so I planned to move to an area where I knew my son would have the best prospects as he grew and made his life in the town. My concern is that the already greatly oversubscribed schools will be combined with the fact that the schools clearly do not have sufficient land to build extensions to deal with the number of subscribing children (e.g. Blossomfield's current extension which is already stretching the physical capacity and land use of that school to the maximum). The increase in the numbers of subscribers mean either the children will have to travel further afield - making traffic even worse - or they will be allocated a place but in an area where traffic will make the schools themselves less desirable or even inaccessible, or finally the schools themselves will have to be developed to increase capacity - meaning in turn overdeveloped facilities with even less land for the children.

4. Crime and anti-social behaviour

One major issue with living on Sharmans Cross Rd and I can only assume this will deteriorate with high density housing is the crime. In the 18 months since living here we have had 4 nearby houses have bricks thrown through the windows of cars parked on driveways. We have had break-is at the back of houses with the police telling us it is criminals trying to find car keys to steal vehicles of driveways. Only a week ago I interrupted the attempted theft of my neighbours' car (48 Sharmans Cross Rd) from his driveway at 1am. My neighbour-but-one (# 42) had a major break-in 2 months ago. And finally there are some teenagers over the road who sit on the base of the oak tree and drink vodka and southern comfort out of sight of their parents. I know they do because my 3 year old came close to picking up one of the bottles they had left behind smashed on the pavement.

It is of course very likely that having a higher density of target properties is only going to increase the high level of property and car crime that the area currently suffers from.

5. Character

It may be less tangible but there is a reason why Solihull is seen as desirable and aspirational. I certainly always wanted to live here and I have been very happy. I hope the area continues to be a place that people can aspire to. But I do think that this development will rob a great deal of the essential character of the area in the exact same way that Hodge Hill did over the past 30 years. I saw Hodge Hill change from a desirable place to a place that people wanted to get away from. I hope that doesn't happen here.

LDP - Proposed Housing Allocation 18

I wish to register my objection to the proposed Local Development Plan of a development of 100 houses on the rugby ground on Sharmans Cross Road, for the following reasons:

1. Lack of Suitability - The development would be very much out of character of the neighbourhood and is out of scale and inappropriate
2. Traffic and Pollution - Sharmans Cross Road is already gridlocked between 8 and 9am. The proposed development will only compound the traffic and associated pollution problems and increase danger to pedestrians & cyclists
3. Parking - this is already a problem in Sharmans Cross Road at peak times, during school start and finish times and when sporting fixtures take place. A new development will only make the situation worse
4. Permanent loss of Sporting Facilities - Solihull should be looking to increase facilities, not reduce them. Sport England has found that Solihull is in the 3rd quartile nationally for over-16 participation in sport three times per week and continues to fall in the national league tables
5. Flooding - is already a problem when there is heavy rainfall. The development will worsen this problem.
6. Schools and medical centres - are already oversubscribed. The proposed development will once again compound these problems.


I urge the council to reject this proposal.