Question 28 - Site 18 - Sharmans Cross Road

Yes for it to be idle and overgrown is wrong when there could be opportunity to provide more needed housing provided it is in keeping with the area and not over developed too densely.

There is enough congestion in this area at peak times and having more husing here will make the problem worse. The new builds will also not fit in with the current the look of the area. Also the loss of the pitches will not be good as there will be no football pitches as such in the locality.

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 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.

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 that the grounds should only be used for sport and they would not sell the freehold.

My objections to this development are the same as they were in 2017.

Loss of Sporting Amenity
--------------------------------
The borough plan acknowledges the importance of improving health and well being within Challenge J and the plan expresses the desire to;

* Promote development that contributes to a healthy and safe population by providing for opportunities to enable people to pursue an active lifestyle and make healthier choices.
* Ensure development promotes positive outcomes for physical and mental health and wellbeing through its location, layout and design, inclusion of appropriate levels of open space and the protection and improvement of air quality.
The table states correctly in the reasons and conditions column that the sports ground is currently unused, but this does not reflect a lack of interest in the facilities but rather an unwillingness by the development company that has acquired the lease to allow the facilities to be used. It appears that while they have been approached to negotiate use of the facilities they have refused to engage as it is not in their interest for the sports facilities to be used. Development of the site would require re-provision of the sports pitches if not in surplus. Given that there is a shortage of pitches in Solihull it is difficult to see how this can be replaced with a facility that has the same quality (e.g. changing rooms and toilet facilities for both males and females) and equally accessible. As a parent I know how difficult it is to encourage an active lifestyle and removing facilities will make this even harder.
The logic of moving the Arden club facilities onto the rugby ground, then building on the Arden club site and also replacing the pitches elsewhere seems incredibly inefficient. If there is a site which could be developed into replacement pitches, why not build houses there instead and save the cost and disruption of moving the Arden club buildings?

Housing density
--------------------
Policy P5 states "The density of new housing will make the most efficient use of land whilst providing an appropriate mix and maintaining character and local distinctiveness."
Looking at the likely area of construction suggests a property density which is five times the density of the neighbouring properties on Winterbourne Rd which is totally at odds with the local character. Given the previous application for a smaller number of dwellings required three storey buildings, it is likely that this would also be required to cram properties onto this site which would again be out of character with the area and would be likely to impact significantly on the neighbouring properties in terms of light, privacy and overshadowing.


Impact on traffic & Parking
-----------------------------------
I am very familiar with the traffic issues on Sharman's Cross Road, especially around the start and end of the school day, and also the junction between Sharmans Cross and Streetsbrook road before 9am. The additional traffic that would be associated with the new homes would make existing congestion problems worse and also could have an impact on the safety of others, particularly children walking to and from school and cyclists. While I note that there is the possibility of widening the exit, this wouldn't counter all the difficulties associated with joining the main road.
Similarly, there would be a potential impact on parking both at the Arden site and along Sharmans Cross Road, which is already problematic at school drop off / pick up times.

Conserving the qualities of the Mature Suburbs
---------------------------------------------------------------

Having lived in other Birmingham suburbs, I can say that Solihull has something special. The attractiveness of the physical environment has a lot to do with it. The number of trees mixed in with the housing, housing design and sense of space should be vigorously defended. At one point areas were threatened by developers buying up neighbouring large houses to replace them with very crowded new buildings that were not in keeping with their surroundings, but thankfully this seems to have ceased. This development would have the same effect but on a slightly larger scale and I cannot see the sense in prohibiting one type of development and not the other.

Pressure on local services
-----------------------------------
There is no spare capacity at the local schools or health facilities, but rather these are already oversubscribed. I note that this is acknowledged in the likely infrastructure requirements assessment and again extending the capacity in the area seems unlikely and providing additional capacity elsewhere will result in poorer service to existing residents.

Similarly, the area is prone to flooding and by replacing the rugby pitch with a less permeable surface is likely to worsen the issue. The likely infrastructure requirements don't include upgrading the areas drainage.

Ethical considerations
-----------------------------
As an aside, while I understand that this falls outside the planning assessment criteria, it is still worth reflecting on the behaviour of the developers that own the leasehold to the rugby ground. It seems they were dishonest about their intentions when they first acquired the land and have since been dishonest in the way they represented the support of the Arden club, while at the same time preventing the use of a sporting facility by the local community. Rewarding unethical behaviour would seem the best way to promote ever increasing levels of unethical behaviour in the future, creating even more obstacles to a local plan that already contains a good number of challenges.

See Letter

I am concerned about the potential development of 100 extra homes in the Sharmans Cross area. In particular I am concerned about the volume of traffic it will create at peak commuter times on the Streetsbrook Road where it is joined by Sharmans Cross Road which is already heavily congested. In addition it will cause further problems around the School at the junction of Woodlea Drive and Sharmans Cross Road.

My objection is purely on the density of the properties. I live in Solihull but not near this site but looking at the plan the housing density seems to much for the area. It reminds me of the density plan for Dickens Heath and look was a nightmare that has turned in to, a once nice quiet area is looking more and more like a badly designed building jungle rather like Coventry Town Centre.

Area infrastructure will not cope mainly traffic

The area needs to have good sports favilitys , these need to be retained and improved, managed by local people

The club recognises that whilst the club does not object to a "whole site" option being considered as part of the overall Local Development Plan review process, it also makes no commitment to any development and reserves the right to comment and negotiate the development of any such plans which as a minimum would need to meet several conditions required by the club to be considered worthy of consideration and discussion with its members. These conditions would necessarily need to include the following:

* Tenure of the land occupied by the club comparable to existing arrangements i.e. Freehold, similar value, proximity for existing membership.
* Beneficial improvements to the structure and buildings of the clubhouse and its associated playing and fitness facilities.
* Ease of access into and out of the site.
* Significant improvement regarding car parking arrangements.
* Significant improvement to the club's potential for future sustainability.
On behalf of Solihull Arden Club, I wish to make it clear to SMBC within this supplementary review response, that the Club's position as stated previously as above remains the same.

I would like to express my strong objection to any commercial or residential building taking place on the covenanted land at the rugby/tennis site in Sharmans Cross RD. every effort should be taken to preserve these sporting facilities, which have been left to degenerate by Oakmore Development for obvious reasons. Since the 60's the population of Solihull must have more than doubled, yet public amenities and sporting facilities have disappeared, I would therefore demand that the 2013 all party policy on the rugby ground maintaining the sports ground only covenant, and not selling the freehold be maintained.

The suggested construction of 67/100 houses would be 4 to 5 times the density of the surrounding area, this would also mean at least 150 extra cars on Sharmans Cross Rd at peak hours, this in the addition to the increased use of this road by diesel buses and heavy goods vehicles would exacerbate traffic chaos outside the school, with increased levels of pollution, is the air quality here monitored I wonder. The character of the area would be diminished, drainage/flooding already a problem would increase. We do not have adequate school and medical capacity at the moment in this area. Maintaining this open space would also be a provide a haven for wildlife which is under threat everywhere and hardly ever considered.

As a long standing resident of Solihull who has played rugby and coached mini rugby at the old Solihull Rugby Club ground I am angered to discover that the sports ground has been included Local Development Plan for potential housing development. This is despite the 2013 all party policy on the rugby ground on maintaining the SPORTS GROUND ONLY covenant and not to sell the freehold.
I demand that the council maintain the above covenant and take active steps to restore the ground as an active sporting facility for the benefit of the local community
On practical grounds I believe the building of between 60 to 100 houses on the old rugby club ports ground would considerably increase traffic flow into Sharmans Cross Road and increase the already dangerous situation to children due to parking outside Sharmans Cross School. It would also add to the existing traffic congestion at the junctions of Sharmans Cross Road, Streetsbrook Road, Stonor Park Road and Dorchester Road at peak times.
The density required to contain 60 to 100 houses on the sports ground site would be at least 4 - 5 times that of the surrounding area and destroy the character and diminish the historical distinctiveness of he area, and also bring into question the future viability of the historic tennis club facility.
I believe that there is inadequate medical and school capacity to support the considerable increase in local population that the development of the sports ground would bring.
I would also question whether services such as the old drainage system would cope with development of the sports ground, Sharmans Cross road has already been the subject to extensive flooding in recent years

As a long standing resident of Solihull who has played rugby and coached mini rugby at the old Solihull Rugby Club ground I am angered to discover that the sports ground has been included Local Development Plan for potential housing development. This is despite the 2013 all party policy on the rugby ground on maintaining the SPORTS GROUND ONLY covenant and not to sell the freehold.
I demand that the council maintain the above covenant and take active steps to restore the ground as an active sporting facility for the benefit of the local community
On practical grounds I believe the building of between 60 to 100 houses on the old rugby club ports ground would considerably increase traffic flow into Sharmans Cross Road and increase the already dangerous situation to children due to parking outside Sharmans Cross School. It would also add to the existing traffic congestion at the junctions of Sharmans Cross Road, Streetsbrook Road, Stonor Park Road and Dorchester Road at peak times.
The density required to contain 60 to 100 houses on the sports ground site would be at least 4 - 5 times that of the surrounding area and destroy the character and diminish the historical distinctiveness of he area, and also bring into question the future viability of the historic tennis club facility.
I believe that there is inadequate medical and school capacity to support the considerable increase in local population that the development of the sports ground would bring.
I would also question whether services such as the old drainage system would cope with development of the sports ground, Sharmans Cross road has already been the subject to extensive flooding in recent years

I was appalled to learn recently they the above location could be included in the Local Development Plan. As a resident of Sharmans Cross Road for over 40 years we have seen the traffic steadily increase with the opening of an Orthodontist Practise that ensure cars are parked on the road all day and the recent expansion of the Junior School ensuring even more parents are waiting on the road both morning and afternoon rush hour for up to 30 minutes.
The consequence of this is that cars mount the pavement with little attempt to slow at just the time the pavements are full of children. It can only be a matter of time before there is a fatality.

The council will be aware that this piece of ground has been a valuable sports facility for the neighbourhood for many years and when the lease was sold to Oakmoor (Sharmans Cross) Ltd in recent years it was on the premiss of honouring all of the existing covenants and obligations.
In 2013 an SMBC all party committee meeting affirmed as policy that they would not sell the freehold of the site or lift the covenants regarding the sites only being used for sporting purposes and as ancillaries to sport.

Solihull needs sports facilities in this part of the borough and it is to be hoped the Council will recognise and look after the needs of residents.

I object to the proposed Development Plan in respect of the development of the existing Rugby Ground adjacent to Sharmans Cross Road.

My Objections are as follows:-

1. Use of Land
SMBC stated unequivocally in 2013 that the use of the land was for sport only. This rule should be restated by SMBC and the land put back into use for sport by amateur clubs and groups wishing to use it. The facilities were well attended when used in the past. The current lease Holders have thwarted any attempts to use the Rugby Pitches by imposing disproportionate charges for use.

2. School and Medical facilities.
The current overstretched School and Medical services will be further stretched by the building of 67/100 new properties with their additional residents. This will have a detrimental effect on the provision for existing residents.

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

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

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

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

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

Re LDP site 245


I am writing as part of your consultation regarding the Old Rugby Group/Arden Tennis Club site. LDP site 245

I understand the council's need to build more housing, but I am concerned that the proposal to build on this particular site is on a scarce recreational amenity / resource and once it is gone, the impact for the community and the Borough will be greatly diminished.

I understand there is also an all party policy on the Rugby Ground maintaining a sports ground only covenant and would urge that this freehold should be retained.


In addition to losing this sports amenity / green wildlife area, the proposed building of houses on this site would also add a significant strain on the area due to the increasing density of the population, which would lead to worsening parking and increased road congestion. This is already significant. I am also concerned regarding access to medical and education resources which are already stretched.

I am writing to object to the proposed development on the rugby ground, Sharmans Cross Road that was meant to be used for sports. The 2013 policy stated that this land should be used for sport only and local residents demand that this should be how the area is used.

I believe that this development will put immense strain on the local environment. Traffic is already at dangerously high levels in this area especially around Streetsbrook Road. The parking and extra cars will only add to this.
Will they be including a new school or medical surgery in this development? As these local resource are already under strain and over subscribed.
Please consider my objections and concerns to any residential development plans for these sports fields.

See Letter

See letter

Regarding the Local Development Plan Site 245.

I demand' that the 2013 all party policy on the Rugby Ground on maintaining the sports ground only covenant and not selling the freehold be retained.

The proposed plans would damage the future of the tennis/squash club at a time when we should be encouraging sport, especially for the young!

The old rugby ground would an ideal and much needed pitch also for football if permitted. Lets make playing sport easier and accessible and not relocating to out of the way places which encourages cars.

I am sure if development went ahead it would also damage the mature oaks and other trees and go against your tree preservation orders.

I live in 33 Dorchester Road and so am writing to express my concern at the above proposal for the following reasons:

1. Increase in volume of traffic. Currently it is extremely slow to get onto Streetsbrook Road from Dorchester or Sharmans Cross. Adding 67 additional houses will greatly exacerbate that problem.
2. This will lead to safety issues for both pedestrians (especially school children at Sharmans Cross School) and cyclists.
3. This will also affect the level of air pollution in the surrounding area especially as many cars will be stationary with engines idling.
4. There is not the infrastructure in terms of schools (Sharmans Cross or Tudor Grange) to cope with an additional influx of people.
5. Medical facilities are already stretched to breaking point. I currently wait for at least 1 week for a doctor's appointment.
6. This level of housing density is completely at odds with all the surrounding houses.
7. Loss of sporting facilities - when a key government policy is to encourage people to be more active, loss of such facilities makes no sense. It was a grave error of judgement for the Council to agree to the transfer of the lease (with a historical restricting clause for only sporting usage) to a company of developers in 2007/8/9. This needs to be rectified by buying the lease back and reverting the facility for its original use.

It is my conclusion that the proposal is contrary to current local and regional planning policies and so should be rejected.

Whereas the need for additional human habitation dwellings
is an ever increasing problem that has to be addressed there
is also the need for recreational facilities and that is what this
land is covenanted for.
There are many a varied reasons that further housing particularly
with high density would be problematic at this site not least
of all the chaos by way of traffic the length of Sharmans Cross Road
at certain times of morning and evening.
I hope this whole venture is abandoned and a return to sports
activity happens . However that appears to need to some strong dealing
with Oakmoor from what I have read.

See attached letter

I am writing to express my very serious concerns in relation to the LDP including the old Rugby Ground/Arden Tennis Club site, Sharman's cross Road in its future projections.
As a neighbour in Welcombe Grove, Solihull, directly affected by these projections I formally object to these specific projections. It is vital that the 2013 all party policy on the Rugby Ground be retained where they would not sell the freehold of the site or lift the covenants; so in order to maintain its use for sporting purposes and as ancillaries to sport.
To propose some 67 - 100 mixed properties is totally unacceptable as its density will be between at least 4-5 times greater than the surrounding area.
I really urge SMBC to take back control of all of the land at the site, including the contentious 'sector' currently under the ownership of a firm of Property developers. In the short/medium term it should be returned to sporting use for the good of the borough, or as a site for say a new school, again with appropriate sporting facilities. I appreciate significant sums of money are involved but that should not stop us taking the right decision for Solihull.
It is my understanding that Solihull is well down the league in terms of providing sufficient sporting facilities/sites for their local sporting needs. Surely with an increasing population and new school places SMBC should be seeking to retain its sporting grounds under such circumstances.
Whilst I have sympathy towards the need for new housing in the Solihull area, SMBC are being terribly short sighted to let go of these excellent recreational facilities; when there are so many other areas of the Borough that are available and not in the Green Belt.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

LOCAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN SITE 245

I was very surprised to hear that the Rugby Club Ground, Sharman's Cross part of the Local Development Plan for new houses. I have previously written to you with my objections about this potential site and I do feel very strongly that this site needs to be removed from these plans once and for all.

I also believe that there was in 2013 there was an all-party policy agreement that the Rugby Ground would maintain the sports ground only covenant and that the freehold would not be sold, yet it has still been listed as available and suitable for new residential properties

I understand that Solihull Council has house building targets to meet and I am also aware that there is already significant amount of residential development in the Solihull area in the area around Tanworth Lane and Blyth Park. What concerns me in respect of the potential development of the Rugby Club Ground is that you will be just 'plonking' 67/100 houses in the middle of an already dense residential area. This would have significant impact in the area in respect of traffic flows, particularly during rush house. More importantly there is already inadequate medical health care capacity and the Schools are already oversubscribed.

The drainage in Solihull area is already a problem with regular flooding on prospect lane and more houses being built in such a small enclosed area would make this flooding even worse. Lastly and perhaps more importantly is the destruction of the character and general uniqueness of the area, which is lovely with lots of beautiful trees.

I therefore would request that you to immediately remove the Rugby Club ground from the local development plans and that the site is retained as sports facilities in line with the current lease arrangements and I demand that the 2013 all party policy agreement to maintain the sports ground only covenant and the freehold would not be sold, is not overturned

LOCAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN SITE 245

I was very surprised to hear that the Rugby Club Ground, Sharman's Cross part of the Local Development Plan for new houses. I have previously written to you with my objections about this potential site and I do feel very strongly that this site needs to be removed from these plans once and for all.

I also believe that there was in 2013 there was an all-party policy agreement that the Rugby Ground would maintain the sports ground only covenant and that the freehold would not be sold, yet it has still been listed as available and suitable for new residential properties

I understand that Solihull Council has house building targets to meet and I am also aware that there is already significant amount of residential development in the Solihull area in the area around Tanworth Lane and Blyth Park. What concerns me in respect of the potential development of the Rugby Club Ground is that you will be just 'plonking' 67/100 houses in the middle of an already dense residential area. This would have significant impact in the area in respect of traffic flows, particularly during rush house. More importantly there is already inadequate medical health care capacity and the Schools are already oversubscribed.

The drainage in Solihull area is already a problem with regular flooding on prospect lane and more houses being built in such a small enclosed area would make this flooding even worse. Lastly and perhaps more importantly is the destruction of the character and general uniqueness of the area, which is lovely with lots of beautiful trees.

I therefore would request that you to immediately remove the Rugby Club ground from the local development plans and that the site is retained as sports facilities in line with the current lease arrangements and I demand that the 2013 all party policy agreement to maintain the sports ground only covenant and the freehold would not be sold, is not overturned

I wish to raise the following objections to the proposed development of the former rugby club ground in Sharmans Cross Road.

1. The proposed development will have a serious effect on both pedestrian and vehicular safety of the area. At peak times an additional 100 - 200 cars exiting on to Sharmans Cross Road will inevitably endanger the large number of children making their way to Sharmans Cross Junior School. These young people are often unaccompanied and frequently use bicycles to travel to school. A great deal has been said in the last few years about the need for children to have more exercise. The increased volume of traffic may well deter parents from allowing their offspring to walk or cycle to school.

2. High pollution levels in the area will be increased by additional vehicles using Sharmans Cross Road and surrounding roads.

3. There have been many, many instances of flooding in Sharmans Cross Road. Any additional development in the area will only exacerbate the problem.

4. Historically Solihull Council affirmed as policy that the freehold of the site in question would not be sold and neither would they lift the covenant regarding the site only being used for sporting purposes and ancillary sporting use. By including this area in the Development Plan, this policy is not being adhered to.

5. The high density of the proposed development is totally out of character with the surrounding area. Figures of between 4 and 5 times the existing density have been mentioned.

6. Pow's Grove, a woodland area, not only separates Welcome Grove from the Rugby Club site, but also acts as a border between the Silhill Football Club and the proposed development. The bank (between the two sports grounds) and the Pow's Grove woodland is a haven for wildlife. I fear the habitats will be destroyed should a development take place.

7. The many mature trees (with Preservation Orders on them) which enclose the site will almost certainly be damaged or destroyed should the planning application be successful.

Local Plan site 245
Sharmans Cross Road

see letter of objection

Please accept this message as my formal objection to the proposed development. The site in question has been a sporting facility for more years than
many can remember and notwithstanding the need for housing this is almost certainly with profit in mind for the developer. Affordable housing is what required by the country and younger generation and the location is in a remarkably doubtful position for such an enterprise. Affordable it would not turn out to be therefore the only beneficiary would be developers creating yet more unaffordable properties for a few.
Sharmans Cross Road is already a dangerous traffic hazard and must not be increased. This proposal would generate horrendous additional problems.
Sporting facilities are amongst the priorities required for kids to aid their later lives etc.
The planning application should be denied.