Question 28 - Site 18 - Sharmans Cross Road

No
There is considerable concern over this site. Not only does the site provide community Sports facilities, it also operates as an informal Public Open Space. There are already considerable congestion issues along Sharmans Cross Road at peak times. This development would undoubtedly exacerbate these problems.

Dear Policy & Spatial Planning Department:
I am a resident of Solihull, and I am writing to express my concerns 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 a detrimental impact on local sporting facilities and is not in keeping with the surrounding roads to Sharmans Cross. This will result in the destruction of character and will diminish the distinctiveness of the area.
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. Since this time the amount of local sports facilities is Solihull gas continued to fall and yet the council now seem to be prepared to overlook their own policy. This is wrong.
I am also concerned with that the development will destroy the character of the neighborhood. 100 houses are effectively 4-5 times the density of property on Winterbourne Rd. This is unacceptable overdevelopment of the site and will be both out-of-scale and out- of-character in its appearance compared to existing development in the vicinity. Property in this area is highly sought after because of its distinctiveness and I fear this could become the thin end of a very large wedge allowing the character of the area to change. If allowed, how long will it be before the proposed development grows to take over the rest of the surrounding open space.
This area of Solihull is highly valued for its environmental benefits and contains many mature trees with Tree Preservation Orders. Development of houses will destroy this space which is enjoyed by many residents. It is also a known habitat for bats and badgers.
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.

I look forward to your response.

Substantial increase volume of traffic leading to increased congestion, especially at the junction of Sharman's cross/streetsbrook/stonar park/Dorchester roads and outside sharmans cross junior school.
More pollution.
Are there places for children at sharmans cross school? If not, children will have to be driven to further schools. See point above.
Strain on existing facilities - schools, doctors, dentist etc. More parking chaos at prospect road shops.
Loosing the old character of the area by changing the landscape and potentially cutting down old trees. Loss of wild life habitat.
Loosing local sports facilities.

See Letter

I refer to the above and Local Development Plan - item 245.

This area has for years been used as social and sporting. Since the demise of the Rugby Club it has been subject to speculation and concern by many.

Such a valuable natural facility is rare and should be cherished - once lost for development it will never come back. What wildlife considerations are made? Trees, Open spaces to enjoy, fresh air and a healthy area to be in once lost can not be replaced.

The proposal for housing is flawed. The road networks in that area are already stretched, the lack of other facilities in terms of Doctors must also raise concerns as well is there sufficient space in local schools?

It is appreciated that housing needs to be considered but there are so many more suitable areas in which such development could be made without disruption to life, nature or compromised road safety.

I wonder how traffic will enter and leave what would realistically be a new estate. Such of course not just attracting residents vehicles but all the necessary services, deliveries, and maintenance that go with it. You will appreciate many modern households probably have more than one vehicle.

Solihull used to be a fine area to live. We are in danger of loosing the title 'Urbs in Rure' for Development and seem to punish residents who will in turn lived in a confined space.

I would urge you and your colleagues to dismiss planning application / consideration and have the area returned to, and used by your residents for sporting, leisure and social activity. Please do not loose such a valuable open space but consider enhancing the same for the benefit of all present and future.

Proposed Housing Allocation Site No 18
Sharman's Cross Road Rugby Ground

I am utterly amazed that the above sports ground is again been considered for housing development.

This issue was considered by the council in 2013. Its findings were that this land should remain for sporting purposes and the council affirmed this policy and they would not sell the freehold of this site or lift the covenants and that this land to be used only for sporting purposes.

Since 2013 no effort as far as I can tell have been made by the owners of the land to attract or use this ground for any sporting purpose. From hearsay, efforts have be made by various people to have use of the ground, but their requests have been ignored.

I respectfully request that the council make efforts for this land to be removed from The Local Development Plan. I believe this will be the only way that sporting activities will return to this ground.

I wish to oppose the inclusion of the old Rugby Club Ground in Sharmans Cross Road in The Local Development Plan for new houses.

The Planning Committee must reiterate its 2013 all party policy on maintaining the sports ground covenant on this site.

The proposals for such a high density of houses, which is 4 to 5 times the density of adjacent housing, would be completely out of keeping and character with the surrounding area and take away from Solihull residents the beneficial effects of this green space asset. If this sports ground and open space is taken away it will never be replaced, countering the recognised benefits of retaining sports grounds and parkland within town and urban areas for the health and well-being for the community now and for generations to come.

Additional road traffic from and to the proposed development would overwhelm the current road system in the area, causing road traffic congestion and increase the risk to pedestrians and cyclists ( especially school children from Sharmans Cross Junior School ). It would almost certainly require major road work improvements at the junction of Sharmans Cross Road and Streetsbrook Road.

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

The impact of the proposals on wildlife and protected trees in the area and the adjacent Pow Grove would be extremely damaging.

The criteria for Sustainability are not met in that the National Policy Framework requires that developments have access to local amenities within 800m/10mins walk away. This site is 1000m from the train station and 1700m from Solihull town centre.

Bearing these points in mind, I ask that the 2013 all party committee meeting which affirmed the policy that they would not sell the freehold of this site or lift the covenants regarding the site only being used for sport be upheld and that this plot of land is left, as intended for sports use only.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

See attached letter

I wish to object to the use of the Sharmans Cross Road site being used as a building site for 67/100 houses. I strong object to this and wish for it to carry on being used as a sporting site as it was many years ago.
The site should be retained...
I believe building the houses on the site would create
1. The area will become overpopulated and very busy
2. There will need to be more school as Sharmans Cross junior will not be able to populate more students
3. Traffic on the road is already awful just the other day there was a crash, which resulted to a car going up in flames!
4. Drainage would become even worse due to Victorian drainage system already being vulnerable all year around
5. The Arden club will have an effect, potentially being used as a walk through into Solihull, which the club are already battling against
6. Will destroy the characteristics of the Victorian houses
7. Also if the houses of lower value than those already here the area will see the effect with crime
I wish to help save this site and am fully against the building site of 67/100 houses

I strongly object to the current planning proposal under consideration for the above site.
I have objected at every stage will continue to do so.
This land MUST be retained for sporting purposes as outlined in the current lease with Oakmoor Estates Ltd.
In my opinion it is not a site suitable for a residential housing development of between 67 and 100 homes.
The area will become so densely populated which is completely out of character with the surrounding area. This will have a direct impact on the character of the area.
Building houses on this site will also cause major problems from a drainage & flooding viewpoint. Sharmans Cross Road is already suffering badly in this area due to the Victorian drains.
We also do not have the capacity for the increased parking issues the building of new homes would create.
Is there also a suitable infrastructure in place to cope with increased demand for school places ? Medical facilities will need to be increased too.is there capacity here too ?
I am currently a member of the Arden Tennis Club. Surely residential homes could damage its future as a longstanding Sporting facility ?
We need to retain this site for sporting purposes only. We need to encourage & facilitate any sporting groups the ability to use such a site as it had been historically.
At present it is an overgrown eyesore that has been left to decay. It is very quickly becoming a site for anti social behaviour & this must stop !
I am actively saying NO to a residential development.

I would like to voice my objection to the proposed building of residential properties on local development plan site 245 (Rugby ground).

My objection is based on the effect on local amenities such as schools and doctors and also the knock on effect on amenities in wider surrounding areas. Facilities are already at breaking point. The massive amount of building work that has already taken place in Shirley/Cheswick Green/Dickens Heath and other parts of Solihull has had a hugely detrimental effect on traffic and access to doctors etc.

The pace of building work needs to be slowed unless amenities are in place and needs of existing residents need to be considered. Regard also needs to be given to features such as leisure facilities or green belt which give an area its character.

Sharmans cross road development of playing fields
I am registering my objection to the proposed development of the playing fields in Sharmans cross road.

My reasons are quite simple
The density of properties is at its peak currently The roads, schools, doctors do not have the capacity to cope with a new development The traffic is already to heavy and any increase would be dangerous there are already issues with parking and air pollution from stationary traffic. The pavements are particularly small in certain areas and there will undoubtedly be increased danger to pedestrians, especially children who walk and cycle to school. There was a major incident only last night.
There are not enough sporting grounds in the borough, if any development goes ahead another sporting space would be lost forever, as I understand there is a commitment by the council to keep this land as sporting ground.

I am disappointed to see that the Arden tennis club site (Local Development Plan Site 245) is again being considered for development.

The existing covenants on this land maintain that the land should be used for sporting activities. Going against this will seriously damage the trust we have in Solihull MBC and the planning process. Taking away opportunities to participate in sport, or simply spend time outdoors will have detrimental long-term health and well-being impacts for our young people. We should be developing this site together as a community and using it to support people's health and well-being, not taking it away. We can continue to use it as a sports ground while also using it as a space to access nature and have other amenities for young people to play, such as a playground.

I recognise that the plan does not intend to directly impact on Pow Grove LWS/Ancient Woodland. However, I am concerned that the development will negatively impact the network of corridors that are so important for creating pathways for birds and mammals to move between habitats. For example, the increase in pollutants from cars next to the LWS will harm many different species from lichens and bryophytes to insects and birds, impacting the intricate food chains and ecological diversity of the LWS. There is evidence that the decrease in house sparrows (a UK BAP priority species) is directly related to the decrease in insects which is thought to be due to a number of factors, including air pollution (nitrogen dioxide from combustion in particular) and lack of hedgerow diversity, something which gardens of new build homes will almost certainly be. The dense proximity of houses will disrupt species in other ways - increased noise can impact bird and mammal behaviour, garden use of insecticide and herbicides and dust smothering vegetation. Pow Grove is all that remains of a once larger site and it is important that we protect it as a wildlife refuge; there are few left in Solihull.

I must also comment on the increased burden this development will have on the junction between Sharmans Cross Road and Streetsbrook Road. If you travel through this junction between 7:30 and 9:00am you will know how congested this spot is already. The addition of 100+ more cars from the proposed development would affect this junction severely. On still days, the level of air pollution at this junction is tangible, we should be working to reduce it, not add to it. From a safety perspective, Sharmans Cross Road is busy already and cars drive too fast along it. I believe there was an accident just this week involving someone leaving the Arden site. We do not need more cars adding to this busy area.

My final concern is with the increased burden on amenities. Are there proposals for new infants schools and doctors surgeries within the area? The areas currents schools and doctors are already massively oversubscribed. I was recently offered a routine doctor's appointment for four weeks time, which is an unacceptable wait. I do not think the area has the suitable amenities for a development of this size.


I ask that you remove site 245 from the local development plan.

In my view it is unacceptable that the council would even consider the use of the rugby ground for future development. In 2013 the council agreed that the freehold of the ground would not be sold nor would the covenant be lifted stating that it should only be used for sporting purposes.

Solihull has so few facilities for sport that it would be unforgivable for this to be lost. Building more houses would only increase the need for such sporting facilities.
In the interests of the local people, the council should, therefore, insist that a realistic rent be offered (not £60,000 a year) by Oakmoor and that they demand that the pitches be maintained in good order

Please accept this e-mail as a formal objection to the proposed development at the rugby club and tennis grounds on Sharmans Cross Road.


It is an absolute discredit to even consider spoiling one of Solihull's most profound and greener areas. Solihull itself is well known for its greenery, plantations and extensive greenlands. This would effectively destroy all of this as well as any nature / wildlife that currently occupies the site. We have come to love the area for its tranquillity and undisturbed habitat but this ludicrous proposal which has been suggestive for a few years now would contribute towards creating a concrete jungle. There are plenty of other areas around the West Midlands that would benefit more from such developments and having this development here would diminish Solihull of its identity and exclusivity.


Traffic & Congestion - The traffic is already somewhat bad on the road and the adjoining roads - you only have to see this in the mornings and evenings to understand. I do not want to be in a position where it takes an hour to go 1 mile up the road.


Schools & Doctors - These are all bursting at the seams already. It takes several attempts to see a doctor at the moment with my local surgery. With an increased population this will be near impossible - please consider this ramification for the elderly and those who require immediate consultations. Schools are already difficult to get into within the borough and are oversubscribed. This will only get worse if an influx of residents arrive to the area.


Sporting facilities - There are lots of sporting events that take place at both sites and members use the grounds extensively. Where will these people go to if the ground is taken away? It was quoted that SMBC has a statutory requirement to ensure loss of pitches are replaced with facilities of equivalent quality and accessibility. Sport England found that Solihull is in the 3rd quartile nationally for over-16 participation in sport and continues to fall in national league tables. If this land is replaced by housing then this statistic would decline exponentially.


Legal Covenant - The 2013 all party policy on the Rugby Club maintaining the 'sports only ground' covenant and NOT selling the freehold would be maintained at any cost. This policy should be re-affirmed that has strictly said that any such development is NOT appropriate for inclusion in the local development plan (LDP) and the ground should be removed from the LDP for any housing scheme


Privacy for existing households - Additional development will affect the privacy of the surrounding dwellings by reducing natural light where the proposed houses overlook gardens. The proposal suggests a mix of family sized town houses and terraced dwellings, plus dwellings for apartments and underground car parking. Just stop to take a look around the area please. The existing houses all have character and something appealing about them. Newer developments would not even come close to this especially squashed behind existing property. This type of mixed, large-scale development in this setting will greatly alter the nature of this area. Solihull has some of the most prestigious and sought-after property in the whole of the West Midlands that cannot be replicated. This unique character should be maintained and not devalued. Opportunities for crime, congestion and the general cleanliness of the surroundings will increase as a consequence.


Trees and conservation orders - The site is flat, its boundaries contain mature vegetation and trees, much of it protected by Tree Preservation Orders (TPO) . Removal of mature and protected trees will contribute to local and global climate changes. Removal of very mature tree roots will also affect ground conditions, i.e. increased risk of flooding and cost to rectify foundations affected.


Flooding - Sharmans Cross Road has been prone to flooding over the years and any development entailing changes to the existing landscape and roads will increase the problem of poor surface water drainage.


Distance to local amenities - This proposed site will not be within walking distance to Solihull town centre or Solihull train station which breaches policy set by the National Planning & Policy Framework of having local amenities within an 800m distance.


Policy considerations - This proposed development does nothing to protect and enhance the amenities of existing residents and are contrary to policies P14 and P15 of the Solihull Local Plan that are supposed to protect Solihull and its existing residents from inappropriate development.

The proposed sites are of great historical importance to the area. Not only have they stood as landmarks for Solihull but also serve as recreational grounds for many who have a keen interest in sport. This should not be taken away from those who have been using the facilities for a prolonged period of time. To my knowledge there is not another Rugby club for some distance away from this one. The tennis club also has other sporting facilities available and is busy so the addition of a housing development would cause chaos for those wanting to enjoy recreational time and those wanting to have access to their properties.

Please think about this rationally and carefully. The unspoilt habitat will be completely destroyed and such a development will bring the area into dismay. This is completely the incorrect dwelling for a housing development. I do agree that there is a housing shortage but there are plenty of other sites that would benefit more from this. Please do NOT go about destroying an area that boasts a certain reputation and is held in high esteem within the West Midlands. Consideration should be given to existing residents and not to developers who are interested in seeking financial gain.

I am writing to register my objections to the proposed inclusion of the Sharmans Cross Road Rugby Ground in the LDP.

This land is subject to a covenant to protect it as a sports facility for the people of Solihull and I demand that Solihull Council uphold the covenant and retain the facility for sporting purposes in line with the 2013 All Party Policy on the rugby Ground.

It is astonishing that the Council has allowed the current lessors to deliberately prevent the facility from being used by local clubs and to breach the terms of their lease without challenge. Solihull needs all of its sporting facilities and steps should be taken to ensure the land is used for the purposes it was intended.

The plans to build 67/100 houses is totally out of keeping with the surrounding area in terms of density and scale.

The adjacent roads already suffer with flooding and traffic congestion in the rush hour and around school finishing times and the site would only make these matters worse.

It would destroy valuable green space for this and future generations and have an impact on the mature trees, some of which have tree preservation orders.

The damage to the surrounding area of such a dense and inappropriate development cannot be overstated.

The land should be removed from the LDP and Solihull Council should act immediately to ensure the Covenant is protected and the terms of the lease are enforced.

Local Development Plan Site 245
Dear Sirs,

I am appalled that the council should even consider the rugby ground as suitable for development. These are my reasons:-
* No other sports pitches within reasonable distance. There is a distinct lack of changing facilities especially for girls, but also boys. The pitches were left in trust to the council who should be enforcing the terms of the lease.
* There is a demand for suitable pitches at an affordable rent, not the ridiculous rents quoted by the developers, Oakmoor, to dissuade people from using them.
* Any suggested development which is far denser than the surrounding area would be totally inappropriate.
* At 1.5 cars per house (67-100 houses) this would increase the pressure on parking in our area to an unacceptable level.
* Increasing the number of homes in this area would put more pressure on doctors and schools who are already struggling to keep up with demand.
* There are tree preservation orders on trees in the area which is also home to bats.

In my opinion the whole site is better suited to providing much needed football and rugby pitches with proper changing facilities and parking to meet the needs of the area. This is in line with the National Policy Framework which states that "Local planning authorities should..take account of the needs of the local population(such as for sport)".

I would like to raise my objections to the proposed development on Sharmans Cross Road, for the following reasons:

1. The playing fields and the tennis club provide important outdoor sporting facilities for the local (and wider) community and any removal of these facilities, in favour of construction, would be a negative step.
2. The playing fields and surrounding environment provide an important open space which benefits both the wildlife and the health of local residents.
3. The development would create significant levels of noise and pollution both during construction phases and on completion, which would have a negative affect on the area.
4. The density of the development would not be in keeping with the characteristics of the local environment.
5. The existing road network around the site is not suitable for handling the increased levels in traffic that would be created by the development and this would lead to increased noise, pollution, congestion and risk to all road users and pedestrians.
6. The development would put further pressure on local services such as schools and medical services which would have a negative affect on both those services and the community

See Letters

I am writing to lodge my strong objections to the above site being included in the LDP.

This is a site which should never have been included in the plan and must remain as a sporting facility for use by the people of Solihull.

It has a covenant on the site which restricts its use for sporting purposes only, and I demand that this be upheld by Solihull council in accordance with the provisions of the covenant and the 2013 all party policy on the rugby ground.

The lessor should be made to put into effect the conditions of the lease rather than seeking to obstruct local clubs from using the land for sport by imposing extortionate fees to rent or use the facility.

Apart from anything else the plans to build so many houses on the site would be totally out of keeping with the surrounding area and cause parking, congestion and drainage problems for the adjacent roads and houses.

It is a dense and ridiculous proposal which would have a detrimental effect on the mature locality. We need to preserve our green spaces in Solihull, not destroy them.

This site should be excluded from the LDP.

letter of objection to local development plan site 245
(site 18 -Sharman's Cross road)

See Letter

I live in Winterbourne Road. We have lived at our current address for almost 8 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 8 and 5. 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. The statement that the proposal was previously rejected due to the lack of affordable housing and thus the principle of development was considered acceptable is simply not correct. The volume of objections received by the Council made it clear that the development was in no way considered acceptable particularly because of the impact on the wider community - I expand on this further below,

In response to Q28 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

The proposal includes the land on the old rugby pitches being developed.


It removes the potential for any development of the site to enable it to become a focus for community sport for children, young adults and older generations. Having access to such facilities which is key to promoting well-being (physical and mental) in our community.

Oakmoor has mentioned previously that the site has been derelict and subject to vandalism for at least 6 years. My understanding is that Oakmoor has previously 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 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 and surrounding roads. 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. In addition, many of the trees around the boundary of the site are subject to TPOs and the impact on the environment of increased pollution, loss of natural habitat for wildlife etc does not appear to have been taken into account at all in the draft master plan.

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.

Local Development Plan Site 245
I have no doubt that you will have had many objections to the putative usurping of the 2013 all party policy on the sports ground only covenant on the Rugby Ground. Selling the freehold for residential development would be both ill-advised and short sighted. The following reasons support this contention, viz:

The density would be 5 times that of the surrounding area.

The character and distinctiveness of the surrounding area would be diminished.

Parking in the surrounding area would become a nightmare.

There are a number of tree preservation orders in operation.

The Victorian drainage system is already fully stretched. And would, almost certainly, break down completely if forced to cope with an increase in capacity.

The existing medical/educational facilities would be sore pressed to cope with the influx that would result from proposed residential development.

Please take this email as formal objections to the Plan from myself and my wife.

See letters 1-4

LDP - Proposed Housing Allocation Site 18
I am writing to state I believe the 2013 all party policy for the Rugby Ground to maintain the sports ground covenant and not sell the freehold should be enforced. I am deeply concerned if the plans go ahead and feel the council should listen to all the objections.

There will be a complete change in the area if it goes ahead - it wouldn't be in the same scale as the existing housing in the area and out of character.

Already, Dorchester Road is seeing a huge increase in traffic as Streetsbrook Road is becoming a standstill traffic jam most mornings, if the development goes ahead the traffic volume would increase beyond what I feel the roads can carry and would cause a huge disruption to residents and commuters alike.

My children walk or ride to school where possible and we walk regularly round the area and I truly worry about their safety should the development go ahead and there would subsequently be an increase in the amount of cars in the area.

Parking would be a major issue, Sherman's Cross Road is already heavily congested at peak times and this would increase and become a danger to school children, pedestrians and road users.

Flooding is another issue I am concerned with as the development would only add to and ever increasing current situation.

The schools in the area are already over subscribed and adding more houses would only add to this situation.

As I understand, l the National Planning Policy framework requires developments to have access to local amenities within 800m/10mins walk and this site doesn't fulfil that, being 1700m from Solihull and 1000m from the station so it has no validity.

I urge the council to make the right decision and not allow the plans to go ahead and retain the grounds for what they were intended.

With reference to the Local Development Proposed Housing Allocation Site 18, I understand that in 2013 there was a SMBC all party committee meeting which agreed that the freehold for the Solihull Rugby Ground on Sharmans Cross Road would not be sold and that the covenants for the ground be honoured, with the land only to be used for sporting purposes. The LDP Proposed Housing Allocation Site 18 is in direct conflict with this and I urge the rejection of this proposal.

Furthermore I also understand that Silhill Football Club have requested use of the pitches for football and have approached Oakmoor the leaseholder who have proposed an annual fee of £60,000. This is outrageous as Oakmoor pay just £250 per annum. Oakmoor clearly have no interest in using the ground for sporting purposes nor the local community and wish to use the ground for their own gain. I consider this a disgrace and SMBC should rescind the lease with Oakmoor and ensure the use for sporting purposes as intended.

Additional points relating to LDP Proposed Housing Allocation Site 18 which concern me are:

* 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 believe that there is already a shortage of rugby and football pitches in the area which need safeguarding. I have lived in Solihull for 57 years and over this time have been saddened to see our parks, playing fields and green spaces eroded. These valuable and essential spaces need protecting for a health future of Solihull.

* Scale & Density - The proposed development plan of 67/100 houses would represent a density of 4 - 5 times that of the surrounding area. This is completely out of character and inappropriate for the location.

* Traffic issues / Access & Egress - The area is already very busy with traffic and the addition of a significant number of dwellings will compound the situation. Parking is also a major issue in this area. LDP Proposed Housing Allocation Site 18 will only compound the situation.

* Drainage & Sewage - The area already suffers from poor drainage, excess surface water and when there is heavy rainfall there is sewage overflow. The loss of pitches and a new housing development will exasperate the situation and put increased pressure on the already inadequate drainage system

* Solihull Arden Rackets Club - The club (of which I am a member) currently utilises parking on the rugby club ground. Despite this at peak times there is inadequate parking space. The reduced parking for the rackets club would cause serious difficulties which would compound the above mentioned traffic and parking issues. In addition I fear that with the potential disruption during the lengthy building process, this could result in the loss of many members which ultimately could result in the closure of the club, leading to the potential loss of more green land and further reduce the recreational facilities in the centre of Solihull.


I do not consider LDP Proposed Housing Allocation Site 18 to be in the interest of Solihull and I urge the rejection to this proposal.

see attached letter

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

1) Sporting Facilities - I understand the Rugby pitch has a stipulation which requires the site to be used for sporting purpose.
As a football coach of a Solihull based u12's football team, and having been so for 6 years, I know how difficult and expensive it is to find local facilities.
We currently have to travel twice a week, both times for an hour in rush hour traffic, to north Solihull to find adequate facilities to train on. Additionally, we also have to move out of the area to play our home matches on Saturday, both due to the lack of, and over subscription of the current sporting facilities available locally.


Not withstanding the inconvenience this causes, for parents all of who live in the B91 area, I know that as just one team I pay around £4,500 -£5,000 for training grounds, match day pitches and club facilities/hospitality, which I would much prefer to spend helping my local facilities and businesses.


I, myself would be interested in leasing/using the facilities, however I understand the holders either do not respond to enquiries, or price the site unrealistically, so that it makes it unviable for the use it was intended.
It feels that the current leaseholders are not interested in using this as a sports facility and this really feels like an underhanded approach by the holders.


I believe with this stipulation that these grounds are inappropriate for inclusion in the LDP, even though multiple attempts for planning permission have been put forward.

My concern is that grounds for sport will disappear with these plans for building and others in the area. We really need to invest in our youth to ensure a healthy lifestyle. Taking away facilities does not support this philosophy. This experience is supported by the data from the National league tables for participation in sport 3 or more times a week which indicates that Solihull is the 3rd quartile (in the 50th to 75th spot).


2) Local Amenities - As a dad of 2 children (aged 13 & 12), I am concerned about the lack of local amenities to service an increased community/population as a result of 67-100 properties being built i.e. school & college places, doctor, hospitals etc.

3) Flooding -We already experience issues with flooding on Sharmans Cross Road and in the gardens running along Beaminster Road. The drainage systems are not equipped to cope with additional usage from an additional 67-100 families.

4) Additional traffic and issues with parking - I am concerned from a safety perspective (my children walking to school) and also the increase congestion and gridlock in the morning and evening.

5) Sustainability. The National Planning Policy Framework requires developments to have access to local amenities within 800m/10
minutes' walk. The site is 1700m from Solihull town centre and 1000m from the station, so these criteria are not met

6) Schools and Medical
Centres. These amenities are already oversubscribed. When calling to make an appointment for my son this week, I found myself number 36 in a queue and had to wait on hold for 35 minutes to get a doctors appointment, having called within 1 minute of the surgery opening at 8am.
This development will further increase demand leading to a degradation of services for residents.

I am really concerned with these plan, and would appreciate you an acknowledgement.