Question 20 - Site 25 - School Road

I object to the development on this land due to:-
1) Public transport not good enough for increased number of residents
2) Traffic generation. School Road is not adequate for the amount of traffic generated.
3) Highway Safety. Increased traffic around the school will be dangerous to pupils.
4) Drainage. The drainage system already cannot cope.
5) School will be unable to cope with additional families.
6) GP/Pharmacy. Inability to get appointment already an issue
7) Wildlife in these fields will be impacted.
8) Fields are already waterlogged most of the year.

I object to the proposed development because:-
1) Traffic generation. School Road & village road structure cannot cope.
2) Highway Safety. Increased traffic will be a danger to pupils.
3) Drains. The village drainage system already struggles.
4) Health. It is already difficult to get a GP appointment.
5) Nature conservation. There are lots of wildlife in the fields.
6) Fields are heavily waterlogged already
7) Public Transport is already poor and would need to be improved.

The draft concept masterplan seems to work well, though not knowing what type of houses are proposed it's difficult to fully comment. I am keen that new development on this site is restricted to no more than 100 houses - preferably less, no more than 50 to enable more green space left around the new houses. I would like the houses to be of a high quality such as those by Waterloo housing in HH and to include a range of sizes. Also no more than 2 story high & considerations for traffic calming on School Road.

My house is directly opposite site 25. I object on grounds of being overlooked/loss of privacy if developed.
I object to the land being taken out of green belt as it is a haven for wildlife including deer.
100 houses would generate as many if not more cars onto an already busy road with a school and loss of field drainage would add to flooding issues experienced recently.
Developers would no doubt strip out every tree and hedge before SMBC could stop them.
There is sufficient access to the canal without another entrance opposite my house

My objection to further development, on this scale, in School Road is TRAFFIC. it is already difficult to exit School Road since the introduction of average speed cameras. In the past there were breaks in the traffic, now traffic is slower but gaps are less frequent.

100 dwellings is too many. Each property could easily support two vehicles. If each vehicle left and returned once per day that would add an extra 400 vehicles to School Road every day. Add to that the expected increase in traffic, both on School Road and Stratford Road from the Blythe Valley development and traffic joining via Aylesbury Road from the large development on the site of Arden School and it is not difficult to see that the area is already heading for gridlock, without any other development.

The plan refers to having access to existing amentities. Other than the school we have very few amentities. The nearest doctors surgery is in Dorridge, and already has over 11,000 patients registered and the pharmacy is at capacity for dispensing prescriptions. You can shop in Hockley Heath for a swimming pool, a very expensive bathroom or a very high end car, not to mention light fittings. The hairdressers has recently closed down and is apparently going to be a Kitchen shop. Meanwhile we are close to losing our Post Office. Only the small One Stop shop is of much use on a weekly basis.

The exit to this development is at a point where cars park for the school. It is already difficult to get past at pick up times. The bend close to the school is dangerous due to the parking bay very close to the bend which causes vehicles to go wide on the outward journey and meet traffic cutting the corner on the inward journey. Bad parking adds to the probelm.

The footpath close to the recent Spitfire development has been damaged by large vehicles parking on the pavement whilst waiting to deliver to that site. It has not all been repaired by Spitfire.

The fields in question are extremely wet and any building would require significant drainage. As the council already know there have been issues with flooding on School Road and the new Spitfire development opposite.

Object to release of washed over/green belt.. School Road affected already by development in Cheswick Green/Blythe Valley/Dickens Heath, road dangerous and not suitable for more traffic. Increase in homes will result in greater difficulty with no additional access direct to A3400, build-up of traffic leaving School Road.

Flooding an issue opposite Tutnall Drive and surrounding fields along School Road.

School capacity already at a maximum, more housing = local children may not be accommodated in village school.

Village facilities would be stretched, proposals for bus service reduction, no doctor/pharmacy or local businesses, means more people, more congestion.

Object to release of washed over/green belt.. School Road affected already by development in Cheswick Green/Blythe Valley/Dickens Heath, road dangerous and not suitable for more traffic. Increase in homes will result in greater difficulty with no additional access direct to A3400, build-up of traffic leaving School Road.

Flooding an issue opposite Tutnall Drive and surrounding fields along School Road.

School capacity already at a maximum, more housing = local children may not be accommodated in village school.

Village facilities would be stretched, proposals for bus service reduction, no doctor/pharmacy or local businesses, means more people, more congestion.

Green belt should be protected and there is already too much traffic on School Road without adding another 100 houses. Also with the expansion of Blyth Valley and the decision to open the emergency access road then even more traffic is likely to be directed up School Risd. The village does not have the local amenities to cope with this additional housing

If you have studied the school traffic in the mornings and afternoons you will realise there isn't sufficient space for cars nor safety measures in place to keep children safe today. Extending the number of properties and therefore village population will only endanger children further.

Hockley Heath is beauty small village. The area around school road should remain clear of new build due to the school being so close. The school is also at maximum capacity in my opinion and adding more spaces will be a detriment to the education our children receive.
The build will also take away the beautiful green land which is home to wildlife and make Hockley Heath the beautiful village it is. I do not agree with this plan.

The land south of school road should not be considered as allocated site. That area is beautiful and green and should not be used to build on. Hockley Heath is a thriving small village. More homes would also mean pressure on the school to provide spaces. Current students will suffer as the ratio between students and teachers will increase making their education tougher
Hockley Heath is a beautiful small village and will not thrive from a development that big. The school is already at capacity, with adding more children, the children who already go there will suffer academically due to more children against one teacher.
I also oppose due to the building taking away the beautiful greenery we have in the village which is home to wildlife. I strongly oppose the building work.

Definitely removed our villages need to retain their identity not be swallowed up into large communities by over development. Use brownfield sites first plenty of offices and old factory sites vacant that could be used.

Green belt provides an important break between the suburban spread and countryside. This proposal is eroding this and will mean that future development will be considered in the green belt. Hockley Heath will become part of the Dorridge/Knowle Suburban sprawl. Should we not be considering more brown field sites in urban areas and housing options that provide higher densities?.

School road is already dangerous with many traffic accidents occurring, it is too narrow for the traffic at present. This will be further exacerbated by the housing proposals at Blythe Valley. More development on School Road will lead to accidents if the road is not improved.

Infrastructure in Hockley Heath will not accommodate this significant rise in households. There are few public transport options, limited shops for locals and the school is already crammed onto a small site.

These proposals will increase development in housing in Hockley Heath from 792 dwellings by a further 20% (144 houses all on School road). This is very disproportionate and with proposals at Blythe Valley will severely effect what is essentially a rural community

School Road is 16ft. wide for much of its length and is already busy and dangerous. Additional traffic generated by 100 new homes and the Blythe Valley development will add to the likelihood of accidents, especially at school times. The neighbourhood plan survey conducted in 2018 showed no local support for new developments in School Road and proposed that if these were necessary they should be to the north of the road, which makes a natural boundary for the Green Belt. Surely the views of local residents who know the area should be considered in such matters.

School Road is already a busy narrow road. An additional 100 homes will create more congestion and satefy concerns for the school

Area infrastructure will not cope

The Promise of a drop off area for the school is totally missing the point and misleading . The issues are with school drop off yes but the traffic along the length of the narrow and pot holed ridden School road is the wider issue. What you are actually saying is the developer will provide some small amount of land to actually encourage more people to drive and drop their kids off at school. When Blythe Valley housing comes on-board this road will be used as a RAT Run and the quality of life will be diminished for existing residents.
This development will be to the determent of the local people but I am sure the developer will be able to market the houses at a premium as many have a canal side view! Who will benefit here?
Local Young people = NO because they will not be able to afford them . Answer is Wealthy individuals who can pay the prices for these homes . Has any assessment been carried out on the overall impact of the additional 200+ cars that will use School road together with Blythe Valley Traffic and existing? The answer is No I strongly Object.

Further housing compounds the existing issues of school parking/access into and out of school road outside a busy primary school. Access onto the main Stratford Road which is already troublesome.
Wildlife and major trees should be taken into account as there regular citings of wild monkjac dear,foxes ,badgers and herons to name a few

I object to any development on the green belt. We have so many brownfield sites which need improving that all development should take place. Building on the green belt in Hockley Heath would not only be bad for local wildlife but would diminish the quality of life for the residents who live there.There is no shortage of housing in this village and the kind of houses which would be built there would just be executive homes which would not enable young people from the village to live there.
As previously I object strongly to Green Belt development for reasons outlined above and can see no justification for increasing congestion and pollution in order for property developers to profit.
To add at least 100 houses to a small village with no chemist, doctors surgery, one small shop is causing problems. It will destroy the village nature of Hockley Heath and just attract further commuter traffic. We have a small school which will be unlikely to accommodate those numbers.

The sites in question are green belt and therefore should not be used for building, hence why they are green belt. The council in agreeing for this to be developed would be washing over the fact that there is no ribbon of development but they are happy to create one. Adding the increase in traffic on a little narrow road, putting children at risk when walking to school. There are 1000 homes being built in Blythe Valley therefore traffic will already increase ten fold. Instead of looking at green grassland, this will become yet another concrete housing block.
Where will the horses go that roam this field, what will become of them? 12% of an already over populated area will cause terrible effects on the community. People buying these houses will be working families who will drop their kids off at school on route, they will not walk - hence the infrastructure in relation to the school will only become worse.
I do not believe that Green Belt should be used for 100 houses, whilst there are houses on the other side of the road this cannot be used as a Ribbon of development. The houses located on School Road are large detached plots, with large gardens to front and rear, therefore not being looked over by any other houses. This should therefore not be deemed as a ribbon of development, or allow a housing estate to be built on a small amount of land. The land is green belt, this was put there for people to come out of the in inner city areas and look at beauty, regrettably this is to be removed to build yet more houses. Green belt should be left alone, already using green belt to build a housing estate at blythe valley, there is no need to use the green belt in hockley heath. Also the effect on the environment where there are birds, badgers, foxes etc, the habitat will be removed - animals will lose their homes, this is not acceptable. Building the houses on green belt will destroy the environment, noise and pollution, risk of flooding etc

there is no way that School road could possibly cope with any more traffic as it is already hazardous during school peak times and delays getting onto the a34. School road in the other direction is a narrow lane which would struggle to accomodate increased traffic volumes. also the local amenities are insufficient for so many more local residents. with the blythe valley development, school road will already be under much more pressure due to additional local traffic.

Site 25 should not be included for the following reasons:
1. This removes most of the green belt from the village itself.
2. Additional infrastucture strain both on School Road, the school and other services in the area
3. The current plan, by the agents, for this site is for 100 houses on land which the LDP itself identifies as capable of 139 houses at least. Once green belt protection is removed there is nothing to stop either the current agent/developers or a subsequent developer from, from moving the nature area planned on site and pushing more housing through planning.

Hockley Heath is bounded by Green Belt,described by the WM Police and others as one of 'Solihull Rurals'. This plan around the building of 100 dwellings along the South side of School Road is dangerous and could easily result in more accidents and maybe even fatalities. I object to the inclusion of plot 25 in the SLP for several reasons detailed below:
It is currently green belt
Across the canal is further green belt being part of Warwickshire and it is in harmony with that green belt.The SLP will turn it into non-green belt and intrude on a well-defined and respected part of the village.
The parking outside the school is already a mess at times, this will only make it worse
100 dwellings squeezed in to the plot is not in harmony with the rest of the developments in the area
Extra traffic on School road will lead to more accidents, especially considering that the other end of School road will finish up in or near an exit from Blythe Valley with its own high density building.plan
There is no plan in place to improve the flooding risk. Why is there no action plan to address the serious flooding on the A3400 in May 2018 ?
The village is short of key infrastructure to support the current population, at a minimum a doctor's surgery and pharmacy is required, the Post Office needs to be replaced as the current owners want to retire..
The new development suggested makes this unlikely to happen as it doesn't appear to be zoned as retail services space but solely housing
This is a non-proportional increase in HH housing which is not needed in Solihull 'rurals', but is trying to address part of Birmingham's housing needs. A city over 12 miles away with poor local transport links to HH. During the end of week-days and start of days, the queues of traffic trying to get out of any HH living space are already long. This new development will only make it worse.
as will the new development in Warwks, but next to the Solihull boundary along Aylesbury road.

Site 25 is unsuitable for development because:
It is green belt land where wildlife will be destroyed e.g. a heron was in the field today.
This semi-rural setting will be spoiled by additional noise and light pollution
It is a low lying area of land often flooded - ponies kept in the field have developed "foot rot" and had to be destroyed.
School Road is a narrow lane, winding and subject to flooding.
There is currently considerable parking congestion at the school. School will be overwhelmed for places.
School Road traffic will increase greatly with Blythe Valley homes.

I do not believe that Site 25 land of School Road should be included in the allocated site.
In the 2018 HHPC Neighbourhood survey areas for development were questioned and the results from the community were that this area, specifically, should not be developed.
 Residents were given seven areas of the village and asked to pick their top three to be protected from development. 69% of residents want the School Road area protected followed by 50% for the Aylesbury Road area and 46% the Spring Lane area of the village.
 Should development take place, 94% of those surveyed strongly wanted to retain the village feeling. 48% would like to see a mix of house sizes on the same development and 43% wanted homes centred on a cul de sac development. Homes in ribbon developments were not supported (6%).
Source: Hockley Heath Parish Neighbourhood Plan Survey Results 2018
It has been confirmed the release of Site 25 will now lead to the release of land to the North of School Road resulting in a further 39 properties. This increase in properties will lead to a material increase in the properties in the village which will lead to the increase in requirements for village services and infrastructure. The additional properties not outlined in this report through windfall small developments and developments outside of the boundaries of Solihull MBC in Warwick District and Stratford upon Avon District are also not accounted for.
This proposed site has significant investment in marketing and publicity from the promoter with no substantive investment in material mitigations of the impact of a heavily constrained part of Hockley Heath which will generate significant increases in the safety of children, parents and residents that visit the immediate area to utilise the school facility.
Safety, disruption, impact on the environment, increase in traffic congestion and the loss of rural aspects are a fundamental consideration in the conclusion of Site 25 not being suitable for development
Draft Concept master plan
The SMBC concept master plan has no detail and is presented on the basis of desk exercise with the caveat "A full site appraisal has not yet been carried out for this site.". The inclusion in the document is flawed without this full site appraisal and requesting a comment on an incomplete concept plan is difficult.
The promoters master concept plan is created as a marketing presentation with no reference to how the proposed features of their plan will be maintained and funded for the future decades. The site has a number of established hedgerows and ancient oaks that are not represented in the concept master plan.
The demand for such properties is not evidenced by the neighbourhood survey and the provision of 100 properties is less that ¼% of the total housing needs of the borough.
The risks associated with the addition of this development along with the significant cost and disruption during construction in the part of the village that centres on the most vulnerable, in the form of primary children, should be assessed with the expectation that this site is not suitable for development for this period of the SMBC local plan.

-There aren't alternative routes to School Road - this is already extremely busy around key times and dangerous for children
-100 additional dwellings will lead to a lot more than 24 additional primary school aged children - material growth to the local school which will undoubtedly put pressure on and change the school, which has been a significant driver for newer residents moving to the village in the first place.
-Site 25 is massive in the context of the village and reducing it to the numbers in the paragraph above is deceptive - developing here will be a material detriment

If the green belt land is to be allocated it also creates the potential of further development this will put strain on the local infrastructure, major works will be needed to inmrove utilities, traffic systems need to be installed, and added pollution levels will rise, the Blyth Valley development is surely a big enough expansion within the local area for now, why do we need to build on more Green belt land.

Housing development Hockley Heath

I wish to express my concerns about increased traffic in Hockley Heath, particularly in the area around Hockley Heath Primary school, should the proposed housing development off School Road take place. I have no objection to a housing development other than the potential for increased risk to both road and pedestrian users in this area. Therefore, I would like to suggest that land adjacent to Hockley Heath school be purchased (by the developers) and used for collection and drop off of school children.

Currently, twice a day the residential area opposite Hockley Heath Primary school becomes a hazard both for car users and pedestrians.
* Cars which are used to collect and drop children off:
* block the access roads
* park on pavements and block access for pedestrians
* Idle engines and cause pollution and noise.
While I appreciate that homes must be built, I hope that a practical solution can be found to address the issue of increased traffic around the Primary school.

No ! School Road simply cannot cope with current traffic volume - it is only a matter of time until there is a fatal accident - the road is simply not wide enough or designed for this !
Flooding and drainage is an issue across the whole village but specifically at these identified sites where I have in years gone by been stranded when water has risen and not allowed any access by car !

No Site 25 should not be included as an allocated site.
School Road is a minor road and experiences congestion around the school. As a local resident I can confirm there is constant concern over the speeding and congestion caused by the existing school run. To add 100 households to that traffic is crazy and will cause major problems on a daily basis.
The land at site 25 is constantly water logged, where will the water go if 100 houses are built?
There is dense wildlife in those fields, including muntjac and fallow deer. Building houses will remove their habitat.

I am astounded that any Green Belt can be described as 'Lower Performance'. Green Belt is Green Belt. Once removed the ribbon of development will head along the canal as far as Illshaw Heath.

Increasing the village by 12% will cause endless vehicule congestion with the lack of medical facilities and also overload the water, gas and electricity supplies. Where will the 200 extra cars park? Where will the potential 75-125 pupils go?

The natural environment of trees and grasses should continue to be protected and provide the 'lungs' for the current conurbation and the health of the future generations.