Question 20 - Site 25 - School Road

School road already suffers from speeding cars and I don't think the school itself can cope with the increase in demand likely to be presented by this additional housing. School road is a country lane that is not designed for this amount of traffic to be coming up and down it.

This site should be excluded as it represents an intrusion into the openness of the Green Belt, and is remote from employment opportunities in the conurbation.

My objection concerns the inadequate provision of road, pavement and parking infrastructure around and leading to site 25. School Road is unfit to support the traffic using it today with significant dangerous stretches of verge void, two dangerous bends and flooding at Cheedon Farm. Sadlers Wells lane bridge has decayed to the point of potential collapse.

The traffic impact of the Blyth valley development is unknown, but negative impact.

Residents life is blighted at school time by chaotic parking on pavements and idling of engines.

DCMP shows narrow roads and shared pavements, more children + more cars =Accidents

School Rd is too narrow. School is almost full & we have no Dr or dentist here

Hockley Heath Parish Council do not believe that Site 25 should be included as an allocated site.

School Road is a minor road and experiences congestion around the school. Local residents frequently inform the Parish Council of excessive speeding and safety concerns. As mentioned previously, School Road is used as a shortcut to avoid the frequent daily congestion on the A3400. In respect of suggestions that any future development could improve Hockley Heath Academy drop off and collections, we would point out that the development is on the other side of the busy School Road and we do not accept that the risks associated with additional children crossing the road offset the negative aspects of the release of the land. The existing volume and speed of traffic will be further impacted by BVP. School Road is also prone to flooding which has not been addressed within the draft consultation documentation. The road also lacks a footpath at the location of the proposed site 25 development and is poorly lit.

In the Summer of 2018 the Parish Council ran a survey across the village in support of the Neighbourhood Plan. The survey received an excellent response rate for a survey of this type (50% of the village responded) and its findings will form a key element of the forthcoming Neighbourhood Plan. Our response to this consultation should be viewed as being informed by representative data from the village as a whole. The survey found:

a) 87% of respondents indicated it was very important for highway changes to School Road to prevent excessive vehicle use arising from additional Blythe Valley Park development. This finding was in advance of any consultation associated with the release of green belt land on School Road and potential housing.

b) the top priority in terms of the natural environment was to protect the views of green belt land and green spaces from inappropriate development (92% of residents)

c) 69% of residents felt that School Road should be protected from development (the highest response)

The draft concept masterplan for the site indicates a density of housing out of proportion to the village as whole.

100 houses representing a 12% increase in the size of the settlement is not a limited and proportionate expansion. School Road and Saddlers Well Lane are inadequate. There is no exceptional reason to remove the site from the Green Belt. The site is a haven of wildlife and flora immediately adjoining the wildlife corridor of the canal. Housing would devastate the existing ecosystem as well as causing substantial light and air pollution.The Green Belt assessment fails to take into account the distinctiveness of the canal providing quiet enjoyment and pastimes to the many people who already frequent the blue network.

The infrastructure of the village will not cope with this level of development. 100 houses will probably mean 200 cars and as most will leave for work and return in concentrated time frames that equates to 400 car journies plus school runs, shopping ,etc. School Road cannot cope now at peak times as anyone who has to turn right into Stratford Road will testify. Cars park at school times with a solid line without a break.There are no doctors in the village, school capacity won't cope and the whole ambience will change from that of a village.

School toad is already over built on, it wasn't designed to take the amount of cars that will be using it as it is, without the extra traffic that will be caused when building the extra houses.

see attached representation

Yes. Nurton Developments, as site promoter, supports the allocation of Site 25. Nurton Developments has previously submitted a Vision Document (Local Plan Consultation, February 2017) to demonstrate that the site is developable and free of major constraints. The site would deliver c100 dwellings in a location adjacent and well related to the built up area of Hockley Heath, within convenient walking distance of a range of village facilities. In particular, being located opposite the village primary school, the site would offer opportunities for walking to school and thus would minimise car travel.

Hockley Heath is a sustainable location for growth and this development would support the existing range of village facilities (e.g. pubs, restaurants, a café, take-away establishments, a convenience shop, butchers, post office, dentist, a physiotherapy clinic, hairdressers, various other retail shops and a community hall).

The site is very well contained by existing built development and the Stratford upon Avon Canal, which has a substantial visual buffer of mature trees along it. As such one of the site's main strengths is that the Green Belt could be re-drawn to a robust and defensible boundary, using readily recognisable features that are likely to be permanent, as required by paragraph 139 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

As described in response to Question 19, the site offers an opportunity to resolve issues with on-street parking for the primary school and potentially provide a location for off street parking as well as expansion of the primary school.

Due to the scale of the site it will play an important contribution in meeting the housing needs shortfall, particularly in the short- and medium-term. A development of c100 dwellings is likely to deliver 50 dwellings per annum with development being commenced within 2 years of the adoption of the Local Plan. As such it can make a more immediate contribution to meeting housing needs than some of the much larger allocations, which take longer to come forward and require substantial infrastructure improvement up-front.

The draft concept masterplan for the site is that put forward by Nurton Developments to the Local Plan consultation in February 2017. Since then, the community consultation undertaken in September 2017 put forward 3 different masterplan options for consultation. The masterplanning process is ongoing and is being informed by responses to consultation and by various environmental studies, so it will be subject to change. However Nurton Developments supports the general principles set out alongside the draft concept masterplan and site analysis in the consultation documents.

No I do not believe site 25 should be included as an allocated site. I don't believe that by building more houses it will address the issues on the congestion of school road. In actual fact I believe it will make it worst, especially with the current development of Blythe Valley!
Currently I enjoy walking down School Road, taking in the beautiful scenery, having more houses to look at it not going be so pleasant! The reason I moved to Hockley Heath and paid a ridiculous amount of money was because of the beauty of the area. We need to maintain these areas within our country!

This parcel of land is full of wildlife, ancient oak trees and hedgerows none of which the Developer has represented on their master plan. The Village Plan stated that School Road would not be a suitable area for further development due to the location of the School and the narrowness of School Road. This is all prior to the Blythe Development which 900 homes will generate residents using School Road on a daily basis. This is a lucrative piece of land for any developer causing flooding for the properties around it and the wrong type of homes.

There are oak trees and hedgerows which are ancient and lots of wildlife in the area, the tow path will be unusaubale due to flooding putting homes on the already waterlogged piece of land. The village plan indicated to not develop on school road due to it being a dangerous road. We are a Village. Let's keep it that way

Site 25 should not be included. this would lead to higher volumes of traffic. School road is in urgent need of repair due to construction traffic using it as a shortcut. Congestion around the school is a hazard. no footpath around the proposed site would put children safety at risk. We do not support changes to Green Belt as this land is highly important for ecological reasons and human wellbeing. If Green Belt was released then the proposed 50 dwellings under 49 & 328 would be catastrophic for oak trees which provide essential oxygen & a haven for the wildlife.

Congestion on roads, green belt land

100% NO. We do not need or want that land south of school road used to build new houses. It will destroy the wildlife that lives there. It will take away the beautiful countryside/canal walks that myself and my family love to do. It will destroy our lovely quiet village. We DONT want it.

If more housing is to be built:
(a) it is important that it is the right type of housing. The community needs a balanced portfolio of housing matching the needs of residents for single resident homes, starter homes, family homes and homes to suit retired or older singles or couples. People shouldn't be forced to look outside the village when their housing needs change. If the community has a balance of housing types people have more chance of moving around the housing stock rather than moving out and losing their links with the community. I believe that this helps to build a stronger community that is more resilient when problems arise.
(b) The windfall income from the CIL levy must be very carefully spent (and where possible matched by funding from other sources) to ensure that it is spent to improve the well being of the area and its residents both now and for future generations. e.g.
- improve and enhance a network of paths and cycleways around the village and the area so that walking and cycling is the best way to get around.
- provide facilities for the use of sports clubs, local clubs and voluntary organisations to encourage community cohesion.
- work with the police and other stakeholders to identify infrastructure changes that will increase the safety and security of residents and their property,
- attract and encourage the setup and development of businesses with employment opportunities for residents.
- support and encourage the restoration of local heritage sites to encourage tourism and to maintain and develop a local identity.
- consider the needs of residents for municipal and commercial services and where possible attract these services (e.g. schools, hospitals, medical facilities, pharmacies, nurseries, libraries) to the area or ensure that transport is available to out of area services.

Totally unsuitable for housing development. This land is always waterlogged. Flooding in Hockley Heath is already a problem so further reduction of Green Belt would make matters worse. Very narrow bridge, Sadlers Well Lane, would be too weak for increased traffic and any widening of this pretty Lane would destroy its character.

School Road is not suitable for increased traffic flow due to a narrow blind bend near to Tysoe close, considerable congestion at school pick up and drop off times and a narrow junction with Stratford Road.

School road is a very narrow country lane already suffering from increased traffic which will only get worse with Blythe valley development. I walk School Road between Blackberry Avenue and Cut throat Lane every morning and am experiencing increased levels of pollution and speeding traffic. Additionally, the local school will be unable to cope with the inevitable increased numbers and the village infrastructure is inadequate for such an increase in housing. Green Belt should be preserved, we have two herons nesting on the canal in this section which the village would be in danger of losing.

School road is too narrow and congested to cope with 100 more houses.

With the excessive over development of Blythe valley already putting stress on village infrastructure, there is no capacity to support more housing and the question needs posing as to why extra housing is required any way.

If alternative travel arrangements can be made for school pick up and drop off is a very empty reason to attempt to justify additional traffic in the village.

Current infrastructure is already at breaking point. No space for car parking, school is full and cannot be extended, the drainage is also an issue. The village floods at the slightest bit of rain. Adding 100 houses will not help, especially as 900 are being built around the corner at Blythe valley! The amount of green belt is what makes hockley heath so appealing to its residents. Removing that to build more houses is short sighted and greedy.

The development is an unnecessary expansion of a village which has retained its character due to the Greenbelt which surrounds it.

Should the development go ahead, School road will become more hazardous than it is presently to pedestrians & in particular children, in addition to road users around the area of Hockley Heath Academy during school drop off & collection times.

In addition, the current infrastructure of the village is insufficient to support the addition of yet more homes.

School Road is narrow and would struggle to cope with the increase in traffic making it hazardous to local residents and school children. Already difficult to exit driveways due to volume of parked cars and passing traffic. Trying to turn onto Stratford Rd from School Rd would be made extremely difficult, there is already queues waiting to turn out. Congestion and pollution are issues. The field is usually flooded in S.E. aspect of site and would seem unsuitable for development. A lack of amenities, including bus services make it less viable. Uncertain how the school can cope with additional children as well as serving new developments in Blythe Valley. The proposed crossing point adjacent to proposed vehicle access will cause considerable traffic build up. Hockley Heath has already had 3 very recent developments and surely does not need more housing or will lose village feel.

School Road is a busy road already. It simply will not cope with the amount of extra traffic. Not to mention the extra strain on local services such as the school.

School Road unable to cope with more traffic - it is dangerous. Loss of green space detrimental to area. No room in school.New telephone exchange will be needed- broadband at far end of School Road is appalling now. Fields provide drainage. Already difficult to get doctors appointments. Blythe Valley providing a lot of housing- more than enough for country lanes to cope with.

Hockley Heath is gradually being enclosed by new building projects. There is a need for green space in a built up area before all green becomes concrete. This land must be identified now before it is lost . Site 25 is situated in a naturally attractive area being adjacent to the canal. A natural for a wild life nature park with the possible recreation of the original pond and wetland area and if planted with a small copse and it would be an attractive feature for the village for walkers, canal users and local wildlife like frogs and moorhens.

The Hockley Heath Residents Association do not consider that site 25 should be included as an allocated site. We represent the views of the residents and as such have taken evidence from the Neighbourhood Plan survey conducted in Summer 2018. The survey received an excellent response rate for a survey of this type (50% of the village responded) and its findings will form part of the evidence base for the forthcoming Neighbourhood Plan. Key data that leads us to this conclusion includes:

- 87% of respondents indicated that highways changes were required to School Road even bore further development is considered (see above)
- The top priority for village residents in terms of natural environment was to protect the views of the Green Belt land and green spaces from inappropriate development (92% of residents). This is entirely consistent with SMBC's own wording in para 187 "The Green Belt is also valuable in the settlement's overall environmental quality and contributes to its semi-rural setting'.
- In particular, 69% felt that School Road should be protected from development (the highest response)

The draft concept masterplan for the site indicates a density of housing that is out of proportion to the village as a whole. 100 homes would mean an increase of 12.6% in the total number of homes in the village and this is in addition to 19 homes built in 2018 and further developments that are taking place on the parish boundary, e.g. Aylesbury House, and in-fill developments along Aylesbury Road, residents of which will use the parish of Hockley Heath as their main centre. This is an unsupportable percentage given the limited range of facilities and infrastucture within the village as highlighted in para 192 of the consultation document and further outlined above.

The Hockley Heath Residents Association do recognise that site 25 does offer a more defensible green belt boundary than other sites in the village and agree wholeheartedly with SMBC that should other sites be released (particularly in the north of the village) this would more likely lead to future erosion fo the green belt. However for the reasons stated above, we feel that the release of the specific site should be avoided. We want to state strongly that this view is made on the assumption that should this site retain its green belt designation, that another less favourable site would not be "released" to compensate.