Question 21 - Green Belt Changes
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 7757
Received: 12/03/2019
Respondent: Mr John Roby
The whole feel of the village will change. There will be solid housing from the Stratford Road up to No.142. The openness provided by green belt will be lost.
Traffic will be increased again with all the inherent problems.
The whole feel of the village will change. There will be solid housing from the Stratford Road up to No.142. The openness provided by green belt will be lost.
Traffic will be increased again with all the inherent problems.
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 7789
Received: 12/03/2019
Respondent: Mrs Julie Bourne
Leave green belt as is.
Leave green belt as is.
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8033
Received: 13/03/2019
Respondent: Linda boyle
This would take away the beauty of the area! Furthermore we just don't have the resources to house all these people. Plus we have flooding issues, which would only get worst with more houses being built over grassland!
Again this would take away the beauty of the area! Furthermore we just don't have the resources to house all these people. Plus we have flooding issues, which would only get worst with more houses being built over grassland!
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8080
Received: 14/03/2019
Respondent: Mrs Jane Porter
I strongly object to Green Belt land being used. Our Village Plan indicated land off the Stratford Road towards Box Trees Road, not School Road. We as a Borough should be using all Brown Field sites before any greenbelt land is touched. The omission of the red sites on the plan seems a unsuitable decision as if SMBC have to build then why no build near a major truck road A3400? Building a larger development means local infrastructure will funded by developers and this meets the needs of the village.
I strongly object to Green Belt land being used. Our Village Plan indicated land off the Stratford Road towards Box Trees Road, not School Road. We as a Borough should be using all Brown Field sites before any greenbelt land is touched. The omission of the red sites on the plan seems a unsuitable decision as if SMBC have to build then why no build near a major truck road A3400? Building a larger development means local infrastructure will funded by developers and this meets the needs of the village.
I am extremely concerned out the proposed removal of green belt land from Hockley Heath for a development of some 100 homes. I am totally against the Council doing this.
The plot identified may be suitable due to the boundaries being clearly defined, however one major factor has not been properly considered. School Road is not a suitable road to withstand anymore traffic. With 700-900 homes going up in Blythe Valley over the next year or so, how much traffic from there is going to be using School Road to cut through if travelling to Dorridge, Stratford, Lapworth, Warwick or Coventry? Also the threat of more traffic coming off the M42 due to a potential motor service station.
Currently there are major issues with young children aged 3 upwards crossing this single track road in the mornings and afternoons, and yet nothing has been considered widening the road at all. There is talk from the potential developers of a car park, but this is on the opposite side to the School, therefore not solving any issues at all.
The other shocking thing is that the proposed development of 100 homes is only going to generate 24 Primary aged children, where has this figure come from, it's seems a joke saying 100 homes will generate 24 children, where most uk families have 2 children. With Tudor Grange being the catchment secondary school we still have 11-18 yrs old walking from this new development crossing over School Road. Where are these families going to find Schools, Doctor, Dentist places (as potentially this is after Blythe Valley has been developed). I believe that within the Solihull plan, Hockley Heath has to grow by 10%, and with all the current developments and ones who have completed over the past year, I believe we have generated a nearly 30% increase. We do not have the necessary infrastructure to cope with the extra dwellings
Our village plan identified 90% of participants said that School Road was a very minor road and could not withstand more traffic without major changes to this.
I live in a small village and wish it to remain this way. I really feel child safety is a major concern building in this area and ignoring this or offering a small area that will not facilitate the number of cars used which I believe to be in the region of 100 -120 cars on a daily basis, will not be provided by any developer, even if they do, it is still the wrong side of the road to reduce the risks to young children.
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8087
Received: 14/03/2019
Respondent: Mr Terry Gow
Greenbelt land should remain. All brown fields should be developed before this. Village plan indicated land by Stratford Road would be preferable? Maybe a larger development with infrastructure funds would be better. We don't have the space, school, doctors etc in Hockley Heath.
Using the land opposite the school is crazy, with young children crossing the road, the developers car park on this land would have to be for 70 plus cars spaces but it's the wrong side of the road anyway!
Greenbelt land should remain. All brown fields should be developed before this. Village plan indicated land by Stratford Road would be preferable? Maybe a larger development with infrastructure funds would be better. We don't have the space, school, doctors etc in Hockley Heath.
Using the land opposite the school is crazy, with young children crossing the road, the developers car park on this land would have to be for 70 plus cars spaces but it's the wrong side of the road anyway!
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8153
Received: 14/03/2019
Respondent: Mr Ken Bridgwater
We do not support changes to Green Belt as School Road is a natural haven for woodpeckers, owls, sparrows etc. Oak trees with TPOs on 49 & 328 provide essential habitat plus produce oxygen and soak up excessive ground moisture as this area is subject to localised flooding. The public footpath allows villagers to access much needed wildlife habitat to maintain society's education of the importance of preserving Green land. Changes to Green Belt for planning would be ecologically catastrophic and upset the balance of human & natural worlds.
We do not support changes to Green Belt as School Road is a natural haven for woodpeckers, owls, sparrows etc. Oak trees with TPOs on 49 & 328 provide essential habitat plus produce oxygen and soak up excessive ground moisture as this area is subject to localised flooding. The public footpath allows villagers to access much needed wildlife habitat to maintain society's education of the importance of preserving Green land. Changes to Green Belt for planning would be ecologically catastrophic and upset the balance of human & natural worlds.
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8236
Received: 14/03/2019
Respondent: Miss Davinia Fisher
Green belt land
Green belt land
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8310
Received: 14/03/2019
Respondent: Mr Eddie Boyle
As with the other questions NO. WE DONT WANT ANY DEVELOPMENT. We dont want it or need it. Blythe valley is already being built upon and extending over towards school road. Hockley heath, Blythe valley, shirley, monkspath will end up being connected as 1 huge area. We dont want or need it
As with the other questions NO. WE DONT WANT ANY DEVELOPMENT. We dont want it or need it. Blythe valley is already being built upon and extending over towards school road. Hockley heath, Blythe valley, shirley, monkspath will end up being connected as 1 huge area. We dont want or need it
Support
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8321
Received: 14/03/2019
Respondent: Mr Colin Redmond-Lyon
The greenbelt needs to be a "green belt" around the boundaries of the community. It doesn't make sense to have green belt land which is surrounded by residential housing and so the green belt should be moved back to the natural boundary of the area.
The greenbelt needs to be a "green belt" around the boundaries of the community. It doesn't make sense to have green belt land which is surrounded by residential housing and so the green belt should be moved back to the natural boundary of the area.
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8363
Received: 14/03/2019
Respondent: Mr Simon Geen
School road is not suitable for a large increase in traffic. There is considerable congestion and limited parking at school pick up and drop off times, there is a narrow blind bend near the entrance to Tysoe close and the junction with Stratford road can be difficult to exit at busy times.
School road is not suitable for a large increase in traffic. There is considerable congestion and limited parking at school pick up and drop off times, there is a narrow blind bend near the entrance to Tysoe close and the junction with Stratford road can be difficult to exit at busy times.
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8370
Received: 14/03/2019
Respondent: Mr Steven Edgington
We do not have the infrastructure for this development. The school is at capacity there are no doctors surgeries or chemists. The road is not wide enough and we have just had the Aylesbury Park and part ownership houses built on the Stratford Road as well as the extensive Blythe Valley estate (500 houses). Enough is enough, the green belt is being taken from us and Hockley Heath Village will soon become another major Town.
We do not have the infrastructure for this development. The school is at capacity there are no doctors surgeries or chemists. The road is not wide enough and we have just had the Aylesbury Park and part ownership houses built on the Stratford Road as well as the extensive Blythe Valley estate (500 houses). Enough is enough, the green belt is being taken from us and Hockley Heath Village will soon become another major Town.
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8385
Received: 14/03/2019
Respondent: Miss Krystyna McMullen
The land should be protected. There is so much wildlife that depends on it. Blythe valley has just destroyed a lot of land not far from here, isn't that enough?!
The land should be protected. There is so much wildlife that depends on it. Blythe valley has just destroyed a lot of land not far from here, isn't that enough?!
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8396
Received: 14/03/2019
Respondent: Mr Dave Tarbuck
Green belt was instigated for a specific reason which was to provide a buffer between town and country. People live to Hockley Heath to experience village live and to move away from towns. Stop ignoring the people's wishes and consider people's quality of life.
Green belt was instigated for a specific reason which was to provide a buffer between town and country. People live to Hockley Heath to experience village live and to move away from towns. Stop ignoring the people's wishes and consider people's quality of life.
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8397
Received: 14/03/2019
Respondent: Mr Sam Tarbuck
This would leave the village vulnerable to more builds in the future. Another way to attempt to justify ruining green space valued by the village and its residents.
This would leave the village vulnerable to more builds in the future. Another way to attempt to justify ruining green space valued by the village and its residents.
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8407
Received: 14/03/2019
Respondent: Mrs Emma Gaskin-Farley
The Greenbelt surrounding Hockley Heath is what gives the village its natural beauty & character. It is home to considerable flora, forna & wildlife ... enjoyed by locals & visitors alike!
Greenbelt should remain exactly that & the boundary should not be moved. It is why many of us bought our homes here in the first place!
The Greenbelt surrounding Hockley Heath is what gives the village its natural beauty & character. It is home to considerable flora, forna & wildlife ... enjoyed by locals & visitors alike!
Greenbelt should remain exactly that & the boundary should not be moved. It is why many of us bought our homes here in the first place!
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8413
Received: 14/03/2019
Respondent: Mr Paul Mansell
The green belt spaces within the village is what makes the village and what makes it attractive to its residents. All you are doing is destroying it for greed and nothing else. Stop being so selfish and think of the people who already live in and care for the area
The green belt spaces within the village is what makes the village and what makes it attractive to its residents. All you are doing is destroying it for greed and nothing else. Stop being so selfish and think of the people who already live in and care for the area
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8434
Received: 14/03/2019
Respondent: Mr Guy Thompson
Green belt land needs to be kept as green belt land. We need to keep Hockley Heath a village and maintain green spaces at all cost. No further housing developments are needed as the village does not have the amenities or infrastructure to cope.
Green belt land needs to be kept as green belt land. We need to keep Hockley Heath a village and maintain green spaces at all cost. No further housing developments are needed as the village does not have the amenities or infrastructure to cope.
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8441
Received: 14/03/2019
Respondent: Mrs Margaret Crook
Hockley Heath is a village. The area needs green spaces. Loss of greenbelt will mean continuous housing. The canal will no longer be a rural retreat for cyclists, walkers and boaters. The fields are also used for horses. Loss of trees and hedges are not good for the environment. Blythe Valley has already removed a large area of open land.
Hockley Heath is a village. The area needs green spaces. Loss of greenbelt will mean continuous housing. The canal will no longer be a rural retreat for cyclists, walkers and boaters. The fields are also used for horses. Loss of trees and hedges are not good for the environment. Blythe Valley has already removed a large area of open land.
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8448
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Mrs Sonal Kailey
Hockley Heath will not benefit from changing the boundary. This is just a way to get more houses in. Hockley Heath does not need more houses.
Hockley Heath will not benefit from changing the boundary. This is just a way to get more houses in. Hockley Heath does not need more houses.
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8493
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Hockley Heath Residents Association
We do not consider that it is appropriate to remove the washed over Green Belt from the north of School Road as we believe additional higher density development will be sought by existing home owners affected.
We do not consider that it is appropriate to remove the washed over Green Belt from the north of School Road. Para 200 talks about the fact that due to there being existing development with minimal gaps it would appear logical to remove it from the Green Belt, however, we don't consider that there is a defensible boundary to the north of these gardens. By removing this 'washed over' Green Belt status we consider that the level of attempted development throughout this ribbon of houses and into the land behind would be inappropriate and could jeopardise the quality of the green belt surrounding Hockley Heath with no clear boundary. We don't consider that any release of the land to the South automatically suggests a revisit to the boundary to the North.
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8508
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Mrs Jennie Lunt
I strongly object to any change to the green belt boundary to the north of School Road. Washed over or otherwise. There is no defensible boundary to the north of these gardens. Would permit level of development throughout this ribbon of houses and into the land behind that would be inappropriate and could jeopardise the quality of the green belt surrounding Hockley Heath with no clear boundary. Release of land to south does not justify changes on north side of School Road.
I strongly object to the removal the washed over Green Belt from the north of School Road. Para 200 talks about the fact that due to there being existing development with minimal gaps it would appear logical to remove it from the Green Belt, however, I don't consider that there is a defensible boundary to the north of these gardens. By removing this 'washed over' Green Belt status I consider that the level of attempted development throughout this ribbon of houses and into the land behind would be inappropriate and could jeopardise the quality of the green belt surrounding Hockley Heath with no clear boundary. I don't consider that any release of the land to the South automatically suggests a revisit to the boundary to the North.
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8517
Received: 14/03/2019
Respondent: Alan Pickford
Disagrees with the stance taken by SMBC over the green belt, in particular the preservation of the Meriden Gap, they are quite happy to see the Green Belt disappear on the south side of the borough. Do we need a Hockley Heath/Henley in Arden Gap?
See attached letter
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8519
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Mrs Barbara Lawton
The village has already had approximately 120 houses built recently. The road infrastructure could not cope with any more additional dwellings, we will already be having extra traffic from the new Blythe Valley travelling through the village on roads which are already unsuitable and heavily used.
The drainage is already struggling causing the drains to back up and flood in various places regularly.
i believe the countryside and wildlife should be protected under the greenbelt and i therefore would not like to see this application go ahead.
The village has already had approximately 120 houses built recently. The road infrastructure could not cope with any more additional dwellings, we will already be having extra traffic from the new Blythe Valley travelling through the village on roads which are already unsuitable and heavily used.
The drainage is already struggling causing the drains to back up and flood in various places regularly.
i believe the countryside and wildlife should be protected under the greenbelt and i therefore would not like to see this application go ahead.
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8572
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Mrs Alethiea De Pasquale
very concerned if the release of Site 25 (approx. 100 units) also led to the release of additional 'washed over' sites with a potential further 50 dwellings being built on School Road in the future. It would have been helpful had the consultation document detailed the existing green belt boundary and the proposed new green belt boundary. We really should be ensuring we protect our green belt areas for the environment.
very concerned if the release of Site 25 (approx. 100 units) also led to the release of additional 'washed over' sites with a potential further 50 dwellings being built on School Road in the future. It would have been helpful had the consultation document detailed the existing green belt boundary and the proposed new green belt boundary. We really should be ensuring we protect our green belt areas for the environment.
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8640
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Sarah Wood
I do not support any changes to Green Belt land in the village as these changes clearly allow this sort of proposed change to go under the radar and increase the likelihood of such things happening in the future.
The land in School Road is green belt and should be left as it is. There are plenty of areas of land elsewhere that are not in this category and these should be further explored.
There is a lack of clarity over what you are also proposing in terms of change.
I do not support any changes to Green Belt land in the village as these changes clearly allow this sort of proposed change to go under the radar and increase the likelihood of such things happening in the future.
The land in School Road is green belt and should be left as it is. There are plenty of areas of land elsewhere that are not in this category and these should be further explored.
There is a lack of clarity over what you are also proposing in terms of change.
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8660
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Mr M Sabin
The reallocation of Green Belt land for housing development is a sacrifice of our countryside and our grandchildren's heritage for the sake of cost avoidance and financial gain for the developers.
The reallocation of Green Belt land for housing development is a sacrifice of our countryside and our grandchildren's heritage for the sake of cost avoidance and financial gain for the developers.
Object
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8756
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Mrs Collette Higgins
No.
Firstly, why are you using impenetrable language to describe what you want to do?'washed over' does not carry any meaning to indicate what is meant by it.
We do not support the potential changes to the Green Belt boundary and would be very concerned if the release of Site 25 (circa 100 units) also led to the release of additional 'washed over' sites with a potential further 50 dwellings being built on School Road in the future. It would have been helpful had the consultation document detailed the existing green belt boundary and the proposed new green belt boundary.
SHARE THIS:
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8783
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Rainier Developments Ltd - Land at Widney Manor Road
Agent: Barton Willmore Planning
We raise no issue with the amended Green Belt boundary, but we use this to highlight the similar justification for the removal of our Client's site from the Green Belt given the adjacent ribbon development, the defensible boundaries and the poor contribution it makes to the purposes of the Green Belt. As we note elsewhere in this response, we consider exceptional circumstances exist to justify this.
Please see covering letter
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8803
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Rainier Developments Ltd - Land North of School Road
Agent: Barton Willmore Planning
We raise no issue with the amended Green Belt boundary, but we use this to highlight the similar justification for the removal of our Client's site (reference 416) from the Green Belt given the adjacent ribbon development, the defensible boundaries and the poor contribution it makes to the purposes of the Green Belt.
Please see covering letter
Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8824
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Rainier Developments Ltd - Land West of Stratford Road
Agent: Barton Willmore Planning
Raise no issue with the amended Green Belt boundary, but we use this to highlight the similar justification for the removal of SHELAA Site 417 from the Green Belt given the potential creation of strong, defensible boundaries and the poor contribution it makes to the purposes of the Green Belt.
Please see covering letter