Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation

The Neighbourhood Plan Steering Committee believe the identified infrastructure requirements fall far short of the requirements for Hockley Heath.
1. Paragraph 189 states "Hockley Heath has regular bus services running through the village connecting Birmingham and Stratford and a more frequent service linking Solihull & Dickens Heath". This statement does not reflect reality following the recent changes made by Travel West Midlands. As of February 2019, Hockley Heath has the 20 service which terminates at Shirley and does not serve Birmingham. Additionally, TfWM (following their consultation - which incidentally did not consult on the changes made to HH bus services) has changed the bus service route and as such the service from Hockley Heath to Solihull and Dorridge station is effectively reduced to an hourly service due to timetabling, irrespective of this being a circular route. Access to rail services is limited; over 2 miles away.
2. School Road traffic has been a concern for some time and will be exacerbated by the Blythe Valley Park development, the effects of which are yet to be felt with the development in its early stages. Our survey, published in June 2018 as a part of the Neighbourhood Plan development process, had 87% of respondents indicating 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
3. The village, and specifically the A3400, suffers from regular flooding/ponding following even moderate sustained rainfall. Hockley Heath Parish Council is engaging with Severn Trent Water and SMBC Highways to identify improvement works across the entire system (from storm drains to river outlet) but there is clear evidence that the drainage infrastructure in the village is struggling
4. There are pockets of Hockley Heath which still do not have access to "super fast" broadband and anecdotal reports of poor water pressure in areas of the village

The Hockley Heath Neighbourhood Planning Steering Committee do not believe that Site 25 should be included as an allocated site. In the Summer of 2018 we 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.
1. Our survey showed 87% of respondents indicating 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
2. 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)
3. 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 out of proportion to the village as whole. The Steering Committee do recognise the opportunities to improve community access to the canal network. 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 NP Steering Committee 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 the future erosion of the green belt. However, for the reasons stated above, the SC feel that the release of this specific site should be avoided, based on the assumption that should this site retain its green belt designation, its release would not then be subsequently 'displaced' to other much less favourable sites elsewhere in the village.

We do not consider that it is appropriate to remove the washed over Green Belt from the north of School Road. Paragraph 200 talks about the fact that due to 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 revision to the boundary to the North.