No

ID sylw: 106171

Derbyniwyd: 04/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Melanie Lidgate

I am at horrified at the reckless scale of the development as a strategic growth location, the justification for which shows no consideration for either the character of the village, the safety of its residents or the wider local population. It also demonstrates the willingness of one authority to make decisions based on their ability to leech off the neighbouring authority for the provision of essential services
Some of my concerns centre aroun the following points:
1, Unjustified overdevelopment
2. Irreversible destruction of green belt, the lungs of the country and inadequate review of sustainable alternatives.
3 Detrimental Environmental and Biodiversity impact
4. Complete Absence of detailed infrastructure capacity planning and funding implications.
5. Significant flooding and drainage risks
6. Breach of Sustainability principles

No

ID sylw: 106175

Derbyniwyd: 04/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Matt Pugh

1. This is Green Belt land that has been green space for years, certainly within living memory. My understanding of Green Belt is that these areas should only be built on in ‘exceptional’ circumstances or at least with the agreement of the residents.
2. The area earmarked for building is vast and does not sit with Solihull Borough Councils ‘local plan’ which states that only small scale development is appropriate for Hockley Heath.
3. This development would have a major impact upon the usage of the Stratford Road (A34).
4. There does not appear to be any improved infrastructure to sustain a development such as this.
5. It really goes without saying that the loss of the Green Belt land would be catastrophic for the local biodiversity with the local flora and fauna being massively disturbed.
6. Most of all I fear the loss of identity as a rural village.

No

ID sylw: 106176

Derbyniwyd: 04/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Hannah Richmond

1. Excessive and Unjustified Overdevelopment.
The scale of SG24 is completely disproportionate to Hockley Heath’s current size, threatening to erode its village identity, disrupt community cohesion, and undermine the very qualities that make it a desirable place to live.

2. Loss of Green Belt and Insufficient Consideration of Alternatives.
The SG24 allocation involves significant development on Green Belt land, which is meant to prevent urban sprawl and protect the countryside. The proposal fails to meet the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) requirement for demonstrating exceptional circumstances for Green Belt release. Some of the justifications used in the assessment are flawed, particularly the claim that the canal provides a suitable boundary many of the proposed sites extend beyond the canal, invalidating this argument.

3. Environmental and Biodiversity Impact.
The SG24 allocation poses a direct threat to local biodiversity, contradicting national sustainability policies. The proposed development sites include ecologically rich areas, particularly along the canal, which serve as important wildlife corridors.

4. Lack of Infrastructure Capacity and Planning.
SG24 is proposed without adequate infrastructure provision to support it. Hockley Heath is already under strain, with limited road capacity, stretched school places, and insufficient healthcare services. The SWLP does not present realistic solutions to accommodate this increased demand.

Roads & Transport: The western side of SG24 relies on narrow single-track roads, some with no pedestrian footpaths, and single-lane canal bridges that are unsuitable for increased traffic. Widening roads would require purchasing small portions of land from multiple private owners, making it unfeasible.

Education: Hockley Heath has only one primary school, which is landlocked and already at capacity. The plan does not explain how school provision will be expanded or how catchment areas will be managed.

Healthcare: Local GP services, dentists, and hospitals are already stretched beyond national accessibility guidelines. The increased population from SG24 would exacerbate waiting times and reduce service quality.

Infrastructure Funding: There is no clear financial plan for how the necessary infrastructure improvements will be delivered. Given Solihull Councils existing position that Hockley Heath can only support small-scale development, the costs of major expansion would likely fall on them something they have not agreed to.

5. Flood Risk and Drainage Issues

Hockley Heath already experiences serious surface water flooding, particularly on key access routes such as School Road, Spring Lane, Cut Throat Lane, and the A3400 Stratford Road. These areas are prone to flooding even in moderate rainfall.

The SWLP does not present updated flood risk assessments, nor does it offer a clear drainage strategy for SG24, despite the fact that some of the proposed development sites are already on waterlogged land. Adding large-scale development without sufficient drainage mitigation will increase flood risks for existing and future residents.

6. Failure to Meet Sustainability Principles.
The SWLP claims to prioritise sustainable development, yet SG24 fails to meet key sustainability criteria. The transport network is inadequate, local services are already overburdened, and environmental harm would be substantial.

No

ID sylw: 106182

Derbyniwyd: 02/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Pamela May

I strongly oppose the proposed planning application for area SG24, which threatens Hockley Heath and lacks justification. I hold Stratford-on-Avon and Warwick District Council accountable for pushing proposals to the edge of their districts, prioritising appeasement of their voters over local interests, and dismissing concerns raised by residents. The plans contradict Solihull's local plan, which only allows small-scale development, and would burden local infrastructure already at capacity. The erosion of green belt land harms biodiversity and community wellbeing, and I demand that these developments be stopped immediately. This approach is profit-driven and neglects the rights and quality of life of Hockley Heath residents

No

ID sylw: 106232

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Alex Smith

Having reviewed the proposals I find them offensive and a clear strategy to meet your housing targets by pushing development to the perimeter of your boundary for others to worry about and accommodate. This I find quite despicable!

The village has few doctors, dentists, shops, pubs and schools. In addition the A3400 is a main thoroughfare for traffic including HGV's which when the M42 is closed for maintenance and accidents creates significant traffic movement through the village causing structural damage to properties in close proximity. When the weather is bad and roads flood it becomes a significant issue for houses on the main road (in which I live) which I assume SW district council will absolve themselves from for with their 3500+ houses proposal?

No

ID sylw: 106236

Derbyniwyd: 01/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Natalie Phipps

I am strongly against the proposed developments in Hockley Heath.

- The surrounding fields around the village flood frequently when the weather is bad. Building on these sites would worsen the problem.
- Harmful to wildlife.
- The land is Green Belt and has been for many years!
- Traffic through the village will increase. It can be heavy due to problems on the motorway and at busy times. More cars within the village will definitely increase this along with noise and pollution.
- There is currently only one access on and off the Park View Estate. If they open up access at the end of Park View onto the new development this will increase traffic through the estate. Not Safe! Access on to the estate from the Aylesbury Road is already dangerous due to inconsiderate parking. Increase in traffic is a risk.
- Infrastructure! We don’t have it in the village. School isn’t big enough, no doctor’s surgery, insufficient bus service.
- Hockley Heath is a village. Please don’t turn it into a town.

No

ID sylw: 106239

Derbyniwyd: 01/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Michael Reading

I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed housing development at Hockley Heath (SG24). While I understand the need for housing, this particular development raises significant concerns for our community, which I urge you to consider.
1. Flooding and Drainage Issues: The village already suffers from surface water drainage problems, the Stratford Road frequently floods during heavy rain. Further development would exacerbate this issue, potentially causing significant harm to properties and infrastructure.
2. Green Belt Preservation: The proposed site is located on Green Belt land, which should only be developed in exceptional circumstances. There is no justification for this incursion, and it risks setting a dangerous precedent for future developments.
3. Conflict with Local Plan: Solihull MBC’s local plan clearly states that only small-scale developments are suitable for Hockley Heath. The proposed scale of this development is entirely inconsistent with this policy.
4. Traffic and Safety Concerns: The A34 is already heavily congested, particularly during incidents on the M40/M42. Additional housing would significantly increase traffic on this road, raising the risk of accidents and further straining local infrastructure.
5. Impact on Wildlife and Biodiversity: The development would harm local wildlife habitats and reduce biodiversity. This would include feeding grounds for Red Listed animal species such as Hedgehogs and Bats. The loss of green space would also negatively affect the well-being of current residents, reducing access to natural surroundings.
6. Loss of Village Character: Hockley Heath has a distinctive rural character that this large-scale development would fundamentally alter. The proposal threatens the village’s unique identity and charm.
7. Inadequate Infrastructure: The village lacks the infrastructure to support a development of this size. Existing services, including education, healthcare, and transport, are already under pressure and cannot accommodate the additional population.
8. Unfair Burden on Solihull: While the development is technically within South Warwickshire, the strain on resources such as schooling, healthcare, transport, and refuse collection would fall to Solihull. Solihull has already opposed this proposal, and it is unfair to impose this burden without adequate support or funding.
I hope the council will consider these critical points and reject the proposed development. Our community deserves thoughtful planning that respects both our environment and our residents' quality of life.

No

ID sylw: 106243

Derbyniwyd: 01/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Lydia Stone-Fewings

I am thoroughly opposed to the development in Hockley Heath (SG24) for the following reasons:

- Hockley Heath village already has surface water drainage issues and the Stratford Road floods regularly during heavy rain. The proposed development areas also flood and there are limited options for proper drainage and further development would worsen this problem. Houses that back onto the land already carry a large amount of the run-off from the land, which would be worsened by the development and threaten the homes already part of Hockley Heath.

- All of the earmarked land is on Green Belt, which is only supposed to be built on in exceptional circumstances. The Government explicitly focussed in its manifesto about developing brown field sites. This does not align with election promises or the overriding obligation to protect Green Belt land.

-Solihull MBC already had a local plan that states only a small-scale development is appropriate for Hockley Heath. The proposed plan, even if one section of the proposed development, would make Hockley Heath over double the size of its current development, which the local area does not have the infrastructure to deal with.

- There are already issues with traffic on the A34 and Aylesbury Road. The development would significantly increase traffic. All proposed developments would need to access the A34, significantly increasing the accident risk. Sometimes it is impossible to get onto the A34 from the Aylesbury Road or Old Warwick Road.

- The development would harm wildlife and impact on biodiversity. There have been multiple car accidents with deer in Hockley Heath recently, this is only likely to increase with increased traffic and removes vast swathes of their remaonimg habitat. The loss of green space would also impact the wellbeing of existing residents, by removing the green spaces that are regularly used by local residents.

- The proposed development would fundamentally alter the character of Hockley Heath and undermine its distinctiveness and rural identity. The community is an integral part of why we moved here and this would remove a distinctive part of the benefit of living in this part of the world.

- The proposed development would put more pressure on the already stretched infrastructure, including schools and transport, particularly given the size of the development. The burden of the new population for schooling, transport, health, refuse collection would fall to Solihull, who have already opposed it. It is likely to ongoing disputes between the councils over future funding. This cannot be an efficient way of working cross counsel.

Please take this into consideration in respect of the proposed development.

No

ID sylw: 106275

Derbyniwyd: 04/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Richard Couzens

I am writing to formally oppose the inclusion of SG24 within the SWLP. I am a local Hockley Heath resident, having lived in the village for 17 years. This ill thought out plan will destroy the character and beauty of this small semi-rural village.
The proposal directly impacts me, my family, friends and fellow residents. Hockley Heath is a beautiful village with the feel and character of a small village and makes living here an absolute joy. Some of my concerns are listed below (not exhaustive);
1. Unjustifiable overdevelopment
The scale of the proposed allocation is excessive and disproportionate, completely out of step with the current community. It would erode our village identity, undermine local cohesion and destroy the very attributes that make Hockley Heath a desirable place to live.
SG24 is being advanced without due consideration of the Solihull Local Plan, which is currently under review. The failure to adopt a coordinated and integrated approach with Solihull Council highlights the enduring issues that will arise should SG24 be taken forward in its current state. The Solihull Plan was very clear that Hockley Heath is only suitable for small scale development due to limited facilities - SG24 is quite the opposite.
SG24 within the SWLP should not be permitted to proceed in its current scale and cannot be considered in isolation away from the Solihull Plan. Any proposed development in area surrounding Hockley Heath must have Solihull Council engagement and agreement.
2. Irreversible destruction of green belt and limited review of sustainable alternatives
Each individual site that makes up SG24 requires inappropriate development on green belt land, designed to prevent urban sprawl and preserve open countryside. This proposal fails to demonstrate the 'exceptional circumstances' required for Green Belt release under the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) with a number of the tests being applied in a flawed manner. The claim that the canal can substitute as a defensible boundary instead of the Green Belt is demonstrably flawed; several proposed sites are located beyond the canal, rendering this justification invalid.
The lack of a proper sustainability appraisal for alternative brownfield options demonstrates a missed opportunity and failure in due process. The SWLP has ignored viable alternatives, including the redevelopment of underutilized commercial spaces into residential in locations that already have a good level of infrastructure readily available.
SG24 within the SWLP should not be permitted to proceed without reviewing alternative sites / options in deeper detail and taking a more comprehensive review of the plan to release green belt and its wide ranging impact linked to character, environment and biodiversity.
3. Detrimental Environmental and Biodiversity impact
SG24 would inflict harm on local biodiversity, directly contravening national sustainability policies. The targeted sites are rich in ecological diversity, supporting an array of wildlife and plant life, particularly along the canal’s vital green corridors and pockets of woodland throughout the fields. The SWLP fails to meet the legal obligation in the NPPF requiring ‘conservation and enhancement of the natural… environment’ and para 175 requiring councils to take ‘a strategic approach… plan for the enhancement of natural capital’
Key failures include; the destruction of key habitats with no credible mitigation plan, failure to use up to date environmental assessments (the 2013 Green Infrastructure is out of date and not fit for purpose), significant increases in air and noise pollution from additional traffic which will harm local air quality and quality of life.
4. Absence of detailed Infrastructure capacity planning and funding
SG24 is being proposed with no credible infrastructure provision to support it. Hockley Heath is already stretched in terms of roads, schools, and healthcare facilities. The SWLP fails to provide any realistic solutions to mitigate the additional strain SG24 would impose.
Roads & Transport: Many affected roads, especially to the west of SG24, are single-lane with no pedestrian walking access. They rely on single lane canal bridges that are entirely unsuitable for increased traffic. Widening roads would require the expropriation of small pieces of land from a large number of private properties, which is unrealistic. The main Stratford Road reaches capacity with traffic at a standstill almost daily. Traffic leaves the busy M42, and uses both the Stratford Road and surrounding road network as an alternative. The road network could not cope with the demands of the large scale development of SG24.
Hockley Heath is served by limited public transport. The nearest railway station is Dorridge which is 2 miles away. Train commuters will drive to the station thus increasing traffic, congestion and parking issues throughout our neighbouring village.
Education: Hockley Heath has a single, landlocked primary school already struggling with capacity and traffic congestion. The plan doesn’t explain how school provision will be improved and there is no mention of how school catchment areas will work.
Healthcare: The increase in demand for doctors, dentists, hospitals could not be covered by Hockley Heath in its current form. The area is already beyond national guidance for travel times to hospitals and A&E services. Increased demand will further exacerbate waiting times and degrade local healthcare services.
Infrastructure Costs: The funding for essential infrastructure expansion is lacking detail, meaning these burdens will fall heavily on Solihull Council, which has already stated that Hockley Heath can only accommodate small-scale development.
5. Significant flooding and drainage risks ignored
Hockley Heath already experiences severe surface water flooding, even at times without heavy rainfall and particularly along the artery routes which will be required to serve SG24; School Road, Spring Lane, Cut Throat Lane and A3400 Stratford Road. The existing drainage infrastructure is insufficient to support additional development and Severn Trent have quoted 2030/2031 for any upgrade works to be carried out.
Several of the fields highlighted in SG24 remain water logged during the winter months, an issue which has increased in recent years with heavy rainfall from the increased number of storms we are experiencing as a country. If these fields are developed where will the water go?
The SWLP has not updated flood risk assessments to reflect the current challenges, has not provided a clear drainage mitigation strategy and has not considered the cumulative impact of adding impermeable surfaces to already high-risk flood zones.
6. Breach of sustainability principles
SG24 fails to meet the Sustainable Development Requirements outlined by South Warwickshire. The transport network is already under strain, local services are stretched, and the environmental consequences are severe. Proceeding with this allocation would be in direct opposition of the fundamental principles of sustainable development, making the entire plan legally and ethically indefensible.
Conclusion: SG24 can not proceed as a strategic growth location in its current format
SG24 inclusion as a strategic growth centre can NOT proceed in its current format within the South Warwickshire Local Plan. We recognise that Hockley Heath has some facilities and can take on a small level of growth, however many of the plans, policies, frameworks have not been reviewed in enough detail or applied correctly. The unsustainable overdevelopment proposed under SG24 would irreparably damage Hockley Heath’s character, environment, infrastructure, and quality of life. It fails to demonstrate exceptional circumstances for Green Belt release, ignores significant viable alternatives and lacks the essential infrastructure planning required for sustainable development.
There are many other issues that arise due to the inappropriate selection of the sites. They represent further significant legal, environmental, sustainability and H&S issues which must be reviewed prior to agreeing the SWLP. SWLP have an obligation to deliver housing and release sites in the most sustainable way, which cannot be achieved via the current SWLP as there are clearly much better performing settlements.

No

ID sylw: 106292

Derbyniwyd: 04/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr & Mrs Duggan

I am writing as a resident of Blythe Valley to strongly oppose the proposed SG24 development in our neighboring village of Hockley Heath. The planned expansion from 700 to 5,000 homes would have severe consequences not only for Hockley Heath but also for surrounding communities including our own.

Living in Blythe Valley, I am particularly concerned about the cumulative impact of this development, especially given the recent growth our own area has experienced. The proposed seven-fold increase of Hockley Heath would create unprecedented pressure on our shared infrastructure and services.

Infrastructure Impact

Our local area is already experiencing significant strain on services:

- Medical facilities are overwhelmed, with residents struggling to secure appointments
- Local schools are at capacity
- The road network between our communities is already congested
- Emergency services are stretched across our expanding communities

Environmental Concerns

The development would have far-reaching environmental consequences affecting both Hockley Heath and neighbouring areas:

- Increased flooding risk along the Stratford Road corridor, which already experiences significant issues
- Loss of crucial green buffer zones between our communities
- Degradation of shared wildlife corridors that connect our local ecosystems
- Heightened pollution levels affecting air quality across our entire area

Traffic and Transportation

As a Blythe Valley resident, I am particularly concerned about:
- Severe congestion on already busy connecting roads between our communities
- Increased pressure on the Stratford Road which serves as a vital link for both areas
- Additional strain on local parking facilities, especially at shared amenities
- Impact on public transport services that are already limited

Cross-Border Planning Issues

It is deeply concerning that South West Warwickshire is proposing such significant development along the boundaries with Solihull MBC without proper coordination. This approach risks creating:

- Uncoordinated development that fails to consider the wider area's needs
- Inconsistent planning policies across administrative boundaries
- Strain on services that are shared between our communities
- Erosion of the distinct character of our local areas

The scale of this proposal would fundamentally alter the character of not just Hockley Heath but our entire local area. Having chosen to live in this semi-rural setting, I am gravely concerned about the urbanisation this development would bring to our region.

I strongly urge you to reject these proposals based on:

1. The disproportionate scale of development
2. Severe impact on already strained infrastructure
3. Environmental degradation affecting multiple communities
4. Lack of coordinated planning across council boundaries
5. Irreversible damage to our area's semi-rural character

The future quality of life for residents across our entire area depends on responsible, sustainable planning that respects both our natural environment and existing communities.

No

ID sylw: 106323

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: DR Paul Clark

I strongly feel that development should be firstly focussed on Brownfield sites as these offer the greatest opportunity plus are often better connected to infrastructure and areas of employment.
Once Brownfield has been fully utilised, I feel areas outside of the Green Belt should be used.
Infrastructure Transport - Lack of rail station, road congestion & access, limited bus service.
The A3400 through the village, School Road, Old Warwick Road (B4439) and Spring Lane (B4101) all suffer from surface water flooding. As does Grange Road and Box Trees Road between Hockley Heath and Dorridge.
The proposed plan for SG24 would increase the number of cars adding more pollution into Hockley Heath and surrounding area.
Increasing vehicles numbers through the village would pose substantial Health and Safety Risk to residences.
Tudor Grange Hockley Heath Academy is a single form primary school which currently meets the needs of the village. However it is full with no capacity for additional students, nor could the site support additional development.
Existing local health infrastructure is currently stretched. There is significant pressure on Dorridge surgery especially for on the day doctors appointments.
By adding additional housing at Hockley Heath the SWLP will be increasing the amount of CSO discharge into the river effecting water quality and environmental impact.
The proposed SG24 could lead to substantial environmental degradation in the area.
There is no information in the plan on the relationship with SMBC or as to whether SMBC would be responsible for potentially providing services to residence not living in the Solihull borough, including education, health and roads.
The sheer scale of building thousands of new homes in Hockley Heath as proposed in SG24 is inappropriate to the village’s current size.
Figure 10 of the SWLP shows that Hockley Heath is not located near to the ‘Core Opportunity Area’ (COA).
The area around Hockley Heath has historic buildings that could be impacted by the large-scale development.

No

ID sylw: 106324

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Frances Griffiths

The village already has surface water drainage issues + building would make it considerably worse. Hockley Heath does not have the infrastructure in terms of education, health + transport to support this idea. South Warwickshire will get all the benefits and HH would have the burden + cost of schooling, transport, health, + refuse collection. Solihull would be responsible for these. Unfair to Solihull + residents who will have to pay for it. Would significantly increase traffic on A34 which is already congested, particularly when A40/A42 have problems. Alter character of Hockley Heath it would become a town rather than a village which the existing residents moved here for. Undermine the rural identity. Accident risk will be increased. Against Solihull's plan for small-scale development. All the earmarked land is on Green Belt, only used for exceptional circumstances. Will harm wildlife. Loss of green space will impact badly on existing residents.

No

ID sylw: 106329

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Victoria J Heywood

My main reasons for objecting are as follows:
Inadequate Infrastructure:

Traffic: The current volume of traffic on the A34 is already at times stretching the road's capacity. Any further increase in traffic would jeopardise the safety of both vehicles and pedestrians.

Drainage: The physical infrastructure, particularly the drainage system, is inadequate. This is evident from the frequent flooding of the existing drainage network during even moderate rainfall events, which I believe also results in a backup of sewage.

Education Provision:

The current education provision is insufficient to cope with any future increase in demand. Local schools are already at capacity, and this development would exacerbate the issue.

Medical Services:

Medical facilities, including both GP services and hospitals, are currently stretched to their limits. An increase in population would place an unsustainable burden on these essential services.

Commercial Facilities:

The existing commercial outlets in the area lack the capacity to handle any significant rise in demand. Furthermore, there is no available space to establish new facilities.

Transport Links:

Both road and rail transport links in the area are inadequate. Any substantial increase in demand would overwhelm the current infrastructure, causing further congestion and inconvenience.

Impact on Solihull Council:

Although this is a Warwickshire planned development, the resulting increase in demand would undeniably impact Solihull Council. Notably, Solihull Council has already rejected any significant rise in house numbers in Hockley Heath as part of their local plan.

Environmental Concerns:

The loss of green space is a major concern, as it would negatively affect local biodiversity. The environmental impact of this development must not be overlooked.

Given these substantial concerns, I strongly urge the relevant authorities to reconsider this poorly thought-out development plan.

No

ID sylw: 106331

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Scott O'Neill

I believe this development poses significant risks to both the environment and infrastructure of our community and I urge the council to reconsider its proposal.


Green Belt Protection and Exceptional Circumstances

First and foremost, the land earmarked for this development is designated as Green Belt, which should only be developed in exceptional circumstances. The Green Belt serves a critical role in protecting the countryside and preserving the natural environment. Allowing development on this land would set a dangerous precedent and undermine the purpose of the Green Belt. The current proposal does not meet the criteria for exceptional circumstances, and as such, I strongly oppose the use of this land for housing.


Traffic Congestion on the A34

One of my primary concerns regarding this development is the likely increase in traffic, particularly along the A34. The road is already an incredibly busy and often congested route, with frequent delays during peak hours. The addition of new homes would only exacerbate this issue, placing further strain on the local road network. Given the limited alternatives to the A34, the development could lead to even more gridlock, significantly affecting the quality of life for local residents and visitors.


Loss of Nature and Impact on Local Wildlife

The proposed development threatens vital green spaces and local wildlife. Over the years, I have observed a range of bird species, including buzzards, red kites, owls, herons, house sparrows, and song thrushes, all of which rely on the open spaces, hedgerows, and trees in the area. These species are increasingly rare and, in some cases, endangered. The destruction of their habitats for development would be detrimental to their survival in this area, as well as a setback for local conservation efforts.


Flooding Risks

Additionally, the proposed development raises serious concerns regarding flooding. The current natural landscape helps manage surface water runoff, reducing the risk of flooding. By replacing green spaces with hard surfaces such as roads and buildings, this balance will be disturbed, leading to an increased risk of flooding in the local area. Given the region's history of heavy rainfall, I fear that this development could exacerbate flooding problems, potentially affecting residents and infrastructure.


Infrastructure and Services

The proposed development also lacks adequate planning for local infrastructure. The roads in the area are already under considerable strain, and the addition of more homes without improvements to the local road network will only worsen congestion. Additionally, the development fails to address the need for expanded educational facilities to accommodate a growing population, which could negatively impact the quality of education for local children. These infrastructure deficiencies must be addressed before any further steps are taken.


Request for Action

In light of the above concerns, I respectfully urge the planning department to reject this proposal. I believe a thorough environmental impact assessment is necessary, especially regarding the effects on local wildlife, the increased risk of flooding, and the capacity of local infrastructure to support additional housing. Furthermore, any decision should carefully consider the long-term sustainability of the development, both from an environmental and social perspective.

No

ID sylw: 106332

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Megan Showell

I am writing to formally object to the proposed SG24 development work around Hockley Heath as a lifelong resident in the area.

I grew up in Hockley Heath, and can attest to the fact that our green spaces are a crucial necessity to the village. I spent much of my time in these areas, and it would be an environmental, social, and historical tragedy to see them taken away.

In the midst of a catastrophic climate crisis, eliminating natural spaces and evicting local wildlife to make room for more environmentally destructive emissions is irresponsible on a national scale, and catastrophic to the animals who have lived here for generations. These proposals notably impose on the green belt in the area, a system put in place to protect these spaces and animals against developments such as this. It would also put undue pressure on an already struggling waste management system, and overcrowd our already limited local amenities and struggling transport links.

I understand the need for housing in this country, but when nearly 700,000 homes sit empty, and already developed areas have room, it is wrong to overpopulate the quickly dwindling number of small villages in the area. As an autistic person, quiet villages like Hockley Heath surrounded by green space are important to mental wellbeing and development, and have been chosen intentionally by it’s residents for this very reason, the proposed plans would eliminate this safe space.

My most specific objections are to site 154 & site 178, areas I grew up walking, that began my passion for photography, and that remain my safe places at home. These are my most crucial spaces, but I know people from all corners of the village with the same necessity for their closest respective sites. I would also point out that Hockley Heath is often a place for lifelong settlement, hence we have and will always have many older residents. These proposed developments would render remaining natural spaces inaccessible to those in the centre of the village who may have limited mobility, spaces they chose when buying their homes.

I vehemently oppose the proposed development SG24 on the grounds of environmental detriment and resident safety/wellbeing. This is due to both the duration and scale of the building work itself, and the resulting change to the village and natural spaces.

No

ID sylw: 106341

Derbyniwyd: 27/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Neil Francis

Development of the suggested scale would be totally out of character for Hockley Heath, described in the Solihull Local Plan Review as having the characteristics of a semi-rural village, with inter and post-war ribbon development along the Stratford Road and noting the Stratford-upon-Avon canal providing a linear heritage asset with a village wharf. There are currently around 1900 residents in Hockley Heath and around 500 households. The suggested proposals are to add 2,875 houses with 6 parcels across 133.51 hectares. This is more than five times the size of the existing village.
Development of the suggested scale is therefore not sustainable and would place a significant and unacceptable demand on local services. Your Sustainability Appraisal (para 5.6.1) acknowledges the potential impact to Grade II Listed Buildings. Parcel HOH1 is adjacent to properties 2301 and 2303 Stratford Road and parcels HOH3 and HOH4 are adjacent to St Thomas’s Church, Nuthurst Lane. The proposals are likely to cause significant harm to the setting of these designated heritage assets.
The Sustainability Appraisal also places Hockley Heath within the bottom five in terms of its negative scores for access to A&E services, GP surgeries and leisure facilities. It views the primary school being within 800m of the parcels as a positive impact but this school has 215 pupils on the school roll, with children from ages 2 to 11. It is a village school and is not going to be able to meet the needs of the additional residents. In terms of mitigation in respect of the health impacts, your appraisal notes that the new infrastructure would require a significant level of investment in health services and leisure facilities which (as noted in the appraisal) is likely to be difficult to achieve. These local services are already under considerable pressure and placing further demands on them would be totally unfair and unacceptable.
The parcels are all in the Green Belt and parcels 1 and 3 are identified as having a moderate contribution. However, it could be argued that some parcels have a strong contribution, notably HOH1 which would bring Hockley Heath significantly closer to Dorridge.
Whilst the suggested allocations are not consistent with the Green Belt review, having regard for the linear form of the village, limited development to parcel HOH6 could retain that form whilst providing a more modest contribution to housing.

No

ID sylw: 106345

Derbyniwyd: 27/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Theresa Grant

I am a resident in Hockley Heath and am writing to oppose the plans for the development in Hockley Heath :
• Hockley Heath already has surface water drainage issues, the Stratford Road floods regularly in this area during heavy rain further development would worsen this problem.
• All the earmarked land is on the Green Belt, which should only be built on in exceptional circumstances.
• This development is completely at odds with Solihull MBC’s local plan, which states that only a small-scale development is appropriate for Hockley Heath.
• This development would significantly increase traffic on the A34, which already is congested, particularly when there are problems on the M40/M42. All proposed developments would need to access the A34, also causing a significant build up of traffic trying to get on to the A34 and increasing the risk of accidents.
• The development would cause harm to wildlife, loss of natural habitat and impact on biodiversity. The loss of green spaces would also impact significantly on the wellbeing of existing residents.
• It would fundamentally alter the character of Hockley Heath, undermining its distinctiveness and rural identity.
• The village does not have the infrastructure in terms of education, health and transport to sustain a development of this size.
• It will also have an impact on the health and education on the Children.
• Although the development falls within South Warwickshire, the burden of the new population in terms of schooling, health, transport, refuse collection would fall on to Solihull, who have already opposed this plan.
This is clearly unfair and would lead to ongoing disputes between the Councils over funding in the future.

For the fore-mentioned reasons above,
I strongly object to this development plan, and urge the council to take my objections into consideration when making their decision.

No

ID sylw: 106348

Derbyniwyd: 27/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Margaret Harrison

We have lived in Hockley Heath for almost two decades and during that time have seen population growth following a number of new buildings across the area. The Green Belt field next to us has been developed into a small housing estate, including social housing, and further houses have been built across the road from our property. We are not NIMBYs and accept that there is a need nationally for an increase to housing stock, and this has happened across the village. However, at the same time we have seen pressure growing on the local roads with a number of accidents resulting, on the few services available in the area and in the adverse impact on the local countryside. This situation will only worsen with the proposed development, which will take the village to almost a small town, but one without the social and transport infrastructure required for such growth.

We utterly oppose this development for the following reasons:

In terms of infrastructure the village does not have the transport, education, or health facilities for such an increase in population. Transport wise, it already struggles. The Stratford Road (A34) is already congested and the roads in Hockley Heath are becoming cut-through and ‘rabbit runs’ for traffic, including highly inappropriate large lorries and HGVs, trying to avoid the A34. They are also heavily used at all times of the day and night whenever there are M40/M42 problems. Emergency vehicles and breakdown vehicles are regularly using the roads to and from motorway incidents. The local bus service is not frequent and the closest train station is a distance way with only a lengthy circular bus service to the station.

2. The A34 regularly floods during heavy rain and more development can only exacerbate the problem and consequent further traffic congestion during flooding and road repairs.

3. We do not understand how any such development on designated Green Belt land can be justifiable - these are not the exceptional circumstances for such usage..?

4. The planned development will have a detrimental impact on local biodiversity and damage wildlife habitats - not just for now but for the future of the area.

5. Visitors come to the village to enjoy its green space - loss of such will impact not only on local residents, but on many other people/families for whom it impacts positively on their physical and mental wellbeing.

We believe that this planned development fails to align with Solihull MBCs local plan which states that Hockley Heath should only have small-scale development - something that has already largely happened in recent times. Further, the burden of said development and the consequent needs of the significantly higher population (private and public transport, health, refuse collection, schooling etc) will be the responsibility of Solihull MBC. Yet Solihull has already opposed the development!

We would appreciate serious consideration to be taken of our formal objection to the planned development (SG24).

No

ID sylw: 106350

Derbyniwyd: 27/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Kathy Hartley

We are a linear village of around 700
We do not have a doctors surgery, library,post office or police presence and lack most amenities.
The railway station is two miles away and bus services infrequent The local school is over subscribed.Where is the school provision in this plan?
Residents need a family car or they find themselves isolated and there is no elderly provision.
To grant any permissions without the developer providing any facilities is detrimental to all.
Why not develop the county town as our hub thus negating the need to concrete over the green fields.
We are already a pinch point for converging motorways and connecting traffic.
Building in villages increase traffic
as children are driven to school or the school bus pick up points.
The carpark at the station is already rammed by early morning.
Is the green belt in the congested West Mids to be concreted over by Warwickshire District Council and Solihull Council to be over ridden.
Can brown field sites be utilised before this happens.
This planning proposal is ill conceived,lacks foresight and is far too huge for Hockley Heath to cope with and I object most strenuously to the size of this proposed development.
We need more consideration.

No

ID sylw: 106355

Derbyniwyd: 04/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Lorraine Sparks

I wish to register my concerns over the above proposed development around Hockley Heath.

TRAFFIC - Over the years Hockley Heath have had to endure the addition of the M42, then the M40 which created the 3A Junction. Any problems such as roadworks and accidents then brings Hockley Heath to a standstill. The A3400 which splits the village then becomes a bottleneck to avoid the hold ups. Due to lack of transport infrastructure most family homes need to be 2-4 car families to get out of the village. Add another 4/5,000 homes to this and it doesn't take a genius to see what will happen. Almost everything in the village feeds into the A3400.

SCHOOLING/HEALTH/AMENITIES - We have no Doctors surgery and need to drive. The small Primary School is full to overflowing and even with a new Primary School built, this does not cover the problem of 11+ and further education students. Tudor Grange and Arden School are not able to take more. Already a few children are having to travel by minibus to Balsall Common. We have no bank and the mobile post office comes for a few hours on a Tuesday.
PLEASE do not further destroy a village and surrounding villages in the name of progress. This will not only affect Hockley Heath but the wider area. In view of the fact that Hockley Heath is serviced primarily by Solihull MBC it seems unfair to add this to their burden. Surely Warwickshire is a big enough County to find a few small develpments to fulfil the Government Directive!

No

ID sylw: 106357

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Paul Donnelly

As a resident of Hockley Heath where I have lived with my wife for 37 years, I would take this opportunity to register my comments concerning the preferred development options published. Specifically concerning how the enormous increase which would nearly quadruple the number of houses in Hockley Heath. This would inevitably have a detrimental impact for multiple reasons upon Hockley Heath and surrounding areas and habitats.
I oppose the development proposals for Hockley Heath Areas SG24 for the following reasons:
• All of the earmarked land is on the Green Belt which should only be built on in exceptional circumstances.
• The proposed development is completely at odds with Solihull MBC’s local plan which states that only small-scale development is appropriate for the village of Hockley Heath.
• The impact of this development given its size would seemingly have a dramatic increase in responsibility for Solihull MBC but none for South Warks. Totally unclear as to where the funding will come from to pay for providing health, education and many other services.
• The village does not have the infrastructure in terms of education, health and transport to sustain a development of this size. There are already existing issues with flooding of the A3400 during heavy rain. NPPF Paragraph 170 requires developments to avoid areas at high risk of flooding.
• Lack of Secondary School Provision – NPPF Paragraph 20 emphasises the need for adequate education infrastructure to support development. No existing capacity exists notwithstanding adding 2,000 households
• Poor Public Transport Links – NPPF Paragraph 109 encourages development in areas with sustainable transport links. Hockley Heath is not close to a train station and has limited public transport increasing reliance on private cars and also contravening the aim to promote sustainable transport.
• Traffic Congestion and Road Safety – NPPF Paragraph 110 states that developments should ensure safe and suitable access for all users. A development of this size will significantly increase traffic on the A3400 and surrounding roads. With the number of households in the village nearly quadrupling this will inevitably increase congestion and safety issues for all road users.
• Lack of Economic Justification – NPPF Paragraph 86 supports development that contributes to local economic growth. Hockley Heath is not a major employment centre, and likely therefore that most new residents would need to commute. This would add strain to transport infrastructure and work against sustainable development goals.
• Limited Local Amenities – NPPF Paragraph 98 stresses the importance of ensuring communities have access to facilities to promote health and well-being. There exists only a limited number of shops, and, therefore significant increases in facilities would be required to meet the need of an additional 2,000 households.

No

ID sylw: 106358

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mervyn Fletcher

I, am writing to express my opposition to the inclusion of SG24 within the SWLP.
I am a Hockley Heath resident , living here in the 1980/90s and returning 15 years ago.
I am extremely concerned at the reckless scale of the proposed development and what I believe is a flawed justification for SG24 as a strategic growth location.
The proposal directly impacts on me, my family and the character of the village. I believe that there are other sites which should have been reviewed and selected I outline below some of my concerns, although these are not exhaustive.

Unjustified Overdevelopment.
The scale of the proposal is excessive and totally disproportionate, given the size of the current village . It gives no consideration to Solihull Local Plan. It would erode the local community, its identity, undermine local cohesion and completely destroy the very attributes that make Hockley Heath such an attractive place to live.
SG24 proposals are isolated large scale urban estates totally out of keeping with the character of the village.

Irreversible Destruction of Green Belt
Green Belt was designed to prevent urban sprawl and to preserve open countryside. The proposal fails to demonstrate exceptional circumstances required for the release of this land. If the canal is a defensible boundary why are some sites put forward located beyond it.
Insufficient consideration has been give to looking for alternative brown field sites.
There has been little or no consideration give to the significant increase in in air and noise pollution, bother detrimental to the Heath and well being of the population

Complete Absence of detailed infrastructure capacity planning and funding The SG24 proposal has no credible provision regarding roads, schools, healthcare facilities. The proposed sites all rely on country roads , single lane canal bridges (already poorly maintained by WCC), no safe routes for cyclists or pedestrians. Potentially 5,000 additional cars accessing the Stratford Road from Spring Lane, Old Warwick Road, and Aylesbury Road at peak times. An already busy road which comes to a complete standstill at these times, particularly if traffic is diverted off the M42 and/or M40 Potentially 5,000 children would needed to be transported by SWDC to schools in their area. The plan makes no mention of how it’s school catchment area would work.
The lack of healthcare is not addressed.

Flooding and drainage risks
These have been totally ignored. The Stratford Road, School Road, Spring Lane, Broad Lane, Cut Throat Lane all flood frequently. Climate change will only mean this will happen more frequently. The current drainage system is insufficient to support such large scale development. The SWLP has not updated its flood risk assessments , has not provided a clear strategy for land which is already water logged. The cumulative impact of adding further impermeable surfaces to already flood zones has not been considered.

Breach of sustainability principles.
SG24 fails to meet the Sustainability Development Requirements outlined by SW. proceeding with this is in direct opposition to its fundamental principles. The plan is indefensible both legally and ethically.
The unsustainable overdevelopment proposed would irreparably damage Hockley Heath, impacting on residents as well as the surrounding environment.

No

ID sylw: 106360

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Peter Osmond

I hereby submit my very strong objection to the proposed 7 fold increase in the housing volume in Hockley Heath. Such a disproportionate enlargement will completely destroy the village.
Apart from the greater numbers of people and buildings there will be massive pressure on the limited infrastructure and a huge increase in traffic. In short, the quality of life of the residents will be destroyed.

No

ID sylw: 106362

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Richard Rendle

I am a Hockley Heath resident having lived in the village for over 24 years and in the Solihull area for over 40 years. I also have family members that live in the village. I currently live in Aylesbury Road. The proposal directly affects me and my family.

I am writing to formally oppose and object to the inclusion of SG24 within the SWLP on numerous grounds. I consider the proposal to be flawed on many levels.

Character of the village

Hockley Heath is a relatively small village of approximately 700 dwellings and whilst there are small areas which could be developed within the village and supported by the current infrastructure the scale and size of the SG24 proposal is completely inappropriate and would destroy the character of the village as it is wholly disproportionate to the available infrastructure and facilities.

Social infrastructure

Solihull hospital does not have an Accident & Emergency (“A&E”) department, the nearest A&E is Heartland Hospital which is struggling to deal with the current level of demand. The A&E department closed many years ago and after continued representations an Urgent Treatment Centre (“UTC”) was recently opened and is already struggling to meet demand. The demands placed on the local hospital are already at breaking point and any further development such as that proposed by SG24 would only worsen a deteriorating situation.

The proposed SG24 development is part of the purview of the Warwickshire Council however SG24 borders Hockley Heath village (Solihull Council area) and in reality, the SG24 proposal will be almost totally reliant upon the services provided by Hockley Heath village. This is wholly unacceptable, as the current infrastructure the village is barely adequate.

There is no GP Surgery in the village and the surgery in Dorridge is at capacity. It is already difficult to obtain appointments and the SG24 proposal would put further strain on a vital service.

There is a dental practice in the village but that is not accepting any new NHS patients until April 2025 at earliest. It is therefore at full capacity. The SG24 proposal would put further strain on an already over-capacity vital service.

The village is on the boundary of West Midlands and Warwickshire police forces. I have already experienced problems of reporting matters to the local police who themselves are unclear at times which force covers particular parts of the village and its environs. Part of the SG24 proposal would appear to overlap the boundary between the two police forces with all the attendant problems that this would cause.

As the village is on the borders of two police forces it suffers from lack of coverage. This lack of coverage will only be exacerbated by an increased requirement which will naturally occur with the proposed large increase in the number of residents as a result of SG24.

The village primary school is land locked and at capacity. In recent years graduates from the school have been unable to access places at the local schools in Solihull. The SG24 proposal and the significant number of new residences which it entails, particularly with the enhanced levels of social housing, will mean that the village school will be unable to cope with the influx of children.

The village Post Office closed in late 2020 and replaced by a visiting Post Office, one day per week. This would be totally inadequate for the scale of the proposed SG24 development.

Possibly, the only service that Warwickshire Council will actually provide to the proposed SG24 development will be refuge collection. Warwickshire Council will effectively be reliant upon the services provided to Hockley Heath proposal. This is unacceptable.

Physical infrastructure

The physical infrastructure for the village is currently at or about full capacity.

The water supply is unreliable, with the supply being interrupted or disrupted on the Aylesbury Road side of the Stratford Road on numerous occasions. Similarly, the water pressure on the Aylesbury Road side of the Stratford Road (apart from a small number of residences nearest the Stratford Road) is barely adequate and residents are regularly subject to reductions in water pressure due to equipment failures.

The Stratford Road is an apparent boundary between water supplies. The water on the south side of the Stratford Road is “soft” water whereas the water supplied to the north side of the Stratford Road is much “harder” has a different taste and leaves a lot of residues. Having lived on both sides of the Stratford Road in the village, water supply, pressure and quality is adequate on the south side of the road but marginal on the north side of the road which is predominantly affected by the SG24 proposal.

The village regularly suffers from flooding, some areas worst than others. The main road through the village, the A3400 is regularly flooded in heavy rain despite numerous attempts at repair by the local council. The council also attempts preventative maintenance by clearing the drains on the A3400 to little effect. There was a noticeable change in surface water run off with the development a few years ago on School Road. The proposed SG24 development will only exacerbate those issues.

During heavy rain we already suffer from sewage backing up in the drains creating obnoxious odours in our house.

The village already suffers from numerous electricity power cuts and outtages. The SG24 proposal will exponentially increase the demand on the network which is already under stress.

Transport

The transport network is already under strain, local services are stretched, and the environmental consequences are severe. The bus service to the village is at best rudimentary; it is a challenge to catch a bus into Stratford to arrive before 9 am in the morning. The car park at the train station in Dorridge is just about full on most weekdays and there is no alternative parking or land that could be made available to expand what is a necessary resource for people using the rail service.

Roads

The road network throughout the village is generally poor and there is little that could be done to alleviate the situation without the wholesale appropriation of land from numerous private residences which is both unrealistic and not viable. Many of the roads are single lane without adequate (or any) footpaths and the cost of upgrading the roads to cope with the enormous increase in traffic which SG24 would entail is not justified.

The village already suffers from traffic issues when there are problems on the M42 and the M40 from as far away as Warwick with the Warwick Road and Aylesbury Road regularly being used as “cut throughs”.

Any access on to the proposed SG24 development land from Aylesbury Road would be dangerous and would meet with insuperable problems in relation to the necessary permissions in relation to S278 of the Highways Act.

Environmental issues

The Blythe Valley development has already had a significant impact on the wildlife which surrounds the village. Attached are two photographs which demonstrate the displacement of wild animals. The hedges in the photographs were laurel hedges which the deer have denuded of all edible material within their reach. The photographs would be amusing if the situation was not so serious.

The proposal to build on yet more green belt land and the effect on the wildlife is simply unsustainable as many key habitats would be destroyed.

Need

Whilst I can understand that there is a need for new housing there seems to be little or no justification for the proposing such a vast development in such a rural setting. There is little or no employment opportunities in the area. New residents would need to travel significant distances to obtain employment and indeed basic social services since the provision in the village is already inadequate.

General Planning concerns

Solihull council has already consulted on developments in the village and after careful consideration turned down the majority of the developments suggested on various grounds. The proposed SG24 development is a re-hash of a previous proposal that was decided against by the local council (Solihull) which is in far closer proximity to the issues of the village than Warwickshire Council.

The proposed SG24 development is situated wholly on green belt land the destruction of which would be irreversible.

The green belt concept was developed to protect the countryside and prevent urban sprawl. The proposed SG24 development rides roughshod over that policy. Furthermore, the proposal represents a breach of the defensible boundary concept and if permitted to go ahead would inevitably mean the loss of further green belt land as there is no natural barrier to further development around SG24. I am not aware of any of the “exceptional circumstances” which would justify the release of green belt land under the National Planning Policy Framework. I do not believe that these exceptional circumstances can be demonstrated, and I do not believe that they exist in relation to the SG24 proposal.

Warwickshire Council has an obligation to comply with Sustainable Development Requirements and there is nothing with the SWLP in relation to SG24 which meets those obligations.

Cost justification

There is no justification for Warwickshire Council proposing to site a disproportionately large development such as SG24 next to Hockley Heath village in the knowledge that the majority of the costs of servicing that development will fall on another council, Solihull and the social, environmental and health issues on the residents of Hockley Heath village.

Summary

The SG24 proposal is an ill-conceived overdevelopment on green belt land to which there are many legal, environmental, infrastructure, sustainability and Health and safety issues which need to be fully considered, reviewed and dealt with before such a proposal can legitimately proceed.

There must be better, less costly proposals that could and should be considered in preference to SG24.

No

ID sylw: 106380

Derbyniwyd: 04/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Daniel Toth

We, the undersigned residents of Hockley Heath, strongly object to the proposed

development (SG224) outlined in the South Warwickshire Local Plan. Having reviewed the proposals, we find them to be entirely unacceptable for the following reasons:

1. Destruction of Green Belt and Loss of Open Spaces The proposed development would result in the irreversible loss of precious Green Belt land, which serves as a critical environmental buffer, prevents urban sprawl, and provides recreational and

ecological benefits. This contradicts the stated aim of the Local Plan to protect the countryside from

unplanned development.

2. Overburdening of Local Infrastructure and Services Hockley Heath is a small village with limited infrastructure. The proposed development would place

an excessive strain on already overstretched services, including: Schools: Local primary and nearby secondary schools are already at or near capacity. There is

no clear plan for additional school places to accommodate new residents. Healthcare: GP surgeries, dentists, and other medical facilities in the area are struggling with

long waiting times. Increased demand would further reduce accessibility to essential

healthcare services.

Road Network and Traffic Congestion: The A3400 and M42 junctions already experience significant congestion, particularly during peak hours. Additional housing and employment

sites will exacerbate traffic issues, leading to increased commute times, higher pollution levels, and reduced road safety.

3. Increased Flood Risk and Environmental Impact The proposed development would significantly alter natural drainage systems, increasing the risk of flooding in Hockley Heath and surrounding areas. The removal of green spaces and increased hard surface coverage will contribute to water runoff problems, threatening local properties and infrastructure.

4. Detrimental Impact on Village Character and Community Wellbeing Hockley Heath is a small, close-knit community with a unique rural character. Large-scale housing and employment developments would fundamentally alter the character of the village, leading to overpopulation, loss of identity, and a decline in community cohesion.

5. Lack of Justification and Sustainable Development

The justification for selecting Hockley Heath as a strategic growth location appears weak. The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) emphasises sustainable development, yet this proposal lacks proper public transport provisions, employment opportunities, and community facilities to support such a large influx of residents.6. Alternative Brownfield Sites Available Rather than encroaching on Green Belt land, the councils should prioritise brownfield site development, which aligns with national planning policies encouraging the reuse of previously developed land before considering greenfield expansion.

Conclusion Given the significant detrimental impacts outlined above, we urge the councils to remove SG224 from the South Warwickshire Local Plan and focus on more sustainable, appropriate sites for development. We expect the council to uphold its commitment to protecting the Green Belt and prioritising the interests of existing residents. We request formal acknowledgement of this objection and look forward to receiving updates on the outcome of this consultation.

No

ID sylw: 106412

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Jessica Palmer

I am writing to formally oppose the inclusion of SG24 within the SWLP. I am a local Hockley Heath resident, having lived in the village since 2021 with close village ties I am worried at the reckless scale of development and flawed justification for SG24 as a strategic growth location.
The proposal directly impacts me, my family, the local character and the lives we have built in this beautiful village - the whole reason we decided to settle here in the first place. Having reviewed the various consultation documents and technical details, it is clear that there are other sites and settlements that perform MUCH better than those selected at SG24 and they have not been reviewed in the correct manner nor in fullness. Some of my concerns are listed below:


1. Unjustifiable overdevelopment
The scale of the proposed allocation is excessive and disproportionate, completely out of step with the current community. It would erode our village identity, undermine local cohesion and destroy the very attributes that make Hockley Heath a desirable place to live.
SG24 is being advanced without due consideration of the Solihull Local Plan, which is currently under review. The failure to adopt a coordinated and integrated approach with Solihull Council highlights the enduring issues that will arise should SG24 be taken forward in its current state. The Solihull Plan was very clear that Hockley Heath is only suitable for small scale development - SG24 is quite the opposite.
SG24 within the SWLP should not be permitted to proceed in its current large-scale quantum, can not be considered in isolation away from the Solihull Plan and must have a Solihull Council engagement and agreement.
We have a congestion as it is throughout Hockley heath at peak times and this impacts on village noise and air pollution, this will only make this issue more damaging.


2. Irreversible destruction of green belt and limited review of sustainable alternatives
Each individual site that makes up SG24 requires inappropriate development on green belt land, designed to prevent urban sprawl and preserve open countryside. This proposal fails to demonstrate the 'exceptional circumstances' required for Green Belt release under the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) with a number of the tests being applied in a flawed manner. The claim that the canal can substitute as a defensible boundary instead of the Green Belt is demonstrably flawed; several proposed sites are located beyond the canal, rendering this justification invalid.
The lack of a proper sustainability appraisal for alternative brownfield options demonstrates a missed opportunity and failure in due process. The SWLP has ignored viable alternatives, including the redevelopment of underutilized commercial spaces into residential in locations that already have a good level of infrastructure readily available.
SG24 within the SWLP should not be permitted to proceed without reviewing alternative sites / options in deeper detail and taking a more comprehensive review of the plan to release green belt and its wide ranging impact linked to character, environment and biodiversity.


3. Detrimental Environmental and Biodiversity impact
SG24 would inflict harm on local biodiversity, directly contravening national sustainability policies. The targeted sites are rich in ecological diversity, supporting an array of wildlife and plant life, particularly along the canal’s vital green corridors. The SWLP fails to meet the legal obligation in the NPPF requiring ‘conservation and enhancement of the natural… environment’ and para 175 requiring councils to take ‘a strategic approach… plan for the enhancement of natural capital’
Key failures include; the destruction of key habitats with no credible mitigation plan, failure to use up to date environmental assessments (the 2013 Green Infrastructure is out of date and not fit for purpose), significant increases in air and noise pollution from additional traffic which will harm local air quality and quality of life.
The Habitat of various wildlife has been dramatically impacted by the building of HS2, which surrounds the Solihull and Warwickshire boundaries. Stripping away habitat and green areas for a local wildlife will not only impact on current wildlife but also future generations. The destruction of their habitat in the quest for industrialization and urbanization will cause several species of plants and animals to be lost.


4. Absence of detailed Infrastructure capacity planning and funding
SG24 is being proposed with no credible infrastructure provision to support it. Hockley Heath is already stretched in terms of roads, schools, and healthcare facilities. The SWLP fails to provide any realistic solutions to mitigate the additional strain SG24 would impose.
Roads & Transport: Many affected roads, especially to the west of SG24, are single-lane with no pedestrian walking access. They rely on single lane canal bridges that are entirely unsuitable for increased traffic. Widening roads would require the expropriation of small pieces of land from a large number of private properties, which is unrealistic.
Education: Hockley Heath has a single, landlocked primary school already struggling with capacity and traffic congestion. The plan doesn’t explain how school provision will be improved and there is no mention of how school catchment areas will work.
Healthcare: The increase in demand for doctors, dentists, hospitals could not be covered by Hockley Heath in its current form. The area is already beyond national guidance for travel times to hospitals and A&E services. Increased demand will further exacerbate waiting times and degrade local healthcare services.
Infrastructure Costs: The funding for essential infrastructure expansion is lacking detail, meaning these burdens will fall entirely on Solihull Council, which has already stated that Hockley Heath can only accommodate small-scale development.


5. Significant flooding and drainage risks ignored
Hockley Heath already experiences severe surface water flooding, even at times without heavy rainfall and particularly along the artery routes which will be required to serve SG24; School Road, Spring Lane, Cut Throat Lane and A3400 Stratford Road. The existing drainage infrastructure is insufficient to support additional development.
The SWLP has not updated flood risk assessments to reflect the current challenges, has not provided a clear drainage mitigation strategy (particularly for the SG24 developments, some of which are on waterlogged land), and has not considered the cumulative impact of adding impermeable surfaces to already high-risk flood zones.


6. Breach of sustainability principles
SG24 fails to meet the Sustainable Development Requirements outlined by South Warwickshire. The transport network is already under strain, local services are stretched, and the environmental consequences are severe. Proceeding with this allocation would be in direct opposition of the fundamental principles of sustainable development, making the entire plan legally and ethically indefensible.
Conclusion: SG24 can not proceed as a strategic growth location in its current format
SG24 inclusion as a strategic growth centre can NOT proceed in its current format within the South Warwickshire Local Plan. We recognise that Hockley Heath has some facilities and can take on a small level of growth, however many of the plans, policies, frameworks have not been reviewed in enough detail or applied correctly. The unsustainable overdevelopment proposed under SG24 would irreparably damage Hockley Heath’s character, environment, infrastructure, and quality of life. It fails to demonstrate exceptional circumstances for Green Belt release, ignores significant viable alternatives and lacks the essential infrastructure planning required for sustainable development.

There are many other issues that arise due to the inappropriate selection of the sites. They represent further significant legal, environmental, sustainability and H&S issues which must be reviewed prior to agreeing the SWLP. SWLP have an obligation to deliver housing and release sites in the most sustainable way, which cannot be achieved via the current SWLP as there are clearly much better performing settlements.

I feel this should build should be considered on a much smaller scale and I will be continuing to protest this development, which I feel is mainly for greed and the profit of the housing companies with no thought to current residents or wildlife in the area.

No

ID sylw: 106418

Derbyniwyd: 03/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Diane S Hadland

We have lived for Fifty Three years in Hockley Health and
have seen numerous changes to it in that time but it has
always remained a village- We now feel that this is about to change and if this development goes ahead will be a disaster for all residents who live here. Aylesbury Road, where we live is already congested with traffic, has noise and air pollution, and speeding traffic which constantly raises safety concerns.
In the last four five years the A3400 has been flooding after heavy rain, local people are reporting flooding in their gardens and homes. There needs to be a complete
new drainage structure in the village to help with this Problem Now - put a new development on it would only exacerbate the situation.
We have a wonderful Primary School which is fully
subscribed but no Secondary School provision at all in the
village. We rely on Secondary education providers in
surrounding areas who are mostly over-Subscribed themselves-2- We have no healthcare facilities in the village we are registered at Dorridge surgery, getting an appointment can be difficult. The village itself has two shops for groceries and one butchers shop So most people drive to the local Supermarkets. Hockley Health has no Train Station and limited public transport So there is increased reliance on cars which means yet more pollution. Finally if this development goes ahead it will alter the character of this beloved village, we will lose the wildlife habitats, there will be impacts on the the biodiversity of plants, insects and wild flowers and Lanes we walk down will disappear!

No

ID sylw: 106420

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Christine Sprague

Please find herewith my reasons to oppose development at Hockley Health (SG24).

The village already has surface water drainage issues and the Stratford Road floods regularly during heavy rain. Further development would worsen this problem. All of the earmarked land is on the Green Belt, which should only be built on in exceptional circumstances. The development is completely at odds with Solihull MBC's local plan which states that only small-scale development is appropriate for Hockley Heath. This development would significantly increase traffic on the A34, which already is congested, particularly when there are problems on the M40/M42. All proposed developments would need to access the A34, significantly increasing the accident risk. The development would harm wildlife and impact on biodiversity. The loss of green space would also impact significantly on the wellbeing of existing residents. It would fundamentally alter the character of Hockley Heath, undermining its distinctiveness and rural identity. The village does not have the infrastructure in terms of education, health and transport to sustain a development of this size. Although the development falls within South Warwickshire, the burden of the new population in terms of schooling, transport, health, refuse collection would fall to Solihull, who have already opposed it. This is clearly unfair and would lead to ongoing disputes between the Councils over funding in the future.

No

ID sylw: 106421

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Robert Symonds

I am writing to formally object to the proposed development at Hockley Heath (SG24) on the following grounds:
1. Flooding and Drainage Issues – The village already suffers from surface water drainage issues, and the Stratford Road frequently floods during heavy rainfall. Additional development would only exacerbate these problems, increasing the risk of flooding.
2. Green Belt Protection – The earmarked land is within the Green Belt, which should only be developed in exceptional circumstances. There is no justification for allowing large-scale development on this protected land.
3. Contradiction to Local Plan – The proposal conflicts with Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council’s local plan, which designates Hockley Heath for only small-scale development. This large development is entirely inappropriate for the area.
4. Traffic Congestion and Safety Risks – The A34 is already heavily congested, particularly when issues arise on the M40/M42. Additional housing would increase traffic levels and accident risks for both drivers and pedestrians.
5. Environmental and Biodiversity Impact – The proposed development would result in the destruction of valuable green space, harming local wildlife and reducing biodiversity. The loss of open land would also have a negative impact on the wellbeing of current residents.
6. Loss of Village Character – Hockley Heath has a distinctive rural identity. Large-scale development would irreversibly alter its character, undermining the qualities that make it a desirable place to live.
7. Strain on Infrastructure and Services – The village does not have the necessary infrastructure to support a development of this size. Local schools, healthcare services, and transport networks are already under pressure and would struggle to accommodate additional demand.
8. Unfair Burden on Solihull Residents – Although the development falls within South Warwickshire, the additional demand for schooling, healthcare, transport, and refuse collection would fall on Solihull, which has already opposed this development. This is unfair and could lead to disputes between councils in the future.
9. Loss of Green Spaces for Dog Walking and Increased Dog Waste – The removal of green spaces would significantly reduce areas for dog walking, forcing more people to exercise their dogs on pavements and roads. This would inevitably lead to an increase in dog waste in public areas, impacting the cleanliness and hygiene of the village. With more residents and dogs, but fewer appropriate areas for them, the problem would only worsen over time.
Given the above reasons, I strongly urge the council to reject this proposal. I trust that my concerns, along with those of other residents, will be taken into serious consideration.

No

ID sylw: 106424

Derbyniwyd: 26/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Stephen Dingley

Consultation on the South Warwickshire Local Plan

My opposition

I have other concerns about the proposals which I feel negatively affect the village and those are also list below. I have lived on Spring Lane for over 30 years so am well informed on local conditions pertinent to the proposal. My Wife Jacqueline Dingley has separately documented her opposition and concerns with which I totally agree.

Lack of Secondary School Provision

Hockley Heath has NO secondary school and relies on schools such as Tudor Grange/Arden and Henley to meet the current demand. In last year's admissions there were many problems with children missing out on their catchment school and travelling as far as Balsall Common School to get a place. Any additional developments in Hockley Heath will only exacerbate this challenging situation. Also, most children attend Solihull schools so why should Solihull provide the educational requirements of South Warwickshire children.

Character of the Village

Hockley Heath is a small village with a few shops/takeaways and a two pubs. When walking around the village you often bump into other residents that you know and have a good chat, most people say hello even if you don't know them. Everyone looks out for each other. This is shown very well with 'Spotted Hockley Heath' on Facebook where residents can share appropriate stories or look for help which adds to the positive atmosphere which can only be achieved in a village environment.

Over the 30 years or so that I have lived here there have been several successful small housing developments that were appropriate to the scale of the village and have not affected the character of the village at all.

It is a friendly small village, and the proposed development threatens to completely change this character.

Contradiction with SMBC's Local Plan. My understanding of SMBC's thoughts on housing developments in Hockley Heath are based on a very detailed piece of research which came together as the Hockley Heath Local Plan. This plan recognises that it is important that the village maintains its identity and SMBC feel that there is only scope for limited new development considering many of the areas highlighted in my opposition document. Your large-scale development proposal, which appears to be not properly thought through, completely undermines SMBC's approach which has been informed by local needs.

If these plans go ahead, I assume that Solihull Council will have to provide many of the infrastructure services such as transport, health, education etc which is not right. If you plan to locate your housing needs in/near Hockley heath you should provide the appropriate infrastructure to support it. I assume you will be receiving council tax from these new developments. Where will this money go? I assume you will not pass it to Solihull MBC to fund appropriate infrastructure. I expect Solihull MBC will include this in their opposition to your plan.

Biodiversity and Environmental Impact

One of the most positive things about living in Hockley Heath is the access to the immediate countryside. There is currently no need to drive to a suitable walking location, it can be done with a short walk. During any proposed large scale development walking locally will be blighted by building works and build works traffic. Post any large- scale development the simplicity of enjoying the local countryside will be lost.

Lack of Economic Justification

There are very limited opportunities for current residents to gain employment in Hockley Heath as there are not many employers based in the village so many residents commute to other areas for work. The proposed large-scale development would simply add additional commuting traffic. So, in summary, this large-scale development will not bring new jobs to the village.