Object

Representation ID: 14202

Received: 03/10/2021

Respondent: Alan Darby

I object to policies TRAN1 and TRAN4 (and the Key Transport Diagram), in particular in the context of policy CSP3 (to which I will object separately) as manifested in 'strategic housing' proposals for Walsall. Those policies' combined effect seems to be to place large amounts of new housing in northern Walsall while ignoring that area's transport needs. Walsall already functions as a 'dormitory' for other West Midlands towns and cities, having vastly more homes than jobs, and this is especially true of its northern and eastern suburbs which are heavily reliant on travel by private car. This has resulted in severe road congestion, especially on A461, A4124 and B4154, which CSP3 will tend to exacerbate. Much employment- and retail- related and other travel in northern Walsall is east-west, broadly corresponding with the A5-M54 corridor which largely lacks public transport services (which tend to be radial, based on Birmingham). I do not see proposals for such services in the Draft Black Country Plan which, like recent transport investment in the West Midlands (for example Metro), does not serve Walsall (especially northeast of the town centre) well. The proposed reinstatement of Wolverhampton-Aldridge passenger rail services via Walsall is very welcome but that is too far south to serve most of the proposed urban extensions. TRAN1 and TRAN4 also seem not to preserve the former South Staffordshire Railway through Pelsall and Brownhills for railway reinstatement or to include it in any other mass transit network (utilising it only as a cycle route) and indeed do not include any key transport corridor improvements within the northern Walsall area identified for mass house-building. Even if realising the inter-regional and national benefits of reopening that railway to freight must be a longer-term goal, it is surely essential to reinstate rail-based rapid mass transit services to Pelsall and Brownhills before those areas are subjected to further - very large - housing developments. If, contrary to my analysis in objection to CSP3, a compelling case can be made for large-scale contiguous peripheral expansion of the conurbation in preference to new freestanding settlements, an acceptable quality of life for northern Walsall's current and future residents depends on prior major improvement in public transport (as well as public rights of way/'active' travel facilities) to make travel other than by car a realistic and attractive choice. I do not see such a radical and transformative tranportation vision in the Draft Black Country Plan: rather, it seems that while Walsall is to receive a disproportionate share of the conurbation's new housing, other areas will receive transport investment. That cannot be either sustainable or right. [ENDS]