Object

Representation ID: 46103

Received: 09/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Lynn Millard

[Worcester Lane]

I would like to lodge my objection to the allocation of sites for future development in the Draft Black Country Plan. This is part of the public consultation (Reg 18) of the plan. Under pressure from national government, I understand Dudley local authority has had to prepare an order to demonstrate where future development will take place and it has calculated there is insufficient brownfield sites to support the Black Country Plan and ‘exceptional circumstances now exist to justify a review of the green belt’. I understand Dudley has assessed all of its greenbelt for proposed future development and has decided that three sites off Worcester Lane would cause less harm and more benefits than other sites and these are being put forward as an option for removal from the green belt for development.

Worcester Lane is already a very busy, fast road with no safe footpaths or street lighting and it is the major road into West Hagley and on to Kidderminster and Worcester from the Stourbridge direction. One access to the proposed sites is over a railway bridge at the junction of Racecourse Lane and Redlake Road with a weight limit of 7.5 tonnes. The other access is through the busy village of West Hagley in which there are two high schools to which access is by one road only and a primary school, which is on a very busy main road with speed ramps. The two high schools both have students who travel by school bus therefore there are at least six buses in and out of the village twice daily. West Hagley is at the south end of the proposed development and if this land was to be developed the transport needed to deliver materials would have a massive impact on the surrounding areas:
Can they access the sites via the railway bridge due to the weight limit?
Access from any other routes would require using
(i) Bromwich Lane, which is a single lane road and totally inappropriate for HGV’s
(ii) Middlefield Lane, which is a narrow road which joins a very busy dual carriageway
(iii) Park Road, which homes the primary school is ridiculously busy at school times and has speed ramps
(iv) Through the village; this is an already heavily congested village due to current level of traffic and school transport and endures traffic problems when the supermarkets/takeaways receive deliveries.

Everyday traffic would increase substantially if every proposed house had a minimum of two cars. The traffic is already considerable at peak times at the traffic lights at the junction with Redlake Road and Racecourse Lane and this would be increased. This is the same in the direction of West Hagley. The pollution would also increase due to the idling traffic; this then affects the air quality which affects the health of the local residents.

The proposal does not take into account the lack of public transport around the sites. There is currently no public service at all. Therefore, if developed, the extra vehicles would create much more traffic, something which I understood the government was trying to reduce. If public transport was introduced this is a new form of traffic and therefore would also add to the increased negative affect to the air quality and pollution which would have a detrimental effect on the residents currently living in the local area.

Worcester Lane currently has a big problem with flooding in a few areas along the proposed fields when we have heavy rain, how can housing be built on land that floods? The area by DUH206 does not have adequate sewage drainage; local houses have been seriously affected.

Worcester Lane road surface is of a tar and gravel mixture which is considerably noisy. Adding more traffic along it would significantly increase the noise to local residents especially those who have gardens backing on to it. This will have a detrimental effect on the quality of enjoyment in the gardens and therefore mental health. More traffic, of any kind private or public, will affect the air quality which will have an effect on the local residents. This will impact the health of the existing residents and the new residents.

The impact on the local residents during the time of development would be significant, the noise levels, the increased traffic, the dust would be substantial and could have a massive detrimental affect on any person already suffering certain illnesses. Many residents choose their property due to the location and countryside views and losing the green fields would affect their mental health.

The existing area is invaluable to not only local residents but the wider public who walk over the fields. This is excellent for mental health and well-being and has been invaluable during the pandemic. The public would lose the Rights of Way and permissive paths and therefore would not be able to continue to enjoy this area. Many families make use of the area teaching their children the importance of wildlife, identifying with them inspects, birds, vegetation etc and respect for the countryside. Where will they go to do this? Many people use the area for walking dogs, running for pleasure or training for sports; where would they go, how far would they have to travel to have the similar environment to enjoy? This is encouraging local residents to use their vehicles to leave their area to go for exercise; again, increasing the vehicle use and therefore affecting the air pollution. It is devastating to think of the loss of open countryside and the peaceful location on the edge of highly populated areas. This is of substantial importance to the physical and mental wellbeing of the local residents and those who enjoy it.

This proposal will destroy 100’s of years of growth of hedgerows, greenery and trees. These give the life to the insects which are the bottom of the eco system. Where will we be when we have developed all of our green fields? Some of the trees along the proposed site have TPO’s – will this be taken into consideration? One of the fields is currently being used for agricultural land – where is the farmer expected to move to? Why are we removing existing hedgerows and then realising we need to replant elsewhere? Our Prime Minister only recently has said we need to build on brownfield sites to preserve our greenbelt and I feel this plan is not inline with government views. We need to protect what little greenbelt we have to preserve all natural habitat and wildlife. Once this has gone it will never recover.

There are insufficient existing local services to cope. Local schools, primary and secondary, are oversubscribed and the two closest secondary schools are, as the crow flies, in another local authority so therefore residents are highly unlikely to be given places. The closet secondary school within Dudley borough is an approximate half an hour walk, not really suitable for young adults to walk on unkempt pavements with no street lighting. There are insufficient primary places now. The closest GP practice is in another local authority and there are constant complaints regarding the waiting lists and difficulty in getting appointments. The GP surgery within the Dudley borough and with whom local residents are registered is often on the local news regarding the difficulty getting appointments/telephone consultations. The local leisure centre is not within walking distance. The nearest few shops are one mile away and in a different authority. There are no safe footpaths or street lighting so this is dangerous. I feel this is penalising people with disabilities or who are less able. This again will increase traffic as it is encouraging people to use vehicles due to the lack of public transport and again is increasing the air pollution thus affecting peoples physical and mental health. Developing new housing in this area will not address the needs of the local people and it will affect existing commuters who already use the roadway.

The area is of importance for its history. The right of way leading into Quarry Park Road is thought to be part of an ancient path; the earliest map showing this is the Pedmore Tithe Plan of 1846. There has been limited archaeological investigation into the area and therefore it is not implausible that more archaeology remains there.

The proposed removal of this greenbelt not only will affect the local people now but will adversely affect generations to come. Once removed greenbelt cannot be replaced and the wildlife and natural habitat will never return. The decision to remove green spaces is extremely serious and should be addressed accordingly. Green spaces are more important than ever as we are aiming for a carbon neutral society. It is absolutely imperative that we keep our greenbelt for the future enjoyment of everyone