1 Introduction

Comment

Representation ID: 10569

Received: 17/08/2021

Respondent: Mr Dave Jackson

I agree that a strategic plan is needed but the balance between a 15 year + view of housing need completely outweighs the lost forever decisions that impact the greenbelt.
The paper appears to decide that greenbelt must be sacrificed and has allocated new build in these areas already. I object to this.
I think a rolling wave approach should be introduced with reviews done every 5 years. Only in the last period should green belt be considered for development and only if extreme conditions persist and are forecast to further persist. I believe that many more brownfield sites will become available in the first 10 years and must be prioritised for redevelopment.
The paper describes keeping the new green belt permanent, but how can this be trusted when decisions have already been made to sacrifice it ?
I use the greenbelt regularly for recreation, walking, running, cycling or just sitting and enjoying the views, its one of the reasons I live in the area and would seriously consider moving away if it were reduced.
The use of greenbelt is an easy way out and the drive for economic growth is outweighing the benefit of living close to the green belt.

Green belt not to be built in in first 10 years and must be reassessed in the period 10-15 years.

Support

Representation ID: 10594

Received: 19/08/2021

Respondent: Mr. Dennis R Whittaker

I approve in principle because a logical framework for future development is needed in order to ensure that such development is appropriate for any given site or provision.

Comment

Representation ID: 10611

Received: 24/08/2021

Respondent: Mr David Smith

I am concerned that the responses from developers and landowners should be viewed with some suspicion as both have a vested interest in the use of 'greenfield' areas. Developers are interested in gaining access to large areas of land that can be developed as cheaply as possible, without having to undertake remedial work, and on which they can make a significant profit. Landowners on the other hand will see an opportunity to sell land for large amounts of money. Neither view is likely to take much account of local needs, concerns or problems.

Support

Representation ID: 10635

Received: 27/08/2021

Respondent: Mr. Dennis R Whittaker

Obviously, some sort of Plan is necessary in order to identify and address future needs of the area - so I support the principle of setting out these matters in a draft document such as this so that residents, businesses and other interested parties can have their say. Hopefully, the views of all interested parties will be taken into accounts when producing the final Plan.

Comment

Representation ID: 10656

Received: 31/08/2021

Respondent: Ms Diane Baker

Already scarce natural areas should not be developed on. To do so goes entirely against the need to preserve and grow the natural environment and preserve these spaces for the wellbeing and health of residents. This is short sighted and lacking in innovative thinking to address housing needs.

Object

Representation ID: 10688

Received: 04/09/2021

Respondent: David Plant

I object and believe that brownfield sites should be explored and exhausted prior to any green belt being considered.

Comment

Representation ID: 10832

Received: 13/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Lawrence Bright

The council has not consulted with its residents about any deregulation of Green Belt Land.
The Council has broken the National Protection Of Green Belt to stop Urban Sprawl.
The council has not informed Residents in Writing by mail about Black Country Plan.
The council has a duty to all to inform consult and listen to the people of Dudley Borough.
The Council has failed all its Residents.
The Residents of Dudley are your employers.

Object

Representation ID: 10901

Received: 19/08/2021

Respondent: Mr Scott Griffiths

hi I think it's appalling that you are building more house on our beautiful countryside. the government goes on about climate change. But building more house mean more Green house gases doesn’t make sense
regards

Object

Representation ID: 10932

Received: 07/09/2021

Respondent: Julie Booth

[All of it]

The council are proposing to protect the Green Belt in these areas and i offer my support to protect the historic countryside, scenic views, wildlife, conservation areas, woodland, natural habitat for wild animals, informal recreation facilities such as walking.

I am in favour of building on brownfield sites only and the green belt land should be left untouched!

Comment

Representation ID: 10946

Received: 17/08/2021

Respondent: Martin Redden

Hi
I understand that you're wanting input from citizens of the black country.
I would like to see beautiful neighbourhoods built please. The accepted idea that people must travel somewhere to see something old to experience beauty is ridiculous, if you think about it. Many people understandably, are NIMBY’s and want to cling to the green belt at any cost;but to my mind this is only because residential neighbourhoods are so ugly.
There are neighbourhood that try to be beautiful. They usually managed estates built for tenants rather than home buyers, for example the model villages of Bourneville and Port Sunlight, the ‘garden cities’ of Welwyn and Letchworth, some of the London neighbourhoods on university campuses are managed environments too with leisure and beauty in mind.
I believe that better tans can be planned. The road at the front model of the 1930s was fine for when vehicular traffic was only for deliveries, but it's downright dangerous when everyone owns a car. In factories, health and safety officers take great care to separate pedestrians and vehicles and there is not likely to be any children or elderly people in factories, so how did residential set ups get away with things that wouldn't be permitted in factories. To my mind the road and the residential parking spot should be at the back, next to the wheely bin, so the front of the house can be safely connected by footpaths into open parkland. You can't walk down the street without risking being run over by somebody reversing off their own drive. In fact, you're lucky to be able to walk down the pavement at all, with all the cars parked on the actual pavement.
Ancient trees should be built around rather than ripped up. Natural and historical features are assets, not obstacles. Councils love to have parks as separate areas that you travel to, I would argue that the whole neighbourhood, where people actually live should be the park. The houses should blend in like cottages in an ancient village.
Please be kind to pass on my email content to planners, or to publish it in your documents.
My contact information should remain private please.

Object

Representation ID: 10967

Received: 18/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Simon Brodie

We should never be building on Green Spaces as the government are requiring to do so. Yet this Government is set on a Green agenda it's hypocritical. The Green spaces in Wolverhampton are very little as it is, Wolverhampton North East is already over built to increase this even more will put pressure on Doctors, New Cross Hospital, Schools , Road net work in and around Wednesfield will not cope with the extra cars this will bring. Where is Wolverhampton's clean air zone !

Comment

Representation ID: 11017

Received: 20/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Richard Carter

Generally, there is a need for the Black Country authorities, and the WMCA as a whole to start thinking outside of the box and to start implementing ideas that move away from the traditional way of thinking. We have plenty of under-utilised and derelict land that can be used for both housing and employment without there being a need to reassign green belt or recreational land to this purpose. We need more green space, not less. There are alternative idea out there. These need to be researched and alternatives selected on their own merits.

Comment

Representation ID: 11028

Received: 20/09/2021

Respondent: Mrs Rebecca Bickmore-Green

Though I agree more housing is needed green land should be protected. There are plenty of derelict buildings that can be used which are on land. Disused car parks should be looked at.

Object

Representation ID: 11034

Received: 21/09/2021

Respondent: Mr David Matthews

Use of greenbelt land for housing - These proposals will:
destroy irreplaceable greenbelt land and will spoil the open space character and landscape, this greenbelt land should be kept for future generations to enjoy.
threaten the movement of animals through these wildlife corridors.
put enormous pressure on existing infrastructure for example generating thousands of extra vehicle movements on the towns already busy and congested roads.
adversely affect the residential amenity of neighbouring homes causing lack of privacy to homes which currently overlook greenbelt land.

Object

Representation ID: 11095

Received: 15/09/2021

Respondent: Daniel Lloyd

Why am you want to build on green belt land where there are lots of empty build which can be use.

I thought green belt to stop anyone build on it

Stop building on green belts please

Comment

Representation ID: 11142

Received: 24/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Richard Carter

There is a need to change attitudes and methodology if the authorities are to succeed in responding to "future challenges in a way that is right for the Black Country, its residents and its businesses.

Comment

Representation ID: 11168

Received: 24/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Richard Carter

The aim of this discussion document is to provide supporting information that will empower the West Midlands Combined Authority’s (WMCA) to change attitudes, improve services and to create innovative industrial solutions that will improve social standards and help to revitalise the UK’s environment. Having said that, it is important to note that implementation of the suggestions detailed in this document can be greatly improved, and become far more efficient, through the introduction of supporting national policies and strategies.

Referring back to my opening remarks, it is worth highlighting how the application of common sense and timely policies and strategies can result in far reaching social benefits. Although the topic being discussed could be interpreted as me “going slightly off at a tangent, it is worth pointing out that it has social, transport and industry relevance.

Comment

Representation ID: 11173

Received: 24/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Richard Carter

When poverty in the UK is researched, what are considered to be the leading causes of poverty are easy to identify. They include (source: https://cpag.org.uk/ accessed 16/01/2021):
Low paid, insecure jobs.
Unemployment and constantly having to cycle between periods of work and unemployment.
High costs and inadequate benefits.
However, what is often missed (and these factors help to feed the issues identified above) are the underlying social, cultural and environmental factors that generate the negativity, dissatisfaction, disillusionment and despondency which contributes to society’s “why should I bother” attitude and which, subsequently, can also lead to self-imposed poverty, i.e. people get trapped in a rut of accepting “second best” and substandard conditions.
On the surface, many British people appear to be content with their lives, they are supportive of charities and they are willing to help when asked. Yet, beneath the surface they are constantly paddling against a tide of anger and frustration; an anger that quickly surfaces, swells and overruns a person when they are brought to task for parking right on the very corner of a busy road
junction, with the rear of their van partially blocking the main road and blocking the views of other
road users. Does that person apologise for not following the Highway Code? No! Their reaction is to chase after the person who “insulted” them, endanger other road users by swerving round pulling in front of the “culprit”, suddenly stopping dead, getting out of their vehicle and threatening physical violence.
In 2020, the United Nation’s “World Happiness Report” 2020 ranked the UK at number 13 out of 156 countries surveyed (Finland was ranked number 1) and ranked London at 36 with Helsinki taking the number 1 slot. This report analyses the results of the Gallop World Poll; which gathers feedback about a country’s Business & Economics, Citizen Engagement, Education & Families, Environment & Energy etc performance, and links this information with six other factors: levels of GDP, life expectancy, generosity, social support, freedom and corruption income.
Although the report provides an indicator of the level of happiness in the UK (the Gallop World Poll surveys approximately 12,900 people or approximately 0.02 of the current population), it may not be truly indicative of the population’s feelings as a whole; particularly if those people are totally unaware of alternative ways of life.
So what could improve the UK’s ranking in the report and peoples’ attitudes?
The primary answer to that question is to implement sustainable changes and systems that will have a positive effect on everyone’s daily life and attitude, and that will result in greater efficiencies and substantial cost savings at national and local government level. I short, implement changes that will make everyone’s life easier.

Comment

Representation ID: 11175

Received: 24/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Richard Carter

If we consider the desire within businesses, and some echelons of society, to increase the use of driverless vehicles and supermarkets without staffed checkouts, for example, although such moves should help businesses to become more profitable, they will also dramatically increase unemployment levels, the strain on society and, in all probability, poverty. In a society where finding meaningful employment is already an uphill struggle, where will the people displaced by these trends work? Where will they obtain the finances to allow them to purchase goods or
services from the very businesses that no longer feel there is a need to employ them?

Object

Representation ID: 11204

Received: 27/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Dennis Brazier

SAFE OUR GREENBELT FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS AND NATUTE TO THRIVE.

Support

Representation ID: 11215

Received: 16/09/2021

Respondent: Sandwell & West Birmingham CCG

The Black Coutry & West Birmingham Clinical Commissioning Group NHS remain committed to and supportive of the Black Country Plan and Black Country Core Plan Strategy. As a Health Care Commissioner we have been engaged in the process of the Black Country Core Plan Strategy review since being invited by the review team late 2019.

We have offered support, provided evidence and data during the process to shape the Health Care Infrastructure Planning Policy, which is underpinned by our suite of Estates Strategies and other supporting documentation.

We will continue to support and engage in the process towards its conclusion and adoption.

Support

Representation ID: 11225

Received: 27/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Philip Williams

I support the proposed Draft Black Country Plan, as it has been very well thought through and suits the needs for the local area over the next decade or so, I also believe that it seeks to meet the housing needs of our immediate area of Peak House Farm, Wilderness Woods and Aston University Recreation Grounds, this will preserve the natural balance and help conserve and hopefully increase the local nature population whilst providing much needed facilities for the next generation, I am very excited to see the plan carried out over the next 15 years.

Support

Representation ID: 11227

Received: 27/09/2021

Respondent: Mrs Phattharapapha Williams

I support the proposed Draft Black Country Plan, as it has been very well thought through and suits the needs for the local area over the next decade or so, I also believe that it seeks to meet the housing needs of our immediate area of Peak House Farm, Wilderness Woods and Aston University Recreation Grounds, this will preserve the natural balance and help conserve and hopefully increase the local nature population whilst providing much needed facilities for the next generation, I am very excited to see the plan carried out over the next 15 years.

Object

Representation ID: 11277

Received: 15/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Kevin Boden

I wish to to inform you that I would like my objection to the whole process of the Black Country Plan. The process is confusing, unclear, and a way of looking as though you take people's views into account but is merely a box ticking exercise to planning pushed through at a later date. The Green belt was designed to stop urban sprawl. This is as relevant today as when set up. Communities deserve green spaces for recreation and aesthetic value. Unfortunately not all land is open for public use but still serving a useful purpose. I say no to any more development, eroding our beautiful surroundings. A climate emergency is active now as announced by Dudley Council, housing will not solve this.

Comment

Representation ID: 11300

Received: 29/09/2021

Respondent: Mrs Usha Kumari-Burns

Wildlife suffers, well being suffers when there are no open spaces.

Comment

Representation ID: 11324

Received: 30/09/2021

Respondent: Miss Holly Harrison

HOUSING - STOP NIMBYISM AND GET BUILDING

BRIERLEY HILL STRATEGIC CENTRE - YES TO DIVERSIFYING USES, ALSO BRING BACK MONORAIL

TRAM EXTENSION - ONLY UNCOOL PEOPLE DON'T LIKE TRAMS, YES TO EXTENSION

Comment

Representation ID: 11338

Received: 30/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Robert Townsend

More extensive use of brownfield sites. Where greenfield sites are needed the allocation of non farming, non productive land that is not adjacent to existing residential property and therefor will not impact residents who have a right to live a peaceful existence.

Comment

Representation ID: 11367

Received: 30/09/2021

Respondent: Mrs Christine Hedges

Local people's voices should have equal weighting with large housing developers who have the money and expertise to argue their point. They have the money but we have the passion, and we have to live here not them.

Comment

Representation ID: 11378

Received: 30/09/2021

Respondent: Mr David Miller

Why do we need so much housing, especially at the expense of valuable farm land?

Object

Representation ID: 11392

Received: 30/09/2021

Respondent: Mrs Melanie Knight

Green belt land in and around Streetly is vital for wildlife, mental and physical health and helps protect our community from being swallowed up by urban sprawl. The distinct character of Streetly will be ruined forever. We don’t have the infrastructure to support 970 new families. Please build on brownfield sites and leave our countryside alone.