1 Introduction

Object

Representation ID: 11424

Received: 02/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Linda Bridges

Proposed building green land harms the health and well being of your constituents by :
Diminishing our access to green space

Environmental damage affecting wildlife and biodiversity

Ignores the long term improvement to our region by clearing and using brownfield lands rather than destroying fresh green space

Object

Representation ID: 11463

Received: 03/10/2021

Respondent: Miss Hollie Templar

The plan does not adequately consider the value of existing green sites. It contains too many building plans on these sites and retrospective replanting and landscaping efforts. This not adequate compensation for the prospective loss of existing green space and established ecological communities.

Object

Representation ID: 11532

Received: 05/10/2021

Respondent: Local Government Authority

1. Destruction of Brown Site Land
2. Decimation of wildlife and trees that are only just becoming established in an area of outstanding natural beauty
3. Loss of countryside/walks and nature at its finest
4. A transport/road structure that struggles already without the addition of further vehicles
5. Services unable to cope without the addition of more properties and residents e.g. GP surgeries/hospitals, dentists, schools and colleges
6. Where does the additional employment come from when the properties are built therefore putting a drain on the government

Comment

Representation ID: 11582

Received: 06/10/2021

Respondent: Ms Joanne James

NON EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCE. NPPF states that Greenbelt is to be protected and requires ‘Very Special Circumstances’ to be built on. There is nothing special about plans to build on unspoilt land just to meet current housing targets. I question the use of a computer based algorithm to assess the housing needs which seem totally overinflated. Local Councils rather than the government are surely better equipped to judge housing targets for their particular area.

The projections assume the population of the Black Country will rise at an alarming rate from
2023 - 2039 well above normal growth.

Comment

Representation ID: 11630

Received: 29/09/2021

Respondent: Mrs Annie Tolley

I'm also concerned that many of the residents where this building work would affect have not been notified and only by word of mouth become aware of any of the proposals.

Object

Representation ID: 11692

Received: 07/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Joseph Southall

Access to local nature will be lost due to development and it will definitely affect my mental health not being able to enjoy this green location. More houses will put pressure on oversubscribed local primary and senior schools and the doctors surgeries. I object in strongest terms due to the impact on mental health of individuals in such a deprived area. Many people enjoy this greenland since covid and its loss would be catastrophic for many, I believe suicide rates would go up. These statistics should be logged as we can see who can be held accountable for increased deaths.

Comment

Representation ID: 11703

Received: 08/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Ken Ferguson

I feel that this consultation is fundamentally flawed due to the majority of residents are not aware and those that are aware have a very short time to comment. After a long time trying ,I was unable to find where to comment on a particular small site on the online portal. Seems to be deliberately vague.

Comment

Representation ID: 11743

Received: 08/10/2021

Respondent: Mr John Hemming

Awareness & distribution of the plan has been totally inadequate, most people are unaware of what is being planned. Despite being active on social media, listening to local radio, reading the local press, I would have been unaware of these plans had the leaflet not been put through my door by Tory party volunteers !

Comment

Representation ID: 11748

Received: 08/10/2021

Respondent: Mr John Hemming

There can be no justification in using greenbelt land attached to populated areas for building on . Its there for the use of the local community and to keep built up areas separate. It can never be replaced

Comment

Representation ID: 11752

Received: 08/10/2021

Respondent: Mr John Hemming

The whole consultation process has been poor, people are simply unaware of it

Comment

Representation ID: 11759

Received: 08/10/2021

Respondent: Mr John Hemming

Removing any greenbelt land from populated areas is detrimental to health & well being !

Object

Representation ID: 11774

Received: 08/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Gary Lambert

OUR INFASTRUCTURE CANNOT COPE AS IT IS AND WE DONT WANT TO SPOIL OUR CONSERVATION GREEN BELT LAND

Object

Representation ID: 11775

Received: 08/10/2021

Respondent: Mr NEAL QUINTON

WE OBJEC T TO THE USE OF GREEN FIELD SITES, WHEN THERE ARE SO MANY INDUSTRIAL EMPTY SPACES/ BROWN SPACES THAT MUST BE USED FIRST.
PARTICULARY THE PROPOSED USED OF FIELDS BY THE GRAPES POOL , WILLENHALL.

Object

Representation ID: 11780

Received: 08/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Robert Simpson

Whilst more houses are needed, why develop green spaces when there are other sites which could be used such as brownfield sites, old industrial estates and vacant housing stock.

Object

Representation ID: 11817

Received: 09/10/2021

Respondent: Sue Limb

How can you think that building on green belt land is a good idea. There are plenty of brownfield sites for you to use.

Comment

Representation ID: 11820

Received: 09/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Richard Knight

There is a signifcant amount of documentation included within the consultation which is not easily navigated or digested. The requirement to comment on individual sections also makes this process onerous. This is likely to deter people from reviewing and commenting on this plan and therefore falls short of the duty to co-operate.

Comment

Representation ID: 11831

Received: 09/10/2021

Respondent: University of Wolverhampton

Access to green space and protecting the region's geological, industrial and cultural heritage should be this plan's no.1 priority. Without these the Black Country loses the significant aspects, totems and locations that give it its unique genius loci; harnessing the community to the landscape through Place-Identity. This is fundamental to ones wellbeing and community cohesion, as well as being the no.1 factor in long-term investment. I urge the teams involved to consult the field of Environmental Psychology and their striking qualitative research when considering making changes to aspects of place that underpin identity, uniqueness, culture and beauty.

Object

Representation ID: 11859

Received: 10/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Karenjit Dhillon

There are numerous sites that would benefit from regeneration rather than using greenbelt land. Also living in Walsall the deprevation is high, are more schools, doctors and other public amenities going to be built alongside the new housing rather than money being given to the council that doesn't benefit the local residents to where the houses are actually being built.

Object

Representation ID: 11865

Received: 10/10/2021

Respondent: Ms jean ward

STOP the destruction of green spaces and nature.
We all need it.
If we destroy nature, we are destroyed along with it

Comment

Representation ID: 11866

Received: 10/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Julie Staley

Extremely concerned about the impact this plan would have on wildlife, the general environment, infrastructure in terms of volume of traffic on the already very busy Aldridge Road, local amenities such as schools and GP’s. Greenbelt land should not be built on AT ALL!
Brownfield sites should be the only areas used for housing (our property is built on brownfield site). The UK had recently been declared one of the worst most nature depleted countries - in the bottom 10% globally and last among the G7 Group of countries. Shame on any councillor who approves houses on green belt land!

Object

Representation ID: 11872

Received: 10/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Matthew Davies

I object to building on greenbelt.

Object

Representation ID: 11873

Received: 10/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Matthew Davies

There is enough brownbelt land that can be redeveloped before using greenbelt and destroying our environment.

Object

Representation ID: 11880

Received: 10/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Rowena Hawkins

Don’t spoil nature in the area by using it to build houses.

Object

Representation ID: 11896

Received: 10/10/2021

Respondent: Land and horse owners

do not build on green belt. and sort the public transport out and the road infrastructure out before you even consider new housing

Object

Representation ID: 11901

Received: 10/10/2021

Respondent: Land and horse owners

We do not want houses built on green belt

Object

Representation ID: 11902

Received: 10/10/2021

Respondent: Land and horse owners

NO TO HOUSES ON GREEN BELT

Object

Representation ID: 11914

Received: 10/10/2021

Respondent: Ms Julie Edwards

New housing on Green field sites is not the answer to housing needs in the future. We need to be more creative and look at inner city locations

Comment

Representation ID: 11923

Received: 10/10/2021

Respondent: Ms Julie Edwards

The green belt is so important at the minute and is been eaten away especially in places like the Black country, where lets face it we don't have much. Individual villages are becoming joined together because of the amount of housing. Design of housing is poor, not green. You have COP22 coming up soon a pledge from the Government to be carbon neutral yet you are still allowing housing to be developed without any Green credentials unbelievable. Not progressive at all, backward.

Object

Representation ID: 11924

Received: 10/10/2021

Respondent: Ms Julie Edwards

General comments. These plans are totally flawed. The last thing we need is more building on green belt. We have a dying town centre (Walsall town centre ) and Brownhills high st the old shopping centre), which needs radical changes and could easily accommodation new housing within the dilapidated Town centres. Yes we know it’s more expensive but they are dying with lack of people in them, such just like in much of Europe we need to put housing within the retail mix. Yes it’s cheaper to build on Green sites, but we need to look long term .

Object

Representation ID: 11951

Received: 10/10/2021

Respondent: Sheeba Mir

The use of green belt land is nonsensical to me. We are already seeing the impact on the world through global warming taking or removing green belt in an already built up area will not help matters. By doing soo now you are setting a precedent for future decision makers.