1 Introduction

Comment

Representation ID: 12956

Received: 10/10/2021

Respondent: Akhlaq Hussain

Why is there no consultation (workshops)with residents in the affected areas?
Why are the proposed consultation being targeted in the areas not affected by the proposal, why are there no consultations being held in the areas that will be affected by the proposal?
Why are you excluding us residents who live in the area with any engagement, do our views not matter, or do you think it’s right to ask someone who is not affected by the proposal their views but not ask the people who live there

Comment

Representation ID: 13148

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Miss Joyce Williams

I went to the meeting at the Compass Suites, Aldridge because a neighbour told people about it. I hadn't seen any publicity for the proposa!s. The meeting wasn't well attended when I went in the afternoon. The planning officers were helpful but it seemed a last minute attempt to consult. Large plans showing possible sites for development were just put on tables rather than being displayed on the walls or 'easels'. This meant people had to queue to see them instead of a few at a time looking at the plan and hearing what the p!anning officer said.

Comment

Representation ID: 13172

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Ms Hannah Jones

finally the consultation form itself is difficult to interpret and the public profile has been too low key for residents to be aware of it

Comment

Representation ID: 13186

Received: 10/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Eileen Russell

• the consultation form is difficult to interpret and understand
• the public profile has also been too low for the residents to be aware of it

Comment

Representation ID: 13219

Received: 08/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Angela Wadeley

Having actually read the 727 page Black Country Plan plus additional information, 1 can clearly see that a massive amount of work has been undertaken to produce such lengthy documents. However it appears to be a re-hash and repeat of much of the current local plans, albeit with more detail concerning climate change and sustainable issues. The plan is the same old, same old, pre-pandemic, unsustainable future with arbitrary requirements for growth. The pursuit of growth is unsustainable and cannot continue at any cost. These targets need questioning in great detail.

Comment

Representation ID: 13228

Received: 08/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Angela Wadeley

However, I am very disappointed in the proposed Plan which suggests that the main, first choice option for the area's supposed housing and business
needs is to build on Green Belt, green spaces land. This is an easy option which should be dismissed immediately where ever you are located.

Object

Representation ID: 13247

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mr & Mrs Mac & Mary Hodgkiss

Number of people: 2

Firstly, we would like to comment on the lack of information made available about the proposals — we heard of the proposal from a neighbour, who had seen something on a lamp post whilst walking their dog! We were assured at the meeting we attended on the 27th September that literature was with Royal Mail and would be delivered to houses during that week — it is now the 6th October and we still have not received any literature via Royal Mail. An article was published in the Express & Star a few days before the meeting on the 27th September— a little late we feel!

Object

Representation ID: 13302

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Bob Barnard

Objection to the consultation process.

Object

Representation ID: 13310

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mr John O'Malley

There has been a lack of proper consultation and due process - this is a strong concern - I don’t believe this to have been done within the parameters of such a process.

Object

Representation ID: 13349

Received: 10/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Brenda Trout

OBJECTION TO BLACK COUNTRY PLAN IN GENERAL + PLEASE SEE ATTACHED SHEETS FOR OBJECTIONS TO 1 SITE IN PARTICULAR.
Local Authority- Walsall Council
I wish to raise the following objections to the Black Country Plan 2021, as outlined below.
Several residents have been in contact with local MP Wendy Morton and Walsall Councillor John Murry about this matter since it was raised during the Covid-19 restrictions in 2020. Assurances have been given in writing, there will be no building in Aldridge on the Green Belt land, this has been reiterated today by the Prime Minister and supported by the Mayor of the West Midlands, Andy Street, that building on green-belt land is now not on the Governments agenda.

The wedge of green belt land on the junction of Middlemore Lane West and Bosty Lane, which is bounded by Daw End railway cutting, is unsuitable for development for the following reasons:-
1. The site is adjacent to a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), please see attached Defra plan below.
This is an ancient site as documented on Walsall Council's website, please see- https://go.walsall.gov.uk/parks_and_green_spaces/conservation_and_the_environment/sites_of_special_scientific_interest_sssis/daw_end_railway_cutting

The old quarry and railway cuttings at Daw End provide excellent exposures on Wenlock Shale (Coalbrookdale Formation) and the overlying Wenlock Limestone which were deposited during the Silurian Period about 410 million years ago.
These are the best exposures available in Britain for this particular group of rocks. During deposition of the Wenlock Limestone marine organisms grew in patches on the sea bed trapping sediment and forming low mounds or reefs. These patch reefs are well seen in the Wenlock Limestone at this site. This is an important geological locality for the study of the Wenlock Series in Britain.

2. Any development on this important sensitive site would comprise the existing delicate eco-structure and be extremely detrimental to the wildlife and to the historic flora and fauna of the site and area generally.

3. Heavy industrial goods traffic on the roads bordering the site, makes access to the site difficult. Access to the Middlemore Lane Industrial estate from Bosty Lane is restricted and can only be accessed by a single-track bridge. This already causes significant tailbacks along the section of Middlemore Lane West onto Bosty Lane. Furthermore, the use of this route by heavy goods traffic is set to increase when the proposed Council recycling centre on Middlemore Lane opens.

4. The junction of Middlemore Lane West and Bosty Lane has been the cause of numerous serious accidents, with some incidents involving the deployment of the air ambulance service. Development on this site will increase traffic at this junction and would be likely to create a high number of incidents without significant improvements to the highway, including the potential to construct a new double-track road bridge over the railway.

5. The development of this green belt site will create additional environmental air pollution and exacerbate the existing noise pollution from the container base.

6. Very limited public transport services in the area, with the local bus service providing a maximum service of two busses per hour. There are currently no public rail links in the area.

7.The green belt creates an important natural division- between the parishes of Aldridge and Rushall and prevents coalescence. This land provides a much-needed haven for wildlife, and currently includes a haven for several horses which graze the pasture and provides a buffer zone to the SSSI. less

Object

Representation ID: 13371

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Councillor Khizar Hussain

Finally and crucially there is no support at all for the development of this land and without public support and confidence in the process this should not go ahead. The consultation process itself has been very poor with many residents expressing their anger and astonishment at the lack of awareness about the development. In addition to this and to add further insult there has been no ‘drop in’ session in this area unlike other ‘more prosperous’ areas of the borough. This is therefore seen rightly as an unequal and discriminatory process by the people of Birchills and Reedswood.
I would be grateful if you would include these comments into the consultation process and acknowledge receipt of this submission.

Comment

Representation ID: 13486

Received: 23/09/2021

Respondent: Mrs Caron Baker

[General Greenbelt]

Even more pressure on our local services - Doctors, Schools etc.
Lack of social spaces for interacting with local dog walkers, children play areas.
We need green spaces for mental wellbeing. The past 18 months have proved the benefits of being out in the fresh air.
The volume of traffic is already at breaking point. The roads are constantly gridlocked. Already on side roads it is impossible to park.

Object

Representation ID: 13521

Received: 03/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs K Cooper

N.A

Object

Representation ID: 13523

Received: 10/09/2021

Respondent: Mr William Trout

Objection to Black Country Plan in general

Object

Representation ID: 13540

Received: 30/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs B Watson

STOP KILLING THE WORLD.

Object

Representation ID: 13666

Received: 08/10/2021

Respondent: Lichfield & Hatherton Canals Restoration Trust

We would request that the word ‘Branch’ be removed from the name of the Hatherton Canal on the policies map. There is a section of the Hatherton Branch Canal which previously connected to the Cannock Extension Canal within the Walsall Council area (at OSGR SK020068) which is not proposed to form part of the restored Hatherton Canal.

Object

Representation ID: 13674

Received: 09/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Iris Williams

Consultation date commenced August 21 why have I only received this form a few days before the end of consultation?

Object

Representation ID: 13759

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mr George Stuart McEvoy

Number of people: 2

1. The consultation period ran from 16th August until 11th October - 49 days - but the pamphlet was posted through our letterbox on the 5th October —6 days before any comments had to be received by the organisers. This is an unacceptable practice. There is very little time for the proposals to be discussed by neighbours and friends and with Streetly Community Library being closed on Mondays this effectively reduces the period to deliver your comments to 4 days if proof of delivery at the library is requested. This is again unacceptable and suggests that this is a deliberate ploy by the authorities to limit any residents' comments. Indeed, it is understood that all Walsall libraries are closed on Mondays.
2. It would be expected that a copy of the proposals would be delivered to each Streetly household, but this is certainly not the case, with many homes being unaware of any pamphlet.

Object

Representation ID: 13801

Received: 08/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Robert Burns

[No text, general objection only]

Object

Representation ID: 13825

Received: 10/10/2021

Respondent: The Wedding Rooms Florist

I feel the public consultation has been very underhand, under the radar during covid, comment forms were only delivered a week prior to the 11th October, which was the last date for response. It is my intention to contact my local MP, and send details of this proposed destruction of woodland to both Michael Gove and Boris Johnson.

Object

Representation ID: 13867

Received: 08/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Jane Corbett

With regard to the Regulation 18 consultation I am concerned enough to object as follows:
1) There has been a lack of adequate information provided to the residents of the areas concerned, and short time period to respond.
2) The area on Queslett Road East should be removed from the plan as it is adjacent to Barr Beacon which is currently protected for conservation and is currently giving pleasure to residents on all surrounding areas.
3) There would be a huge impact on local services, such as doctors, schools, general amenities & the traffic would cause jams and pollution in the area.
4) The natural landscape would be destroyed & any new greenspace provided would be manufactured & unnatural.
5) The natural life in the area would be devastated - birds, wild animals, flora and fauna, trees in direct contradiction to the world wide need to preserve nature.
6) more use can be made of 'brown' sites for new builds.

Object

Representation ID: 13911

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Jane Tonks

When I moved here back in 1998, this area was all farmland, with grazing sheep and horses and its a pleasure to walk around safely at anytime of the day/night. If you build houses it will loose its peaceful scenic views and farmland existence, it will bring extra pollution to the area, and increase asthma and other health conditions, it will have more traffic congestion and hence more noise and disturbance aby time of the day/night there will be hazardous materials being involved, then foundation issues on the land.
and it will have a great impact on this residential area.
I don't see the relevance of this project at all.

Object

Representation ID: 14000

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Lynne Byrne

... it would appear that all previous acceptance of objections to this plan has been overturned without due recourse. This has happened on previous occasion and suggests "underhand" means.

Object

Representation ID: 14014

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Janet Phillips

(Wildlife)
Foxes
Hedgehogs
Birds
Squirrels
Bats

So many lovely trees was planted over 20 yrs ago, and now you want to cut them down. I do believe you called it the black country urban forest.

Object

Representation ID: 14037

Received: 01/11/2021

Respondent: Mrs Louise Fletcher

On one hand you talk about responding to the climate change emergency, however this is only in some areas, whislt others will end up with a greater level of polution as 1000s of houses are built, which will result in additional cars, and traffic in the area. There is very little investment in public transport which is appalling across the region, and finally you feel the only answer to the housing crisis which you have allowed to develop over the last 30 years is to build on green belt land.

There are a huge amounts of brown field sites, as well as disused housing, shops and factories which could all be utilised for housing well before the green belt is used.

In a time where there is clear evidence of the benefits of green space to the health of residents, particularly following covid, you want to build on this land which is appalling and extremely short sited. By taking this approach you will put a greater level of pressure on the NHS which is already stretched, and are doing nothing to encourage preventative approach to medicine where residents have safe places to exercise.

Birmingham City Council is doing everything possible to become a green city, yet a few miles down the road councils in the Black Country want to build on green field sites, and basically turn the rest of the midlands into a concrete jungle. You need to really consider your long term planning in light of the health benefits of green spaces, and associated improvements to air quality, rather than just bricks and mortar which will make developers huge propefits by building properties which local people cannot afford, and will not resolve the issues of afforadable housing for those most in need.

Object

Representation ID: 14095

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Carol Fellows

The effect on local services, NHS, further delays in local health services.
Effect on local services, roads being really busy and noisy and poorer air quality.
Also loss of greenbelt and impact on local wildlife and the environment.

Object

Representation ID: 14111

Received: 04/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Jaspal Sehint

My objection are:
a) It will cause traffic congestion and add to the fumes and o2 and ozone layer.
b) The proposed 960 homes will add a great strain to the local services.
c) The local environment will be affected especially to the natural nature in the fields. Loss of natural habitat.
d) More and more open spaces are being destroyed and affects people's health and wellbeing as research has shown that green spaces means people have less stress and impacts on their wellbeing. Loss of trees.
e) A view that we have seen for over 30 years will disappear and not leave a legacy for my child. Loss of view.
e) Affect the value of local properties/ loss.
f) Highway safety, road access
g) Traffic generation, causing even more congestion and noise to ever growing traffic noise.
h) disturbances to the neighbourhood
I) Loss of light
J) Nature conservation
K) Road access

Object

Representation ID: 14146

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Gillian Barakat

100% against plans cant say it any plainer than that

Property prices will be compromised (go down)

pressure added to schools, local doctors who already can not cope

Traffic will increase unbelievably adding not only to congestion but also air quality will go down

The overall look of the area will be changed and spoilt completely

Unfortunately I fear that residents who object will be ignored as they are generally. I wonder who will be the financial winner!! they say follow the money!!!!!!!

Object

Representation ID: 14193

Received: 09/10/2021

Respondent: Barry Cooper

we in this area feel that we are squeezed between two authorities and feel that we are not being consulted enough. In fact had it not been for a campaign by our local MP and councillors, many would not have been advised about the Black Country Plan.

Object

Representation ID: 14218

Received: 04/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Layton Crennell

[no comments made]