Policy GB1 – The Black Country Green Belt

Object

Representation ID: 10573

Received: 18/08/2021

Respondent: Miss Karen Beddow

Green Belt is never an option for housing - during COVID its the only thing to keep people sane - this shouldnt be under estimated. Together with the wildlife along with supposed green policies the government is adopting, its contradictory. The infrastructure for the new housing also needs urgently addressing, currently Aldridge is struggling with both schools, doctors and roads. Building more homes will stretch and already crippled system.

the greenbelt should be sacred, along with flood planes being needed, the ecological importance is huge

Object

Representation ID: 10738

Received: 27/08/2021

Respondent: Stevelilart

The following items are taken from the government website:

Protecting the green belt :
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-rules-further-strengthen-green-belt-protections
Drawing on protections in the National Planning Policy Framework, to protect the green lungs around towns and cities.
Green belt boundaries should only be altered in exceptional cases, through the preparation or review of the Local Plan.
Communities Secretary Eric Pickles said:
I am crystal clear that the green belt must be protected from development, so it can continue to offer a strong defence against urban sprawl. Today’s new rules strengthen these protections further, and ensure that whether it’s new homes, business premises or anything else, developers first look for suitable sites on
brownfield land.

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/national-planning-policy-framework/13-protecting-green-beltland

13. Protecting Green Belt land
137.
The government attaches great importance to Green Belts. The fundamental aim of Green Belt policy is to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open; the essential characteristics of Green Belts are their openness and their permanence.
138. Green Belt serves 5 purposes:
(a) to check the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas;
(b) to prevent neighbouring towns merging into one another;
(c) to assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment;
(d) to preserve the setting and special character of historic towns; and
(e) to assist in urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land.
Proposals affecting the Green Belt
147. Inappropriate development is, by definition, harmful to the Green Belt and should not be approved except in very special circumstances.

Object

Representation ID: 10744

Received: 30/08/2021

Respondent: Rachael Harrison

The development would have significant impact on greenbelt area which is is home to a variety of wildlife including deer who regularly graze in the area. This sort of land is essential to maintain vital eco systems as well delivering on local authorities commitment of access to green space. I add the comments below to the opening paragraphs of the Green Space report which demonstrates the importance of green space. I have also attached a copy of the report.

"Greenspace, such as parks, woodland, fields and allotments as well as natural elements
including green walls, roofs and incidental vegetation, are increasingly being recognised
as an important asset for supporting health and wellbeing. This ‘natural capital’ can help
local authorities address local issues that they face, including improving health and
wellbeing, managing health and social care costs, reducing health inequalities, improving
social cohesion and taking positive action to address climate change.
Evidence shows that living in a greener environment can promote and protect good
health, and aid in recovery from illness and help with managing poor health. People who
have greater exposure to greenspace have a range of more favourable physiological
outcomes. Greener environments are also associated with better mental health and
wellbeing outcomes including reduced levels of depression, anxiety, and fatigue, and
enhanced quality of life for both children and adults. Greenspace can help to bind
communities together, reduce loneliness, and mitigate the negative effects of air
pollution, excessive noise, heat and flooding. Disadvantaged groups appear to gain a
larger health benefit and have reduced socioeconomic-related inequalities in health
when living in greener communities, so greenspace and a greener urban environment
can also be used as an important tool in the drive to build a fairer society"


Moreover, the government have committed to development of brownfield sites before greenbelt. We have seen a great example of this in Goscote where significant housing has been created on a former factory site. This is the sort of development we should be concentrating on and very proud of as a community. The Black Country, the birthplace of industry in the UK, and indeed Staffordshire have significant brownfield sites that should be developed prior to digging up green space such as the proposed Yeildfield farm development.

Brownfield areas MUST be used before digging up more of our precious countryside and consideration should be given to how this population will be served and the extreme disruption and negative impact for the local population. The Turnberry Estate took significant greenbelt land from the area. Please do not take anymore.

Object

Representation ID: 10746

Received: 30/08/2021

Respondent: Jane Nyirenda

I write to register my objections to plans to build on greenbelt land in particular; Yieldfields Hall Farm
adjacent to Bloxwich Golf Course. I personally feel that in and around Walsall there are too many vacant
buildings and brownfield land that could be developed before resorting to destroying our precious greenbelt
land and the wild life that live in it. For example, builds vacated by shopkeepers which could be repurposed
to accommodate other businesses and as residential premises.

I therefore urge you as planners to reject any applications that may be submitted to build on this land and
other greenbelt land in the borough.

Object

Representation ID: 10748

Received: 02/09/2021

Respondent: Mrs Julie Platt

I object and wish to lobby against the massive urban extension planned for Essington (Bloxwich/Newtown), in regards to loss of green belt that our conservative government manifesto promised to protect.
Plus, generally lobby all other sites across South Staffs that have green belt land proposals.

Our green belt allows all our surrounding areas a little bit of breathing space to walk past and have a little bit of country walks after a hard days work. Would we consider building on Hyde Park? Has every bit of grass got to go, why is it named green belt meaning:-
“an area of open land around a city, on which building is restricted.”
Why have I even got to contest, lobby or object? Green belt is green belt.

> Brownfield sites to be developed and refuse the plans for development on our bit of green belt that we have left as once it’s gone it’s gone.

Object

Representation ID: 10755

Received: 01/09/2021

Respondent: Mr & Mrs Steve & Karen Edwards

Number of people: 2

I am wring to you to oppose the proposed Yieldfields Farm Housing Development and the removal of our Green Belt
status.

I would like to know what jusfies a development of this size? Why these numbers??
There are also two planned developments in Essington Parish, this would mean even more loss of Greenbelt and a
converging conurbaon!!
Why is there a need for this proposed number of houses in such a small parish??
We cannot support a new community of this scale within it! Brownfield sites are available across adjoining boroughs
as well as South Staffs.


PLEASE SAVE OUR GREENBELT - BROWNFIELDS FIRST!

Object

Representation ID: 10758

Received: 07/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Joseph Horton

I am deadly opposed to this development as I don't want to see greenbelt development around where I live for as long as I live for my children and grandchildren.

Comment

Representation ID: 10761

Received: 07/09/2021

Respondent: Jane Clarke

The loss of green belt will have a devastating impact on the area, as the other two developments in Essington will result in a converging conurbation, taking away each areas individuality.

I understand that there is a requirement for housing, but to take away the green belt when there are Brownfield sites available is unacceptable. This is a small parish, how can we support such a large development ? Jobs, schools,community hubs, all need funding.

Object

Representation ID: 10831

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.

Object

Representation ID: 10855

Received: 14/09/2021

Respondent: S Lucas

I object to green belt being used for development. 19% is far too high a figure, I believe that 0% should be used. I do not see any justification here for using green belt sites for development. I understand that there is enough brownfield land available for development.

Comment

Representation ID: 10864

Received: 16/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Paul Rogers

I believe the green belt should be protected wherever possible and compensatory improvements to other areas can never truly offset the destruction of such amenity. There is a lot of brownfield and poor quality / poorly utilised land which should, in my view, always be used first before permitting extension of development for any purpose into our precious countryside.

Object

Representation ID: 10874

Received: 16/09/2021

Respondent: Mrs Dawn Bissell

I do not believe green belt should be built on. PLEASE use the brown field sites first as they are usually in areas with much better facilities for a growing population.

Object

Representation ID: 10876

Received: 16/09/2021

Respondent: Ms Leanne Bood

Green belt should not be used for such sites when there is sufficient brownfield.

Comment

Representation ID: 10894

Received: 15/09/2021

Respondent: Miss Megan Jones

Distruction of greenbelt area that has historical importance. A wide variety of animals will lose their homes, and potentially die. Loss of trees and vegetation which are essential for our health and climate change. The horses that are currently on the land will be at risk; one of them will need to be put down due to health conditions if they are required to move to a different area. Used by walkers, dog-walkers, cyclists and others for exercise and supports good mental health. Already busy with traffic around the nearby school.

Comment

Representation ID: 10936

Received: 16/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Ian Fellows

I also strongly object to using Green Belt Land for housing as this will impact on the hedgerows and wildlife at a critical time when we are being encouraged to protect and develop this. less

Comment

Representation ID: 10940

Received: 17/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Martin Simmonds

Loss of green belt which can never be replaced & the impact it will have on the local wildlife

Object

Representation ID: 10970

Received: 18/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Mark Griffiths

The yew tree estate is built on to limit. More houses will put pressure on local school already over capacity after the closure of fir tree school and the addition of housing in place of.
Also building on green belt land and local playing field what is suitable to all from football to family entertainment games as ball games are not allowed in local area. This is the last local area where children can play and be looked after safely without crossing main roads. Also the local road structure would have to be changed to access the planned area.

Object

Representation ID: 10976

Received: 19/09/2021

Respondent: Jonathan Browning

Green belt land should not be released for development in any circumstances. Statements to define a 'new permanent boundary' are meaningless, and were probably stated last time the green belt was built upon.

Support

Representation ID: 11005

Received: 17/08/2021

Respondent: Mrs Joyce Daniels

I wish to support keeping our greenbelt from developers. It is used by hundreds all
year round for it’s scenic beauty and its history, and used regularly by walkers and families for pure
enjoyment.
Dudley Council have proposed to protect our greenbelt and I wholeheartedly support them.

Support

Representation ID: 11007

Received: 17/08/2021

Respondent: Jill Parkes

Number of people: 2

We wish to support Dudley Councils proposed protection of the Green Belt in
Halesowen , incorporating Tack Farm, Coombeswood, Lutley and Foxcote.
We have enjoyed this historic countryside for the past 60years, so uplifting to explore
these natural open spaces and taking de-stressing walks ,in particular during the
recent pandemic.
These areas of Green Belt are available to everyone and are well supported with walk
leaflets.
We also feel it is so important to preserve the woodlands, hedgerows and fields which
encourage wildlife , our legacy for future generations to explore.

Support

Representation ID: 11011

Received: 26/08/2021

Respondent: Geraldine Blewitt

Supporting the protection of special Green Belt areas around Coombeswood, Lapal, Illey, Grange Hill, Tack Farm, Hayley Green, Lutley, Foxcote Farm, etc.

This special countryside, which should receive appropriate recognition for its contribution to the informal recreational needs of a wide community, including, of course, those of the individual Black Country Authorities, but also the needs of Birmingham; North Worcestershire and beyond.

Object

Representation ID: 11020

Received: 20/09/2021

Respondent: Mrs Cherie Lumby

We object to any development of green and green belt land. They provide a green lung for communities and vital habitat for wildlife.
There are plenty of brownfield sites across the Black Country on which to build on.

Comment

Representation ID: 11022

Received: 20/09/2021

Respondent: Mrs Rebecca Bickmore-Green

No greenbelt land should be used there are lots of brown land areas that should be looked at first.

Comment

Representation ID: 11033

Received: 20/09/2021

Respondent: Mr John Griffiths

I would like to register my dismay at Walsall planning to remove one of the last proper areas of agricultural green belt land at Yelderfields.

Support

Representation ID: 11042

Received: 07/09/2021

Respondent: Mrs Vivienne Jones

Please register that I strongly wish to protect the greenbelt surrounding Dudley especially the Halesowen and Cradley area.
These areas already border heavily developed areas and provide green lungs both for a human population and wildlife.

I would appreciate acknowledgement that my views have been received.

Regards

Vivienne Jones

Comment

Representation ID: 11044

Received: 21/09/2021

Respondent: Mrs Sally Matthews

Use of greenbelt for housing - Site WAH242
This proposal will
Destroy swathes of irreplaceable greenbelt land which should be kept for future generations to enjoy. It is imperative that our town should not lose any of what little greenbelt land it has.
Threaten the movement of wildlife through the greenbelt corridors.
adversely affect the amenity of neighbouring homes which will lose the open space aspect of greenbelt land and lose their privacy

Support

Representation ID: 11046

Received: 09/09/2021

Respondent: Miss TRACEY Monsma

Dear ...............

As a resident of Halesowen , I write to confirm I fully support the protection of the Green belt in and around Halesowen, namely Illey, Lapal , Uffmoor, Hayley Green, Coombsewood, Lutley and Foxecote . It is vital we protect these areas for the future generation , the benefit of wildlife and those people who live in the area.

Please reply to confirm receipt of my representation of support.

Thanks and Best Regards

Tracey Monsma

Comment

Representation ID: 11047

Received: 21/09/2021

Respondent: Mr David Matthews

Summary: 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.
adversely affect the residential amenity of neighbouring homes causing lack of privacy to homes which currently overlook greenbelt land.

Support

Representation ID: 11051

Received: 09/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Stephen Walder

I am pleased, following a review of the Green Belt around Halesowen, that 'The Plan' is supporting the protection of special Green Belt areas around Coombeswood, Lapal, Illey, Grange Hill, Tack Farm, Hayley Green, Lutley, Foxcote Farm, etc., and are rejecting the 'Call for Sites' proposals that would severely damage these areas and adversely impact upon neighbouring special sites in Worcestershire, including ancient Uffmoor Wood; the Clent Hills; and the Hagley Estate, including, of course, the prominent Iron Age Fort on Wychbury Hill.

This special countryside, which should receive appropriate recognition for its contribution to the informal recreational needs of a wide community, including, of course, those of the individual Black Country Authorities, but also the needs of Birmingham; North Worcestershire and beyond.

In the 1980s and subsequent decades, Dudley Council, through it's Countryside Service followed a policy, known as the 'Dudley Countryside Management Plan', to promote and improve this countryside for landscape; biodiversity; historic and informal recreational values.

The benefits of that policy are still palpable today and were particularly valuable to the mental and physical wellbeing of many users who benefitted from this countryside during the Covid-19 restrictions.
Walk leaflets promote this countryside and are very popular.
The balance, which is very sensitive and depends upon the whole, as much as the component areas, is delicate and would severely damaged by urban developments, including the new roads and infrastructure.
I reiterate my support.

Comment

Representation ID: 11061

Received: 22/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Greg Baker

It seems clear that there is massive potential for brown field first opportunities within the Black Country but developers will obviously object and come up with obstacles as this approach will cost more; it is apparently financially more viable to eat into our precious green belt. It seems that the greed for profit is outweighing a more sage approach of preserving our green areas for future generations of families to enjoy while developing run-down inner city and other sub-urban sites. I object most strongly with plans to steel our beautiful greenbelt areas from us!