6 Housing

Comment

Representation ID: 10868

Received: 16/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Paul Rogers

[Figure 4]

The map (figure 4) regarding sites DUH206-209 inclusive is deceptive. It indicates housing of 50-100 units in this space whereas the development is listed as providing space for 115 homes elsewhere in the plan.

Comment

Representation ID: 10871

Received: 16/09/2021

Respondent: Mrs Jane Rogers

[figure 4]
The map shown in figure 4 is misleading as the area adjacent to Worcester Lane (DUH206 -DUH209) shows a spot representing a development of less than 100 houses where in fact the detailed plan indicates 115 houses would be built.

Support

Representation ID: 11008

Received: 23/08/2021

Respondent: Mr James Mullaney

I strongly welcome this plan for the Black Country. We urgently need new housing - this should be the number one priority for the country and I urge the Black Country to lead the way. Young adults and families are in danger of being priced out of the housing market and becoming 'Generation Rent' for life. If we drastically increase the supply of housing, more people will be able to afford to buy their first home.

If you respond to this plan with something along the lines of "don't build here, not in my back yard, we must protect this green space" etc then you clearly do not want young people, new families and those from lower income backgrounds to be able to own their own home

Comment

Representation ID: 11009

Received: 20/08/2021

Respondent: Mrs Eleanor Taylor

I do not understand why green belt land is threatened for development for housing when so many opportunities are available from existing buildings : long empty pubs, Worcester Street Surgery, Helios tanning club in Quarry Bank, the old restaurant and vets in Market Street Stourbridge , so many empty retail units - especially «above the shop» premises, empty houses that are left neglected, old industrial buildings such as Jones and Attwood, huge office buildings like the one on Stourbridge ring road which seems to only ever had one tenant.


How will infrastructure cope with new build?

Leave open spaces alone. There is insufficient rain off potential as it is

Object

Representation ID: 11224

Received: 27/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Satish Salhan

Policy WSA7 - Calderfields West, land at Aldridge Road, Walsall

The development at this cherished and much loved location is aggressive and will have a irreversible negative impact on the environment .
Below i have list a few of known impacts:
- Light pollution
- Destruction of nature & wildlife
- Noise pollution
- Added traffic congestion

Comment

Representation ID: 11257

Received: 28/09/2021

Respondent: Mr STEVE PARLETT

I oppose plans for new housing at site numbers WAH236 (Yorks Bridge) and WAH238 & WAH240 (Coronation Road/Mob Lane).

Comment

Representation ID: 11413

Received: 01/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Chris Ion

Grapes Pool green space area is vital to the health and well being of all residents. If any development be considered it should be for the wider community, not just more beds. Building houses does not equate to building community, so I oppose Grape Pool Housing development plans.

Object

Representation ID: 11417

Received: 01/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Ethan Jones

Site DUH217
This site is a designated greenbelt space, so is not unused like has been mentioned in plans. It is also a site with very limited access, so the potential removal of a house, disruption to roads around the site and removal or blockage of walkways/bridleways to gain this access is ridiculous, and that is without the disruption and damange to the nature of the site. Flora and Fauna call this site home and in a time of climate change and global warming we should be protecting and growing these green spaces, not removing them.

Object

Representation ID: 11469

Received: 04/10/2021

Respondent: Mr CLIVE HEYWOOD

The BCP is flawed in that it overestimates housing needs!
1, Uses out of date population figures - Office Of National Statistics (ONS) states, in 2021 figures that population will decline in the next 15 years and NOT increase as calculated for in BCP
2. There are 1.3 million more homes in the UK than households , According to the Community Planning Alliance -September 2021
3, Andy Street (WM Mayor) has stated on his website there are enough Brownfield sites in the whole of the Black Country for the next 15 years , he has gained £435m for this use.

Object

Representation ID: 11497

Received: 04/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Peter Riley

76076 is far to many homes.
GREEN BELT is not for building on at anytime. Once you start to do that, there will be a next time and a next time until there is just one big mass of housing and no lungs for the region.
Not enough Doctors , Hospitals, Schools as it is. If anything you should build these first.
What gives you the right to erode our countryside. Build on Brownfield sites only. You are putting Construction company Profits before peoples wellbeing.
Stop this ill thought out building for buildings sake now before its to late.

Object

Representation ID: 11513

Received: 05/10/2021

Respondent: Mr John Hyde

Specific objection is to land near Viewfield Crescent in Sedgley - although object to demise of Green Belt generally.
OBJECTIONS:
Further traffic generated from build
Adequacy of room to park/ delivery vehicles ( loading, unloading and turning)
Road access
Noise and disturbance for residents and wildlife
There is a need for Nature Conservation - many wild animals on and around site
Plant life disturbed and loss of trees
Loss of light or overshadowing
Highway safety

Comment

Representation ID: 11522

Received: 03/10/2021

Respondent: Richard Power

Pouk Hill public open space, Bentley Lane, Reedswood, Walsall.

• The Pouk Hill green space area should not be promoted for new housing or new employment land development within the emerging BCP (Review).

Public open space located North of Churchill Road and the Jane Lane School, Reedswood, Walsall.
This site should also not be promoted for new housing development within the emerging BCP (Review).

Reedswood Town Park public open space

• Reedswood Town Park public open space should not be promoted as a potential new housing or new employment land development site within the emerging BCP (Review). Walsall Council should be aware that Town Parks are not appropriate locations for these types of uses given their high level of green space planning policy sensitivity.

Former Reedswood Golf Course

• This green space site should be removed from the new housing site allocation as identified on page 510 (Proposed Housing Site Ref: WAH244) of the emerging BCP (Review) (2021). This site is not suitable for new housing development as it forms a very sensitive 'Greenfield' site. The site does not form previously-developed land (urban brownfield land) as claimed by Walsall Council.

Object

Representation ID: 11524

Received: 05/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Arturo Francese

I believe we should protect the Green Belt area as much as possible. If the criteria in the Plan is just to increase market "attractiveness" to new housing, therefore building near or inside a green area, then maybe some incentives could be assigned to also increase the market interest somewhere else.
Re-qualification of brownfield land must be a priority for the Local Council for a number of reasons.

Object

Representation ID: 11536

Received: 05/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Paul Durrant

DUH218 Guys Lane.
Green belt space is very important both for people who live in the area and the wild life. This area off Guys lane is home to a variety of birds, animals and insects.
Since the development of two local brownfield sites, with a third on the way the volume of traffic along Guys Lane has increased considerably with people using it as a rat run between Cinder road and Himley road.

Object

Representation ID: 11554

Received: 06/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Simon Mallaband

Site reference: DUH217
Objection to allocation as site for housing.

Object

Representation ID: 11595

Received: 07/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Mark Daniels

We need to protect our green belt spaces. The proposals do not account for any brownfield sites as a priority for building.

Object

Representation ID: 11658

Received: 07/10/2021

Respondent: Miss Gemma Cooper

The area is already congested and over populated, with not enough parking per household, cars are parked on bends, blocking people drive ways and causing obstructions within tiny roads. The new housing will add more stress onto the local schools and doctors which are already struggling.

The perks of living in this area, are the green areas which seem so hard to find now days with all the new housing being built.

Object

Representation ID: 11659

Received: 07/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Aaron Degville

The area is already busy, parking is congested when parents are picking up children from schools and attending GP. This will only increase further if new houses are built. Increased noise will also be an issue. Removing our green land is also going negatively affect local peoples wellbeing

Object

Representation ID: 11660

Received: 07/10/2021

Respondent: Miss Michelle Brough

A disgusting use of valued greenbelt land in Bloxwich. Schools will be overcrowded. Parking for schools is already dangerous in our area. We have difficulties getting to see a Doctor. All amenities will be over stretched. Exsisting heavy traffic will be increased unacceptably, causing even more pollution. This will also be grossly impacted by similar proposals in Pelsall, as traffic will also come from there. We have all worked hard to be able to afford to live in this area and one of the reasons we live here is because of local greenbelt land creating beauty, wildlife & lower pollution.

Object

Representation ID: 11791

Received: 09/10/2021

Respondent: Ms Laura Muckles

I believe that a disproportionate amount of houses are being allocated in the green space around Kingswinford.
The reason I wanted to move to this area and start a family was due to the surrounding green space and the quieter neighbourhood.

Object

Representation ID: 11800

Received: 09/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Jonathan Walsh

The development of green belt behind Coronation Rd and Mob Lane will remove a much used and valued natural resource which provides a buffer between Pelsall and Shelfield and allows their distinctive character to remain. The area will become an anonymous sprawl.
Of particular concern is traffic levels in Field Lane if a junction to the site is built in Cornonation Rd and/or Mob Lane. Field Lane is already a bus route and very narrow and would be used as a cut through to Mill Road and amenities decreasing safety levels for local residents.

Object

Representation ID: 11801

Received: 09/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Andy Coyne

I do not want greenbelt built upon. rather numerous brownfield sites in the same area. I do not see this in the plan especially in regards to St Mathews Walsall.

Object

Representation ID: 11933

Received: 10/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Joanne Robinson

Duh217
I think this green space needs protecting as it valuable amenity and me and my family regularly use it for walking and cycling. There is brown land that should be used which will preserve the ever shrinking areas that we have

Object

Representation ID: 11946

Received: 10/10/2021

Respondent: Mr James Perks

Objection against the housing development proposed to the pacific nursery site off the Chester road. This is a green belt site with vast woods and wildlife that would be destroyed. There are plenty of other sites!

Object

Representation ID: 11982

Received: 10/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Lawrence Gabb

We are horrified to discover the proposals to rip up green land along Doe Bank Lane/Queslett Road East/Aldridge and near Great Barr Hall. Doe Bank Park and Barr Beacon both have views across open fields giving a sense of well being to estate residents, such as those on Pheasey. The fields are the first fields encountered travelling out from Birmingham. Developments will increase the size of the Birmingham conurbation taking away a priceless green land. The places chosen have very poor public transport links, with no train station and few buses. Better to create homes in town centres, e.g. Walsall.

Object

Representation ID: 11994

Received: 10/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Debbie Floyd

I am writing regarding the 'Walsall Growth Targets for Housing and Employment Land Allocations', specifically the north Aldridge and Walsall Wood green belt land including Lazy Hill Road, Chester Road, and Stonnall Road areas of Aldridge. The proposal to remove sites from the green best listing further diminishes our countryside, and the stunning views, walking areas and wildlife that makes Aldridge such a sought after place to live. There is brown belt that can be used for housing that would not impact on Aldridge, that make it one of the more affluent areas of Walsall borough.

Object

Representation ID: 12013

Received: 10/10/2021

Respondent: Miss Brooke Watts-Wilson

It is the field on my nans street , and if houses were built on there it would create more traffic in the neighbourhood & parking would be worse for the school. And would look a mess and a eyesore.

Object

Representation ID: 12043

Received: 10/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Deb Watts-Wilson

My parents have owned their house in York crescent since 1956.I co own the house now?Our house faces the field and believe it will be an eyesore.The school traffic is already at capacity.The extra traffic the houses will generate will be unbearable.The noise pollution will be an intrusion.Losing the greenery will impact local wildlife.My mum is very upset by this proposal.There is often problems with the sewers and drains,extra houses will make it worse.The local school is not big enough for extra children.

Object

Representation ID: 12062

Received: 10/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Alexander Pointon

I disagree because there are perfectly good brownfield sites that can be used and destroying our greenbelt is not the answer to the housing crisis when we are meant to be committed to stopping climate change. It will also put a major strain on an already weak public transport system and the small number of community facilities we have in Pelsall. The plan needed more advertisement in Pelsall specifically as the book exchange did not receive a copy of the plan and local residents who live nearby have informed me of how worried they are.

Object

Representation ID: 12067

Received: 10/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Clare Tolley

I object to the land being used on the old power station site and old
golf course if developers start to encroach on Reedswood Park land