Policy WSA1 (Walsall Strategic Allocation) – Home Farm, Sandhills, Walsall Wood

Object

Representation ID: 18190

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Wayne Adams

Number of people: 2

[redacted details of address] we have noticed a significant increase in the ammount of traffic that uses our road and having such an increase in housing will substantionally increase it further. The amount of accidents and near misses we have seen on this road is incredible especially how fast some drivers are going and must be a danger to people. We are going to be losing a substantial amount of green belt in what is already a well populated area. I was always told that the woodland directly opposit our property was environmentally protected and dont see any mention of that.
Surely there must be better sites for us not to lose this green belt.

Object

Representation ID: 18259

Received: 30/09/2021

Respondent: Judith Beardshaw

Draft Consultation Plan - Proposal Home Farm, Sandhills, Walsall Wood WS9 9DJ.

My bungalow backs on to the beautiful land currently being used as farmland (Home Farm). I purchased this property specifically for the view, tranquility and wildlife. This was the main incentive to move here.
We have bats, deer, buzzards and many other wildlife which would be endangered by this development. Should this development go ahead the value of my property would be adversely affected so I would be unable to move somewhere else and enjoy this benefit.

The main roads surrounding the proposed development are already under pressure and unable to cope with traffic - there are children already at risk when crossing these busy roads who would be further impacted by an increase in residents on the proposed site.

The emergency services are already struggling to get through the traffic and this is impacting on patient safety - imagine the extra pressure this development would have on them.

I was only made aware of the proposals yesterday and yet the deadline for comment is 11th October - many neighbours are oblivious and so their objections will not be counted.

No consideration for house price depreciation, noise, traffic, loss of views etc.

Object

Representation ID: 18294

Received: 08/10/2021

Respondent: Neil Latimer

Re Black Country Plan - Home Farm, Sandhills Aldridge North & Walsall Wood

Traffic
Large increase in traffic from new homes on to already congested A461 +A452 particularly shire oak traffic lights.
Already many heavy lorries in and out of JPE Quarry which will be vastly exacerbated if building new homes!
Very busy road for school children at Shire Oak Academy already.

Schools
Schools in the area are already oversubscribed - where are huge numbers of additional children supposed to go?

Doctors
Very difficult to get a doctors appointment at the moment. Large additional numbers of patients would make this impossible!

Environment
There seems to be plenty of disused land/ Brownfield Sites in Walsall without destroying valuable ever shrinking

GreenBelt
We are being constantly told that we need to protect the trees and wildlife around us an you want to destroy 54ha in one area!

Object

Representation ID: 18317

Received: 07/10/2021

Respondent: Mr & Mrs Ramon & Tonia Gregory

Number of people: 2

Re Home Farm, Sandhills (Aldridge North & Walsall Wood) 54 Hectares for 800 new homes

We paid a higher price for our property [Redacted-GDPR] due to having green belt front and rear (estate agents use this as a major selling point today). [Redacted-GDPR]
There is already a high volume of traffic (both moving and standing) due to:
(a) The A461 (Lichfield Rd, Sandhills) is one of the main routes from the North East (M1/A38), used particularly by HGVs to gain access tot he northern West Midlands and visa versa.
(b) Additional housing estates have been built in areas such as Lichfield, Burntwood and Chasetown aswell as in the Walsall area. the result means that we have to live with:
(1) An extremely busy and dangerous road (there were 2 accidents Mon 27th September '21)
(2) Cars and lorries making 3 point turns as they find ridiculously long traffic queues particularly at peak times.
(3) Constant traffic noise
(4) High pollution levels from the vehicles that we breathe in every day, this is only offset by a few hedges and trees in the fields

The addition of the proposed 800 new houses being built on the green belt would exacerbate the above (4) points. The properties would lose their values, would the council compensate for the loss of value?
We understand more properties are needed but feel there should be a balance with the environment plus the health and welfare of the residents that already live in the area. Surely the council has a duty of care in these matters.

Comment

Representation ID: 18463

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Sport England

WAH235 (WSA 1) - Home Farm, Sandhills, Walsall Wood - 1417 dwellings
The occupiers of new development, especially residential, will generate demand for sporting provision. The existing provision within an area may not be able to accommodate this increased demand without exacerbating existing and/or predicted future deficiencies. Therefore, Sport England considers that new developments should contribute towards meeting the demand that they generate through the provision of on-site facilities and/or providing additional capacity off-site. The level and nature of any provision should be informed by a robust evidence base such as an up to date Sports Facilities Strategy, Playing Pitch Strategy or other relevant needs assessment. The Council are currently preparing a new Playing Pitch and Outdoor Sports Facilities Strategy (PPOSS) to consider how to meet existing and future needs for playing pitches and other outdoor sports facilities. The PPOSS will scenario test the proposed major housing growth sites within the proposed plan and make recommendations for how best to meet the future needs generated by this population growth. These needs might be best met by either on-site provision of new pitches and ancillary facilities, off-site contributions to improve existing provision of pitches/ancillary facilities in the local area or a combination of both. Sport England are aware that there are several existing sports facilities locally that would potentially benefit from developer contributions in order to improve the existing provision to cater for the additional demand generated by these proposed developments. Sport England considers that the following proposed allocations are of sufficient size to justify suitable developer contributions towards sport to meet the needs of the respective developments. At Reg 19 stage, following the completion of the PPOSS, Sport England will make more detailed comments with reference to Sport England's Playing Pitch Calculator. The following proposed policy allocations should make specific reference to securing suitable developer contributions towards the provision of facilities for sport in line with the findings and recommendations of the PPOSS:

WAH235 (WSA 1) - Home Farm, Sandhills, Walsall Wood - 1417 dwellings

Object

Representation ID: 18534

Received: 05/10/2021

Respondent: Hammerwich Parish Council

The propose building on Greenbelt Land in Shire Oak, Page 507, Home Farm Sandhills, outlines the 1,417 houses planned for Shire Oak, and 538 the plans for Industrial release on Greenbelt.

The Governments National Planning Policy Framework 2021 clearly states
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 five purposes:
a) to check the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas;
b) to prevent neighboring 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.
148. When considering any planning application, local planning authorities should
ensure that substantial weight is given to any harm to the Green Belt. ‘Very special
circumstances’ will not exist unless the potential harm to the Green Belt by reason
of inappropriateness, and any other harm resulting from the proposal, is clearly
outweighed by other considerations.

Object

Representation ID: 19229

Received: 07/10/2021

Respondent: Wayne Reid

I operate my business from Walsall Wood Depot, a location chosen for good quality commercial parking - this means that I travel in and around the area, predominantly A452 / A461, daily to operate my business. Obviously as a coach operator my vehicles travel far and wide, as an industry we are already suffering from driver shortages, I cannot afford additional travel delays impacting my drivers permitted hours. A development such as this will substantially increase the traffic in and around Brownhills / Walsall Wood area, which will delay my routes cost additionally in drivers hours as well as fuel either trying to avoid the congestion or sitting in traffic with engines running. I also understand that there are proposed developments for Streetly along Queslettt Road / Aldridge Road and Pheasey Park Farm, Sutton Road / Longwood Road - so triple whammy to cost me more money! Surely there are better alternative sites, I regularly see old factories are crying out to be redeveloped, across Walsall Borough?

Object

Representation ID: 20195

Received: 01/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Valerie Nicholls

Home Farm, Sandhills Aldridge North & Walsall Wood.
1. Shire Oak crossroads are horrendous already with large lorries backwards and forwards from the quarry on Chester Road.
2. There is also Shire Oak School with cars collecting and dropping off children. Also lots of children walk down from Shire Oak along Chester Road to Brownhills.
3. Brownhills High Street is often grid-locked with traffic caused by buses and lorries coming through from A5.
4. Traffic coming through from Burtwood and Lichfield using A5 to Muckley Corner and along Lichfield Road towards Shire Oak, always long traffic jams.
5. We have problems leaving our drive now, imagine with extra cars (800 houses x2 cars each) roads around Home Farm could not cope with this.
6. We also think we should keep our Green Belt.

We completely object to this plan.

Comment

Representation ID: 20995

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: L&Q Estates

Agent: Pegasus Group

Paragraph 12.3 - "It is envisaged that the Sandhills site could deliver a significantly larger amount of housing by 2039 than that assumed by the Council in Table 31 as is set out in Appendix B."

Support

Representation ID: 20996

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: L&Q Estates

Agent: Pegasus Group

Paragraph 12.4 - Supports the allocation, mixed tenure and dph.

Comment

Representation ID: 20997

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: L&Q Estates

Agent: Pegasus Group

Paragraph 12.7 - Other facilities are suggested in addition to the policy "shops or a community hub building, including working from home alternatives."

Comment

Representation ID: 21001

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: L&Q Estates

Agent: Pegasus Group

Paragraph 12.8 - " Initial ground conditions work has
been undertaken which indicate that this site is not affected by contamination."

Comment

Representation ID: 21102

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: L&Q Estates

Agent: Pegasus Group

Paragraph 12.10 - Through access could be provided for buses through a bus gate or filtered permeability.

Support

Representation ID: 21103

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: L&Q Estates

Agent: Pegasus Group

Paragraphs 12.12 to 12.16 - Suggestions offered as to how the strategic requirements can be met.

Comment

Representation ID: 21104

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: L&Q Estates

Agent: Pegasus Group

Paragraph 12.16 - Some hedge removal may be required as indicated in comments relating to environment policies.

Support

Representation ID: 21105

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: L&Q Estates

Agent: Pegasus Group

Paragraph 12.17 - The site can deliver in excess of the biodiversity gain required by the Environment Bill.

Comment

Representation ID: 21210

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: L&Q Estates

Agent: Pegasus Group

Paragraph 12.18 - The MSA mineral policy is not required because a Mineral Resource Assessment has been submitted which demonstrates that in the absence of development the minerals would not be worked.

Object

Representation ID: 21325

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Russell Haywood

Comments re housing site Home Farm, Sandhills (WAH235 / SA-0022-WAL)

I object to the proposal of green belt to be used for any kind of development including housing and to any alteration of green belt boundaries; and specifically the inclusion of Home Farm, Sandhills (WAH235 / SA-0022-WAL) within the plan. Now, more than ever, people are spending a considerable more amount of time at home and so it is more important than ever that we look after the environment around us. Furthermore the growing impact of climate change it is so important that we protect all of our green belt. Building on this proposed site will leave no green space between Brownhills and Sandhills

I reside in Sandhills and will be impacted on greatly by the destruction of this green belt area at Home Farm Sandhills.

Habitat
The field subject to the proposal is surrounded by mature hedgerows which provide habitat to the considerable variety of wildlife. We have seen large numbers of newts, toads, frogs, hedgehogs, deer, foxes, owls, bats, birds of prey and garden birds around our home and in the fields of Home Farm. After all, this is green belt land.
I am aware of the historic records held by EcoRecord which highlights the protected and notable species recorded at Home Farm, Sandhills and the site is of great ecological value – The Wildlife Trust for Birmingham and Black Country determined that the area is of medium-high ecological value!

Noise
The noise levels will be unbearable due to the close proximity and we would get no peace in our home. This noise would be from the building work and then subsequent increased traffic.
Our road is already very busy and is a popular have route. Our house already shakes from the current traffic, let alone following building work and increase in traffic.

Pollution
The dust created from digging up the site would blow straight into our home and impose a number of issues from health problems to blocked drains due to the dust created. We already have a high volume of dust from the quarry behind us, adding to this would be unbearable. During the summer it is expected to have windows/doors open in our home. The dust would stop us from being able to do this.

Object

Representation ID: 21376

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Sandra Wickson

Site REf: 10131/SA-0022-WAL
Home Farm Sandhills Walsall Wood WS9 9DJ

My house directly overlooks Home Farm, we brought our property some 20 years ago, due to its location and situation, for which I have no doubt we paid a premium for, the proposed development will significantly affect our quality of life, as well as devaluing our *property.
* As everyone is fully aware, homeowners are finding the value of their property is the major factor in the funding of care in their old age, this proposal has this double financial impact on homeowners surrounding the development site.

In addition I comment:

There are numerous species of wildlife that inhabit the fields of Home Farm, ranging from foxes to deer, Canada Geese in August (for around 3 weeks), there are birds of prey, woodpeckers and bats along with starlings, crows, pigeons, magpies, blackbirds, thrushes and robins to name just a few, where will they go??

Traffic in and around the A452/A461 junction is already chaotic at times, but my concern is how will the roads cope with another 800 households, generally with 2 cars nowadays, so potentially 1600 cars entering and exiting our already congested roads?

A461 Lichfield Road Sandhills has seen it's fair share of serious accidents over the years, along with a student of nearby Shire Oak School being killed at Anchor Bridge (jnc Chester Road and Linden road), which I am sure are well documented, this is the exact road infrastructure that will have to carry the additional 1500+ cars daily!

Object

Representation ID: 21441

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Sharon Clayton

I object to the Black Country Plan of the proposed allocation for 800 homes to built on Sandhills Farm Lichfield rd Walsall
The volume of traffic using the Lichfield rd is already substantial, increacing at peak times, I believe that adding 800 homes worth of traffic would considerably add to an already very busy road with frequent traffic jams due to the pure volume of traffic from not only walsall boroughs but surrounding areas in Staffordshire boroughs such as Lichfield and Tammworth. Please do not forget about the amount of lorries using the road and already causing problems with potholes etc not to mention them making three point turns on the road when stuck in traffic or rolling back down the hill during winter when the roads are icey. The noise and air pollution caused at present is not good for residents and wildlife alike and can only increase if these plans go ahead. Of course the value of our homes would drop, and as we paid a premium price because of the greenbelt and its views you can see how this would happen with no greenbelt and views.
Surely there are other places to build homes, I understand the growing demands and that homes have to be built but taking all of the greenbelt should not be the answer, the amount of derelict Public Houses and empty shops could possibly be worth investigating as future building plots
Regards
Sharon Clayton

Object

Representation ID: 21460

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Simon Traat

HOME FARM SANDHILLS
We have lived in this property for two years now; what sold it to us was the surrounding open space with fields at the rear and the farmland at the front. We bought this property because it is not overlooked. Since hearing the plans for the build of Homefarm we are extremely upset and disappointed that this is even a consideration. It seems that any remaining countryside and greenbelt has planning in place for construction of some kind. We are totally against this plan and will do everything we can to stop it from going ahead.

Object

Representation ID: 21547

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Wendy Clark

Removing a green belt site to replace it with hundreds of houses with their emissions and accompanying vehicles is detrimental to the environment. Carbon dioxide is the main cause of climate change, and the proposed plan is detrimental to clean air and will greatly increase the greenhouse gases which cause global warming. It is widely accepted that councils should be reducing its carbon footprint not increasing it by removing green belt sites. The site has numerous mature trees which may have to be felled to allow development.
The roads adjacent to the site are already overcrowded and toxic fumes are high. The Chester Road has no obvious access to the site apart from a farm track between private houses and the Anchor public house. The track emerges opposite the offset, very busy Lindon Road, adjacent the Canal bridge. The Chester Road is a continuation of Brownhills High Street which is already a highly congested highway leading to the very busy Shire Oak traffic lights. HGV lorries are already a major cause of the congestion and fumes, and further traffic would add to this.
Sandhills is a very busy road with traffic usually nose to tail heading towards Shire Oak traffic lights and regularly backed up to the dual carriageway.
The current access to the farm are two narrow lanes / drives lined by mature trees, which would no doubt need to be removed by the development to allow access. There are numerous other mature trees on the site including a small copse.
The access of traffic to and from the site would be difficult and dangerous due to the high volume of traffic already using the surrounding roads.
Please consider the detrimental effects of the planned development and recognition both road safety and environmental concerns.

Object

Representation ID: 22131

Received: 04/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Milan Ancin

I started my haulage business, I chose to locate at Coppice Rd WS8 7DG because of the quality of the parking available, security, lighting etc but more so for the proxcimitary to the road network allowing me to access the major roads to work Nationally and easy of commute as I myself live in Lichfield.
The plan is to gradually grow my business, expanding and employing more staff as time goes on. I travel daily along the A461 to commute to work, (over A452 junction), this week (27th September 2021) there has been 3 major accidents at the junction of A461 Lichfirld Road and Barracks Lane, it appears to me the entry/exit for this new housing estate will be 200 meters from this up and coming accident blackspot.
I have to plan my journey into/out of work now to avoid peak traffic congestion where possible, the potential additional traffic this development will bring is frightening.
My trucks are restricted because of weight, so we have to come via A452/A461 junction to depart and return to our depot, additional traffic delays eat into valuable driving hours increasing operating costs.
In light of this new potential housing developement, I am asking myself is Coppice Road WS8 7DG going to be suitable for me to grow my business, employing local drivers or do I need to re think my plan?

Object

Representation ID: 22390

Received: 08/10/2021

Respondent: Inland Waterways Association Lichfield

Policy WSA1 - Home Farm, Sandhills, Walsall Wood
This site is an important area of countryside alongside the Wyrley & Essington Canal. It is part of the West Midlands Green Belt which serves to check the sprawl of built-up areas, to encourage the regeneration of urban land, and to safeguard the countryside. Its proposed removal from the Green Belt would undermine those purposes and damage the setting and economy of the canal. Therefore, IWA objects in principle to its allocation for development. However, if exceptional circumstances can be proven then it is important that the adverse impact of development on the canal is limited and mitigated by sensitive layout, design and landscaping.
The Wyrley & Essington Canal is a historic waterway and a valuable amenity and recreational corridor, providing leisure boating, walking, angling, cycling and nature conservation benefits to the area. It is part of the national waterway system which attracts millions of visits each year from local people and holidaymakers from home and abroad, and is a major component of the nation’s tourism industry.
The rural environment of the canals plays a vital role in attracting and sustaining the recreation and tourism use of the whole canal system, which contributes to the visitor economy and helps support local businesses. The income from boating activities provides a major part of the funding necessary for the Canal & River Trust to maintain the canals for public use and enjoyment.
Although much of the canal network in the Black Country is urban or suburban in character, the northern parts of the system in Walsall in particular include several attractive countryside sections. Because of their limited extent, these are of particular value to sustaining tourism as well as an important amenity for nearby residents.
However, major built developments in the countryside adjacent to the canal system destroy the rural setting that contributes to their heritage interest, wildlife, amenity value and recreational use. Visually intrusive built development alongside the canals damages their tourism potential and economic benefits.
The Wyrley & Essington Canal currently enjoys a pleasant open rural outlook across this site that enhances its attractiveness for recreational use. The canal towpath is open to the public and provides an accessible footpath. However, the attractive countryside setting of this section of the canal will be largely lost by this proposed allocation. Whilst the canal corridor will provide an amenity for the new residents, its overall value to the local community and the visitor economy would be diminished if the development is visually intrusive.
It is therefore important that the visual impact of the development on the canal is limited by sensitive design, layout and landscaping through appropriate masterplanning of the site. This should provide a broad buffer zone alongside the canal with only limited built development forming a continuous corridor of open amenity land to help preserve and enhance the canal environment. This corridor could encompass Public Open Space, parkland, woodland, wildflower meadows, sports fields, children’s play areas and informal recreation space.
This will be in line with the aspirations of Policy ENV7 – Canals, that development affecting the canal network should (1) “deliver a high quality environment”, (2e) “protect and enhance its visual amenity, key views and settings”, (3a) “enhance and promote its role in providing opportunities for leisure, recreation and tourism activities”, and (3d) “positively relate to the waterway by promoting high quality design, including providing active frontages onto the canal and by improving the public realm”.
This site also includes the disused Sandhills Branch of the Wyrley & Essington Canal, the course of which although largely filled-in is clearly visible in the field boundaries and its full extent is shown on historic maps. Part of it is shown as a Site of Local Importance for Nature Conservation (SLINC) on the Strategic Allocation plan.
Policy ENV7 – Canals (5) requires that the potential to record, preserve and restore disused canal features should be fully explored, and that the line of the canal should be protected by the detailed site layout. Para. 10.102 further advises that the potential to preserve the line of the canal as part of the wider green infrastructure network be explored, and also that where feasible and sustainable, proposals should consider the potential for the restoration of disused sections of canal.
There is considerable potential here for the Sandhills Branch Canal to be at least partly restored to water to protect its historic interest and to provide an attractive aquatic feature and environmental corridor within the site. Without access to private land it is not clear how much of the original wharf buildings survive northwest of Home Farm but any that do should be retained, restored and reused as part of the public realm within a linear parkland setting along the line of the canal. Consideration should also be given to more fully restoring the branch canal back to its original junction with the main line of the canal and to including a number of permanent residential boat moorings in the original terminal basin area, which would add variety and interest to the housing provision on this site.

Object

Representation ID: 22610

Received: 07/10/2021

Respondent: Miss Michelle Southall

Number of people: 9

Most of Brown hills high street is either derelict or in a state of disrepair, an eyesore to everyone living or passing through, with all the wasted brown land available in this are a alone, (which would benefit everyone in the area if it were regenerated)why must existing homeowners who purchased their property in good faith, paid for surveys to ensure the Greenbelt surrounding it would not be built on be so severely impacted? We do not purchase properties overlooking Greenbelt by accident.
Not only will it cause a significant increase in traffic and all the pollution that comes with it on the Lichfield/Chester Road, in particular the Shire Oak junction, but all the wildlife once again is destroyed, from slow worms and bats (which I understood were protected) to deer, all frequently seen in the field.
The existing traffic on both the Chester and Lichfield Road is never ending, they are major routes for heavy goods vehicles 24/7, your proposing 800 homes on the land, most homes have 2 cars so another 1600 plus vehicles in an already congested area, the traffic would make it impossible to safely cross the road as many of the older residents need to do to get to the local shop and bus stop. Shire Oak School children have already suffered a fatality crossing the Chester Road at the very place your planning access near the Anchor Pub, and the junction at Lindon Road would literally grind to a halt. I just cannot comprehend how that much extra potential traffic will flow through Brownhills.
Our houses, [personal details redacted] have 20ft of rear garden, mine 10ft from the patio doors, the only consolation to such a meagre plot is the view of the field, where will our light come from if there is a housing estate 20ft away? Our grove is frequentlyflooded as it is, without the land to soak up some of the heavy rainfall becoming the norm where will that go?
The house price depreciation, traffic noise and pollution, loss of wildlife, risk to pedestrians and many school children and untold misery if the land is built on is immeasurable not a 'moderate risk' to loss of views. The photographer obviously chose the location to minimise the impact the new homes will have on the view, at least have the decency to show the true reflection of the devastating loss you are planning to the existing homes. I have enclosed photos but feel free to look at the stunning views and wildlife from my garden and take another photo to truly reflect the beauty aboutto be destroyed.
For those of us overlooking the field you are not planning for a better future for us at all, quite the opposite!

Comment

Representation ID: 23197

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Bloor Homes Midlands

Agent: Cerda Planning Ltd

6.4. When considering the somewhat questionable location and boundaries to sites on the edge of the plan area such as the proposed allocations under policies WAS4, WSA1, CSA1 and CSA2, the plan and its policies do little to consider the wider spatial or landscape impacts of developing these sites and appear to reduce the weight given to high (and moderate-high) levels of Green Belt and landscape harm in these areas favoring its central area.

6.5. The plan identifies the development of a network of Neighbourhood Growth Areas are proposed to be released from the Green Belt in sustainable locations. However, given the identified infrastructure requirements on each of these sites (noting that no fewer than 7 new Health Centres
are required by the allocating policies) it is our submission that these areas should be planned more holistically to ensure that wider benefits ensue from these allocations and that the delivery of the necessary infrastructure is actually viable and will be delivered where there is a proven need. To this end the term NGA, which is, by any other name, a housing allocation should be widened to provide for coordinated growth in areas where there is an identified need (or deficiency) of services and sites allocated in order to provide for both the much needed new homes but also new services and facilities.

Object

Representation ID: 23397

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: West Midlands CPRE

Agent: Gerald Kells

WAM235 (WSA1) Walsall Sandhills
This site has a long planning history and has been rejected for development since the Walsall Unitary Development Plan in the 1990s. it would be a significant incursion into the Green Belt beyond the very edge of the conurbation. Because of the slope of the land, it would be highly visible. It is poorly served by public transport with limited bus services extending beyond the edge of the conurbation on the Lichfield Road. Bus routes into the development are suggested but may well not be viable in the long run given its location. The site has no clearly defined boundary towards Lichfield except for the boundary between the two local authorities. The boundary of the Lichfield Road is somewhat illusory.
There is a short amount of ribbon development on the road itself but beyond that is further Green Belt.
Green Belt assessment in Land Use Consultants’ 2019 Green Belt Study - High

Object

Representation ID: 44917

Received: 09/03/2022

Respondent: Sandfield Park Group Response

Number of people: 71

To whom it may concern,
As a resident of [Redacted-GDPR] Brownhills, I object to the following aspects of the Black Country Plan:
-Housing development: WAH247
-Housing development: WAH235
-Employment development: WAE409; WAE410
First, the development of WAH247 and WAH235 will increase levels of traffic, noise, light and emission pollution; Lichfield Road does not have the capacity to withstand such an increase in traffic.
I am particularly concerned about WAH247 [Redacted- GDPR]. Residents [Redacted-GDPR] are subject to residential requirements (no children, no dogs, limited pets, limited vehicles) and live here because we have chosen a quiet, peaceful and secluded life. Residents of any new development will not be required to abide by the same rules and as a result, their presence will be disruptive and our quality of life will diminish.
The development of WAE409 will again be disruptive due to increased levels of traffic, noise, light and emission pollution. Residents already suffer from the visible pollution created by the Industrial Estate on Lichfield Road and further industrial development will compound this.
Crucially, the environmental impact of the proposed developments will be disastrous. While I fully appreciate the need for 'good quality' housing and employment in the local area, proposed developments will negatively impact the local environment. The designated sites are home to countless forms of wildlife, for example, [Redacted-Sensitive information], wild birds and a variety of flora and fauna. The proposed developments will destroy the local environment, for good. Furthermore, the impact of this destruction will have negative consequences for the broader community.
Collectively, the proposed developments will limit our view of the local countryside (something we all enjoy and many of us purposefully bought these properties to enjoy), devalue our homes and have a negative impact on our physical and mental health, and thus our quality of life. Plenty of brownfield sites exist in the Walsall borough and locally, a number of derelict employment units are available, for example: Maybrook, Coppice Side, Ravens Court, Silver Court and multiple units on Brownhills High Street.
We respectfully request that the proposed plans are reconsidered and relocated to sites that will not destroy our way of life and our local environment.

Object

Representation ID: 45035

Received: 04/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Nigel Slater

SITE REFERENCE 10131 HOME FARM, SANDHILLS, BROWNHILLS WS9 9DJ
WIKIPEDIA DEFINES BROWNHILLS AS A FORMER MINING TOWN UNTIL CLOSURE IN THE 1950s THE LOCAL AUTHORITY INSTITUTED A REGENERATION PROGRAMME IN 2007, WHICH WAS HOPED WOULD REVIVE THE TOWNS FORTUNE ,BUT THERE HAS BEEN LITTLE SUBSEQUENT DEVELOPMENT.
WELL THERE YOU HAVE IT, BUT THE OPPORTUNITY TO BUILD 1260 HOUSES AND
COLLECTING THE RATES ON THEM ALL IS GETTING THE GREEN LIGHT, ALL THE CORRECT
ARGUMENTS ARE IN PLACE, LITTLE CHANCE OF FLOODING, THE LANDS NOT THAT
GOOD FOR AGRICULTURE , WE NEED HOUSES , VERY LITTLE THINGS OF INTEREST LIVE THERE ,BATS FOXS,AND THE NEVER SEEN WOMBLE, TRAFFICS NOT A PROBLEM AS WEVE USED OUTDATED STATISTICS, THERES MAYBE A PRIMARY SCHOOL ,BUT ONLY IF REQUIRED ,AND IT CAN BE DEVELOPED VERY QUICKLY WITH NO FUSS.
THIS LAND WAS ORIGANLLY EARMARKED FOR LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT WITH
AN ADHOC PLANNING APPLICATION IN 1994, BUT ALL WENT VERY QUIET UNTIL I HERE FROM A NEIGHBOUR VIA A PERSONALLY PREPARED LETTER, NOTHING FROM THE COUNCIL, NOTHING FROM THE PROPOSER, SO MUCH FOR THE CLOSE COMMITMENT TO THE COMMUNITY AS PRESENTED IN THER INDICATIVE DEVELOPMENT PLAN , PAGES AND PAGES OF SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS, AND PROMISING DELIVERY.
PERFECT SITE FOR GROWING VEG, WHICH IVE SEEN OVER THE YEARS, POTATOES AT THE MOMENT. BUT AT ONLY 85.05 HECTARES, OR IS IT 55.03 IVE SEEN TWO DIFFERENT APPLICATIONS, AND ONLY BEING LESS THAN 10% OF THE CURRENT 2000 ACRE (809 HECTARES) ITS NOT AN ISSUE IF ITS LOST, MY GRANDPARENTS HAD A FARM OF 100 ACRES, AND THEY MADE A LIVING FROM SHEEP AND CATTLE, SO 210 ACRES WOULD DO VERY NICELY THANK YOU , ITS ONLY A SMALL PROPORTION -BECAUSE TH EVE GOT A
LOT !
THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS FOR 1260 DWELLINGS ,BY POSSIBLY THREE
DEVELOPERS -NOT FORGETTING THAT PEGASUS GROUP , WHO OWNS GALLAGHER ESTATES, OR IS IT L & Q GROUP ARE NOT HOUSE BUILDERS BUT MASTER DEVELOPER, SO THERES THREE , OR IS IT FOUR COMPANYS EXPECTING A GOOD
RETURN ON THERE INVESTMENT. NO PROBLEM -BUT HOW ABOUT PROVIDING SOME ongoing employment opportunities some light industrial units

Comment

Representation ID: 45738

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Geoffrey Meacham

To whom it may concern,
As a resident of [Redacted-GDPR] Brownhills, I object to the following aspects of the Black Country Plan:
-Housing development: WAH247
-Housing development: WAH235
-Employment development: WAE409; WAE410
First, the development of WAH247 and WAH235 will increase levels of traffic, noise, light and emission pollution; Lichfield Road does not have the capacity to withstand such an increase in traffic.
I am particularly concerned about WAH247 [Redacted- GDPR]. Residents [Redacted-GDPR] are subject to residential requirements (no children, no dogs, limited pets, limited vehicles) and live here because we have chosen a quiet, peaceful and secluded life. Residents of any new development will not be required to abide by the same rules and as a result, their presence will be disruptive and our quality of life will diminish.
The development of WAE409 will again be disruptive due to increased levels of traffic, noise, light and emission pollution. Residents already suffer from the visible pollution created by the Industrial Estate on Lichfield Road and further industrial development will compound this.
Crucially, the environmental impact of the proposed developments will be disastrous. While I fully appreciate the need for 'good quality' housing and employment in the local area, proposed developments will negatively impact the local environment. The designated sites are home to countless forms of wildlife, for example, [Redacted-Sensitive information], wild birds and a variety of flora and fauna. The proposed developments will destroy the local environment, for good. Furthermore, the impact of this destruction will have negative consequences for the broader community.
Collectively, the proposed developments will limit our view of the local countryside (something we all enjoy and many of us purposefully bought these properties to enjoy), devalue our homes and have a negative impact on our physical and mental health, and thus our quality of life. Plenty of brownfield sites exist in the Walsall borough and locally, a number of derelict employment units are available, for example: Maybrook, Coppice Side, Ravens Court, Silver Court and multiple units on Brownhills High Street.
We respectfully request that the proposed plans are reconsidered and relocated to sites that will not destroy our way of life and our local environment.