Policy WSA3 – Land north of Stonnall Road, Aldridge

Object

Representation ID: 16297

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Ms Dawn Taylor

raft Black Country Plan July 2021. Table 31 - Walsall Sites Allocated for Housing by Black Country
Plan (policy HOU1)
Pages: 506, 507, 508, 509, 510, 515, 516
Site Ref: WHA230 Land on the east side of Chester Road, Aldridge; 66 Units
Site Ref: WAH231 Land off Sutton Road, Longwood Lane, Walsall; 202 Units
Site Ref: WAH234 Land between Queslett Road, Doe Bank Lane and Aldridge Road, Pheasey;
1426 Units
Site Ref: WAH237 Land north of Stonnal Road, Aldridge; 363 Units
Site Ref: WAH 240 Land at Mob Lane, High Heath, Pelsall; 209 Units
Site Ref: WAH242 Calderfields West, Aldridge Road, Walsall; 592 Units
Site Ref: WAH246 Land to the East of Chester Road, north of Pacific Nurseries Hardwick; 228 Units
Site Ref: WAH254 Pacific Nurseries, Chester Road, Walsall; 121 Units
OBJECTIONS
1) The aforementioned proposed sites make up massive swathes of valuable green spaces which
is precious Green Belt which is invaluable for residents and visitors mental health, wellbeing and
recreactional purposes. The UK is suffering a loss of nature and is one of te most nature-depleted
countries in the world:
https://www.itv.com/news/2021-10-10/uk-is-one-of-the-most-nature-depleted-countries-in-the-world
We all must take active roles in safeguarding these green lungs’ spaces for residents and
humankind and nature to thrive. We must honour the sites natural significance and protect it from
being forever changed to the built environment. Existing residents use these green spaces for many
recreational activities including but not restricted to: walking, cycling, geocaching, some offer music
events, etc. With the cost of living increasing and many failing to see their incomes rising in line with
these costs, our green spaces provide free recreational areas for everyone to enjoy.
2) The existing infrastructure struggles to accommodate the current residents living closeby to these
sites and if these sites are developed, the roads will witness increased numbers of vehicles usage
which in turn will increase noise, air and light pollution; GP surgeries are already swamped with the
numbers of patients; existing schools will be unable to take new pupils; residents - both existing and
new - will be unable to benefit from and enjoy the health and wellbeing attributes offered by having
access to green spaces.
3) Wildlife and natural habitat will be destroyed and once gone, they are lost forever.
In closing, I object to the potential theft of our multi-beneficial Green Belt and green spaces being
changed forever from green to built environment for the reasons set down in thess Objections.

Object

Representation ID: 16317

Received: 05/10/2021

Respondent: Mr David Khayat

I would like to voice my strong objection to proposed housing site WAH237 in Aldridge, Walsall. This is green belt land, part of an essential buffer between local towns and includes significant amounts of hedgerows which are crucial to our wildlife and their habitats. Nationally the rate of green belt developments has been increasing and this is is not sustainable for our environment - once its built on, you can never get it back. I think you have a duty to protect the green belts in your authority to avoid the detrimental effects losing our countryside and adversely affecting climate change.
In additional to my environmental objections I would also like to raise the question of affordability in the WAH 237 proposed development site. Newly built housing in this area will be completely unaffordable for people on housing waiting lists or those trying to get on the housing ladder? even 3 bedroom semi-detached houses will be over the national housing price average and totally out of reach for those who really need housing. So what this development would actually achieve is just another tidy profit for a housing developer with no impact on easing the problem for providing affordable housing. With the exponential decrease in High Street Shopping, which is only likely to continue, why not convert more retail land and unused industrial land to residenital? Redevelopment on this land would be far more environmentally friendly and would actually help ease the housing affordability crisis. Please don't be responsible for tarmacing over our green belt when our retail centres in Walsall are like ghost towns.

Object

Representation ID: 16444

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Joan Whale

Black Country Plan. Policy No WSA3 Land North and South of Stonnall Road - Ref WAH237 and WAH253.
I have lived in [Redacted-GDPR]. In that time so much land has been took up for housing. I feel Aldridge has given enough space for building over the years and it's time to call a halt to any more development. Aldridge is being swallowed up and will not be a pleasant place to live with all the extra traffic etc.
I will list SOME of the developments.

Off Stonall Rd
Stonnall Gate
Pavilion Close
Linkside Way

Off Lazyhill Rd
Coppy Hall Estate
(Kingshayes Rd)

Off Walsall Wood Rd
Old Oak Close
The glades
Noddy Park
Noddy Park Rd

Leighswood Road
Flats and houses
Aldridge bypass flats

Off North Gate
Homebell House
Sherriton Close
Flats in centre of Aldridge between high street and Little Aston Road

I could go on. The greenfield act 1975is being completely ignored. How can this happen. What's the good of these acts if they are not adhered to? Please think again about this plan and explore extensively all the many brownfield sites before you ruin what little green we have left.
LEAVE ALDRIDGE ALONE.

Object

Representation ID: 16482

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Elizabeth Mincher

REGARDING SITES WAH237 AND WAH253 IN PARTICULAR.

Destruction of Green Belt.
The Black Country Plan mentions "Health and Wellbeing" and "Mental Health" (1.34, 1.35 and 1.36). As far as I am aware, the purpose of designated "Green Belt" was to help prevent urban sprawl. There are precious few areas of Green Belt within the Black Country, or anywhere else for that matter. I think it is generally agreed that the loss of Green Belt so far has been regrettable. It is clear it has been protected for good reasons. Why are those same reasons no longer valid or valued? Once gone, Green Belt can never be recovered.
The physical and mental benefits of green spaces cannot be denied. Any psychologist would recommend spending time in such places, they would never recommend visiting a housing estate to improve one's wellbeing. I have lived in Aldridge for 45 years and enjoyed the environment here as have my children. During the pandemic, many people, not only Aldridge residents, came here to enjoy the green spaces around this area. When the local Golf Club opened its land to the public during lockdown, hundreds of people took the opportunity to benefit from the offer. It is widely acknowledged that walking in green spaces is recommended to improve mental heath problems. Why would anyone want to reduce the remaining Green Belt when there are so many other sites for redevelopment and regeneration?
This is not only a selfish point of view. I will be getting on for 80 years old by the time this happens. I will have enjoyed the environment for over 50 years. People still refer to Aldridge as a "village". I would like this to continue so that future generations can enjoy it too. I think it is important to value and maintain its character instead of turning it into another endless sprawl of housing estates. We can see the downside to the urban mass surrounding Birmingham.


I think it is important to remember that the areas outlined to provide much needed homes are already "homes" - for wildlife, plants, insects, crops. We are not the most important "life" on the planet. Loss of habitat must surely be considered otherwise David Attenborough has wasted his time. Have we learned nothing about conservation from the evidence in front of us?

Boris Johnson, in his most recent speech, declared there would be no building on fields. This is directly at odds with this Plan. Will this be taken into account in the planning?

Brownfield Sites
1.43 c Reviewing the role and extent of Green Belt
This says that "evidence suggests" there is a deficit in brownfield land supply. What is the evidence of this? Is there a list of Brownfield sites you have considered and rejected? There is a huge site in Middlemore Lane, Aldridge, formerly occupied by McKechnie's, I believe. This does not appear to part of the building plan. Is this because the house builders do not want to lose profit when cleaning the site?
I would have thought regeneration of land and areas was more important than swallowing chunks of Green Belt.
The new houses on the proposed sites will not even help those most in need, first time buyers. The new builds will be too expensive for those struggling to get onto the property ladder owing to the premium applied on a green area.

1.43 h "Health and Wellbeing".
Again, loss of Green Belt and the extension of built areas will not contribute to this goal. We will lose more than we gain.

Impact on local services
Doctors, schools, dentists, parking spaces. All of these will be impacted negatively by the proposed development, services which are already stretched. It is doubtful the services will be in place before completion of the buildings.


Extraction of sand and gravel from the sites in preparation for the development.
Sand and gravel extraction in Branton Hill has already caused years of problems and should be a lesson well learned judging from the protests from residents there and the noise and nuisance they experienced. This process will affect residents on many fronts - increased traffic, dirt, pollution from vehicles, air quality, general quality of life.

Access to the sites
Stonnall Road and Lazyhill Road both become narrow country lanes as they proceed to Chester Road. The increased volume of traffic will cause disruption, congestion and concerns with residents' safety. Both roads have a 30 mph limit which is regularly exceeded in anticipation of the country lanes which people assume will be without a speed limit or, if they are aware of the limit, they ignore it

Object

Representation ID: 16805

Received: 10/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Isabel Moore

Comments on Draft Plan Consultation - Black Country Plan - Walsall Borough.
Specific objection to the following: Walsall Housing on Green Belt Land WSA3 - Land North of Stonnall Road.

I am opposed to building on green-belt land. Much of this is essential, productive agricultural land. As a country we need to aim to become self-sufficient in food production in order to cut down on the devastating environmental effect of air miles involved in importing food which can be grown perfectly well here.
Decreasing the amount of green-belt can lead to the destruction of biodiversity, having a knock-on effect on air quality as well as on food production. Trees in particular cut down the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere, and all food crops rely on pollination by beneficial insects which would disappear without biodiversity.
Building on green-belt, and the increased roads etc. which this would entail, would considerably decrease the ground available for draining away of rain water, with the potential risk of flooding in some areas.
The recent pandemic has demonstrated the necessity for us all to have the opportunity to exercise outdoors, in open spaces, for our physical and mental well-being. The green-belt in the WSA3 proposal helps provide this amenity close to existing homes, together with views across the Trent Valley and further afield, all without the need to travel and further pollute the atmosphere.
It should also be considered that this proposal would considerably reduce the value of a number of existing properties which currently surround the green-belt.

Object

Representation ID: 17071

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Greg Martin

Following my review of the proposal, I am disappointed that this plan has even been considered. The utilisation of farmland in the plan goes against everything that both my local councillors, MP and National Government have pledged in the previous 5 to 10 years.

Given my location in the Lazy Hill area of Aldridge, the proposed plan to use the farmland from Stonnall Road to Lazy Hill Road is said to be providing 363 houses which will increase the number of houses in Aldridge by a considerable amount. This has a delivery timescale of 2027 - 34, does this mean that the site will take 7 years to complete? I also noted that the land will be excavated of sand and gravel, which will lead to a large number of large vehicles, along with dust and debris being in the local air.

I note that you are to increase the size of Stonnall Road, but has any consideration been given to other local roads such as Lazy Hill Road?

Within the local community, there is already a shortage of places in local schools, doctors, dentists and the private sector within the Aldridge community (supermarkets and other shops) are already full. How will the additional c1400 people (based on an average of 4 people within each property) be able to access services? The 4% uplift in population (based on 2011 census figures) that this will cause on an already stretched community is unsustainable)

In conclusion, the idea of using Green Belt land to grow a community at breaking point when there is Brown Belt available locally is nothing short of a disgrace and I look forward to this plan being rejected.

Object

Representation ID: 17171

Received: 04/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Hazel Beale

Fields off Stonnall Road
Seems a shame to use agricultural land for building on also how will schools and doctors cope with all the extra people and all the traffic it will make for Aldridge. I don't agree with these plans.

Object

Representation ID: 17196

Received: 01/10/2021

Respondent: Mr & Mrs David Roberts

Number of people: 2

Section 2: Representation and Comments on draft proposals (continued):
Objections raised regarding development of land for housing on Stonnall Road/ Birch Lane,
Aldridge, Green Belt land as this contravenes National Planning Policy.

1.0
Introduction:
1.1 Aldridge is a town and former civil parish in the Walsall borough, West Midlands, England. It is
historically a village that was part of Staffordshire until 1974. It is 3 miles (4.8 km) from Brownhills, 5
miles (8 km) north east of Walsall, 6 miles (9. 7 km) from Sutton Coldfield and 7 miles (11 km) from
Lichfield.
1.2 Whilst it is appreciated National planning policy allows councils to remove land from the Green Belt
when they are preparing new Local Plans -- provided they can show that there are "exceptional
circumstances" for doing so.
1.3 Being a long standard resident of Walsall for over 50 years, we challenge that while a shortage of
new homes can be considered, the Black Country/ Council have not demonstrate that exceptional
circumstances have been applied given the following development hierarchy:
• they've used as much brownfield land as possible;
• have optimised the density of development; and,
• have considered whether neighbouring councils can help meet their housing need.
1.4 Government's legislation to transform our environment has returned to Parliament through the
Environment Bill, with a commitment to clean up the country's air, tackle the climate change
emergency, restore natural habitats and increase biodiversity. The Bill also outlining how the
government will reduce waste, make better use of resources, and improve management of water
resources in a changing climate.
1.5 The Bill will crack down on water companies that discharge sewage into rivers and will include a
world-leading legally-binding species target for 2030, aiming to halt the decline of nature and to
protect beloved British animals, such as red squirrels and hedgehogs.
1.6 As we build back greener from the pandemic, it is vital that we address the twin challenges of
climate change and biodiversity loss and protect and improve the environment for future
generations.
1. 7 The Environment Bill is described as the delivery of the most ambitious environmental programme
of any country on earth, which is why it is essential that we complete its passage into law as soon
as possible and as such protect our boroughs from over development. With hard infrastructure and
removing valuable green belt which acts as a nature defence against flooding and poor air quality.
To consider such land for development contravenes the very core of these values and jeopardises
our future generations.
1.8 When do we reflect and say STOP, enough is enough. When do we take stock of land that is
already used, but of poor quality and value that can be redeveloped as opposed to virgin resources
of land stock. Climate change issues are very real and an imminent risk as, it is well documented
on the news with more and more climate disasters, yet as planners, this emergency needs
addressing in more creative and sustainable solutions. Town centres are becoming tired, yet with a
wealth of potential for development to bring town centre living together with retail and the hospitality
sectors. I challenge that insufficient emphasis is being, placed on new ways of thinking, as opposed
to traditional easy option plans, because those easy options are diminishing and time for change is
now.
2.0 Stonnall Road:
Wildlife and biodiversity
2.1
The land on Stonnall Road is a valued asset to the local community for passive recreation, dog
walkers, horse riders etc.
It boast a wealth of wildlife, many species protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981,
2.2
making it illegal to damage or destroy their nesting grounds. On the land in question is a mini eco­svstem of its own. The wooded area to the right of Richmond Hall has [REDACTED-SENSITIVE INFORMATION] who frequent the area and surrounding fields as a hunting ground [REDACTED- SENSITIVE INFORMATION] an range of tree
species including oaks, birch, beech, chestnut and sycamore. The woodland floor is carpeted with
snowdrops and bluebells in the spring. The bluebell is protected under the Wildlife and Countryside
Act (1981). This means digging up the plant or bulb in the countryside is prohibited and landowners are prohibited from removing bluebells from their land to sell.
[REDACTED- SENSITIVE INFORMATION] ave been a protected species for quite some time, under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, and the Conservation Regulations 1994. Under these acts, it is a criminal offence to: Intentionally capture, injure or kill [REDACTED-SENSITIVE INFORMATION]
Disturb [REDACTED-SENSITIVE INFORMATION] deliberately disturb a group of [REDACTED-SENSITIVE INFORMATION]
Yet approving such a development would wipe this mini oasis out overnight, destroying habitat, nesting grounds, hedgerows, etc. all in the name of progress.

Overview of dense woodland, wildlife habitat with [REDACTED- SENSITIVE INFORMATION] trees, beech, birch, holly, snowdrops that would be destroyed with proposed
development. Alternate and more suitable
brownfield sites need to be identified as
alternatives to save this mini eco-system within
the urban environment.
This development contravenes National Policy,
local policy, the climate agenda and should not be
endorsed.

2.3
The parcel of the land opposite Malvern Drive, Aldridge is owned by [REDACTED-GDPR]. In speaking with their planning department at their [REDACTED- GDPR] offices [REDACTED-GDPR] they unashamedly admit that this is purely a commercial venture to raise funds. They are fully aware of the plans, and clearly have no interest in the impact on the local community or borough of Walsall.

2.4
Walsall council approved its urban forestry strategy at Cabinet in February 2017, setting a clear
direction in improving tree canopy across the borough, tackling localised flooding with trees,
hedgerows, and green space providing natural flood defences. Yet developing on our Green Belt
and removing historic woodland for housing development, contradicts its strategy and manifesto
pledges. More hard standing with roads, footpaths, driveways, and despite developments
incorporating green space, how many residents have traditional front gardens, or how many are
being turned into car parks to serve our materialistic desires and modern lifestyle needs.
2.5 Hedgerows along the lane have previously been designated as 'Local Importance for Nature
Conservation' in association with The Countryside Agency, in previous council plans and
countryside area profiles (CAP's) for land east of Aldridge (as per attached).

3.0 Traffic problems and highway infrastructure (Birch Lane)
3.1
Birch lane is a beautiful narrow country land, with no designated footpath, bordered by raised
verges and historic farm hedgerows and trees, winding through the landscape. There is no street
lighting along the road and it is designated as a 30mph speed limit. probably for good reason as the
road is narrow with pinch points along the way where barley two cars can pass each other without
having to slow down and give way. This proposed housing development would devastate this
landscape, as road widening would surely be a necessity to accommodate the population growth
and increase in traffic movement. So not only would the development destroy the existing
landscape on the build site, unlike many developments on brownfield land with existing
infrastructure, it would extend beyond to the country lane, threatening hedgerows, mature trees,
nesting grounds etc.
3.2
The road is a primary route for access to the A452, with transport links to Lichfield, Staffordshire,
Birmingham as well as Shenstone and Blake Street train stations. With no public transport links or
near by bus stops, no designated footway and roads too narrow for safe cycle lanes, the
development is greatly compromised, with high risk of excessive trip generation from private
vehicles, resulting from the development. This having a negative impact on air quality, pollution,
and increasing the carbon footprint.
3.3
As the road joins from Stonnall Road onto Birch Lane, there is a natural dip in the landscape/road.
During heavy storms, this can occasionally be prone to localised flooding. The development would
put additional strain on this area and with an increase in hard landscaping, could exasperate this
problem.
3.4 A restriction has be imposed for
environmental reasons on this route as
it is identified as unsuitable for use by
heavy goods vehicles, and where there
is a better and equally convenient
alternatives. Birch Lane is a defined area of roads
that have been determined as
unsuitable for use by vehicles over a
certain width or weight, preventing
heavy goods vehicles from using minor
roads as inappropriate short-cuts
between main routes.
3.5 Reasons such a restriction has been introduced on this stretch of road is:
• to prevent damage to the highway infrastructure
• protect the character and environment of rural areas, villages and residential estates
• manage congestion on our roads
• reduce risks to vulnerable road users, including pedestrians, cyclists, motorcyclists, horse riders
etc.
3.6
The road network for this development is insufficient and not designed to accommodate
construction traffic and multiple large goods vehicles, and places unnecessary undue pressure on
the wider transport network. A network that is already a high congestion zone and road traffic
accident hotspot as detailed in section 4.0.

4.0 Chester Road (A452) / Birch Lane Junction

4.1 Road traffic incidents, congestion, area, traffic capacity and accident hotspot:
Data already show the A452 Chester Road and the junction to Birch Lane a known accident hot
spot. This development will make this area increasing unsafe with the additional amount of traffic
placed on the network.
4.2 September 2018 - A car crashed into a wall on the A452 Chester Road, at Stonnall, close to Stonnall Service Station [REDACTED-GDPR]
4.3 October 2018 Police have closed Chester Road (A452) for forensic checks after [REDACTED-GDPR]
was critically injured in a serious crash [REDACTED-GDPR]
4.4 October 2019 The crash happened on the A452 Chester Road at its junction with Birch Lane at
about 7am today. [REDACTED-GDPR] were assessed by paramedics from West Midlands Ambulance Service before being taken to Walsall Manor Hospital.
4.5 The A452 / Birch Lane is a congestion hotspot with existing capacity issues, particularly during peak
periods and rush hour. The proposed housing developments on Stonnall Road will put
unmanageable pressure on the network and undoubtedly lead to an increase in accidents and
fatalities. This stretch of road (A452, just passed Cromwell's / Shell garage) is also a known spot for
localised flooding.
West Midalnds Key Route Data showing A452 as being a congestion area & hotspot zone with a high
number of serious/fatal accidents and has existing traffic capacity issues:
5.0 Japanese Knot Weed (contaminated land)
5.1 As already mentioned the junction of Birch Lane and Chester Road is an accident hot spot. and
would not cope with the demands placed upon it with increased traffic due to the developments.
Assuming many households have 2 cars these days. This could result in an additional 2,000 traffic
movements per day on an already pressured narrow country lane and junction, not withstanding,
commercial fleet, visitors etc. The junction is already difficult to navigate at the best of times and
particularly within rush hour traffic, as Birch Lane is used as a rat run from Lichfield, Stonnall,
Brownhills, Streetly and Shenstone into Aldridge, Walsall and beyond.
5.2 Any road improvement works could be prohibited by a large scale infestation of Japanese Knotweed
covering an area of circa 500m2, extending to the roadside of Birch Lane and the Chester Road.
Previously reported to Walsall Council in June 2021, it was deemed that nothing is required to be
done at this stage, as it is not disturbed, on private land and not encroaching onto developed land.
5.3 Soil or plant material contaminated with non-native and invasive plants like Japanese knotweed can
cause ecological damage and are classified as controlled waste. Advise in June from the council
was, the landowner does not have to remove Japanese knotweed from their land, but could be
prosecuted or given a community protection notice for causing a nuisance if you allow it to spread
onto other property.

6.0 Sewage &Services
Previous problems with Sewage pumping station to existing properties and lack of drainage facilities.

7.0 Covid-19 and mental health
7.1
In these unprecedented times of the pandemic. more people having to stay at home, work from
home, do we take nothing from this, in respect of the value of our green space and greenbelt for the
communities to live and breath. With an increase in mental health problems and society re-setting
their behaviours, valuing their local area and re-connecting with the landscape that surrounds them.
Green Belt land provides a lifeline to communities, its identity, its wellbeing, and this needs to be
preserved for future generations.
8.0 Druid Heath Golf Course
Health & Safety concerns and a potential blight on the existing landscape:
8.1 Druids Heath golf course runs in parallel with the land on Stonnall Road on the south easterly
boundary of the proposed site.
8.2 The gold courses 9" and 10" fairway run alongside the land and despite a mature, historic
hedgerow and tree line, golf balls frequently land on the proposed site.
8.3 Should houses be developed this would pose a real health and safety risk to property damage,
injury to residents and/or a potential fatality.
8.4 Measures to remedy such a risk would be an unsightly blight on the sky line and landscape and
overshadow the proposed development. Notwithstanding the impact on the local wildlife, inhabitants of the hedgerow, nesting birds etc.

9.0 Summary Objections:
In closing, we strongly reject the proposals and request instead that the space remains as open
countryside and farmland, or if developed, open green space, woodland and parkland for local people,
given the limited access to such facilities in this part of Aldridge.

Summary objections in no particular order of importance:
• potential conflict with Structure Plan, Local Plan or Unitary Development Plan policies
• contrary to government planning policy guidance
• loss of important historic Trees and hedgerows
• 'inappropriate development' in Green Belt
• harm to landscape
• threat to wildlife, flora and fauna [REDACTED-SENSITIVE INFORMATION]
• Wildlife and countryside Act 1981
• Japanese knotweed infestation
• conflict with character of the area
• over development
• spoiling natural or existing contours
• potential incompatible with the design of existing buildings
• loss of important trees, hedge or other vegetation
• threatening a public right of way
• failure to meet council's access and on-site turning standards
• loss of important wildlife habitats
• harm to rare plants or animals
• destroying traditional field patterns
• loss of high-quality agricultural land
• public sewers inadequate
• road network inadequate
• 7.5 tonne weight restriction on road -- road infrastructure inadequate for construction traffic
• risk of flooding or creation of flood risk
• accident hotspot, congestions and current high volumes of traffic
• inadequate public transport links
• no public footways, cycle ways and safety of regular horse riders
• regular traffic queuing
• threat to mental health and wellbeing of existing residents
• overlooking adjoining properties
• blocking natural daylight
• generating noise, disturbance, smells, pollution
• visually damaging in the landscape or in the setting
• conflict with the character of the area
• environmental damage caused by vehicles
• inconvenience for pedestrians
• road system is inadequate
• prejudice highway safety
• loss of open spaces
• losing historic street pattern
• better alternative sites available

10.0 Black Country I Plan
10.1 To quote the plan itself in relation to Proposals on Stonnall Road and Birch Lane, Aldridge
We need to plan for:
• Addressing climate change -we question, how this can be met with this proposed location?
• Create healthy, safe spaces - we question, how this can be met with this proposed location?
• Protect and enhance historic and natural environment - we question, how this can be met with
this proposed location?
10.2 The plan states, (7,926) of these new homes will be provided in the urban area on brownfield sites,
yet the development on 'Green Belt' contravenes National Planning Policy, given the number of
other brownfield sites that have not been included as suitable alternatives.
10.3 The first call on housing should be on brownfield sites. This is not just about protecting the Green
Belt - it is about promoting regeneration on derelict and neglected urban sites in the Black Country
- and millions of pounds in Government funding has been won, to do just that. As it stands,
Walsall's housing allocation can be met for the next 5 years without any building on our Green Belt.
11.0 Alternate and more suitable Brownfield site priority options for development (to name
but a few):
a) Oak Park/ KFC site (old Oak Park Leisure centre car park site on the Lichfield Road}
b) The Brown Jug public house site, Willenhall
c) The Old Bush public house, Pelsall
d) The Rising Sun, Brownhills West
e) Walsall Saddlers Centre
f) Whittimere StreeUlntown Row, Walsall: Ruinous site and unoccupied buildings
g) FORMER DALE STREET FAMILY CENTRE, DALE STREET, WALSALL, WS1 4AH: Vacant
Buildings
h) MOAT STREET, WILLENHALL, WV13 1SZ: Fire damaged dangerous building
i) TRAVELLERS REST, 35, GREAT BRIDGE ROAD, BILSTON, WV14 8LG: vacant site
j) FORMER PACKAGING R US, RESERVOIR PLACE, WALSALL: vacant site
k) OLD BUSH INN, WALSALL ROAD, PELSALL, WALSALL, WS3 4BP: dangerous fire damaged
building
I) BROWN JUG, SANDBEDS ROAD, WILLENHALL, WV12 4EY: vacant, dangerous building
m) The Eagle, Cresswell Crescent, Mossley: Vacant Building

Object

Representation ID: 17246

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mr John Rushton

I was shocked to find that the plan meant using green field sites off Stonnall Road in Aldridge

This is a diabolical plan through up by someone who has no idea of the area.

Points;
1) why spoil our very valuable green spaces round the village which are highly cherished
2) Does any one have any idea about the roads leading to these sites?
Even if the cars can escape from the projected houses, has no one even thought of what will happen
3) where will the children, of which there will be many, go to school?
4) Where will householders go shopping? Has no one ever seen the car Park at Morrisons in Aldridge? Its always full even now!

I hope the Prime Minister's plan that greenfield sites will not be used is upheld.

Object

Representation ID: 17279

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: K Moore

Strategic Allocation WSA3 Lazy Hill Road/Stonnall Road, Walsall

Areas of green belt are a valuable asset for the physical and mental wellbeing of local communities, as evidenced particularly during the pandemic. They also act as important wildlife corridors which, once lost, cannot be replaced. This particular site includes ancient trees and hedgerows and supports a range of species including foxes, hedgehogs, owls and numerous other birds and insects.
UK agriculture (for which the land is currently in use) is vital for our future food security, for employment and to reduce the environmental and economic impact of an over-reliance on imported produce.
Building on this site would be detrimental to the local heritage and distinctive character of Aldridge, especially as so much of the historic village centre has already been lost. It would result in an increase in road traffic and air pollution, and place greater pressure on local services and infrastructure

Object

Representation ID: 17348

Received: 10/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Beryl Meehan

My objection concerns 2 proposed developments, land north of Stonnall Road WAH237 and land south of Stonnall Road WAH253:
- the land is agricultural land with crops grown annually, so producing food sustainably and locally
- this will lead to the loss of green belt land
- the developments will destroy hedgerows and trees and so cause a loss of habitat for several species of invertebrates, small mammals and birds (Currently there are several species in this location such as [Redacted-sensitive information] Now the UK is newly evidenced to be one of the world's most nature depleted countries, in the bottom 10% globally.
- rather than reduce the number of trees and hedgerows and green leaf crops the Council should be seeking to have such plantings increased in order to absorb carbon dioxide and counter pollutants that are man made. The developments will add to the bad effects of climate change, not diminish them.
- Walsall Borough Council should be preserving our existing 'green lung' at all costs.
- since the Black Country authorities, including Walsall MBC, received their directives from central government for new housing and additional jobs, circumstances have changed and continue to change substantially.

Object

Representation ID: 17353

Received: 10/10/2021

Respondent: Mr K S Steele

WAH237WAH253. I would like to object to the planned 363 houses on this supposed green belt land as there are many other brownfield areas that could be developed prior to this being considered and there are many other reasons as to why it should not be developed...

1. The land has mining rights attached and would have to be cleared of Bedrock etc prior to building, possibly two years of heavy machinery creating harmful exhaust emissions and dust clouds which would be harmful to people with respiratory problems etc.
2. The local schools (infant, junior and senior) are already at capacity and would not be able to accommodate up to another 950 students.
3. Sewage would be a major problem as the pumping station at the bottom of Malvern Drive is already at full capacity.
4. There is still a quarry very close to the site that would propose a safety problem to children as it has two sheer faces that are dangerous. If the quarry was to become a landfill site then this would create dangerous odours/gasses that could create problems for people with respiratory problems as recently reported in Staffordshire.
5. Stonnall Lane would need to be widened but due to the limited footpaths it already has, then widening it would create more danger for pedestrians on narrower footpaths, couple this with approximately 725 extra vehicles using the road then accidents would happen as well as increased pollution.
6. Existing housing, especially those enjoying the open fields aspect would be instantly devalued.
7. The increased number of vehicles would increase 'rat runs' around the existing streets where children play, again accidents would increase and possible loss of life.
8. Extra housing could mean increased criminal activity in the area, Adridge Police station has recently been closed, we never see police patrolling, (except for the mobile speed camera) just the odd Special Constable which is not enough going forward.
9. Other local sites that were developed had promises of extra shops, doctors surgeries, schools but as soon as the sites were developed the promises above were never fulfilled.

The above sites should not be developed, Aldridge does not have the infrastructure in place to accommodate this proposal and indeed other proposals that have been suggested at Calderfields and Brownhills, do what the government said they would do and develop brownfield sites first

Object

Representation ID: 17443

Received: 08/10/2021

Respondent: Jane Stanley

Proposed large housing site (strategic allocation) WAH237 rear of Lazy Hill Rd etc. Pages 507 and 552-3.
I fully appreciate the need to provide good, affordable housing for everyone.
However, I strongly object to housing being placed on Green belt sites such as this one. Brownfield sites should be used.
We need housing but we also need the green belt. In this particular case the land is prime agricultural land on which a variety of crops are grown every year - cereal, sweetcorn, carrots etc. We need food as well as housing and this land is contributing to our food security.
It also provides space for local residents to walk - an invaluable resource during the current pandemic. The land is also a necessary refuge, outside Aldridge's village, for local wildlife.
If this greenbelt is built on the land will be lost for ever.
Once it's gone - it's gone.

Object

Representation ID: 17622

Received: 01/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Terrence Braid

My name is Terry Braid, I am a resident of [redacted].
I am surprised this large development has even been considered, without any consultation with residents in the local community. The proposal would have a detramental effect on the infrastructure - for example- a heavily used thoroughfare leading onto the A452 chester road with hazardous junctions ( Birch lane / Chester road / Lazy hill / Chester road)
This proposal would bring in the region of 800+ extra vehicles plus a great number of personnel - adding strain to our NHS, police ect.
Why choose Green belt when there are ample brownfield sights available? It seems lack of consultation and understanding of the deminishing effect this would have on our enviroment.
Perhaps you could take the forgoing into consideration

Object

Representation ID: 17636

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Claire Robinson

Number of people: 2

Document Reference - Strategic Allocation WSA3, Site WAH 237/WAH 235

OBJECT

The plans state that decisions on planning applications for these sites should be made in accordance with the specific policy requirements.

We / I object on the grounds that this proposal is not taking into account your own policy requirements and design principles as well as those laid out in the National Planning Policy Framework.

The policy states proposals for redeveloping existing uses within the green belt will only be permitted if very special circumstances can be demonstrated or the proposal meets the criteria set out in national planning policy.
The land is currently used for agriculture and should not be changed as per the statement above. There are no special circumstances which suggest this designation should be changed nor would it be in line with the framework principles.

Your policy document states that one of the design principles is “Improvements to local facilities to support residents and to enhance the sustainability of the existing area, in particular improved capacity at the primary school and local health centre”. The existing area will not be enhanced as there is no infrastructure for transport and schools are already significantly oversubscribed as well as the local health centre.

Widening the local roads will have a significant negative impact to local residents, increased traffic, air pollution, noise all of which are identified as factors which should not have an adverse affect on the local area.

Your policy document states that one of the design principles is “Improvements to local facilities to support residents and to enhance the sustainability of the existing area, in particular improved capacity at the primary school and local health centre”. The existing area will not be enhanced as there is no infrastructure for transport and schools are already significantly oversubscribed as well as the local health centre.

Widening the local roads will have a significant negative impact to local residents, increased traffic, air pollution, noise all of which are identified as factors which should not have an adverse affect on the local area.

Waste - The Sewage pumping station is at capacity and adding new homes to this would require siginicant new drainage. Links Side Way was built on the basis that these homes were the maximum number of homes the pumping station could service. There are no existing drainage amenities suitable for such an extensive development and any development will directly contradict your principles of delivering landscape, biodiversity and amenity benefits.

The development will directly and negatively impact your strategy for landscape and habitat creation that provides enhancement, retention and mitigation for established trees and hedges.

Any development will have a significant adverse impact on visual amenity and character and on animal species. Impact on landscape - the harm would be a major negative impact on the landscpe, this was reported in the BCP Sustainability Assessment "The site is located in an area of mederate - high landscape sensivity based on the Landscape Sensitivity Assessment and an area of high sensivity in relation to Green Belt Harm" "..the scale of the development proposed at approx 483 dwellings would be expected to result in major negative impact on the landscape."

Cannock Chase is a Special Area of Conservation (SAC) and has a 15km Zone of interest, the border of Walsall is only 7.5km away, the impact on Cannock chase could be air pollution, hydrological changes, wilfires & arson.

The site is in a Mineral Safeguarding Area and should be safeguarded as per the National Planning Policy Framework, Section 17 “safeguard mineral resources”. There is a huge need to safeguard our natural resources and this land should be retained for its original designation, agriculture and minerals. All developments should be based on the “presumption in favour of sustainable development” and the above factors do not comply with this.

The proposals to allocate the site for housing directly contradict your Strategic Priority 11 which is to protect and enhance the natural environment, biodiversity, wildlife corridors geological resources, countryside, and landscapes.

The site is used for agriculture, Grade 3a and is consistently producing crops each year. Any change to this will significantly affect the livelihood and economical well being of the people involved in this valuable food production system.

The proposal to allocate the site for housing directly contradict Strategic Priority 12 which is to protect, sustain and enhance the quality of the built and historic environment whilst ensuring the delivery of distinctive and attractive places. Our area is a very distinctive and attractive place which


will be completely decimated and the landscape ruined with development. Visual amenity will be lost and economic detriment on house values for all the local residents.

The proposed allocation of this site wholly and significantly contradicts your policy CSP 3 which states “ A defensible green belt to help promote urban renaissance within the urban area and that provides easy access to the countryside for local residents; with the landscape safeguarded and enhanced where possible for its heritage, recreation, agricultural and nature conservation value”
and “the landscape, nature conservation and agricultural land will be protected and enhanced where practical and possible”.

The further areas of the National Planning Policy Framework which are contradicted include:-

* Section 11 - recognise that some undeveloped land can perform many functions, such as for wildlife, recreation, flood risk mitigation, cooling/shading, carbon storage or food production; By developing this land you are not giving suitable recognition that this land is already performing several of the above (wildlife, recreation, food production) without the need for development.

* Section 13 – Protecting Green Belt Land. Strategic policymaking authorities should consider the consequences for sustainable development of channelling development towards urban areas inside the Green Belt boundary, towards towns and villages inset within the Green Belt or towards
locations beyond the outer Green Belt boundary. Where it has been concluded that it is necessary to release Green Belt land for development, plans should give first consideration to land which has
been previously-developed and/or is well-served by public transport. The land has not been previously developed, nor should it as being in a MSA. It is not served well by public transport and would need considerable investment in infrastructure.

* Section 15 - Conserving and enhancing the natural environment. Planning policies and decisions should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by: a) protecting and enhancing valued landscapes, sites of biodiversity or geological value and soils b) recognising the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside, and the wider benefits from natural capital and ecosystem services – including the economic and other benefits of the best and most versatile agricultural land, and of trees and woodland; Any proposal to develop this site for housing does not conserve or enhance the environment, it will be completely destroyed. The valued landscape will disappear as well as all the current biodiversity generated from the agricultural operations.

Our beautiful countryside will be removed and as stated previously the economic benefit from versatile agricultural land will be lost. This is simply unacceptable and wrong to affect so many livelihoods and extended beneficiaries of the ecosystem especially when it is perfectly and reasonably possible to use suitable brownfield land which all authorities need to give substantial weight to as well as using other suitable sites which can be remediated and developing under- utilised land and buildings to meet housing needs where available sites could be used more effectively.

Our local MP also considers that the proposals do not explore enough the brownfield first policy and she has launched a petition to support the fact that we MUST promote regeneration on derelict and neglected urban sites in the Black Country and we have won millions in Government funding to do just that. As it stands, Walsall’s housing allocation can be met for the next 5 years without any

building on our Green Belt. Prime Minister - Boris Johnson has also said that no more homes to be build on Green Belt land (Green Fields).

Object

Representation ID: 17711

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Jane Leighton

Number of people: 4

Walsall/Sites WAH237 and WAH253 - I strongly object to these proposed building sites for 4 main reasons

1. Transport and Access. Stonnall Road is already a busy road with many cars and delivery lorries especially for Richmond Hall nursing home. The bottom half of the road is a narrow twisting lane where the drivers do not stick to the speed limit. The proposed site will increase the volume of traffic on this road which will increase the pollution. The road is used as a cut through from the Chester Road and the junction with Chester Road can be very dangerous. Construction vehicles turning in and out of this junction will only increase the danger and risk to life at this junction. After construction 400 plus new houses will mean 800 additional vehicles using this road.

2. Green belt should be kept. Once it is destroyed it cannot be returned. This proposed site has borders of ancient woodland hedges with much wildlife living in it. The council should be keeping green spaces to stop climate change. This is not sustainable development and goes against current thinking on climate change and green spaces. I cannot believe that Walsall council does not have enough brown sites in the area for the number of houses proposed for this site.

3. Services. Medical services in Aldridge are already stretched. There is usually a wait for doctors/ nurses appointments. The schools in Aldridge are full. After Redhouse school was closed the remaining schools in Aldridge are already oversubscribed. Cooper & Jordan School is very busy at school drop off time with parents parking where ever they can including the town centre. Increasing class sizes would only increase the amount of parents trying to park near the school. I do not believe the schools have enough space to expand to accommodate the children that would be housed in 400 houses. Unless parking is considered for all 3 schools in Aldridge I do not think that Aldridge can increase the school intake without serious consequences. There is also very limited parking in Aldridge town centre. The surrounding roads are busy with parked cars of people either working in Aldridge or visiting to shop. Walsall Wood Road is particularly dangerous with parked cars as people are turning off the dual carriage-way.

4. To extract sand and gravel from these sites will change the road into a industrial site which will bring noise and dust pollution and affect the quality of residents life and health.

Object

Representation ID: 17792

Received: 28/09/2021

Respondent: K Wilson

Sirs,
I write regarding the above planning proposal that involves the Green Belt area of
Aldridge/Stonnal.
The area proposed covers not only the most attractive aspect of any of the approaches
to Aldridge but takes in the long established and current crop-growing land around the
close vicinity of Aldridge. This is absolute vandalism of the countryside - especially
when brown field sites still abound close to the area of the proposed development.
I appreciate the Governmental pressure for Councils to provide suitable sites for
development but to take long established and still currently farmed land is surely not in
the original thinking. In these stressful times, please take time out to reconsider the
proposal and help retain the attractiveness of Aldridge that residents have worked hard
to maintain over many years. Let Aldridge continue to attract prospective house
owners in the years ahead when they can view the area as a desirable place to raise their
families.
Please review!
Thank you.

Object

Representation ID: 17793

Received: 06/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Kelly Mccall

I would like to object to the possible development site in Aldridge which lies between Lazy Hill and Stonnal Road. We are in the process of purchasing a property on Links Side Way and would therefore be directly affected if the building work takes place. Firstly there is the issue of the site being built on Green Belt which local residents and councillors have always tried to protect. I would question if all other alternative sites have been explored beforehand, one of the implications would be the damage it causes to the natural scenery. There is also the issue of the area becoming too crowded. This will impact on the privacy of existing residents on Links Side Way. There is also the issue of how busy Stonnal Road will become with the volume of traffic and any potential issues with parking

Object

Representation ID: 17799

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Mark Boden

Re: Proposed Large Housing Site (Strategic Allocation) WAH237 – Land north of Stonnall Road, Aldridge

I am writing to express serious concerns at the proposed release of around 300 hectares of Green Belt land as part of the Spatial Strategy for Walsall included within the current consultation on the draft Black Country Plan.

The proposed Spatial Strategy for Walsall provides only 59% of its future housing allocation on brownfield land, and with some 41% of housing provision due to come from sites currently in the Green Belt this could seriously undermine regeneration of the urban areas.

Whilst I realise that there is only a finite amount of brownfield land available, the amount of new homes provided on available brownfield sites could be raised by increasing densities.

With regard to Proposed Large Housing site WAH237, land north of Stonnall Road, Aldridge, there are a number of reasons why this land should not be allocated as a housing site within the Black County Plan. These are as follows:

Green Belt

The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) states that the Government attaches great importance to Green Belts, and that the fundamental aim of Green Belt policy is to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open.
This land performs the Green Belt purpose of assisting in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment and clearly housing development on this site would result in an outward sprawl of the urban area of Aldridge, contrary to the advice of the NPPF.
It is noted that the 'Green Belt Study', forming part of the Plan's evidence base, classified this area of land as having a 'harm' rating of 'High' i.e. that a potential high level of harm will be caused by removing this parcel of land from the Green Belt.
The NPPF advises that Green Belt boundaries should only be altered where exceptional circumstances are fully evidenced and justified, following appraisal of all alternative options.
I consider that Walsall Council should look again at the alternative options to release of this Green Belt land; alternatives which the NPPF sets out as including whether as much use as possible has been made of suitable brownfield sites and underutilised land; optimising densities in town centres and areas well served by public transport; and by accommodation of housing growth by neighbouring authorities under the Duty-to-Cooperate.

Loss of Agricultural Land

The land is classified as Grade 3 and is therefore some of the best and most versatile agricultural land in England and is constantly under crop.
The NPPF advises that where significant development of agricultural land is demonstrated to be necessary, areas of poorer quality land should be preferred to those of higher quality.
Development for housing on this site would mean the permanent loss of this highly productive agricultural land.

Historic Landscape

The site evidently contains and is bordered by ancient hedgerows.
The 'Birmingham and Black Country Local Sites Assessment Report', that forms part of the evidence base to the Black Country Plan, notes that the site comprises a field system with hedgerow boundaries that has changed little since 1840.
Additionally, the Report notes that the surrounding rural land has connections to medieval ridge and furrow ploughing practices.
The historic landscape of this site contributes significantly to the character and setting of this rural edge of Aldridge and housing development would adversely impact on the character and distinctiveness of this area.

Habitats and Biodiversity

Whilst the site is not designated as being of importance for nature conservation, the historic hedgerows provide habitats for a variety of wildlife, including foxes, squirrels and many bird species.
New data released only yesterday, 10th October 2021, as part of a report by MPs on the Environmental Audit Committee, shows that the UK is one of the world's most nature-depleted countries.
Whilst it may be possible to retain some of the hedgerows and develop the site for housing, it is very unlikely that these ecological networks will not be damaged, and biodiversity further depleted.

Visual Impact

There is an intrinsic character and beauty to this area of countryside, and from the most northerly boundary of the site are the most amazing long views of Lichfield Cathedral and Staffordshire, even stretching as far as the Derbyshire border on some days.
It is noted that the Sustainability Appraisal, which accompanies the Black Country Plan, states that the site was selected for housing development due to "limited visual impact". This is clearly not the case as the land rises towards both the northern and southern boundaries of the site and housing development on this land will be very visually intrusive.
I would recommend that site visits and a full Landscape and Visual Impact Analysis are undertaken, in order to fully appreciate the visual impact that will result from the development of this site.

Minerals

It is noted that the site is in a proposed MSA and that Policy WSA3 states that prior extraction for bedrock and superficial sand and gravel, shall take place where feasible prior to the housing development.
Whilst it is understood that plans should provide for the extraction of mineral resources, it is clear from the information provided within the evidence base to the Plan, that the area of sand and gravel in the east of Walsall is very extensive. It is therefore quite baffling as to why the identified 'Preferred Area for Sand & Gravel' is located directly to the rear of housing.
The NPPF advises that planning policies should prevent existing development from being put at unacceptable risk from, or adversely affected by, unacceptable levels of air or noise pollution. Clearly the extraction of sand and gravel from this site, in such close proximity to residential properties, will give rise to very high levels of air and noise pollution, adversely affecting the amenity of residents and impacting on their quality of life.

Highways

The 'Design Principles' of Policy WSA3 includes a transport strategy for the widening of Stonnall Road for the extent of the site.
Whilst widening would be necessary, this would only be for a section of Stonnall Road and would mean that access from the A452 Chester Road would be via the winding, and at times narrow, Birch Lane/Stonnall Road.
363 houses on this site would mean a massive increase in traffic movements on what is essentially a rural lane. In addition, there would also be several years of construction traffic utilising highways that are inadequate for large vehicles, together with noise and vibration caused to existing residential properties in the area and this would be further exacerbated by extraction of minerals from this site, prior to the housing development.

Conclusion

Overall, I consider that the spatial strategy for Walsall included within the Black Country Plan, should be re-examined to reduce significantly the amount of Green Belt proposed to be released for housing development.
Strategic Allocation WAH237, Land north of Stonnall Road, Aldridge, should be deleted from the Plan, for the various reasons set out above and the land should also be removed from the Minerals Safeguarded Area.

I would also like to add that the 'Black Country Plan' leaflet that was distributed to residents is extremely misleading due to the fact that despite Strategic Allocation WAH237 being shown on the 'Walsall Spatial Strategy' map, the site is not included in the list of large housing sites in the accompanying table on the opposite page. Clearly, as a site for 202 houses was included here, this site for 363 homes, should also have been listed.

I trust that my comments will be taken into consideration as the Black Country Plan is progressed to the next stage.

Object

Representation ID: 17919

Received: 10/10/2021

Respondent: K Tucker

WAH237 & WAH253

I am a local resident and feel very upset at the prospect of planning taking place on our Green Belt land.

As a PE Teacher and Duke of Edinburgh Co-Ordinator it is my job to promote the importance of our green spaces and how walking and enjoying the great outdoors is vital for our physical health, mental health and wellbeing. I am worried for the future of our community as feel that there will be no green belt for them to enjoy.

When in lockdown and teaching from home it proved to me even more how precious our beautiful home is and our surroundings provide us with so much joy and peace of mind.

It would an absolute tragedy if planning was to take place when there is so much Brown Land and derelict sites that can be regenerated. We need to think about the devastation this will have on local flora and fauna. We must protect it before it is too late and it is a duty to ensure it is around for future generations to enjoy

Object

Representation ID: 17991

Received: 10/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Michael Moore

SPECIFIC OBJECTIONS TO PLAN WSA3 LAND NORTH OF STONNALL ROAD ALDRIDGE -
This area of land is in full agricultural use and has been as long as can be remembered. It helps feed our ever growing population and reduces dependence on imported food. Agricultural land is valuable and can never be replaced on our small island.
Removal of this area of land from the existing agricultural use would reduce the viability of the remaining farmland leaving it prey to future urban sprawl.
Aldridge already has many issues with traffic, parking, provision of schools, doctors. Additional housing in the area would increase these problems.

Object

Representation ID: 18116

Received: 02/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Anthony Green

STATEGIC ALLOCATION WAH 237
We wish to express our objection to the above plan which removes precious green belt in favour of new housing development.
Whilst we appreciate the need for new homes I feel this should not be at the devastation of our green belt. Surely we should be promoting the regeneration of derelict & neglected brown field sites not land that is currently used for agricutural purposes. Is it a purley financial decision in favour of the developers ?
Other considerations are access routes leading to the chester road are already extremely busy. Aldridge schooling is also a concern as all local schools are already squeezed to capacity which would be added pressure an already struggling education system.

Object

Representation ID: 18283

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Miss Lauren Williams

My objection is to building housing on green belt land behind Lazy Hill road and Stonnall Road. Green belt should be protected. It is environmentally unfriendly to excavated and build more housing in this area, specifically behind Lazy Hill Road. This has been farmland for centuries, and by building on this land it not only destroys the true heritage of Aldridge, but also the beautiful, idyllic countryside that Aldridge and surrounding areas have to offer. There are plenty of Brownfield sites that could be used to achieve the same result. I, for one, am sick of seeing disused buildings around the area and then new housing being built on greenbelt. An example being the Care Home built on the Chester Road. We aren't gaining any new farmland in the country. As a country we are moving towards being more self sustainable, less reliant on non-renewable energy sources and reducing our carbon footprint. By removing all this greenbelt, we will be moving in the complete wrong direction. It will also destroy the habitat of wildlife whom we should be seeking to protect. Housing is also proposed to be built on mineral sites. Building on the land will devalue many houses and destroy the livelihoods that many residents have. The extraction process will be disruptive and unnecessary. Nearby services aren't large enough to cope with all these homes due to be built. Schools, nurseries, GPs are already at capacity. It will benefit no one. It will bring a lot more traffic to the area, further increasing the carbon emissions for the local council. As a borough we should seek to set examples to the wider county and country by developing Brownfield sites and existing services rather than building on and destroying green belt. With the proposal of 450+ new homes, this will bring to the area so much traffic, how will the roads cope with it. Lazy Hill Road is narrow leading to an almost single track lane, surrounded by farm land. Stonnall road is of a similar size. Both back onto the Chester road, a 50mph limit, it will be dangerous, especially if these 450+ homes have children living in them, let alone the safety of the village as it is, without the additional traffic. Parking around Leighswood school at rush hour is dangerous enough.

Object

Representation ID: 18407

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Rachel and Steve Brown

Site SA-0034-WAL [Site Ref: WAH237/WSA3]

Greenbelt — It cannot be justified that land within the Greenbelt be released where other brownfield
alternatives can be delivered. The area in question is valuable open space, which contributes
significantly to the visual amenity of the area and to local wildlife.
Highways — The nature of the surrounding roads do not lend themselves to this scale of
development. Something of this quantum with the associated increase in traffic volume, particularly
at peak times, poses a significant risk to safety and increased congestion. Under the Reasons For
Selection of Site SA-0034-WAL, it is noted Stonnall Road may need to be widened and further
infrastructure works may be required in order to facilitate the extent of the proposed development.
Stonnall Road is a narrow lane with minimal verges but hedgerows. It is clear that works would
absolutely be required in order to accommodate an increase in traffic volume generated by the
development, but in the information provided to date, it is unclear to what extent widening and
further infrastructure are required or indeed that they are in any way deliverable. In addition to this,
the area already has a number of accident plack spots.
Ecology — Leading on from comments regarding the need for highways improvements, particularly
around Stonnall Road, there are a significant number of hedgerows which provide much needed
habitat for numerous species of wildlife. Any highways works, or indeed the development itself, will
therefore have a material and detrimental impact. We do know that there are wild birds and [Redacted-sensitive information] habitating here amongst many others.
Overlooking — We strongly object to any development adjoining our boundary on the grounds of
overlooking and the impact upon our privacy. Currently the plan comes right up to our boundary.
This could impact any future sale or the value of our property.
Local infrastructure — Any development of this nature would place significant strain on limited local
infrastructure, even with the plans for another school and doctors surgery there are many other
amenities that would be required by 363 new households.

Object

Representation ID: 18470

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Sport England

WAH237 - (WSA 3) - Land north of Stonnall Road, Aldridge - 363 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: WAH237 - (WSA 3) - Land north of Stonnall Road, Aldridge - 363 dwellings

Object

Representation ID: 19247

Received: 07/10/2021

Respondent: Mr William Snowden

Re sites WAH237.
1. Any incursion into or reducing the green belt should be avoided while brown field and former industrial sites remain unused. Green space should remain untouched to combat the climate crisis and urban sprawl.
2. WAH 237 is productive arable land. British food self sufficiency has fallen from 78% in the mid-1980s to 60% now. Nationally and locally we should not be destroying this valuable local asset and adding to the issue of food miles.
3. The developments will increase demand on existing services in Aldridge. Medical services and schools are already operating under pressure of numbers. Local shopping and parking facilities such as the shops at Lazy Hill Road / Walsall Wood Road are extremely limited.
4. The proposed extension of gravel and mineral prior to the land being developed for housing would cause noise and disruption to local residents and turn a residential area into an industrial one.
5. The transport of sand and gravel would mean a high volume of heavy vehicles on Lazy Hill and Stonal Roads, both roads are inappropriate for this. Until recently lorries going to and from the landfill site on Chester Road used both Lazy Hill and Stonal Road causing constant erosion of the surface and a safety hazard so that the local authority had to impose a weight limit which is still in force.
6. Both roads have a high proportion of traffic and are used as rat runs in particular Stonal Road would see a massive increase in traffic.

Object

Representation ID: 19259

Received: 11/12/2021

Respondent: Mrs Ruth Long

I STRONGLY OBJECT to the proposed plans for the development of the new large housing
sites BOTH alongside and opposite Links Side Way, Aldridge W59,SHT. I [REDACTED- GDPR] chose to buy our home as it was surrounded by Green Belt and open space.
Housing should be developed on Brownfield Site first and foremost before destroying Green Belt. It is not just about protecting Green Belt, it 5 about promoting regeneration on derelict and Urban Sites in the Black Country first!! \We are constantly being told on TV programmes
such as "Countryfile" to plant trees to promote a cleaner environment and to grow plants to attract bees/wildlife into our gardens. YET, in Aldridge there are proposals for YET MORE housing developments in the future!! Hence, reducing the clean air in our postcode and destroying
both wildlife and valuable farmland.
During the last 10 years we've experienced a HUGE INCREASE in SPEEDING traffic along
Stonnall Rd/ Birch lane crossroads. The prospect of YET MORE traffic(despite the proposed widening of the
afore mentioned roads) simply horrifies us!!! Since living here several traffic accidents have occured at the Chester Rd/ Birch lane crossroads. We can only foresee this getting worse with the INCREASED future traffic from the propose future large housing sites!!! Subsequently, a HUGE increased in pollution as well!! To conclude briefly my other major concerns are:-
Reduction of already limited parking in Aldridge around the Shopping Area
• Increased traffic on roads around the school runs/ rush hours.
· The extraction of sand and gravel before development.

Comment

Representation ID: 19306

Received: 10/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Sean Russon

I wish to raise my concern regarding the additional housing plan for the large housing site (WAH237)
in Aldridge Lazy Hill/Stonnall road.
I have lived in [GDPR REDACTED] which overlooks the proposed site for 363 houses for over [GDPR REDACTED] years which is currently farmland. The underlying reason for buying this house was the open aspect view across countryside towards Lichfield. I realise this would come across as (not in my backyard) but I have lived in Aldridge for [GDPR RRDACTED] years and all building work of new houses has taken place within the green belt boundaries of Aldridge never in the green belt.

The farmland behind us has been farmed for crops every year we have lived here and continues today. I do not know of any other fields in Aldridge used for crop farming. The loss of farming jobs and income of crops and food will also be affected.

The detriment to people’s mental health and well being who will be affected by this will be large. I feel privileged to have this view at the end of my garden and spend a lot of me enjoying it.

Aldridge although it has grown over the past 50 years is still proudly stated as being a village this
growth and future growth will see it become a sprawling town. Why must more houses be built in a
village, if the answer is Aldridge is a beautiful village to live and more people want to live there then
making it bigger will eventually see the loss of its character. Lot’s of people want to live in Padstow
Cornwall, but they don’t go and build 100,000 houses to make it possible.

The infrastructure is not available in Aldridge to take this many houses from school places, doctors,shops and transport.

As soon as you give permission to build on greenbelt it is a green light to greedy developers who will
then continue to do so stating it has been granted elsewhere. The green belt around Aldridge is not
large with some areas only a fields width. It would be a tragedy to go down this path with all the villages around Walsall becoming joined.

Object

Representation ID: 21418

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Sarjan Hayer

OBJECTING TO PROPOSED DEVELOPMENTS ON STONNALL ROAD (SITE REF WAH237,
WAH253)
Aldridge is a settled community with its own unique characteristics.
DESTRUCTION OF THE GREEN BELT
These proposals hand over swathes of green space and green belt. These sites provide valuable green space for residents. Given the climate emergency that the nation and the world face, it is not sustainable to develop valuable green space. The site is currently valuable agricultural land and should remain so.
The fields are currently ideal habitat for many animals, including hedgehogs, which are classified as vulnerable to extinction. Building on it would have a massive environmental impact and a significant effect on the local wildlife.

INCREASING CAPACITY ON PUBLIC SERVICES
Aldridge is already struggling with access to local services, schools, GPs. The two local primary schools Leighswood and Cooper & Jordan, are already oversubscribed, for instance.
Aldridge only has one supermarket, Morrison’s. The number of spaces at Morrison’s car park is limited, and during weekends and peak times, the car park is frequently full, with cars queuing on the Aldridge bypass. Further increasing Aldridge’s population would increase demand on the local shops, many of which were not designed to cater to this many people.

INCREASED ROAD CONGESTION
The proposals will increase traffic on the road network. Stonnall Road was not designed to be a well-used road. The road is well used by cyclists and horse riders who will be put in increased danger due to increased traffic levels. The road is already used as a “rat run” to and from Chester Road. The junction with Chester Road is a four-way junction. Vehicles turning from Stonnall Road
can often wait minutes until it is safe to enter Chester Road. There have been accidents at the junction in the past. The proposed developments would result in longer waiting times at the intersection and increase the danger to users.
One significant limitation of the road is a sharp blind corner near the proposed site. The width of the road means vehicles have to take the corner slowly, and there is only sufficient room for one large vehicle. Widening the road is not feasible since the road would encroach on the land of homeowners situated on the bend. The road had a weight limit of 7.5 tonnes.
Moreover, the road has a problem with speeding cars, further increasing the risk to residents.
After the bend, it is downhill, which causes the vast majority of vehicles to speed. Any development would pose a substantial safety risk to users of the road.
Any development would require significant upgrade works to both Stonnall Road and Lazy Hill Road, which would cause substantial disruption to residents and local businesses. The road has already had to be repaired/resurfaced numerous times in the last few years.
The congestion would not just be limited to Stonnall Road. Due to Aldridge's limited number of amenities, many residents have to travel to Walsall by travelling on Walsall Road. This would increase the risk of accidents, particularly involving pupils in and out of Aldridge School.

POLLUTION AND HEALTH IMPACTS
The development will negatively impact people's mental health due to noise and air pollution during construction and once completed. Many of the residents are elderly, some with pre-existing health conditions. This will cause undue stress on them and their families.
The proposals to extract sand and gravel from the proposed sites before development will result in the area becoming an industrial estate. This would significantly impact residents quality of life. The problems caused by gravel extraction at Branton Hill Road is evidence of what will likely happen to Stonnall Road.
Any housing development would also present more danger to the pupils attending Leighswood School, which is nearby.
The new houses will also cause loss of privacy and overshadowing on the nearby houses, negatively impacting residents.
The overwhelming majority of residents are against the proposed developments. The community will continue to oppose this unjustified development until the very end.

Object

Representation ID: 21419

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Enderjit Singh Hayer

OBJECTING TO PROPOSED DEVELOPMENTS ON STONNALL ROAD (SITE REF WAH237,
WAH253)
Aldridge is a settled community with its own unique characteristics.
DESTRUCTION OF THE GREEN BELT
These proposals hand over swathes of green space and green belt. These sites provide valuable green space for residents. Given the climate emergency that the nation and the world face, it is not sustainable to develop valuable green space. The site is currently valuable agricultural land and should remain so.
The fields are currently ideal habitat for many animals, including hedgehogs, which are classified as vulnerable to extinction. Building on it would have a massive environmental impact and a significant effect on the local wildlife.

INCREASING CAPACITY ON PUBLIC SERVICES
Aldridge is already struggling with access to local services, schools, GPs. The two local primary schools Leighswood and Cooper & Jordan, are already oversubscribed, for instance.
Aldridge only has one supermarket, Morrison’s. The number of spaces at Morrison’s car park is limited, and during weekends and peak times, the car park is frequently full, with cars queuing on the Aldridge bypass. Further increasing Aldridge’s population would increase demand on the local shops, many of which were not designed to cater to this many people.

INCREASED ROAD CONGESTION
The proposals will increase traffic on the road network. Stonnall Road was not designed to be a well-used road. The road is well used by cyclists and horse riders who will be put in increased danger due to increased traffic levels. The road is already used as a “rat run” to and from Chester Road. The junction with Chester Road is a four-way junction. Vehicles turning from Stonnall Road
can often wait minutes until it is safe to enter Chester Road. There have been accidents at the junction in the past. The proposed developments would result in longer waiting times at the intersection and increase the danger to users.
One significant limitation of the road is a sharp blind corner near the proposed site. The width of the road means vehicles have to take the corner slowly, and there is only sufficient room for one large vehicle. Widening the road is not feasible since the road would encroach on the land of homeowners situated on the bend. The road had a weight limit of 7.5 tonnes.
Moreover, the road has a problem with speeding cars, further increasing the risk to residents.
After the bend, it is downhill, which causes the vast majority of vehicles to speed. Any development would pose a substantial safety risk to users of the road.
Any development would require significant upgrade works to both Stonnall Road and Lazy Hill Road, which would cause substantial disruption to residents and local businesses. The road has already had to be repaired/resurfaced numerous times in the last few years.
The congestion would not just be limited to Stonnall Road. Due to Aldridge's limited number of amenities, many residents have to travel to Walsall by travelling on Walsall Road. This would increase the risk of accidents, particularly involving pupils in and out of Aldridge School.

POLLUTION AND HEALTH IMPACTS
The development will negatively impact people's mental health due to noise and air pollution during construction and once completed. Many of the residents are elderly, some with pre-existing health conditions. This will cause undue stress on them and their families.
The proposals to extract sand and gravel from the proposed sites before development will result in the area becoming an industrial estate. This would significantly impact residents quality of life. The problems caused by gravel extraction at Branton Hill Road is evidence of what will likely happen to Stonnall Road.
Any housing development would also present more danger to the pupils attending Leighswood School, which is nearby.
The new houses will also cause loss of privacy and overshadowing on the nearby houses, negatively impacting residents.
The overwhelming majority of residents are against the proposed developments. The community will continue to oppose this unjustified development until the very end.