Policy WSA6 – Land off Sutton Road, Longwood Lane, Walsall

Object

Representation ID: 13220

Received: 06/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Kay Farrington

1. Although there is a need for new housing to meet demand the 2 sites in this plan are currently in land previously designated Green Belt. Government policy said that Green Belt would be protected from development.

2. There is no indication in the plans of the infrastructure that will need to be developed alongside new housing e.g. schools, medical facilities, shops that will be within walking distance.

3. The main access roads are already straining with traffic at certain times of the day causing delays which will be exacerbated by such large developments.

4 The need for facilities such as recreation areas e.g. tennis courts, football pitches to address the mental health and fitness of all residents need to be considered

Object

Representation ID: 13242

Received: 03/10/2021

Respondent: Ms and Mr Lucy and Paul Harrington and Cicerella

Number of people: 2

I object to all of it, mostly the housing development sites to be built on green belt land. I object to the building on of the sites - Homes Farm (Sandhill), Yieldfields Farm (Bloxwich), Queslett Road East/ Aldridge Road (Streetly), Sutton Road/ Longwood Lane (Pheasey Park Farm), Yorks Bridge (Pelsall), Coronation Road/ Mob Lane (Aldridge North/ Walsall Wood), Calderfields/ Aldridge Road (St Matthews), Bentley Lane (Short Heath), Johnsons Farm, Meadow Farm/ Watling Street (Brownhills)
The reason I object - I think we should be preserving what little there is of green belt land, not destroying by building houses on it. There's no denying we are destroying the world and and acts like this are not helping. I strongly oppose it on ecological grounds, there's no counting how many animals (including bugs and insects) homes will get destroyed in the process and how bad the knock on effect will be for wildlife.
Also I am completely opposed to the cutting down of healthy trees for the same reasons above.
People who do these kind of things have no respect for the life they are destroying why is it never a consideration. I cannot explain enough how against this I am

Object

Representation ID: 13251

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Angela x

Site Reference - WAH231 - Sutton Road/ Longwood Lane. Strategic Allocation - WS.6 comments below are made in reference to site WAH231 and refer to areas in various sections of the document.

Environment
*As the site is a designated Site of Local Importance for Nature Conservation (SLINC) there is a serious loss of wildlife habitat which will arise as part of this proposed development. This needs to be protected.
*Various inconsistencies between plan and local site assessment reports around various environmental factors all relating to the WAH231 site.
*Serious health risk to Sutton Road/ Orchard Hills residents from increased traffic pollution/noise
*Increased stress to Sutton Road residents with construction work and loss of green space. Town Planning, Infrastructure, Health and Wellbeing.

*Proposed site has no pedestrian and no cycle access. Also lack of any street lighting on Longwood Lane, and pavement.
*Sutton Road/ Longwood Lane would be unable to cope with increased traffic congestion including access issues into Sutton Road with no proposed details of how this would be managed.
* Neighbournig areas such as Orchard Hills, Park Hall will se increased traffic as a result, only compounded by the fact that housing on this particular space will result in creation of a bottleneck within the local area causing disruption not just to residents but schools, and businesses too.
* No capacity for increase in pupils at local schools and increased traffic as there is no feasible options for walking to schools which is encouraged across all local authority schools.
*Design Principles around more capacity for schools, and medical facilities are all hypothetical with no evidence in any of the proposals around how this will be achieved.
* Proposed dwellings per hectare (dph) of 35 indicated is out of character with local area.

Landowners for significant portions of the land have not been consulted through this process, and do not support the proposed development.

Object

Representation ID: 13301

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Bob Barnard

Objection to developing this site.

Object

Representation ID: 13303

Received: 01/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Michael Mitchell

This is green belt and should remain green belt. The development will cause more congestion and local roads are already very busy. It will impact on the arboretum

Object

Representation ID: 13334

Received: 10/10/2021

Respondent: Miss Ann Marie Gutteridge

Number of people: 2

grounds for objections:
1 loss of green belt - access to and use of green belt is important for the well being and mental health of the community; its value has been of particular importance during the pandemic and this need continues especially with the increase in ownership of dogs and more residents becoming aware of the benefits of walking
2 Impact on wildlife habitats and biodiversity
3 Potential for further erosion of the green belt: we are concerned that if development is permitted that it is inevitable that further development will follows
4 potential loss of agricultural land which may otherwise be used for the production of food/ animal feed for local consumption
5 increasing the volume of traffic leading to further congestion on already busy roads especially Queslett Road and the adjacent roads and consequential increase in pollution and poorer air quality
6 infrastructure significantly increased demand for schools doctors dentists and other local amenities – land would also be required for building of additional schools, surgeries, etc.
7 greater demand for public transport too
8 further consideration should be given to the use of brownfield sites and other options for example the development of former public houses the repurposing of vacant buildings – former commercial and retail premises in town centre locations which would assist with revitalising town centres

Object

Representation ID: 13339

Received: 25/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Diana Wilkes

Objection to development at this site.

Object

Representation ID: 13363

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Haroon Majid

I write to object to the proposal to build houses at Calderfields – Aldridge Road and Sutton Road/ Longwood lane

The development would result in the character of the are changing significantly and the green belt on the border between Aldridge and Walsall being lost and their being a significant loss to the wildlife on the proposed sites.

The character and landscape would change significantly with any proposed development which would have a detrimental affect to the Arboretum and result in a rise in pollution with the increase in people and traffic as a result of any development – this would affect wildlife and the plant habitation of the Arboretum

The drainage and sewerage of any proposed sites would be problematic as the current resident of the sites have constant issues with flooding and would also cause pollution to the Arboretum due to the height of the water level of the land

Any development would affect the amenity and cause significant disruption to those currently resident in the area and the increase in traffic would result in there being increases risk to the elderly and young who live and walk in the area surrounding the proposed site

The result of Covid has increased the need to have green areas and sites- these sites have served such a purpose for over 100 years

There are more suited Brownfield sites in the Walsall area which could be developed for Housing purposes

Object

Representation ID: 13438

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Annette Duffy

Environment
We need to protect and preserve these areas for future generations, we have already failed them in so many ways and developing on this green belt site is definitely not the way forward. Site WAH231 has long been a green corridor that provides a vital link between a number of sites noted for their importance for nature and wildlife -- Arboretum Park & Extension - Park Lime Pits -- The Dingle/Cuckoo's Nook - Barr Beacon. WAH231 is in itself a site of local importance for nature conservation and biodiversity, that once gone cannot be replaced. It provides a link between Hay Head Wood (SLINC) and Rushall Canal (SLINC), an essential wildlife passageway and habitat for a large number of wild animals.
This development is contrary to Policy ENV1 -- Nature Conservation which states that
'Development within the Black Country will safeguard Nature Conservation' Section 5 'All appropriate development should positively contribute to the natural environment of the Black Country by: Sb improve wildlife movement' - wildlife movement will be further diminished through this plan.
Hoar Brook runs along the length of the site and feeds into the Walsall Country Park where it is recorded as being populated with the water vole (Arvicola terrestris) -- a legally protected species.
In the policy document WSA6, the design principles state that 'A strategy for landscape and
habitat creation that provides enhancement, retention and mitigation for existing SL/NC features and established trees, to ensure there is no significant adverse impact on ecology, biodiversity, visual amenity and character or on protected animal species'. It is not possible to achieve any of this by developing the land on WAH231 into a housing estate.

Walsall's green spaces function as the lungs, the breathing space that is required for people and nature to co-exist effectively together. Eating into the green belt will deal a crushing blow to local biodiversity, increase carbon emissions and pollution, impacting negatively on climate change - unjustifiable on any level. Are we going to have continual growth and expansion until there is nothing left?

Object

Representation ID: 13495

Received: 04/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Beverley Georgiou

My objections relate to Walsall Local Authority, Sutton Road/Longwood Lane and Calderfields/Aldridge Road sites - reference WAH231 and WAH242.

I strongly object to the housing development proposals of these two as both sites would affect me as a resident of Sutton Road. Where we pay a high community tax.
Reasons:-
Sutton Road currently is a very busy road to the point that at certain times of the day the traffic is at a standstill. This in itself is a difficulty particularly for emergency services any further housing of the sites referred to would prove ridiculously impossible to access or egress our homes.
Furthermore I chose to reside here due to the green conurbation and this would be destroyed the wildlife including [Redacted-sensitive information] would be driven away.
In respect of Longwood Lane - similar to Sutton Road there is great congestion of traffic which causes delays, lack of access to emergency services together with frequent road traffic accidents. This area - Sutton Road requires traffic calming measures.
In respect of WAH252 three crowns site
The plans were passed and it would be beneficial to see just the proposed x7 houses completed to improve the eyesore that has remained for too many years.

Object

Representation ID: 13580

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Arthur Yarnold

Site Reference -- WAH231 - Sutton Road/ Longwood Lane. Strategic Allocation - WS.6
Comments below are made in reference to site WAH231 and refer to areas in various sections of the document.
Environment


• As the site is a designated Site of Local Importance for Nature conservation (SLINC) there is a serious loss of wildlife habitat which will arise as part of this proposed development. This needs to be protected.
• Various inconsistencies between plan and local site assessment reports around various
environmental factors all relating to the WAH231 site.
• Serious health risk to Sutton Road/Orchard Hills residents from increased traffic pollution/noise.
• Increased stress to Sutton Road residents with construction work and loss of green space. Town Planning, Infrastructure, Health & Wellbeing


• Proposed site has no pedestrian and no cycle access. Also lack of any street lighting on
Longwood lane, and pavement.
• Sutton Road/Longwood Lane would be unable to cope with increased traffic congestion including access issues into Sutton Road with no proposed details of how this would be managed.
• Neighboring areas such as Orchard Hills, Park Hall will see increased traffic as a result, only compounded by the fact that housing on this particular space will result in creation of a bottleneck within the local area causing disruption not just to residents but schools, and businesses too.
• No capacity for increase in pupils at local schools and increased traffic as there is no feasible options for walking to schools which is encouraged across all local authority schools.
• Design Principles around more capacity for schools, and medical facilities are all hypothetical with no evidence in any of the proposals around how this will be achieved.
• Proposed dwellings per hectare (dph) of 35 indicated is out of character with local area.


Landowners for significant portions of the land have NOT been consulted throughout this process, and do NOT support the proposed development. Based on all the above

Object

Representation ID: 13790

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Eileen Archer

Site Reference - WAH231 - Sutton Road / Longwood Lane. Strategic Allocation WS.6.
Comments below are made in reference to site WAH231 and refer to areas in various sections of the document.

Environment:
- As the site is a designated Site of Local Importance for Nature Conservation (SLINC) there is a serious loss of wildlife habitat which will arise as part of this proposed development. This needs to be protected.
- Various inconsistencies between plan and local site assessment reports around various environmental factors all relating to the WAH231 site.
- Serious health risk to Sutton Road/Orchard Hills residents from increased traffic pollution/noise.
- Increased stress to Sutton Road residents with construction work and loss of green space.

Town Planning, Infrastructure, Health and Wellbeing:
- Proposed site has no pedestrian and no cycle access. Also lack of any street lighting on Longwood Lane, and pavement.
- Sutton Road/Longwood Lane would be unable to cope with increased traffic congestion including access issues into Sutton Road with no proposed details of how this would be managed.
- Neighbouring areas such as Orchard Hills, Park Hall will see increased traffic as a result, only compounded by the fact that housing on this particular space will result in creation of a bottleneck within the local area causing disruption not just to residents but to schools, and businesses too.
- No capacity for increase in pupils at local schools and increased traffic as there is no feasible options for walking to schools which is encouraged across all local authority schools.
- Design Principles around more capacity for schools, and medical facilities are all hypothetical with no evidence in any of the proposals around how this will be achieved.
- Proposed dwellings per hectare (dph) of 35 indicated is out of character with local area.

Landowners for significant portions of the land have NOT been consulted throughout this process, and do NOT support the proposed development. Based on all the above I believe this should be removed from the Black Country Plan.

Object

Representation ID: 14104

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Carol Green

Regarding
Queslett Rd East / Aldridge Road - Streetly
Sutton Road / Longwood Lane - Pheasey Park Farm
As a resident on the Aldridge - Streetly border we moved here for the amount of green belt it had to offer. I object to any more homes being built we also had the increase of Netherhill Park on the Old St.Margarets site.
The Queslett Road especially in the area close to Asda is frequently ridiculously busy with traffic. It's almost impossible to get an appointment with the doctors as it is.
There are plenty of brown sites in Walsall that should be considered first.

Object

Representation ID: 14529

Received: 03/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Biney Singh

The planned development in my area concerns me greatly.
The proposed plans will have a catastrophic impact on the local infrastructure, environment, health and wellbeing.
Sutton Rd can not cope with congestion at this moment in time with increased traffic it would have devastating effects on all surrounding roads.
Sutton Rd residents would have to deal with increased level of noise and traffic pollution and loose it’s appealing green space.
There will also be serious implications to the wildlife habitat in this local area. The green space, nature and wildlife should be protected.
I am strongly against these ideas, Sutton Rd needs speed cameras that actually work in order to prevent careless drivers who do speeds in-excess of 80mph at times.
I have many time witnessed drivers speeding and overtaking driving into on coming traffic. This is what needs to be addressed this is what should be on top of the agenda before such actions result in loss of life. Damage limitation prevent this before it’s too late.

Object

Representation ID: 14783

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Lorna Simpson

Site Reference -- WAH231 - Sutton Road/ Longwood Lane. Strategic Allocation - WS.6
Comments below are made in reference to site WAH231 and refer to areas in various sections of the document.
Environment


• As the site is a designated Site of Local Importance for Nature conservation (SLING) there is a serious loss of wildlife habitat which will arise as part of this proposed development. This needs to be protected.
• Various inconsistencies between plan and local site assessment reports around various
environmental factors all relating to the WAH231 site.
• Serious health risk to Sutton Road/Orchard Hills residents from increased traffic pollution/noise.
• Increased stress to Sutton Road residents with construction work and loss of green space. Town Planning, Infrastructure, Health & Wellbeing


• Proposed site has no pedestrian and no cycle access. Also lack of any street lighting on
Longwood lane, and pavement.
• Sutton Road/Longwood Lane would be unable to cope with increased traffic congestion including access issues into Sutton Road with no proposed details of how this would be managed.
• Neighboring areas such as Orchard Hills, Park Hall will see increased traffic as a result, only compounded by the fact that housing on this particular space will result in creation of a bottleneck within the local area causing disruption not just to residents but schools, and businesses too.
• No capacity for increase in pupils at local schools and increased traffic as there is no feasible options for walking to schools which is encouraged across all local authority schools.
• Design Principles around more capacity for schools, and medical facilities are all hypothetical with no evidence in any of the proposals around how this will be achieved.
• Proposed dwellings per hectare (dph) of 35 indicated is out of character with local area.


Landowners for significant portions of the land have NOT been consulted throughout this process, and do NOT support the proposed development. Based on all the above I believe this should be removed from the Black Country Plan.

Comment

Representation ID: 14970

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Lucy Blenkin

Sutton B Longwood Lane
Pheasey Park Farm
Hectares 8
New Home 202

Similar considered to the above
The year 2011 (November) showed devastation to Houses East of Aldridge Road & South of Foley Road
Also 200 new housing could also be in Danger

(c) Also the proposals involve a certain loss of green open spaces which are beneficial to Walsall Residents/

Object

Representation ID: 14977

Received: 09/10/2021

Respondent: Anthony Pleaden

I Object to the development of any Green Field site for housing development. The Areas of:
Queslett Road East/Aldridge Road, Calderfields/Aldridge Road, Sutton Road/Longwood Lane

All of which surround Urban Housing Areas - Brown Sites should 1st be investigated, we all witness
dilapidated & empty Factories.

I refuse to accept the idea of development in OUR GreenBelt, this land provides leisure areas for young and old residents, generates much of the fresh air and assists in the reduction of CO2.

Local Facilities Are already overloaded:

Commuter Traffic already overloads our local roads, and create pollution.
Existing Facilities such as Schools & Doctors are overcrowded - Extra Housing will not ease the burden on roads,schools, and health care, But will destroy the existing environment.

The Hundred Acre Site was not well developed, small gardens

Object

Representation ID: 15134

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Cheryl Johns

I would like to lodge my objection at the proposal to develop hectares of land on the Sutton Road/Longwood Lane Pheasey Park Farm. I'm yet to be convinced of the benefit of using the green space that these areas provide to build yet more houses on, when it seems that other brown sites have not been considered.

Your document makes reference to making improvements to the Black country area that has significant rates of social deprivation, lack of education and health problems which simply will not be rectified by housing being built upon green spaces that are used by the local community.

We are a community that prides itself on our green spaces that are used not only for exercise but for mental well being in being out amongst nature alongside the natural habitat for the native animals to the area.

More houses will simply have a more devastating impact upon an already stretched NHS services inclusive of GP practices and local hospitals but also upon overly subscribed schools making it even more difficult to obtain school places for our children.

The level of traffic congestion is already substantial around the Great Barr area due to the ever expanding area of Perry Barr for it now to be further by more houses meaning more vehicles on the roads leading to poorer air quality that cannot be absorbed by the green spaces.

i do not support more houses on this green space and feel that the easy option has been sought when there are plenty of brown sites that are former factory site that could be redeveloped to fit the needs of the housing scheme that should be considered.

Object

Representation ID: 15137

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Chontell Uppal

We would like to raise our concerns about the proposed housing developments at Sutton Road / Longwood Lane. The main trunk roads serving these areas are already heavily congested during the busier periods of the day and additional strain will certainly negatively impact local residents. Additionally, building on green belt land which provides natural drainage, habitat for wildlife and local enjoyment of the open spaces should be a last resort. Once built upon this will never be able to be restored or reclaimed.

Object

Representation ID: 15201

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Graham Scattergood

Site Reference -- WAH231 - Sutton Road/ Longwood Lane. Strategic Allocation - WS.6
Comments below are made in reference to site WAH231 and refer to areas in various sections of the document.
Environment


• As the site is a designated Site of Local Importance for Nature conservation (SLINC) there is a serious loss of wildlife habitat which will arise as part of this proposed development. This needs to be protected.
• Various inconsistencies between plan and local site assessment reports around various environmental factors all relating to the WAH231 site.
• Serious health risk to Sutton Road/Orchard Hills residents from increased traffic pollution/noise.
• Increased stress to Sutton Road residents with construction work and loss of green space. Town Planning, Infrastructure, Health & Wellbeing


• Proposed site has no pedestrian and no cycle access. Also lack of any street lighting on
Longwood lane, and pavement.
• Sutton Road/Longwood Lane would be unable to cope with increased traffic congestion including access issues into Sutton Road with no proposed details of how this would be managed.
• Neighboring areas such as Orchard Hills, Park Hall will see increased traffic as a result, only compounded by the fact that housing on this particular space will result in creation of a bottleneck within the local area causing disruption not just to residents but schools, and businesses too.
• No capacity for increase in pupils at local schools and increased traffic as there is no feasible options for walking to schools which is encouraged across all local authority schools.
• Design Principles around more capacity for schools, and medical facilities are all hypothetical with no evidence in any of the proposals around how this will be achieved.
• Proposed dwellings per hectare (dph) of 35 indicated is out of character with local area.


Landowners for significant portions of the land have NOT been consulted throughout this process, and do NOT support the proposed development. Based on all the above I believe this should be removed from the Black Country Plan.

Object

Representation ID: 15204

Received: 08/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Gwendoline Hussey

Black Country Plan
Queslett Rd East/Aldridge Rd
Sutton Rd/Longwood Lane - Streetly Pheasey Park Farm

My objections to building on the above sites is:

Will have adverse effects on all the wildlife.
Negative visual impact on areas of green fields
dverse effect on conservation areas and heritage it will affect the well-being of peoples health losing the countryside.
There is inadequate local structure of schools and doctors at present without the population increasing.
IF more houses are required they should be built on brownfield sites only.

Object

Representation ID: 15929

Received: 08/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Susan Ford

My objection to building on Queslett Road East/Aldridge Road and Sutton Road/Longwood Land.
Total of 1162 new homes

I object to the building on green belt land when there is plenty of brownfield land available.
The land along Queslett Road / Aldridge Road is farming land, in the future we will need more farming as we are no longer in the E.U. Climate change, polution will be worse.
The infrastructure. there is already a shortage of school places and doctors within the area. Bus service, shops everything is lacking. The roads are already busy. Bridle Lane which runs upto Barr Beacon is a very narrow lane, already causing problems for locals.
Historically Barr Beacon has been a focal point through history for hundreds of years. The land around it should be left alone as a historical site.
I hope for the future of Streetly this will be not be allowed to go ahead. I also believe these fields along Queslett/Aldridge Road, are safety measures Crash zone for B'ham Airport.

Object

Representation ID: 15973

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Christine Coleman

Site reference - WAH231 - Sutton Road / Longwood Lane. Strategic Allocation - WS.6
Comments below are made in reference to site WAH231 and refer to areas in various sections of the document.
Environment -
As the site is a designated Site of Local Importance for Nature conservation (SLINC) there is a serious loss of wildlife habitat which will arise as part of this proposed development. This needs to be protected.
Various inconsistencies between plan and local site assessment reports around various environmental factors all relating to the WAH231 site.
Serious health risk to Sutton Road / Orchard Hill residents from increased traffic pollution/noise.
Increased stress to Sutton Road residents with construction work and loss of green space.

Town Planning, Infrastructure, Health & Wellbeing -
Proposed site has no pedestrian and no cycle access. Also lack of any street lighting on Longwood Lane, and pavement.
Sutton Road/Longwood Lane would be unable to cope with increased traffic congestion including access issues into Sutton Road with no proposed details of how this would be managed.
Neighbouring areas such as Orchard Hills, Park Hall will see increased traffic as a result, only compounded by the fact that housing on this particular space will result in creation of a bottleneck within the local area causing disruption not just to residents but schools, and businesses too.
No capacity for increase in pupils at local schools and increased traffic as there is no feasible options for walking to schools which is encouraged across all local authority schools.
Design Principles around more capacity for schools, and medical facilities are all hypothetical with no evidence in any of the proposals around how this will be achieved.
Proposed dwellings per hectare (dph) of 35 indicated is out of character with local area.

Landowners for significant portions of the land have NOT been consulted throughout this process, and do NOT support the proposed development. Based on all the above I believe this should be removed from the Black Country Plan.

Object

Representation ID: 15978

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mr and Mrs David and Judith Wheeler

Number of people: 2

We lodge our objections to the following sites:

Sutton Road/ Longwood lane

All of these green belt sites if built on will take away areas of significant natural beauty, have a detrimental impact on wildlife and our environment. There is no need to use these precious sites. There is an abundance of brownfield sites in Walsall as well as disused industrial sites and empty factories to cover all the requirements for future housing requirements.

Object

Representation ID: 16103

Received: 07/10/2021

Respondent: Angela Arnold

Why is the site WAH231 Sutton Road/Longwood Lane included in the plan when it is clearly unsuitable?
The current owners of 50% of this site, Friel and a Sutton Road resident were never consulted about the proposed development and do not support it!!!

The site is unsuitable because

Infrastructure:
Sutton Road unable to cope with the extra traffic
Any Longwood Lane access would cause increased traffic congestion, on an already overused road
Longwood Lane has no pedestrian/cycle access
Severe traffic congestion at the junction of Longwood Lane and Sutton Road
No capacity for increase in pupils at local schools
Already issues with Doctors and waiting times to get appointments etc, without many more residents
Proposed dwellings per hectare of 35 out of character with local area

Health and Wellbeing
Serious health risk to Sutton Road residents from increased traffic pollution and noise
Increased stress to Sutton Road residents with construction work and loss of Green Space

Environment
Serious loss of wildlife habitat (deer, foxes, birds) WAH231 is a site of local importance for nature conservation (SLINC) and should be protected.

Why was this site included in the plan when the landowners of 50% of it do not support its development.

I have lived on the Sutton Road for years and the traffic has increased significantly in that me. The road is busy at all times of the day but particularly at rush hour as it is one of the main routes into Walsall and to the M6/M5. More traffic would make the road a living hell to get off our drive and to travel into the town.

I STRONGLY OPPOSE THIS DEVELOPMENT!!

Object

Representation ID: 16105

Received: 01/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Christine Wright

Sutton Road is often heavily congested with traffic. I feel that if the houses proposed were built they will greatly add to this problem. I am also concerned about increased air pollution.

Comment

Representation ID: 16197

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: M W Rooney

Black Country Plan Development Objections
Freedom of Information Act 2000 request

Why is the DERsite WAH231, Sutton Road/Longwood Lane included in the plan when it is clearly unsuitable? The current owners of this site, Friel and a Sutton Road resident, were never consulted about the proposed development and do not support it!

The site is unsuitable because:
Infrastructure
Sutton Road unable to cope with increased traffic
Any Longwood Lane access would cause increased traffic congestion
Longwood Lane has no pedestrian/ cycle access
Severe traffic congestion at Longwood Lane/ Sutton Road junction
No capacity for increase in pupils at local schools.
Proposed dwellings per hectare (dph) of 35 out of character with local area

Health and wellbeing
Serious health risk to Sutton Road residents from increased traffic pollution and noise.
Increased stress to Sutton Road residents with construction work and loss of Green space

Environment
Serious loss of wildlife habitat (deer, foxes, birds). WAH231 is a Site of Local Importance for Nature Conservation (SLINC) and should be protected.

Why was this site included in the plan when it is clearly not suitable?
Who put forward the site for inclusion in the plan when the landowners of 50% of it do not support its development?

Comment

Representation ID: 16334

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Frazer Powell

WAH242 Calderfields West
WAH231 Land off Sutton Road, Longwood Lane

Moving onto the particular concerns in respect of the Calderfields West, Aldridge Road and Sutton Road/ Longwood Lane, Walsall sites, the green belt in both these areas provide materially significant areas of natural habitat for mammals, birds, insects and reptiles and highly valuable green space for recreation for local people. I walk regularly in these areas, particularly Walsall Arboretum and appreciate the benefits of having such a pleasant green area so close to home. I am sure that these areas of green belt taken together have had and I hope will continue to have significant benefit for both the natural environment and residents. It is difficult to over- estimate the benefits these areas provide in a Borough that has long suffered from having some of the most deprived wards in the UK. The benefits of these area are for all the people of Walsall and the surrounding area. These environmental and health and wellbeing benefits help to mitigate the already serious problems of traffic noise, pollution, over development and general noise and congestion in the area. Walsall in real terms needs more not less green belt.
The sites detailed above given their size and the intensity of development proposed would make an already significant problem materially worse, it would reduce the amenity of both existing and new residents and have long term adverse consequences for the Borough. I would hope action could be taken to enhance and improve the existing green belt provision, not destroy this crucial fragile asset, which has on-going long term benefits.
LUC consultants in their report of September 2019 ( copy attached ) ,please see comments at page 23, paragraph 49 in respect of L31 ( which covers both the Calderfields and Sutton Road, Longwood Lane sites ) recognise clearly the significant benefits of retaining the green belt and the material adverse impacts any development at the two sites would have. As stated previously, there are significant amenity considerations/ benefits to residents and the local and wider environment of Walsall in retaining and working to enhance the green belt. I think these benefits could also reasonably said to include health and wellbeing, these could be classed as a relevant planning consideration. I submit, that there is judicial precedent for this, please see the judgment of Pill LJ in West Midlands Probation Committee v (1) Secretary of State for the Environment (2) Walsall Metropolitan Borough Council.

Object

Representation ID: 16349

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Janet Moram

Site reference - WAH231 - Sutton road/ Longwood Lane. Strategic Allocation - WS.6
Comments below are made in reference to WAH231 and refer to areas in various sections of the document.

Environment.
As the site is a designated Site of Local Importance for Nature Conservation (SLINC) there is a serious loss of wildlife habitat which will arise as part of this proposed development. This needs to be protected.
Various inconsistencies between plan and local site assessment reports around various environmental factors all relating to the WAH231 site.
Serious health risk to Sutton Road/Orchard Hills residents from increased traffic pollution/noise.
Increased stress to Sutton Road residents with construction work and loss of green space.

Town planning, infrastructure, health and wellbeing.
Proposed site has no pedestrian and no cycle access. Also lack of any street lighting on Longwood Lane, and pavement.
Sutton Road/ Longwood Lane would be unable to cope with increased traffic congestion including access issues into Sutton Road with no proposed details of how this would be managed.
Neighbouring areas such as Orchard Hills, Park Hall will see increased traffic as a result, only compounded by the fact that housing on this particular space will result in creation of a bottleneck within the local area causing disruption not just to residents but schools, and businesses too.
No capacity for increase in pupils at local schools and increased traffic as there is no feasible options for walking to schools which is encouraged across all local authority schools.
Design principles around more capacity for schools, and medical facilities are all hypothetical with no evidence in any of the proposals around how this will be achieved.
Proposed dwellings per hectare (dph) of 35 indicated is out of character with local area.

Landowners for significant portions of the land have NOT been consulted throughout this process, and do NOT support the proposed development. Based on all the above I believe this should be removed from the Black Country Plan.

Object

Representation ID: 16379

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Jean Huskisson

Site reference - WAH231 - Sutton Road / Longwood Lane. Strategic Allocation - WS.6.
Comments below are made in reference to site WAH231 and refer to areas in various sections of the document.

Environment
As the site is a designated site of local importance for nature conservation (SLINC) there is a serious loss of wildlife habitat which will arise as part of this proposed development. This needs to be protected.
Various inconsistencies between plan and local site assessment reports around various environmental factors all relating to the WAH231 site.
Serious health risk to Sutton Road / Orchard Hills residents from increased traffic pollution/ noise.
Increased stress to Sutton Road residents with construction work and loss of green space.

Town planning, Infrastructure, health and well being
Proposed site has no pedestrian and no cycle access. Also lack of any street lighting on Longwood Lane, and pavement.
Sutton Road/ Longwood Lane would be unable to cope with increased traffic congestion including access issues into Sutton Road with no proposed details of how this would be managed.
Neighbouring areas such as Orchard Hills, Park Hall will see increased traffic as a result, only compounded by the fact that housing on this particular space will result in creation of a bottleneck within the local area causing disruption not just to residents but schools, and businesses too.
No capacity for increase in pupils at local schools and increased traffic as there is no feasible options for walking to schools which is encouraged across all local authority schools.
Design principles around more capacity for schools, and medical facilities are all hypothetical with no evidence in any of the proposals around how this will be achieved.
Proposed dwellings per hectare (dph) of 35 indicated is out of character with local area.

Landowners for significant portions of the land have NOT been consulted throughout this process, and do NOT support the proposed development. Based on all the above I believe this should be removed from the Black Country Plan.