Policy WSA8 – Land between Queslett Road, Doe Bank Lane and Aldridge Road, Pheasey

Object

Representation ID: 13598

Received: 10/09/2021

Respondent: Paul Dhanda

WAH234 GB1 Land between
Queslett Road, Doe Bank Lane and
Aldridge Road, Pheasey
Neighbourhood
Strategic Allocation Policy WSA8

I am expressing concerns about as well as loosing greenbelt there will be additional pressure put on schools doctors surgeries which are already oversubscribed. There will be the need to add additional schools and surgeries to cover the extra demand created which will mean extra funding to meet the needs. We can also clearly see the land acts as a floodplain when there is heavy rain.

Object

Representation ID: 13622

Received: 13/09/2021

Respondent: Miss Sukhwinder Tanda

Site Ref: WAH 234 (Columba Park - Aldridge Road) WAH 246 (Chester Road)

I wish to register my objection to the proposed development of 960 homes across the Aldridge Rd/Queslett Road East site. The development will destroy our precious green belt land. It will create traffic congestion in an already busy area. The increased traffic will create air pollution which can lead to health conditions such as asthma or exacerbate them further. It will put pressure on the services in the area such as GP and schools. It will destroy the wildlife that depends on the green fields. I think the council should look at other alternatives for housing.

Object

Representation ID: 13623

Received: 13/09/2021

Respondent: Kathryn Brown

Number of people: 2

WAH234 GB1 Land between
Queslett Road, Doe Bank Lane and
Aldridge Road, Pheasey
Neighbourhood
Strategic Allocation Policy WSA8

Object

Representation ID: 13635

Received: 16/09/2021

Respondent: Mrs Nikki Medlicott-Hulme

WAH234 GB1 Land between
Queslett Road, Doe Bank Lane and
Aldridge Road, Pheasey
Neighbourhood
Strategic Allocation Policy WSA8

I am writing to object the planned proposal as referenced above for several reasons.

1) Concerns regarding infrastructure, roads, pollution and congestion. We already live in a very built up area and are lucky enough at this point to have it offset by this beautiful piece of greenbelt. If this land were to be developed, there would be over subscription to local amenities such as schools and NHS services, as no extra services have been negotiated as part of the Columba Park proposal. The roads would become horrendous with this many houses being proposed and this would have significant impact on the residents already living in the area. Furthermore, this land is in very close proximity to several schools, the environmental impact of the extra pollution caused would cause harm to our children.

2) Ecology - There are a number of established trees and hedgerows on this site including oak and hawthorn. Causal observation has shown there are at least 11 red listed bird species on the proposed site. These include Skylarks, starlings, song thrush, house sparrow, linnet, yellowhammer, redwing, fieldfare, grey wagtail, lapwing, herring gull and ring Ousel. Also noted within 1/2 mile radius are Whinchat, spotted fly catcher, wood warbler, tree pipit, whitethroat, wheatear, Peregrine, kestrel, Willow Warbler, Nuthatch, Stock Dove, Sand Martin, Swallow, House Martin, Swift, Raven, Buzzards and many more. Bats have also been frequently spotted in the area . This brief list does not take into account plant, insects and other wild life such as foxes, hedgehogs and which are known to live around the proposed site. Without this site being preserved and left as greenbelt land, I fear we will endanger the existence of these species within the area.

3) As previously mentioned, we live in an already very build up area, saved by the greenbelt area and local park which adjoins this on Doe Bank Lane. I believe that this open green space is the lung of our community and necessity for the mental health of our community. As a parent, I love being able to take my children into what feels like countryside and open space on our door step. I believe it is a life line for most parents in the area and for the mental wellbeing of our children. To add all those houses over the road from a much used and well loved park would increase the noise and environmental pollution and have detrimental impact on how our children are able to use the park, their safety and ability to connect with nature.

4) Risk of flooding - I believe there is an underground overflow gravity water pipe which runs across this site. This comes off on the top of the Beacon and runs into Kingstanding. Therefore by tampering with this area, we run the risk of flooding.

Object

Representation ID: 13692

Received: 09/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Alfred Jones

WAH234 Columba Park Chester Road [& WSA8]
WAH246 Chester Road

This area is already gridlocked at times of the day the extra vehicles from 960 homes would increase pressure on the road system. When Aldridge Road was closed for a short time recently for the women's cycle race Chester Road was blocked. The roads are already full to increase capacity would increase pollution and affect mental health.
The contrast of 960 houses on green belt land would put more pressure on schools, doctors and other health services. Protect our green belt and find other brownfield sites more suitable.

Object

Representation ID: 13700

Received: 05/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Linda Capewell

I write objecting to the plan of building housing on green belt fields on and around the Pheasey Estate, primarily in the area of Doe Bank. This area has always been a haven for people who enjoy the boundaries of a cities but also have the beauty of fields and the Barr Beacon around us. Over the years this has been eroded by not only local government but also central government (we havent forgotten the St Margarets Hospital scandal where local people and local government were overuled by a Labour governement to build housing there!!!)
Over the past 18 months the fields around this estate have been a comfort to many as lockdown walks became the norm. Green fields and farms on your doorstep are good for mental health and for childrens education. Please do not spoil our area for future generations!!!

Object

Representation ID: 13712

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mr James Smith

The Black Country Plan includes some interesting comments such as 'in the face of new development how will the natural and historic environment be protected and improved' and 'how we will protect and enhance the historic and natural environment.'
Interesting given that the proposed 960 homes are on the green belt.
The draft plan seeks to deliver the majority of developments in the existing urban area making use of brownfield land. This intension seems hardly credible.
I have to add that the amount of traffic onto Queslett Road and Aldridge Road would be an absolute nightmare. I doubt if you will find many fans for this proposal and just to be clear politics has nothing to do with it. 96 not 960 might be acceptable.

Object

Representation ID: 13723

Received: 27/09/2021

Respondent: Mr John Carter

My first objection is in regard to the ratio of land to be developed at Streetly to that in Pelsall and the number of homes to be built at these sites:
Streetly 42 hectares with 960 homes
Pelsall 13 hectares with 580 homes
Surely the Pelsall site is less than a third the size of the Streetly site and should therefore have the equivalent number of around 290 homes and not double that figure i.e. the 580 allocated
I can only conclude that these new dwellings planned at the Pelsall site will be designed as more densely populated accommodation and advertised as waterfront properties which face onto the canal.
My second objection is that a new Yorks Bridge at Pelsall has been proposed for many years now as the current bridge is narrow, has blind approaches on both sides and was closed when a [Redacted] car driver struck the parapet wall recently, demolishing part of the bridge. I imagine that the majority of residents will welcome the installation of a canal crossing which is safe to use, conveniently sited for the new development and fit for purpose in the 21st century. However, unless a weight restriction is applied to the new bridge, HGV drivers will take advantage of the shortcut from the A5 to Walsall M5/M6 junctions avoiding Brownhills and Bloxwich thus increasing heavy goods traffic through Pelsall village. We have been given no assurances that any such restrictions will be implemented.
if 580 new homes are built here in Pelsall, what plans are in place to meet the educational needs for primary and junior age school children for example? The three existing schools would not be able to cope with an influx of over 1000 children potentially. In fact the existing schools have struggled to cater for those requiring places in recent years. Temporary, prefabricated wooden buildings have gradually been replaced by brick built extensions to Ryders Hayes School but this has not increased capacity significantly. The much older facility in Old Town lane has seen the replacement of the original roof but no new provision has been proposed for future expansion to my knowledge
The amenities at Saint Michael's school have been improved recently but the site does not allow further buildings to be accommodated to enable more pupils to be enrolled and educated at the establishment.
Finally I would add that new housing would be welcome in my view of a plan for long term development around Pelsall were communicated clearly enabling residents to engage in discussions to benefit everyone.
I look forward to being contacted about the Local Plan in due course

Object

Representation ID: 13725

Received: 04/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Valentine Byrne

Thanks to the highways dept closing intersections we now have regular motorcycle and car races along Queslett Rd unfortunately the camera vans operate between 1100 and 1500 who are they targetting at these times? Delivery drivers.
Due to the continuing development in Walsall and Aldridge the noise, traffic and pollution is unbearable, and funnels along Queslett Road East towards Birmingham. Is it really necessary to destroy every blade of grass between the Scott Arms and the Chester Road North? How many schools, health centres and policing numbers are going to be built - increased? These houses will be unaffordable for local families and are being built for developer and council profits and revenue

Object

Representation ID: 13742

Received: 28/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Lee Wagstaff

I want to object to the proposed housing on Pheasey Estate on Doe Bank RD

Me and my Family object because:
To build 960 houses would just increase air pollution from all the extra cars going past our house most houses have 2 cars ,so all that extra air pollution and traffic. The impact on the landscape and all the birds and wildlife it is going to affect. All the hedge rows that are going to be removed will be devrestating ,all the animals and insects
would be gone,lost forever.

In the pandemic we have found so much joy in our green belt and parkland area , not having to drive to see wildlife, this is NOT increasing our carbon footprint.

Why oh Why do you not use brown belt areas first before you use green belt.

The roads around bridle lane and doe bank lane will have to be widened to cope with extra traffic,you said it would not be disturbed ,but its going to have to , because of all the traffic we will be getting. how are these juntions going to cope with the extra influx of traffic,especially at dangerous juntions. Beacon rd/Bridle Way.

We havent got enough schools ,doctors ,hospitals to cope with the extra demand it will bring to our area, you cannot get to see a doctor now ,so what going to happen then.
Why has the doe bank lane developement had an allocation of 22% of the required total build in our
borough,this is an unfair proportion .

The goverment are very wrong to ask individual councils to meet housing quota,we have very limited green areas in walsall,soon we will not have any left. As soon as this land goes ,it wont be long before all the fields will be gone ,we chose to live on the pheasey because of all the green space to bring up a family, a countryside within walking distance, wildlife on our doorstep ,i hope you take my points into consideration.

Object

Representation ID: 13762

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mr George Stuart McEvoy

Number of people: 2

9. Turning now to the proposed building of 960 homes by Queslett Road and Aldridge Road. This would impact on the whole of Streetly and surrounding areas to a marked degree. It would be much more considerate to phase in stages any such building plan. The impact would be much more manageable and easier to assimilate by Great Barr, Pheasey and Streetly. It would also allow modifications to be made as the needs of the growing community is assessed.

Object

Representation ID: 13802

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Linda White

I want make clear my feelings on the planned building in Streetly in the black country plan reg. 18, to this i whole heartedly OBJECT. This once lovely area is already over populated, we struggle to get our children into local schools our doctors are overrun and at bursting point, never appointments without a long wait, the traffic here is way out of control and we DO NOT want to lose any more of our greenbelt land. The amount of houses planned in this area is proposterous.

Comment

Representation ID: 13832

Received: 30/09/2021

Respondent: Mrs Kathleen Allen

People have to live somewhere. I broadly support this plan. Queslett Rd East/Aldridge Rd with suitable traffic management!

Object

Representation ID: 13868

Received: 08/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Jane Corbett

With regard to the Regulation 18 consultation I am concerned enough to object as follows:
1) There has been a lack of adequate information provided to the residents of the areas concerned, and short time period to respond.
2) The area on Queslett Road East should be removed from the plan as it is adjacent to Barr Beacon which is currently protected for conservation and is currently giving pleasure to residents on all surrounding areas.
3) There would be a huge impact on local services, such as doctors, schools, general amenities & the traffic would cause jams and pollution in the area.
4) The natural landscape would be destroyed & any new greenspace provided would be manufactured & unnatural.
5) The natural life in the area would be devastated - birds, wild animals, flora and fauna, trees in direct contradiction to the world wide need to preserve nature.
6) more use can be made of 'brown' sites for new builds.

Comment

Representation ID: 13958

Received: 08/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Frances Fox

1. I do not find it useful to be told that an area is equivalent to x number of football pitches.
2. The areas I am most familiar with are the Sandhills, Queslett Road East and Calderfields sites
3. I think they are all suitable for extra housing, albeit much is farmland, and a balance has to be maintained between growing food and housing people
4. The difficulty here is that information is limited to the number of houses it is intended to build - what about shops, schools, welfare? - what sort of houses? 2 bed starter homes? 3 bed family homes? bungalows? flats to rent?. How can we comment when we do not know what the structures will look like. The areas do not need anymore 5 bed monstrosities as have been erected in the Aldridge Area of late - nor if it comes to that, any more retirement flats.

Object

Representation ID: 13969

Received: 26/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Matthew Draper

I wish to catalogue my objections to the above housing development plan for the proposed Walsall development situated on the site that sits between Queslett Road, Doe Bank Lane and Aldridge Road.
My objections to this include the following reasons:

1/ Detrimental impact on landscape and ecological habitats -a barn owl and bats seen in the area. Observation of bird life has found: 11 RED LISTED BIRD SPECIES on the proposed footprint: skylark, starling, song thrush, house sparrow, linnet, yellowhammer, redwing, fieldfare, grey wagtail, lapwing, herring gull. Including sparrow hawks seen in local residents gardens, images are on Save our Barr Beacon Green Space site. Barn Owl spotted in the area. Also noted in a half mile radius: Whinchat, spotted flycatcher, wood warbler, tree pipit (all red listed), whitethroat, wheatear, peregrine, kestrel, willow warbler, nuthatch, stock dove, sand martin, swallow, house martin, swift, raven, buzzard plus many more. Bats are also frequently spotted in the spot but roost origins are unknown. This brief list is not taking into account plants and insects.

2/ The proposal states an extra 900 houses are to be built on this land, resulting in unacceptable noise and disturbance during the build. This will also result in greater noise and pollution from this extra housing. Assuming that each household will also own at least 1 car, and possibly 2, 3 or 4, then this will result in an extra 900 to 3600 cars on the local roads leading to much greater congestion at peak travel times and a greater volume of vehicles using Aldridge and Queslett Road, leading to a much greater volume of exhaust fumes and air pollution. From 7am to 9am on school days, there are already queues on Aldridge Road from the Queslett Road roundabout stretching back to Bridle Lane. A great volume of cars will make this situation worse. The road passes Lindens Primary School, where there will be a detrimental impact of much greater exhaust fumes and air pollution on young children's lungs and physical health.

3/ There are no plans to improve the infrastructure of the area despite the increase in the population, number of school age children and number of vehicles. The roads are already heavily congested at peak travel times, so the extra cars will make the roads unbearable, affecting people's quality of life and commute to work and school. There are no plans to build new schools or expand existing schools, so where will the extra children go to school? There are no plans to build new shops, new GP surgeries, new post offices, new police stations, new fire stations, so this will lead to food shortages, greater waiting times at GP's surgeries or people not able to access medical services, crime will rise with no extra police and fire risks will increase, along with danger to life.

4/ This is a quiet area of peaceful tranquility. Many people have used this area for walking, unwinding and relaxation for many years and more so during the recent pandemic. It is imperative for well being and positive mental health that the greenbelt is preserved and maintained and for reasons of environmental factors that buildings are not erected on it.

5/ There will be a reduction in air quality and an increase in pollution during the build and subsequently.

6/ The government attaches great importance to Green Belts. The fundamental aim of Green Belt policy is to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open; the essential characteristics of Green Belts are their openness and their permanence.

7/ Green Belt serves 5 purposes:
(a) to check the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas;
(b) to prevent neighbouring towns merging into one another;
(c) to assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment;
(d) to preserve the setting and special character of historic towns; and
(e) to assist in urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land.

8/ Inappropriate development is, by definition, harmful to the Green Belt and should not be approved except in very special circumstances.

9/ The above referenced green strip is an emergency landing/flight path & therefore cannot be built on.

10/ There is an underground overflow gravity water pipe running parallel with Doe Bank Lane. This comes off the reservoir on top of the Beacon and runs into Kingstanding for when (as it has done in the past) Kingstanding runs dry.

11/ This land forms a green corridor between Barr Beacon, Sutton Park for wild life to move between, a safe passage to move and rest safely.

12/ There may be a detrimental effect on listed buildings, conservation areas and archaeology - this is a conservation area being greenbelt land and a place of natural beauty.

13/ Once it is gone it is gone for good. Not only will these houses be built but the land allocated to each house for garden areas, potentially in the future will also be awarded planning permission for extensions.

14/ It is likely will make future planning applications in the area and surrounding woodland more likely to be granted. Plus people will be removing their gardens for drive ways, an increased risk of flooding and lack of home to insects.

Object

Representation ID: 13989

Received: 26/09/2021

Respondent: Mrs Sarah Draper

WAH234 GB1 Land between
Queslett Road, Doe Bank Lane and
Aldridge Road, Pheasey
Neighbourhood
Strategic Allocation Policy WSA8

I wish to catalogue my objections to the above housing development plan for the proposed Walsall development situated on the site that sits between Queslett Road, Doe Bank Lane and Aldridge Road.
My objections to this include the following reasons:

1/ Detrimental impact on landscape and ecological habitats -a barn owl and bats seen in the area. Observation of bird life has found: 11 RED LISTED BIRD SPECIES on the proposed footprint: skylark, starling, song thrush, house sparrow, linnet, yellowhammer, redwing, fieldfare, grey wagtail, lapwing, herring gull. Including sparrow hawks seen in local residents gardens, images are on Save our Barr Beacon Green Space site. Barn Owl spotted in the area. Also noted in a half mile radius: Whinchat, spotted flycatcher, wood warbler, tree pipit (all red listed), whitethroat, wheatear, peregrine, kestrel, willow warbler, nuthatch, stock dove, sand martin, swallow, house martin, swift, raven, buzzard plus many more. Bats are also frequently spotted in the spot but roost origins are unknown. This brief list is not taking into account plants and insects.

2/ The proposal states an extra 900 houses are to be built on this land, resulting in unacceptable noise and disturbance during the build. This will also result in greater noise and pollution from this extra housing. Assuming that each household will also own at least 1 car, and possibly 2, 3 or 4, then this will result in an extra 900 to 3600 cars on the local roads leading to much greater congestion at peak travel times and a greater volume of vehicles using Aldridge and Queslett Road, leading to a much greater volume of exhaust fumes and air pollution. From 7am to 9am on school days, there are already queues on Aldridge Road from the Queslett Road roundabout stretching back to Bridle Lane. A great volume of cars will make this situation worse. The road passes Lindens Primary School, where there will be a detrimental impact of much greater exhaust fumes and air pollution on young children's lungs and physical health.

3/ There are no plans to improve the infrastructure of the area despite the increase in the population, number of school age children and number of vehicles. The roads are already heavily congested at peak travel times, so the extra cars will make the roads unbearable, affecting people's quality of life and commute to work and school. There are no plans to build new schools or expand existing schools, so where will the extra children go to school? There are no plans to build new shops, new GP surgeries, new post offices, new police stations, new fire stations, so this will lead to food shortages, greater waiting times at GP's surgeries or people not able to access medical services, crime will rise with no extra police and fire risks will increase, along with danger to life.

4/ This is a quiet area of peaceful tranquility. Many people have used this area for walking, unwinding and relaxation for many years and more so during the recent pandemic. It is imperative for well being and positive mental health that the greenbelt is preserved and maintained and for reasons of environmental factors that buildings are not erected on it.

5/ There will be a reduction in air quality and an increase in pollution during the build and subsequently.

6/ The government attaches great importance to Green Belts. The fundamental aim of Green Belt policy is to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open; the essential characteristics of Green Belts are their openness and their permanence.

7/ Green Belt serves 5 purposes:
(a) to check the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas;
(b) to prevent neighbouring towns merging into one another;
(c) to assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment;
(d) to preserve the setting and special character of historic towns; and
(e) to assist in urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land.

8/ Inappropriate development is, by definition, harmful to the Green Belt and should not be approved except in very special circumstances.

9/ The above referenced green strip is an emergency landing/flight path & therefore cannot be built on.

10/ There is an underground overflow gravity water pipe running parallel with Doe Bank Lane. This comes off the reservoir on top of the Beacon and runs into Kingstanding for when (as it has done in the past) Kingstanding runs dry.

11/ This land forms a green corridor between Barr Beacon, Sutton Park for wild life to move between, a safe passage to move and rest safely.

12/ There may be a detrimental effect on listed buildings, conservation areas and archaeology - this is a conservation area being greenbelt land and a place of natural beauty.

13/ Once it is gone it is gone for good. Not only will these houses be built but the land allocated to each house for garden areas, potentially in the future will also be awarded planning permission for extensions.

14/ It is likely will make future planning applications in the area and surrounding woodland more likely to be granted. Plus people will be removing their gardens for drive ways, an increased risk of flooding and lack of home to insects.

Object

Representation ID: 14025

Received: 17/09/2021

Respondent: Jake Lilly

To Whom it may concern

I am logging my objections to the above housing development plan for the proposed Walsall development situated on the site that sits between Queslett Road, Doe Bank Lane and Aldridge Road.

My objections to this include the following reasons;

1/ It contravenes the governments proposal to tackle climate change and the planting of trees. The area from my photographs show established trees, including oak and hawthorn, and established hedgerows, home to bird life, insects (vastly in decline). Both necessary for food and oxygen in the future

2/ Impact on landscape and ecological habitats-a [Redacted-sensitive information] seen in the area. Observation of bird life has found: 11 RED LISTED BIRD SPECIES on the proposed footprint: [Redacted-sensitive information] Including [Redacted-sensitive information] seen in local residents gardens, images are on Save our Barr Beacon Green Space site. [Redacted-sensitive information] spotted in the area. Also noted in a half mile radius: [Redacted-sensitive information] plus many more. [Redacted-sensitive information] are also frequently spotted in the spot but [Redacted-sensitive information] origins are unknown. This brief list is not taking into account plants and insects. It would be very interesting to read your ecology report. This was missing pages from previous report on the site. As images October 2018 on Dairy Farm planned build.

3/ Reasons to prevent a build include; Noise and disturbance- During the build and subsequently more people in a peaceful park location. Add to residents moving in, visitors, their cars, noise..Noise and pollution from this extra housing, if limited to the proposed 900 houses, for example most houses will have at least one, two up to four cars each that equates to 900, 1800, 3600 cars? Plus visitors to those people. Picture those cars adding to the rush hour congestion into the city?

4/ This is a quite area of peaceful tranquility. Many people have used this area for walking, unwinding and relaxation for many years and more so during the recent pandemic. Working in mental health, I know how vital this is for well being, and forms part of the governments own five part plan for well being. It is imperative for well being and positive mental health that the greenbelt is preserved and maintained and for reasons of environmental factors that buildings are not erected on it.

5/ Reasons to prevent a build include; Air quality and odours-during the build and subsequently.


6/ The government attaches great importance to Green Belts. The fundamental aim of Green Belt policy is to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open; the essential characteristics of Green Belts are their openness and their permanence.

7/ Green Belt serves 5 purposes:
(a) to check the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas;
(b) to prevent neighbouring towns merging into one another;
(c) to assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment;
(d) to preserve the setting and special character of historic towns; and
(e) to assist in urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land.
Proposals affecting the Green Belt

8/ Inappropriate development is, by definition, harmful to the Green Belt and should not be approved except in very special circumstances.

9/ ‘our’ green strip is an emergency landing/flight path & therefore can’t be built on. Correct me if I am wrong.
There is an underground overflow gravity water pipe running parallel with Doe Bank Lane. This comes off the reservoir on top of the Beacon and runs into Kingstanding for when (as it has done in the past) Kingstanding runs dry.

10/ Drain on local services and amenities; schools, shops, GP surgeries etc.

11/ This land forms a green corridor between Barr Beacon, Sutton Park for wild life to move between, a safe passage to move and rest safely.

12 The area as described on Wikipedia. "Described on Wikipedia
""The site is on green belt land and is of local importance for nature conservation, as defined by Walsall Borough Council, who have designated some 60 acres (25 ha) of it as a Local Nature Reserve."
How important Walsall Council? Important enough to build on every piece of land around it, destroying local nature reserve?"

13/ Reasons to prevent a build include; Effect on listed buildings, conservation areas and archaeology- this is a conservation area being greenbelt land and a place of natural beauty

14/ Once it is gone it is gone for good. Not only will these houses be built but the land allocated to each house for garden areas, potentially in the future will also be awarded planning permission for extensions. There will be 2/3 cars each to each house increasing air pollution, traffic congestion etc.

15/ It is likely will make future planning applications in the area and surrounding woodland more likely to be granted. Plus people will be removing their gardens for drive ways, an increased risk of flooding and lack of home to insects.


I think it is very sad, I have lived here most of my life, we need to preserve the countryside, particularly with global warming, planting more trees, as only this week in the media and the government saying they are committed to this. Once this site gets built on it opens the floodgate to continue building , every planning application be that little bit easier. We lost the woodlands at Netherhall, lost most of the land down Booths Farm, Foxhills and the Dairy Farm.. The scouts building on the Aldridge Road went up, I didn't even know that was happening.


Once these areas get built on, our greenbelt land will be gone forever. there never going to come a time when someone says, '" lets knock down all these houses and buildings and plant a forest, return to nature" is there?

When there are no insects there will be no food, when there are no trees there will be no oxygen to breathe.

Hello, I am contacting you in regards to my shock and dismay at hearing the news that plans are being considered to develop land around Reedswood park, Pouk Hill and opposite Jane Lane school.

I walk through these areas frequently and visit the land affected off Reedswood park leading to the canal daily and it is one of the nicest parts about living in the area. This is home to so much wildlife, just this morning I witnessed fox cubs playing and a couple of Hedgehogs slightly further along. The prospect of this underrated area soon being lost saddens me greatly. Whilst I appreciate the growing housing needs for the area I feel there are many suitable brownfield sites in the vicinity which are sitting vacant.

I am also concerned about the lack of public consultation and short time frame for objections to be submitted. I only found out of these plans by a chance encounter with a fellow dog walker this morning. These plans should have been published much better to local residents.

Thanks for taking the time to read. I would urge you to visit the proposed sites so you can appreciate the rare tranquility they offer in the midst of a bustling town.

Object

Representation ID: 14056

Received: 02/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Kathryn Keig

Walsall Council, Streetly, Queslett Rd East/Aldridge Road.

I am very concerned about the damaging environmental effects of building on this site. We currently experience regular flooding on the Queslett Rd roundabout. Without the trees, shrubs and grassland of the adjacent fields, there will be nothing to soak up the rain water which pours down from the beacon. This could become a real problem with the climate change issues which we face. This is one of the many reasons why it would be hugely detrimental to the environment.

I understand that we as a population need more housing, and i also agree that developing brownfield sites can be beneficial. However, I strongly believe that building on our precious greenbelt, although alleviating short term problems, will ultimately contribute to the ruin of our planet, making it a dangerous and eventually uninhabitable place. Building on our greenbelt is the thin end of the wedge and eventually, there will be no quality of life for anyone, let alone the "new builds".

Although I strongly disagree with the site being developed, i think that a much smaller development, surrounded by woodland and shrubland would go some way to limiting the damage which the current proposal would cause. A 'screen' of trees and shrubs would also help combat noise pollution, air pollution, and improve the environment in which we live.

Object

Representation ID: 14081

Received: 04/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Amanda Sharman

Planning Ref 21/1298 Site location Land at Queslett Road East, Doe Bank Lane & Aldridge Road, Streetly

I wish to register my objection to the above housing development plan.

1. Some of the land included in the plan is designated as a local nature reserve. This land forms a corridor between Barr Beacon and Sutton Park allowing wildlife passage to and from these areas for their safety and for them to rest. There are many species of birds on this land that are on the Red List as well as bats, insects and flora.

2. The noise and disturbance created by builders will have an adverse effect on the general population around the area and will also impact I their mental health. The area is prone to flooding and this will be exacerbated by removing field which assist with drainage.

3. The infrastructure in this are is already overloaded, a new housing development will add to this overload and will require additional facilities, such as Doctors, Dentists, schools, utilities etc., which have not been included in the plans.

4. The roads around this area are already congested particularly in rush hour, new housing will mean extra vehicles contributing to more congestion. Our air quality will also be at risk, particularly if trees and green land is removed and residents trade their front gardens for block paved drives.

5. We must encourage the use of derelict brown sites and other urban land which land owners are holding onto the cash in on the rise of land prices. We are always here on the TV about the amount of empty and derelict properties across the country, could these not be renovated and put to good use?

6. This affects not just those in the Walsall area but those on the boarder in Birmingham too!

The principles of Green Belt Land is to

Safeguard our country side and it's native wildlife and flora.
Check unrestricted sprawl of large built up areas and prevent neighbouring towns merging into each other

The consultation process is flawed, discriminatory and underhanded. Residents did not know about the plan until late in the consultation. Many people do not have access to the internet so are discriminated against. The councils are able to send out council tax notices, so why were letters not sent to hold holds informing them of the plans.

Once the Green Belt is gone, there is no turning back and its gone for good.

Object

Representation ID: 14105

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: 14154

Received: 08/10/2021

Respondent: Dr and Mrs Paul and Gail Wright

Number of people: 2

This Objection Is sent on behalf of Dr.Paul Wright and Mrs Gail Diane Wright




SAVE OUR GREEN BELT LAND / ALDRIDGE ROAD QUESLETTE ROAD, STREETLY / ALSO KNOWN AS COLUMBIA PARK DEVELOPMENT



Dear sir or Madam

We wish to advise you that we strongly object to the proposed BCP using Green Belt land in particular the land on the Aldridge Road and Quelsette Road here in Streetly.



The density of housing on this site is the highest on the BCP plan and is totally unacceptable for our community. The area will put extreme pressure on our already overwhelmed community infrastructure ,where are all the children going to go to school, how are we going to ensure everyone can get a doctor's appointment (impossible now)??. Dentists will be overwhelmed, Police with their limited resources will be stretched even more, and Council Services will be put under more pressure.

By using this land to build 960 homes will take way for ever or corridor of open space we have at present. In these times when the focus is on Climate change and global warning it would be an absolute tragedy for our generation and future generations to build so many homes on this site. It will remove for ever the trees, hedgerows, fields' grassland and habitation for so much wild life. All this totally goes against the message of Climate change the Government is setting out. We need to retain our Green belt land to have chance of building a better world so it survives for generations to come.

The homes would bring more air, light and noise pollution and emissions, 960 homes will equal at least 960 cars. This will lead to an increase in traffic on local roads that are already used by far too many vehicles now and are now unsuitable for a vast increase in traffic. If these homes were built major changes would have to be made on the surrounding network of roads to make them safe to either enter or exit the site for all these additional vehicles. Public Transport is at present inadequate for the area, if it was ever to be improved with more bus routed this would be another addition to our already congested roads and would add to the emissions.

Every effort and additional efforts must be made to identify and use Brown Field Sites, there are many many abandoned shops and units along our high streets .... convert these to affordable homes to breathe life back in to the High Streets before they are lost forever. I know the Plan has to give some more Employment but surely now as you look at the West Midlands there is so much unused and empty Industrial/Office Spaces so why are these not been looked at so they can be used. Off ice Blocks can be converted in to suitable homes
for all ages. By using Brown Field sites it is an opportunity to put back the area to housing stock and improve the surrounding environment so giving more back to improve the Climate not to mention how much better it would all look so appealing to a wide majority of home owners and bringing a better standard of environment and surrounding area.

Flooding is another issue here in Streetly, when we have heavy rain many of our roads become flooded as they cannot cope now, put another 960 homes in to the equation and we are going to be in serious trouble especially at the junction of the Aldridge Road and Queslette Road it is impassable when flooded until it is cleared. There would have to be some serious adaptation of the complete drainage system in the area.

With an already busy area for troff ic if this plan is past to use this Green belt site during construction what Guarantee's would we have as local residents to be able to go about our daily routines if the area is swamped with construction traffic? I suspect we would have no guarantees what so ever that our lives would not be disrupted for a very long time.

We, like other residents are concerned about our house values, who would want to buy in the midst of this large development taking place, I think we would certainly lose a lot of value to our homes during and after construction.

In your documents you state that you have to make the most efficient use of any land, I presume that means putting as many homes on one site as possible but then you read on and you say you will ensure a healthly living environment It goes on to say about enhancing nature conservation but you are destroying our nature if this plan goes ahead so it is all very contradictory is it not?

These are our reasons for been totally against the use of this Green Belt Land for these 960 homes here in Streetly, or for that matter any other Greenbelt Land for any other number of homes or businesses. This land is very precious and important to us all living and enjoying healthily lives. If you pass this plan the Greenbelt Land will be gone forever and no matter how many promises you make it will never be the same for those of us living here now and for future generations.

Yours sincerely

Object

Representation ID: 14186

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Jean Cooke

Additional Road Widening. Aldridge Road. Lower speed limit. Queslett Rd East New school, infant - senior. Green spaces and leisure facilties. A great deal of extra public transport. A lot more retail facilities. More medical facilities.

Object

Representation ID: 14190

Received: 09/10/2021

Respondent: Kiranjeet Plaha

Queslett Road East / Aldridge Road - Streetly
Spoiling of a green belt
Extra congestion in local area
Burden on infrastructure - impact on shops, food, schools, medical - GPs / Dentists Surgery, jobs in local area, public transport

Object

Representation ID: 14226

Received: 08/10/2021

Respondent: Adrian Johnson

Concerned the proposals will designate green space as development land, in particular I am against the Queslett Road East, Aldridge Road and Doe Bank Lane proposal. This will have a serious negative impact on ecology and habitats that exist within these areas. I am also concerned about the increase in Air Quality that will no doubt be as a result of increased development, especially for those children attending Lindens primary school.

Once the greenbelt is lost we will not be able to bring it back.

Object

Representation ID: 14246

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Lee Swann

I believe the local infrastructure in the Streetly Area cannot support any additional houses. The green areas around Streetly are beautiful and provide superb habitats for animals, insects, birds etc including bats. It also provides a welcome "nature break" between Streetly, Aldridge, Four Oaks and Pheasey.

I also believe there are adequate Brown field sites in the area that could and should be an alternative to building on green belt areas or farming fields & meadows. The local amenities are already at capacity and the local roads are busy at all hours (also, why did I only receive this today !!)
Green Belt should be the last resort, not the first option !! WAH234

Object

Representation ID: 14271

Received: 23/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Keith Clapham

WAH234 GB1 Land between Queslett Road, Doe Bank Lane and Aldridge Road, Pheasey Neighbourhood Strategic Allocation Policy WSA8

1. The open fields on this application act as a flood plain for the surrounding area, due to global warming and the change in weather conditions, this has become more noticeable, the lower fields towards the Queslett Rd are becoming flooded when we have heavy rain. Also the Aldridge Road from the Hundred Acre Road down to Queslett Rd becomes a river as the existing Storm Water/Sewerage System is unable to cope. This will become a lot worse if the proposed development takes place.
2. The Local GP Services/Schools/Fire and Ambulance services will be unable to cope unless a major investment takes place.
3.The Aldridge Rd becomes Grid Locked several times a day due to the current traffic load, this will become a serious situation if the Development takes place without major road improvement for the area.
4.The Development will destroy an area of natural beauty/wildlife also degrade local environment for the existing residents.
5. As all our elected officials MP's & Councillors are against this development, also it would appear the majority of the local residents. Would be far more sensible to develop the Brown Sites that the Black Country has available and not destroy an area of Green Belt enjoyed by many and future generations

Object

Representation ID: 14283

Received: 08/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Gary Walter

We object to this proposal on the grounds that 960 dwellings would create 2000 cars approx, with Doebank Lane and Aldridge Rd Streetly already suffering a excessive traffic, as this will cause a gridlock on the roads towards B'ham,
As regard building on Green Belt the purpose of Green Belt are to support urban regeneration of the priority areas controlling the growth of built up area, to prevent neighbouring settlements from merging, and to help preserve their special character.

Object

Representation ID: 14291

Received: 05/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Jeanette Evans

Firstly, why, when consultation began on 16 August and closing date for feedback is 11 October, did we not receive this document until 30 September??? - Suspicious

Queslett Rd E/Aldridge Rd
Strong objection
In light of climate change, it is longstanding ecological and bio-diverse area, sustaining immense amount of wildlife and plant life.
Practicalities - unsustainable pressure on schools, doctors and all other heath services and amenities plus transport service and infrastructure not able to take increase traffic also police pressure and availability insufficient.

Object

Representation ID: 14315

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Andrew Jones

1. The government attaches great importance to Green Belts. The fundamental aim of Green Belt policy is to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open, the essential characteristics of Green Belts are their openness and their permanence:
(a) to check the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas.
(b) to prevent neighbouring towns merging into one another.
(c) to assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment.
(d) to preserve the setting and special character of historic towns; and
(e) to assist in urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land.
The plan contravenes all the above.
This land forms a green corridor between Barr Beacon, Sutton Park for wild life to move between, a create habitats, I believe this site is also listed as conservation area which only adds to all of the above. If this site is removed from the Greenbelt boundary the fear is all future planning applications will be that little bit easier, if this site is removed, we will never get back the peaceful and tranquil land so important to the local residents, the wildlife and also the environment.
Inappropriate development is, by definition, harmful to the Green Belt and should not be approved except in very special circumstances.
Is this proposal deemed Very special circumstances?
2. The local transport infrastructure is already at breaking point, with too many cars on the road adding to pollution and noise, if the proposed 960 houses all have an average of 2 x cars per household, this will be adding a minimum of 1920 cars to the already heavily polluted and over ran area. Queslett Road has a history of speeding motorist and subsequently a high accident rate, adding to this known problem would be inappropriate and irresponsible action by Walsall Council and the Black Country Plan, with no consideration for highway safety and Traffic generation.
3. The Local Education facilities in the area are already heavily oversubscribed. It was recently reported that The Streetly Academy would on average receive 1200 applications for 243 available places. Lindens primary School is also heavily oversubscribed and is a known feeder school for Streetly Academy. Barr Beacon Secondary School is also over subscribed with an expected intake of only 252 pupils each year. Working on an average of only, 0.5 children per household a new estate of 960 houses would potentially put an extra 480 pupils in the middle of 2 oversubscribed and underfunded school’s, again, this would be inappropriate and irresponsible action by Walsall Council and the Black Country Plan.