Policy DSA1 Land South of Holbeach Lane /Wolverhampton Road, Kingswinford

Object

Representation ID: 22607

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Michelle Donald

I've been a resident of Kingswinford for over 35 years, it has always been a lovely place to live, with the countryside a short walk away. Access to the countryside over the last 12 months has been vital for my mental health with the pandemic taking its toll.
I am objecting to the proposal to build on green belt land ie: The Triangle and Holbeache because of the loss of habitat for many insects and animals and the biodiversity they bring to these areas. I belife that Dudley is on target to build the amount of homes the government requests, so feel that these two sites should not be put forward because once the greenbelt has gone its gone for ever. This land is used for growing crops which is vital for us because of the population growth across the world, furthermore we are trying to reduce population across the world.
Furthermore the infrastructure around both sites is not fit for purpose at the moment let alone for another 1000 homes+. The roads around this area are not designed for extra traffic. There are many pinch points along these roads that cause problems for residents at present, long cues not just at rush hour and the extra pollution caused. In addition to the above the local Doctors surgeries are all over subscribed making it difficult for residents at the moment to make appointments. The local schools are over subscribed, child not getting first choice, The government has said it is a parents right to choose a school, if this proposal goes a head there will be no choice for parents around education and schools.
The local Hospital (Russells Hall) is doing a brilliant job, but is already straining at the seems, if these proposals go ahead then I fear that this will put even more strain and burden on the NHS which is already under unbelievable pressure to treat residents at present.
One last point I do not feel it is appropriate for dudley to allow buildings for other areas ie. Sandwell and Wolverhampton, why should we give up our Green Spaces for other local Authorities
I hope that Dudley MBC will listen to its residents! We know there needs to be a plan for housing but I feel we need to exhaust our BROWN FIELD SITES before taking Green Belt, just because it is more lucrative to builders, because they can increase profits

Object

Representation ID: 22623

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Miss Mollie Haden

DUH 208 - Holbeache
DUH 211 - Triangle
DUH 218 - Guys Lane
DUH 031 - Straits Majors
DUH 210 - Viewfield Crescent

Environment - Destruction of habitats/hedgerows, trees - increased flooding
Road/Highways - Significant increase in highways traffic - accidents increase
- lack of infrastructure to support developments
- lose of village identity
- Additional houses will not be affordable
- Green space/belt should only be taken in exceptional circumstances - this is not exceptional circumstances as available brownfield sites

Object

Representation ID: 23202

Received: 23/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Colin Hopes

We refer to the flyer leaflet Wall Heath as we're campaigning to protect our surrounding green belt.
This includes the Black Country Plan which proposes to build 863 high value expensive houses on green belt land in our area:
- Triangle (Swindon Road) - 533 houses
- South of Holbeache Lane - 350 houses
Based on the information we deeply oppose this development under the but not least the following:
1. Effect on population. Based on average of 2-4 people per household for the development would increase by Triangle 1279 people and Holbeache 792 people.
2. Effect on local services - NHS. Average waiting times at Russells Hall Emergency Department at present are four hours and in some cases over. Also there are not enough local doctors (namely Moss Grove and Summerhill Surgery) and dentists in the local area.
3. Effect on local services - roads. The A449 traffic surveys already show high volumes of vehicles causing high CO2 emissions and poor air quality, also the risk of increased accidents.
4. Effect on local services - schools. At present Ofstead (2019) numbers show there to be Summerhill School capacity 1030, actual 1034 leaving 16 places, Kingswinford School capacity 899, actual 908 leaving minus 9 spaces.
5. Strain on local services - amenities. Already there is a lack of parks, no youth centres and no local sports centres.
6. Loss of green belt. Would impact on local wildlife and the environment. All brownfield sites must be used first before the green belt.
Thus we believe local opinion is to oppose this development when houses will be expensive, which will not help to achieve affordable housing targets. Thereby causing more problems for local paying residents.

Object

Representation ID: 23298

Received: 25/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Darren Potter

DUH208 - Holbeache

Objections against building on our green spaces:
- noise overcrowding in area.
- loss of places for children to play.
- loss of dog walking places.
- if more houses are built in the area there will be more cars on the road.
- threat of wildlife.
- the GPs and hospitals will be stretched to capacity.
- pressure on schools.
- also lack of parking.
- increase of accident risk.
We need to preserve green spaces for the future.

Object

Representation ID: 23405

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: West Midlands CPRE

Agent: Gerald Kells

DUH 208 Dudley Kingswinford
This site is agricultural land beyond the north of the east- wards expansion of Wall Heath. The area immediately to the north is designated not only as Green Belt but as high historic landscape value. Development of this area of land would affect the setting of the Grade II listed Holbeche House (clearly an issue in relation to Policy ENV5). This property is an important historic site as the house where some of the 1605 Gunpowder Plot conspirators were arrested. While there is a bus service, the site would generate significant extra traffic on the A449 which would be used as its main access. The A449 was formerly a trunk road and continues to be a Primary Route (green signs), the main road between Worcester and Wolverhampton. It would be harmful to the purpose of the A449 as a Primary Route to develop new housing adjacent to it, slowing down existing traffic, especially at peak hours, and causing road safety risks.
Green Belt assessment in Land Use Consultants’ 2019 Green Belt Study - Moderate-High

Object

Representation ID: 23466

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: N M Owen

With this so called plan being put forward, have the following points been considered:-
The general infrastructure of the area, education, roads, hospitals, G.P. Surgeries, dentists etc. which are already over used and are at breaking point! The impact of the wildlife which is constantly under threat

Object

Representation ID: 23471

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Neil Page

Kingswinford and Wall Heath have already seen extensive housing developments in recent years with no additional schools, doctors, shops or improvements to infrastructure. The area is continually congested with traffic: There has been no new employer in recent years to attract more people and jobs, therefore requiring a demand for housing.
Commuting is very difficult. There are many brown field sites to redevelop before spoiling greenbelt. We are only moving the housing issue further out to create more super villages with no improvements

Object

Representation ID: 23481

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Neil Steventon

Effect on Local Roads
Local Infrastructure is already congested. The A449 is a very busy, noisy road and access via the Wall Heath roundabout area an increasingly dangerous manoeuvre for both vehicles and pedestrians. The sloping gradients tempt 'a game of chicken' as thundering cars and lorries descend into the narrow, inadequate 2 into 3 lanes design.
Hence suggestions of tinkering with an extra spur onto W'ton Rd, or even re-developing the muddy track from Holbeache towards Oak Lane are not financially viable. the peace and quiet of the elderly residents of Holbeache house is under attack from all sides.

Object

Representation ID: 23482

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: N R Withers

Only when all brown field sites are exhausted will green field sites are investigated
Medical Facilities are stretched now unless more facilities are produced it is a no go

Object

Representation ID: 23495

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Nicholas Warren

Traffic
We live on Wolverhampton Road and already suffer with traffic congestion. The local roads will not cope with additional traffic, there is already daily traffic backing up down Wolverhampton Road and A449 up to Holbeache island.
This traffic build up will then affect the centre of Wall Heath at the double island which again is congested most of the time.
Wall Heath will be brought to a stand still.

Local Schools - Primary & Secondary already over subscribed
Green Belt - Once lost never regained, this will affect generations to come

Will the massive increase in road traffic and the loss of greenbelt the local air pollution levels will increase enormously affecting health at the local population, with long terms effects on our children

Object

Representation ID: 23497

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Heidi Warren

Traffic
We live on Wolverhampton Road and already suffer with traffic congestion. The local roads will not cope with additional traffic, there is already daily traffic backing up down Wolverhampton Road and A449 up to Holbeache island.
This traffic build up will then affect the centre of Wall Heath at the double island which again is congested most of the time.
Wall Heath will be brought to a stand still.

Local Schools - Primary & Secondary already over subscribed
Green Belt - Once lost never regained, this will affect generations to come

Will the massive increase in road traffic and the loss of greenbelt the local air pollution levels will increase enormously affecting health at the local population, with long terms effects on our children

Object

Representation ID: 23499

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Nicholas Haden

I strongly object to the planning proposals ref above, why do new housing estate need to be built on green land, I cannot believe that all the brownfield sites have already been developed.
Green belt land and in this case arable land is good for your health and wellbeing, something the government are promoting at present.
The infrastructure is already at breaking point, there is congestion and pollution this will only get worse, the road is also dangerous hence the no right turn off the 449 onto Beachcroft Rd and only turn left into the A449 when leaving Beachcroft Rd. These road restrictions would not be in place if the road was not dangerous or busy.
The schools are already and the doctors are full. the hospital s are struggling to meet government standards of being seen within 4 hours where are these 800+ families going to go?
These developments need top be on brownfield sites or town centres which would regenerate that particular area, empty shops turned in to homes would be idea, these would probably be the social housing homes because the 800+ homes would not include any social housing homes because the contractors would not make enough profit.
PS. Finally Gavin Williamson MP has recently been invited in the press endorsing what I have stated above, the green belt should be saved and new development should be built on wastelands and Brownfield sites express ad star 9/10/20

Object

Representation ID: 23606

Received: 03/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Adam Cockerton

These comments apply to Black Country site Assessment Report - Dudley Appendix A, Page 79. The Triangle SA-0025-DUD (DUH 211) and Holbeache DUH 208.

It is far better to use old factory sites (Brownfield) and re-develop inner cities to revive town centres. Developing green belt means the loss of access to countryside. The enormous increase in vehicles will mean increased pollution with obvious road safety consequences. The area struggles to contain the volume of traffic already running through it and there are insufficient doctors surgeries, schools, shops and emergency services within Dudley to serve the area. The proposal to build 533 new houses on the triangle alone would increase the local population by 1279 (Office of National Statistics occupation rates are 2.4 people per household. Local Health services are already over-subscribed and unsustainable. Providing more 'high value' housing does not solve the problem of a lack of affordable or social housing, which would also need a more sustainable infrastructure of health facilities, education, mass transit and employment centres.
We stand to lose ancient trees, natural habitats and biodiversity. There will be a loss of wildlife and an impact on the fields and meadows. An increased flood risk affecting drainage of the area and ground water. The housing proposals do not meet affordable housing targets with expensive housing within areas of green belt.
The National Planning Policy Framework states that 'where significant development of agricultural land is demonstrated to be necessary, areas of poorer quality should be preferred to those of higher quality and identifies that:
Sites of biodiversity should be protected and any impacts minimised (para 170);
Land with the least environmental or amenity value should be considered for development and habitat networks and green infrastructure should be maintained and enhanced (para 171);
Protect and enhance biodiversity and geodiversity and safeguard local wildlife-rich habitats and priority habitats and species, and ecological networks (para 174);
Inappropriate development is, by definition, harmful to the Green Belt and should not be approved except in very special circumstances (para 147).

Object

Representation ID: 23607

Received: 03/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Rebecca Cockerton

These comments apply to Black Country site Assessment Report - Dudley Appendix A, Page 79. The Triangle SA-0025-DUD (DUH 211) and Holbeache DUH 208. It is far better to use old factory sites (Brownfield) and re-develop inner cities to revive town centres. Developing green belt means the loss of access to countryside. The enormous increase in vehicles will mean increased pollution with obvious road safety consequences. The area struggles to contain the volume of traffic already running through it and there are insufficient doctors surgeries, schools, shops and emergency services within Dudley to serve the area. The proposal to build 533 new houses on the triangle alone would increase the local population by 1279 (Office of National Statistics occupation rates are 2.4 people per household. Local Health services are already over-subscribed and unsustainable. Providing more 'high value' housing does not solve the problem of a lack of affordable or social housing, which would also need a more sustainable infrastructure of health facilities, education, mass transit and employment centres.
We stand to lose ancient trees, natural habitats and biodiversity. There will be a loss of wildlife and an impact on the fields and meadows. An increased flood risk affecting drainage of the area and ground water. The housing proposals do not meet affordable housing targets with expensive housing within areas of green belt.
The National Planning Policy Framework states that 'where significant development of agricultural land is demonstrated to be necessary, areas of poorer quality should be preferred to those of higher quality and identifies that:
Sites of biodiversity should be protected and any impacts minimised (para 170);
Land with the least environmental or amenity value should be considered for development and habitat networks and green infrastructure should be maintained and enhanced (para 171);
Protect and enhance biodiversity and geodiversity and safeguard local wildlife-rich habitats and priority habitats and species, and ecological networks (para 174);
Inappropriate development is, by definition, harmful to the Green Belt and should not be approved except in very special circumstances (para 147

Comment

Representation ID: 43813

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Crestwood Park Residents Action Group

Green Belt Sites -- The Triangle (DUH211) and Holbeache (DUH208)

19. I have signed the bulk objection for these two sites, but wish to make an additional point.

20. Brownfield sites that have been deemed as unviable, in the Key Sites Viability document, have the potential to deliver 2,615 houses. This is roughly three times the number of houses proposed to be built on the Triangle and Holbeache. This does not demonstrate the
exceptional circumstances required to release land from green belt for development.

Object

Representation ID: 43840

Received: 06/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Oneeb Ul-Haq

This will bring disorder, nuisance, litter, noise to our local environment. It will also increase traffic on Wolverhampton Road.

Object

Representation ID: 43898

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Nicholas Johnson

DUH 208 P371 Holbeache
DUH 211 P371 Triangle
Dudley Appendix A, Page 79, The Triangle, SA-0025-DUD

This is an important & strategic tract of Green Belt preventing urban sprawl along the western edge of the Black County. If the proposed A449 Kidderminster Road forms the amended Green Belt boundary then all the Greenfield sites encompassed by that on the boundary of currently vulnerable from south Staffs Local Plan would be at risk from development as a precedent would be set for a new boundary. It is useful Agricultural land graded 3. Increase in traffic resulting in road safety issues for children walking to nearby schools. Poor air quality. Road traffic congestion in the area is already high. A449 & A419 gridlocked in a morning + Stallings Lane to add to the mix. Traffic on journey home just the same. Traffic flowing up back from Stourbridge too is bumper to bumper. Same on outward journey. The double islands in Wall Heath village creates a backlog of traffic & poorly designed causing many hazards to local school children. Flooding is another issue. Drainage of the area and ground water inadequate. Flooded island after rainstorm causing traffic jams of safety issues for children walking to Summerhill School!
HIGHWAYS would need to do a new road infrastructure around the triangle as already the roads can't cope with the high volume of traffic travelling along Swindon Road. Kewford Eagles Sunday Football already has an overflow of vehicles parked along Swindon Road causing traffic hazards. More houses more issues!!

Object

Representation ID: 45025

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Nichola Piggott-Turner

Ward: Kingswinford North & Wallheath
Site References:- DUH208 & DUH 211
Location of site: Land south of Holbeache Lane & Land at Swindon Road.
Central Government and Local Government manifesto's stated brown field sites first - protect our green belt areas - so why are we even fighting suggestions of potential of houses on these two green belt areas. We do not have the infrastructure to support more people, ie roads are already overused in every direction, Wall Heath is a bottle neck so more land will be needed for a bypass.
We simply don't have doctors, dentists of hospitals to absorb 515 + 300 houses, so potentially 4 people per household = 3,200 people additional to an already saturated system.
Following your manifesto promise & go with a brownfield site

Object

Representation ID: 45033

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Nigel Kirc

Holbeache DUH 208
Draft BCP
The Triangle DUH211 Page 371
DSA2 Pages 424 - 428

Object

Representation ID: 45354

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Nigel Wellings

1) SA-0050-DUD / BCP REF DUH 216 - Bryce Road (Green Space)
2) SA-0199-DUD / BCP REF DUH 222 - Severn Drive (Green Space)
3) SA-0025-DUD / BCP REF DUH 211 - Summerhill Triangle (Green Space)
4) SA-0017-DUD / BCP REF DUH 208 - Holbeache (Green Belt)
5) SA-0042-DUD / BCP REF DUH 213 - Lapwood Avenue (Green Space)
6) SA-0198-DUD / BCP REF DUH 221 - Standhills(Green Space)
7) BCP REF DUH 218 - Guys Lane
8) BCP REF 203 - Ketley Quarry (Policy DSA3)

1) SA-0050-DUD / BCP REF DUH 216 -
Absolutely fantastic ground for locals/youngsters playing sports - dog walking. Also I recall watching/seeing/observing the HAWKSHEAD MOTH catapillar along the adjacent disused "Round Oak" steelworks railway line cira 1978 - 1982 - Great Place to explore/+ History of old disused canal - please let it be. I grew up around these places :-(
2) Unsure of this - but object
3) Not to be touched - As the "Poppy Fields" are to remember! Very useful cut through for school children.
4) Perfect - GreenBelt - I'm sure Sandiacre (Richard & Anne) disapprove (my cousins)
5) Nature Reserve! (The Kracker?) High acres - Bach Pool N.R.?)
6) Football Sports Fields - Once again - which should be available for use/Local Community
7) As per #?
8) Ketley Quarry - Marc Hole - very dangerous - 50 + years but great for a green space
I'm 51 years old, and lived in Kingswinford & Pensnett all my life. We need areas to walk/play socialise. Please don't take the ("our spaces and heritage") away

Please considere the few spaces which are remaining around Pensnett, BRockmore, Wordsley & Kingswinford. The sub-structure has now, nothings...schools, Doctors, (Aw Surgeries)…..nothing to offer. 26-09-21 - Not to mention the Road traffic!!!!
I could go on...

Object

Representation ID: 45366

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs N Rose

Comments against building at the Triangle and Holbeach

1. Further encroachment on our green spaces. Loss of views, walking areas and hedgerows for our wildlife within Lodge Land the triangle.
2. Possibility of Chaterfields becoming 'less desirable' due to views. Will we have council tax cuts?
3. Local schools oversubscribed now so are more schools in the pipeline?
4. Drs Surgeries can't cope. Drs have closed leading to the remaining to pick up the short fall. Some patients are being sent to Kinver NOW!!
5. Roads are grid locked. currently so further traffic will only exacerbate problems.
6. DON'T USE OUR GREENSPACES. ONCE THEY'RE GONE THEY DISAPPEAR FOR GOOD!
'USE THE BROWN SITES'

Object

Representation ID: 45394

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Oliver Harris

I object to the Greenbelt being used for housing. I think that Brownbelt should be used first. Greenbelt is good for my mental health and the outdoors should be protected

Object

Representation ID: 45407

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Owen Haywood

I am writing today to object to the construction of new houses on the sites known as Holbeache and to the Triangle. As a commuter town, Kingswinford itself is already under great strain from heavy traffic - the construction of these houses will exacerbate this problem and add more cars to the roads which are already congested. Further, this increased traffic in the roads will drive down our air quality and decrease the overall quality of life for both current and new residents. Green Belt land exists, in principle, to protect wildlife and prevent urban sprawl; the construction of housesin these areas would damage some of the UK's dwindling wildlife, and is indicative of poor urban planning. As Kingswinford expands, its already struggling public services (Schools, doctors practices) will buckle under the weight of the new demands brought about through this development, all whilst the town's residents are further divorced from the local countryside - one of the towns most appealing factors.

Object

Representation ID: 45464

Received: 04/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Stanley Pickett

SA - 0050 - DUD / BCP Ref DUH 216 - Bruce Road (Green Space)
SA - 0199 - DUD / BCP Ref DUH 222 - Severn Drive (Green Space)
SA - 0025 - DUD / BCP Ref DUH 211 - Summer Hill Triangle (Green Space)
SA - 0017 - DUD / BCP Ref DUH 208 - Holbeache (Green Space)
SA - 0198 - DUD / BCP Ref DUH 221 - Stanhills (Green Space)
BCP Ref DUH 218 - Guys Lane
BCP Ref DUH 203 - Ketley Quarry (Policy DSAS)

Wildlife will be negatively affected by loss of green belt and spaces. Too many houses will cause problems for emergency services, the traffic congestion would cause vast problems for Russels Hall hospital and local residents. People will lose valuable places to walk and exercise dogs and children have little enough safe places to play already.

Object

Representation ID: 45838

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Ronald Griffin

Holbeache Site [by Charterfields]
Dudley MBC - Black Country Plan
Objections: Building on a greenfield site instead of developing derelict areas, factories, waste land, redundant premises etc. When green belt is lost it never comes back.
Increase in vehicles, affecting air quality, parking, traffic congestion, accidents.
Pressure on schools, doctors, surgeries, dentists and hospitals.

Object

Representation ID: 45878

Received: 22/03/2022

Respondent: Mr Richard Dando

HOLBEACHE
BCP Site Ref DUH208 page 371
DSA1 pages 419-423

These relate to just some of the issues:
Road infrastructure - roads into and around Wall Heath and Kingswinford are already heavily congested. They cannot support an increase in traffic caused by hundreds of new homes being built at Holbeache, without compromising more Green Belt.
Road safety will be seriously impacted by new housing developments, with increased risk to elderly, infirm, schoolchildren attempting to cross roads.
Increased congestion on public transport and poorer air quality. Services are already affected, particularly at peak times. Particle pollution caused by tyres will become even worse, impacting on residents who are elderly, the young and those with chronic illnesses such as [redacted] severe asthma. The A491 feeds into Wordsley High Street where unsafe air quality has been identified already, "Nitrogen Dioxide" exceeds the "national air quality objective of 40µg/m3."
All brownfield areas and disused buildings across the whole of England should be identified to meet the national housing need. Dudley, a highly concentrated urban area should not have to release the vitally important Green Belt Land. It is important for mental and physical health, as well as the importance for wildlife. The hedgerow around Holbeache is part of a SLINC. Holbeache is very good - Graded - Agricultural Land. it reduces the need to import food into Birmingham.
Flood risk due to land gradient - it will impact on the drainage of the area. [redacted- sensitive information]

Object

Representation ID: 45908

Received: 10/10/2021

Respondent: Ms Pamela Haden

Holbeache DUH 208
Triangle DUH 211

MY PARTICULAR CONCERN IS THE LOSS OF GREEN BELT SO TO COMBINE
DEVELOPMENTS WITH GOOD CONSERVATION I SUGGEST THE FOLLOWING:-
1. GIVE INCENTIVES TO DEVELOPERS TO ENCOURAGE THEM TO USE BROWN SITES
2. ENSURE THAT DEVELOPERS CONSULT WITH CONSERVATIONISTS AND WILDLIFE
EXPERTS AND COMPLY WITH THEIR SUGGESTIONS
3. INSIST THAT AN AREA OF EACH SITE IS GIVEN OVER TO WILDLIFE AND SUITABLE
HABITATS
4. EVERY EFFORT SHOULD BE MADE TO WORK AROUND EXISTING TREES
5. EVERY SITE COULD AND SHOULD CONTRIBUTE TOWARDS GOOD CONSERVATION AS
PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT BY PROVIDING:-
GRASSED AREAS TO AID DRAINAGE
WILDFLOWER AREAS TO PROVIDE HABITATS FOR INSECTS
BIRD BOXES; BAT BOXES; INSECT/BEE HOTELS
AREAS OF HABITAT THAT PROVIDE EASY ACCESS FOR HEDEHOGS, FOXES,

6. WHEN ADDING LANDSCAPING TO A SITE MAKE IT WILDLIFE FRIENDLY - E.G. USE NATIVE
HEDGES, USE TREES AND SHRUBS THAT PROVIDE FOOD FOR WILDLIFE
I FEEL THAT IF WE HAVE TO ENCROUCH ON GREEN BELT IT COULD AT LEAST BE DONE
SUSTAINABLY AND SYMPATHETICALLY - WE ALL HAVE A DUTY OF CARE FOR OUR
ENVIRONMENT AND A RESPONSIBILITY TO MAINTAIN IT'S NATURAL BALANCE.
THANK YOU.

Object

Representation ID: 45925

Received: 03/10/2021

Respondent: Miss Rebecca Stafford

I object to the following developments: Land south of Holbeache Lane/Wolverhampton Road Kingswinford DUH 208
Land at Swindon Road Wall Heath ‘The Triangle’ DUH 211
I feel the plan should not include any greenbelt land as there is only 14% in the borough. Once built on it is lost forever.
I believe there is a disproportionate amount proposed for Kingswinford, that would put additional strain and pressure on local services and exacerbate traffic issue in the area.
There has already been numerous housing sites developed in the Kingswinford area, notably Ibstock brick, Stallings Lane, Wordsley Hospital and Crystal Glass site.
Currently there is further development at The Leys, Brierley Hill Road on the Pen’s Meadow site and planned development at Ketley Farm DUH 203. Both these sites represent a large number of houses being added to the area. Both these sites have made use of the brownfield sites in the area and these developments should be encouraged to preserve Greenbelt land.
I also think it is unreasonable for Dudley borough to be expected to hit the high housing levels as the borough is already largely built on.

Object

Representation ID: 45936

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Ms Nicola Brettle

There is a huge amount of disused brownfield development sites available in the Black Country, I see no reason why greenfield should be developed at this point.

These greenfield sites are just the developers pressing for the biggest possibel returns, the council should target developers on using many of teh disused sites to improve the characteristics of the area rather than build on greenfield which only worsens the lives of residents. I also worry about the strain on our roads, doctors, hospitals, and impact on teh wildlife which is loved in this area.

The plan for Dudley is ill thought out 860 of the 1,100 properties planned are in two developments less than 1 mile apart, both affecting Wall Heath.

I strongly oppose!

Object

Representation ID: 45940

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Nicholas Hilliard

Direct quote from Andy Street- April 2021 via www.andystreet.org.uk - "We have shown that there are enough derelict brownfield sites to ensure that nothing is built on the Green belt in the Black Country for at least 10 years, and the Government is providing hundreds and millions of pounds to clean up those old sites so they can be used for housing."

Given the above from the Midlands Metro Mayor I am unsure how development on green belt can be justified. There is a huge amount of disused brown field land within striking distance of these proposed developments- therefore I can see no realistic requirement, bar the fact developers can make more profits (which isn't in the public interest) to develop these sites. Promoting the development of brownfield first should be the priority, it retains our valuable green spaces and improves the look and feel of areas currently derelict thereby having a net positive effect.

In addition the local area does not have the facilities to accommodate more than 2,000 new residents (based on average of 2.4 people per household)- 1) there are already no spare capacity in the schools, this before other new developments are completed in the area (development on stallings lane) 2) A449 is hugely busy and noisy, this will add traffic and also impact the flow of traffic 3) NHS services are already stretched, please note wait times and givernment ratings of service. Finally there is also the loss of habitat and a wildlife that will come with thsi development that should be considered unacceptable in a case where it is patently avoidable.

The plan for Dudley is utterly lopsided 860 of the 1,100 properties planned are in two developments less than 1 mile apart, both affecting Wall Heath. Surely the plan should be more spread out rather than focused in on such a small geography- calling this a plan is about a loose a use of the term as I've seen.