Policy DSA2– Land at Swindon Road, Wall Heath, Kingswinford (The Triangle site) Strategic Allocation

Object

Representation ID: 10601

Received: 22/08/2021

Respondent: Mr Neil Thomas

The plan related to this site takes away a significant piece of green belt which is of local importance and does so with little or no consideration to the impact on services, infrastructure and quality of life in the area. There are other more appropriate sites, including brownfield, which would be far more appropriate. Not to mention the proposal being to do this over a 10 year period, therefore having a sustained negative impact on the noise and environment for local residents.

Object

Representation ID: 10602

Received: 22/08/2021

Respondent: Miss Elizabeth Lamb

Green belt prevents urban sprawl, & once it has gone it has gone. There are already more than enough brownfield sites in the Dudley area to satisfy all housing needs. Existing pressure on doctors,schools,transport,hospitals & roads is already unacceptable, & proposals would add a further 1300 people into the mix.
Local countryside has been enjoyed & used by families for many years. This is the first of many applications by a property developer which will totally change the ambience of the village.
Affordable housing would not be built, but high value housing would

Object

Representation ID: 10605

Received: 23/08/2021

Respondent: Mr Stephen Moore

Loss of Green Belt. Once its gone, its lost for ever.to future generations.
Loss of green spaces contributes negatively to climate change.
Better to use Brown field and redevelop redundant commercial buildings.
Adverse impact on air quality. Area already has very high air pollution from vehicles.
More houses = more cars = more pollution. Area A449/A491 is grid locked at peak times.
30min + travel at peak times to Wolverhampton / Stourbridge rail stations.
Adverse impact on local services. Doctors, schools etc. There are capacity issues now.
"High value" houses do nor resolve the issue of affordable / social houses.

Object

Representation ID: 10643

Received: 28/08/2021

Respondent: Mrs Malgosia Baker

Black Country Site Assessment report
Section Dudley Appendix A page 79 the triangle SA-0025-DUD
Not enough services for 100's of additional people. Roads would be gridlocked, therefore more air pollution. Greenbelt land is essential to people's well being and wildlife alike. Dudley borough amenities being used by South Staffs council paying residents putting a strain on already stretched services. It should be affordable housing, not luxury housing in South Staffs.

Object

Representation ID: 10650

Received: 30/08/2021

Respondent: Dr Sharon Boden

There is already too much noisy speeding traffic in this area. There is no need to build on greenbelt when other land is available. Schools are already full. Doctors are full. This plan would lower the quality of life for many residents. You would also be destroying natural habitats for wildlife. The Triangle is an important local green space with valuable trees, hedgerows and open fields. As our local council you haver a duty of care to the environment.

There is huge opposition from the local community. Please listen to us!

Object

Representation ID: 10694

Received: 05/09/2021

Respondent: Dr Sharon Boden

Why can't you read the whole objection above?

highways impacts - roads are congested and dangerous
delivery of green belt loss mitigation - you will not offset the damage caused - read government guidelines
delivery of biodiversity net gain - biodiversity will plummet
delivery of recreational open space improvement - not needed

Here is reality - you will be ruining the lives and well-being of many local residents, not to mention wildlife and natural biodiverse habitats, Shame on Dudley Council - you will have a fight on your hands if you don't remove The Triangle from your under researched 'plans'.

Object

Representation ID: 10696

Received: 06/09/2021

Respondent: Mrs Lorna Weston

The plan for building a substantial number of new homes, is untenable in the area. Numerous houses have already been built at the Stallings Lane site in Kingswinford to build further homes on Holbeach is doubling the amount of already existing homes that the local infrastructure is already struggling to deal with. Additional homes in the Kingswinford area (the triangle) is expanding the residential numbers beyond capacity of schools, surgeries and local hospitals.

Object

Representation ID: 10773

Received: 11/09/2021

Respondent: Mrs Sian Cannings

I oppose to the houses being built in the triangle of green belt land by Summerhill school. Reasons detailed below.

I do not want to see the green belt field (triangle) by summerhill school converted into houses. Cutting back and taking over green belt land will change the landscape of our beautiful village and take away the village feel by making the area larger and more built up. The traffic going through Kingswinford is incredibly busy already in peak times and extra housing here will only add to and exacerbate this issue. Also nursery and school places are already very limited and these houses would put further pressure on. We are a small market village and the proposed houses in the triangle would change this, remove our valuable and scenic greenbelt land and put further pressure on local schools and traffic.

Comment

Representation ID: 10797

Received: 10/09/2021

Respondent: NXD Consulting Ltd

One of the keys things highlighted by the recent COVID pandemic has been the huge benefit of green spaces to the physical and mental health of Dudley Borough residents. To even consider building on such green belt sites such as the Lodge Lane/Swindon Road triangle in Wall Heath/Kingswinford and the fields at Holbeache would seem to be nonsensical at the very least. Such developments would swamp existing infrastructures and increase traffic to a point which would cause major issues in terms of volume and pollution.

Object

Representation ID: 10801

Received: 11/09/2021

Respondent: Mrs Sian Cannings

I do not want to see the green belt field (triangle) by summerhill school converted into houses. Cutting back and taking over green belt land will change the landscape of our beautiful village and take away the village feel by making the area larger and more built up. The traffic going through Kingswinford is incredibly busy already in peak times and extra housing here will only add to and exacerbate this issue. Also nursery and school places are already very limited and these houses would put further pressure on. We are a small market village and the proposed houses in the triangle would change this, remove our valuable and scenic greenbelt land and put further pressure on local schools and traffic.

Object

Representation ID: 10803

Received: 11/09/2021

Respondent: Mr John Foster

Remove these sites from the plan. Given the location of these two sites to the border with South Staffs Council, inclusion in the plan will indicate to SSC that development of green belt land along this border is acceptable when in fact it is completely the opposite as it would represent a huge loss of green belt with horrendous detriment to biodiversity, air quality and well being and open space availability to Dudley residents. Furthermore it would have negative impact on all local infrastructure. There is huge opposition to the development of this green belt area and if DMBC give the nod to developing these sites then it weakens any argument that the campaign groups have with SSC

Object

Representation ID: 10828

Received: 14/09/2021

Respondent: Mr John Garratt

The change will lead to:
* An increase in vehicles on local roads leading to an increase in actual drive times and bottlenecks. The extra traffic will result in increased noise and air pollution affecting the health of residents.
* Increased pressure on local schools, doctors, hospitals.
* Loss of local wildlife habitat, greenbelt and rights of way.

Object

Representation ID: 10833

Received: 14/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Timothy Price

Use of green belt land in Kingswinford unacceptable. Too little left. Also ROADS CANNOT COPE!

Object

Representation ID: 10888

Received: 16/09/2021

Respondent: Mrs Karen Churchman

Black Country Site Assessment Report Dudley Appendix A Page 79 The Triangle SA0025.DUD.
This land should NOT be built on we need green spaces for all our sake.

There is already too much traffic affecting our health & wildlife.

Object

Representation ID: 10890

Received: 16/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Neil Churchman

Black Country Site Assessment Report Dudley Appendix A Page 79 The Triangle SA0025.DUD.
This land should NOT be built on we need green spaces for all our sake.

There is already too much traffic affecting our health & wildlife.

Object

Representation ID: 10895

Received: 16/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Neil Churchman

Black Country Site Assessment Report Dudley Appendix A Page 79 The Triangle SA0025.DUD.
This land should NOT be built on we need green spaces for all our sake.

There is already too much traffic affecting our health & wildlife.

Object

Representation ID: 10913

Received: 17/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Martin Simmonds

The development will impact schools as there will not be be enough places for the additional children
Each house will have on average two cars, causing untold misery to motorists on the already very busy local roads
Loss of green belt which can never be replaced & the impact it will have on the local wildlife

Object

Representation ID: 10919

Received: 16/09/2021

Respondent: Mrs Leanne Darby

Additional houses in Kingswinford will increase traffic, making an already congested small village more busy and polluted. The triangle is directly opposite a school (summerhill) and extra cars will endanger school children walking to and from school. Please build on industrial sites not green fields.

Object

Representation ID: 10935

Received: 16/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Ian Fellows

Kingswinford has already had a lot of housing development around Stallings Lane and Tansey Green Road. This has resulted in increased traffic and congestion within the area. This impacts on air quality. More housing within the area will only add to this problem.More housing and therefore more people will impact on school admissions, doctors surgery's, dentists and hospitals.
I also strongly object to using Green Belt Land for housing as this will impact on the hedgerows and wildlife at a critical time when we are being encouraged to protect and develop this.

Object

Representation ID: 10971

Received: 18/09/2021

Respondent: Mr John McMurray

This ground is used for growing crops and should be retained for that purpose. Also ground absorption of rainwater will be considerably reduced and combined with the exit culvert of Dawley brook by the road Island on the A449 properties would result in major Flooding including the major junction island.
The increase in traffic to kingswinford of 553 new houses will cause a major congestion problem.
I fear that those who make these proposals will not suffer the consequences of there planning mistakes only the resident of the area.

Comment

Representation ID: 11039

Received: 02/09/2021

Respondent: Mrs Jude Prime

Number of people: 2

To whom it may concern we, Adrian Prime and Judith Prime would like to register our concerns as regards the proposed building of house on green belt site.
Kingswinford and Wallheath are both small towns, and would be unable to successfully incorporate the extra traffic and parking this would bring. Lodge lane is already a very fast and potentially dangerous road, that has already seen fatalities, as there is a senior school on this road.It also joins the A449, which is a national speed road, that is always very busy, as it is main route to Wolverhampton, Stourbridge and Kidderminster.
Additional policing would be necessary, more shops, doctors, and dentists would be required so as not to overload existing services.
Councillor Patrick Harley has been put on record as saying that Dudley is committed to building on “suitable brown sites.” The above plot does not fall into this category.
Please reconsider building on this plot.Thank you.
Regards
Adrian Prime
Judith Prime

Object

Representation ID: 11071

Received: 25/08/2021

Respondent: Mr Brian Graystone

SA-0025-DUD

I am horrified that good farming land will be lost if this housing development goes ahead. Kingswinford is fast becoming very congested as the housing in the area expands and even more homes will make the situation worse

The local doctors surgeries are overloaded as it is with far too many people registered making it difficult to get appointments - addition houses will only make this situation worse.

The open nature looking out over fields of the top of The Summerhill will be lost forever if houses are given the go ahead.

I can see no advantages in this development moving forward.

Please do not allow it to go ahead.

Object

Representation ID: 11082

Received: 29/08/2021

Respondent: Mrs Elaine Williams

I am reading very disturbing news about green belt development. I am particularly concerned about proposed sites in and around Wall Heath.

The triangle at Summerhill is farming/agricultural land. How can this be a proposed site when there are acres of un-used brownfield sites. The Farmer is still using that land and it is also an important recreational space used by families and dog walkers. Many children and their parents love tobogganing on those fields and their pleasure is a joy to behold.

I believe land is proposed also at the back of Wall Heath, maybe by Staffordshire Council. As we know residents across Staffordshire/ Dudley border all use our already overstretched health and educational facilities. Already it is almost impossible to get appointments at local GP surgeries and local hospitals. Schools also in our area are already pushed to their limits. Roads are already clogged up with traffic increasing air pollution above safe levels. Development of this land would not leave Himley as the village it once was just an extension of Wall Heath. I remember Wall Heath before [Name] was allowed to build on green sites on its boundaries.

I believe that these developments would also be a heart breaking decision that would not take into account our wonderful wildlife in the area. There is an abundance of beauty out there and wildlife habitats would be irrevocably destroyed and lost forever.

The future if our well being is in your hands and your decision will have consequences down through the generations and will be judged as such. Please lead with your conscience and make the right choices. I am sure developments on green field sites will generate a more desirable living environment for those choosing to live there, making enormous profits for developers and over inflated Council tax for Dudley Council for people having a DY6 Postcode. This can be seen from the development at the bottom of TANSEY Green Road which has always been Pensnett/Shut end and is now strangely enough Kingswinford. More desirable than calling it what it is Pensnett. An example of Developers/ Councils moving boundaries for financial gain.

Please give consideration to the above and ensure you are able to live with your future plans.

Object

Representation ID: 11083

Received: 29/08/2021

Respondent: Daphne Reynolds

I object to building of houses on land adjoining the Swindon Road, as this is destruction of our Green Belt, there is also a lot of pressure on our Schools, Doctors and Hospitals as well as our roads, traffic is already strangling the area we don't require anymore. I am sure there is plenty of brown field sites which could be vastly improved by housing instead of leaving it derelict and unsightly.
I appreciate we need more housing but feel you do not need to use our Green Belt which is our green lung. There are plenty of Brown Field sites around especially in Brierley Hill where there are a lot of derelict factories which would could be raised to the ground and the area improved by housing, in turn infrastructure could be improved in Brierley Hill.

Object

Representation ID: 11101

Received: 11/09/2021

Respondent: Claire Evans

[The Triangle]

I would like to add my vice to the objections raised against the inclusion of or development of the above areas

I consider that the need to develop Brownfield sites is now more relevant than ever before. Our town centres are in need of regeneration and a global pandemic has demonstrated that many people can now work from home. Loss of green belt should always be a genuine and absolute last resort. Brownfield development would breathe new life into town and city centres, keep them bustling and populated and more desirable.

Greenbelt land should continue to be highly prized - no matter what current government policy might be. It benefits all of us and all of our children. The land in question is useful Agricultural land graded 3 and above. The quality of life for people already living in these areas would be diminished should green belt land be developed, in terms of character and visual amenity. the area of green belt land in question provides a valuable barrier, preventing urban sprawl on the western boundary of the Black Country. If the proposed A449 Kidderminster Road forms the amended Green Belt boundary, then all the Greenfield sites encompassed by that on the boundary and currently vulnerable from the South Staffs Local Plan would be at risk from development, as a precedent would be set for a new boundary. I personally would not want to live in my current location should this be permitted.

It seems to me a very short sighted approach to sacrifice greenbelt. Developing green belt means loss of access to precious countryside which is slowly but surely being eroded. Aside from the obvious air, noise and light pollution in an already heavily populated area, once it's gone and I feel that future generations will not thank us for such decisions. We, as a society are now fully aware of the benefits of the countryside to our physical and mental wellbeing and this cannot be underestimated. Poor air quality is linked to certain types of dementia, asthma etc and council run parks do not offer the same benefits as open countryside in terms of beauty, tranquillity, clean air and places to exercise and enjoy nature and its associated wildlife. Areas of natural beauty should be prized highly and enhance our environment. If this is sacrificed, the area becomes a less desirable place to live.

Any development of this area will also noticeably increase numbers of vehicles on the roads in the Black Country, with all the polluting and road safety resulting consequences. Road traffic congestion in the area is already high. Work was recently undertaken on the high street in nearby Wordsley to try and east traffic flow on a highly polluted thoroughfare. It has made little difference. Even the A449 and A491 passing through the area of green belt are gridlocked in a morning. This will be compounded by further housing in the area.

Nor do we want more roads carving up our green belt. As indicated above, I believe that the future will include greater flexibility of working and that more people will elect to work from home. Sacrificing green belt land for roads could risk easing a problem that in a few years' time may no longer exist - particularly with investments being made in public transport. This is desperately needed, along with cycle routes for example. Hansen rate this area as having the worst commuting score from homes to places of employment. In addition, there is also poor rail access. A more creative approach is needed - creative housing, one eye on the future and looking to how other countries and urban areas have successfully managed the needs of their population in a greener way.

Add to the equation 2 further development sites locally at Stallings Lane in Kingswinford and Ketley Quarry (within 2 miles) with no proposed infrastructure improvements and we are in a dire situation.

It is clear to me that the Black Country would bear the brunt of any proposed developments on these sites. The area feels saturated and our community feels very strongly that there are other ways which are not being explored. Brownfield sites might offer additional complications to developers, but they should be encouraged to utilise these properties before any land is destroyed. Taking the easier option will change our environment forever and have a detrimental impact on this and future generations.

Object

Representation ID: 11109

Received: 22/09/2021

Respondent: Mrs Tracy Price

Wall Heath-Kingswinford-Wordsley is one large housing estate. Green space in k’ford is irreplaceable.

Comment

Representation ID: 11127

Received: 24/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Andrew Johnson

The loss of the greenbelt at DUH211 for over 500 houses is horendous.

The plan to lose so much greenbelt is a disgrace, and your comments about Greenbelt Loss Mitigation so much hot air.

Object

Representation ID: 11129

Received: 24/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Andrew Johnson

I wish to object to the amount of housing proposed for Kingswinford. The 3 sites (DUH208-211-203) total 1475 new houses, this will change the nature of Kingswinford for ever. The loss of the greenbelt at DUH211 for over 500 houses is horendous.
Kingswinford rush hour traffic is a major problem for residents, this will make it much worse. The Swindon Road / Lodge Lane junction is already a bottleneck before 500 new houses - up to 1000 additional vehicles.
The plan to lose so much greenbelt is a disgrace, and your comments about Greenbelt Loss Mitigation so much hot air.

Object

Representation ID: 11137

Received: 09/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Roger Hutt

Number of people: 2

My wife and I must object in the strongest terms to the proposed development at DUH217. This a favourite walk of
ours as it for many other retired people and there is no way you can access this site without great upheaval and
destruction of natural habitats..
This madness must be stopped
Roger Hutt
Maureen Hutt

Object

Representation ID: 11146

Received: 07/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Malcolm Chilton

The proposal is to reallocate this greenfield site to housing for the construction of 530 new homes. 7
This is a much loved site on the fringe of the Borough that has been used by local residents for excersise
and fresh air for many years. Other greenfield sites in nearby South Staffordshire are available but are too far
for many residents to walk and would necessitate a car journey. This is the last open space in Kingswinford
that has not been given over to housing development in recent years and is highly valued by residents as a
result.
Kingswinford is poorly served by public transport having no rail or Metro connections. As a result the motor
car is the usual mode of transport for getting to work. It is likely that most of the occupants of any new
dwellings built on the site will also primarily use their cars for work, shopping and entertainment. The main
junction at the Cross in Kingswinford is already very congested during peak times and this proposed
development will, without doubt, add to the congestion. I do not believe it is possible to improve the junction
due to the closeness of existing buildings.
Schools and health centres are already under pressure in the area. it is all but impossible to get a GP
appointment in Kingswinford and this development will further worsen the situation.
Most importantly we should protect our beloved greenfield sites because they put the natural world within
easy reach for residents. The nature conservation mitigation proposed in the plan is to add a few bird/bat
boxes. this is almost pathetic and shows a real misunderstanding on the behalf of the planners of the value
local residents place on this triangle of greenfield land.