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

Object

Representation ID: 11161

Received: 24/09/2021

Respondent: Mrs Angela Cartwright

(DUH 211)
Dreadful traffic congestion which we have already
Pollution/Environment
Damaging of wildlife
we haven't got the infrastructure - ie
doctors/ schools
Demise of the green belt
Water supply pipe
Wall Heath A449 to The Triangle
A decision would have been agreed to go ahead with the new housing so why weren't we "consulted then" - I am afraid this is just typical of the local council!!
The people in the area are always last to know. Where's the local councillor when you need him!!

Object

Representation ID: 11197

Received: 26/09/2021

Respondent: Mrs Jennifer Tomkins

The Triangle SA-0025- DUD
Loss of Greenbelt countryside. Better to use brownfield sites and redevelop Dudley Town Centre which is so run down with loads of empty buildings that could be converted to affordable flats/apartments.
We are lucky enough to live in Wall Heath and enjoy walking which keeps us fit and gives us tranquility.
The impact of even more traffic on the A449 will increase pollution and road safety consequences, plus an increase in noise levels to residents and wildlife. Please Listen as once the Triangle has gone there will be no coming back.

Object

Representation ID: 11205

Received: 27/09/2021

Respondent: Mr martin Round

REF Black Country Site Assessment Report
Dudley Appendix A , Page 79. The Triangle SA-0025-DUD.

I wish to object in the strongest terms to the proposed development ! To build 533 " high value" properties on this site is a disgrace, it will do nothing to help the need for affordable housing and it will destroy a valuable piece of useful agricultural land.

There are two existing developments around Kinswinford at present but no increase in local facilities to match.
Add to this the proposal to develop 330 houses at Holbeach Lane and i feel that services will be overwhelmed

Object

Representation ID: 11208

Received: 27/09/2021

Respondent: Mrs Elaine Round

Do not use this site until Brownfield sites exhausted

Reference.

Black Country Site Assessment Report
Dudley Appendix A, Page 79. The Triangle SA-0025-DUD.

I strongly object to this proposal as building 533 " high Value" homes on this site helps no one! It does nothing to help the need for more Social housing and destroys a piece of valuable farm land.

No proposals for more local amenities are included with most facilities running at maximum at present.

Two large developments on going at present and a further proposal for Holbeache Lane within the local area will cause numerous difficulties.

I accept the need for more housing but by destroying Green areas before utilizing Brown Field sites seems to be pandering to the profit motives of developers

Object

Representation ID: 11229

Received: 16/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Satish Patel

brownfield site around the area, which should be used for housing.

By using brownfield site, you also turning around unsightly factories / eyesore etc that have closed and decaying and putting to good use.

Object

Representation ID: 11231

Received: 10/09/2021

Respondent: Sarah Poole

I am a resident
of the Kingswinford area.
I would like to object to the proposed plans for both The Triangle DUH 211 page 371 and Holbeach
site DUH 208 page 371. I am gravely concerned with regard to the amount of traffic this will bring to
already extremely busy SMALL roads, also the impact on schools. I am also disappointed that houses
become priority over our green belt, where there is such limited green belt left and the impact it will have on the wildlife.
Please reconsider this proposal taking into account residents views

Object

Representation ID: 11234

Received: 12/09/2021

Respondent: Mrs Sarah Lawson

I am writing to object to the development of parts of our Green Belt, in particular sites
referred to as Holbeach and The Triangle. I have lived in the Kingswinford and
Wordsley area since 2004 and am a regular user of the Green Belt adjacent to where
I live. This is a valuable, much used and much loved part of the local area, especially
during the recent pandemic when people found much solace in escaping to the green
areas near our homes for leisure and escapism.
To my knowledge both sites are currently used for agriculture, where a range of crops
can be grown. We should continue to protect this land and use the soil in a
sustainable way. Significant loss of countryside will no doubt impact on wildlife in the
local area; we have , owls, foxes, hedgehogs and moles locally as well as a
plethora of other species. As well as loss of important habitats such as hedgerows
and significant tree species. This will be devastating to those of us who enjoy nature
and enjoy that it is so close and easy to access. My young family and I often go for
walks and bike rides in these areas to enjoy the peace and tranquility that they offer -
an escape from the rapid pace of life. We indeed moved to the road we are in now
due to its proximity to the countryside.
Additionally, as a local resident, especially to The Triangle, which is a 4 minute walk
from my home, I am concerned about the impact of additional homes and families will
have on the local roads and services. Roads in the Kingswinford area are already
especially busy, particularly during peak flow times in rush hour and school pick
up/drop off times. Roads such as Cot Lane and Stream Road are bumper to bumper
with traffic; it is regularly a long wait to pass through the traffic lights by the Harvester
Pub at the junction of Cot Lane and Lodge Lane. The A449 also has an extremely
large volume of traffic throughout the day; I would not support a future plan to expand
or widen this road in order to support your plans for housing on the Green Belt land.
With more residents to the area would only bring more traffic congestion, more noise
and a reduction in air quality. We already suffer from a large number of
cars/motorbikes using Lodge Lane as a race track - which has caused a fatal accident
in recent years.
Additionally more local residents would put increasing pressure on our local services
such as schools, doctors and Russell’s Hall hospital. These are already
oversubscribed and overused services. Summerhill School is over subscribed; with
an active waiting list. The nearby Kingswinford and Crestwood schools are also full to
capacity. Crestwood School and Wordsley school recently upped their PAN number in
order to accommodate the growing number of school age children in the local area; I
am not sure where you propose further families to the area would send their children?
The local doctors surgeries continue to struggle with provision after the Covid
lockdowns meaning that people are continuing to wait to be seen or speak to a GP. I
myself used the out of hours provision this weekend at Russell’s Hall hospital and had
to wait for 3 hours to be seen by a doctor in order to get medication. Without
significant improvements to our local education and healthcare providers I cannot see
how they would be able to cater for more families; they would be a drain to an already
failing system.
There has been no real investment in the area in terms of leisure and recreation other
than an improvement to Cot Lane park lead and funded by a local action group. This
means there is little to do in the area for children and young people. In recent years
we have seen an increase in anti-social behaviour including drug dealing on Cot Lane
park, evidence of drug and alcohol use on Cot Lane park and Wordsley park as well
as more general anti-social behaviour in the alley way behind Summercourt
Square/Summercourt Drive close to the Triangle site. Young people have set fire to
part of the Ridge woods and have left much litter and mess there after lockdown meet
ups. I am very concerned about the impact of bringing more families and young
people to the area and only see these issues becoming more of a problem.
In the Black Country we have much in the way of brownfield sites, some of which
have already been developed. This means these areas are improved and become
more desirable. I believe that continued investment should be made in developing
brownfield sites as a priority over the development of green belt land. This would not
only provide the housing stock the Black Country needs but would also be an
investment in the local area as run down and derelict ex-industrial sites would be
improved. I am a geography teacher at a local secondary school and regularly
discuss with classes the importance of sustainable development and land
management.
I hope you see sense and listen to the objections I know friends, neighbours and local
residents will make against this particular part of your Black Country Action Plan

Object

Representation ID: 11240

Received: 16/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Philip Guise

I object to the proposed development Site reference DUH208p371 regarding Swindon Road & Holbeache Lane.
My concerns are as follows:
1. The massive increase in traffic to already congested and dangerous volumes of traffic which will affect pedestrian safety and pollution .
2.The local NHS is already stretched to breaking point and GP's & dentists could not cope with such a rise in Local population.
3. The loss of habitat for an already struggling local wildlife population.
4 We should maintain all the agricultural land that we can to help produce food to feed the general population and look to build on all available Brown Field Sites

Object

Representation ID: 11249

Received: 24/09/2021

Respondent: Mrs Sheila Cooper

Black Country Site Assessment Report
Dudley Appendix A, Page 79. The Triangle SA-0025-DUD

1. Loss of green belt
1.1 It is better to use old factory sites (Brownfield) and re-develop inner cities to revive town centres
1.2 This is useful Agricultural land graded 3 and above.
1.3 The visual Amenity and Character of the Area would dramatically change.
1.4 This is an important and strategic tract of Green Belt preventing urban sprawl along the Western Edge 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

2. Quality of life
2.1 Developing green belt means loss of access to countryside, once it's gone, it's gone.
2.2 higher noise levels impact of adjoining residents and wildlife.
2.3 Increase in light pollution in a much needed area of tranquillity.
2.4. Poorer air quality impact of adjoining residents and wider area, particularly from increase in traffic,
2.5 Impact of building from construction noise and traffic.

3. Impact on traffic and transport
3.1 Increasing numbers of vehicles will mean increased pollution, road safety consequences.
3.2 Road traffic congestion in the area is already high. A449 and A491 gridlocked in a morning. Nor do we want more roads eg 'western Strategic (Orbital) Route' destroyed more green belt.
3.3 Lack of public transport or cycle routes. Hansen rate this area as having the worst commuting score from homes to places of employment.
3.4 Poor rail access. Time taken to reach the rail network to Wolverhampton/ Birmingham is much longer than 30 minutes.
3.5 there are also at least two other major development sites at Stallings Lane and Ketley Quarry (within 2 miles) which do not have any infrastructure improvements either.

4 pressure on local facilities
4.1 there are not enough doctors surgeries, schools, shops, emergency services in Dudley to serve the area. The proposal to build 533 new houses on the triangle would increase the local population by 1279 (Office of National Statistics average occupation rates are 2.4 people per household).
4.2 Local Health services are already over subscribed and un-sustainable
4.3 Primary school over 15-minutes walk away
4.4 Rod infrastructure already struggling to cope at present with high traffic levels. Impact on the wider road network particularly Kingswinford and Wall heath Junctions.
4.5 No suitable or regular bus routes or cycle network
4.6 No nearby employment sites of network
4.7 Providing more 'high value' housing does not solve the problem of lack of affordable or social housing, which would also need a sustainable infrastructure of health facilities, education, mass transit and employment centres.

5. Destruction of the local environment
5.1 Loss of ancient trees, natural habitats, biodiversity
5.2 Loss of SLINC (Site of Local Importance for Nature Conservation) hedgerows to create access
5.3 This will contribute to climate change
5.4 Loss of wildlife, impact on the fields and meadows.
5.5 Loss of wildlife corridors linking green spaces
5.6 Flood risk affecting drainage of the area and ground water
5.7 contributing to rapid loss of species in Britain in recent decades eg. Moths, butterflies, bees have declined significantly.
5.8 Replanting scheme do not replace ancient habitats and features.
6. Important locally
6.1 local people love and appreciate this green belt area, and want it for future generations.
6.2 Important local green space, valuable trees, hedgerows and open fields. Many trees have Tree Preservation Orders.
6.3 Site of Local Importance for Nature Conservation (SLINC) - 'Ashwood Haye Fields' - Hedgerow around the perimeter of the site and some within the site,
6.4 It contains important local green space, valuable trees, hedgerows and open fields.
6.5 There is an important network of footpaths (rights of way) across the area including links to Monarchs Way, Staffordshire Way, linking to Cheshire Gritstone Trail, the Heart of England Way and the North Worcestershire Path.
6.6 It is next to an important woodland Ridgehill Woods, which will be hugely impacted. Disrupting the wildlife corridors and surrounding habitats for these would be irreversible.
6.7 It is part of the Mid Severn Sandstone Plateau - important for habitat conservation.
6.8 in addition, it is an important habitat for declining British wildlife (list species where known)
6.9 Disrupting the wildlife corridors and surrounding habitats for these would be irreversible.
6.10 Historic character of Prestwood. Prestwood is a locally designated Historic Landscape area. A collection of Scheduled Ancient Monuments associated with the Greenforge Roman Camp are situated in the area between Swindon and Prestwood to the west of Kingswinford.

7. Hugh opposition by the local community
These housing proposals are not meeting affordable housing targets with expensive housing in the Green Belt

8. Relevant Legislation
The National Planning Policy Framework (the goverment's planning policies) says "where significant development of agricultural land is demonstrated to be necessary, areas of poorer quality should be preffered to those of higher quality" and identifies that:
8.1 Sites of biodiversity should be protected and any impacts minimised (para 170)
8.2 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)
8.3 Protect and enhance biodiversity and geodiversity and safeguard local wildlife-rich habitats and priority habitats and species, and ecological networks (Para 174)
8.4 inappropriate development is, by definition, harmful to the Green Belt and should not be approved except in very special circumstances (para 174)

Object

Representation ID: 11258

Received: 24/09/2021

Respondent: Mr John Cooper

Black Country Site Assessment Report
Dudley Appendix A, Page 79. The Triangle SA-0025-DUD

1. Loss of green belt
1.1 It is better to use old factory sites (Brownfield) and re-develop inner cities to revive town centres
1.2 This is useful Agricultural land graded 3 and above. ... r> 1.3 The visual Amenity and Character of the Area would dramatically change.
1.4 This is an important and strategic tract of Green Belt preventing urban sprawl along the Western Edge 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

2. Quality of life
2.1 Developing green belt means loss of access to countryside, once it's gone, it's gone.
2.2 higher noise levels impact of adjoining residents and wildlife.
2.3 Increase in light pollution in a much needed area of tranquillity.
2.4. Poorer air quality impact of adjoining residents and wider area, particularly from increase in traffic,
2.5 Impact of building from construction noise and traffic.

3. Impact on traffic and transport
3.1 Increasing numbers of vehicles will mean increased pollution, road safety consequences.
3.2 Road traffic congestion in the area is already high. A449 and A491 gridlocked in a morning. Nor do we want more roads eg 'western Strategic (Orbital) Route' destroyed more green belt.
3.3 Lack of public transport or cycle routes. Hansen rate this area as having the worst commuting score from homes to places of employment.
3.4 Poor rail access. Time taken to reach the rail network to Wolverhampton/ Birmingham is much longer than 30 minutes.
3.5 there are also at least two other major development sites at Stallings Lane and Ketley Quarry (within 2 miles) which do not have any infrastructure improvements either.

4 pressure on local facilities
4.1 there are not enough doctors surgeries, schools, shops, emergency services in Dudley to serve the area. The proposal to build 533 new houses on the triangle would increase the local population by 1279 (Office of National Statistics average occupation rates are 2.4 people per household).
4.2 Local Health services are already over subscribed and un-sustainable
4.3 Primary school over 15-minutes walk away
4.4 Rod infrastructure already struggling to cope at present with high traffic levels. Impact on the wider road network particularly Kingswinford and Wall heath Junctions.
4.5 No suitable or regular bus routes or cycle network
4.6 No nearby employment sites of network
4.7 Providing more 'high value' housing does not solve the problem of lack of affordable or social housing, which would also need a sustainable infrastructure of health facilities, education, mass transit and employment centres.

5. Destruction of the local environment
5.1 Loss of ancient trees, natural habitats, biodiversity
5.2 Loss of SLINC (Site of Local Importance for Nature Conservation) hedgerows to create access
5.3 This will contribute to climate change
5.4 Loss of wildlife, impact on the fields and meadows.
5.5 Loss of wildlife corridors linking green spaces
5.6 Flood risk affecting drainage of the area and ground water
5.7 contributing to rapid loss of species in Britain in recent decades eg. Moths, butterflies, bees have declined significantly.
5.8 Replanting scheme do not replace ancient habitats and features.
6. Important locally
6.1 local people love and appreciate this green belt area, and want it for future generations.
6.2 Important local green space, valuable trees, hedgerows and open fields. Many trees have Tree Preservation Orders.
6.3 Site of Local Importance for Nature Conservation (SLINC) - 'Ashwood Haye Fields' - Hedgerow around the perimeter of the site and some within the site,
6.4 It contains important local green space, valuable trees, hedgerows and open fields.
6.5 There is an important network of footpaths (rights of way) across the area including links to Monarchs Way, Staffordshire Way, linking to Cheshire Gritstone Trail, the Heart of England Way and the North Worcestershire Path.
6.6 It is next to an important woodland Ridgehill Woods, which will be hugely impacted. Disrupting the wildlife corridors and surrounding habitats for these would be irreversible.
6.7 It is part of the Mid Severn Sandstone Plateau - important for habitat conservation.
6.8 in addition, it is an important habitat for declining British wildlife (list species where known)
6.9 Disrupting the wildlife corridors and surrounding habitats for these would be irreversible.
6.10 Historic character of Prestwood. Prestwood is a locally designated Historic Landscape area. A collection of Scheduled Ancient Monuments associated with the Greenforge Roman Camp are situated in the area between Swindon and Prestwood to the west of Kingswinford.

7. Hugh opposition by the local community
These housing proposals are not meeting affordable housing targets with expensive housing in the Green Belt

8. Relevant Legislation
The National Planning Policy Framework (the goverment's planning policies) says "where significant development of agricultural land is demonstrated to be necessary, areas of poorer quality should be preffered to those of higher quality" and identifies that:
8.1 Sites of biodiversity should be protected and any impacts minimised (para 170)
8.2 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)
8.3 Protect and enhance biodiversity and geodiversity and safeguard local wildlife-rich habitats and priority habitats and species, and ecological networks (Para 174)
8.4 inappropriate development is, by definition, harmful to the Green Belt and should not be approved except in very special circumstances (para 174) less

Object

Representation ID: 11260

Received: 28/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Nicholas Breakwell

Loss of Green Belt land and wildlife habitat. More traffic and pollution on already overcrowded roads. GPs and Hospitals already stretched. A large number of new houses have been built at the top of Stallings Lane, so we do not need any more in the area.

Object

Representation ID: 11266

Received: 17/09/2021

Respondent: Mrs Lisa Cooper

We cannot afford an increase in population in this area, I work for the local NHS and it is at breaking point already. Please consider waiting times (GP, Accident and emergency, in-patients and out-patients appointments) the impact of this on our communities health and well being.... r> Our current infrastructure is congested, higher emissions and increased CO2 will have an impact on our environment and the health of current residents another strain on the NHS
Has consideration been given to the impact on local education, September 2021 the only secondary school with places for year 7 was Wordsley School most other school years were full.
A huge concern for me as a mental health professional is the loss of green belt land. Brownfield sites should be used first surely. Loss of wildlife, bees, butterflies would have a detrimental affect on our environment and the mental health of our resident, yet another impact on our NHS.

Object

Representation ID: 11268

Received: 28/09/2021

Respondent: Mrs Janice Breakwell

Loss of green belt as this is a strategic tract of green belt preventing urban sprawl within our area. Loss of wildlife habitat and valuable trees and hedgerows. Increase in traffic on already congested roads. Gridlocks are already common during most of the day at various junctions in Kingswinford and Wall Heath which leads to an increase in pollution. Increased pressure on NHS services which are already stretched in our area.

Object

Representation ID: 11279

Received: 12/09/2021

Respondent: Keith Turley

Dear Sir,
I am writing to express my clear objection to the proposal to build 800+ new houses
on two sites in Wall Heath. The resulting huge increase in population and traffic
cannot be sustained, and the relatively small village nature of Wall Heath will be
completely overwhelmed, as well as destroying much valued green belt land enjoyed
by many.
The daily increase in cars alone, especially those travelling towards Wolverhampton
or Birmingham would make it difficult for us in Heathbrook Avenue to emerge on to
the A449 at all!
Lack of parking and facilities in the centre of Wall Heath could not possibly support
this proposed increase, and would just destroy the nature of it.
The construction of so many new homes cannot be carried out without the necessary
infrastructure; where are the required school places coming from? Local schools are
already operating beyond capacity, as are local Doctors' surgeries. We all know that
services will be choked to the detriment of all who already live here.
In my view, such a proposal is utter madness. Clearly, there has to be further housing
provision, but does it have to be done by severely reducing the quality of life for
everyone else?
Yours Faithfully

Object

Representation ID: 11281

Received: 16/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Julian Roberts

I strongly object to hundreds of additional homes being built on greenfield sites such as Holbeache DUH 208 and the Triangle DUH 211.
The loss of these greenfield sites would be detrimental to those living in the area and their mental health. I and many others use the Holbeache area to walk around and the benefit of such an area cannot be understated. All brownfield sites should be utilised before any of these are considered.
Kingswinford is already gridlocked with traffic and not just at peaks times. The infrastructure to support this does not exist. This will make an already bad situation worse. The land at Holbeache would for example put more traffic onto an island that cannot cope now.
There are not enough school places to support those wishing to attend now. The local schools are already oversubscribed by hundreds. Where will these additional children be educated?
There are already homes being built around Stallings Lane and the Pensnett Trading Estate and more planned for Ketley Quarry.
Adding more homes may also cause flooding issues as more tarmac and less green fields to absorb the water may cause issues.
The bus services in Kingswinford are mediocre currently. Adding more people to use this service for work or to attend college will exacerbate the problem further.
The plan would be a disaster for Kingswinford and should be rejected

Comment

Representation ID: 11313

Received: 29/09/2021

Respondent: Mrs Emily Fitz-Harris

Future building needs to really take this into consideration, while I agree there is a need for new housing and the supporting infrastructure it is so important that it does not as stated cause a detrimental impact on the living conditions for future OR CURRENT occupiers of new residential properties, in terms of: privacy and overlooking, access to sunlight and daylight; artificial lighting; vibration; dust and fumes; smell; noise; crime and safety;
This is also why I feel that the Triangle, Holbeche and other green spaces should not be built on for new housig. The roads cannot cope with so many more households which will all have a minimum of 1 car. We need to provide green spaces within reach of housing for mental and physical wellbeing and cause as little negative impact on the environment as possible.

Comment

Representation ID: 11361

Received: 30/09/2021

Respondent: Mrs Maria Cassidy

These two sites are precious areas of green belt land to the local residents. Not only do they provide areas to walk and exercise, but they also form a distinct boundary of the Dudley Borough.

My concerns about these two proposed sites involve the following areas:

Roads & Transport

The road network through and around Kingswinford is already immensely overburdened and struggles to cope with the existing volume of traffic. To add to the problem with a potential additional 800 plus homes for residents within the Dudley Borough will only exacerbate the problems currently experienced. It is already accepted that Wordsley High Street is one of the most polluted roads within the Black Country and with absolutely no scope to alleviate the pressure, this pollution will only spread further along the main route between Kingswinford and Stourbridge, including onto surrounding roads.

To travel anywhere from Kingswinford involves high volume traffic and regular queuing traffic.

If the thought process of Dudley Council is that these two sites will potentially attract buyers of property from further afield that could access the sites by using the A449 (again another densely used road), this indicates that the properties are not being targeted at people requiring property within the Dudley Borough.

NHS Services

We are all acutely aware of the pressures the NHS is under nationally.

To add to this burden locally will certainly have an effect on the current residents of Kingswinford. Doctor’s surgeries already struggle to facilitate the current population in the area and, without major changes, would only struggle further should more residents require registration at the existing doctor’s surgeries.

Education

We have many excellent schools within Kingswinford and the close surrounding areas. Many families already relocate to the area to take advantage of these establishments. Should further properties be built, surely this will only increase the requirement for school places. Even if schools can accommodate more pupils, this is only going to be to the detriment of the pupils who may no longer be able to gain access to their first-choice school, thus having to travel further and again adding the pressure on the road network.

Green Belt

These two sites are precious areas of green belt land to the local residents. Not only do they provide areas to walk and exercise, but they also form a distinct boundary of the Dudley Borough. Should these green belt areas become large housing conurbations, it would surely only be a matter of time before South Staffordshire Council would also consider developing on green belt areas up to their boundaries. This would lead to immense areas of green belt that have existed for many hundreds of years being lost to facilitate housing.

Object

Representation ID: 11374

Received: 30/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Neil Thacker

I would like to object to the proposed plans specifically at "the triangle" on swindon road, kingswinford. I feel a development of such scale would have a significant negative impact on the local community and the fact it would be on green belt land would be disasterous to the natural environment. I feel this would be an unnecessary and irreversible tragedy robbing future generations of local families a sense of wellbeing that this countryside locality brings. There are other locations where development would be more suitable without losing our precious green belt.

Object

Representation ID: 11428

Received: 02/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs L Prowse

This is an area that is already overcrowded for traffic, schools, medical needs. To build on this land is absolutely ridiculous. To say it has been taken out of the green belt is underhanded. The area is already saturated with families and cars, no more is necessary here.

Object

Representation ID: 11438

Received: 02/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Jonathan Neale

The local infrastructure will not be able to cope with further housing in the Kingswinford and Wall Heath Area. Even at the current time during peak hours the local area very often gets gridlocked and this has got worse over the past 10 years

Object

Representation ID: 11440

Received: 02/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Deborah Neale

The Kingswinford and wall Heath infrastructure will not cope with further housing on the triangle. Far too often the Wall Heath and Kford area is extremely busy resulting in gridlock and many motorists who know the area circumvent the main roads by driving round residential streets which is a danger to children and other pedestrians

Object

Representation ID: 11448

Received: 03/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Graham Jordan

Object to the building on 533 houses on precious green belt land like 'the Triangle' which is vital for the wellbeing of local residents.
533 houses could mean 1300 more people and 700 cars, resulting in poorer air quality, noise, destroy wildlife, and habitat. Infrastructure is stretched anyway as it is, the A449/A491 and other minor roads are gridlocked daily.
You can't see a doctor or talk to one on the phone easily,
Not enough shops, no near employment, no cycle routes, no police station, no near fire station, no public transport, no near rail links, and one hospital.

Object

Representation ID: 11466

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: 11467

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

Object

Representation ID: 11474

Received: 04/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Philippa Pearson

Destroying this site will mean losing a wide variety of birds/wildlife. The idea that retaining hedgerows and trees in isolation will continue to represent rich habitat shows a lack of understanding of how ecology works. Building right up to a hedgerow and across the hunting ground will have a catastrophic effect on habitat quality. Adjacent green belt including Ridgehill Woods will be damaged due to loss of neighbouring wildlife corridor/buffer zone, noise, vehicles, pollution, and street lighting. Green spaces are more important than ever for our mental health and wellbeing and this one is important to our community.

Object

Representation ID: 11476

Received: 04/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Diana Glaze

Destroying this site will mean losing a wide variety of birds/wildlife. Building right up to the hedgerow and across the hunting ground will completely destroy habitat quality. Adjacent green belt including Ridgehill Woods will also be damaged due to loss of neighbouring wildlife corridor/buffer zone, noise, vehicles, pollution, and street lighting. Green spaces are more important than ever for our mental health and wellbeing and this one is important to our community. There is already a huge traffic problem in this area as commuters struggle to reach rail networks or nearby towns.

Object

Representation ID: 11548

Received: 06/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Rachel Newman

My family moved to Kingswinford for cleaner air & good schools. If you build on this green belt land it will destroy wildlife and natural habitats, polluting locally & overall reducing our quality of life, plus the current schools can not accommodate more children - the infrastructure is not there to support this.
If you build on this green belt, it’s highly likely my family will move to a neighbouring authority where green spaces are prioritised and protected, not built on. We will take with us our work skills & money.

Object

Representation ID: 11563

Received: 06/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Carlo Di Terlizzi

The triangle is a very important natural green space for our area. It is a habitat for birds: walk by in spring and you will hear the skylarks singing overhead. I have seen nervous muntjac deer close by and foxes. It would be a travesty to lose these due to habitat loss. I'm also extremely concerned about the impact of increased traffic: the A449, A491 and A4101 have reached gridlock. The air quality can be awful and we know pollution causes serious health issues including death. It also takes ridiculous lengths of time to drive very short distances.

Object

Representation ID: 11573

Received: 21/09/2021

Respondent: Mrs Emma Westwood

[Black Country Site Assessment report Dudley Appendix A Page 70 The Triangle - SA0025-DUD]

objection due to:
- effects on local roads, A449 is already very busy and noisy road.
-Effect on local schools, most local schools are already at legal size
-Effect on NHS not enough doctors and dentists in the local area
-Local amenities are already strained, there are lack of parks with good equipment, hardly ant youth centres and no local sport centres
-loss of greenbelt will have a huge impact on local wildlife and environment
I moved to this area 12 months ago to live closer to a rural area with cleaner air and green space, building of this size will cause air and water pollution.

Object

Representation ID: 11577

Received: 21/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Robert Westwood

[The Triangle - SA 0025-DUD]

I wholeheartedly object to the building of all the new houses in the area, in particular the building on The Triangle, Swindon Road.

The construction of all said houses in the area is going to have a huge negative impact from beginning of construction all the way through to of construction all the way through to occupation of the houses. Construction will cause an untold amount of traffic + pollution problems . Once occupied where all the new residents send children to school (schools are already struggling to meet demand). Where will they be able to get Doctors and Dentists appointments. again the are is already struggling with being able to get Doctors + Dentist appointments
If these points weren't important the biggest point is the destruction of more green spaces + wildlife in the area. It seems there is no respect at all for this and what we are leaving behind for our children. all we are achieving with these plans is:
*overcrowding *Destroying wildlife * Destroying Green spaces * More Pollution
Where are the positives !?!