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

Object

Representation ID: 12430

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Alan Green

no comments provided

Object

Representation ID: 12447

Received: 07/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Barry Hubble

The Triangle: DUH211 page 371
Holbeache: DUH208 page 371
My objections to this plan are as follows:
HIGHWAYS- Both these applications front the A449 which is already a very busy road. In my opinion additional traffic would be a road safety hazzard both to pedestrians who need to cross this road and the traffic on the road.
LOCAL SERVICES- Schools, Doctors and Hospitals are already very stretched to meet local demand. Should a potential developer offer to build new surgeries and schools the question is where and how will they be staffed. There is also a concern that there is sufficient policing for the additional population
CLIMATE- Whilst the major concern is climate pollution, this proposal will eliminate a green belt area. There are many brown site area available in the borough, although we are informed that any site that cannot take 10 properties is not counted

Object

Representation ID: 12467

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Alan Stevens

I object to the planning application on several ground:
the local infrastructure will be put under considerable street with additional traffic and local services
* Road congestion/ Highways traffic
*local Schooling
*Local health care

Object

Representation ID: 12502

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Ian Bambrick

I live next to this greenbelt, bought my house because it was next to green belt, barely 12 months of enjoying this and you are trying to build on it. There is plenty of other land that can be re-used without destroying this land.

Object

Representation ID: 12507

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mr ian Fradgley

I object to the proposed development at Holbeache and the 'Triangle' for the following reasons.

1) The local area infrastructure (schools/doctors/dentists/hospitals) are struggling with current loads and will not cope with additional housing.
2) The local road network is at breaking point. At rush hour it can take up to 1/2 hour to get from one end of Stallings lane to the other. Travel from kford to Stourbridge is also much slower. The additional housing at the top of Stallings lane has had an adverse effect on travelling, which will be exacerbated when the proposed Ibstock development is completed.
3) Loss of green areas, the fields, Holbeache and Triangle give much needed fresh air (except when the wind blows from the Himley tip. If I wanted to live in the middle of mass housing, I would have moved to Whithymore on Milking Bank.

Object

Representation ID: 12512

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Alex Johnson

[DUH 208 Holbeache
DUH 211 Triangle]

The visual amenity + character of the area would dramatically change. It is useful agricultural land graded 3 and above.
Increase in light pollution in a much needed area of tranquillity. Poorer air quality of adjoining residents + wider area, particularly from increased in traffic. Impact of building from construction noise + traffic. Unsafe for nearby school. Increasing numbers of vehicles will mean increased pollution, road safety consequences. Lack of public transport already. Poor rail access. Time taken to reach rail network to Wolv/ Bham is much longer than 30 mins and when you eventually get to Stourbridge junction, even overflow carpark cannot accommodate vehicles which flow onto nearby streets! Highways will need a new road infrastructure. Commute from Wall Heath during busy periods is horrendous. Even after new Pensnett road system it is bumper to bumper every morning! Hansen rate this area as having the worst commuting score from homes to places of employment. More houses will only increase this traffic, making commuting even more of a nightmare! Flooding... this weekends rain saw A449 island (Swindon Road) flooded, cars having to mount kerbs to go around it, endangering pupil's safety walking to school. If houses were to be built on the triangle, some serious road changes would need to be adapted. HIGHWAY MAJOR ISSUES !!!

Object

Representation ID: 12523

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Jane Johnson

The Triangle Ref DUH211 Page 371
Holbeach Ref DUH208 Page 371
Too many houses are being built around this area.
Increased traffic & accidents.
Local schools are over subscribed.
Doctors surgeries & Russell's Hall Hospital are all struggling to meet patients needs.
It's becoming a concrete jungle and we need our greenbelt more than ever.

Object

Representation ID: 12536

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Alexander Chuter

The area immediately surrounding the Wallheath/Kingswinford location is of tremendous
importance, not only to the current inhabitance, but of generations before us. The residents have an ongoing relationship with the farmer of the "triangle" and the children use the fields upon the first snowfall of the year.

It goes without saying that the backdrop of the current residents will be forever changed, not only
with the increased noise, traffic and crime levels.
The A449 has been, for many years, a troublesome route, with the traffic levels already at sky-high levels, with nearly 900 homes this will cause further concern, no doubt accidents and an immediate impact on the mental health of the residents.

The amenities of the village's are more than adequate for the size of the population, we do not require or indeed request for further intrusion into our lives with your proposed plan. The residents do not require further schools, pharmacies or shops, and we do not require alterations to our networks. Most importantly, we do not want our surrounding landscapes to be destroyed for ever.
I whole-heartedly reject this proposal!!!!

Object

Representation ID: 12541

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Janet Dennison

Black Country Site Assessment Report
Dudley Appendix A Page 79
The Triangle SA0025-DUD
The loss of the land at Holbeache will effect my mental health.
I cannot cross the road for traffic on A449, very few buses and always late, traffic noise and air pollution around area, as its basically an island of land traffic goes 6 ways round it.

Object

Representation ID: 12546

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Alison Chambers

My objection is to the new housing future green belt development parcels DUH 208 Holbeache and DUH 211 The Triangle.
The black Country Plan has not been developed with regard to NPPF 20 July 2021.
Transport has not been adequately considered. These sites are not close to dual carriageway road network.
The A449 is single carriageway between Kidderminster and Wolverhampton. the road into Dudley Borough A4101 is single carriageway. Access to Russels Hall Hospital is slow and hazardous. Maternity unit facilities are greatly reduced. Further family housing will be at risk. Education facilities for families are limited by suitable staffing and facility.
Local neighbourhood shopping is limited with villages such as Stourbridge, Brierley Hill and Dudley having reduced options.
Alternatives such as Stourbridge Merry Hill and even some convenience shopping rely on motorists shopping.

Object

Representation ID: 12548

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Jason Round

1. Loss of green belt
• It is better to use old factory sites (Brownfield) and re-develop inner cities to revive town centres.
• This is useful Agricultural land graded 3 and above.
• The Visual Amenity and Character of the Area would dramatically change.
• 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
• Developing green belt means loss of access to countryside, once it’s gone, it’s gone.
• Higher noise levels impact of adjoining residents and wildlife.
• increase in light pollution in a much needed area of tranquillity.
• Poorer air quality impact of adjoining residents and wider area, particularly from increase in traffic.
• Impact of building from construction noise and traffic.
3. Impact on traffic and transport
• Increasing numbers of vehicles will mean increased pollution, road safety consequences.
• Road traffic congestion in the area is already high. A449 and A491 gridlocked in a morning. Nor do we want more roads e.g. ‘Western Strategic (Orbital) Route’ destroying more green belt.
• Lack of public transport or cycle routes. Hansen rate this area as having the worst commuting score from homes to places of employment.
• Poor rail access. Time taken to reach the rail network to Wolverhampton/Birmingham is much longer than 30 minutes.
• 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
• 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)
• Local Health Services are already over subscribed and un-sustainable.
• Primary Schools over 15 minutes walk away.
• Road Infrastructure already struggling to cope at present with high traffic levels. Impact on the wider road network particularly Kingswinford and Wallheath junctions.
• No suitable or regular bus routes or cycle network.
• No nearby employment sites or network.
• 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
• loss of ancient trees, natural habitats, biodiversity.
• loss of SLINC (Site of Local Importance for Nature Conservation) hedgerows to create access.
• this will contribute to climate change
• Loss of wildlife, impact on the fields and meadows.
• Loss of wildlife corridors linking green spaces.
• Flood risk affecting drainage of the area and ground water.
• Contributing to rapid loss of species in Britain in recent decades eg moths, butterflies, bees have declined significantly.
• Replanting schemes do not replace ancient habitats and features.
6. Important locally
• Local people love and appreciate this green belt area, and want it for future generations
• Important local green space, valuable trees, hedgerows and open fields. Many trees have Tree Preservation Orders
• Site of Local Importance for Nature Conservation (SLINC) - ‘Ashwood Haye Fields’ - hedgerow around the perimeter of the site and some within the site
• It contains Important local green space, valuable trees, hedgerows and open fields.
• 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.
• 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.
• It is part of the Mid Severn Sandstone Plateau - important for habitat conservation.
• In addition, it is an important habitat for declining British wildlife (list species where known).
• Disrupting the wildlife corridors and surrounding habitats for these would be irreversible.
• Historic character of Prestwood. Prestwood is a locally designated Historic Landscape area. A collection of Scheduled Ancient Monuments associated win the Greensforge Roman Camp are situated in the area between Swindon and Prestwood to the west of Kingswinford.
7. Huge opposition by the local community
• These housing proposals are not meeting affordable housing targets with expensive housing in the Green Belt.
8. Legislation could be quoted
The National Planning Policy Framework (the government’s planning policies) says “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)
For sites
DUH 208 p371 – Holbeache
DUH 211 p371 – Triangle
I strongly object!
We need to protect our Greenbelt
There will be increased air pollution
Pressure on already pressured roads
Simply not enough infrastructure to cope.

Object

Representation ID: 12552

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Jeanette Evans

Holbeache DUH 211 page 371
The Triangle DUH208 page 371
I am objecting to the above areas being included in the Black Country Plan for redevelopment for the following reasons: -
- loss of green belt and impact on wildlife
- plenty of brownfield sites that can be developed in the Dudley area
- an increase in traffic in an already busy area causing polution and safety issues for children walking to school
- potential flooding as both sites are on a slope

Object

Representation ID: 12587

Received: 28/09/2021

Respondent: Ian Sutton

For the proposed houses in both Wallheath and Kingswinford I object.
The roads through Wall Heath are extremely busy as they are and are saturated (Wall Heath, Kingswinford, Wordsley and Stourbridge road systems are already struggling). The local schools are at capacity as are the doctor's surgeries at Moss Grove and Sandhills Road.

There is no extra space in [unable to read]
Something must [unable to read]
Holbeache Lane in Wall Heath
The Triangle in Kingswinford. I object to this ‘development’

Object

Representation ID: 12591

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Jennifer Smith

Re The Triangle BCP site DUH 211 page 371
Holbeache BCP site DUH 208 page 371
I wish to object to the proposed buildings
Mainly because the services etc. Doctors, Schools, Dentists cannot cope with more patients on their books.
Schools do not have the capacity to take on more pupils.
Our roads cannot cope with more cars and the conjestion it would cause.
We do not need more houses in our area.
It is becoming more and more built up and dangerous for our children.

Object

Representation ID: 12594

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Jennifer Tromans

The Triangle Ref DUH 211 page 371
Holbeache Ref DUH 208 page 371
I object to the proposals to build literally hundreds of houses on both the Triangle and Holbeache on the grounds of
a) the infrastructure will not be able to cope
b) it is important to maintain the green belt in the area as far as possible
c) I have grandchildren at two already overloaded local schools. Any more intake is just not viable, and
d) local Doctors surgeries and hospitals are already struggling
In short this area just cannot cope with this amount of new homes.
It's all about quality of life!

Object

Representation ID: 12601

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Ms Joanne Harrison

Reference numbers
1 - Holbeach site DUH 208 page 371
2 - The Triangle DUH 211 page 371

A - effect on local services - NHS
B - effect on local services - roads
C - effect on local services - schools
D - strain on local amenities
E - loss of Green Belt and impact on local wildlife and environment
F - other things to consider
Historical - Holbeach House - Grade II listed building
Local opinions and huge opposition
Residents on Charterfields, Maidensbridge and elderly residents - Holbeache will be affected daily for a long period of time
No rail networks or cycle networks - limited bus services will force more commuters to use cars and gridlock A449 / A491

Object

Representation ID: 12607

Received: 21/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Ian Westwood

Re Draft Black Country Plan 2039 (Regulation 18)

I am commenting on the subject plan, which I find to be ill-conceived, as anyone who lives in, or near to the area would know. The plans are to build houses south of Holbeache Lane (330 houses) and at the Triangle (Swindon Road - 533 houses). The plans clearly fail any reasonable test.

1. Can the local infrastructure support an influx of in excess 1000 extra motor vehicles? No, the only major road that serves the area (the A449) already suffers from chronic congestion at the normal commuting times on the day, as well as at school opening and closing times. There are no local rail stations and the bus service is inadequate (in terms of frequency). This will lead to additional pollution, as well as congestion, with through traffic being tempted to find alternative routes on roads designed for light residential traffic, not heavy through traffic.

2. The developments are planned to be of "high value" houses, so do not appear to meet the often publicised Government targets for creating affordable housing. As "high value" housing, it is highly unlikely that any potential new owners will not already be in housing of their own. All such that developments will achieve is transfer current home-owners from one area to another and will do nothing to solve the alleged housing crisis.

3. Educational considerations - Most of the local schools are already over-subscribed each year. With other 800 houses planned to be built, how will those schools accommodate many hundreds of additional children seeking places? With no additional school to be built, this will be a major problem that has no current solution.

4. With the potential increase in noise and pollution (of both air and light), the area will be downgraded from its current aspirational status, due to the loss of green spaces. Quality of life will be impacted for the existing residents, both during the construction phase and afterwards.

Object

Representation ID: 12616

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Rev John Brindley

The Triangle DUH 211 page 371
The current infrastructure is under significant pressure at present. It is difficult to gain access to hospital or medical facilities & dental capacity is limited. Additional housing will add to already stretched services.
The increase in traffic caused by this proposed development will have a severe impact on roads & public transport as well as increasing levels of pollution, from traffic and housing.
The greenbelt is a fast declining benefit and it seems that with the decline in heavy industry in the area there are brownfield sites that should be developed before the greenbelt is touched, once its gone its gone for good.
The overall quality of life for young people would diminish with additional population trying to access very limited facilities for young people.
Schools would be under very severe pressure & the under provision of hospital capacity would result in linger waiting times & appointment delays.
All in all this would appear to be an ill conceived plan to make money at the expense of the local population.

Object

Representation ID: 12643

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mr John Dalloway

Loss of Green Belt.
Brownfield sites should be used before green belt is used. Very good agricultural land should not be built on this area is very good agricultural land.
Effect on local services roads.
The A449 is a very busy noisy road and with any increase in traffic the road in the area would not cope. With higher CO2 emissions would result in very poor air quality.
Schools
Schools in the area would be overwhelmed and would not have enough places.
Environment
The loss of green belt would have a devastating effect on wild life. Trees would be lost. Trees are needed to combat CO2 emissions and reduce global warming.

Object

Representation ID: 12664

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mr John Evans

Green belt building surrounding Wall Heath

Proposed building development in "green belt" would effectively destroy unique village character of Wall Heath
Services are already overloaded / unable to meet essential demand

Object

Representation ID: 12669

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mr John Evans

Holbeach DUH211 page 371
The Triangle DUH 208 page 371

My objection to the Black Country plan for the development of the said areas are as follows
1 - The extra traffic and polution to the area.
2 - Schools and Doctors will be under greater pressure.
3 - The loss of Wildlife, which is under great pressure with all the development that is already going on in this area

Object

Representation ID: 12683

Received: 22/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Alan Clark

The Triangle - BCP Site REf DUH 211 Page 371, DSA 2 Pages 424-428

Far too much building in K'ford and surrounding areas. The roads will not cope with extra traffic, which are already congested. Wall Heath to Stourbridge one of worst roads in the borough, Stallings Lane cannot cope with the new houses being built at the moment too much traffic. Not enough roads!

Object

Representation ID: 12690

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Amanda Martin-Smith

I do not know how the roads will cope with the extra traffic, it is already really chaotic as it is now. Nor the schools, I work in one and we are already oversubscribed. As well s the ones in the village of Wall Heath. Having left Wall Heath a few years ago and the returning to the village last year 2020, I have seen a massive change. To build even more houses will ruin our beautiful green belt beyond belief and put extra pressure in our resources, as well as not helping the environment

Object

Representation ID: 12694

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Amanda Round

I believe that the local roads and infrastructure of Wall Heath and Kingswinford would not be able to cope with extra traffic, schooling, and pollution of the amount of traffic that it would create in the future.
More facilities would be required for this to be a viable option

Object

Representation ID: 12696

Received: 21/09/2021

Respondent: Miss Alexia Fletcher

Firstly schools are overcrowded. How do we ensure the teaching levels are up to standard by increasing students but not space and teachers?
Doctors - an absolute joke to get an appointment. You may say you'll build another doctors but we need to focus on what we currently have and sort that out before we build another houses and another doctors.
Safeguarding our roads is vital. The traffic is stupidly busy. The roads need widening to allocate all the traffic. Around the triangle there is a school which has a huge amount of traffic of surrounding this.
Mental health wellbeing? Since lockdown I do regular walks across the countryside, am I meant to walk amongst traffic?
Roads, people, doctors, dentists, pollution, mental health, traffic, crime will increase which damaging.

Object

Representation ID: 12697

Received: 23/09/2021

Respondent: Mrs Alison Cure

I object strongly to the proposed development on 'The Triangle'. Building on the green belt will, I believe have a significant negative on the quality of life of local residents. Access to the local countryside will have been lost, poorer air quality from increased traffic will impact on people's health, increased noise level will result, loss of local natural habitats and the wildlife found there, increased risk of flooding due to green spaces being lost to concrete/built on surfaces, significant impact on local services e.g. doctors, schools and hospitals (The local NHS services cannot cope with the current demand let alone adding more!) and the pressure added to an already struggling road infrastructure should not, in my opinion, go ahead and I strongly object to it.

Object

Representation ID: 12698

Received: 21/09/2021

Respondent: Mrs Irene Foley

Re Black Country Site Assessment Report
Dudley Appendix A Page 79 The Triangle.
SA - 0025 - DUD (Triangle - Swindon Rd)

Objections :-
1) Local road infrastructure already congested. During rush hours, Lodge Lane, cars nose to tail without additional vehicles from proposed buildings.
2) Already busy waiting times to get Drs appointments & ambulances have difficulty reaching patients.
3)Why use our lovely greenbelt when brownfield sites available, it will be lost forever.
4)Schools already bursting at seams.
5)Many residents purchased properties because of close proximity to green belt.
6) A449 already very busy, noisy and frequent accidents occur.
7) Building on this land will change this lovely area for ever, and certainly not for the better. Just consider local residents.

Object

Representation ID: 12707

Received: 30/09/2021

Respondent: Mrs Alison Jones

Waiting times for appointments at hospitals and Doctors are too long, getting into Dr's is difficult enough. More houses equal more children for less school places.
More people waiting for appointment. More cars on the roads which are not built for the sheer volumes of traffic , longer queuing times, pollution and air quality will be affected, less clear air.
Our green spaces help peoples mental health, the wildlife once lost will not come back. It is a fine balance between wildlife, environment and humans.

Object

Representation ID: 12709

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Amanda Smith

Black Country Draft Plan 863
I strongly object to the plan 863 to build new homes on south holbeache Road & Swindon Road Triangle. Wall Heath has no further NHS services to offer, our doctors, Dentists & Hospital for this area is at full capacity. Our roads busy already, the A449 carrying high volumes of traffic, further commuters will add to the noise, co2 emissions, and traffic delays. Schools in this area are not going to offer new parents places for primary or secondary children, they are full. The NHS Ambulance Service to Wall Heath is struggling with journey times taking far too long. Sometimes 40 minutes to get to hospital. Our wildlife for this area will be impacted if building takes place, destroying hedgerows and nesting for larks and other wild birds.
It was always the plan with new builds to use "brown field sites" 1st before Green Belt and Agricultural land. why are we considering either of these Green Belt sites at all as Green Belt land is protected.

Object

Representation ID: 12712

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Ms Amy Hill

The building of 870 properties on the Triangle and he fields at Holbeache would destroy at least two greenbelt sites in Dudley.
It would put unsustainable pressure on the local services and infrastructure that are already under immense pressure.
In addition, the destruction of two green belt sites would cause irreversible harm to wildlife and their habitats.
We also object to these plans because our roads are poor quality and extremely congested. The air quality in Dudley South would further deteriorate.
Furthermore, we object to the proposed plans because noise and light pollution would increase to the detriment of existing residents.
No one should be expected to keep losing open spaces whilst brownfields, unused buildings and industrial sites are available. As residents of Kingswinford/ Wall Heath for most of our lives we strongly object to all of the plan.