Dudley Borough's Vision

Object

Representation ID: 10571

Received: 17/08/2021

Respondent: Whitewater Technologies Ltd

With specific reference to BL15, ie development on green belt taking in Stourbridge Golf Course and surrounding area. This suggested site does not appear to have taken into account:
1 the types of habitat present. There are muntjac deer and bats living on the proposed area for development as well as foxes, rabbits, and birds such as buzzard, greater spotted woodpecker, green woodpecker, long tailed tits, goldfinches to name a few.
2 the health and wellbeing of residences using this area for recreation. The path across the golf course is very well used by walkers and cyclists.

Object

Representation ID: 10841

Received: 14/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Stephen Hathway

My complaint is regarding housing section DUH2171.
Why is this land being taken when we are surrounded by brown belt land and empty houses??? I’ve walked and played on these fields all my life. We have lost enough wild life havens to builders .

Object

Representation ID: 11408

Received: 01/10/2021

Respondent: Mr David Shaw

The wording used is mis-leading and only concentrates on the positives. It should clearly state the negative impacts this will have on the area to put this in balance. Removing green belt status and covering it in concrete should not be something the Black Country plan should be promoting.

Comment

Representation ID: 11788

Received: 09/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Jane Mallin

Your plans to build on green site land go against so many points on your vision, tourism … come see more houses! Regeneration of town centres .. change use to residential. Apartments over shops. Environment will be spoilt by taking away places where people can breathe and run and play and see nature first hand. You will create a generation that has never seen a fox or a squirrel etc etc. Children need to know that we respect wildlife not flatten and build on their habitat

Object

Representation ID: 11794

Received: 09/10/2021

Respondent: Dr Mark Garvey

Summary:
Building on green belt land
Environmental impact
Increased traffic on a very busy area
Dangerous with extra traffic with children walking to near by schools
Affecting countryside

Object

Representation ID: 11864

Received: 10/10/2021

Respondent: Ms Jessica Stoll

Dudley, Sandwell, Wolverhampton and Walsall are all highly urban areas already and so our green belt has special importance, and once it's gone -- it's gone forever.

In order to make the Black Country an attractive place to live, the green belt should be conserved -- not built upon at a revolutionary rate, which is what this plan is proposing.

Comment

Representation ID: 13127

Received: 21/09/2021

Respondent: Councillor Qadar Zada

It is absolutely right that we defend, tooth and nail, every bit of Green space.

The Labour group is against this unnecessary rampage on our Green space, which is a direct result of policy failure by this Council.

Comment

Representation ID: 13158

Received: 27/08/2021

Respondent: Mrs Ruth Buttery

Good afternoon,

As a councillor for Hayley green and Cradley South I recommend this plan in terms of the Halesowen area.
I know for the residents within my ward this has been a hugely significant plan and various meetings, walks and groups have been formed and occurred over the last 3 years, showing the passion and importance of the green belt to the residents not just in Halesowen but wider afield who also use this precious area, which has become more important still over the last 18 months.

As you are aware the Halesowen town and area borders onto Lapal, Uffmoor wood and Clent Hills areas that are classed as ancient woodland and the surrounding area is all green belt and a mix of SLINC, landscape heritage area and mineral safeguarding area.

I am very pleased to see that the area marked for developments in the Halesowen region are all brownfield sites being reused for housing and there is no proposed development on any of the important and environmentally significant green belt land.

Kind regards,
Ruth

Object

Representation ID: 14866

Received: 07/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Kelly Cook

Unacceptable increase in already overstretched local facilities and amenities such as schools, doctor's surgery and Hagley village parking.

Local area already suffering from substantial residential developments and this would further add to the local urban sprawl.

Contribute to the loss of historical and natural boundary between Pedmore and Hagley.

Increase in already problematic local traffic and related pollution allied to the loss of green pastures and Grade 1 agricultural land with the resultant damage to the environment.

Object

Representation ID: 21497

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Cornerstone Marketing

Dear Sir,
I wish to appeal against the removal of the Rear Garden Land, Old Farm, Norton from the original Call For Sites proposal published by Dudley MBC in January 2021 and have the site reinstated as part Draft Black Country Plan Regulation 18 Consultation (August 2021).

The basis of my objections to the removal are as follows

The Assessment on the Rear Garden Land, Old Farm, and Norton appears to have been completed by people who have never visited the site.
Historical references have been used that are totally out of date
There has been a gross misrepresentation of key facts throughout.
Conclusions that were arrived at by DBMC Planning Officers have been contradicted without being substantiated
Statements on key issues have been made that have no bearing on the truth.
No reference is made to the 46 LVIA Report attached


In support of the above I have attached

A Background Summary.
Response to the key points raised in the Site Assessment.
A satellite view of Norton Covet and the Rear Garden Land at Old Farm
The layout of the proposed Old Farm Development
The 46 page - Landscape & Visual Assessment Document - prepared independently by PDP
Associates

for all comments and documents see attachments