Brierley Hill Strategic Centre

Object

Representation ID: 12265

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Dennis Passmore

Having lived in [personal details redacted] for almost fifty years, I was horrified to learn that Dudley MBC are contemplating building houses on the green spaces adjacent to Severn Drive and Butterfield Road. (DUH222)
The pure logistics of this proposal shows that it is not viable. Access for construction materials, plant and contractors vehicles must be via Corbyns Hall Lane, Corbyns Hall Rd or Comber Drive, which are already accident black spots.
The sheer misery of this construction to the residents would be unforgiveable. These green spaces are essential, being used by children of all ages for different activities, dog walkers and the general interaction of all residents in the area, which provides both physical and mental well being to everyone.
Extra houses would impact on our already under pressure GP's, hospitals, schools and traffic problems.
The avenue of trees on Severn Drive provide cover for bats, owls and hawks and it would be a great pity to destroy this oasis.
Your help in preventing this development would be greatly appreciated.

Object

Representation ID: 12285

Received: 04/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Denise Mallen

SA-0050-DUD / BCP REF DUH 216 Bryce Road (Green Space)
SA-0199 – DUD / BCP REF DUH 222 Severn Drive (Green Space)
I wish to object to the above proposals on the following grounds
More houses will mean an increase of traffic volume in areas with narrow roads with vehicles parked on roads. Comber Drive is already dangerous and more traffic will increase the danger here.
Building on the Severn Drive site will mean the loss of a valuable recreation site for people and dog walkers. Mayflower Drive green site is too small to offer as a realistic substitute meaning people will have to drive to somewhere to exercise dogs and therefore increase traffic and pollution levels.
More houses and their occupants mean that doctors surgeries, dentists, schools will be even more over subscribed than they are now.
These two sites are valuable and have been valuable to the local people, myself included. Physical + mental health.

Object

Representation ID: 12899

Received: 04/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Andrew Simner

DUH 216 (Bryce Road)
Kids need somewhere to play
places to walk the dogs

Object

Representation ID: 13279

Received: 30/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Alan Hale

I object to the building on Severn Drive green space because being dissabled its the only place close to my home where i can walk my dog and see other like people to talk to.
SA 0199 - DUD BCP Ref DUH222

Object

Representation ID: 13298

Received: 07/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Alan Perry

Number of people: 2

My wife and I wish to object to the proposed development of housing on the field / land adjacent to Guys Lane, Gornal Wood.
We are constantly being requested by social media etc., to be aware of climate change to plant more trees and wild flower meadows, wherever possible. Yet for some reason Dudley Council wish to do the opposite. Chop down trees and dig up green spaces.

From our property we can see the trees and the amount of many types of birds nesting. In Spring the trees are covered in blossom which attracts bees / butterflies. It is nice to see Horses in the field and to use the land behind to go for a walk.

TRAFFIC: Guys Lane is now a constant cut through from the Himley Road to Cinder Road to avoid the traffic lights at the Bull Street cross roads. Some years ago a weight restriction had to be applied to Guy's Lane to prevent HGV's. using it. Yet they still come along the lane. Early morning and late afternoon there is a constant stream of traffic with people going and returning from work. At times we have to queue to get to our own property. If more houses were built in Guys Lane this would be more of a problem.

GORNAL VILLAGE: Has anyone from Dudley Council driven through the village lately and tried to park especially when Red Hall School children are being collected. Even the buses have a problem getting through at times. Sometime ago we were promised a car park on land between the Methodist Church and Egginton's Chemist. This has not materialised. Now we are being told that an ALDO store is to be built there. WHY? We do not need an ALDI store. We already have SPA and Sainsburys and Lidl and Morrisons close by. How many more supermarkets do we need. ALDI would kill off the village and the small shops would suffer. Just think how much more traffic an ALDI store would bring.

The traffic in and around Gornal has become much worse since the building of the new estate know as Himley View near Stallings Lane. (Who gave it the name Himley View when Guy's lane etc., is already the Himley View estate!) We think Dudley Council should rethink this proposal Afterall there are other brown sites and areas that need developing in Dudley. LEAVE OUR GREEN SPACES ALONE.

Object

Representation ID: 13320

Received: 04/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Alan Slatter

I reject the building application on the below sites

SA-0050-DUD / BCP REF DUH 216 Bryce Road green space
SA-0199-DUD / BCP REF DUH 222 Severn Drive green space
SA-0042-DUD / BCP REF DUH 213 Lapwood Avenue green space
SA-0198-DUD / BCP REF DUH 221 Standhills green space

Roads bad now how will they cope!!
No Doctors!! in area???
No places for kids to let of steam, leading to crime not good!!!
Leave our green space

Object

Representation ID: 13330

Received: 04/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Alan Whitcombe

SA-0199-DUD/BCP REF DUH222
I object to any buildings on this green space as local hospitals and schools are already over crowded.
Its vital that we hold on to as much green as possible for the environment and for us locals to walk our pets.

Object

Representation ID: 13785

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Linda Morris

DUH216

I wish to object in the strongest possible terms to ANY building on green belt in the Dudley Borough area.
In the Council Scrutiny meeting on 6.10.21 your officer admitted that NO bio diversity checks have been made or wildlife impact assessment.
Our roads are already gridlocked, schools over subscribed, GP's over subscribed, huge waiting lists at hospitals.
People need green spaces for mental health and physical fitness. The impact on the environment and climate by building over remaining green land has been
underestimated. An audit of preserved or valuable trees has not been carried out.
The quality of life for existing residents will be greatly diminished, with more traffic, parking issues, nowhere to walk dogs or just take a walk in a green environment.
The plan mentions re-wilding - but where will that be as all available space is gradually eroded and built on. Why not just leave the existing habitat alone.
I do not believe that 'exceptional circumstances' apply in any of the areas listed. I do not believe that all brownfield sites have been identified. I do not believe that all empty Council houses that could be refurbished have been. It is clear that if there is a shortage of land that there should be a preference or flats or maisonettes thereby creating more housing from the same brownfield plot.
A question was also raised in the Scrutiny meeting regarding the data upon which the housing requirement has been calculated. Dudley Council should ask for this to be reviewed particularly post Brexit and post pandemic.
Listed as follows please register my objection
[...]
DUH216 Bryce Road
DUH222 Severn Drive
DUH213 Lapwood Avenue
DUH218 Guys Lane
DUH 206 Worcester Lane
DUH 207 Worcester Lane Central
DUH 209 Worcester Lane South
DUH 217 Wollaston Farm grazing land
DUH 210 Viewfield Crescent
DUH 041 Two Gates Lane Cradley
DUH 212 Lewis Road Lye
DUH 214 Seymour Road Wollescote
DUH 215 Bent Street Brierley Hill
I strongly object to the Conclusions in the draft plan that do not protect our greenbelt and green spaces in Dudley borough, by assessing sites there as suitable for residential or industrial purpose.

Object

Representation ID: 14312

Received: 01/10/2021

Respondent: Alan Jones

Number of people: 2

I am fully aware of the Governments proposals for housing developments in our region and would wish to comment as follows:-
Although road improvements have been undertaken over the 52 years that I have lived in Wall Heath, these are in no way sufficient to keep pace with the number of housing developments that have been carried out in this area. Added to this is the fact that most families now have two and even three cars per family which are endeavouring to use the same number of roads. In addition parents who both work use their cars to drop children outside schools so if you are unfortunate enough to live by these schools you are lucky if you can get off your drive at certain times of the day.
Hospital and GP services have also been severely impacted due to the increased number of residents now living in this area and this has been highlighted particularly during the pandemic.
Our green spaces are precious. What would we all have done if we could not have gone for walks during this horrible period.
Please do not build large numbers of houses around Wall Heath, Kingswinford, Wordsley and Stourbridge. Improve housing stock that already exists particularly local authority and housing association houses. Only build on brown field sites which is crying out for development.
LEAVE OUR GREENBELT ALONE.

Object

Representation ID: 14319

Received: 04/10/2021

Respondent: Miss Jenna Kitson

I wish to object to the building of houses on the proposed sites
BCP REF DUH 216 Bryce Road (Green space)
BCP REF DUH 222 Severn Drive (Green space)
BCP REF DUH 213 Lapwood Ave (Green space)
BCP REF 203 Ketley Quarry (Policy DSA3)

1. Traffic impact on all four sites
2. Effect on road safety again on Lapwood - Bryce road and on Severn Drive
3. Effect on school admissions for all areas concerned
4. The effect it will have on the NHS (Hospital) (one only) not enough local doctors or dentists in the local areas. Residents are now being forced to travel further to get access for care.
5. Effect on mental health. Severn Drive is flat for people of all ages to walk-run-play on. Mayflower Drive - Derwent Close make up a 1/4 of the space, neither terrain or shape is viable for any activities. Neither of these sites were large enough to be audited in the open space review 2017.
6. Loss of biodiversity, , bats, owls, foxes and other numerous species of birds.
7. Traffic infrastructure cannot cope now - check traffic on high st Pensnett between 3:30pm - 5:30pm and 7:30am till 9:00am its chocka-block.

Object

Representation ID: 14492

Received: 04/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Jessica Kitson

I wish to object to the building of houses on the proposed sites
BCP REF DUH 216 Bryce Road (Green space)
BCP REF DUH 222 Severn Drive (Green space)
BCP REF DUH 213 Lapwood Ave (Green space)
BCP REF DUH 203 Ketley Quarry (Policy DSA3)

1. Traffic impact on all four sites
2. Effect on road safety again on Lapwood - Bryce Rd and on Severn Drive.
3. Effect on school admissions for all areas concnerned.
4. The effect it will have on the NHS (hospital) (one only). Not enough local doctors or dentists in the local areas. Residents are now being forced to travel further to get access for care.
5. Effect on mental health. Severn Drive is flat for people of all ages to walk-run-play on. Mayflower Drive, Derwent Close make up a 1/4 of the space, neither terrain or shape is viable for any activities. Neither of these sites were large enough to be audited in the open space review 2017.
6. Loss of biodiversity, - Bats, owls, foxes and other numerous species of birds.
7. Traffic infrastructure cannot cope now - check traffic on high st Pensnett between 3:30pm-5:30pm and 7:30am till 9:00am its chocka-block.

Object

Representation ID: 14493

Received: 04/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Jessica Kitson

I wish to object to the building of houses on the proposed sites
BCP REF DUH 216 Bryce Road (Green space)
BCP REF DUH 222 Severn Drive (Green space)
BCP REF DUH 213 Lapwood Ave (Green space)
BCP REF DUH 203 Ketley Quarry (Policy DSA3)

1. Traffic impact on all four sites
2. Effect on road safety again on Lapwood - Bryce Rd and on Severn Drive.
3. Effect on school admissions for all areas concnerned.
4. The effect it will have on the NHS (hospital) (one only). Not enough local doctors or dentists in the local areas. Residents are now being forced to travel further to get access for care.
5. Effect on mental health. Severn Drive is flat for people of all ages to walk-run-play on. Mayflower Drive, Derwent Close make up a 1/4 of the space, neither terrain or shape is viable for any activities. Neither of these sites were large enough to be audited in the open space review 2017.
6. Loss of biodiversity - Bats, owls, foxes and other numerous species of birds.
7. Traffic infrastructure cannot cope now - check traffic on high st Pensnett between 3:30pm-5:30pm and 7:30am till 9:00am its chocka-block.

Object

Representation ID: 14862

Received: 06/10/2021

Respondent: Glenis Simms

[Viewfield crescent]

The site itself is home to much wildlife in the area and we regularly have bats in our back garden, which reside here. Many local people also visit the area to walk and take in the views, which reach as far as the Welsh mountains, Malvern and Bridgnorth. In the age of well-being being a priority I would argue this is a natural ‘pick me up’ on a par with any medication. With housing here the view is decimated.
The Ridgeway, which is the only route in and out of Viewfield Crescent is notorious for traffic issues. It is a ‘rat run’ for those attempting to beat traffic on the main Dudley road, which runs parallel. As older people who have lived here years pass away or move on families are moving in and it is just a matter of time until a child out playing is killed by an idiot navigating the bends of the road at high speed. There is also an issue with the bend by the council flats at the section of road near the GP surgery. These flats have no parking and so park on a tight bend leading from from a junction with Viewfield Crescent. This pushes oncoming cars onto the opposite side of the road often into the path of those coming at speed and this doesn’t need extra vehicles on this road as it is bad enough as it is.
I believe you need to rethink this as it will add to problems already there.

Object

Representation ID: 14930

Received: 10/10/2021

Respondent: Ian Hamblett

The plans to pull down prospering businesses in Colley Gate whilst not including in the plans properties that are both an eyesore and derilect. The Chip shop , Chemist , General store (Nisa) all serve a need for the general population of the area which tends to be in the upper age bracket and should be left alone . The decision is mindlessly stupid and should be stopped immediately. If any re generation is needed in the area the derilect buildings land should be utilised first , foremost and last!!

Object

Representation ID: 14933

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs M Williams

DUH 031
I wish to oppose the black country plan to build on the above site. It is green belt land and should stay that way. There is so much wildlife that would be affected. The beautiful view for the current residents would be destroyed which would affect their mental health. The amount of extra traffic would be a nightmare too on our already busy roads. Our local schools are full and over
subscribed as it is aswell as our doctors surgeries.
Goverment keeps saying plant more trees so why destroy the existing ones?
Use brownfield sites instead!

Object

Representation ID: 15249

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Sylvia Stevens

Black Country Plan DUH213 Lapwod Avenue
This piece of ground was my life line during lockdown from COVID It is used every day by the residents of Crestwood Park. Famileys - youngsters playing football - dog walkers - and us older residents:
FITTEN Av can flood and with the extra houses and driveways this will get worse.
The Air Ambulance has landed there as it is safe to do so:
The exsess traffic this proposal would bring would mean conjestion on Bromley Lane, as Brice Rd site also opens on to Bromley.
THIS AREA IS VERY MUCH PART OF THE ESTATE

Object

Representation ID: 15258

Received: 08/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Tanya Round

Lapwood Avenue DUH213
This is are only communal green space on the Estate which is accessible all year round for all our residents (many elderly) who enjoy using this to walk their dogs and socialising and exercise which helps their health and mental well being.
PS The green space at the top of our estate is a quagmire, use that space instead because no-one uses that.

Object

Representation ID: 15260

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Miss Taylor-Mae Crannage

DUH222, DUH213
When I visit my nan's me and cousins and my Uncle [redacted] go on the field and play games, but it you was to build on here we wont be able to do that anymore. There will be no where local were I feel safe to play.
When we go over there we also get to socailise with other children, also some people like to walk there dogs over there and let them free. Me and my cousin like to run and race there but if you were to build on there we would not be able to have exercise near us and feel safe. [Redacted]

Object

Representation ID: 15370

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Wordsley Residents Alliance

Agent: Wordsley Residents Alliance

On behalf of the Wordsley Residents Alliance we are objecting to the following sites being put forward for release of greenbelt status and for the development of future housing or infrastructure projects. Brierley Hill Road was once surrounded by greenbelt, in 1947 horses grazed in fields and cows roamed opposite. By 1970‘s & 80s,the whole of lawnswood housing was built on country estates.
Our Greenbelt disappeared , we then had to venture beyond these houses to be in the country side.
Now in 2021, the greenbelt that surround those houses built in the 60s-80s is under threat. This is forcing our community further and further in to urban area where we were once rural.
Ridge Hill hospital site was built on greenbelt in the 70’s, when they demolished it in 2000’s it was then described as Brownfield, we have the developers Linden Homes push and push their plans so they encroached past the agreed boundary in outline planning permission that was granted, all because the 5 bedroom luxury houses can be secluded from rest of ‘The Leys’ and more desirable &
saleable. This is one example of how our community has been forced to have 109 homes built which are all coming onto a already congested and busy Brierley Hill Road. Anyone who has sat in the traffic jam from the Sampson & Lion to Wordsley High St would tell you that the Ridge Hill Development access should have been from Auckland Drive or at least half of it!
With the houses proposed at Cookley Works, Ridge Hill and the one on Leys Road and Plant Street WITHOUT the ones proposed on Greenbelt our area will be congested and health of our resident will suffer. Dudley Council should be mortified that Wordsley High Street emissions are as high and dangerous as they are. We need to sort out the infrastructure to cope with what we have already.
With this said we now move on to our OBJECTIONS to the BCP We OBJECT to the following
DUH 208 Holbeache Page 371 BCP , Greenbelt. OBJECTION LOSS OF GREENBELT
This would result in a loss of Greenbelt for Dudley Borough, which is supposed to halt urban
sprawl. Another concern is the lack of GP, and hospital appointments. Also School spaces are currently at capacity, this then puts pressure on parents who will be transporting their children further afield, causing excess use of vehicles which is unsustainable and unfair
for residents opposite schools like our community.
As the area is agricultural land this will result in the loss of wildlife habitat. Wildlife is not just what you can see, but the unseen too. Owls rely on those fields to obtain their food, insects and bees will all be impacted.
DUH 211 The Triangle Page 371 BCP , Greenbelt. OBJECTION - LOSS OF GREENBELT
This would result in a loss of Greenbelt for Dudley Borough, which is supposed to halt urban sprawl. Another concern is the lack of GP, and hospital appointments. Also School spaces are currently at capacity, this then puts pressure on parents who will be transporting their children further afield, causing excess use of vehicles which is unsustainable and unfair for residents opposite schools like our community.
Unacceptable again as this land is bordered by South Staffordshire and this will mean no greenbelt buffer between our county boundaries. Dudley has hardly any greenbelt left. We need to preserve this. If there is a shortage of housing - then allow people to go & purchase where there isn’t a shortage. Other counties have plenty of Brownfield land and they should be encouraged to develop... that not first - but always.
These are the last two remaining greenbelt sites in Dudley South which will certainly cause irreversible harm to wildlife and their habitats, cause pressure on our NHS , schools and local services.
We therefor Object to the building on ANY of our greenbelt,we object to the inclusion of any greenbelt in the BCP. There is another way, Building on brownfield should be the BCP priority.
Our MP for Dudley South Mike Wood, Stourbridge MP Suzanne Webb , Dudley North MP Marco Longi,
Halesowen MP James Morris as well as numerous Councillors and Community Groups & Campaigners are
all saying No! , and we are adding our communities voice to that objection.

Object

Representation ID: 15393

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Wayne Rutherford

The proposal is flawed in many ways. we would have an unacceptable increase in already overstretched local facilities schools, Drs surgery, parking to name but a few.
The local area has already been subjected to substantial development which has increased the above to more than unacceptable.
Traffic, passing on main road speeds is constant and a risk to public health not to mention the increase of traffic throughout the village, which is fast becoming at "rat run" in order to avoid ever growing ques.
This development should not compromise our green belt which is being eaten away at an alarming rate!

Object

Representation ID: 15507

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Valerie Buttery

Green Belt land off Sandyfields Road, Sedgley and land off High Arcal/Brick Kiln Lane (North of Himley Road) Sedgley (promotional document by OBA Estates)
If houses are built on this Green Belt area it will impact on a variety of aspects of everyday life for residents who already live in the vicinity.
Increased numbers of vehicles meaning increased pollution, noise levels in areas where road traffic congestion is already high. Public transport as it stands, cannot support an increase in demand.
Sandyfields Road and The Straits/Straits Road will bear the brunt of this extra traffic. Local roads around Gornal and Sedgley will be considerably exacerbated by an increase in housing stock which, in total, will be in the hundreds if the proposals to change the above sites from Green Belt are made. Local schools will not have spaces enough for the greatly increased number of families moving into the area. Local services such as GP surgeries and, more widely, Hospitals, the Fire Service and Ambulance Service will face a great increase in usage. Can they all cope?
Brownfield sites should be found and used for regeneration before any thought is given to reclassifying Green Belt land. True, this may cause more work for builders, ie decontamination etc. and of course it is easier to build on acres of empty green space, but this should not be a reason to do so.
With climate change and environmental worries, much consideration should be given to local flora and fauna eg [redacted] on all the above sites. While woodland cover may be increasing, the wildlife within it is decreasing says the Woodland Trust. If we don't tackle the threats facing our woods and trees and habitat within, we will severely damage the UK's ability to address the climate and nature crises. Ancient woodlands continue to be lost and damaged by house building, new roads and railways, and a consequence of this could be an increased flood risk.
The above synopsis on the specifically named areas above can also be applied to other sites within the Dudley Borough such as the Seven Cornfields, Sedgley, Land at Swindon Road and Holbeache Lane, Kingswinford north.

Object

Representation ID: 15591

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Sharon Burns

DUH213, DUH216 and BCP Ref 203

1) The proposed building of 45 houses on Hapwood Avenue would be detrimental to the whole estate!
2) After the past year of the pandemic, has this not taught us the value of our green spaces and how valuable they are to our mental health and wellbeing!!
3) The wild life in the green spaces are being squeezed out, we are fortunate to have fox and owls and many other birds.
4) The additional strain that these 45 residences, will cause excessive strain on the already stretch infrastructure of the schools, NHS, Dr and hospital.

Object

Representation ID: 15744

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Stephen Crump

DUH213 Lapwood
[comments crossed out and not replaced]

Object

Representation ID: 15828

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Stewart Holds

DUH213 DUH216
Me and my wife have lived on Crestwood Park Est since 1971 and have been very happy hear. Now in our later years we have got this problem of maybe losing the only greenspace we have on the estate, but I think the bigger problem is going to the amount of people we will be atracting with not enough amenities to to cope with influx also I think the through road which has been mentioned from the Dudley Road A4101 through Crestwood Park ontl Bromley Lane it will also have an effect on schools, hospitals, doctors in the area with the amount of traffic it will conjure up.

Object

Representation ID: 15987

Received: 21/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Stewart Monk

Regarding the proposal to earmark 'Greenfield' land for development off Severn Drive in Pensnett, I wish to object in the strongest possible terms. I am therefore registering my initial opposition to this proposal, but not precluding that, during the consultation period, I may wish to raise further observations and objections.
My reasons are manifold and underlie the importance of this green space within our local community. Similarly other 'Greenfield' spaces' and 'Greenbelt' land nearby have also been identified in the Black Country Plan. It is also important to remember therefore that as a largely industrial community, activities within this area already impinge to a higher degree on the existing infrastructure. The plan takes no account of how this infrastructure would be able to cope with such a considerable increase in housing and industrial expansion. The plan is both ill thought through and will place catastrophic pressures on the environment in the future.
The plan to develop land off Severn Drive more specifically, will lead to a crowded network of estates and roads, which take away the benefits which realistically support our community at present.
The 'Green' spaces (both north and south of Butterfield Road) are regularly enjoyed by walkers, dog walkers, children and for social purposes. The Land Trust states: 'Our green spaces are more than just places for recreation or to help wildlife thrive -they also provide important functions to society which have an economic value.' This is a very important point and echoes the governments statement in its National Planning Policy Framework which also states that it is crucial to: ''protect and enhance our natural, built and historic environment; including making effective use of land, improving biodiversity, using natural resources prudently, minimising waste and pollution, and mitigating and adapting to climate change, including moving to a low carbon economy." It is also government policy to encourage ALL generations to become more active outside. How can this possibly be achieved if all green spaces are removed? The nearest parks and recreation areas will entail in most instances, additional car journeys resulting in further congestion and pollution. We cannot possibly achieve any of these goals with plans to remove 'Greenfield' spaces in Pensnett and its surrounding area, let alone the plans to build on local 'Greenbelt' sites.
The knock on effect of the council's proposals will push masses of additional vehicles onto local roads. Congestion, pollution levels and the risk of accidents are already high but Dudley's proposals will see these levels soar. This cannot be good for the people of the Dudley area and certainly would be grossly unfair on the residents of Severn Drive and other nearby sites marked for development. As a user of 'active travel' I implicitly understand the relationship between domestic traffic, commercial vehicles and a diminishing network of thoroughfare routes. The danger to 'active travel' users is obvious, but Dudley has no policy to deal with this effectively. The infrastructure is already chaotic and residents are constantly looking for ways to reduce if not eliminate their journeys. In reality however we know that this is not possible and the lack of an effective public transport system simply adds Insult to injury. If, up to 30 properties were built on the Severn Drive site then there is a chance that local traffic could increase by around 60 -90 vehicles (assuming 2 -3 car households). The access roads that serve this area simply could not. cope with these increased volumes of traffic. Multiply the potential number of new homes projected with possible numbers of cars and you will have thousands of extra vehicles on the streets of Pensnett. Forcing development would make for an unpleasant and harmful outcome, both in terms of the Health & Safety of residents, congestion and pollution. Many people would want to move away from the area.
Recreation sites will be lost forever. Safe havens for children to play without being knocked down by rushing motor vehicles would become a thing of the past. Is this something that any council can seriously believe is an acceptable trade off for a few extra council tax donations? Who will ultimately benefit from the building of all these homes? The fact is that if people are stifled in ever­-crowded environments, their health will suffer and the knock on effect will be felt throughout our society. It is easy to see that where provision is less, problems are greater.
Education services will suffer terribly as the massive increase in domestic dwellings will create pressure on local schools (not helped by the closure and demolition of Pensnett School) who will not be able to make sufficient spaces for each new intake. This will inevitably result in proposals to build new schools within the community in the near future. There will however be little if any land left to achieve this!
Similarly with health care. In an already stretched service, GP practices cannot cope with the patients they already have and will collapse under the strain if further demands are imposed through additional families requiring access to medical treatment. Pensnett has lost its local GP service to a larger practice in Brierley Hill. Pensnett residents are already drawing the 'short straw' and the local councils plan to extensively develop our green spaces will further impoverish this facility.
Pollution studies in this area haven't been undertaken in several years. When they were, it was noted that we were, in many places (both in and around Pensnett), in excess of nationally agreed acceptable levels. With the present increase in industry and their desire for around the clock working, plus, the proposals to develop more homes on 'Greenfield' and 'Greenbelt' sites, the future for the health and mental well being of local residents is seriously being put at risk. It is well known and properly documented that green spaces have a beneficial effect on the individual particularly in towns and cities. The National History Museum website states: "Simply having access to green spaces in cities can do wonders for our stress levels and concentration at work". Surely it is these ideals, which should drive society, NOT to capitalise on easy build land and rob smaller communities of this amenity.
Brownfields sites are more prevalent than people would imagine and none more so than in Pensnett. There are many unoccupied or derelict properties, which can either be reused, upgraded or redeveloped to meet the needs of additional housing. It is this latter point however, which causes a real difficulty for many. Without real tangible facts to demonstrate the actual need for housing, (and in many cases you would expect the majority to be affordable homes), a 'broad brush' approach in dealing with the communities needs seems to have been taken. The developments on 'Greenbelt' and 'Greenfield' sites will in the main be expensive family homes, offering local and national developers a good return on their investment. What it will not do however is solve any real housing crisis which arises from an increased need, but will inevitably be hindered by families who have an inability to fund such expensive properties. These are likely to command a £400,000+ sum! This scenario has been seen to the south of midlands area and even within our own conurbation over recent years.
Unless there is a definable and appropriate use of brownfield sites, green spaces and our countryside will be lost forever and the same people will still be crying out for affordable housing!
I stand in opposition to building on all 'Greenfield' and 'Greenbelt' land.

Object

Representation ID: 16354

Received: 22/08/2021

Respondent: Mr S Wood

I wish to register my objection to building of houses on Severn Drive and Butterworth Close (DUH222)
1. Green space is for the people in that area to walk children to play on and not for a builder to make a profit
2. Wildlife use the feilds
3. Trees TPOs
4. Traffic in the area
5. We can always jump in a car to go for a walk more traffic on the road
6. more and more houses in this area we have seen about 500 house already and planning for 500 more
7. Brown sites in the area left for year Kingswinford Youth Club been 20 years no money off that empty council house
8. Green spaces are for the people in the area To uses and not to be sold
9. What is the Council selling next Himley Hall Pensnett Pools
10 What type of houses

Object

Representation ID: 17173

Received: 05/10/2021

Respondent: Mr John Cookson

[DUH217 - 'Wollaston Farm']

BCP Development Allocation Draft Plan - Object to Plans DUH217 - 'Wollaston Farm' has been key for my wellbeing enjoying the fresh air, fields, paths, wildlife and habitat. It is an important wildlife corridor! and should be preserved for future generations and not for financial gain for developers!


The proposals to build houses on precious green belt land would be detrimental to all wellbeing with more noise. Pollution poorer air quality. There are enough Brownfield sites identified anyway!
Plus local infrastructure is poor anyway - A491/ A449 is gridlocked daily, not enough surgeries, cycle paths, no near employment no near fire station, no near police station, no fire station.

Object

Representation ID: 17193

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Steven Jinks

Biodiversity or Geodiversity on the site - How can this be scored as green as surely developing any green belt space must have a negative impact on the areas overall biodiversity. Has the mandatory biodiversity net gain (part of the Environment Bill) which forces all development schemes to deliver 10% biodiversity net gain to be maintained for at least 30 years taken into consideration when scoring this site. Until this has been completed independently this aspect of the assessment should score at least an amber. This is area is a wildlife corridor housing dozens of animals birds and insects which appears to have been glossed over in the site assessment document. [redacted] the very fact these animals chose to live in the is area suggests a wide range of others smaller animals can also be found in the immediate area. [redacted]

Highways Access and Transportation -High way access via the Kingsway Road ( which is the likely access point)will cause issues to all local residents as it is already effectively only one car wide due to cars parking in front of the flats. Two cars cannot pass side by side safely. Access to the local school already causes chaos 2 / 3 times a day and increasing houses and therefore traffic in the area will only make this existing issue more hazardous. Public transport in the area is under utilised and if increased to support more residents as proposed will cause safety issues each time.

Social - Healthcare - The local General Practice Lion Health is already over subscribed with many patients experiencing very poor customer service. This is reported on an almost daily basis via one form or another. The addition of 90 additional houses, averaging 3 persons per house will increase the pressure on already struggling GP facilities. In addition the the local concerns, its is known that South Staffordshire Planning have agreed private development on triangle of land on the corner of Bridgnorth and Vicarage Road) and clearly state within their plans that facilities within Wollaston are to used. In this instance South Staffs get the "tick in the box" for providing a number of dwellings, will receive the associated tax but certain services will be provided by DMBC, and increase pressure on the local services within Wollaston. This is something I strongly object too.

Local Facilities - Residents already struggle with local parking and access to local shops, more housing will only make this situation worse. Recently this area has seen many expansions with no improvemtn to local infrastructure to support the develoements that have been built. (Examples include Richardson Drive 15 houses, Dalton Brook 150 houses, Wentworth Road 5 houses, old scholl site in the old quarter 55 houses) - The local area cannot keep absorbing this constant increase in housing in the area.

Summary - Following a conversation with Dudley Planners, it is known that this area has been selected due to the lack of "feasible" brown sites to develop, but what happens once this "easy" green space is gone, what does the future hold. Will councils and government continue to avoid these " difficult" brownfield site and continue to attack green spaces in areas that already have been identified as having a " below average quantity of open spaces". I fear this development will simply pave the way for further erosion of green belt land in the immediate area. Please protect this Green Belt Land for now and for the future

Object

Representation ID: 17237

Received: 25/09/2021

Respondent: Ms Pauline Martin

DUH 222 - Severn Drive (Green Space)

Green area needed for children, dog walking. Estate already has a lot of housing - green areas needed to give balance. Would be better facilitated as communal area e.g. children's play area.

Object

Representation ID: 17264

Received: 04/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Sue McDowall

DUH217
I feel to develop this piece of land for housing would be detrimental to both local residents and certainly to the habitat of wildlife and vegetation which is currently enjoyed by many people. The right of way across the field was substantially reduced in size a few years ago which means the track is much narrower.
The field is regularly used by many people as access to walking/ running / cycling/horse riding routes on the nearby canal and woodland.
If this land were to be developed it would mean an increase in traffic to the development when already roads nearby become congested. The local school already has a high demand on places.
I would ask this plan be carefully considered and thought given to local residents and the beauty of the surrounding area to be retained as Green Belt land.