Development Allocations

Object

Representation ID: 15177

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Chris Murfin

I write with regards to the proposed development on land previously owned by Peak House Farm, Great Barr. Although this land has now rightly been removed from the draft Black Country Plan, I'm concerned that the developer can still appeal the decision and have the land reinstated in the plan. Development of this land makes no sense on the following points:
- Sandwell has plenty of brownfield sites suitable for development, why would it make sense to build on greenfield?
- in 2003, according to Sandwell Council, the land was "an area of potential archaeological importance" and also of "special character for nature conservation". Has this changed in the last 20 years?
- There is not the infrastructure in Great Barr to support such a large development especially in terms of roads; the A34 through the Scott Arms, M6/J7 and around The Bell is already gridlocked each rush hour without adding extra traffic caused by more housing.
At a time when the UK's biodiversity levels are dropping to record lows, I strongly believe that we should be adopting a 'brownfield first' approach to development and leave our greenfield sites to be used by the natural wildlife and enjoyed by future generations.

Object

Representation ID: 15914

Received: 24/09/2021

Respondent: Mark Poolton

Please do not approve the destruction of the last areas of green space in old Warley.
The loss of this space affects many many households and families at this time we
need more green space to help our physical and mental health, not less.
There are many other areas within Sandwell that need investment and offer great
opportunities for housing development why destroy such a beautiful green space
that’s been in existence for over 100 years.
Please, please do not approve this destruction, I have two beautiful grandchildren
living very close to this space and I would like to see them and many many more
families enjoy this beautiful green space.

Object

Representation ID: 15959

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Timothy Parkes

Number of people: 161

I would like to raise objections with respect to the proposal in the Black Country Plan to develop the Brandhall Golf Course site (SAH228) for housing.

Site SAH228, t he former Brandhall Golf Course, is a site rich in wildlife, flora and cultural heritage. In this respect, it is unique in the local area. It is protected by deeds of dedication, a land covenant, legislation in the form of The Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act (2006) (NERC) Section 41 and the whole site is designated as a Core Habitat Zone by the Black Country Plan itself! How on earth could this site have been passed for housing
development?

Object

Representation ID: 16031

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Mr David Fisher

Site Assessment Reference SA-0066-SAN
To whom it may concern. My name is David Fisher, I live in the Charlemont with Grove Vale Ward
and I’m also an elected member of Sandwell Council that represents Charlemont with Grove Vale.
I would like to put forward my case for the refusal of the loss of Charlemont Community Centre
under the Black Country Plan. Charlemont itself is a deprived area with no community assets except
for Charlemont community centre. The community centre has been neglected by Sandwell Council
for many years. This I feel has caused the decline in numbers using the facility. Since being elected in
May 2021 I have been promoting the centre and I have been contacted by 3 local community groups
who are interested in using this facility.
SMBC have agreed to invest money in the centre to redecorate rooms that are being used and this
will only improve the facility and encourage more groups interested in hiring the community centre.
Charlemont community centre currently has a group “Dynamic Kids” that uses this centre during the
daytime offering childcare and holiday clubs. The community centre has a good history with offering
children a place to participate in activities after school. The current local football team that uses the
football pitches adjacent to the community centre have shown an interest in using it for them to
meet and offer refreshments during match days.
The centre plays a vital part in the local community and if this is taken away, I feel the area will be
worse off.
The access road in not “un-adopted as per the report states but owned by the lease holder of
Briarley House. SMBC and I have had ongoing discussions about the poor state of the access road
with the lease holder to no avail.
I just want to state that loosing this community asset for a single unit is not going to help the local
deprived area and will only cause more deprivation and increase the levels of ASBO and crime in a
highly populated area.
Nicola Richards MP who represents West Bromwich East has also raised a petition to save
Charlemont Community Centre.
Regards
Cllr David Fisher
Charlemont With Grove Vale

Support

Representation ID: 16188

Received: 09/10/2021

Respondent: Beacon Action Group

Peak House Farm
In particular, we support Sandwell Council in removing the Peak House Farm site from the Black Country Plan.
These environmentally sensitive sites are very important in maintaining open spaces in this area, providing a pathway to the Beacon Way and importantly preventing coalescence between the three aforementioned areas. The area needs to maintain this Green Belt as it is already an extremely polluted area due to the nearby M6/M5 motorway at Junction 7 and the frequently heavily congested A34 dual carriageway from the Scott Arms junction through to Walsall.

Object

Representation ID: 16304

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Ms Dawn Taylor

Draft Black Country Plan, July 2021. Table 22, Sandwell Residential Site Allocations (BCP Policy
HOU1), pages: 445, 446, 447. BCP Site Ref: SAH226 - Land North of Painswick Close Sub Station.
The Indicative Development Capacity (net homes) is stated to be 120 on Green Belt land. I raise
several Objections as to why this site should NOT be developed, the details are:
1) The land is precious Green Belt which is invaluable for residents and visitors mental health,
wellbeing and recreactional purposes. The UK is suffering a loss of nature and is one of te most
nature-depleted countries in the world:
https://www.itv.com/news/2021-10-10/uk-is-one-of-the-most-nature-depleted-countries-in-the-world
We all must take active roles in safeguarding these green lungs’ spaces for humankind and nature
to thrive. The site is not only Green Belt but also the majority of the site is a SLINC - “Site of Local
Importance for Nature Conservation” - which is a non-statutory designated site of the borough
importance identified by Sandwell MBC and the Wildlife Trust. We must honour the site’s natural
significance and protect it from being forever changed to the built environment.
2) The existing infrastructure struggles to accommodate the current residents living on Yew Tree
and Tamebridge. There are only two GP surgeries serving in excess of 3000 homes on Yew Tree
alone plus the homes at Tamebridge. The parking provisions for residents’ vehicles is poor and
results in on-road parking which leads to traffic congestion, air and noise pollution. There are poor
shopping facilities and only one school to provide educational provision to this large area. There is
insufficient infrastructure to accoummodate the existing residents’ needs let alone more residents.
3) The area used to have sited numerous blocks of flats which were “no-go” areas with troublesome
incidents occurring regularly. The Draft BCP Plan states that proposed properties should be raised
in height and I object to blocks of flats or apartments’ blocks being built on this site to not only avoid
potential anti-social behaviour from occurring but also to retain the green landscape that provides
existing residents some soundproofing against the noise pollution created by the close proxmity of
the motorway network.
4) Building under and/or in the vicinity of electrical overhead cables is deemed dangerous. The
cables also make constant crackling noises which would be disruptive to potential new residents
living in the proposed new build 120 properties.
5) Access. There is currently no viable access to this proposed new build residential site which is
stated to require two such accesses. “The current main issue is that there doesn't appear to be a
viable access option from an existing adopted highway. All current potential access points cross
private driveways to dwellings and hence to open up development opportunities would require the
purchase of private properties and demolition to provide access from either Caledonian Close, …
CONTINUED ON SEPERATE PAGE
CONTINUATION PAGE
Draft Black Country Plan, July 2021. Table 22, Sandwell Residential Site
Allocations (BCP Policy HOU1), pages: 445, 446, 447. BCP Site Ref: SAH226 -
Land North of Painswick Close Sub Station
5) Access (Continued).
“...Delamere Drive and/or Broom Road. For a residential site of this proposed size,
two accesses are preferred, for amenity and highways safety issues”. It is
counter-productive to suggest that existing residents might be forced to sell their
homes and one assumes that all such purchases would be made as Compulsory
Purchase Orders (CPOs) with residents forced to seek legal advice and their Right to
Compensation (of which the general principle is that owners and occupiers of land
should not be financially worse of and no better off after a CPO than before). It is
counter-productive to suggest that existing residents could lose their homes to make
way for new homes’ access for highways and amenities and therefore, I object to this
aspect of the proposed plan.
“If a suitable access could be found then the junction of Greenside Way and Walsall
Road would need to be tested for capacity and safety”. Greenside Way is an
extremely busy main arterial road onto Yew Tree and Tamebridge and Walsall Road
is an extremely busy dual carriageway serving as access to Stone Cross, Fullbrook,
Silverdale areas and beyond. To introduce another potential access to service the
potential 120 homes would lead to more vehicles using the junction of Greenside
Way and Walsall Road which will result in longer queue times, more air pollution,
more noise pollution and the potential for increased road traffic accidents. I am
therefore objecting to this aspect of the proposed plan.
6) The Rushall Canal has been known to flood before and the proposed site would
be vulnerable to potential flooding. The building on Green Belt would remove natural
drainage from the site which is currently offered by the natural environment it is
comprised of.
7) Wildlife and natural habitat will be destroyed and this is criminal of Sandwell MBC
to consider such destruction especially as both are so important to the climate and
environment which is increasingly to the forefront of everyones’ minds. The green
spaces around Yew Tree and Tamebridge provide invaluable recreational
possibilities to the area’s residents especially in light of the fact that there is very little
provision in terms of recreational activities available in this large area.
In closing, I object to the potential theft of our beneficial Green Belt and green space
north of Painswick Close Sub Station at Yew Tree and Tamebridge, Walsall being
changed forever from green to built environment for the reasons set down in this
Objection.

Comment

Representation ID: 16402

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: H E Allen

SA-0003-SAN Peak House Farm

It was extremely disturbing to discover that contrary to the view of Sandwell Strategic Planning Officers, the above plan includes the Peak House Farm (Wilderness Lane) site. The very fact that Sandwell’s Planning Department consider the site unsuitable for development and an essential part of the Green Belt should mean that it is not included.

The development of the site for housing would have a severe impact on the local infrastructure. The schools are already oversubscribed and the side roads of Wilderness Lane and Peak House Road are frequently solid with traffic especially in the morning and the afternoon due to Q3 school. The A34 is frequently solid with traffic either heading towards the motorway or towards Walsall and the nature of the land in the area means it is not possible to put in new roads to ease any congestion.

The loss of this Green Belt area would also have a severe impact on the wildlife corridor leading from Great Barr Park, through Merrions Wood, Peakhouse Farm land down to the Sandwell Valley. The land is currently tenanted by a farmer and surely after recent events, the loss of agricultural land would not appear to be a good idea moving forward.

I fully support Sandwell Council’s Planning Officers in saying this site should not be included in the Sandwell Black Country Development Plan due to the constraints on the site and the problems it would cause to the surrounding area.

Object

Representation ID: 16419

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Derick North

bject to the development of Brandhal Golf Club l used to play golf there regularly and my wife
grewuplocally. There is such a shortage of public open space in the vicinity of the site for children
to goand play ad also for adults to just walk around
countryside
ltis such a huge site that, des#te ts location, you feel, on much of it, that you could be in the
l understand the requirement for housing and there may be scope for sore limited development
near
Covid
to the Wolverhampton Road but over 50O new homes is too much
good
has made people realise just how important open space is and how 'local' open space is so
for people's physical and mental wellbeing. Sandwell s i one of the most built up and deprived
areas
designating
of the country and yet, when a potential area of new open space comes forward, rather than
it as anew park for the borough. it is to be developed for housing
some
l understand
peripheral
that
housing
a Masterp/an is to be created but t i will be aMasterplan for houses not a park with
The area near to the motorway is too noisy for housing and it is too noisy for open spa0e (please dont
which
put the open space net to the motorway - the air quality will be poorer and there is no peace
woodland.
is what people need when they go out for g walk Thie area should be planted as a new
The rest of the area could have a children's play area, a large area of wildlife meado
and some mown grass for sporting activities.
The stream is a source of the River Tame which eventually leads to the Humber what an asset and
yet
Where
who knows that itis there?
are people and children on the Brandhall Estate supposed to walk and play the local
council
housing.
must give as much consideration to peoples' physical and mental wellbeing as it does to
upkeep
The retention as a park might be costly to the Council in terms of maintenance and
but local groups could get involved as could schools
Climate change - the retention and planting of trees within such a built up area would be tar better
than the loss of trees and the construction of 50O houses

Object

Representation ID: 16442

Received: 09/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Glynis Cooke

Sandwell Sites in WS5 / B43

I very much object to the use of Green Belt Land in the WS5/B43 area as we have already had much removed from here. The area has been degraded and the traffic increased exponentially. The corridors of greenery are shrinking so that any wildlife left will soon have few places to go and as a "horse owning" area - where will the animals graze in the future if all the fields disappear. if the intention is to knock 6% off the green belt each time there will soon be none left - use the brown field sites, there are very many of them still around.

Comment

Representation ID: 16505

Received: 30/09/2021

Respondent: Mrs M McCorkell

PEAKHOUSE FARM
I would like to object strongly to any planning application on Peakhouse Farm Great Barr. We are at the moment surrounded by the two dual carriageways and the M6 and traffic in this area is unbelievable. I am sure air quality is poor and I cannot see how the roads will cope with even more traffic.

Object

Representation ID: 16549

Received: 30/09/2021

Respondent: Fiona Sim

I'm writing to object to the proposal to build houses on the sites of Brandhall Golf Course and Parsons Hill Park.
This area is deprived of green spaces which have been shown to be beneficial for supporting mental health and reducing rates of crime and anti-social behaviour as well as being essential for the environment and keeping levels of urban pollution down.
Its seems short sighted to build on one of the few remaining green spaces in this area when there are brown-field sites which can be reclaimed and houses standing empty which could be compulsorily purchased.

Object

Representation ID: 16899

Received: 06/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Hayley King

I am objecting to the housing allocation to the Brandhall Gold Course as proposed on the Sandwell map of the Black Country Plan (BCP).
As you can see on the Sandwell map, this area is heavily populated anyway and have very limited green space in comparison to other areas of the county.
If you take this space away, where am I going to go to breath fresh air, admire the beautiful nature which is present in this space. Where are children who live in a heavily populated urban environment going to experience and learn about nature.
The local General Practitioners (GP) surgeries are full to capacity, and have to wait 3 weeks to see a GP, if you can get through to speak to a receptionist in the first instance. I have called my GP surgery 40 times in 1 hour to speak with a receptionist, and did not get through.
The local road system is at full capacity and have queues daily on the Wolverhampton Road, Brook Road and Pound Road. The Wolverhampton Road already has dangerous sections with various roads leading off this, if you add more homes to the community, more lives are going to be in danger.
The transport network of buses and trains are full now, how are you expected to use transport if more people live in this community.
One point that continues to be overlooked, Brandhall Golf Course and the surrounding area will flood. When it rains now, the roads and golf course drainage system waster rises and struggles to deal with the amount of water. Where will this water go?
Please do not develop the one site of natural beauty away from me, my family and the community.

Object

Representation ID: 17060

Received: 20/09/2021

Respondent: Friends of Sheepwash Nature Reserve

WE OBJECT TO SITE ALLOCATIONS SAH088 AND SAH098 IN SANDWELL AS UNSUSTAINABLE AND IN OPPOSITION TO THE POLICY of The Black Country Local Nature Recovery Opportunity Map (draft April 2021) which we support.
The principle thrust of our objection to this plan are the unsustainable housing allocations centred in the Lower Tividale area, and in particular on an area of green space linked to Sheepwash which is part of the wider canal corridor. Together, this adds up to 607 new homes in an area less than a mile square, on an already saturated housing estate built on former agricultural land.

[See attachment for full details]
Objections relate to contamination of land and surrounding area and lack of remediation, loss of wildlife habitat, presence of unoccupied houses and other buildings in Sandwell that could be used for housing and historical failure to bring site forward for development through allocation in previous plans.

Support

Representation ID: 17104

Received: 30/09/2021

Respondent: House of Commons

SAH068

I welcome the use of brownfield sites as a priority for meeting the required housing needs, noting in my constituency the proposals of DUH004, DUH036, DUH052, DUH059, SAH068, SAH072, SAH095, SAH096, SAH097 and SAH100 for new homes, aswell as DUH046 and DUH066 for mixed use development including housing.

Support

Representation ID: 17105

Received: 30/09/2021

Respondent: House of Commons

SAH095

I welcome the use of brownfield sites as a priority for meeting the required housing needs, noting in my constituency the proposals of DUH004, DUH036, DUH052, DUH059, SAH068, SAH072, SAH095, SAH096, SAH097 and SAH100 for new homes, aswell as DUH046 and DUH066 for mixed use development including housing.

Support

Representation ID: 17106

Received: 30/09/2021

Respondent: House of Commons

SAH072

I welcome the use of brownfield sites as a priority for meeting the required housing needs, noting in my constituency the proposals of DUH004, DUH036, DUH052, DUH059, SAH068, SAH072, SAH095, SAH096, SAH097 and SAH100 for new homes, aswell as DUH046 and DUH066 for mixed use development including housing.

Support

Representation ID: 17107

Received: 30/09/2021

Respondent: House of Commons

SAH096

I welcome the use of brownfield sites as a priority for meeting the required housing needs, noting in my constituency the proposals of DUH004, DUH036, DUH052, DUH059, SAH068, SAH072, SAH095, SAH096, SAH097 and SAH100 for new homes, aswell as DUH046 and DUH066 for mixed use development including housing.

Support

Representation ID: 17108

Received: 30/09/2021

Respondent: House of Commons

SAH097

I welcome the use of brownfield sites as a priority for meeting the required housing needs, noting in my constituency the proposals of DUH004, DUH036, DUH052, DUH059, SAH068, SAH072, SAH095, SAH096, SAH097 and SAH100 for new homes, aswell as DUH046 and DUH066 for mixed use development including housing.

Support

Representation ID: 17109

Received: 30/09/2021

Respondent: House of Commons

SAH100

I welcome the use of brownfield sites as a priority for meeting the required housing needs, noting in my constituency the proposals of DUH004, DUH036, DUH052, DUH059, SAH068, SAH072, SAH095, SAH096, SAH097 and SAH100 for new homes, aswell as DUH046 and DUH066 for mixed use development including housing.

Comment

Representation ID: 17110

Received: 30/09/2021

Respondent: House of Commons

SAH100

With regards to SAH100, the proposal for housing at the site of the former Edwin Richards Quarry in Rowley Regis, I will be monitoring these proposals carefully to ensure that the Strategic Open Space is not compromised, and that there are no adverse effects to new developments resulting from the quarry.

Object

Representation ID: 17172

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Miss Joanne Rushton

SAH224

A new housing estate with no new access into Tanhouse Avenue will cause massive problems to the already busy and quite dangerous surrounding roads.

Highfield Road and Greenfield Road are already used as cut through roads, and 50 more houses, equating to 50 to 100 more cars, will be terrible for the residents already living locally.

There are two primary schools right next to the proposed land with no crossing lady, and the influx of even more traffic, will surely pose a threat to the young children.

Sandwell Valley entrance is right next to the proposed new site, and the environmental impact will surely effect the wildlife around this natural beauty spot. There are many areas in the surrounding area that have run down sections, and my view it that it would be better to use these areas instead of ruining a green area.

Object

Representation ID: 17469

Received: 08/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Janet Heywood

(Sustainability Appraisal)

I object to Brandhall Golf Course being selected for housing (although apparently no assessment made)

The supposed public consultation was flawed. 3 options - All of which included the building of houses. No options to keep the area as a green space available.
Old Warley has the least amount of green space in the whole of Sandwell.
Table 5.3 - Impact matrix (page 139) shows that SA6999 would be negatively impacted in terms of 1) cultural heritage 2) landscape 3) biodiversity 4) climate change mitigation 5) waste and 6) health and red flagged on 7) climate change adoption 8) natural resources and 9) pollution
How could a council supposedly there to advance the best interests of its residents possibly consider building on this wonderful natural resource? (ctd on enclosed sheet)

Development of Brandhall Golf Course will cause a huge increase in pollution and obliterate up to 4000 mature trees. The site is sandwiched between M5 and A4123 - Wolverhampton Rd The traffic pollution in the area is already well above national norms. Please do not increase/ make worse our environmental problems.

Brandhall Golf Course and the surrounding area already suffers from serious flooding issues. The building of houses here would be not just detrimental but fool hardy in the extreme.

Sandwell council must not build on Brandhall Green Space.

Object

Representation ID: 17621

Received: 04/10/2021

Respondent: Jillian Osborne

Brandhall Golf Course - I am appalled with Sandwell Council, continually selling off public land, for the purpose of new housing. In 1992 the council rejected plans for a new club house on the site, due to the loss of open space for the general public, as there was a shortage of such provisions. Whats changed? We have lost green space all over the borough and not gained any extra, its a disgrace!!

Object

Representation ID: 17657

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Sport England

SAH091 - Land at Friar Park Road, Wednesbury - 750 dwellings.

The site includes playing fields, the loss of which needs to be addressed in line with para 99 of the NPPF and Sport England's Playing Fields Policy. Sport England notes that the table states the playing pitches on the site will need to be retained or replaced. The wording of the policy should be refined to ensure that in the absence of the playing field being demonstrated to be surplus, mitigation provision that is equitable in quantity and quality in a suitable location will be required. This is necessary to ensure the policy accords with para 99 of the NPPF and Sport England's Playing Fields Policy.

Object

Representation ID: 17658

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Sport England

SAH228 - Brandhall Golf Course - 560 dwellings.

The site allocation involves the loss of an existing sports facility. The Council have undertaken a Golf Needs Assessment to make the case that the golf course is surplus. Whilst Sport England do not wish to object to the loss of the golf course, as its accepted that there are other courses in the local area with capacity for new members and for pay and play use, there is a strong case for securing mitigation from the loss of this course to invest in improvements to existing golf facilities. England Golf advise that Warley Woods is a prime candidate for investment and could definitely offer a more rounded facility to cater for more golfers if money were to be spent here. They advise that the golf club members have been asking for a while for improvements to the building they use as a clubhouse and have faced numerous challenges. Sport England would therefore be likely to object to the allocation at Reg 19 stage unless the policy allocation expressly includes a requirement to secure a suitable developer contribution towards mitigation for the loss of the golf course. Whilst Sport England understand that the development of the site will also involve the development of a new park with opportunities for informal recreation, this cannot be agreed as mitigation for the loss of the golf course as this does not benefit golf.

Object

Representation ID: 17659

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Sport England

SAH103 - Former Phoenix Collegiate School, Friar Park Road, Wednesbury - 84 dwellings.

The site includes playing fields, the loss of which needs to be addressed in line with para 99 of the NPPF and Sport England's Playing Fields Policy. The wording of the policy should be revised to ensure that in the absence of the playing field being demonstrated to be surplus, mitigation provision that is equitable in quantity and quality in a suitable location will be required. This is necessary to ensure the policy accords with para 99 of the NPPF and Sport England's Playing Fields Policy. The table refers to a planning application having been submitted. Sport England have objected to the planning application as a package of mitigation has not yet been agreed.

Object

Representation ID: 17660

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Sport England

SAH091 - Land at Friar Park Road, Wednesbury - 750 dwellings.
The occupiers of new development, especially residential, will generate demand for sporting provision. The existing provision within an area may not be able to accommodate this increased demand without exacerbating existing and/or predicted future deficiencies. Therefore, Sport England considers that new developments should contribute towards meeting the demand that they generate through the provision of on-site facilities and/or providing additional capacity off-site. The level and nature of any provision should be informed by a robust evidence base such as an up to date Sports Facilities Strategy, Playing Pitch Strategy or other relevant needs assessment. The Council are currently preparing a new Playing Pitch and Outdoor Sports Facilities Strategy (PPOSS) to consider how to meet existing and future needs for playing pitches and other outdoor sports facilities. The PPOSS will scenario test the proposed major housing growth sites within the proposed plan and make recommendations for how best to meet the future needs generated by this population growth. These needs might be best met by either on-site provision of new pitches and ancillary facilities, off-site contributions to improve existing provision of pitches/ancillary facilities in the local area or a combination of both. Sport England are aware that there are several existing sports facilities locally that would potentially benefit from developer contributions in order to improve the existing provision to cater for the additional demand generated by these proposed developments. Sport England considers that the following proposed allocations are of sufficient size to justify suitable developer contributions towards sport to meet the needs of the respective developments. At Reg 19 stage, following the completion of the PPOSS, Sport England will make more detailed comments with reference to Sport England's Playing Pitch Calculator. The following proposed policy allocations should make specific reference to securing suitable developer contributions towards the provision of facilities for sport in line with the findings and recommendations of the PPOSS: SAH091 - Land at Friar Park Road, Wednesbury - 750 dwellings.

Object

Representation ID: 17663

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Sport England

SAH228 - Brandhall Golf Course - 560 dwellings.

The occupiers of new development, especially residential, will generate demand for sporting provision. The existing provision within an area may not be able to accommodate this increased demand without exacerbating existing and/or predicted future deficiencies. Therefore, Sport England considers that new developments should contribute towards meeting the demand that they generate through the provision of on-site facilities and/or providing additional capacity off-site. The level and nature of any provision should be informed by a robust evidence base such as an up to date Sports Facilities Strategy, Playing Pitch Strategy or other relevant needs assessment. The Council are currently preparing a new Playing Pitch and Outdoor Sports Facilities Strategy (PPOSS) to consider how to meet existing and future needs for playing pitches and other outdoor sports facilities. The PPOSS will scenario test the proposed major housing growth sites within the proposed plan and make recommendations for how best to meet the future needs generated by this population growth. These needs might be best met by either on-site provision of new pitches and ancillary facilities, off-site contributions to improve existing provision of pitches/ancillary facilities in the local area or a combination of both. Sport England are aware that there are several existing sports facilities locally that would potentially benefit from developer contributions in order to improve the existing provision to cater for the additional demand generated by these proposed developments. Sport England considers that the following proposed allocations are of sufficient size to justify suitable developer contributions towards sport to meet the needs of the respective developments. At Reg 19 stage, following the completion of the PPOSS, Sport England will make more detailed comments with reference to Sport England's Playing Pitch Calculator. The following proposed policy allocations should make specific reference to securing suitable developer contributions towards the provision of facilities for sport in line with the findings and recommendations of the PPOSS: SAH228 - Brandhall Golf Course - 560 dwellings.

Object

Representation ID: 17684

Received: 04/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Patrick Bradley

[SAH228]

I wholly object to the building on the green space, formerly used as Brandhall Golf Course.

Previously as a golf course Brandhall was not used much by the community due to the limited appeal and popularity of this sport, not because the community dont value this area greatly.
Whilst it was used as golf course, Brandhall and the surrounding area still benefited from the crucial green buffer between 2 very busy and polluted arteries, namely the M5 and the Wolverhampton Road A4123.
This green space still provided the local community with a rare space to take a perimeter stroll, to walk the dog, albeit with the limitations of access as a golf course.
This green space still helped in absorbing all the harmful gases produced by these busy roads and the small particulates produced by diesel, tyre and brake wear.
See here for more details:
https://uk-air.defra.gov.uk/assets/documents/reports/cat09/1907101151_20190709_Non_Exhaust_Emissions_typeset_Final.pdf

This green space still helped in our battle against climate change.
This green space still provided a flooding barrier for local houses.
This green space still provided rare habitat for birds, bats, foxes, rabbits and all sorts of flora and fauna.
This green space was an oasis in a borough, lagging massively behind on green space compared to the national average.
This green space still made Brandhall all the more attractive for the surrounding community and other developments both residential and commercial.
Now, no longer a Golf Course, all of the above benefits still exist and are more important than ever.
The potential of this green space though has grown exponentially now in becoming an asset the whole community can use, not just golfers.
This green space can play a vital part in improving the air quality for the local community, providing a space for exercise and enjoyment to offset mental and physical challenges of Sandwell residents.
This green space can offer a fabulous education space for future generations in natural sciences and the green economy.
This green space with minor investment, can offer facilities for our community to come together.
This green space can be sustainable and generate green revenue for Sandwell MBC.
Development of this land for houses will be bad for both new residents moving into these houses and bad for the existing local population all round.

The 1992 Planning Application lodged by Open Golf & Leisure Ltd to develop the club house was rejected by Sandwell Council as it was;
"not acceptable in that it would entail the loss of open space for use by the general public in an area where there is a shortage of such provision".

In the 30 years that has passed since this application, the green space provided by Sandwell MBC has only deteriorated further.
Therefore I ask why should Sandwell MBC grant development of this vital space now?
In the 30 years that has passed since this rejected application, science has proved we are in a full climate emergency and should be using our full weight to defend, appreciate and unlock the true value of this green space.
I urge all community servants involved in decision making on this development to reject it 100%, be bold and look beyond the developers cheque book for a one off cash sum.
Once our green space is gone, its gone forever.

Support

Representation ID: 17686

Received: 09/12/2021

Respondent: Patrick Cluxton

Number of people: 2

Our OBJECTION relates to the land behind Peak House Farm: Call for Sites Number 115 and Site Assessment Reference SA-0003-SAN in the Draft Black Country Plan Appendix B Sandwell
The land now in the ownership of Wain Estates [formerly Himor Land Limited] extends to 27.3 ha We kept and bred horses on 6.59ha of this land for over 30 years. In the early 1990s we were Sub- Tenants to the farmer [name] up until [name] retired. Then we had a Grazing License direct with the owners, the [name]; until they sold to Himor Land Limited, completing in December 2014. Himor [now Wain Estates] put us off the land at the end of September 2020 so that they could begin their "management". The whole of the 27.3 ha is now rented to the farmer/builder [name and Farm] [who already had the main area at 20.35ha]. Un-fortunately [name], unlike many farmers; has no interest in wildlife conservation. We managed our 6.59 ha for wildlife and saw the range and number of species increase dramatically from the mid 1990s up until 2020. Our Tenure coincided with the creation of the RSPB Nature Reserve at Sandwell Valley [begun in 1985]. We found that we enjoyed an overspill of wildlife from the valley; particularly with regard to Birds and Mammals. The land also pulls down migrating birds as they use the corridor which goes North-East from the valley. The valley is a glorious place for wildlife but also often busy with people. Over the years we found that some species of Birds preferred to nest on "the Peak House Fields" because they were left undisturbed. Rotational Grazing ensured that there was always a supply of insects and seeds and the hedges were left to grow on to their natural height. The land which we used to manage was divided into 8 fields and paddocks with a variety of sizes: Nrs 0173 0150 0179 0837 1061 1167 1373 and one un-numbered [rpa holding numbers at Grid SP0495]. All these fields are together to the North-East side of 115 - SA-0003-SAN. We called the fields "The spare field" [un-grazed for 25 years] "The wildflower meadow" [grazed to suit butterflies and insects] "The big field" [strip-grazed] "The wet field" [grazed in late Summer only] "The wild field" [next to the A34 at Sargent's Hill]- [wet and un-grazed for at least 35 years]. "Where we park"[un-touched between 1995 and 2020] "The foal paddock"; and a small area of land in front of the stables for out-door foaling, fenced off from the 'spare field'. We had 8 bird boxes in the hedges and in the spinney [which is in the wet field] and 4 bat boxes. We took these boxes down when we left so that the Birds and Bats would not be lost to Himor's "management". We recorded all the wildlife we saw on the land between 1995 and 2020 and that included the following: Breeding Bullfinches, Goldfinches, Chaffinches,Greenfinches and Reed Buntings. Breeding Blue Tits, Great Tits and Long-Tailed Tits. Breeding Chiff-Chaffs, Whitethroats, Swallows, Song Thrushes, Blackbirds, Wrens and Robins. Breeding Linnets [rarely] and Yellowhammers [very rarely]. Breeding [protected species] [once,reared 4 to fledging]. Breeding Buzzard [now every year], Green Woodpecker and Little Owl. Resident and Visiting: Snipe, Heron, Grey Partridge, Woodcock, Mallard Duck. Canada Geese, Lesser-Black-Backed Gull, Greater-Black-Backed Gull, Herring Gull, Black-Headed Gull, Short-Eared Owl and Tawny Owl: Wheatear, Pied Wagtail. Grey Wagtail, [protected species] [Juvenile 2020] Kestrel, Sparrowhawk [often breeding in [location]] Treecreeper and Nuthatch [rare visitors to the feeders from Merrion's Wood in Winter]. Starlings breed in the roofs along Peak House Road and Wilderness Lane and the fields sustain the Winter flock of Adults and Juveniles; consistently 30-40 for the last 25 years [never joined by continental Starlings, probably because of the distance from the nearest coast]. Carrion Crows nest on the tree line [between the big field and the wet field] every year or sometimes in the belt of trees next to the wildflower meadow. The pecking order for nest sites is clear; always the Crows with the highest nest, the Buzzards lower and the Magpies forced to breed in the hedges. Despite 10-12 Magpies on the 27.3 ha in earlier Spring; aggression from the other two species results in only one pair of Magpies nesting each year. Foxes breed successfully on the land and scavenge from the nearby bins; one year a Vixen was seen with five cubs. Foxes were seen to take Juvenile Magpies from long grass on two occasions and this might be quite a common source of prey. The presence of Foxes means that a Rabbit has never been seen. Other Mammals include Grey Squirrel[for the Hazel nuts in Autumn], Stoat, Short-Tailed Field Vole [brick and stone piles provided] Common Shrew and Pigmy Shrew [the wild field is full of territories] and the wild field has at least 18 species of grasses including Vernal Grass. Mole and Brown Rat [unfortunately and trapped]. Pipistrelle and Long-Eared Bat. At least 12 species of Butterflies have been recorded including high numbers of Meadow Brown and Gatekeeper; feeding extensively on Bramble and Dog Rose and Clover Flowers; and numerous species of day-flying and night-flying Moths. We provided an artificial pond which attracted Frogs and Toads. We have noticed that many species of wild flowers have colonised the fields which we managed; which we never saw in [name] day. These grow particularly between the hedges and the paralell electric fencing [now removed] and in the field corners and include Purple Vetch, Lady's Bedstraw, Cowslip, Bird's -Foot Trefoil and many, many others. Unfortunately the "management" carried out by [name] for Himor [Wain Estates] since September last year has already resulted in the loss of some of this wonderful Wildlife Habitat. We took photographs in May 2020, September 2020, December 2020, May 2021 and September 2021 to record the loss of habitat and the consequent loss of Wildlife. We used to manage the Ragwort on the 6.59ha [poisonous and possibly fatal to horses] and the Japanese Knotweed, being a " non-native Notifiable weed". Those species have grown unchecked since September last year. Himor [Wain Estates] want to build 700-900 Houses and some Industrial Units on the land, without mitigation. This would destroy an important wedge-shaped area of land which begins the West Midlands Green Belt in the South-West corner. The possibility was last put forward in 1980 when a vast Metropolis was proposed; allowing Birmingham., Walsall and Sandwell to merge completely with only Parks, Small Nature Reserves, Playing Fields and "Green Dots" remaining. The idea was quashed by the Environment Minister at the time. Alternative Proposals were put forward for Sand and Gravel Extraction but these proposals were not pursued. We hope that the Black Country Consortium and the surrounding Authorities, if required, can find a sufficient number of previously-developed sites to meet the perceived housing need until the end of the Plan Period. IF any Green Belt land must be released, we believe that this land should be saved because of the "High" value which this particular land has for it's contribution to the purposes of including land within the Green Belt. Thank You for your attention to our Comments.