Green Belt Areas

Comment

Representation ID: 10572

Received: 17/08/2021

Respondent: Mrs Debbie Sant

The green belt in Halesowen, Tack Farm, Coombeswood, Lutley and Foxcote is of historical importance (Lutley Mill and Halesowen Abbey) and provides vital open space for the housing estates that border it. It provides walking access for residents to clent Hills and surrounds. I stronly feel that this should be protected from large scale development.

Object

Representation ID: 10621

Received: 25/08/2021

Respondent: Mrs Helen Sharman

DUH206, DUH207, DUH209
High risk of increased traffic and air pollution through West Hagley/Hagley due to use of local access roads to get access as Poor public transport links. These are already of concern for the local area. Has this impact been discussed with Bromsgrove?

Negative impact on Hagley's character as a village due to removal of separation between Hagley & Stourbridge.

Negative impact on the local environment for wildlife, leisure activity for residents eg walking

Increased burden on already stretched facilities eg hospitals, schools, GPs

Overall detrimental effect on locality and well being of existing residents

Comment

Representation ID: 10623

Received: 25/08/2021

Respondent: Mr Christopher Westwood

I object to DUH 206, DUH 207 and DUH209. The area around Worcester lane and Tsourbridge Golf Course provide a break between continuous development between stourbridge and Hagley. These areas are vital to be kept as Green Belt and should be fully protected and not taken out. The potential linear development along Worcester lane will seriously affect the Green belt break in this area and must be resisted at all costs. The area is in any case already overdeveloped, putting pressure on roads, schools and medical services. Only brownfield land should be in the Dudley area programme for housing development.

Support

Representation ID: 10682

Received: 04/09/2021

Respondent: Mrs Caroline Smith

Greenbelt MUST be retained in these urban areas including in and around the Sedgley area. We are faced with aggressive building and greenbelt land grabs by the neighbouring Council of South Staffs who are trying to build on the greenbelt of the Dudley and Wolverhampton areas that Sedgley intersects with. This includes the North of Himley area (The Straits) and the Severn Cornfields areas.
Greenbelt MUST never be included in planning proposals as before long we have no green space left. All brownfield unused spaces including that owned and not maintained by the council MUST be used first.

Object

Representation ID: 10684

Received: 04/09/2021

Respondent: Mrs Nicky Parker

SA-0016-DUD DUH 206, DUH 207, DUH 209
traffic and transport:

165 units equate 240 cars. Local roads and congested towns and villages become worse.

Peak time traffic currently gridlocked.

Virtually non existent local public transport.

Impact on local services:

Schools at capacity.

Doctors, dentists and hospitals already stretched

Loss of local amenities

Once greenbelt built on it will never come back.

Effect on character of the area.
It’s a gateway public footpaths and bridleways. The prospect of walking through a house estate will push traffic elsewhere increase congestion.

Impact on natural environment:

Loss agricultural land.
Loss of habitat for wildlife.

Comment

Representation ID: 10703

Received: 06/09/2021

Respondent: Ms Joanna Nind

I am concerned about the impact on wildlife - ie.., and foxes that will their habitat.
It would involve felling trees which are so vital for the air we breathe and the life they give to wildlife.
Nature, bird watching and being surrounded by green space have been vital to my wellbeing.
It is an important wildlife corridor.
Destruction of the hawthorn bushes would be detrimental to 300 types of insects that feed on it, its flowers are eaten by dormice and provide nectar for bees.
Access to it is vital to my wellbeing.

Support

Representation ID: 10705

Received: 07/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Richard Slaughter

Permanent retention and legal protection of every piece of Green Belt designated land within Dudley Borough is of paramount importance. It must ALL remain inviolate in perpetuity. Green space and access to it improves people's mood; a lot of the built up areas in Dudley are very ugly and contribute to poor mental health.

Object

Representation ID: 10721

Received: 07/09/2021

Respondent: Mr David Eades

The extra pressure that development DUH217 will put on the roads around the Kingsway and on St James Primary School. The environment will suffer from the extra pollution and destroying the habitat of greenbelt land can never be replaced. Access to the site will be very difficult.

Object

Representation ID: 10726

Received: 08/09/2021

Respondent: Ms Rachel Cooney

I am objecting to the plans to build on site DUH217 its a little oasis and should be left that way

Object

Representation ID: 10789

Received: 12/09/2021

Respondent: Mrs Debbie Haynes

DUH2171 Apart from the environmental impact on wildlife and nature I am concerned that people will lose green space which is important for well being within walking distance. Also at busy times the roads out of this area are already gridlocked and the extra pollution this would cause will be dangerous to health.

Object

Representation ID: 11436

Received: 02/10/2021

Respondent: Mr David Willetts

should not be removed from Greenbelt
Impact on wildlife
nature recovery network link
Impact on footpath
detrimental to health and well being
Access arrangements poor

Object

Representation ID: 11437

Received: 02/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Sarah Willetts

no exceptional circumstances to release from GB
Impact on Nature covers network as it is part of the link from canal and river
Impact on wildlife and reduce opportunity for biodiversity
Impact on health and well being
Impact on access -Inadequate arrangements
Adverse impact one infrastructure and services already overstretched

Object

Representation ID: 11446

Received: 03/10/2021

Respondent: Ms Amanda Stockton

Open spaces in urban areas are essential. With the increasing population, recreational areas should be promoted. For areas to walk, cycle, dog walking and definitely for the natural habitat.
There are many disused industial sites in this area, that could be re-devloped and turned into good quality housing. We should not be destroying our countryside and chopping down trees to make more areas for development when areas already exist.

DUH217

Object

Representation ID: 11593

Received: 07/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Patricia Wilkins

I object to alterations of the Stourbridge Green Belt, and in particular DUH 217, DUH 206,DUH 207, DUH208 These last remaining strips of green belt are the remains of our agricultural history, and follow the ancient path of the Roman Road running from Kingswinford to Hagley. An essential green corridor for nature, they provide a rich variety of flora and fauna, with hedgerows vital for pollinators. The area has the bare minimum of green space for its population , these sites are a popular, well used resource for a diverse group of people who benefit in mental and physical health

Comment

Representation ID: 11786

Received: 09/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Jane Mallin

We need to keep our green belt we do not need housing built on these areas. Wildlife and people need these. Build on once industrial sites, refurbish derelict buildings, look at council houses are they best used.? Under occupancy? let’s face it houses built on green belt will not be affordable to the people that need the houses, they will be luxury detached, yes there will a tiny percentage of on sites but only to meet a set bare minimum requirement. Since COVID these spaces have become even more important for well-being.

Object

Representation ID: 11961

Received: 10/10/2021

Respondent: Dr Jane Cobb

Object to greenbelt sites being developed - these are homes for our precious wildlife such as and foxes
particularly object to Wollaston Farm grazing land DUH217 enjoy walking dogs here, hundreds of insects feed on bushes there - would be criminal to build in this important wildlife corridor all we have left between built up areas
Also object to DUH206, DUH207, DUH 209 - these areas need these green spaces for their wellbeing

Object

Representation ID: 11962

Received: 10/10/2021

Respondent: Mr Jeremy Cobb

DUH217 object to the loss of this valuable wild life corridor
DUH206 207 209 object to loss of attractive green belt land
DUH208 object to loss of green belt land and loss of amenity
DUH211 object to loss of green belt land and the enormous scale of the housing development proposed which will change the character of the area and put strain on local services.

Object

Representation ID: 16548

Received: 10/10/2021

Respondent: Fiona Mclachrie

I am purely objecting to the proposals to build on green belt or areas of open green space. We must stick to the ideology of brownfield first and not be swayed by current persons of interest own beliefs or self interest.
I absolutely believe that the current figures of need for new housing is incorrect and must be scrutinized
The preservation of green space will define us. Future generations will hopefully recognise that enough of us saw what a fools game we were involved in and stopped this incessant lazy business model. Reuse and repurpose.
Biodiversity will be lost forever.
We do not have the infrastructure to support more large housing estates.
I also wish to say the the consultation and response process is a disgrace. A large percentage of the population will not have been able to respond.

I feel that any new housing developments that impact directly on people's lives ie noise. smell and increased traffic should be taken to the people and a referendum held. Also the people who will financially gain be named. Not holding company names actual people.

Thank you.

Object

Representation ID: 16596

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Ms Gaye Partridge

Please note I have also sent an email to local councillors and to the Black Country Plan email address as the official and prescribed form keeps quitting.

This response is made on behalf of Cradley and Wollescote Labour Party.

Our Comments are as follows:-

We object to any loss of the greenbelt in the local area and in the wider areas of Stourbridge and Halesowen.The basis for our objections are the the original reasons for the granting of this status remain valid.

We object to any assertion that reducing the size of the greenbelt or building on it is in the best interests of the community. It is clear to us that to suggest this is the case is morally wrong, not for the social good and ethically incorrect.

We are concerned that the timing and the way the consultation has been progressed has prevented full and proper discussion of relevant local, national and global issues and that this will be to the general detriment of the Borough of Dudley.


G L Partridge
Secretary
Cradley and Wollescote Labour Party.

Object

Representation ID: 18275

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Judith Stroud

The Mayor of the West Midlands Consortium, Mr Andy Street, proclaims that there are sufficient Brownfield sites within the Black Country to accommodate its housing needs. In view of this, the West Mids Combined Authority, should be required to provide indisputable proof that their housing needs cannot be met within the Black Country before pressuring neighbouring authorities to relinquish valuable Green Belt for development. Climate change is, quite rightly, of major importance and to disregard the importance of the Green Belt and other green spaces is irresponsible. Developers have had their own way for far too long by proposing sites in the Green Belt that are more profitable for them to develop, this needs to change.

Authorities and Developers make great claims that developments should enhance an area, development in the Green Belt destroys an area!