Question 8

Object

Representation ID: 9

Received: 01/11/2021

Respondent: Mr Mohammad Nouri

I have no idea about those locations suggested on SA5 but generally I don't support any development in green areas particularly on the land North of Linthouse Lane due to the reasons set out in previous questions .

Object

Representation ID: 19

Received: 01/11/2021

Respondent: Ms M Collins

272/274/576
Object to all as developing on green belt and open countryside. Making Kinver develop into a town without investing in the relevant infrastructure to support this further development. The houses for minimum are low however this is minimum therefore will pack in the maximum amount of houses. Also no evidence that all these houses will sell in these areas - new houses in the village have take a while to sell.
This goes against the council’s stance on climate change

Support

Representation ID: 25

Received: 03/11/2021

Respondent: N/a

the sites in around the wombourne area seem appropriate and proportionate, utilising land that isnt being used for much currently.

Object

Representation ID: 31

Received: 03/11/2021

Respondent: Mr Thomas Barnsley

Site 255 is a poor choice of location for an increase of that size. The road, drainage, water are already an issue. There has been no flood assessment done in recent years that I can find. The road and houses especially in that area flood repeatedly each year due to poor badly maintained aged drains, run off from agricultural land (again poor drainage maintenance). The level of traffic on the lane is already at dangerous levels due to parking and lack of speed management, it is a major cut through for people avoiding the village.

Object

Representation ID: 40

Received: 03/11/2021

Respondent: Mr Simon Whale

Your not fit for purpose

Object

Representation ID: 52

Received: 05/11/2021

Respondent: Mrs Steph Dainty

Re 463 and 284 Wombourne. Very concerned regarding flooding risk on Corner of Smallbrook Lane torrents of water when it rains causing flooding on Gilbert Lane just before A449 often cars get stuck. Flooding on Rookery road by Wombrook entrance. Likely to worsen if green belt tarmaced over. Numerous attempts have been made to solve problem - none worked. Smallbrook Lane traffic often has to reverse back as road narrow would be worsened with increased traffic flow. Can Wombourne infrastructure support this many new houses? Adversely affect beauty of Wombrook Nature Walk. NIMBY

Object

Representation ID: 77

Received: 09/11/2021

Respondent: Mr James Aust

I fully disagree with the proposed plans to build more houses in Wombourne

Object

Representation ID: 82

Received: 09/11/2021

Respondent: Mrs K Tregillus

Re all site references in Wombourne: 416, 285, 562/415, 459, 463, 284, 286
I object to the building of more properties in Wombourne due to the infrastructure already being at breaking point. Doctors surgeries, schools, pharmacies are all at a point where they cannot cope with any more people. Service is suffering with already long queues and and waiting times.
The village center does not have enough parking or shops to service this many more vehicles or people. Traffic and subsequent pollution are significantly worse than ever before.
The loss of more green land could also cause more flooding.

Object

Representation ID: 100

Received: 09/11/2021

Respondent: Mr Darren Imms

With reference to: 416, 285,562,415,459,463,284 & 286. I object strongly to all of these proposals

Object

Representation ID: 113

Received: 10/11/2021

Respondent: Miss Amanda Griss

There's no room in Wombourne, like I've said......GP's can't cope. If you build......there will be floods. Please don't build in Wombourne.

Object

Representation ID: 140

Received: 15/11/2021

Respondent: Mr Flavell

Ref 463/284. The development is too large. Its proximity to roads that are already congested and to a major traffic island will result in congestion and accidents. There is no indication as to how the traffic increase will be handled, both to/from the site and the village. 223 dwellings implies at least 400 vehicles, at peak times this will further clog congested roads, a major accident at Wodehouse island becomes inevitable.
Ref 286. This development is adjacent to a blind bend, on the crown of which is cemetery access. Again, no thought has been given to traffic / safety considerations.

Object

Representation ID: 143

Received: 15/11/2021

Respondent: Mrs Judith Longman

Site 285/562/415/459- infrastructure poor, traffic and pollution issues, green belt. (Promised infrastructure when Poolehouse was built but never happened.)
Site 463/284 - this would be a huge loss to Wombourne - these areas are significant areas of beauty which affect the identity and historical character of Wombourne. The natural water flow of the streams means that land is water logged and wombrook walk/nature/wildlife would be hugely affected. Flooding and drainage issues are already problems that council currently ignores. Congestion, traffic and pollution are obvious concerns.
Site 416 - narrow road, congestion, pollution, loss of green belt

Object

Representation ID: 154

Received: 15/11/2021

Respondent: Mr Carl Harper

284,285,286,416,459,562/415.

We object to all six sites in wombourne.

Support

Representation ID: 155

Received: 16/11/2021

Respondent: Mr Peter Wilkes

Agent: Mr Mark Turner

The site is ideally suited for residential development and no issues have been identified with it which would make it unsuitable for housing. It has excellent access, particularly to the road network, and is close to a school and a leisure centre, as well as the village centre. It would create a natural extension to Cheslyn Hay. The site is suitable, available, and achievable.

Object

Representation ID: 157

Received: 16/11/2021

Respondent: Mr Lee Simner

This is for the proposed new housing development in Wombourne, Site reference numbers 416,285,562,415,459,463,284,286. This will create more traffic, more pollution including noise pollution, more strain on services which is already under pressure, more crime, more risk of flooding, loss of wildlife habitats and an impact on fauna , loss of green spaces, potential to lose village status, potential to be swallowed up into Wolverhampton city, massive impact on mental health for existing residents.

Object

Representation ID: 158

Received: 16/11/2021

Respondent: Mrs Ann Jauncey

638 and 536a will impact on more traffic through both villages which at peak times is already problematic.
Sanitation issues with the sewage and drainage is already a big problem with local flooding also being an issue

Object

Representation ID: 160

Received: 16/11/2021

Respondent: Mr Arran Shuker

Site ref 416, 285, 286, 263, 463, 284, 562, 415
Wombourne already has issues with school places, introducing more people to the village will only worsen this. The roads around the village are already in poor state of repair due to high traffic volumes, especially in the village centre itself where there is also an issue with parking for people to buy from local businesses. This also has an impact on the safety of our children walking to and from school. The doctor surgery is already difficult to get an appointment, what happens when there are more people?

Object

Representation ID: 175

Received: 17/11/2021

Respondent: Mr Brian Graystone

Building on green field sites is not acceptable.

Object

Representation ID: 194

Received: 18/11/2021

Respondent: Mrs Samantha Brownless

036c
The local infrastructure in Weeping Cross cannot support additional housing in the area.
It’s already near Impossible to get Dr appointments. There are people queueing at the door of A & E in the mornings. The traffic getting in and out of town can be horrendous especially during peak times. There has been MORE than enough new housing built in Stafford. Most of it is unattractive.

Object

Representation ID: 197

Received: 19/11/2021

Respondent: Mrs C Starkey

Development should retain and reflect farm area and existing properties that are close by. Another junction on Long Street will impact on road safety and existing business - public house and Turners Garage. Having to have a dual purpose access road to site that is for residents and farm will also impact on personal safety.

Object

Representation ID: 206

Received: 20/11/2021

Respondent: Mr David Jackson

Site 036c is unsuitable and has quite correctly been previously rejected by South Staffs.

Object

Representation ID: 223

Received: 22/11/2021

Respondent: Mr Eric Organ

The area South of Stafford (Ref: 036c - above). This area is already very congested with the new development on the old Staffordshire Police Headquarters land with Wildwood estate as well, the traffic flow into Stafford town center has made this route, at certain times of the day, vertually impossible. The traffic will not affect South Staffordshire and Cannock but will affect Stafford. Also due to the recent new houses on the land mentioned above Schools are above capacity and local Primary Schools are full. This again will not affect South Staffordshire CC but will affect Stafford.

Object

Representation ID: 224

Received: 22/11/2021

Respondent: Mrs Catherine Sutton

16 houses next to one existing house in Orton Lane?? 223 on green fields by Billy Buns Lane? Again you are asking too much of an already overcrowded village and eroding any green belt left. Who will be able to afford these 2/3 bathroom houses? Commuters??

Object

Representation ID: 234

Received: 22/11/2021

Respondent: Miss Maria Forte

Site No 582 Langley Road
I have lived in Lower Penn for 14 years. I absolutely love living here and it is wonderful for my Well being.
The building of houses will devastate the whole tranquility of living here. The roads will not accommodate more traffic, there is no spaces in nearby schools. There is a 3 week waiting list to get to seem my GP.
The wildlife distribution will be affected greatly. There is such a diverse amount of wildlife around Lower Penn.
New housing equals more pollution ie more cars . Please don’t build on Lower Penn.
Thankyou

Object

Representation ID: 237

Received: 22/11/2021

Respondent: Mrs Julia Watt

Site 036c. I object due to extra traffic congestion as exiting Wildwood Estate is already difficult and dangerous at all times. This proposal will also impact on other nearby roads. The Doctor's surgery is already overloaded partly due to a large elderly population in this area and local schools are full to capacity. I also feel that probable use of Stafford Borough facilities due to closer proximity than facilities at Cannock is unfair to Stafford Borough taxpayers while South Staffs will receive the Council Tax revenue. In 2017 SSDC rejected Gladman's proposals, so what has changed?

Object

Representation ID: 248

Received: 23/11/2021

Respondent: Mr Alex Fenlon

Langley Road I do not agree with - again a direct impact on green belt.

Object

Representation ID: 254

Received: 23/11/2021

Respondent: Mr Mark Evans

Site 610 - Fentonhoue lane /Marston Road

An Important historical asset and an important part of the village's history would be destroyed if the site was developed.

Negative effect of the village's landscape.

Negative effect on wildlife in and around the local.

Increased traffic along poor roads.

Increased traffic along the routes taken by schoolchildren.

The propsed site is prone to flooding all year round.

Close proximity to the SSSI site of Motty Meadows.

Loss of a local amenity which brings villagers close to our rural sourroundings i.e. grazing cattle

Object

Representation ID: 261

Received: 23/11/2021

Respondent: Ms Claire Jones

sites 463 and 284
This would have an extremely damaging effect on the amenity of the village boundary. It goes against policies that seek to avoid encroachment and identity.
Further Highway infrastructure cannot be supported by a unitary authority that currently cannot meet it's statutory duties and that is being met by volunteers, specifically road sweeping and gully emptying.
GP's and Dentists are at capacity already.
Fuel stations are at capacity.
There is no provision for electric vehicle charging in the village
Flood risks will increase due to further surface run off from metalled surfaces.

Object

Representation ID: 266

Received: 24/11/2021

Respondent: Mr L Wildman

Site 536a
Land off Holly lane should be retained as open space to preserve green belt and areas identity as a village .
There is currently brownfield site opposite in the form of empty factory unit and open space which should be purchased and utilised for any development in area. If any development is to proceed then this should be restricted to school side of railway line and not the area surrounding landywood farm as both will add to an already overdeveloped area.

Object

Representation ID: 274

Received: 24/11/2021

Respondent: Mr Angus Hughes

Reference site: 285, 562/415, 459, 463 & 284. Developments of over 400 houses can not be sustained within the local community. Local services (schools, GPs, shops, parking, traffic volumes, road quality) are not able to support the existing populations. Increasing crime since the closure of the Police station would only get worse. The sites identified are open green spaces and provide valuable resource for the local ecosystem and wildlife. Access routes into the village at these proposed sites regularly flood, and have high traffic volumes at peak times which impacts feeder routes into the area with regular accidents.