Object

Representation ID: 3

Received: 27/11/2023

Respondent: Mr Darrell Hargrove

650 houses probably means a further 1200 cars trying to get on and off Ploverdale Crescent which will be total chaos. It is already a nightmare to get on and off Sandpipers Estate.
There is also traffic chaos at Pensnett Trading Estate, tailbacks onto the main road from McDonald's drive thru not forgetting traffic coming and going to Aldi.
The traffic situation has been exacerbated with the new pedestrian refuge by Ploverdale which doesn't allow enough room for more than 1 car to move over when turning right.
650 house is far too many and I very much doubt the council will put any additional infrastructure in place for doctors, dentists and extra school places that will be needed. Within half a mile radius from here we have all the new properties that have and are being built at the top of Stallings Lane/Tansey Green Road, once again with no forethought to the increase in the essential services that are required.
All I can foresee is congestion and traffic chaos along this section of the Dudley Road which will further compound the traffic misery that already exists from Russell's Hall Hospital to Pensnett.

I feel that this area of Kingswinford has had its fair share of new developments and housing and Dudley Council could consider other areas of the Borough to develop.

Object

Representation ID: 4

Received: 27/11/2023

Respondent: Mrs Victoria Mokes

I live in Kingswinford, I do not agree with building homes on Ketley Farm.
The traffic is bad already at peak times.
The Doctors surgery are oversubscribed as are the dentists and the schools. Another 650 homes is too many, the infrastructure will collapse.

Object

Representation ID: 5

Received: 11/11/2023

Respondent: Ms Kathleen Bailey

I sincerely hope that the plans for the above include a new primary school, a new secondary school, plus a doctors surgery and dentists surgery.
How on earth are our local schools, doctors etc... expected to cope with this influx of new families. I understand the need to build more housing, but please put strategies in the infrastructure in place to cope first...
I FULLY OPPOSE THESE PLANS IF THE ABOVE STATEMENTS ARE NOT PUT INTO PLACE.
I have lived in Kingswinford for most of my life, in fact since when it was a 'village'. but during the last 10/20 years the traffic through our village and the surrounding area has been atrocious. How on earth are we expected to cope with extra traffic a further 650 houses will generate?

Object

Representation ID: 8

Received: 27/11/2023

Respondent: Rachel Harris

Dear all,
After attending a recent community meeting regarding the draft Dudley local plans I
feel compelled to write.
I write to express my objections in the strongest terms to the plans for 650 houses on
ketley quarry.
I outlined all of my concerns about traffic, pollution, schools, doctors, infrastructure
and quality of life at the meeting alongside my belief that these will not in fact be
affordable homes and therefore not in keeping with the alleged objectives of the plan.
I could write endlessly about each concern I have raised, as a Kingswinford resident
already dealing with the daily difficulties of commuting around the area however I am
sure you are well aware of the local feeling and if you travel around the area you
cannot avoid these issues.
My biggest concern was that no representative was able to adequately address a
single one of the concerns raised at the community meeting and offer any assurance
around infrastructure, services and the future of children and adults in the area who
will have to live with the consequences should these plans go ahead.
Rest assured the community will continue to object in the strongest terms to these
plans and myself and my family will support all the way

Object

Representation ID: 14

Received: 30/11/2023

Respondent: Mr Satish Patel

I object to the number of house planned for Ketley quarry.

I understand house are required, but this is too many and the local infrastrucure , namely roads will not be able to handle the increase traffic.

Also the idea of using ploverdale cres as acees point to this new estate will cause further bottlenecks. better alternative design is required

Also there is nothing in plan for other infrastructure like doctors, schools etc . With that many houses where do you expect the children to go to school?

Where do you expect people to go for doctors, even today I as resident can't get a doctors appointment at my clinic when I need one. 650 more houses = 2.5 per house that is 1625 more people need to find these services?

The plan need to be revise to acceptable houses, and also with a plan for the services - doctors, schools need to be within these plans

Object

Representation ID: 15

Received: 16/11/2023

Respondent: Laurie and Phil Lovatt

Number of people: 2

I object to the building of 600 plus new houses on the Ketley Quarry site for the following reasons. Dudley Council should prioritise putting sufficient infrastructure in place for the existing residents before cramming more households in the area placing massive strain on roads, schools and healthcare providers. The road network is always congested, continual roadworks do not resolve the failing road infrastructure. Years of under investment and increased traffic on the roads have led to a miserable experience for all road users in the area. You say the borough has an extensive transport infrastructure, para 2.31, but this is not enough for the households now, without adding more vehicles to the network from the proposed new housing estates. You refer to the train links from Stourbridge to Birmingham. Getting to Stourbridge station from Kingswinford is stressful at best. Choices are to sit in a car in traffic congestion for over an hour to get to the station, or catch a bus, 2 an hour if they turn up. Probably not relevant but the train service is a joke. Yes, the metro will be a welcome addition to the transport infrastructure when complete, however this has been pushed back numerous times. The metro from Wolverhampton to Birmingham is fine and quick when operating and could be successful. You need to get the issues with the roads resolved before even considering putting more households into the area.

Object

Representation ID: 16

Received: 30/11/2023

Respondent: Dean Pedder

I am writing to inform you of my objection of the proposed plans to build 650 new houses on the ketley quarry site. The infrastructure in local area cannot withstand such a vast amount of housing/occupants which will inevitably lead to even more pressure on the local schools, doctors and an already extremely busy main road. I am not completely against the building of homes but more the sheer quantity suggested on a small area. As a resident of (redacted) I must also inform you of my dismay and objection towards the proposed idea to have one of the 3 access points off of Ploverdale Crescent. It is already difficult during peak travel times to get off and on the estate let alone with the possible influx of trafic this estate will bring. My second objection is if the build were to go ahead why the existing access cannot be used .? Why would you want to cut down trees and remove wildlife to form a new road and the costs involved when there is already a marked entry/exit point into the quarry off the main road. This would help ease the possible difficulty of getting out of Ploverdale crescent onto the main road.

Object

Representation ID: 17

Received: 29/11/2023

Respondent: Mr Paul Millward

I strongly object to the development, Kingswinford is being used for over development to meet government quotas.
Our roads, infrastructure and health care cannot cope.(hardly seems to be a consideration?.).
The access/exit via petrol station is unsuitable and as for the proposed access off Bromley Lane?(this is ill thought out as traffic in school times is already over congested, and even if lights were installed this would only add to the problem.
Agreed more(Affordable)housing is required but this site MUST be scaled down and no access off Bromley lane allowed.
A thought maybe to have a smaller development, a new doctors surgery or a school perhaps.

Object

Representation ID: 28

Received: 30/11/2023

Respondent: Elaine Stafford

650 Dwellings at Ketley Quarry is too many.
The size of this development would:-
- approx 1,500 vehicles entering + leaving the site
- cause GRIDLOCK on an already very busy main road
- make our journey time to Russell Hall Hospital greatly increased

Comment

Representation ID: 47

Received: 09/12/2023

Respondent: Mrs Elaine Grimshaw

I am not opposed to the building of 650 homes on the Ketley Quarry site providing appropriate infrastructure is in place particularly in relation to the road network, public transport services and health care services

Comment

Representation ID: 113

Received: 19/12/2023

Respondent: Wall Heath & Kingswinford Green Belt Group

Given our concern over effects of development on infrastructure, this paragraph refers to any necessary developer contributions. We feel that such contributions must be rigorously applied as otherwise, the financial constraints surrounding councils - Dudley is certainly no expectation - could mean that tax payers will be called upon to fund extensions to facilities, or alterative, they could be not be installed.

Comment

Representation ID: 115

Received: 19/12/2023

Respondent: Wall Heath & Kingswinford Green Belt Group

Paragraph 6 uses terms such as "It is...anticipated.." getting to the point that developer contributions will be provided. We are extremely concerned that developers, whose business plans are focused on maximisations of profit, will see this position as weak. DMBC need to be robust in their dealing with developers and wording throughout every aspect of this commercial relationship must be as robust as possible. The people of Dudley have a right to expect no less.

Comment

Representation ID: 116

Received: 19/12/2023

Respondent: Maureen Stott

I live in Kingswinford and the proposals for many hundreds of extra dwellings is ridiculous...the schools in the area are at capacity the doctors are over burdened...the roads are already conjected...in fact, all amenities and infrastructures are over stretched already...plus there has already been a large development in the Stallings Lane area...surely Kingswinford has already had its share of new developments.

Comment

Representation ID: 122

Received: 19/12/2023

Respondent: Mr Keith Archer

My concerns about this proposed development are as follows:-
1. What type of houses are proposed? It is important that these are affordable for those on low to average earnings.
2. The number of houses proposed to be built will have many more people living here with many more cars, children, medical & care needs, etc. What work os being undertaken to ensure the infrastructure is in place? This includes schools, roads, GP practices, hospital expansion, etc.
3. What is Dudley Council requesting any developer to commit to in terms of building any new required infrastructure?

Object

Representation ID: 123

Received: 20/12/2023

Respondent: Mrs Angela Davies

I live on the estate adjacent to the Ketley Quarry. To build 650 houses will be an enormous impact on our roads as the residents have problems entering and exiting the estate now because of the severe volume of traffic. The plan is saying that schools will be extended - this is not good enough - new schools, new doctor surgeries, new road infrastructure, etc., will be imperative to the people of Kingswinford. There is also much wildlife in this area - including badgers, foxes and muntjacs - what will happen to them?. I definitely object strongly to this proposal.

Object

Representation ID: 149

Received: 21/12/2023

Respondent: Ms Christine Anderson

My name is Christine Anderson and I live at XXX. I have concerns about the development of housing in Ketley fields. I have attended meetings and no one has been able to reassure me that there is enough spaces at local school and GP surgery for the size of the development. I also asked about green spaces and again no answers. Green space is really important for physical and emotional well being. Whilst I understand that housing is needed I believe that the number should be restricted unless there is an infrastructure to support it. Please check Bromley Lane at 3.25 on a weekday, absolute bedlam with taxis trying to get into the Briar school and parents picking their children up from the two other schools.

Object

Representation ID: 196

Received: 29/12/2023

Respondent: Mrs M.A. Harris

19.12.23.
Dear Sir,
Re: Dudley Local Plan Ketley Quarry Kingswinford.

We are very concerned about the number of houses included in plan for Kingswinford and surrounding area. Main Concerns:-
Traffic - in all areas, the amount of time spent on journeys due to congestion Pollution.
Leisure/ Excercise Sadly lacking, places to walk few and far between.
Schools/ Hospitals /G.Ps Already overstretched.

To say Dudley Boro. need more housing is condeming future generations to a poor quality of life in this area. These developments will attract people from outside of borough, adding to exsisting problems.
Yours faithfully
MR. J.A. and MRS. M.A. HARRIS

Object

Representation ID: 198

Received: 29/12/2023

Respondent: Mr J.A. Harris

19.12.23.
Dear Sir,
Re: Dudley Local Plan Ketley Quarry Kingswinford.

We are very concerned about the number of houses included in plan for Kingswinford and surrounding area. Main Concerns:-
Traffic - in all areas, the amount of time spent on journeys due to congestion Pollution.
Leisure/ Excercise Sadly lacking, places to walk few and far between.
Schools/ Hospitals /G.Ps Already overstretched.

To say Dudley Boro. need more housing is condeming future generations to a poor quality of life in this area. These developments will attract people from outside of borough, adding to exsisting problems.

Support

Representation ID: 349

Received: 13/12/2023

Respondent: Urban Remediation

Agent: Bright & Associates

Ketley Quarry, Dudley Road, Kingswinford (site reference DLPKQH1) is one of five priority sites which have been
identified for the delivery of new homes as part of the draft Dudley Local Plan 2041. The site constitutes brownfield
land and is the key housing site in the Pensnett to Kingswinford Regeneration Corridor (RC1).
The site has previously been put forward as part of the call for sites exercise. Over a number of years, submitted
sites have been assessed on a wide range of criteria including access to services, capacity of new homes,
supporting infrastructure and the natural value of the site.
In November 2022 we submitted an outline planning application for up to 650 dwellings at the former Ketley Quarry
(reference P22/1734) on behalf of our Client (Urban Remediation Ltd.). We have referred to this in our
comments as part of the consultation process.
As the Dudley Local Plan 2041 is adopting an urban-led approach, the site offers an ideal opportunity to utilise
previously developed land to regenerate the area and provide new homes for local people as well as new public
green space, pedestrian and cycling links. The site is both well connected and well served by local amenities
and represents sustainable development.
Comments on the information provided in the document is provided on

Comment

Representation ID: 350

Received: 13/12/2023

Respondent: Urban Remediation

Agent: Bright & Associates

Site Map. Please see our later comments regarding the Dudley Local Plan 2041 Policies Map.
Much of the text on pages 2018 to 222 is replicated from the draft Black Country Plan (2021) and we would
request that this is revised to reflect the current site situation.
Point 8 Nature Conservation and Net Biodiversity Gain Requirements. (a) With respect to the SSSI and SLINC
designations, please refer to our comments made regarding the Dudley Local Plan 2041 Policies Map. (c) The
description refers to the need for bat and bird surveys etc. for the abandoned farmhouse and surrounding
buildings. Permission to demolish the former Ketley Farm was approved in September 2018 (reference
P18/1306/PN11B). This has been carried out to prepare the site for development. Relevant ecological surveys
were submitted as part of the recent planning application (reference P22/1734).
Point 9 Historic Environment Requirements. We have made comments about the designations shown on the Site
Map (see Dudley Local Plan 2041 Policies Map).
Point 10 Recreational Open Space Requirements. The phrasing suggests multiple sites and that the site is close
to open countryside which is incorrect.

Comment

Representation ID: 677

Received: 22/12/2023

Respondent: Natural England

We welcome recognition of the Ketley Claypit Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI). The policy could give its name, for ease of reference.

Object

Representation ID: 854

Received: 19/12/2023

Respondent: Sport England

Note that Parts 4 and 10 of the policy allocation identifies the impact on infrastructure provision referring to open space requirements, there is currently no provision within the policy for sport and physical activity infrastructure. Raise an objection to the allocation which could be addressed by including an appropriate reference to meeting the needs of the development for playing pitches and built sports facilities in line with the policies and evidence base referenced.

Calculations provided using the Sport England's Sports Facilities and Playing Pitch Calculators.