Policy SA5: Housing Allocations

Object

Representation ID: 5485

Received: 22/12/2022

Respondent: Mrs S Readshaw

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Site 582 Langley Road.
Black Country Plan has collapsed, and Black Country authorities examining brownfield options, not sensible to continue strategy of releasing greenbelt sites in South Staffordshire.
Negative impact on infrastructure and services. No Masterplan, flood risk or air quality assessments have been produced.
New development would be heavily reliant on private vehicle transport contrary to NPPF policy regarding situating development in sustainable locations.
Siting of Battery Energy Storage System on adjoining land will detract from attractiveness of this site for housing.
Plan uses 2014 ONS data, which is now out of date, latest figures show reduction in number of dwellings required. In light of recent Government announcements, plan should be paused.

Object

Representation ID: 5486

Received: 28/11/2022

Respondent: J Richardson

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Copart plan should be developed instead of Billy Buns/Gilbert Lane.
Negative impact on road network.
Loss of Green Belt.
Impact of village character.
Impact on health and wellbeing of existing residents.
Any expansion of Wombourne should be to the west not the north/east.

Object

Representation ID: 5487

Received: 23/12/2022

Respondent: Jaskaran Sahota

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Site 582 Langley Road.
Negative impact on availability of school places and the quality of education provision. Cumulative impact of this site and sites in Wombourne would mean impact on schools not sustainable.
More hard surfaces will increase surface water flooding and sewage issues.
Negative impact on local road network particularly Bylls Lane, which already has poor visibility, more cars will amplify existing problems and safety concerns.
Loss of greenbelt; encroachment onto countryside.

Object

Representation ID: 5489

Received: 23/12/2022

Respondent: Mrs J Stroud

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Site 582 Langley Road.
Oppose loss of Green Belt to accommodate needs for neighbouring authorities using out of date figures and not meeting the tests of very special circumstances.
No indication of how additional development will be accommodated in terms of impacts on local infrastructure and demand for services.

Object

Representation ID: 5491

Received: 20/12/2022

Respondent: Mr C Thompson

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Wombourne’s population is currently declining, Wombourne needs more accessible green space not less.

Object

Representation ID: 5493

Received: 21/12/2022

Respondent: Ms Carolyn Tranter

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

GPs surgeries at capacity.
No evidence of capacity measurement of school places.
Plan not justified. Wombourne is a Tier 2 village which has already been over developed. No evidence of the requirement for developers to build affordable homes. No strategy linking proposed sites with viable employment, health, education, recreation and shopping facilities.
Sites 284 and 463 would result in unjustified loss of Green Belt. Copart and land opposite Poolhouse should be examined. Sites 284 and 463 will destroy the character of the village.
The proposed plan does not adhere to national policy on sustainability. National policy changes mean that the plan does not align.

Comment

Representation ID: 5497

Received: 22/12/2022

Respondent: Mrs Laura Smith

Lack of consideration for local factors such as the significance of Small Brook Farm as a historic Gateway into Wombourne.
Small Brook is a high risk flood area.
Negative impact on the provision of local services such as GP surgeries and local schools.
Negative impact on character of village.
Provision based on out of date 2014 ONS forecasts.
Neighbouring authorities are pausing their plans.
Brownfield should be developed before green belt sites.

Object

Representation ID: 5498

Received: 20/12/2022

Respondent: Mr & Mrs A Smith

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Oppose proposed site 576 – councillor conflict of interest

Object

Representation ID: 5499

Received: 19/12/2022

Respondent: B & C Unett

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Land South of Stafford.
Loss of agricultural land.
Negative impact on wildlife, fields and hedgerows.
Negative impact on already congested roads.
Development not necessary to meet needs of Stafford which is where the proposal will relate.
Coalescence risk between Wildwood, Baswich and Walton.
Inadequate doctors surgeries and non existent school places, children at the new development would have to be bussed to schools on other side of Stafford.

Object

Representation ID: 5500

Received: 23/12/2022

Respondent: J Vaughan

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

South of Stafford
Object to proposal – A34 too congested, local shops and services not able to meet demand for extra housing.

Object

Representation ID: 5503

Received: 23/12/2022

Respondent: Ms J Walton

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

More development will increase levels of traffic and congestion. Narrow streets in village centre and illegal parking are causing increasing safety issues for pedestrians.
Recent housing developments have not improved affordability.
Negative impact on overstretched services.
Increased risk of flooding.

Object

Representation ID: 5505

Received: 23/12/2022

Respondent: Mr Nick Walton

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

There has already been a dramatic increase in the traffic and congestion in Wombourne centre.
Centre is subject to speeding vehicles and inappropriate parking creating safety issues for pedestrians.
Recent housing developments have not improved affordability.
Negative impact on overstretched services.
Increased risk of flooding.

Object

Representation ID: 5507

Received: 19/12/2022

Respondent: David Webb

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Lack of information justifying the use of green field sites in preference to brownfield sites.
No information on impacts upon highways, educational, medical or social services.
Changing National Policy is not adequately reflected in the proposed plan.
Green Belt should be protected.

Object

Representation ID: 5508

Received: 23/12/2022

Respondent: Rowena Webb

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

South of Stafford
Negative impact on already busy commuter routes along A34.
Negative impact of services and facilities including GP surgeries which are already overstretched

Object

Representation ID: 5509

Received: 22/12/2022

Respondent: C Westley

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Land at Boscomoor Lane
Negative impact on character and landscape.
Should be the subject of limited development with the objective of retaining significant open space while providing benefits to the current local community.
Site proposal should retain significant open space.

Object

Representation ID: 5510

Received: 23/12/2022

Respondent: Mr and Mrs Richard Bennett

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

New housing sites (285/459/562/41)will negatively impact on Poolhouse/Ounsdale/School Road which is not designed for this level of traffic.

Object

Representation ID: 5511

Received: 23/12/2022

Respondent: Mr and Mrs Richard Bennett

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Site 463 & 284
development of this increases risk of coalescence with the West Midlands conurbation.
Destruction of rural character of the village.
Increase parking issues.
Risks associated with building in close proximity to power transmission lines.
Inadequate local services to accommodate more development.
Poor public transport links

Object

Representation ID: 5513

Received: 22/12/2022

Respondent: Save the Lower Penn Green Belt (Action Group)

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Not legally compliant, not sound, fails to comply with DtC.
Poor consultation processes contrary to NPPF requirements. Online meetings not available to people without PC and not long enough in length. Appointment based meeting inadequate, limited time slots and too restrictive for people who worked. No open public meetings. Sessions were poorly advertised.
Opus portal confusing, difficult to navigate and restrictive.
Poor quality evidence base, council decided on a high housing number which they have tried to retrospectively fit biased data.
Web based documents difficult to locate.
Spatial distribution is based on insufficiently robust and out of date technical evidence base.
No consideration given to the impact of economic recession.
Too much weight given by the District Council on report produced by Lichfields.
No detailed consideration to study produced by consultants on behalf of the action group.
10,000+ vacant homes in West Midlands conurbation.
Consideration needs to be given to changes in commuting patterns etc. following covid.
Current housing proposal is too high, is based on out-of-date housing needs forecasts. This is not sustainable and will negatively impact on amenity, landscapes and wildlife habitats.
Housing supply is being driven by a desire to increase council tax receipts with costs of infrastructure provision being borne by the adjoining conurbation.
Failed DtC, no evidence of an SPD, infrastructure delivery strategy or master plan.
2021 census results indicate lower number of households in Wolverhampton than 2014 ONS forecast.
Reg19 Plan has failed to take account of changes in Central Government planning policy including removal of need for mandatory housing targets.
Sustainability Appraisal
SA Objective 1: Lack of analysis of GHG emissions, no attempt to quantify and understand impact of CO2 emissions of site proposals.
SA Objective 2: Site 582 rated as high risk of surface water flooding. Adaptation to impacts of future climate change will be problematic and the site should be excluded from development.
SA Objective 3: Site 582 has a LNR along one of its boundaries. Assessment gives pre-mitigation impact as uncertain. This is contrary to stated methodology which indicates assessment should be minor negative.

Object

Representation ID: 5514

Received: 21/12/2022

Respondent: Land off Cherrybrook Action Group

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Concerned that due process not undertaken when site was originally allocated. Request to see comments submitted by residents with respect to the Local Plan decision to remove the site from Green Belt and to identify the site as safeguarded land.
Site will have unsatisfactory access.
Access roads will not be able to accommodate increased traffic flows.
Emergency vehicles will be hampered in gaining access.
Increase vehicles will increase the risks of accidents.
Inadequate traffic surveys produced at incorrect times.
Increased traffic noise and pollution emanating from the M6, which will increase as a result of WMI.
Site does not have satisfactory SuDS.

Object

Representation ID: 5515

Received: 22/12/2022

Respondent: South Stafford Action Group

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

South of Stafford remote in relation to the needs identified in West Midlands conurbation.
Housing should be situated in a more sustainable location associated with the provision of new services with easy access to road and rail networks.
Site is isolated from all existing settlements in South Staffordshire.
No relationship to existing urban form.
Negative impact on roads, schools and leisure provision in Stafford.
No school places available. Walton High has limited potential for expansion meaning pupils will need to travel 3-5 miles for education.
Only one GP surgery which has 23,000 registered patients.
Road system severely congested. Vehicular demand exceeds supply and site will not be able to meet stated plan objectives of encouraging good access to health and educational infrastructure, open space, sport and leisure and to be supported by appropriate infrastructure such as road improvements.
Stafford Borough providing 10,000 new dwellings which is far in excess of own requirements and therefore will already be meeting overspill need from South Staffordshire district. There is therefore no need for additional housing in or around Stafford to meet the needs of the town.
Proposal will negatively impact on the open character of the area and is close proximity to the AONB.
Site contains diverse wildlife including 34 bird species, deer, badgers, bats and hares.
Loss of good quality agricultural land.
Site is not justified, inclusion appears to be purely on basis of being within an open countryside and non green belt area.
Proposal does not take account of recent changes to Government Planning Policy providing greater flexibility to local authorities to determine housing requirements.

Object

Representation ID: 5517

Received: 23/12/2022

Respondent: Stacey Harper-Turner

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

- Road network will not support additional development
- Schools at capacity
- Doctors surgeries at capacity
- Loss of Greenbelt
- Loss of farmland.

Object

Representation ID: 5570

Received: 22/12/2022

Respondent: DBA Estates Ltd

Agent: Fosse Planning

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

The proposed allocation in Pattingham, although safeguarded land, has no physical/recognisable southern boundary to the GB. This prejudices the permanence of the GB, causing it harm.

Comment

Representation ID: 5581

Received: 23/12/2022

Respondent: Canal & River Trust

Site 006 - land at Boscomoor Lane.
Support the requirement to retain and reinforce existing tree and hedgerow to protect the Canal Conservation Area and Lyne Hill Bridge and access requirement for connection to the towpath.

Meaningful, appropriately landscaped with native species, buffer between the towpath and future development be provided to retain semi-rural character of canal corridor.

A requirement to make contributions towards improvements should be included in the plan, probably as local upgrade upon towpath connection rather than s106.

Object

Representation ID: 5588

Received: 23/12/2022

Respondent: Councillor Ray Barron

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Site 036c would have a detrimental impact on local services and the community in Stafford.

The site is remote from any settlement or services within South Staffordshire.

Infrastructure and services in Stafford are at full capacity in the south of the town.

Comment

Representation ID: 5600

Received: 23/12/2023

Respondent: Severn Trent Water

Site 419a&b (land at Keepers Lane and Wergs Hall Road) - The size of the development may impact nearby sewage pumping stations, we encourage the developer to engage with us as early as possible.

Sites 141, 536a, 136, 638, and 704: There have previously been reports of hydraulic sewer flooding in this area, we encourage the developer to engage with us as early as possible. We have an existing capital project in this area which should be informed by the latest development proposals here.