6.1

Object

Representation ID: 4230

Received: 22/12/2022

Respondent: J Richardson

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Totally unsound evidence that makes up this plan. The green belt around South Staffordshire should be maintained at all costs.

Object

Representation ID: 4350

Received: 19/12/2022

Respondent: CPRE Staffordshire

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

In Section 6 the housing allocations identified for cross-boundary growth are Land at Cross Green, Land north of Linthouse Lane and Land at Langley Road. The plan's figures suggest these could deliver 2790 dwellings in the plan period and 776 more beyond. There is no justification for this deferral approach.

These sites either abut the edge of Wolverhampton or are in close proximity to it. There is not evidence to show the Duty to Cooperate has been met through joint working with Wolverhampton. We question whether the Council has carried out its Duty to Co-operate with the relevant bodies. We have not seen the evidence for this in the published documents.

East of Bilbrook and Land North of Penkridge would provide at least 1977 houses in total and are easily accessible to Wolverhampton by train. Assume that the balance of the 4,000 would be met by these sites with the remaining 757 considered to serve the needs of South Staffordshire. This issue is not addressed in the plan.

Comment

Representation ID: 4652

Received: 19/12/2022

Respondent: Woodland Trust

The local plan should give strong weight to LNRSes for development site allocation at a local level to embed avoidance of impacts. It should also inform priority locations for the provision of green infrastructure and habitat creation and enhancement through BNG.