6.3

Object

Representation ID: 4782

Received: 18/12/2022

Respondent: Mrs Helen Benge

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Strongly object to development on site 036C land South of Stafford.

The Local Plan runs against many planning documents the Council has published and is very unclear. Within appendix 5 of the current policy and physical constraints documents it is recommended three times that this site should not be taken forward into the local plan.

The site has already been rejected by the council's planning committee as a result of an application submitted in 2017. Application no 17/00505/OUT was refused by the planning committee in Dec 2017 and an appeal APP/C3430/W/18/3195496 was withdrawn by the applicant in September 2018 after South Staffordshire housing allocations were updated. Therefore, it is unclear why the site is being considered within the Local Plan.

Object

Representation ID: 4996

Received: 22/12/2022

Respondent: L&Q Estates Limited

Agent: Barton Willmore

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Not positively prepared, not justified and not consistent with national policy.
More suitable sites have not been adequately considered or included for allocation. Yieldfields represents a sustainable location and should be included as a site allocation in the Local Plan. Yieldfields not selected primarily due to perceived higher Green Belt harm. The Green Belt study (2019) predated selection of the southern portion of the site as a Walsall strategic housing allocation. Considered as a consolidated whole (i.e. land within South Staffordshire & Walsall) would result in lower levels of potential harm than reported in the South Staffordshire Green Belt Study and would not significantly weaken the integrity of the surrounding Green Belt. Shallow ridgeline on northern edge of site (when reinforced through green infrastructure) would create defensible site boundary and reduce the risk of settlement coalescence. Barton Wilmore has undertaken a site-specific appraisal of the site against the SA criteria and considers that the site scores well against the 12 SA objectives (8 positives and 2 negatives). It is considered that the Yieldfields site scores better than Linthouse Lane allocation (SA3).