Question 3

Object

Representation ID: 334

Received: 24/11/2021

Respondent: Tracey Abbiss

Settlement already too large and doesn't need to contribute to development.

Object

Representation ID: 337

Received: 01/12/2021

Respondent: Mr Ralph Butler

The impact on the greater Birmingham housing strategy should not be a consideration and in fact actively ignored. Green belt land should not be heavily impacted upon by addressing city problems.

Object

Representation ID: 350

Received: 02/12/2021

Respondent: Mr Adam Turner

None of the objectives limit the amount of development in the area, at which point will the council say no and look for alternative options other than to sacrifice the greenbelt land. In none of the policies does it mention repurposing empty properties to meet the housing needs yet in a government report the figures state there were 11193 empty properties across the black country and staffordshire as at October 2021 with some properties having been empty for more than two years. Why can't these properties be repurposed to tackle the housing crisis.

Object

Representation ID: 359

Received: 03/12/2021

Respondent: Nicola Dixon

What about existing residents? What about protecting trees? We are members of the wildlife trust and this is simply not enough.
What about pressure on school places? We moved here for the school, and more pressure means we may not get in.

Support

Representation ID: 369

Received: 05/12/2021

Respondent: Inland Waterways Association (IWA)

IWA agrees that the Hatherton Canal Restoration Project could contribute to tourism and flood alleviation.

IWA agrees with Strategic Objective 13: Enhance the built environment, conserving and enhancing district’s heritage assets including the district’s canal network.

Object

Representation ID: 390

Received: 07/12/2021

Respondent: Mrs K Edwards

Climate Change.
Urban sprawl - increase smaller villages or create a new one along A449 corridor to avoid congestion, air pollution,
DUTY OF CARE to current council rate payers
see attached notes

Support

Representation ID: 393

Received: 07/12/2021

Respondent: Mr T Cowern

Agent: Mr Hugh Lufton

Generally, yes.

Reading across the Plan there does however seem to be a disconnect with the location of major warehousing and distribution proposals for the West Midlands Interchange at Four Ashes, the strategic employment sites and the housing proposals.

It is accepted that the WMI is recognised as part of the employment land portfolio and well referenced in the Plan however the Strategy does not reflect how this will influence changes to commuting and employment opportunities. The housing strategy and distribution lacks synergy with the provision of employment.

Object

Representation ID: 405

Received: 07/12/2021

Respondent: Mrs SUSAN WAKEFIELD

Strategic Objective 1is to 'Protect the Green Belt and open spaces as far as possible'. In my opinion this should mean that brownfield sites are used, not just considered, to fulfil this objective. If planners start to encroach on Green Belt land while we still have other options then how long will our Green Belt last .... our environmental 'lungs' and areas to provide much needed 'well being ' environments?

Object

Representation ID: 418

Received: 08/12/2021

Respondent: Lichfield & Hatherton Canals Restoration Trust

The present document has failed to carry forward the policy protection necessary for the projected restoration of the Hatherton Canal within the South Staffordshire District. LHCRT has continued to work towards that objective, including through consultations on the other relevant Local Authority Plans - Black Country Plan and Cannock Chase District Plan - but it is vital that the South Staffordshire District Plan continues to provide formal route protection as shown in the previous Local Plan. Without that protection the whole project becomes far harder to fund and to deliver.

Object

Representation ID: 425

Received: 08/12/2021

Respondent: Croft Development Consultancy UK Ltd

Strategic Objective 2 can be interpreted as being very inward and insular looking and does not take into account key settlements that actually boarder onto the administrative boundary of south staffs, which still may be sustainable locations for Development.

Object

Representation ID: 447

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: Mr Chris Manton

Having ONLY found out about the review yesterday (4 days before its deadline for comments), and given the look of astonishment around the table at yesterdays Parish Council Meeting, this whole process has not been communicated well enough throughout the parish and by SSDC to allow for everyone to comment effectively. The deadline from comment needs to be extended.

Object

Representation ID: 456

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: Mr Rob Boydon

Agent: Stansgate Planning

N/A

Support

Representation ID: 463

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: NHS

The Black Country and West Birmingham CCG have been involved in providing information to inform the visions and strategic objectives of the Local plan.

Support

Representation ID: 471

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: Bellway Homes Limited (Hyde Lane site)

Agent: Turley

- Objectives rightly reflect contribution to unmet needs and locating new development in sustainable locations.
- Assumed Kinver a key village.
- Strategic objection 9 should acknowledge that new development will also maintain and enhance the vitality of South Staffordshire’s rural communities.

Support

Representation ID: 481

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: Bellway Homes Limited (Dunsley Drive site)

Agent: Turley

- Objectives rightly reflect contribution to unmet needs and locating new development in sustainable locations.
- Assumed Kinver a key village.
- Strategic objection 9 should acknowledge that new development will also maintain and enhance the vitality of South Staffordshire's rural communities.

Object

Representation ID: 492

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: Miss EMP Shaw Hellier Settlement

Agent: Stansgate Planning

N/A

Object

Representation ID: 514

Received: 11/12/2021

Respondent: DOCTOR Prabhjoyt Kler

The quantity of housing being built and the amount of green belt land being used will have a profound local impact, particularly on the diversity of species that roam around the local area. This will push these species further and further away and I see no provisions to preserve this. The only conservation I see is not improving on local services or infrastructure which cannot cope with current standards and therefore will not improve in the future with increased housing. I agree with housing towards Bilbrook as this will connect towards existing areas of Pendeford and Science Parks.

Object

Representation ID: 525

Received: 11/12/2021

Respondent: Mrs Sarah Burgess

I fully agree that new developments should designed and located in a way that delivers greater energy conservation and reduces carbon emissions. This must be fully integrated into the planning process. As well as the emissions produced by new dwellings themselves, both during and after construction, it is also very important to consider the location of new development. If it locks in car-dependency, this will not help reduce emissions. The objective to "protect the Green Belt and Open Countryside as far as possible" is also vague, as what constitutes "as far as possible" is open to interpretation.

Object

Representation ID: 532

Received: 11/12/2021

Respondent: Mr R Gidlow

the evidence for the housing requirements has not been proven

Object

Representation ID: 564

Received: 12/12/2021

Respondent: R Simner

The phrase " compensatory improvements to the environmental quality" is used when referring to the green belt but it's by no means clear what that means. Simply having lots of extra housing with minimanl improvements to local services (new schools, new GP practices) doesn't seem to fulfil this objective.

Object

Representation ID: 580

Received: 12/12/2021

Respondent: Mr J Knight

Almost 50% of the proposed new dwellings would be for “neighbouring Authorities”, which shows the complete lack of concern the Council has for the welfare of current South Staffordshire Residents. It severely reduces the opportunities of young people in South Staffs to buy their own home. The Mayor of the West Midlands has said there are sufficient “Brown Field sites” and other land to meet the needs of Authorities in the Black Country where there are currently 35,000 empty houses. Why are these not being brought back into use? The Government has allocated significant funds for “Brown Field” redevelopment.

Object

Representation ID: 588

Received: 12/12/2021

Respondent: Mr G Jordan

Once again if it's the 'vision' for all of South Staffs area-but its not, it's already been written elsewhere that the parish villages of South Staffs are to be protected from any development, in other words South Staffs want to latch on right next to DMB but still take the revenue from any build on green belt.

Support

Representation ID: 605

Received: 12/12/2021

Respondent: Keon Homes

Agent: Evolve Planning & Design

The Vision is clear and succinct, however as presently drafted in doesn’t appear locally relevant and contains no spatially specific elements.
Keon Homes supports the strategic objectives identified. These are considered succinct, locally relevant and relate to the most important areas of change or protection within the District.

Support

Representation ID: 606

Received: 12/12/2021

Respondent: Keon Homes

Agent: Evolve Planning & Design

Keon Homes considers the draft and emerging policies will assist in delivering these objectives.

Object

Representation ID: 617

Received: 12/12/2021

Respondent: Kinver Neighbourhood Plan Steering Group

Mostly reasonable.
Objective 2: sustainable is used too widely with variable and malleable meaning.
Objective 12: Resilience to Climate Change is essential, but won't be enough unless we have strong, detailed mitigation policies and implement them.Renewables are a good start, we also need a retrofit policy and new homes to standards that will not need retrofit. And include location/transport etc . This policy is not wide ranging or quantitified enough.

Support

Representation ID: 620

Received: 12/12/2021

Respondent: Lovell Homes

Agent: Evolve Planning & Design

a) The Vision is clear and succinct, however as presently drafted it doesn’t appear locally relevant and contains no spatially specific elements.
Lovell Homes supports the strategic objectives identified. These are considered succinct, locally relevant and relate to the most important areas of change or protection within the District.
b) Lovell Homes considers the draft and emerging policies will assist in delivering these objectives.

Support

Representation ID: 646

Received: 12/12/2021

Respondent: Mr P Wilkinson

The developments to date have failed to protect the natural environment, with biodiversity loss, damage to wildlife corridors and increased pressures on nearby natural environments, including SSSI's. The protection of the natural environment requires developments to include or create open space for recreation and nature conservation, not rely on nearby conservation sites and increasing the public pressure i.e Highgate common SSSI, Baggeridge Country Park, etc. Houses need to have solar panels, ground heat source pumps, electric points for cars and other key measures to reduce carbon and address the climate crisis. This has not been demonstrated to date.

Support

Representation ID: 648

Received: 12/12/2021

Respondent: Mr P Wilkinson

to date, the natural environment has not been adequately protected, resulting in biodiversity net loss. it is expected that adjacent open spaces will also experience biodiversity net loss due to increased public pressure without mitigation or compensation to those sites. to date, missed opportunities for housing to include the basics for climate adaption such as solar panels, ground source heat pumps and electric car charging points on drives. Important corridors for wildlife have been disturbed, damaged and lost as green infrastructure has not been considered so far. Residents need to be protected from development nuisances, and incorporated into the new.

Support

Representation ID: 655

Received: 12/12/2021

Respondent: Mrs Janice Rowley

The objectives appear to identify the correct vision

Support

Representation ID: 658

Received: 12/12/2021

Respondent: Mrs Janice Rowley

I believe the correct vision and strategic objectives have been identified but do not believe the objectives will be delivered. The urge to develop green belt areas instead of utilising brownfield sites in less isolated areas seems to be a 'creeping' invasion