Question 4

Object

Representation ID: 338

Received: 01/12/2021

Respondent: Mr Ralph Butler

Housing targets are no excuse for open space developments. The West Midlands area is awash wish brownfield sites and has all the infrastructure required. You should be wilfully ignoring any pressure or diktat to help address their shortages.

Object

Representation ID: 351

Received: 02/12/2021

Respondent: Mr Adam Turner

Inappropriate to build in the green belt at plot ref 255 as the housing isn't for the local community need. The distinct character of staffordshire is 80% green belt and the council have not limited the amount of greenbelt that can be developed or been honest about the percentage of greenbelt that will be lost. Councillors in the GBHMA area have openly stated that they want to see their brownfield sites identified and developed in their own conurbations before local authorities are pressed for valuable greenfield sites including councillors Bateman, Potter and Bateman. Brownfield sites within staffordshire have been overlooked.

Object

Representation ID: 355

Received: 03/12/2021

Respondent: Ms Melanie Hallam

Green belt in Bilbrook is under threat of being developed as part of a planning bid to build over 800 homes. Why is green belt being used? We will lose our village status. There will be over crowding on roads, in shops, doctors and schools.

Object

Representation ID: 360

Received: 03/12/2021

Respondent: Nicola Dixon

We are members of the wildlife trust and this simply does not consider protecting green spaces for future generations.

Not only does it take away green space, but it also adds all of the pollution code that comes with additional houses additional humans live in there. This is solely about money and does not take into consideration future generations.

Object

Representation ID: 370

Received: 05/12/2021

Respondent: Inland Waterways Association (IWA)

IWA does not support the northern part (646a) of the Policy SA2 housing site allocation at Cross Green.

Support

Representation ID: 385

Received: 06/12/2021

Respondent: Mr J Egginton

With regard to the green belt land between Perton and Wolverhampton (Yew Tree Lane & A41), would like to see this land to be used to create a country park. Similar to the ones created at Baggeridge and Northycote. This would benefit residents of both local authorities.

Support

Representation ID: 387

Received: 06/12/2021

Respondent: Mrs K Egginton

I am pleased that the proposed allocation of housing for Perton has been reduced, particularly regarding the green belt land between Perton and Wolverhampton which serves as a natural green buffer and is used by many for walking and recreation. Retention of the green belt is important for both physical and mental wellbeing.

Support

Representation ID: 394

Received: 07/12/2021

Respondent: Mr T Cowern

Agent: Mr Hugh Lufton

N/A.

Support

Representation ID: 406

Received: 07/12/2021

Respondent: Mrs SUSAN WAKEFIELD

DS1 quotes SMALL sites are considered for redevelopment e.g. infill, small rural - this should be considered in all cases.

DS2 supports the use of sites that will be enhanced with development but not radically changed DEPENDANT on previous use - this should be considered in all cases.

Support

Representation ID: 417

Received: 08/12/2021

Respondent: Lichfield & Hatherton Canals Restoration Trust

No comments to offer.

Object

Representation ID: 422

Received: 08/12/2021

Respondent: Ms Amelia Watt

Policy DS2 reads: 'Limited affordable housing for local community needs in the Green Belt will be supported on small rural exceptions sites where the development complies with Policy HC6.'

What is Policy HC6 and why is it not easily accessible? This makes it difficult to know if a 'small rural exceptions site' might be excluded from Green Belt protections or not.

Object

Representation ID: 439

Received: 09/12/2021

Respondent: Mrs Louise Russell

272,274,576. Greenbelt protects against Urban Sprawl. This is being overlooked.
Before concluding that exceptional circumstances exist to justify changes to green belt boundaries, SSDC should be able to demonstrate that it has examined fully all other reasonable options for meeting its identified need for development.
SSDC have NOT demonstrated that it has fully examined all other reasonable options. There are sites in the Black country which have not been fully explored which would reduce our allocation under the Duty to Cooperate.

Object

Representation ID: 448

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: Mr Chris Manton

Penkridge is already over capacity. 6 weeks minimum to get a Dr Appointment. A449 is not fit for purpose especially when accident on M6, village becomes gridlocked. Village roads full of potholes.

Given how badly this whole review has been communicated, the deadline for comment needs to be extended in order that more parishioners can be made aware of this and comment appropriately.

I cannot believe that our Parish council has let this get to this stage without communicating this information properly to the parishioners, nor having an appropriate plan of action/protection in place.

Object

Representation ID: 454

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: Mr Rob Boydon

Agent: Stansgate Planning

N/A

Support

Representation ID: 472

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: Bellway Homes Limited (Hyde Lane site)

Agent: Turley

We have no comment on these policies, which deal with non-strategic residential development on land remaining in the Green Belt and open countryside.

Support

Representation ID: 482

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: Bellway Homes Limited (Dunsley Drive site)

Agent: Turley

We have no comment on these policies, which deal with non-strategic residential development on land remaining in the Green Belt and open countryside.

Support

Representation ID: 491

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: Miss EMP Shaw Hellier Settlement

Agent: Stansgate Planning

N/A

Object

Representation ID: 515

Received: 11/12/2021

Respondent: DOCTOR Prabhjoyt Kler

Extension of housing in to green belt in codsall will cause adverse effect on the diversity of the area. I support the building of housing in Bilbrook as infrastructure and links alongside work sites are provided in these areas, and therefore would be a natural extension with minimal impact on the environment. Codsall backs on to open countryside with diverse species and this is not being taken in to account and will reduce biodiversity with a higher impact.

Object

Representation ID: 524

Received: 11/12/2021

Respondent: Ms Liz Sithole

Proposals do not not have details of any new schools, doctors ad other local infrastructure to support the additional population.

Object

Representation ID: 533

Received: 11/12/2021

Respondent: Mr R Gidlow

the green belt should not be released for spurious housing needs of other local authorities. We need the green belt foe health and well being as has been proven by government advisors during the last two years of the Covid 19 pandemic.

Object

Representation ID: 543

Received: 11/12/2021

Respondent: Mr David Harrison

It is essential that we retain green space and countryside in order to prevent Staffordshire from being absorbed into the polluted, urban, environmentally damaged Black Country. Air quality, biodiversity, the mental health and wellbeing impact of having green space in one's surroundings, as well as existing pressure on roads, public services like schools and hospitals and other infrastructure are all reasons not to go ahead. There is a great deal of unused former industrial land and unused retail space that could be turned into housing, without destroying nature and diminishing quality of life for existing residents.

Object

Representation ID: 547

Received: 11/12/2021

Respondent: Mr PHILIP GRIFFIN

REF SITES IN KINVER 274/272/576. The National Planning Framework(NPPF) state that green belt is to protect against urban sprawl this seems to have been totally forgotten in Kinver we have lived hear forty plus years.
Brownfield sites in the Black Country of which there are many should be considered first and which the Mayor of the West Midlands Andy Street said should be used before our valuable green belt is destroyed.

Object

Representation ID: 556

Received: 12/12/2021

Respondent: Mr David West

The district is taking on the overspill housing requirements of the Black Country conurbation meaning building on Green Belt land however there are large areas of brownfield land in the Black Country that could be exploited instead. Land that originally had industrial, retail or office usage that are unlikely to be used in these ways again. With biodiversity and climate concerns at the forefront we can not afford to lose more green belt land.

Object

Representation ID: 558

Received: 12/12/2021

Respondent: Miss Stephanie Tompson

The proposed site off dodds field and hall end Lane pattingham. It's taking away the green belt at the back of dodds field im against you building on this green belt it should be for the horses and pattingham is a countryside village stop building on the green belt build on brown belt sites

Support

Representation ID: 565

Received: 12/12/2021

Respondent: R Simner

Reuse and repurposing seems correct if it protects high amenity value green belt.

Object

Representation ID: 575

Received: 12/12/2021

Respondent: Mr Andrew Faulkner

Erosion of the village culture and loss of our natural greenbelt land. Infrastructure unable to support further increases in both properties and population within the Wombourne area.

Object

Representation ID: 587

Received: 12/12/2021

Respondent: Mr J Knight

Almost 50% of the proposed new dwellings would be for neighbouring Authorities, indicating the complete lack of concern the Council has for the welfare of current South Staffordshire Residents. There are currently 35,000 empty houses in the Black Country. Why are these not being refurbished? The Government has allocated significant funds for this.

It is vital to protect the Green Belt. Ancient trees have already been lost in the Bilbrook area for example at the I54 site (these trees were designated to form part of the Midlands Forest) and the on-going extension to the District Council offices in Wolverhampton Road.

Object

Representation ID: 589

Received: 12/12/2021

Respondent: Mr G Jordan

Do not support any mention or hint no matter how it's worded or camouflaged in any way of building on valuable green belt land to the detriment of DMB residents. Suggest that South Staffs do any larger builds against their own villages and not next door to DMB.

Support

Representation ID: 607

Received: 12/12/2021

Respondent: Keon Homes

Agent: Evolve Planning & Design

In terms of the strategic approach to the Green Belt there is an acceptance within the Local Plan that there needs to be changes to the Green Belt boundary to accommodate growth requirements within the plan period. It is also recognised that development will be required outside of existing development boundaries in non-Green Belt settlements, such as Wheaton Aston, to deliver a sustainable spatial development strategy. This strategic approach is supported by Keon Homes.

Object

Representation ID: 621

Received: 12/12/2021

Respondent: Lovell Homes

Agent: Evolve Planning & Design

Lovell Homes supports the policy approach in Policy DS1, however consideration does need to be given to the permanence of the Green Belt beyond the current plan period. Safeguarded land should be identified to ensure GB boundaries endure will beyond the plan period.