Question 6

Support

Representation ID: 917

Received: 22/12/2021

Respondent: Natural England

Welcome the green infrastructure and health section.

Object

Representation ID: 938

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Essington Parish Council

The need for a new settlement is not proven and given that we do not consider the current inclusion of 4,000 homes for the Black Country is justified it is hard to conclude that an additional settlement is likely to be required or would be consistent with long term Climate Change goals.

Support

Representation ID: 953

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Gavin Williamson CBE MP

Some reservations about a new settlement depending on its location. It must be clear that a new settlement would prevent significant developments in other areas of the district.

Support

Representation ID: 959

Received: 01/02/2022

Respondent: Highways England

Given the location it can be expected that any new settlement within this area of search will have material implications for the SRN. When further details emerge National Highways should be consulted at the earliest possible stage.

Support

Representation ID: 973

Received: 01/02/2022

Respondent: Stafford Borough Council

Note that the new settlement area of search was considered less sustainable than other areas of search for strategic development in the GBHMA Strategic Growth Study 2018. Would request the Council is kept informed on progress on this front.

Object

Representation ID: 987

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: Severn Trent Water

One of the main challenges in developing a new settlement can be finding a suitable location to discharge treated effluent back to the environment without causing damage. The watercourses within the area of search identified in Appendix F are not particularly large, this creates an issue with the dilution ratio between discharged treated effluent and the watercourse baseflow.

Support

Representation ID: 997

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Wolverhampton City Council

We support the longer term growth aspirations for a new settlement with strong sustainable transport links to the Black Country, which could help meet longer term Black Country housing shortfalls.Request that the affordable housing secured on sites proposed in the Plan within the Wolverhampton locality are allocated through nomination rights for Wolverhampton residents with requirement set out in the Publication Plan

Object

Representation ID: 1025

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Gladman

Agent: Gladman

Gladman suggest given the Council’s clear longer term growth aspiration and the current stage of plan-making, that the Council consider extending the plan period to 30
years (i.e. 2018 to 2048) in line with the new guidance contained within the NPPF which would establish a pragmatic approach to the possibility that a new settlement is required in the district to accommodate long-term growth needs.

Support

Representation ID: 1038

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Hallam Land Management

Agent: Acres Land & Planning

Generally supportive of the need for longer term growth aspirations and the responsibility of the Council to look beyond the current plan period.
A new settlement should not been seen as a once and for all golden bullet to overcome the development pressures within the District.
It is welcomed that the Council has taken a pragmatic approach in seeking to identify a new settlement site through an area of search and not by allocating a large site and hope development will come forward.
Meanwhile, and alongside this, the Council must ensure they continue to provide a wide portfolio of different sizes sites throughout the District.

Support

Representation ID: 1050

Received: 08/02/2022

Respondent: Staffordshire County Council

- P1: Policy should provide for consideration of expanded settlements that meet the criteria in Policy DC4, not just freestanding options, to avoid limiting options.
- P3: wording should reflect the need for a range of technical studies to show how any new settlement meets objectives identified
P39: It is unlikely that existing secondary school infrastructure could accommodate a large settlement so careful consideration should be given to how any new school could be funded, delivered and sustained
- P51: Siting and design of a new settlement must fit into the local landscape character as most other settlements in the District have evolved over hundreds of years

Object

Representation ID: 1070

Received: 09/12/2021

Respondent: St Philips

Agent: Pegasus Group

Policy DS4, proposing a longer term 'New Settlement' is considered unsound as it is not justified at the present time. It is currently only at an 'options' stage as set out in the first paragraph of the draft policy. It is considered there are locations around existing settlements that could accommodate such growth e.g Wombourne. The Plan, as drafted, purports the idea of a potential New Settlement in the longer term, but there is no specific location for the settlement, it has not formed part of the evidence base and Sustainability Appraisal and has not been fully justified for the purpose of the Preferred Options. The Policy should therefore be deleted.

Object

Representation ID: 1091

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Lilactame Ltd

Agent: Pegasus Group

The policy as drafted fails to recognise the potential to utilise other locations within the District to provide similar facilities. This could include Wolverhampton Airport which represents a substantial area of brownfield land.

Object

Representation ID: 1094

Received: 04/02/2022

Respondent: Environment Agency

Potential constraints include potential new sewage treatment facility; discharge to watercourse, not a foregone conclusion that foul water could be easily discharged.

Object

Representation ID: 1119

Received: 11/02/2022

Respondent: Lower Penn Parish Council

The need for a new settlement is far from proven and the current inclusion of 4,000 homes for the Black Country is not justified or consistent with climate goals.

Support

Representation ID: 1142

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Taylor Wimpey UK Ltd

Agent: Evolve Planning & Design

Highlight that even if a suitable or viable option were identified it would take a long time to masterplan and deliver alongside a much larger scale of infrastructure than other development.

Support

Representation ID: 1151

Received: 12/12/2021

Respondent: Lovell Homes

Agent: Evolve Planning & Design

Highlight that even if a suitable or viable option were identified it would take a long time to masterplan and deliver alongside a much larger scale of infrastructure than other development.

Support

Representation ID: 1175

Received: 12/12/2021

Respondent: Keon Homes

Agent: Evolve Planning & Design

Highlight that even if a suitable or viable option were identified it would take a long time to masterplan and deliver alongside a much larger scale of infrastructure than other development.

Object

Representation ID: 1213

Received: 15/02/2022

Respondent: Historic England

Policy DS4 - Reference should be made to protection and enhancement of the historic environment. Assessment will be required to consider impacts and opportunities for the historic environment.

Object

Representation ID: 1224

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Barberry

Agent: RCA Regeneration Ltd

Why is the policy included when it applies to a time period outside the scope of the plan -why not extend the plan period instead?

Support

Representation ID: 1236

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Cameron Homes Ltd

Agent: Evolve Planning & Design

Highlight that even if a suitable or viable option were identified it would take a long time to masterplan and deliver alongside a much larger scale of infrastructure than other development.

Support

Representation ID: 1262

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Bloor Homes

Agent: Evolve Planning & Design

Highlight that even if a suitable or viable option were identified it would take a long time to masterplan and deliver alongside a much larger scale of infrastructure than other development. A new settlement should not be delivered at the expense of safeguarded land to provide a more permanent Green Belt boundary.

Object

Representation ID: 1280

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: CCB Investments

Agent: RCA Regeneration

Why is the policy included when it applies to a time period outside the scope of the plan -why not extend the plan period instead?

Object

Representation ID: 1288

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Goldfinch TPS

Agent: Goldfinch TPS

Goldfinch TPS view the proposed planning policy DS4 - Longer Term Growth Aspiration for a New Settlement are developed through out of date data and insufficient technical evidence.

Object

Representation ID: 1329

Received: 09/12/2021

Respondent: St Philips

Agent: RCA Regeneration Ltd

Why is the policy included when it applies to a time period outside the scope of the plan -why not extend the plan period instead?

Object

Representation ID: 1338

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Taylor Reed Homes

Agent: RCA Regeneration Ltd

Why is the policy included when it applies to a time period outside the scope of the plan -why not extend the plan period instead?

Object

Representation ID: 1346

Received: 09/12/2021

Respondent: Seven Homes

Agent: RCA Regeneration

Why is the policy included when it applies to a time period outside the scope of the plan -why not extend the plan period instead?

Support

Representation ID: 1352

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: Mr - Cox & Jenks

Agent: PlanIt

It is sensible for such schemes to be identified through the plan making process given the lead in times and complex nature of such projects. It is our view that it is more sustainable to extend existing settlements in the first instance where services and facilities exist, including the allocation of urban extensions.

Support

Representation ID: 1369

Received: 20/12/2021

Respondent: Richborough Estates

Agent: Pegasus Group

Support policy DS4 and recognise the importance and suitability of this growth corridor as recognised in the Strategic Growth Study. Land North of the A5 falls within this area and is next to a proposal by Rodbaston College, offering an opportunity for a comprehensively planned site.

Support

Representation ID: 1384

Received: 09/12/2021

Respondent: Mrs Pamela Aust

Should you remain in the belief that further housing is required then we would urge you to consider a brand new development, one which can be constructed with existing transport links in mind. This would also ensure that already stretched services across the county are protected with the introduction of new schools, GP practices, Leisure facilities and general infrastructure.

Support

Representation ID: 1390

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Taylor Wimpey UK Ltd

Agent: Pegasus Group

Taylor Wimpey has no comment to make in respect of Policy DS4, other than to agree that such an option would not contribute to housing growth during the proposed plan period to 2038.