Question 8

Object

Representation ID: 745

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Mr RICHARD WHERTON

Site Ref 463 & 284 - these sites are at the gateway to the Wombourne village. Much of the centre of the village is in a conservation area and it seems ludicrous to point to a policy of not building in the centre as some sort of justification for building in this gateway. The entrance to the village and its centre should be viewed as whole.
Speculation suggests that the Co Part site may be available and, by linking to the Poolhouse Rd development or to Feashill Road could overcome the Highways concerns re access on to the B4176.

Object

Representation ID: 748

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Mr RICHARD WHERTON

Site Ref 286 - Except for the breach already made via the development in Beggars Bush Lane, there are small parcels of land shielding the village from the A449 main road. I consider that this site should remain undeveloped as part of a 'shield' that should be maintained to protect the western boundary of Wombourne and avoid encroachment that may well otherwise lead to a fusion with neighbouring areas.

Object

Representation ID: 751

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Mrs R Groom

I am not familiar with these areas.

Object

Representation ID: 758

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Mrs Michelle Such

Site 523 has no safe entry/exit point from Wolverhampton Road. The road is already an accident hot spot and adding an entry point near a tight bend will surely only cause more accidents and possibly deaths. The infrastructure in the area is not good enough to support extra dwellings. Both Primary and High schools are full and over subscribed and the road system cannot cope with the volume of traffic. We are yet to see the impact of the extra dwellings being built in Saredon Road (less than half a mile away) will have on the immediate area.

Support

Representation ID: 760

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Bellway Homes Ltd

Agent: Wood PLC

Site 416 Orton Lane: Bellway Homes supports the allocation of this site as a deliverable and sustainable site, with further details included as part of the attached.

Site 708 (new allocation): this is proposed as and additional or alternative allocation to the larger allocations currently being considered in Wombourne with limited impacts on the Green Belt given its smaller scale as well as its physical and visual self-containment. Further justification to underpin the allocation of this site, and corresponding proposed changes to Policy SA5 are provided in the attached. This is supported by a landscape and GB review.

Object

Representation ID: 761

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Miss Katie Green

Site Reference 255 not enough consideration has been given to the existing infrastructure which isn't sufficient to cope for the residents who already live in the area including highways, public transport, retail facilities, healthcare providers, power, telephone, broadband and the existing flooding that occurs in this area. I also object to the fact that the proposed site reference 255 includes land that belongs to myself and is a part of my garden, the information in this site survey / allocation is out dated.

Object

Representation ID: 769

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Mrs M Holiday

Site 576 is totally unsuitable for any housing development for the numerous reasons set out in full above.

Object

Representation ID: 779

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Completelink Ltd

Agent: Zesta Planning Ltd

See Sections 2 & 3 of the attached representation document for Prestwood House Care Home & Estate, submitted on behalf of Completelink Ltd.

Object

Representation ID: 786

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Miss A Wood

Site 224;
Summary:
- Station Road and surrounding area classed by Council as a Conservation Buffer Zone therefore not appropriate to build on.
- Lack of rationale to necessitate a new carpark.
- Infrastructure including; lack of capacity on railway, roads, schools, doctors and shops.
- Environmental impacts upon local wildlife, including badgers, bats, owls

Object

Representation ID: 787

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Gravel Hill Surgery

Regarding Wombourne - we have significant concerns around population expansion and access to primary care at Gravel Hill Surgery. At present we have limited ability to expand to accommodate this. We ask that this is taken into consideration with future planning.
We would welcome the ability to work with South Staffordshire Council and South East Staffs and Seisdon Peninsula CCG in order to ensure that the Primary Care health needs of the growing population of our surgery are met.
We trust that healthcare provision is taken into account when building development levies are considered by the council.
Gravel Hill Surgery.

Object

Representation ID: 788

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Mrs Sheila Mason

All sites in Wombourne (286,285,459,562/415,416) but especially re sites 463/284.
If these proposed builds go ahead it will add to the congestion already experienced in this area. We have yet to see the impact of the recent building developments already underway. Limited options for public transport so the volume of motor traffic will increase. The infrastructure of roads in and out of the village at various times of the day is a problem. Diversions on any one of the roads leading out of the area results in gridlock. Safety hazard for young children, difficulty for buses, emergency services vehicles.

Object

Representation ID: 796

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Harris Lamb Property Consultancy

No, as referred to in our Representations the housing requirement in the daft Plan needs to be increased significantly, and new allocations identified adjacent to the edge of the conurbation to support the growth of the conurbation. It is our view that the Redrow site at Castlecroft should be a preferred site for allocation in the emerging Plan.

Object

Representation ID: 804

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: National Trust

The National Trust objected to site 274’s removal from the green belt during consultation on the now adopted Site Allocation plan. The Inspector recommended some measures in relation to the setting of Kinver Edge and protecting the remaining greenbelt from further encroachment. These matters would need to be addressed in relation to any additional allocation of the safeguarded land. Consideration is also needed of the relationship between housing on the site and the woodland area immediately to the south. This is owned by the National Trust for conservation and public enjoyment.

Object

Representation ID: 808

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Harris Lamb Property Consultancy

No, as referred to in our Representations the housing requirement in the daft Plan needs to be increased significantly, and new allocations identified adjacent to the edge of the conurbation to support the growth of the conurbation. It is our view that the Redrow site at Castlecroft should be a preferred site for allocation in the emerging Plan. We comment on this matter further in the “Omission Site - Castlecroft” section of this letter.

Object

Representation ID: 811

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Harris Lamb Property Consultancy

No allocations are proposed for Himley and Harris Lamb representing CWC GROUP/Clowes consider that SHELAA site 368b can deliver sustainable development.

Support

Representation ID: 825

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Land Fund Limited

Agent: Turley

Land Fund support the proposed allocations of land to the west of Wrottesley Park Road, Perton (Ref. 239) which is proposed to be allocated for a minimum of 150 dwellings within Policy SA5. The Site provides the most sustainable and suitable site for development within Perton which is supported by the evidence base which underpins the LPR.

Object

Representation ID: 835

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Staffordshire Wildlife Trust

We neither support nor object to the proposed housing allocations, as it is not currently possible to determine the impact to biodiversity, whether 10% net gain can be delivered, or whether the sites are appropriate in terms of protecting or enhancing key habitat corridors. We recommend that a further ‘layer’ of assessment is carried out, to identify sites that need additional more detailed targeted ‘Stage 2’ assessment of the ecology baseline, and that this is carried out before final allocations are made.

Object

Representation ID: 836

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Mr Benjamin Middleton

I seriously disapprove of this proposal for site 582. The local area cannot support an additional housing estate. Not only the road congestion and gridlocking which is already at ridiculously high and dangerous levels, but infrastructure such as Doctor's Surgeries, schools, and dentists are massively oversubscribed and the parking for these services is already grossly insufficient. The land allocated is also not suitable for building on because it contains a heritage site which should NOT be destroyed and it is prone to bad flooding.

This site is not acceptable for this purpose.

Object

Representation ID: 838

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Mr D Jackson

The West Midland Bird Club is concerned about the proposed use of open green space countryside close to a SSSI at Mottey Meadows, within the proposed Plan.

We are making a representation and objection to site no. 610 being developed as proposed in the proposed Plan at Marston Road/Fentonhouse Lane, Wheaton Astons:

1. Site 610 is in close proximity to Mottey Meadows SSSI owned /managed by Natural England. The Meadows are an important bird habitat which has hosted breeding Snipe, Lapwing, Curlews, and Yellowhammers, which are Red Listed species in the RSPB’s Species of Conservation Concern on a national scale.

Object

Representation ID: 841

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Mr Richard Williams

582 Housing on farming land with flooding problems with houses to make it worst

Object

Representation ID: 851

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Mr David Middleton

I have lived in this area all of my life and I can, without question, say that the proposal for site 582 is seriously bad. The changes I've seen over the years have made this very difficult to reside in. It cannot support more houses. The roads around this area are all single-carriageway and extremely busy. At peak times they are gridlocked. As a pensioner, with the hospital being on the other side of Wolverhampton, you can imagine why this greatly concerns me and having the doctors surgeries so busy as well. It's insufferable and very scary.

Please reconsider.

Object

Representation ID: 859

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Mrs Karen Daker

IT is not fair that Bilbrook is getting so much of the Housing. It needs to be spread around more evenly. Bilbrook will grow by 50%. Perton & Codsall have been allocated hardly any housing.

Object

Representation ID: 861

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Mr Greg Ball

Re 463 and 284 sites at Billy Buns Lane. Development here would destroy the country-like approach to Wombourne, and create an urban feel to land adjoining the A449. It would add to the existing heavy traffic flows at the A449 roundabout and on the twisting roads towards Sedgley. There is no bus service towards Dudley. Houses near the A449 would be exposed to road noise.
If the sites were developed, there should a woodland screen along the A449. Withymere Lane should be closed to vehicles and made into a route for cyclists and walkers, and possibly northbound buses towards Wolverhampton.

Object

Representation ID: 862

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Mrs marnie phillips

The Proposal to set aside land on the cannock rd adjacent to the Wildwood estate in Stafford (036C) will have a detrimental effect on the local infrastructure:
We have no doctors/surgeries locally that can take additional patients
The local schools are full
These residents will become Stafford locals and impact on all local amenities
Our local housing quota has no relevence

I agree and support all comments from SBC

Object

Representation ID: 867

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Mrs Jacqueline Buckley

I seriously do not approve of the proposal for site 582. My elderly mother lives very close and the traffic is already at dangerously high levels. She is fearful to step outside and this development directly next to her will massively exacerbate this problem. Not only this but it's already very difficult to get local GP appointments. The school parking on Bhylls Lane, near my house, is so dangerous that it scares me. This area simply cannot accommodate an additional housing estate of this size. Merryhill, the nearby shopping area, is also constantly rammed with cars. Unusable for the elderly.

Object

Representation ID: 868

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Mr J Ball

I object to plans for Bridge Farm: 54 Long Street, for purposes of overcrowding and pressure on village infrastructure

Object

Representation ID: 871

Received: 08/11/2021

Respondent: Mr Stephen Blakemore

Object to development at Linthouse Lane
Impact on/loss of Green Belt, impact on road network, climate change and flooding.

Support

Representation ID: 875

Received: 27/01/2022

Respondent: Association of Black Country Authorities

Request that affordable housing on Langley Road site is allocated through nomination rights to Wolverhampton residents in the Publication Plan and that an SPD/Infrastructure Delivery Strategy is prepared for this site also.

Support

Representation ID: 882

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Cannock Chase Council

Support infrastructure led strategy but the infrastructure
and service needs of residents who reside across administrative boundaries should also be considered.

Object

Representation ID: 893

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: Berkswich Parish Council

Object to the inclusion of Site 036C, land at Cannock Road. Remote from areas of unmet need within the HMA and Stafford Borough currently does not have an unmet housing need. The environmental and social harm of the development have not been fully considered, would lead to additional traffic/congestion along A34 and Weeping Cross roundabout.The allocation would lead to additional pressure on local medical and school facilities outside the local plan area within Stafford Borough which are already
operating at or beyond capacity.Erection of a housing estate here would significantly and harmfully alter the appearance of the site and its contribution to local landscape character in contradiction of proposed policies NB1 and NB4. Will harm the views from Cannock Chase AONB contrary to Strategic Objective 11.