Question 11

Support

Representation ID: 12

Received: 01/11/2021

Respondent: Mr Mohammad Nouri

this policy covers so many subjects I have no idea about some of them but generally I agree with most of the context , obviously every single of these still needs proper consultation and consideration to be able to achieve the best out of it.

Object

Representation ID: 43

Received: 03/11/2021

Respondent: Mr Simon Whale

Leave the small communities alone
Digrace

Object

Representation ID: 46

Received: 04/11/2021

Respondent: Miss Lucy Benton

Regarding policy NB7. Site ref 255 - moor lane pattingham. I am concerned about the recent flooding in the area getting more.

Object

Representation ID: 47

Received: 04/11/2021

Respondent: Mrs Jessica Barfield

Regarding policy NB7
Site Ref 255 - Moor Lane, Pattingham.
I am concerned about the flood risk in this area. This is an area which already floods and I believe more housing would exaggerate this issue.

Object

Representation ID: 48

Received: 04/11/2021

Respondent: Mrs Hayley Shingler

Policy NB7 site ref 255. My reasons are due to flooding on the land. The road and land regularly flood in that area. It is not suitable for housing.

Object

Representation ID: 49

Received: 05/11/2021

Respondent: Mrs sue benton

Regarding Policy NB7
Site ref 255 - Moor Lane
Pattingham

I am concerned about the fact that every time it rains, both Moor Lane and the field of the proposed building site and The Elms Paddock all get flooded extremely quickly. There is a drainage ditch behind our garden, in said field (green belt!) which has had to be dug to try to cope with the water. Moor Lane floods so much that people have canoed on it!! Many of our neighbours have sand bags to stop their garages flooding.

Object

Representation ID: 51

Received: 05/11/2021

Respondent: Mr John Charlesworth

Regarding Policy NB7, Site Ref: 255 - Moor Lane, Pattingham.
My concerns are in regard to the worsening of localised flooding on Moor Lane and surrounding areas. This has naturally increased in recent years, and by building additional houses, this will potentially further restrict drainage by way of limiting natural drainage, thus resulting in a very strong possibility of flooding spreading to existing properties, causing both financial loss and stress to residents.
I question both the suitability of this location for development and your research in to the flooding in this location. A more suitable location should be chosen

Object

Representation ID: 57

Received: 06/11/2021

Respondent: Mr S Benton

Due to the flooding that occurs every time it rains on Moor Lane, and in the field behind our house, I feel that this is absolutely not a suitable place to build more homes! There is also an access issue, with Moor Lane being very narrow, especially going down towards Great Moor.
The flooding issue has got worse and worse over the years we have lived here, regardless of works carried out by Severn Trent.

Object

Representation ID: 80

Received: 09/11/2021

Respondent: Mr James Aust

I fully disagree with the proposed plans to build more houses in Wombourne

Object

Representation ID: 103

Received: 09/11/2021

Respondent: Mr Darren Imms

I disagree with HC1-4. HC9,10+11. HC17. No open space be it green belt etc to be built on. To sum up no more houses to be built in Wombourne all planning applications to be rejected completely out of hand

Object

Representation ID: 116

Received: 10/11/2021

Respondent: Miss Amanda Griss

You need to have a question after each section. Do you expect people to remember 35 points???? This is a poor consultation.
Have bigger rooms. Plus families will want to be in lockdowns together so make more houses for extended families & grandparents to move in to help with child care. You should re do the consultation.

Object

Representation ID: 130

Received: 14/11/2021

Respondent: Ms Lynne Deans-Knight

Still need infrastructure which is sadly lacking

Object

Representation ID: 147

Received: 15/11/2021

Respondent: Mrs Judith Longman

NB1 - developments will destroy natural habitats of wildlife.
NB4 - lack of sensitivity to landscape - the nature of what is planned at site 463/284 raises multitude of concerns on so many levels - the fields are an asset to the village and nature.
6.29/ NB7 risk of flooding site 463/284 - risk of spoiling natural route of streams
6.33/ NB9. Wombourne is a historical village and its heritage is being destroyed by over development. It’s canals, brooks and nature are assets that need protecting from over development/destroying green spaces.

The above points support not developing the site 463/284

Object

Representation ID: 178

Received: 17/11/2021

Respondent: Mr Brian Graystone

Building on green field sites is not acceptable

Support

Representation ID: 184

Received: 17/11/2021

Respondent: Mr K Lloyd

They make a lot of sense and should address the most pressing need, which is climate change and biodiversity loss but the devil will be in the detail. All decisions relating to future developments must take these policies into account and not just cherry pick the ones which suit the overall objective of building more houses.

Support

Representation ID: 185

Received: 17/11/2021

Respondent: Mr K Lloyd

EC11. It is imperative that transport solutions are weighted on alternatives to car use. Regardless of EV uptake in the future, all decisions must encourage active travel and use of public transport. Evs will still contribute to traffic congestion and particulate pollution. There should be suitably compliant bicycle and electric scooter hire points in villages to allow clean, safe transport within SStaffs and the Black Country and vice versa, using protected routes which avoid mixing with motor vehicles. The dedicated bicycle lane in Bilbrook should be extended to Codsall and Perton to facilitate safe travel for school children and commuters.

Object

Representation ID: 186

Received: 17/11/2021

Respondent: Mr K Lloyd

NB2 The biodiversity net gain should be a minimum of 10% or more if possible.

Object

Representation ID: 187

Received: 17/11/2021

Respondent: Mr K Lloyd

NB1. As well tree lined streets, hedges should also be included as they are important wildlife corridors and refuges, especially for small mammal such as hedgehogs and mice.

Support

Representation ID: 189

Received: 17/11/2021

Respondent: Mr K Lloyd

NB1. The important green corridor which runs along Moat Brook to the North of Bilbrook needs protecting and enhancing. It is in danger of being developed in the future and should be earmarked for protection. It connects the ecologically diverse Jubilee Wood to the Pendeford Milll Nature Reserve though is very narrow in places. It is a natural flood plain and provides flood mitigation in the Upper Trent Valley catchment and could/should be enhanced. It could also provide significant climate change mitigation. I have attached an image of the green corridor in question, marked in red.

Support

Representation ID: 190

Received: 17/11/2021

Respondent: Mr K Lloyd

HC12. Although it is welcome to see that EVs will be accommodated for on new developments, there is very little/no EV charging infrastructure in the existing villages. If this is not addressed, then EV owners in the existing villages will take advantage of the new facilities and park their cars there to charge up. This will lead to local conflict. Better charging infrastructure needs to be built in the existing villages in order to avoid problems in the future.

Support

Representation ID: 191

Received: 17/11/2021

Respondent: Mr K Lloyd

HC1. Although it is welcome to see that there will be suitable provision for affordable housing for 1st time buyers, it is not clear what form this will take. Houses take up a much larger footprint than apartments, are more costly to build, use more resources and more costly to live in and maintain. There should be more accommodation in the form of apartments which have a significantly smaller footprint thereby reducing the need to use up precious land which, instead, could be used for biodiversity enhancements and bigger open spaces for residents.

Object

Representation ID: 220

Received: 22/11/2021

Respondent: A G Morris

I'd like to see the canal network redeveloped to support cycle usage.

As regards drainage, I'd like to see more capacity built into the system in Essington, which has many flood prone areas, to cope with the more intense rainfall we are getting. Also, I'd like to see more regular maintenance of the drainage system built into this policy.

Support

Representation ID: 277

Received: 24/11/2021

Respondent: Mr Angus Hughes

Fully support developments which embrace the following: planting of trees, adequacy of parking, retention of open space, creating supporting infrastructure, improving health and wellbeing, diversity of housing mix, meeting affordability criteria for all ages, adopting all 'green' opportunities (solar panels, charging points, etc), height restrictions, protecting wildlife and ecosystem.

Support

Representation ID: 299

Received: 25/11/2021

Respondent: Brewood Civic Society

No comment.

Support

Representation ID: 305

Received: 19/11/2021

Respondent: Alder Allen

Need / requirement for affordable housing.

Object

Representation ID: 320

Received: 27/11/2021

Respondent: Ms Jacquie Leach

The open space HC11- HC17 - EC10- .006ha/dwelling is 25% less than before. Unacceptable.
The River Penk Flood plains must be retained to preserve Biodiversity.
SSC charge developers such a high fee in order to pass on open space that they consequently decide to hold on to the land and hand it over to Management Companies. Legal issues have occurred with the Lyne Hill Corridor. Residents are not getting facilities from their Council tax e.g. ground maintenance but having to pay extra. This makes "affordable housing" expensive.

Object

Representation ID: 354

Received: 02/12/2021

Respondent: Mr Adam Turner

NB7 with regards to site 255 has not taken into consideration the existing flooding issues to properties already situated on Moor lane. Flooding which requires property owners to stock sand bags. There is no evidence in the plan to protect the current properties from the increased risk of overland run off and groundwater flooding. Also the risk of flooding will be greater due to the increased impervious paved and built up areas proposed in the plan. Also how will the decrease in greenbelt increase this risk of flooding. 6.31 and key evidence of 6.32 does not mention Moor Lane.

Support

Representation ID: 377

Received: 05/12/2021

Respondent: Inland Waterways Association (IWA)

Policy HC8 on Gypsy and traveller pitches should include a requirement to protect heritage assets.

Policy NB10 Canal Network is supported, but should distinguish between development by canals and canal related development e.g. marinas, which cannot realistically be limited to existing settlements.
NB10 supports restoration of the Hatherton Canal, but to be effective the Plan should retain the route protection policy and detailed plans of the route.
Para. 6.33 says canal conservation areas run for large distances through the District. In fact they cover the whole of the Staffordshire & Worcestershire Canal and the Shropshire Union Canal within the District.

Object

Representation ID: 410

Received: 08/12/2021

Respondent: Lichfield & Hatherton Canals Restoration Trust

The present proposed policies EC1, EC10, EC11 and NB2 should be amended to make them more supportive towards the restoration project on the Hatherton Canal. Proposed policy NB10 needs to be substantially expanded to adequately carry forward the route protection policy in the previous Local Plan. That route protection is vital for the project to proceed to sustainable completion. Much work has already been done - such as the culverts formed when the M6 toll was constructed - but to deliver the benefits of work done so far, continuing the route protection is very necessary.

Object

Representation ID: 428

Received: 08/12/2021

Respondent: Mr Peter Dunn

Ref policy NB7, managing flood risk, Site ref 225 Moor Lane. I am concerned further development will worsen existing flooding issues where there is regular flooding to the road outside my property covering a length of up to 100 metres following heavy rain

There have been multiple calls to, and support from Severn Trent Water and Staffs highways. It has also been raised by Gavin Wiliamson as a concern and been under the review of Staffordshire Councils Flood Management team (Andrew Brett).

Without significant improvement of the drainage system there will be additional and worse flooding.