Preferred Options November 2021

Object

Representation ID: 944

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Gavin Williamson CBE MP

Several evidence documents raise a number of key issues present throughout the Preferred Options Plan: firstly, that the district council’s current housing target numbers are too high and inappropriate for South Staffordshire in both a practical and historical context; secondly, that the council’s current approach to meeting the housing need for Gypsy, Traveller, and Travelling Showpeople risks legitimising illegal behaviour and does not represent a positive use of the Duty to Co-operate mechanism.

Support

Representation ID: 946

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Gavin Williamson CBE MP

Yes. Putting aside the merits of the site allocations themselves, I do agree that the IDP has identified the correct infrastructure.

Support

Representation ID: 948

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Gavin Williamson CBE MP

The correct vision and objectives have partially been identified.

Object

Representation ID: 949

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Gavin Williamson CBE MP

Concern with Strategic Objective 2. South Staffordshire should only commit itself to considering a proportionate contribution to the housing shortfall of the GBHMA. Strategic Objective 4, relating to the design of properties, should be worded stronger. Do not agree that the draft policies will deliver these objectives. By reconsidering the approach around excessive housing allocations this would put the Council in a better position to meet the Strategic Objectives, specifically SO1, SO2 and SO5.

Support

Representation ID: 950

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Gavin Williamson CBE MP

Partially support. support the general approach of Policies DS1 and DS2 to preserve Green Belt and Open Countryside land.

Object

Representation ID: 951

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Gavin Williamson CBE MP

Do not support any immediate alteration of the Green Belt boundary to accommodate the development allocations set out in Policies SA1, SA2, SA3, SA5, and SA7, as I believe these development allocations should be reconsidered alongside housing target numbers and the future employment site allocations.

Object

Representation ID: 952

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Gavin Williamson CBE MP

Do not agree with the council’s current plan to take on 4,000 additional dwellings to contribute to the GBHMA shortfall. Subsequently, I do not support this as the starting basis for the Spatial Strategy Policy.
I also do not support the ongoing approach to the district’s freestanding strategic employment sites. I believe the Secretary of State’s approval of the West Midlands Interchange has significantly altered the case for how some of the proposed and earmarked employment sites should be used

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.

Object

Representation ID: 954

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Gavin Williamson CBE MP

The district council, in reducing their overall target housing numbers, should reduce the scale and size of their proposed strategic housing allocations or delete some of them altogether. Concerns with SA1 in Bilbrook which represents a clear threat to the green wedge between the Codsall/Bilbrook and Wolverhampton. The scale of the development will create insurmountable pressures on the social and physical infrastructure in Bilbrook/Codsall. Concerns with SA3 at Linthouse Lane - danger of an orphan community being created that belongs neither to urban Wolverhampton nor to rural South Staffordshire.

Support

Representation ID: 956

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Gavin Williamson CBE MP

While I disagree with the scale and location of some of these sites, it is appropriate that they have their own policy to set an appropriate vision for the site, alongside a detailed masterplan and design code.