Preferred Options November 2021

Object

Representation ID: 927

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Essington Parish Council

Housing numbers in South Staffordshire, particularly 4000 home contribution to the Black Country are not justified and is untested, Unclear what the 'testing' of South Staffordshire's HMA contribution means in practice. Concern the 35% uplift for Wolverhampton has been added to general housing need. Exceptional Circumstances for removing Linthouse Lane site from the Green Belt do not exist. Land availability in the Black Country, including in Centres (from former office and retail space), has been underestimated by over 5000 homes. Housing supply in South Staffordshire has been underestimated by around 1000 homes from windfall sites, meaning South Staffordshire is oversupplying by 1153 homes. Minimum figures in the plan will see more development delivered. Strategy focuses on directing development to less sustainable locations

Object

Representation ID: 928

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Essington Parish Council

Linthouse land site is very car dependent and will result in additional traffic and rat running, impact on the local landscape and the impact on public access to the countryside. Commitment to sustainable transport to the site too vague. Concerned on deliverability/commitment of developer to deliver local infrastructure, including local centre, and the impact on the sustainability of the site. Concerns about the impact on biodiversity and flooding. Site would result in high Green Belt harm. In the SA, Linthouse Lane only performs better than other sites in the Essington area in terms of education and worse in terms of several other indicators, including climate change. Concern on impact on the Public Rights of Way running across the site, would see the loss of Grade 3 agricultural land. The site would potentially create some coalescence. Unclear if there is sufficient secondary school capacity to serve the site. Site is adjacent a AQMA, Presence of a moated site may need to be explored for its impact on the historic env.

Object

Representation ID: 933

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Essington Parish Council

Evidence base in some cases outdated, especially in light of the trends accelerated by Covid. In terms of Site 486c the Sustainability Appraisal does allow some assessment of the site but it appears to me to underestimate the potential for negative impacts in some areas, particularly in relation to transport and traffic congestion, landscape and access to the countryside. Appendix A is also limited in the documents it includes. There are serious concerns about the weight being placed on housing numbers,

Object

Representation ID: 934

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Essington Parish Council

A number of potential infrastructure issues associated with site 486c. particularly in relation to traffic congestion, sustainable transport and the delivery of the local centre.

Support

Representation ID: 935

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Essington Parish Council

Strategic Objective 1 is supported. However, compensatory Green Belt provision is not something that fully ameliorates loss of Green Belt.

Object

Representation ID: 936

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Essington Parish Council

Strategic Objective 2 is not supported. The additional 4,000 houses for the Black Country should be removed. Strategic Objectives 3-5 on housing can be supported but they should relate to needs arising in South Staffordshire - evidence that significant housing needs to be included from the Black Country is not supported. Strategic Objective 12 is not supported - the Plan should support a reduction in Climate Change emissions not only through mitigation at development sites but also in the overall approach to development locations.

Object

Representation ID: 937

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Essington Parish Council

Support the general approach to DS1 but removal of sites SA1-SA7 from the Green Belt is not supported. The sites, and in particular site 486c, should remain in the Green Belt.

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.

Object

Representation ID: 940

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Essington Parish Council

Relating to Policy HC15 and school infrastructure, there are concerns about the adequacy of school provision on the Linthouse Lane site. Concerns about the extent to which some of the EC policies rely on encouragement rather than instruction. Not clear from EC11 how the implementation of new walking and cycling routes will happen. The approach to climate change is too weak when accounting for the long-term impacts on climate change of such unsustainable development patterns.

Object

Representation ID: 941

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Essington Parish Council

Agree with the strategic policies identified, but the obvious omission is a strategic policy to limit the impact of development on Climate Change, including its location and its impact on development in more sustainable locations.