Preferred Options November 2021

Object

Representation ID: 3069

Received: 23/06/2022

Respondent: Resident

Housing figures overstated and accommodate Black Country and Birmingham people, far from their work and families.
Agricultural land needed for food production.
Housing figure 8881 implies incorrect level of accuracy.
Figure should represent a starting point rather than the target and be adjusted based upon the harm that occurs in meeting it on agricultural land versus brownfield land within and around the conurbation.
Penkridge described as a village (although nearer town size) and new development described as a village, should be integrated.

Object

Representation ID: 3070

Received: 23/06/2022

Respondent: Resident

Development should be intergrated into Penkridge.
Site can be seen from a number of view points across area.
Site located next to anaerobic digester.
Policy should require:
• The creation of high quality direct pedestrian and cycling routes from the development to the key facilities in the settlement
• Suitable bus stops and facilities
• The creation of a country park on both sides of the Penk south to Penkridge Middle School at least from the A449. The current proposal doesn't form any sort of contiguous facility and simply uses a piece of floodplain that can’t be developed. A part of 420 and 584 should be allocated for “green infrastructure”. This would be a practical contribution to reducing the need for residents to visit Cannock Chase.
• The creation of a new pedestrian route from the development across the floodplain to Penkridge Middle School as well as ongoing connections to Wolgartson High School to enable pupils to walk and cycle easily and safely to school
• The provision of additional pedestrian crossings on the A449 to ensure that it doesn’t become a barrier to sustainable movement
• Improvements to Penkridge railway station which may involve the provision of additional parking by the Monckton Centre. (the station car parks are normally full with additional parking on verges)
• Improvements to the centre of Penkridge to allow the facilities to better serve a greatly increased population and to improve it to form a “town centre”. (I am concerned that with the reference to retail in the new development we will end up with two retail complexes at either end of Penkridge which both generate vehicular trips and create completely separate communities. In addition you struggle to get a GP appointment now!)
• That the public open space is useable for the majority of the time.
• That wildlife corridors are maintained and created

Object

Representation ID: 3071

Received: 23/06/2022

Respondent: Resident

Policy DS2 - Open Countryside
Section C of the policy lacks clarity and could cover a wide range of activities. It should be deleted.

Object

Representation ID: 3072

Received: 23/06/2022

Respondent: Resident

Policy DS4 - Longer Term Growth Aspirations for a New Settlement
This policy is extremely odd as given the policy principle of avoiding the green belt the only area of search is between the extended Penkridge and the Dunston.
The policy is un-achievable.
To deliver any sizeable infrastructure it will need to be several thousand new dwellings and should also have some employment. This suggests a location at Dunston. No doubt an additional station has been suggested, but given the capital costs and the shortness of the journey times together with line capacity it’s deliverability has to be questionable. Far better to extend Stafford south into South Staffordshire as it has a core of facilities and bus services rather than create a “village” which relies on other locations for the bulk of its services.