Preferred Options November 2021

Support

Representation ID: 479

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: Bellway Homes Limited (Dunsley Drive site)

Agent: Turley

- SA landscape and townscape score for site 272 not justified. Landscape Study assesses much larger area. Updated assessment of specific site required.
- SA landscape and townscape score for site 272 should be 'neutral' based on promoter's evidence base.

Support

Representation ID: 480

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: Bellway Homes Limited (Dunsley Drive site)

Agent: Turley

We have no objection to the potential junction improvements at White Hill / Meddins Lane and Meddins Lane / Enville Road, indeed the need for these improvements were first identified as part of the adopted Site Allocation Plan. Land east of Dunsley Drive could make a proportionate contribution to these off-site highway improvements.

Beyond the above, no further infrastructure requirements are identified for Kinver.

Support

Representation ID: 481

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: Bellway Homes Limited (Dunsley Drive site)

Agent: Turley

- Objectives rightly reflect contribution to unmet needs and locating new development in sustainable locations.
- Assumed Kinver a key village.
- Strategic objection 9 should acknowledge that new development will also maintain and enhance the vitality of South Staffordshire's rural communities.

Support

Representation ID: 482

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: Bellway Homes Limited (Dunsley Drive site)

Agent: Turley

We have no comment on these policies, which deal with non-strategic residential development on land remaining in the Green Belt and open countryside.

Support

Representation ID: 483

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: Bellway Homes Limited (Dunsley Drive site)

Agent: Turley

- Support overall spatial strategy and need
- Should plan period be to 2039 so 15 years post adoption (based on current LDS)

Support

Representation ID: 484

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: Bellway Homes Limited (Dunsley Drive site)

Agent: Turley

We have no comment on the approach to a new settlement given it is understood this will address needs in future plan reviews and not meet any need arising in this plan.

Support

Representation ID: 485

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: Bellway Homes Limited (Dunsley Drive site)

Agent: Turley

We wholly support the principle of the proposed release of land east of Dunsley Drive, Kinver (site 272) from the Green Belt and allocation for housing growth. The Council’s evidence base is clear it performs better than other options at Kinver. Bellway is now preparing a detailed site specific evidence base for the site which will inform an updated masterplan. This will be submitted to the Council in due course, once complete.

Support

Representation ID: 486

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: Bellway Homes Limited (Dunsley Drive site)

Agent: Turley

- HC1: should allow some flexibility in mix should evidence demonstrate that demand in location requires a different mix to that prescribed by the Housing Market Assessment.
- HC2: should include flexibility as when determining factors specific to each site at the development management stage, such as character, appearance and neighbouring land use, it may be that a lower density is appropriate.
-HC17: no objection in principle to open space being provided centrally, the policy should allow some flexibility if the design rationale for a site justifies locating it elsewhere.

Support

Representation ID: 487

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: Bellway Homes Limited (Dunsley Drive site)

Agent: Turley

Policies DS1 – DS4 and SA1 – SA7 represent policies which are limited to those necessary to address the strategic priorities of the area, providing a starting point for any non-strategic policies that are needed as defined by NPPF paragraph 21.

Support

Representation ID: 1515

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Bellway Homes Limited (Dunsley Drive site)

Agent: Turley

The scope of the evidence base prepared to inform the emerging plan is generally robust and proportionate. However, it is noted that the transport modelling work has yet to be published (expected in 2022). This will be critical to informing the new plan and may require changes to the preferred options consultation plan to reflect its findings.