Publication Plan November 2022

Object

Representation ID: 4941

Received: 23/12/2022

Respondent: AJM Planning Associates Ltd

Agent: AJM Planning Associates Ltd

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

It is considered that the Council’s approach continues to place far too much emphasis on the “strategic development locations”, most particularly proposals SA2 (Cross Green) and SA3 (Linthouse Lane). It now appears that SA2 only “safeguards” the land for the potential rail-based parkway with no requirement for it to be provided (in contrast to previous Infrastructure Delivery Plan’s implicit indications).

These large allocations put the delivery of a large part of the new housing requirement firmly in the hands of the larger developers, who will consequently potentially dictate supply. It is considered that the strategy should instead seek to deliver more growth around the edges of settlements in locations which are already sustainable and deliverable, such as in Bilbrook & Brewood.

it is noted that the proposed strategy does not allow for any new safeguarded areas of land in accordance with para 140 of the NPPF. Safeguarded land should continue to be identified within the higher Tier settlements, including Bilbrook and Brewood.

Moreover, this emphasis on “strategic development locations” has meant that smaller sites adjacent to the conurbation have not been fully evaluated. One such site is at The Wergs, Wolverhampton

Comment

Representation ID: 4942

Received: 23/12/2022

Respondent: AJM Planning Associates Ltd

Agent: AJM Planning Associates Ltd

Policy far too prescriptive and will lead to developments
of too similar character and blandness. There should be more flexibility built into the policies to allow for the individual circumstances of each site and its context.

Comment

Representation ID: 4943

Received: 23/12/2022

Respondent: AJM Planning Associates Ltd

Agent: AJM Planning Associates Ltd

Policy far too prescriptive and will lead to developments
of too similar character and blandness. There should be more flexibility built into the policies to allow for the individual circumstances of each site and its context.

Comment

Representation ID: 4944

Received: 23/12/2022

Respondent: AJM Planning Associates Ltd

Agent: AJM Planning Associates Ltd

Policy far too prescriptive and will lead to developments
of too similar character and blandness. There should be more flexibility built into the policies to allow for the individual circumstances of each site and its context.

Comment

Representation ID: 4945

Received: 23/12/2022

Respondent: AJM Planning Associates Ltd

Agent: AJM Planning Associates Ltd

It now appears that SA2 only “safeguards” the land for the potential rail-based parkway with no requirement for it to be provided (in contrast to previous Infrastructure Delivery Plan’s implicit indications). The release of green belt with assessed “very high” harm in this location appears to have far less justification now in the context of the proposed “infrastructure led” approach.

Object

Representation ID: 4946

Received: 23/12/2022

Respondent: AJM Planning Associates Ltd

Agent: AJM Planning Associates Ltd

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Site 616 Land at rear of Melwood Lane, Brewood should be allocated for future housing development in the Review, particularly in view of how it “reads” as part of the village; the minimal harm to Green Belt considerations that would result from built development, and its limited visual sensitivity.It is confirmed that the land is available for development without any ownership or known technical constraints.

Object

Representation ID: 4947

Received: 23/12/2022

Respondent: AJM Planning Associates Ltd

Agent: AJM Planning Associates Ltd

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Site 065 to the rear of St Mary's Row, Brewood should be allocated for future housing development in the Review or, at the very least, identified as “safeguarded”, particularly in view of how it “reads” as part of the village; the minimal harm to Green Belt considerations that would result from built development, its limited visual sensitivity and sustainability credentials.

Object

Representation ID: 4948

Received: 23/12/2022

Respondent: AJM Planning Associates Ltd

Agent: AJM Planning Associates Ltd

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Site 221 Land at Dam Mill, Codsall should be allocated for future housing development in the Review or, at the very least, identified as “safeguarded” for longer term development. Development of the site would have limited visual and green belt impact and is well served by public transport and local facilities in a location in proximity to the conurbation edge and thereby close to the source of unmet need.

Object

Representation ID: 4952

Received: 23/12/2022

Respondent: AJM Planning Associates Ltd

Agent: AJM Planning Associates Ltd

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Sites 236/237, Land at the Wergs should be allocated for future housing development or removed from the green belt and safeguarded for longer term development in the Review. This would provide more flexibility in meeting current and future housing needs than the current approach. The site is close to bus routes and has other locational advantages including proximity to schools and the shops and other services in Tettenhall village.