Draft Black Country Plan

Comment

Representation ID: 21475

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Charles Church Homes

Agent: Claremont Planning Consultancy

Policy CSP1 – Development Strategy

2.1. Policy CSP1 provides the proposed Development Strategy for the emerging Plan, identifying the need to deliver at least 47,837 homes. It identifies how this is to be delivered, which includes delivering the majority of development in the existing urban area; focusing growth and regeneration into the Growth Network and Strategic Centres and Regeneration Areas; as well as through a number of Neighbourhood Growth Areas in highly sustainable locations on the edge of the urban area.

2.2. The housing number proposed in Policy CSP1 however establishes that the Plan is not intending to meet its housing numbers in full, as the supporting text explains there will be a shortfall between the housing target and the local housing need of 28,239 homes. It is envisaged by the Black Country Authorities that this shortfall will be met through the Duty to Co-Operate.

2.3. As part of the Evidence Base for the Regulation 18 Consultation, a Duty to Cooperate Statement has been published. This details the outcome of initial attempts by the Black Country Authorities to engage with neighbouring authorities, and outlines the emerging ‘offers’ to meet unmet housing needs in the Greater Birmingham and Black Country Housing Market Area (GBBCHMA). Whilst this emerging Plan is still at an early stage of preparation, it is a concern that the ‘offers’ that have been made so far totals 8,000 homes, some of which would be contributing to unmet needs in Birmingham as well as the Black Country. Therefore a substantial shortfall is apparent between the local housing need figure for the Black Country and the amount of housing that is proposed to be delivered either within the Black Country Plan Area or neighbouring authority areas. It is unclear how this shortfall will be met.

2.4. Notwithstanding the efforts that have been made, the emerging Plan should recognise that the Duty to Co-Operate has been diminished by the Government, following the publication of the revised National Planning Policy Framework in 2018 and the Planning for the Future White Paper in 2020, with the latter proposing to abolish the Duty entirely without identifying what would replace it. Whilst previously, the Framework required authorities to work collaboratively with other bodies to meet development requirements which cannot be wholly met within their own areas, this requirement has been watered down in later revisions of the Framework. Authorities are still required to prepare and maintain Statements of Common Ground documenting cross-boundary matters and progress in cooperating to address these, as per Paragraph 27 of the 2021 version of the Framework. However, there is no longer a requirement in the Planning Practice Guidance for cooperation to produce effective and deliverable policies on strategic cross boundary matters, and instead bodies are required ‘to engage constructively, actively and on an ongoing basis to maximise the effectiveness of local plan preparation’. It is therefore considered that the emerging Black Country Plan should not be reliant on neighbouring authorities to deliver approximately one-third of the housing need for the Plan. There is no robust evidence that this level of housing need can be delivered by neighbouring authorities, or that there is a mechanism to ensure that this is achieved.

Comment

Representation ID: 21476

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Charles Church Homes

Agent: Claremont Planning Consultancy

Policy CSP2 – The Strategic Centres and Core Regeneration Areas

2.6. This Policy identifies that the primary focus for regeneration and infrastructure will be the Growth network, which consists of the ‘Strategic Centres’ and the ‘Core Regeneration Areas’. The policy establishes that 11,208 new homes will be delivered within the Core Regeneration Areas, ‘in sustainable locations well-supported by community services and local shops, set within and linked by comprehensive networks of attractive green infrastructure with cycling and pedestrian routes’.

2.7. This policy is supported, however in light of the housing shortfall identified in respect of Policy CSP1, it is considered that the Council should be seeking to increase the amount of housing to be delivered in both the Strategic Centres and Core Regeneration Areas. This in particular should include identifying all opportunities for residential development within the urban area, recognising that such locations are typically the most sustainable.

2.8. It is considered that this should include identification of land at Corbett Hospital, as promoted by Charles Church Homes and The Dudley Group NHS Foundation Trust, as the site lies within one of the Core Regeneration Areas. It provides an opportunity to deliver high quality residential development within the urban area, in close proximity to existing services and facilities. By utilising sustainably located sites such as this, it would be possible for greater numbers of housing to be delivered within the Growth Network identified by the Plan, and for the Plan overall to be more able to meet its housing needs.

2.9. As such, it is considered that Policy CSP2 should be reviewed once the Council has fully taken into consideration all available sites, including land at Corbett Hospital, and propose that greater numbers of housing are delivered through these defined areas.

Comment

Representation ID: 21477

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Charles Church Homes

Agent: Claremont Planning Consultancy

Policy CSP3 – Towns and Neighbourhood Areas and the Green Belt

2.10. The evidence supporting the emerging Black Country Plan has identified that within the urban area is insufficient capacity to meet the Plan’s housing needs, even when taking into account potential opportunities for redevelopment of brownfield sites and increasing densities for new development. As a result, it has been concluded that there is sufficient justification to release land from the Green Belt through this Plan.

2.11. Whilst the need to release the Green Belt is not disputed given the scale of housing need and shortfall identified, it is a concern that the Authorities have proceeded to do so despite not exhausting all opportunities within the urban area. As a result, in order for the Plan to be justified and consistent with national policy regarding the Green Belt, the authorities need to demonstrate that all other reasonable options to meet its identified needs have been examined fully. This should include consideration of available sites within the urban area, such as the Land at Corbett Hospital, which represents underutilised land in a sustainable location within the urban area.

2.12. Therefore, in order for the Council to proceed with Green Belt release through this Plan and included within Policy CSP3, the Plan must be supported by a robust evidence base that justifies this approach. This should include identifying how all opportunities within the urban area such as the Land at the Corbett Hospital have been assessed, in order to ensure that the Plan accords with the Framework’s tests of soundness.

Comment

Representation ID: 21478

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Charles Church Homes

Agent: Claremont Planning Consultancy

Policy GB1 – The Black Country Green Belt

2.13. This policy and the supporting text, provides the detail confirming the proposed release of certain areas of land from the black Country Green Belt to meet housing and employment needs. As set out previously in respect of Policy CSP3, it is considered that whilst the release of land from the Green Belt is likely to be justified, before concluding this the authorities should be able to demonstrate that all other options have been considered. This is set out in Paragraph 141 of the Framework. As the emerging Plan does not recognise the potential opportunity provided by Land at Corbett Hospital to provide housing within the urban area, and taken forward the site as an allocation for housing, it is not considered that the authorities have fulfilled the Framework’s requirements in this regard.

Object

Representation ID: 21479

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Charles Church Homes

Agent: Claremont Planning Consultancy

Policy DSA4 – Corbett Meadow Local Green Space

3.1. Charles Church Homes and The Dudley Group NHS Foundation Trust strongly objects to the proposed Local Green Space (LGS) designation of Land at Corbett Hospital, considering that it is not justified or appropriate. It does not reflect the nature of the site and conflicts with the requirements for the Black Country Plan to contribute to delivering sustainable development and meeting housing needs.

3.2. The Framework identifies at Paragraph 101 that ‘Designating land as Local Green Space should be consistent with the local planning of sustainable development and complement investment in sufficient homes, jobs and other essential services’. Furthermore, in Paragraph 102 it goes on to identify that the designation of Local Green Space should only be used where the green space fulfils certain criteria. It is considered that the designation of Land at Corbett Hospital is not consistent with the requirement for the emerging Plan to contribute towards achieving sustainable development, and in particular deliver sufficient housing to meet objectively assessed needs.

3.3. The promotion of the site for LGS appears to be focused on the history of the site, as identified in the assessment provided in Appendix A-6 of the Draft Black Country Plan Site Assessment Report. This asserts that the site has significant local history, having originally been purposed with the intention of the land to be used for medical purposes for the people of Stourbridge and the surrounding areas. However, no reference is made in the assessment to the subsequent transfer of the land to the NHS when it was formed in 1948, and the NHS having formally identified the land as surplus to requirements. As a result, it has been included in the register of NHS Surplus Land as available for disposal, with the anticipated disposal expected during 2021/22. The site was added to the register of public sector land in 2017 and was offered exclusively to all other public sector users before being offered on the open market for housing.

3.4. The Government has encouraged the disposal of surplus NHS land to realise capital receipts that could provide a key capital funding stream for the NHS. A review of NHS Property and Estates was undertaken by Sir Robert Naylor in 2018, which identified land that could be released to deliver 26,000 homes that could fund £2bn of capital transformation. The latest NHS Property Disposal Guide (2021) confirms that there is now a policy that requires that at least 50% of the net proceeds of property disposals are to be reinvested in the local health economy, ensuring that local developments are prioritised for the receipt from disposal of sites such as the Land at Corbett Hospital. As the land at Corbett Hospital is owned freehold by The Dudley Group NHS Foundation Trust, 100% of the net proceeds of the sale will be spent within the Dudley health economy.

3.5. DHSC’s ‘Homes for NHS Staff’ policy requires that housing built on land formerly owned by the NHS should be offered initially to employees of the NHS. The development of homes on Land at Corbett Hospital could therefore support the housing and employment objectives of the Core Regeneration Areas policy. By restricting the potential development prospects of the site through the proposed LGS designation, it is considered that the Black Country Authorities are preventing the realisation of critical investment to the NHS both locally and nationally.

3.6. It is considered that a sensitively designed proposal of a suitable scale could deliver some residential development within the site, whilst retaining and enhancing many of the natural features of the site. Furthermore, parts of the site would provide public open space, facilitating public access to the site that is currently not available as no public access is deliverable at present. As a result, it is considered that the proposed development would actually deliver improvements in respect of public access, that would not be the case if the site were to be designated as Local Green Space. The initial landscape analysis that identifies the potential of the Corbett Hospital site to accommodate housing is attached to these representations.

3.7. Furthermore, the proposed allocation of the site as Local Green Space, is inconsistent with national policy, specifically in that such a designation would conflict with the need for policies to contribute towards achieving sustainable development and delivering ‘sufficient homes’. It has already been identified within these representations that the emerging Plan is not addressing local housing needs appropriately, both in regards to the proposed reliance on neighbouring authorities and the proposed release of land from the Green Belt.

3.8. As such, it is considered that it would be highly inappropriate for the emerging Plan to continue to propose to allocate the Land at Corbett Hospital in the context of a significant shortfall in housing supply and the opportunity available to provide housing in a sustainable location within the urban area. Securing residential development on the site would accord fully with the Spatial Strategy set out in CSP1, which establishes that the intention is to deliver growth and sustainable patterns of growth by ‘Delivering the majority of development in the existing urban area’. It should therefore be preferable to seek to accommodate some of the identified level of housing need on suitable sites such as this, rather than seeking to restrict the potential for development through the designation of a site for Local Green Space.

4. Health and Wellbeing

Policy HW1 – Health and Wellbeing

4.1. This policy seeks to ensure that regeneration and transformation of the Black Country will create an environment that protects and improve the physical, social and mental health and wellbeing of residents. As part of this, it provides a list of requirements that should be delivered through new developments, including enabling active and healthy lifestyles, providing a range of housing types and tenures, and be designed with residential amenity and health and wellbeing in mind. It is considered reasonable to expect new developments to respect these requirements and these will be delivered through the proposed development on land at Corbett Hospital.

4.2. Importantly, as part of this policy it establishes that developments should ‘protect and include a range of social infrastructure such as social care, health, leisure, sport and recreation…. close to where people live’. Unlocking residential development on land at Corbett Hospital will directly contribute towards achieving this objective, by realising capital receipts for the NHS through the disposal of this surplus land. There is a mandate that 50% of this capital receipt is to be reinvested in the local health economy, thereby ensuring that local people will directly benefit from delivery of the development. If the Plan seeks to constrain the ability to secure development on the site through the proposed allocation as Local Green Space, this will have a detrimental impact in

respect of the realisation of capital receipts and accordingly reduce the potential for investment to be secured for local health developments. This will directly conflict with the objective of Policy HW1, and the wider aims of the emerging BCP.

4.3. Furthermore, it is considered that by seeking to resist development on the site, the authorities will be restricting the potential for development in a highly sustainable location within the urban area. This could, to a degree, reduce the need for development to be delivered in less sustainable locations either within the Borough or in neighbouring authorities, which should be a key consideration for the Plan and the need to ensure that it is consistent with national policy aims of achieving sustainable development. Ensuring that development is directed to appropriate locations such as this is a consideration for Policy HW1 specifically, as by securing development within the urban area it is more likely that future residents will be able to utilise active and environmentally sustainable forms of travel for accessing places of work, education and day-to- day services and facilities

Comment

Representation ID: 21480

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Charles Church Homes

Agent: Claremont Planning Consultancy

4. Health and Wellbeing

Policy HW1 – Health and Wellbeing

4.1. This policy seeks to ensure that regeneration and transformation of the Black Country will create an environment that protects and improve the physical, social and mental health and wellbeing of residents. As part of this, it provides a list of requirements that should be delivered through new developments, including enabling active and healthy lifestyles, providing a range of housing types and tenures, and be designed with residential amenity and health and wellbeing in mind. It is considered reasonable to expect new developments to respect these requirements and these will be delivered through the proposed development on land at Corbett Hospital.

4.2. Importantly, as part of this policy it establishes that developments should ‘protect and include a range of social infrastructure such as social care, health, leisure, sport and recreation…. close to where people live’. Unlocking residential development on land at Corbett Hospital will directly contribute towards achieving this objective, by realising capital receipts for the NHS through the disposal of this surplus land. There is a mandate that 50% of this capital receipt is to be reinvested in the local health economy, thereby ensuring that local people will directly benefit from delivery of the development. If the Plan seeks to constrain the ability to secure development on the site through the proposed allocation as Local Green Space, this will have a detrimental impact in

respect of the realisation of capital receipts and accordingly reduce the potential for investment to be secured for local health developments. This will directly conflict with the objective of Policy HW1, and the wider aims of the emerging BCP.

4.3. Furthermore, it is considered that by seeking to resist development on the site, the authorities will be restricting the potential for development in a highly sustainable location within the urban area. This could, to a degree, reduce the need for development to be delivered in less sustainable locations either within the Borough or in neighbouring authorities, which should be a key consideration for the Plan and the need to ensure that it is consistent with national policy aims of achieving sustainable development. Ensuring that development is directed to appropriate locations such as this is a consideration for Policy HW1 specifically, as by securing development within the urban area it is more likely that future residents will be able to utilise active and environmentally sustainable forms of travel for accessing places of work, education and day-to- day services and facilities

Object

Representation ID: 21481

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Charles Church Homes

Agent: Claremont Planning Consultancy

Policy HOU1 – Delivering Sustainable Housing Growth

5.1. The Policy establishes that sufficient land is to be provided to deliver at least 47,837 net new homes over the period 2020-2039. As set out in response to Policy CSP1, it is considered that the authorities’ approach to determining this figure, is not sound, in that it does not accord with the Framework’s requirement for Plan’s to be positively prepared. The Framework requires that Plan’s should as a minimum, seek to meet the area’s objective assessed needs, which the Plan as currently drafted is not seeking to achieve. Whilst this approach may be reasonable and justified, it is not considered that sufficient justification has been provided at this stage.

5.2. As such, the scale of housing the Plan seeks to achieve is not considered appropriate, or robust, and should be reconsidered as the preparation of the Plan progresses. Given the scale of the shortfall, and the proposed reliance on neighbouring authorities to deliver housing despite a lack of formal agreement on where this is to be accommodated, it is considered that the Plan as a whole and Policy HOU1 in particular should reflect a higher level of housing to be delivered within the Plan area.

5.3. This is particularly the case in light of the opportunity to deliver housing on Land at Corbett Hospital, which has been overlooked in the draft of the Plan that has been published for consultation at this stage. The site could accommodate in the region of 100 dwellings including a range of house types and sizes and affordable housing, which would be delivered in a highly sustainable location within the urban area. These would be accommodated within a sensitively designed development, which responds to the site’s natural features including the variations in topography and existing mature trees, as well as provides substantial areas of public open space and soft landscaping.

Comment

Representation ID: 21482

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Charles Church Homes

Agent: Claremont Planning Consultancy

Policy ENV1 – Nature Conservation

6.1. The aims of the Plan in seeking to safeguard nature conservation are supported in principle, however it is important that this is balanced with the need to deliver appropriate levels of

development within the Plan area. Where sites are recognised as being of value for nature conservation purposes, it is important that the protection afforded to them reflects the level of significance. This should not necessarily restrict the potential for any development to be accommodated in close proximity or within designated areas, if it can be suitably demonstrated through the site selection and/or planning application process that any harm to the protected site would be mitigated as part of the development.

6.2. In the case of land at Corbett Hospital, it is noted that the site is designated as a Site of Local Importance for Nature Conservation (SLINC). However, the emerging Policy ENV1 does not seek to prevent entirely any development that may affect such designations, however seeks to protect such sites from development proposals that could negatively impact them. It is important therefore that when applying the policy, the authorities do not seek to restrict proposals that otherwise would deliver sustainable development, but instead works with applicants or developers in order to facilitate development that could deliver housing (or commercial uses) alongside potential enhancements to such features.

6.3. Policy ENV1 recognises that there may be circumstances where ‘strategic benefits of a development clearly outweigh the importance of a local nature conservation site… damage must be minimised’. It is considered that this should include recognition of the significant benefits that delivering housing development within the urban area would deliver, in particular where there would also be enhancements delivered to the designated site. This is particularly important due to the scale of housing shortfall anticipated, and the need therefore to ensure that all opportunities to deliver housing in appropriate locations can be realised.

Object

Representation ID: 21483

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Charles Church Homes

Agent: Claremont Planning Consultancy

Policy ENV4 – Provision, Retention and Protection of Trees, Woodlands and Hedgerows

6.5. The requirement within this emerging policy is that replacement tree planting should be provided on a three for one basis as a minimum. This is not considered to be an appropriate requirement for every site as there may be instances where removal of trees is justified, for example due to the poor condition of particular tree specimen, and where the particular specimens does not justify such a level of replacement planting. The replacement of poor specimen trees on a development site should not be absolutely required at this level, particularly if it would harm the development capacity. In such circumstances funding toward off-site provision should be equally supported.

6.6. The level of detail proposed within Policy ENV4 is also considered to be unnecessary and inappropriate. Whilst it is important to ensure that appropriate provisions are included within the policy, it is considered that there are provisions within the policy that area already covered by best practice guidance and/or other regulations. For example, the detail regarding tree planting on site, and the need to ensure the protection of trees during development. The policy should not reproduce such requirements unless it is considered specifically necessary and justified in accordance with the provisions of the National Planning Policy Framework.

Comment

Representation ID: 21484

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Charles Church Homes

Agent: Claremont Planning Consultancy

Policy ENV5 – Historic Character & Local Distinctiveness of the Black Country

6.7. The policy seeks to ensure that development proposals sustain and enhance the locally distinctive character of the area, respecting and responding to positive attributes in order to help maintain the cultural identity and strong sense of place of the Black Country. This is an important

consideration for development within the Plan area, however should be balanced against other considerations both in respect of plan-making and decision-taking. In order to meet the development needs of the Plan area, there are likely to be circumstances where changes to the landscape will be required in order to facilitate development that may be considered to adversely affect landscape features, as assessed and demonstrated through the accompanying landscape statement for the Corbett Hospital site. Whilst to a degree this would conflict with this policy, this must be balanced against the need to meet other policy objectives and requirements. As such the safeguarding of existing landscape settings and contexts should not be absolute and must provide for suitable development opportunities in order to achieve the overall strategy and accommodate development within sustainable locations.