Draft Black Country Plan

Object

Representation ID: 19715

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Sandwell Liberal Democrats

This site includes playing fields, and such community facilities should not be sacrificed for housing when there are outstanding planning applications that have not been built. This proposal should be rejevted unless the playing fields are retained.

The proposal is for 120 units on land that includes electricity pylons and open space used by the local community. This will need sympathetic development that ensures that the development would be an attractive and safe place to live. The number of houses being proposed therefors seems excessive.

Object

Representation ID: 19719

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Sandwell Liberal Democrats

Part of the land for this site has a long association with the neighbouring school and provides playing fields to the local community. In addition to retaining the playing fields, any development on this site will need to mitigate for possible subsidance or other problems from previous mining avtivity in the area. As the allocation report notes, part of this site is a SINC and neighbours a bird reserve. Any development MUST be sympathetic and not destroy the delicate balance of the envirnment in the area.

As a result this propsal should be rejected unless the scale of the develpment is reduced to a level that ensure that there is little or no disruption to the biodiversity of the area and ensures the playing fields are still available to the local community.

Comment

Representation ID: 20022

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Sandwell Liberal Democrats

I have taken a look at the Draft Black Country Plan Consultation site. It is not particularly easy to navigate and find things, but some of the detail on the developments is quite useful. However, I encountered a couple of problems.

Access errors
Despite being logged in as a registered user, I was only able to view document Policy HOU1 out of the three listed for the Charlemont Community Centre site, the other two returned an “access denied” error. (HOU! was the Land Supply and Indicative Phasing document, which includes useful data, but I have question on that as well, see separate email.)

Search errors (no list of search results)
Some of my address searches briefly flashed up a number of results, but did not list the addresses. Most were OK, but Painswick Close stubbornly refused to show the 8 results is claimed to have found.

In terms of lodging objects or comments, this looks relatively easy but for the three main sites I am interested in (Tanhouse Avenue playing fields, Painswick Close, and Charlemont Community Centre) it looks as though they have to done as part of the Sandwell Valley section, where all the sites are listed. Is it not possible to comment on individuals sites?

From the key provided with the map, I assume the yellow site near the Charlemont Community Centre is part of a Core Regeneration Area. The site is on the corner of Beaconview Road and Wyndmill Crescent and looks to be a derelict site. Are there any outstanding plans, with planning permission, for this site?

Object

Representation ID: 22106

Received: 30/09/2021

Respondent: Sandwell Liberal Democrats

Ref SAH225 (Charlemont Community Centre)
The proposal for this site is for one house, and that will have no impact on the housing stock while opening up the possibility of developers encroaching on the neighbouring open space. This proposal should therefore be rejected and the Council should instead look for ways to make use of the building as a community centre. This could be either through the Council itself, or inviting community groups to make use of it.

in addition to this site depriving the local community of a community centre, and threatening local green space, there is a vacant plot of land less than 200 meters from this site (corner of Beacon View Road and Wyndmill Crescent) that looks like it could accommodate two or three houses. Such sites should be used before opening up Green Belt and open space.