Black Country Core Strategy Issue and Option Report
Search representations
Results for Wolverhampton Campaign for Real Ale (CAMRA) search
New search
New search
Black Country Core Strategy Issue and Option Report
Question 47 - Do you think that Policy HOU5 should be expanded to cover other types of built social infrastructure and to set out standards for built social infrastructure to serve major housing devel
Respondent: Wolverhampton Campaign for Real Ale (CAMRA)
Representation Summary:
Yes - Pubs should be considered built social infrastructure and would certainly count as "community meeting places." Community pubs promote social inclusion, help combat social isolation (the Local Government Association has cited loneliness as a major public health issue) and research from Oxford University, "Friends on Tap," has shown that people with a "local" pub are happier, are more satisfied with their life and have a wider network of friends
Full text:
Yes - Pubs should be considered built social infrastructure and would certainly count as "community meeting places." Community pubs promote social inclusion, help combat social isolation (the Local Government Association has cited loneliness as a major public health issue) and research from Oxford University, "Friends on Tap," has shown that people with a "local" pub are happier, are more satisfied with their life and have a wider network of friends
Black Country Core Strategy Issue and Option Report
Question 48 - Do you agree that the requirement in HOU5, to demonstrate there is adequate alternative provision to meet the needs of the community served by a facility which is to be lost, should be r
Respondent: Wolverhampton Campaign for Real Ale (CAMRA)
Representation Summary:
If social infrastructure, including pubs, is included there should be requirement that adequate alternative provision is demonstrated. The Black Country being predominately urban doesn't mean a community or locality is not affected in the same way as the loss of the "last pub in the village" - there is reference elsewhere to facilities of being within "easy walking distance" particularly for less mobile community members - if the last pub in a locality went it could contribute to social isolation of those not able to travel wider. Loss of pubs could be counter to social inclusion and sustainable communities.
Full text:
If social infrastructure, including pubs, is included there should be requirement that adequate alternative provision is demonstrated. The Black Country being predominately urban doesn't mean a community or locality is not affected in the same way as the loss of the "last pub in the village" - there is reference elsewhere to facilities of being within "easy walking distance" particularly for less mobile community members - if the last pub in a locality went it could contribute to social isolation of those not able to travel wider. Loss of pubs could be counter to social inclusion and sustainable communities.
Black Country Core Strategy Issue and Option Report
Key Issue 1 - Updating the evidence base
Respondent: Wolverhampton Campaign for Real Ale (CAMRA)
Representation Summary:
3.4 mentions "heritage assets" some pubs could be interpreted as being heritage assets - particular those of note as being a landmark building or serving a community for a very long time (Wolverhampton has a number of 18th century pubs).
Full text:
Apologies for not using the online process but I wanted to include a "covering letter" of sorts explaining my organisation and context of my comments. I would appreciate confirmation of receipt of the form.
My comments are on behalf of Wolverhampton branch of the Campaign for Real Ale (CAMRA - 1230 members approx. across the Wolverhampton area) so concern how public houses may be affected by the Black Country Core Strategy and whether they can be explicitly defined as built social infrastructure or a community facility. I've tried to associate my comments to specific questions in the consultation (in particular changes to policy HOU5 would seem the most likely avenue to achieve this) but would appreciate it if the status of pubs could also be considered more generally in case I have not put my comments in the best places.
I appreciate a large thrust of the consultation is around the status of Green Belt and options regarding using that for development. I was informed that 2 of the pubs in Tettenhall, Wolverhampton are situated in the green belt but would suspect that across the whole of the Black Country there would be many more that are affected by areas covered by the strategy (including strategic centres and regeneration corridors) or any future changes to the identified areas. The consultation also asks about identifying areas outside the four councils (e.g. land in South Staffs) for housing and employment which might also affect pubs there.
Our hope would be that pubs could be recognized as an important community facility within the strategy or associated policies so that any proposed development for the land they sit on is weighed up against the impact of losing an important community facility (e.g. so that a "need for housing" identified in the strategy doesn't automatically trump the need for a community to retain its pub).
Whilst I am commenting on behalf of Wolverhampton CAMRA, CAMRA has branches in Walsall and Dudley that would hold similar views on the importance of pubs to their local communities and we would be most happy to be contacted for further discussion on this subject if desired.
Rep made against: Key Issue One, para 3.4, p 17
3.4 mentions "heritage assets" some pubs could be interpreted as being heritage assets - particular those of note as being a landmark building or serving a community for a very long time
(Wolverhampton has a number of 18th century pubs).
Rep made against: Question 13b - What infrastructure do you think would be needed for different sizes of SUEs? If a SUE is large enough and far enough away from existing facilities (reasonable walking distance) then a pub would be an important social infrastructure facility that should be considered. A good
local pub would be the heart of its community and promote social inclusion and well-being. The lack of such a facility would contribute the SUE being a mere dormitory.
Question 13d - Do you think that the Core Strategy should set out detailed guidance for the development of SUEs (e.g. type and tenure of housing, specific infrastructure required), rather than details
Answer = Yes. I fear without specific guidance in the strategy a developer would seek the profitability of squeezing as many houses as possible into an area with little regard to creating a community people would want to live in.
Rep made against: Question 23 - Do you have evidence of social infrastructure that is no longer needed and where the site could be reallocated for alternative uses? Yes/No; If yes, please provide details.
If anyone has identified a pub or pubs in this section (pub plots can be very appealing to housing developers) please consult with the local community or interested bodies such as CAMRA before accepting it as a fact.
Rep made against: Question 25 - Will there be any new social infrastructure requirements necessary to serve large new housing developments? Yes/No; If yes, please explain the type and scale of any new social infrastructure.
Answer = yes. Similar to my response to 13d. For a large housing development a pub would be an important social infrastructure facility that should be considered. A good local pub would be the heart of its community and promote social inclusion and wellbeing. The lack of such a facility nearby (reasonable walking distance) would contribute the development being a mere dormitory.
Rep made against: Policy HOU5 - Education and Health Care Facilities, Question 47 - Do you think that Policy HOU5 should be expanded to cover other types of built social infrastructure and to set out standards for built social infrastructure to serve major housing development
Answer = yes. Pubs should be considered built social infrastructure and would certainly count as "community meeting places." Community pubs promote social inclusion, help combat social isolation (the Local Government Association has cited loneliness as a major public health issue) and research from Oxford University, "Friends on Tap," has shown that people with a "local" pub are happier, are
more satisfied with their life and have a wider network of friends. In short, a housing development without social infrastructure like pubs is a dormitory, not a community.
Link to cited report: http://www.camra.org.uk/documents/10180/36197/Friends+on+Tap/2c68585be47d-42ca-bda6-5d6b3e4c0110
Rep made against: Policy HOU5 - Education and Health Care Facilities, Question 48 - Do you agree that the requirement in HOU5, to demonstrate there is adequate alternative provision to meet the needs of the community served by a facility which is to be lost, should be r
Answer = yes. If social infrastructure, including pubs, is included there should be a requirement that adequate alternative provision is demonstrated. The Black Country being predominately urban doesn't mean a community or locality is not affected in the same way as the loss of the "last pub in the village" - there is reference elsewhere to facilities of being within "easy walking distance"
particularly for less mobile community members - if the last pub in a locality went it could contribute to social isolation of those not able to travel wider. Loss of pubs could be counter to social inclusion and sustainable communities.
Rep made against: Policy EMP6 - Cultural Facilities and the Visitor Economy, Question 56 - Do you agree with the proposal to update Policy EMP6 in line with current priorities? Yes/No;
If no, please explain why
The Black Country is home to a number of pubs on CAMRA's national inventory heritage list which might fit in with the heritage themes of the list of attractions
Black Country Core Strategy Issue and Option Report
Question 13b - What infrastructure do you think would be needed for different sizes of SUEs?
Respondent: Wolverhampton Campaign for Real Ale (CAMRA)
Representation Summary:
If a SUE is large enough and far enough away from existing facilities (reasonable walking distance) then a pub would be an important social infrastructure facility that should be considered. A good local pub would be the heart of its community and promote social inclusion and well-being. The lack of such a facility would contribute the SUE being a mere dormitory.
Full text:
Apologies for not using the online process but I wanted to include a "covering letter" of sorts explaining my organisation and context of my comments. I would appreciate confirmation of receipt of the form.
My comments are on behalf of Wolverhampton branch of the Campaign for Real Ale (CAMRA - 1230 members approx. across the Wolverhampton area) so concern how public houses may be affected by the Black Country Core Strategy and whether they can be explicitly defined as built social infrastructure or a community facility. I've tried to associate my comments to specific questions in the consultation (in particular changes to policy HOU5 would seem the most likely avenue to achieve this) but would appreciate it if the status of pubs could also be considered more generally in case I have not put my comments in the best places.
I appreciate a large thrust of the consultation is around the status of Green Belt and options regarding using that for development. I was informed that 2 of the pubs in Tettenhall, Wolverhampton are situated in the green belt but would suspect that across the whole of the Black Country there would be many more that are affected by areas covered by the strategy (including strategic centres and regeneration corridors) or any future changes to the identified areas. The consultation also asks about identifying areas outside the four councils (e.g. land in South Staffs) for housing and employment which might also affect pubs there.
Our hope would be that pubs could be recognized as an important community facility within the strategy or associated policies so that any proposed development for the land they sit on is weighed up against the impact of losing an important community facility (e.g. so that a "need for housing" identified in the strategy doesn't automatically trump the need for a community to retain its pub).
Whilst I am commenting on behalf of Wolverhampton CAMRA, CAMRA has branches in Walsall and Dudley that would hold similar views on the importance of pubs to their local communities and we would be most happy to be contacted for further discussion on this subject if desired.
Rep made against: Key Issue One, para 3.4, p 17
3.4 mentions "heritage assets" some pubs could be interpreted as being heritage assets - particular those of note as being a landmark building or serving a community for a very long time
(Wolverhampton has a number of 18th century pubs).
Rep made against: Question 13b - What infrastructure do you think would be needed for different sizes of SUEs? If a SUE is large enough and far enough away from existing facilities (reasonable walking distance) then a pub would be an important social infrastructure facility that should be considered. A good
local pub would be the heart of its community and promote social inclusion and well-being. The lack of such a facility would contribute the SUE being a mere dormitory.
Question 13d - Do you think that the Core Strategy should set out detailed guidance for the development of SUEs (e.g. type and tenure of housing, specific infrastructure required), rather than details
Answer = Yes. I fear without specific guidance in the strategy a developer would seek the profitability of squeezing as many houses as possible into an area with little regard to creating a community people would want to live in.
Rep made against: Question 23 - Do you have evidence of social infrastructure that is no longer needed and where the site could be reallocated for alternative uses? Yes/No; If yes, please provide details.
If anyone has identified a pub or pubs in this section (pub plots can be very appealing to housing developers) please consult with the local community or interested bodies such as CAMRA before accepting it as a fact.
Rep made against: Question 25 - Will there be any new social infrastructure requirements necessary to serve large new housing developments? Yes/No; If yes, please explain the type and scale of any new social infrastructure.
Answer = yes. Similar to my response to 13d. For a large housing development a pub would be an important social infrastructure facility that should be considered. A good local pub would be the heart of its community and promote social inclusion and wellbeing. The lack of such a facility nearby (reasonable walking distance) would contribute the development being a mere dormitory.
Rep made against: Policy HOU5 - Education and Health Care Facilities, Question 47 - Do you think that Policy HOU5 should be expanded to cover other types of built social infrastructure and to set out standards for built social infrastructure to serve major housing development
Answer = yes. Pubs should be considered built social infrastructure and would certainly count as "community meeting places." Community pubs promote social inclusion, help combat social isolation (the Local Government Association has cited loneliness as a major public health issue) and research from Oxford University, "Friends on Tap," has shown that people with a "local" pub are happier, are
more satisfied with their life and have a wider network of friends. In short, a housing development without social infrastructure like pubs is a dormitory, not a community.
Link to cited report: http://www.camra.org.uk/documents/10180/36197/Friends+on+Tap/2c68585be47d-42ca-bda6-5d6b3e4c0110
Rep made against: Policy HOU5 - Education and Health Care Facilities, Question 48 - Do you agree that the requirement in HOU5, to demonstrate there is adequate alternative provision to meet the needs of the community served by a facility which is to be lost, should be r
Answer = yes. If social infrastructure, including pubs, is included there should be a requirement that adequate alternative provision is demonstrated. The Black Country being predominately urban doesn't mean a community or locality is not affected in the same way as the loss of the "last pub in the village" - there is reference elsewhere to facilities of being within "easy walking distance"
particularly for less mobile community members - if the last pub in a locality went it could contribute to social isolation of those not able to travel wider. Loss of pubs could be counter to social inclusion and sustainable communities.
Rep made against: Policy EMP6 - Cultural Facilities and the Visitor Economy, Question 56 - Do you agree with the proposal to update Policy EMP6 in line with current priorities? Yes/No;
If no, please explain why
The Black Country is home to a number of pubs on CAMRA's national inventory heritage list which might fit in with the heritage themes of the list of attractions
Black Country Core Strategy Issue and Option Report
Question 13d - Do you think that the Core Strategy should set out detailed guidance for the development of SUEs (e.g. type and tenure of housing, specific infrastructure required), rather than details
Respondent: Wolverhampton Campaign for Real Ale (CAMRA)
Representation Summary:
I fear without specific guidance in the strategy a developer would seek the profitability of squeezing as many houses as possible into an area with little regard to creating a community people would want to live in.
Full text:
Apologies for not using the online process but I wanted to include a "covering letter" of sorts explaining my organisation and context of my comments. I would appreciate confirmation of receipt of the form.
My comments are on behalf of Wolverhampton branch of the Campaign for Real Ale (CAMRA - 1230 members approx. across the Wolverhampton area) so concern how public houses may be affected by the Black Country Core Strategy and whether they can be explicitly defined as built social infrastructure or a community facility. I've tried to associate my comments to specific questions in the consultation (in particular changes to policy HOU5 would seem the most likely avenue to achieve this) but would appreciate it if the status of pubs could also be considered more generally in case I have not put my comments in the best places.
I appreciate a large thrust of the consultation is around the status of Green Belt and options regarding using that for development. I was informed that 2 of the pubs in Tettenhall, Wolverhampton are situated in the green belt but would suspect that across the whole of the Black Country there would be many more that are affected by areas covered by the strategy (including strategic centres and regeneration corridors) or any future changes to the identified areas. The consultation also asks about identifying areas outside the four councils (e.g. land in South Staffs) for housing and employment which might also affect pubs there.
Our hope would be that pubs could be recognized as an important community facility within the strategy or associated policies so that any proposed development for the land they sit on is weighed up against the impact of losing an important community facility (e.g. so that a "need for housing" identified in the strategy doesn't automatically trump the need for a community to retain its pub).
Whilst I am commenting on behalf of Wolverhampton CAMRA, CAMRA has branches in Walsall and Dudley that would hold similar views on the importance of pubs to their local communities and we would be most happy to be contacted for further discussion on this subject if desired.
Rep made against: Key Issue One, para 3.4, p 17
3.4 mentions "heritage assets" some pubs could be interpreted as being heritage assets - particular those of note as being a landmark building or serving a community for a very long time
(Wolverhampton has a number of 18th century pubs).
Rep made against: Question 13b - What infrastructure do you think would be needed for different sizes of SUEs? If a SUE is large enough and far enough away from existing facilities (reasonable walking distance) then a pub would be an important social infrastructure facility that should be considered. A good
local pub would be the heart of its community and promote social inclusion and well-being. The lack of such a facility would contribute the SUE being a mere dormitory.
Question 13d - Do you think that the Core Strategy should set out detailed guidance for the development of SUEs (e.g. type and tenure of housing, specific infrastructure required), rather than details
Answer = Yes. I fear without specific guidance in the strategy a developer would seek the profitability of squeezing as many houses as possible into an area with little regard to creating a community people would want to live in.
Rep made against: Question 23 - Do you have evidence of social infrastructure that is no longer needed and where the site could be reallocated for alternative uses? Yes/No; If yes, please provide details.
If anyone has identified a pub or pubs in this section (pub plots can be very appealing to housing developers) please consult with the local community or interested bodies such as CAMRA before accepting it as a fact.
Rep made against: Question 25 - Will there be any new social infrastructure requirements necessary to serve large new housing developments? Yes/No; If yes, please explain the type and scale of any new social infrastructure.
Answer = yes. Similar to my response to 13d. For a large housing development a pub would be an important social infrastructure facility that should be considered. A good local pub would be the heart of its community and promote social inclusion and wellbeing. The lack of such a facility nearby (reasonable walking distance) would contribute the development being a mere dormitory.
Rep made against: Policy HOU5 - Education and Health Care Facilities, Question 47 - Do you think that Policy HOU5 should be expanded to cover other types of built social infrastructure and to set out standards for built social infrastructure to serve major housing development
Answer = yes. Pubs should be considered built social infrastructure and would certainly count as "community meeting places." Community pubs promote social inclusion, help combat social isolation (the Local Government Association has cited loneliness as a major public health issue) and research from Oxford University, "Friends on Tap," has shown that people with a "local" pub are happier, are
more satisfied with their life and have a wider network of friends. In short, a housing development without social infrastructure like pubs is a dormitory, not a community.
Link to cited report: http://www.camra.org.uk/documents/10180/36197/Friends+on+Tap/2c68585be47d-42ca-bda6-5d6b3e4c0110
Rep made against: Policy HOU5 - Education and Health Care Facilities, Question 48 - Do you agree that the requirement in HOU5, to demonstrate there is adequate alternative provision to meet the needs of the community served by a facility which is to be lost, should be r
Answer = yes. If social infrastructure, including pubs, is included there should be a requirement that adequate alternative provision is demonstrated. The Black Country being predominately urban doesn't mean a community or locality is not affected in the same way as the loss of the "last pub in the village" - there is reference elsewhere to facilities of being within "easy walking distance"
particularly for less mobile community members - if the last pub in a locality went it could contribute to social isolation of those not able to travel wider. Loss of pubs could be counter to social inclusion and sustainable communities.
Rep made against: Policy EMP6 - Cultural Facilities and the Visitor Economy, Question 56 - Do you agree with the proposal to update Policy EMP6 in line with current priorities? Yes/No;
If no, please explain why
The Black Country is home to a number of pubs on CAMRA's national inventory heritage list which might fit in with the heritage themes of the list of attractions
Black Country Core Strategy Issue and Option Report
Question 23 - Do you have evidence of social infrastructure that is no longer needed and where the site could be reallocated for alternative uses? Yes/No; If yes, please provide details.
Respondent: Wolverhampton Campaign for Real Ale (CAMRA)
Representation Summary:
If anyone has identified a pub or pubs in this section (pub plots can be very appealing to housing developers) please consult with the local community or interested bodies such as CAMRA before accepting it as a fact.
Full text:
Apologies for not using the online process but I wanted to include a "covering letter" of sorts explaining my organisation and context of my comments. I would appreciate confirmation of receipt of the form.
My comments are on behalf of Wolverhampton branch of the Campaign for Real Ale (CAMRA - 1230 members approx. across the Wolverhampton area) so concern how public houses may be affected by the Black Country Core Strategy and whether they can be explicitly defined as built social infrastructure or a community facility. I've tried to associate my comments to specific questions in the consultation (in particular changes to policy HOU5 would seem the most likely avenue to achieve this) but would appreciate it if the status of pubs could also be considered more generally in case I have not put my comments in the best places.
I appreciate a large thrust of the consultation is around the status of Green Belt and options regarding using that for development. I was informed that 2 of the pubs in Tettenhall, Wolverhampton are situated in the green belt but would suspect that across the whole of the Black Country there would be many more that are affected by areas covered by the strategy (including strategic centres and regeneration corridors) or any future changes to the identified areas. The consultation also asks about identifying areas outside the four councils (e.g. land in South Staffs) for housing and employment which might also affect pubs there.
Our hope would be that pubs could be recognized as an important community facility within the strategy or associated policies so that any proposed development for the land they sit on is weighed up against the impact of losing an important community facility (e.g. so that a "need for housing" identified in the strategy doesn't automatically trump the need for a community to retain its pub).
Whilst I am commenting on behalf of Wolverhampton CAMRA, CAMRA has branches in Walsall and Dudley that would hold similar views on the importance of pubs to their local communities and we would be most happy to be contacted for further discussion on this subject if desired.
Rep made against: Key Issue One, para 3.4, p 17
3.4 mentions "heritage assets" some pubs could be interpreted as being heritage assets - particular those of note as being a landmark building or serving a community for a very long time
(Wolverhampton has a number of 18th century pubs).
Rep made against: Question 13b - What infrastructure do you think would be needed for different sizes of SUEs? If a SUE is large enough and far enough away from existing facilities (reasonable walking distance) then a pub would be an important social infrastructure facility that should be considered. A good
local pub would be the heart of its community and promote social inclusion and well-being. The lack of such a facility would contribute the SUE being a mere dormitory.
Question 13d - Do you think that the Core Strategy should set out detailed guidance for the development of SUEs (e.g. type and tenure of housing, specific infrastructure required), rather than details
Answer = Yes. I fear without specific guidance in the strategy a developer would seek the profitability of squeezing as many houses as possible into an area with little regard to creating a community people would want to live in.
Rep made against: Question 23 - Do you have evidence of social infrastructure that is no longer needed and where the site could be reallocated for alternative uses? Yes/No; If yes, please provide details.
If anyone has identified a pub or pubs in this section (pub plots can be very appealing to housing developers) please consult with the local community or interested bodies such as CAMRA before accepting it as a fact.
Rep made against: Question 25 - Will there be any new social infrastructure requirements necessary to serve large new housing developments? Yes/No; If yes, please explain the type and scale of any new social infrastructure.
Answer = yes. Similar to my response to 13d. For a large housing development a pub would be an important social infrastructure facility that should be considered. A good local pub would be the heart of its community and promote social inclusion and wellbeing. The lack of such a facility nearby (reasonable walking distance) would contribute the development being a mere dormitory.
Rep made against: Policy HOU5 - Education and Health Care Facilities, Question 47 - Do you think that Policy HOU5 should be expanded to cover other types of built social infrastructure and to set out standards for built social infrastructure to serve major housing development
Answer = yes. Pubs should be considered built social infrastructure and would certainly count as "community meeting places." Community pubs promote social inclusion, help combat social isolation (the Local Government Association has cited loneliness as a major public health issue) and research from Oxford University, "Friends on Tap," has shown that people with a "local" pub are happier, are
more satisfied with their life and have a wider network of friends. In short, a housing development without social infrastructure like pubs is a dormitory, not a community.
Link to cited report: http://www.camra.org.uk/documents/10180/36197/Friends+on+Tap/2c68585be47d-42ca-bda6-5d6b3e4c0110
Rep made against: Policy HOU5 - Education and Health Care Facilities, Question 48 - Do you agree that the requirement in HOU5, to demonstrate there is adequate alternative provision to meet the needs of the community served by a facility which is to be lost, should be r
Answer = yes. If social infrastructure, including pubs, is included there should be a requirement that adequate alternative provision is demonstrated. The Black Country being predominately urban doesn't mean a community or locality is not affected in the same way as the loss of the "last pub in the village" - there is reference elsewhere to facilities of being within "easy walking distance"
particularly for less mobile community members - if the last pub in a locality went it could contribute to social isolation of those not able to travel wider. Loss of pubs could be counter to social inclusion and sustainable communities.
Rep made against: Policy EMP6 - Cultural Facilities and the Visitor Economy, Question 56 - Do you agree with the proposal to update Policy EMP6 in line with current priorities? Yes/No;
If no, please explain why
The Black Country is home to a number of pubs on CAMRA's national inventory heritage list which might fit in with the heritage themes of the list of attractions
Black Country Core Strategy Issue and Option Report
Question 25 - Will there be any new social infrastructure requirements necessary to serve large new housing developments? Yes/No; If yes, please explain the type and scale of any new social infrastruc
Respondent: Wolverhampton Campaign for Real Ale (CAMRA)
Representation Summary:
Similar to my response to 13d. For a large housing development a pub would be an
important social infrastructure facility that should be considered. A good local pub would be the heart of its community and promote social inclusion and wellbeing. The lack of such a facility nearby (reasonable walking distance) would contribute the development being a mere dormitory.
Full text:
Apologies for not using the online process but I wanted to include a "covering letter" of sorts explaining my organisation and context of my comments. I would appreciate confirmation of receipt of the form.
My comments are on behalf of Wolverhampton branch of the Campaign for Real Ale (CAMRA - 1230 members approx. across the Wolverhampton area) so concern how public houses may be affected by the Black Country Core Strategy and whether they can be explicitly defined as built social infrastructure or a community facility. I've tried to associate my comments to specific questions in the consultation (in particular changes to policy HOU5 would seem the most likely avenue to achieve this) but would appreciate it if the status of pubs could also be considered more generally in case I have not put my comments in the best places.
I appreciate a large thrust of the consultation is around the status of Green Belt and options regarding using that for development. I was informed that 2 of the pubs in Tettenhall, Wolverhampton are situated in the green belt but would suspect that across the whole of the Black Country there would be many more that are affected by areas covered by the strategy (including strategic centres and regeneration corridors) or any future changes to the identified areas. The consultation also asks about identifying areas outside the four councils (e.g. land in South Staffs) for housing and employment which might also affect pubs there.
Our hope would be that pubs could be recognized as an important community facility within the strategy or associated policies so that any proposed development for the land they sit on is weighed up against the impact of losing an important community facility (e.g. so that a "need for housing" identified in the strategy doesn't automatically trump the need for a community to retain its pub).
Whilst I am commenting on behalf of Wolverhampton CAMRA, CAMRA has branches in Walsall and Dudley that would hold similar views on the importance of pubs to their local communities and we would be most happy to be contacted for further discussion on this subject if desired.
Rep made against: Key Issue One, para 3.4, p 17
3.4 mentions "heritage assets" some pubs could be interpreted as being heritage assets - particular those of note as being a landmark building or serving a community for a very long time
(Wolverhampton has a number of 18th century pubs).
Rep made against: Question 13b - What infrastructure do you think would be needed for different sizes of SUEs? If a SUE is large enough and far enough away from existing facilities (reasonable walking distance) then a pub would be an important social infrastructure facility that should be considered. A good
local pub would be the heart of its community and promote social inclusion and well-being. The lack of such a facility would contribute the SUE being a mere dormitory.
Question 13d - Do you think that the Core Strategy should set out detailed guidance for the development of SUEs (e.g. type and tenure of housing, specific infrastructure required), rather than details
Answer = Yes. I fear without specific guidance in the strategy a developer would seek the profitability of squeezing as many houses as possible into an area with little regard to creating a community people would want to live in.
Rep made against: Question 23 - Do you have evidence of social infrastructure that is no longer needed and where the site could be reallocated for alternative uses? Yes/No; If yes, please provide details.
If anyone has identified a pub or pubs in this section (pub plots can be very appealing to housing developers) please consult with the local community or interested bodies such as CAMRA before accepting it as a fact.
Rep made against: Question 25 - Will there be any new social infrastructure requirements necessary to serve large new housing developments? Yes/No; If yes, please explain the type and scale of any new social infrastructure.
Answer = yes. Similar to my response to 13d. For a large housing development a pub would be an important social infrastructure facility that should be considered. A good local pub would be the heart of its community and promote social inclusion and wellbeing. The lack of such a facility nearby (reasonable walking distance) would contribute the development being a mere dormitory.
Rep made against: Policy HOU5 - Education and Health Care Facilities, Question 47 - Do you think that Policy HOU5 should be expanded to cover other types of built social infrastructure and to set out standards for built social infrastructure to serve major housing development
Answer = yes. Pubs should be considered built social infrastructure and would certainly count as "community meeting places." Community pubs promote social inclusion, help combat social isolation (the Local Government Association has cited loneliness as a major public health issue) and research from Oxford University, "Friends on Tap," has shown that people with a "local" pub are happier, are
more satisfied with their life and have a wider network of friends. In short, a housing development without social infrastructure like pubs is a dormitory, not a community.
Link to cited report: http://www.camra.org.uk/documents/10180/36197/Friends+on+Tap/2c68585be47d-42ca-bda6-5d6b3e4c0110
Rep made against: Policy HOU5 - Education and Health Care Facilities, Question 48 - Do you agree that the requirement in HOU5, to demonstrate there is adequate alternative provision to meet the needs of the community served by a facility which is to be lost, should be r
Answer = yes. If social infrastructure, including pubs, is included there should be a requirement that adequate alternative provision is demonstrated. The Black Country being predominately urban doesn't mean a community or locality is not affected in the same way as the loss of the "last pub in the village" - there is reference elsewhere to facilities of being within "easy walking distance"
particularly for less mobile community members - if the last pub in a locality went it could contribute to social isolation of those not able to travel wider. Loss of pubs could be counter to social inclusion and sustainable communities.
Rep made against: Policy EMP6 - Cultural Facilities and the Visitor Economy, Question 56 - Do you agree with the proposal to update Policy EMP6 in line with current priorities? Yes/No;
If no, please explain why
The Black Country is home to a number of pubs on CAMRA's national inventory heritage list which might fit in with the heritage themes of the list of attractions
Black Country Core Strategy Issue and Option Report
Question 47 - Do you think that Policy HOU5 should be expanded to cover other types of built social infrastructure and to set out standards for built social infrastructure to serve major housing devel
Respondent: Wolverhampton Campaign for Real Ale (CAMRA)
Representation Summary:
Pubs should be considered built social infrastructure and would certainly count as
"community meeting places." Community pubs promote social inclusion, help combat social isolation (the Local Government Association has cited loneliness as a major public health issue) and research from Oxford University, "Friends on Tap," has shown that people with a "local" pub are happier, are more satisfied with their life and have a wider network of friends. In short, a housing development without social infrastructure like pubs is a dormitory, not a community. Link to cited report: http://www.camra.org.uk/documents/10180/36197/Friends+on+Tap/2c68585be47d-42ca-bda6-5d6b3e4c0110
Full text:
Apologies for not using the online process but I wanted to include a "covering letter" of sorts explaining my organisation and context of my comments. I would appreciate confirmation of receipt of the form.
My comments are on behalf of Wolverhampton branch of the Campaign for Real Ale (CAMRA - 1230 members approx. across the Wolverhampton area) so concern how public houses may be affected by the Black Country Core Strategy and whether they can be explicitly defined as built social infrastructure or a community facility. I've tried to associate my comments to specific questions in the consultation (in particular changes to policy HOU5 would seem the most likely avenue to achieve this) but would appreciate it if the status of pubs could also be considered more generally in case I have not put my comments in the best places.
I appreciate a large thrust of the consultation is around the status of Green Belt and options regarding using that for development. I was informed that 2 of the pubs in Tettenhall, Wolverhampton are situated in the green belt but would suspect that across the whole of the Black Country there would be many more that are affected by areas covered by the strategy (including strategic centres and regeneration corridors) or any future changes to the identified areas. The consultation also asks about identifying areas outside the four councils (e.g. land in South Staffs) for housing and employment which might also affect pubs there.
Our hope would be that pubs could be recognized as an important community facility within the strategy or associated policies so that any proposed development for the land they sit on is weighed up against the impact of losing an important community facility (e.g. so that a "need for housing" identified in the strategy doesn't automatically trump the need for a community to retain its pub).
Whilst I am commenting on behalf of Wolverhampton CAMRA, CAMRA has branches in Walsall and Dudley that would hold similar views on the importance of pubs to their local communities and we would be most happy to be contacted for further discussion on this subject if desired.
Rep made against: Key Issue One, para 3.4, p 17
3.4 mentions "heritage assets" some pubs could be interpreted as being heritage assets - particular those of note as being a landmark building or serving a community for a very long time
(Wolverhampton has a number of 18th century pubs).
Rep made against: Question 13b - What infrastructure do you think would be needed for different sizes of SUEs? If a SUE is large enough and far enough away from existing facilities (reasonable walking distance) then a pub would be an important social infrastructure facility that should be considered. A good
local pub would be the heart of its community and promote social inclusion and well-being. The lack of such a facility would contribute the SUE being a mere dormitory.
Question 13d - Do you think that the Core Strategy should set out detailed guidance for the development of SUEs (e.g. type and tenure of housing, specific infrastructure required), rather than details
Answer = Yes. I fear without specific guidance in the strategy a developer would seek the profitability of squeezing as many houses as possible into an area with little regard to creating a community people would want to live in.
Rep made against: Question 23 - Do you have evidence of social infrastructure that is no longer needed and where the site could be reallocated for alternative uses? Yes/No; If yes, please provide details.
If anyone has identified a pub or pubs in this section (pub plots can be very appealing to housing developers) please consult with the local community or interested bodies such as CAMRA before accepting it as a fact.
Rep made against: Question 25 - Will there be any new social infrastructure requirements necessary to serve large new housing developments? Yes/No; If yes, please explain the type and scale of any new social infrastructure.
Answer = yes. Similar to my response to 13d. For a large housing development a pub would be an important social infrastructure facility that should be considered. A good local pub would be the heart of its community and promote social inclusion and wellbeing. The lack of such a facility nearby (reasonable walking distance) would contribute the development being a mere dormitory.
Rep made against: Policy HOU5 - Education and Health Care Facilities, Question 47 - Do you think that Policy HOU5 should be expanded to cover other types of built social infrastructure and to set out standards for built social infrastructure to serve major housing development
Answer = yes. Pubs should be considered built social infrastructure and would certainly count as "community meeting places." Community pubs promote social inclusion, help combat social isolation (the Local Government Association has cited loneliness as a major public health issue) and research from Oxford University, "Friends on Tap," has shown that people with a "local" pub are happier, are
more satisfied with their life and have a wider network of friends. In short, a housing development without social infrastructure like pubs is a dormitory, not a community.
Link to cited report: http://www.camra.org.uk/documents/10180/36197/Friends+on+Tap/2c68585be47d-42ca-bda6-5d6b3e4c0110
Rep made against: Policy HOU5 - Education and Health Care Facilities, Question 48 - Do you agree that the requirement in HOU5, to demonstrate there is adequate alternative provision to meet the needs of the community served by a facility which is to be lost, should be r
Answer = yes. If social infrastructure, including pubs, is included there should be a requirement that adequate alternative provision is demonstrated. The Black Country being predominately urban doesn't mean a community or locality is not affected in the same way as the loss of the "last pub in the village" - there is reference elsewhere to facilities of being within "easy walking distance"
particularly for less mobile community members - if the last pub in a locality went it could contribute to social isolation of those not able to travel wider. Loss of pubs could be counter to social inclusion and sustainable communities.
Rep made against: Policy EMP6 - Cultural Facilities and the Visitor Economy, Question 56 - Do you agree with the proposal to update Policy EMP6 in line with current priorities? Yes/No;
If no, please explain why
The Black Country is home to a number of pubs on CAMRA's national inventory heritage list which might fit in with the heritage themes of the list of attractions
Black Country Core Strategy Issue and Option Report
Question 48 - Do you agree that the requirement in HOU5, to demonstrate there is adequate alternative provision to meet the needs of the community served by a facility which is to be lost, should be r
Respondent: Wolverhampton Campaign for Real Ale (CAMRA)
Representation Summary:
If social infrastructure, including pubs, is included there should be a requirement that adequate alternative provision is demonstrated. The Black Country being predominately urban doesn't mean a community or locality is not affected in the same way as the loss of the "last pub in the village" - there is reference elsewhere to facilities of being within "easy walking distance" particularly for less mobile community members - if the last pub in a locality went it could contribute
to social isolation of those not able to travel wider. Loss of pubs could be counter to social inclusion and sustainable communities.
Full text:
Apologies for not using the online process but I wanted to include a "covering letter" of sorts explaining my organisation and context of my comments. I would appreciate confirmation of receipt of the form.
My comments are on behalf of Wolverhampton branch of the Campaign for Real Ale (CAMRA - 1230 members approx. across the Wolverhampton area) so concern how public houses may be affected by the Black Country Core Strategy and whether they can be explicitly defined as built social infrastructure or a community facility. I've tried to associate my comments to specific questions in the consultation (in particular changes to policy HOU5 would seem the most likely avenue to achieve this) but would appreciate it if the status of pubs could also be considered more generally in case I have not put my comments in the best places.
I appreciate a large thrust of the consultation is around the status of Green Belt and options regarding using that for development. I was informed that 2 of the pubs in Tettenhall, Wolverhampton are situated in the green belt but would suspect that across the whole of the Black Country there would be many more that are affected by areas covered by the strategy (including strategic centres and regeneration corridors) or any future changes to the identified areas. The consultation also asks about identifying areas outside the four councils (e.g. land in South Staffs) for housing and employment which might also affect pubs there.
Our hope would be that pubs could be recognized as an important community facility within the strategy or associated policies so that any proposed development for the land they sit on is weighed up against the impact of losing an important community facility (e.g. so that a "need for housing" identified in the strategy doesn't automatically trump the need for a community to retain its pub).
Whilst I am commenting on behalf of Wolverhampton CAMRA, CAMRA has branches in Walsall and Dudley that would hold similar views on the importance of pubs to their local communities and we would be most happy to be contacted for further discussion on this subject if desired.
Rep made against: Key Issue One, para 3.4, p 17
3.4 mentions "heritage assets" some pubs could be interpreted as being heritage assets - particular those of note as being a landmark building or serving a community for a very long time
(Wolverhampton has a number of 18th century pubs).
Rep made against: Question 13b - What infrastructure do you think would be needed for different sizes of SUEs? If a SUE is large enough and far enough away from existing facilities (reasonable walking distance) then a pub would be an important social infrastructure facility that should be considered. A good
local pub would be the heart of its community and promote social inclusion and well-being. The lack of such a facility would contribute the SUE being a mere dormitory.
Question 13d - Do you think that the Core Strategy should set out detailed guidance for the development of SUEs (e.g. type and tenure of housing, specific infrastructure required), rather than details
Answer = Yes. I fear without specific guidance in the strategy a developer would seek the profitability of squeezing as many houses as possible into an area with little regard to creating a community people would want to live in.
Rep made against: Question 23 - Do you have evidence of social infrastructure that is no longer needed and where the site could be reallocated for alternative uses? Yes/No; If yes, please provide details.
If anyone has identified a pub or pubs in this section (pub plots can be very appealing to housing developers) please consult with the local community or interested bodies such as CAMRA before accepting it as a fact.
Rep made against: Question 25 - Will there be any new social infrastructure requirements necessary to serve large new housing developments? Yes/No; If yes, please explain the type and scale of any new social infrastructure.
Answer = yes. Similar to my response to 13d. For a large housing development a pub would be an important social infrastructure facility that should be considered. A good local pub would be the heart of its community and promote social inclusion and wellbeing. The lack of such a facility nearby (reasonable walking distance) would contribute the development being a mere dormitory.
Rep made against: Policy HOU5 - Education and Health Care Facilities, Question 47 - Do you think that Policy HOU5 should be expanded to cover other types of built social infrastructure and to set out standards for built social infrastructure to serve major housing development
Answer = yes. Pubs should be considered built social infrastructure and would certainly count as "community meeting places." Community pubs promote social inclusion, help combat social isolation (the Local Government Association has cited loneliness as a major public health issue) and research from Oxford University, "Friends on Tap," has shown that people with a "local" pub are happier, are
more satisfied with their life and have a wider network of friends. In short, a housing development without social infrastructure like pubs is a dormitory, not a community.
Link to cited report: http://www.camra.org.uk/documents/10180/36197/Friends+on+Tap/2c68585be47d-42ca-bda6-5d6b3e4c0110
Rep made against: Policy HOU5 - Education and Health Care Facilities, Question 48 - Do you agree that the requirement in HOU5, to demonstrate there is adequate alternative provision to meet the needs of the community served by a facility which is to be lost, should be r
Answer = yes. If social infrastructure, including pubs, is included there should be a requirement that adequate alternative provision is demonstrated. The Black Country being predominately urban doesn't mean a community or locality is not affected in the same way as the loss of the "last pub in the village" - there is reference elsewhere to facilities of being within "easy walking distance"
particularly for less mobile community members - if the last pub in a locality went it could contribute to social isolation of those not able to travel wider. Loss of pubs could be counter to social inclusion and sustainable communities.
Rep made against: Policy EMP6 - Cultural Facilities and the Visitor Economy, Question 56 - Do you agree with the proposal to update Policy EMP6 in line with current priorities? Yes/No;
If no, please explain why
The Black Country is home to a number of pubs on CAMRA's national inventory heritage list which might fit in with the heritage themes of the list of attractions
Black Country Core Strategy Issue and Option Report
Question 56 - Do you agree with the proposal to update Policy EMP6 in line with current priorities? Yes/No; If no, please explain why
Respondent: Wolverhampton Campaign for Real Ale (CAMRA)
Representation Summary:
The Black Country is home to a number of pubs on CAMRA's national inventory heritage list which might fit in with the heritage themes of the list of attractions
Full text:
Apologies for not using the online process but I wanted to include a "covering letter" of sorts explaining my organisation and context of my comments. I would appreciate confirmation of receipt of the form.
My comments are on behalf of Wolverhampton branch of the Campaign for Real Ale (CAMRA - 1230 members approx. across the Wolverhampton area) so concern how public houses may be affected by the Black Country Core Strategy and whether they can be explicitly defined as built social infrastructure or a community facility. I've tried to associate my comments to specific questions in the consultation (in particular changes to policy HOU5 would seem the most likely avenue to achieve this) but would appreciate it if the status of pubs could also be considered more generally in case I have not put my comments in the best places.
I appreciate a large thrust of the consultation is around the status of Green Belt and options regarding using that for development. I was informed that 2 of the pubs in Tettenhall, Wolverhampton are situated in the green belt but would suspect that across the whole of the Black Country there would be many more that are affected by areas covered by the strategy (including strategic centres and regeneration corridors) or any future changes to the identified areas. The consultation also asks about identifying areas outside the four councils (e.g. land in South Staffs) for housing and employment which might also affect pubs there.
Our hope would be that pubs could be recognized as an important community facility within the strategy or associated policies so that any proposed development for the land they sit on is weighed up against the impact of losing an important community facility (e.g. so that a "need for housing" identified in the strategy doesn't automatically trump the need for a community to retain its pub).
Whilst I am commenting on behalf of Wolverhampton CAMRA, CAMRA has branches in Walsall and Dudley that would hold similar views on the importance of pubs to their local communities and we would be most happy to be contacted for further discussion on this subject if desired.
Rep made against: Key Issue One, para 3.4, p 17
3.4 mentions "heritage assets" some pubs could be interpreted as being heritage assets - particular those of note as being a landmark building or serving a community for a very long time
(Wolverhampton has a number of 18th century pubs).
Rep made against: Question 13b - What infrastructure do you think would be needed for different sizes of SUEs? If a SUE is large enough and far enough away from existing facilities (reasonable walking distance) then a pub would be an important social infrastructure facility that should be considered. A good
local pub would be the heart of its community and promote social inclusion and well-being. The lack of such a facility would contribute the SUE being a mere dormitory.
Question 13d - Do you think that the Core Strategy should set out detailed guidance for the development of SUEs (e.g. type and tenure of housing, specific infrastructure required), rather than details
Answer = Yes. I fear without specific guidance in the strategy a developer would seek the profitability of squeezing as many houses as possible into an area with little regard to creating a community people would want to live in.
Rep made against: Question 23 - Do you have evidence of social infrastructure that is no longer needed and where the site could be reallocated for alternative uses? Yes/No; If yes, please provide details.
If anyone has identified a pub or pubs in this section (pub plots can be very appealing to housing developers) please consult with the local community or interested bodies such as CAMRA before accepting it as a fact.
Rep made against: Question 25 - Will there be any new social infrastructure requirements necessary to serve large new housing developments? Yes/No; If yes, please explain the type and scale of any new social infrastructure.
Answer = yes. Similar to my response to 13d. For a large housing development a pub would be an important social infrastructure facility that should be considered. A good local pub would be the heart of its community and promote social inclusion and wellbeing. The lack of such a facility nearby (reasonable walking distance) would contribute the development being a mere dormitory.
Rep made against: Policy HOU5 - Education and Health Care Facilities, Question 47 - Do you think that Policy HOU5 should be expanded to cover other types of built social infrastructure and to set out standards for built social infrastructure to serve major housing development
Answer = yes. Pubs should be considered built social infrastructure and would certainly count as "community meeting places." Community pubs promote social inclusion, help combat social isolation (the Local Government Association has cited loneliness as a major public health issue) and research from Oxford University, "Friends on Tap," has shown that people with a "local" pub are happier, are
more satisfied with their life and have a wider network of friends. In short, a housing development without social infrastructure like pubs is a dormitory, not a community.
Link to cited report: http://www.camra.org.uk/documents/10180/36197/Friends+on+Tap/2c68585be47d-42ca-bda6-5d6b3e4c0110
Rep made against: Policy HOU5 - Education and Health Care Facilities, Question 48 - Do you agree that the requirement in HOU5, to demonstrate there is adequate alternative provision to meet the needs of the community served by a facility which is to be lost, should be r
Answer = yes. If social infrastructure, including pubs, is included there should be a requirement that adequate alternative provision is demonstrated. The Black Country being predominately urban doesn't mean a community or locality is not affected in the same way as the loss of the "last pub in the village" - there is reference elsewhere to facilities of being within "easy walking distance"
particularly for less mobile community members - if the last pub in a locality went it could contribute to social isolation of those not able to travel wider. Loss of pubs could be counter to social inclusion and sustainable communities.
Rep made against: Policy EMP6 - Cultural Facilities and the Visitor Economy, Question 56 - Do you agree with the proposal to update Policy EMP6 in line with current priorities? Yes/No;
If no, please explain why
The Black Country is home to a number of pubs on CAMRA's national inventory heritage list which might fit in with the heritage themes of the list of attractions
Need help completing this? Click
here for our simple user guide.
