Object

Representation ID: 1391

Received: 09/12/2024

Respondent: Clowes Development LTD

Agent: Savills

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

We also consider a functional relationship to exist in the form of the Dudley Travel to Work Area (TTWA). Clowes Development’s site at Lawnswood Road, South Staffordshire is located within the Dudley Travel to Work area, along with areas of Dudley including Stourbridge, Kingswinford and Brierley Hill. TTWAs have been developed by ONS to provide an approximate self-contained labour market areas. These are areas where most people both live and work. They are based on statistical analysis rather than administrative boundaries. We consider that such measures should be used when determining the weight given to functional relationships with other Local Authorities.

Object

Representation ID: 1414

Received: 29/11/2024

Respondent: William Davis Homes

Agent: Define Planning and Design Ltd

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

As has been extensively raised in previous representations, there are significant, fundamental concerns with the approach the Council are taking to not only identifying but meeting its housing needs. It is a real prospect that the Inspectors will be unable to find the Plan sound without it being ‘fixed’ during examination. Given the complexities likely to need consideration such as the unmet need not only in DMBC but the wider West Midlands and Birmingham Housing Market Areas (HMA), review of Green Belt sites and potential impact of changes to the NPPF, the timetable will slip significantly, even if submission is made on time.

Plan period is too short and doesn't allow time for slippage. Plan has been rushed to avoid transitional arrangement of proposed NPPF.

However, as will be further set out in representations to Sections 5 and 8 of the PLP, DMBC’s decisions on housing need, spatial growth options and to not assess suitable sites in the Green Belt (including William Davis Homes’ site ‘Land at Bromwich Lane’) will not only lead to the Plan being found unsound at examination but also could compromise the ability to meet the other priorities of the Plan and the vision for the Borough.

only allocating land in the urban area and brownfield sites for development, it will also limit the benefits from development that can be achieved. Council will fail against its own vision to deliver “a wide range of housing that will meet people’s needs through their various life stages and is affordable to live in (all tenures)”. The high density nature of development required on the sites allocated, especially those in the low value areas where affordable housing is also reduced to 10%, will inevitably lead only to the provision of flats.

The Plan has not been prepared positively; and it is not consistent with national policy.

Comment

Representation ID: 1417

Received: 29/11/2024

Respondent: Network Rail

Agent: CBRE Limited

Chapter 3 - Context of the Local Plan (pp41 to 58)

Table 3.2 (pp41 to 48) sets out the area’s issues and challenges concerned with ‘Homes and Communities’. Table 3.3 (pp49 to 58) summarises the area’s economic issues. These tables include sections on the following matters, which are of most relevance / potential relevance to Network Rail and the operation of the railway:

• Ensuring access to local services and supporting infrastructure (Table 3.2, p44);
• Infrastructure needed to support new growth (Table 3.2, p46);
• Need for improved transport links to connect people and businesses (Table 3.2, pp47 to 48); and
• Need for improved transport links to connect people and businesses (Table 3.3, p52).

The final column of Tables 3.2. and 3.3 set out the evidence base documents that have been relied upon as part of the draft Local Plan in connection with each of the issues identified above.

There are several evidence base documents identified relating to various aspects of transport, including those prepared by Transport for West Midlands (“TfWM”). Evidence is also noted in the Local Plan as being drawn from West Midlands Rail Executive (“WMRE”) in specific regard to Policy DLP67 “The Transport Network” (pp349 to 356).

In many cases, Network Rail’s views are aligned with other transport bodies from a strategic point of view. However, the Plan should also specifically identify and consider Network Rail’s position as a statutory undertaker. The West Midlands Strategic Advice (October 2022) represents Network Rail’s long-term strategic view of how to enhance the West Midlands rail network and it is worth noting that more localised studies are also being undertaken by Network Rail, working with others in the rail industry to develop long term service proposals as well as infrastructure priorities in those studies.

To ensure the Plan is sound, including through being justified based on proportionate evidence, Network Rail requests that reference to the West Midlands Strategic Advice 2022 and emerging relevant local studies is made, with regards to the above-mentioned transport- related issues and challenges in Tables 3.2 and 3.3, and elsewhere in the Plan as appropriate.

Object

Representation ID: 1425

Received: 29/11/2024

Respondent: William Davis Homes

Agent: Define Planning and Design Ltd

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

GREEN BELT ASSESSMENT - EVIDENCE

Inappropriate scale from which to assess the site and its contribution to the purposes of the Green Belt.

Inspectors found in an appeal in St Albans District (Appeal Ref. 3265926) that as a result of the inclusion of a more discrete Green Belt site within a much larger Green Belt assessment parcel that included more significant Green Belt parcels, that the characteristics of the wider assessment parcels “bear little or no relationship to the appeal site.”

It is crucial that DMBC undertake its own Green Belt Review as well as assessing Green Belt sites for allocation to ensure a sound Plan is produced. Without doing so the Plan fails to be positively prepared to meet the area’s needs nor justified.

Object

Representation ID: 1427

Received: 29/11/2024

Respondent: Birmingham and Black Country Wildlife Trust

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

1. Introduction
What is a Local Plan review and why are we doing a review?


In accordance with the National Policy Framework and Guidance, all public authorities have a duty to conserve and enhance biodiversity and must “have regard” to relevant local nature recovery strategies in the process. Guidance on complying with the biodiversity duty includes who public authorities are and what they should do. Here, we would strongly suggest ensuring a recognition of the value of brownfield sites for nature recovery. We suggest that the DLP have a mechanism of assessment put in place to check individual sites regarding their nature conservation value, and employing a local site assessment, as appropriate.

Object

Representation ID: 1428

Received: 29/11/2024

Respondent: Birmingham and Black Country Wildlife Trust

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

1. Introduction
What is a Local Plan review and why are we doing a review?


In order to be compliant with the Revised National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF 2023) and its associated Planning Practice Guidance (PPGs), all plans should include and address “conservation and enhancement of the natural and built environment”. Similarly, the Environment Act 2021 includes a biodiversity duty in that “Public authorities who operate in England must consider what they can do to conserve and enhance biodiversity in England.” Thus, this section should include not only protection, but also enhancing the natural environment toward legal compliance to protect and enhance nature, biodiversity, and contribute to nature’s recovery.

Object

Representation ID: 1429

Received: 29/11/2024

Respondent: Birmingham and Black Country Wildlife Trust

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

1. Introduction
What is a Local Plan review and why are we doing a review?


Green and blue infrastructure, climate change resilience, and equitable access to greenspaces should be key focuses of the overall development in the urban area, in line with the LNRS, the Revised NPPF (December 2023) (e.g., paragraph 35, “Sustainability soundness test for Local Plan Reviews”), and the adopted Black Country Core Strategy (2011) Policy CSP3 ‘Environmental Infrastructure’. In accordance with the National Policy Framework and Guidance, all public authorities have a duty to conserve and enhance biodiversity and must “have regard” to relevant local nature recovery strategies in the process. Protecting and enhancing the natural environment, in line with the Local Nature Recovery Strategy Priorities will aid Dudley Council in achieving the aims of the Dudley Climate Change Action Plan, the Dudley Health and Wellbeing Strategy 2023-2028, the 2023 Natural England Green Infrastructure Framework, and the West Midlands Local Transport Plan (LTP) aims.

Object

Representation ID: 1430

Received: 29/11/2024

Respondent: Birmingham and Black Country Wildlife Trust

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

2. Profile of the borough
Environment


In accordance with the National Policy Framework and Guidance, all public authorities have a duty to conserve and enhance biodiversity and must “have regard” to relevant local nature recovery strategies in the process. Guidance on complying with the biodiversity duty includes who public authorities are and what they should do. Here, we would strongly suggest including Local Wildlife Sites. These are integral components of Areas of Particular Importance for Biodiversity as identified in the Local Nature Recovery Strategy, as well accessible green space.

Object

Representation ID: 1431

Received: 29/11/2024

Respondent: Birmingham and Black Country Wildlife Trust

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Table 3.2 Homes and Communities – Issues and Challenges:
Location of development and distribution of growth

Comment: All public authorities have a duty to conserve and enhance biodiversity and must “have regard” to relevant local nature recovery strategies in the process. Guidance on complying with the biodiversity duty includes who public authorities are and what they should do. Here, it is necessary to ensure there’s a recognition of the value of brownfield sites for nature recovery. We suggest that the DLP have a mechanism of assessment put in place to check individual sites regarding their nature conservation value, namely through a local site assessment, as appropriate.

Object

Representation ID: 1432

Received: 29/11/2024

Respondent: Birmingham and Black Country Wildlife Trust

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Table 3.4 The Natural and Built Environment – Issues

OBJECT – SOUNDNESS

Comment: Evidence list includes both “Black Country Local Nature Recovery Strategy 2022” and “Black Country Local Nature Network Recovery Strategy 2022”. Are these each referring to the “Black Country Local Nature Recovery map and strategy: an emerging approach”? Please amend these evidence references.

Object

Representation ID: 1433

Received: 10/12/2024

Respondent: Police Crime Commissioner for West Midlands (PCCWM)

Agent: Tyler Parkes

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Detailed crime statistics that could be included in the plan.

Recent announcements by the new Government suggest an increase of 143% in the level of housing provision (rising from 657 dwellings per annum to 1,594 dwellings per annum). A consequential increase in population will inevitably result an unfortunate increase in crime levels. Recent statistics show levels of offending in Dudley Borough 12% higher than the national rate for England as a whole.

The PCCWM requests that in accordance with national planning policy, the theme of community safety and crime prevention is given prominence in the Dudley Local Plan, with appropriate references being included as set out in the following detailed comments.

Support

Representation ID: 1434

Received: 10/12/2024

Respondent: Police Crime Commissioner for West Midlands (PCCWM)

Agent: Tyler Parkes

PARAGRAPH 1.4

Support 5th bullet point responding to comments at Reg 18.

Comment

Representation ID: 1435

Received: 10/12/2024

Respondent: Police Crime Commissioner for West Midlands (PCCWM)

Agent: Tyler Parkes

Chapter 3

In relation to Paragraph 3.2, the PCCWM made the following representation to the Regulation 18 consultation:
“ could usefully have an additional bullet making reference to healthy, secure and safe
living environments. The PCCWM requests this is added as it would demonstrate
commitment to the importance of these matters to the built environment. [Objection]”

The Consultation Statement acknowledges this representation and suggests an amendment has been made to the plan adding a new bullet point to (an incorrectly numbered paragraph 1.4). This appears to be a drafting error and the PCCWM requests this should be re-examined. Pending this re-examination the PCCWM objects to this omission and requests the addition of a further bullet point to paragraph 3.2 making reference to, “healthy, secure and safe living environments”.

Object

Representation ID: 1436

Received: 10/12/2024

Respondent: Police Crime Commissioner for West Midlands (PCCWM)

Agent: Tyler Parkes

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

SUSTAINABILITY APPRAISAL

It is noted that paragraph 3.39 states, “A Sustainability Appraisal (SA) is a statutory requirement, which ensures that the environmental, social and economic effects of a plan ..” However, it is noted that the SA’s objectives are materially different to the objectives and strategic priorities of the Local Plan and appear to focus on the environmental arm of sustainable development. If this interpretation is correct, then it implies that social and economic matters (including those of the PCCWM and those of others) receive lesser priority in the assessment process because of its focus on environmental considerations.

Table 3.2 - various entries in this table that relate to design quality and infrastructure do tend to gloss over the importance of providing a secure and safe living environment. Additionally, there is no reference to policing, yet all other public services and infrastructure providers do appear to have been picked up.

Suggested edits (see reps):
Page 43 – The PCCWM objects to the omission of necessary text. Amend the issue to read, “Delivering homes of a high-quality, safe and secure design that reflect the
character and distinctiveness of the borough” and the proposed policy to, ‘Design is an overarching concept which interacts directly or indirectly with all other aspects of the plan. Strategic design policies in the DLP aim to form the foundations on which to build future detail and ensure that development is located and designed to create safe and secure places for all residents in future”.

• Page 44 – The PCCWM objects and requests amendments. Under the issues, “Ensuring access to local services and supporting infrastructure” and “Balancing growth across communities by ensuring that local services and facilities continue to thrive”, under column 3 in both entries, amend second bullet to:
‘• Liaison with health, West Midlands Police and education providers’.

• Page 45 – The PCCWM objects and requests amendments. In relation to the issue,
“Addressing the health and wellbeing of residents and inequalities across the borough”, under the proposed policy approach, ‘The Plan recognises the important role that spatial planning has in the creation of healthy, safe, secure and inclusive communities and that the places that we live in have a fundamental impact on health quality of life. Many of the policies of the Plan will have an impact on these matters, so it is important that community needs are supported through the provision of appropriate physical and social infrastructure and the built and natural environment, including the public realm, allows for and supports healthy living choices for residents everyone.’ The third column should add reference to ‘Liaison with West Midlands Police’.

• Page 46 – The PCCWM objects and requests amendments. Under the issue “Infrastructure needed to support new growth”, under column 3, amend second bullet to: ‘• Liaison with health, West Midlands Police and education providers’.

Object

Representation ID: 1437

Received: 10/12/2024

Respondent: Police Crime Commissioner for West Midlands (PCCWM)

Agent: Tyler Parkes

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

See rep for changes which are bold and underlined.

The PCCWM objects to the omission of text relating to safety and security within the vision statement, and specifically seeks the following amendments:

• Amend 4th bullet to read, “• sustainable urban growth delivering distinctive, safe and secure places - meeting the needs of its communities and businesses.” (Suggested changes in bold and underlined).
• Amend 9th bullet to read, “• a high quality and beautiful natural, built and historic environment and safe and secure public realm that respects and enhances local character and distinctiveness, including valued historic buildings and areas, and continues to be regarded as a tourist destination, and UNESCO Global Geopark with enhanced tourism facilities”. (Suggested changes in bold and underlined).

Objective 3: Enhancing Places and Communities
The PCCWM objects to the lack of reference to the need to plan for safe and secure places. It is requested that Strategic Priority 5 be amended to read: Creating safe and secure well designed and beautiful places, promoting the health and social wellbeing of communities by:’ and also, add additional bullet on the following lines, “Ensure that the principles of Secured by Design are integral to new development and improvements to the public realm”. (Suggested changes in bold and underlined).

Comment

Representation ID: 1440

Received: 29/11/2024

Respondent: Harworth Group

Agent: Claremont Planning Consultancy

**Summary:**

1. **National Planning Policy Context:**
- The Draft Plan comes at a time of significant changes in national planning policy, including reforms introduced by the 2023 Levelling Up and Regeneration Act and proposals from the Labour Government post-2024 General Election. These reforms could impact local housing calculations and require Green Belt reviews if housing or commercial needs aren’t met.
- The proposed changes could increase Dudley's housing need to nearly 1,600 dwellings annually, compared to the current 657. While Dudley may avoid immediate changes due to transitional arrangements, the Draft Plan should acknowledge these future shifts and the challenge they present for local planning.

2. **Timetable for Plan Submission:**
- The draft Plan's timeline for submission in Spring/Summer 2025, examination by mid-2025, and adoption in early 2026 is considered optimistic. Given the average duration of plan examinations (around 1 to 1.5 years), delays are likely. The Plan should account for potential delays to ensure the plan period extends at least 15 years post-adoption, as required by national guidelines.

3. **Regional Planning Policy Context:**
- The Draft Plan does not adequately address planning at the regional level, particularly the Black Country, where there is uncertainty about housing delivery. The Duty to Cooperate Statement indicates limited progress in coordinating with other authorities.
- The Plan also overlooks the needs of lower-quality employment land, which may need to be relocated to accommodate housing. The Council should ensure realistic expectations for employment land availability.
- The Plan fails to meet the requirements of the Duty to Cooperate, which must be addressed before the Plan can be submitted for examination. Effective joint working is essential for the Plan to be considered sound.

Comment

Representation ID: 1441

Received: 29/11/2024

Respondent: Harworth Group

Agent: Claremont Planning Consultancy

The Draft Plan outlines a vision with seven aspirations for the Borough’s future, which are generally supported. However, balancing all of these aspirations may be difficult, especially when they conflict. For example, achieving both affordable housing and a green network, alongside a high-quality, affordable transport system, will be challenging.

Additionally, the vision should explicitly highlight the need for sufficient new homes to meet local demand, making this a central focus of the emerging Local Plan.

A key concern is the proposed plan period ending in 2041. Given the likelihood of delays during preparation or examination, the Plan might not meet the required 15-year post-adoption period, as outlined by national policy. To address this, the Council should extend the plan period by at least two years to ensure the Plan complies with national guidelines and can be considered sound.

Object

Representation ID: 1465

Received: 21/11/2024

Respondent: Nurton Developments Ltd

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Here's a summary of the key points from the document "Representations of Nurton Developments re the EDNA":

### Introduction
- **Nurton Developments Ltd (NDL)**: A Birmingham-based developer active in the West Midlands, promoting industrial and warehouse premises.
- **Key Projects**: Branston Locks (mixed-use development) and Hilton Park (strategic employment site).

### Main Concerns
- **Accuracy of Employment Land Needs Assessment (EDNA)**: NDL emphasizes the need for accurate, realistic, and consistent data on employment land needs and supply in the Black Country.

### Critique of EDNA 2022
- **Underestimation of Employment Land Need**: NDL argues that the need for employment land has been significantly underestimated.
- **Overestimation of Deliverable Supply**: The supply of employment land has been overestimated, leading to a larger shortfall than reported.
- **Mismatch in Quality and Type of Sites**: There is a discrepancy between the types of sites needed by developers and those provided.

### EDNA 2023 Overview
- **Comparison with EDNA 2022**: The 2023 update shows similar conclusions but with some methodological changes.
- **Key Figures**:
- Need: 533 hectares
- Supply: 380 hectares
- Shortfall: 153 hectares

### NDL's Concerns with EDNA 2023
- **Methodology**: Inconsistent application of forecasting methods across different authorities.
- **Suppressed Demand**: Past completions do not reflect true demand due to constrained site supply.
- **Replacement of Future Losses**: Underestimation of future losses of employment land.
- **Flexibility and Market Churn**: No allowance for market churn or flexibility in the assessment.
- **Strategic Employment Land**: Lack of reference to the need for large strategic sites.

### Recommendations
- **Increased Need**: NDL suggests a minimum need of 672 hectares, including a margin for flexibility.
- **Realistic Supply Assessment**: The maximum realistic supply is estimated at 302 hectares.
- **Shortfall**: A minimum shortfall of 370 hectares, with potential contributions from neighboring areas still leaving a significant gap.

### Conclusion
- **Call for a Bolder Approach**: NDL advocates for a more ambitious release of employment land to support economic growth and attract investment.

Comment

Representation ID: 1471

Received: 29/11/2024

Respondent: Canal and River Trust

COMMENTS ON INTRODUCTION, PROFILE OF THE BOROUGH, CONTEXT OF THE LOCAL PLAN, VISION

Introduction: no further additions to Reg 18 observations.

Profile of the borough: Welcome addition of paragraph 2.5 - request inclusion of 'active travel' and 'well-being' within its values.

Context of the Local Plan: no further additions to Reg 18 observations.

Vision, Objectives and Priorities: reiterate previous Regulation 18 comments. In relation to ‘Delivery, Monitoring, and Implementation’ maintain Regulation 18 request for ‘opportunity to engage with the Council on an on-going basis throughout the plan period to secure the benefits to the canal network envisaged by the Plan’s suite of policies.’

Comment

Representation ID: 1509

Received: 29/11/2024

Respondent: Feoffess of Oldswinford Hospital (Foundation)

Agent: Turley

The Feoffees of Old Swinford Hospital (the Foundation) is preparing its response to the Dudley Local Plan (DLP) Regulation 19 consultation, welcoming the opportunity to contribute to the plan's development. The Foundation oversees Old Swinford Hospital, a voluntary aided school in Stourbridge founded in 1667, which is now co-educational.

### The Sites:
The Foundation owns two sites in Stourbridge, both of which it is promoting for development:
1. **Racecourse Lane** (Council ref: DUD2023-048)
2. **Worcester Lane** (Council ref: DUD2023-051)

Both sites were submitted via the March 2023 Call for Sites exercise. The Foundation plans to develop these sites for new homes while preserving and enhancing green spaces. The revenue generated will support Old Swinford Hospital School.

### Racecourse Lane:
- **Description**: Racecourse Lane includes Stourbridge Golf Course and arable farmland, surrounded by residential development. It is designated as an area of High Historic Landscape Value with nature conservation sites (SINC/SLINC).
- **Development Proposal**: The plan proposes 650-700 new homes, community infrastructure (primary school, nursery, health center), and a replacement golf course. The development will focus on enhancing biodiversity, providing public open space, and improving local infrastructure, including roads. The aim is to create a sustainable urban extension to Stourbridge, incorporating significant green infrastructure.
- **Achievability**: The Foundation owns the land outright, allowing for immediate planning applications after the adoption of the DLP. There are no significant technical constraints, and the development is expected to deliver substantial ecological and infrastructure benefits. The site can be delivered in the short-medium term.

### Worcester Lane:
- **Description**: Worcester Lane is flat agricultural land, surrounded by residential properties, a railway line, and further development. It is in the Green Belt but not constrained by ecological or heritage designations.
- **Development Proposal**: The site is proposed for 120 new homes, a robust landscape buffer, and enhanced biodiversity. The development would include public open spaces, play areas, and a recreational route, with a buffer from the railway line to mitigate noise.
- **Achievability**: The site is unconstrained, in a sustainable location, and requires minimal infrastructure. The development could be delivered early in the planning period to help meet housing needs.

### National Policy Considerations:
- **Ministerial Statement (July 2023)**: The government aims to boost housing supply, including revising housing targets and Green Belt policies.
- **National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) Consultation (July 2024)**: The revised NPPF proposes a new housing need standard method, which would significantly increase the housing requirement for Dudley. This would result in a housing shortfall if the DLP is adopted without addressing these needs.
- **Green Belt Review**: Both Racecourse Lane and Worcester Lane sites make a limited contribution to the Green Belt, particularly given their proximity to urban areas. The development of these sites is seen as justifiable under "exceptional circumstances" due to the urgent need for housing.

### Conclusion:
The Foundation expresses concerns about the draft spatial strategy in the DLP, which relies too heavily on brownfield sites to meet housing needs. It argues that both Racecourse Lane and Worcester Lane should be considered for release from the Green Belt to help meet the substantial housing shortfall. The representations call for a review of Green Belt boundaries and highlight the urgent need for additional housing in the area.

The full response is structured as follows:
1. **Section 2**: Detailed response to the draft policies, including an assessment of their soundness.
2. **Section 3**: Conclusion to the representations.

Comment

Representation ID: 1510

Received: 29/11/2024

Respondent: NHS Property Services Ltd

Evidence Base Local Plan Viability Assessment
The draft policy requirements identified in the Plan are supported by the Local Plan Viability Assessment. Having reviewed the Assessment, we note that it includes a specific allowance for S106 contributions towards health of £3,107 per home applied to typologies over 10 units. Healthcare facilities are currently experiencing significant strain. If appropriate mitigation is not secured, the growth strategy outlined in the Plan is expected to exacerbate this situation. Without prejudice to any future representations the NHS or its partners may make on specific planning applications with respect to S106 obligations or applications for CIL funding, in our view the S106 contribution allowance towards health is generally sufficient to enable suitable financial contributions to be secured for healthcare. Therefore, we consider that overall, the assessment of plan-wide viability demonstrates that policy requirements in relation to healthcare infrastructure contributions are deliverable. This would also ensure that healthcare mitigation is appropriately weighted when evaluating the potential planning obligations necessary to mitigate the full impact of a development.

Comment

Representation ID: 1512

Received: 29/11/2024

Respondent: NHS Property Services Ltd

Evidence Base Infrastructure Delivery Plan

The provision of adequate healthcare infrastructure is in our view critical to the delivery of sustainable development. A sound IDP must include sufficient detail to provide clarity around the healthcare infrastructure required to the level of growth proposed by the Plan, and to ensure that both planning obligations and the capital allocation process for the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) effectively support and result in capital funding towards delivery of the required infrastructure.
We welcome the engagement undertaken to date with the ICB and the detailed analysis of the potential impacts of new development on the proposed site allocations which has revealed specific areas of need.
To ensure that any mitigation options secured align with NHS requirements we suggest the following process (set out in red text below) for determining the appropriate form of contribution for the provision of healthcare infrastructure associated with new development is included in the IDP: Proposed addition to Section 6 of the Infrastructure Delivery Plan relating to Healthcare Infrastructure:
The requirement for a contribution towards healthcare infrastructure from new development will be determined by working with the ICB and other key stakeholders as appropriate, in accordance with the following process:
• Assessing the level and type of demand generated by the proposal.
• Working with the ICB to understand the likely impact of the proposals on healthcare infrastructure capacity in the locality.
• Identifying appropriate options to increase capacity to accommodate the additional service requirements and the associated capital costs of delivery.
• Identifying the appropriate form of developer contributions.

Object

Representation ID: 1516

Received: 29/11/2024

Respondent: Feoffess of Oldswinford Hospital (Foundation)

Agent: Turley

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

The Foundation evaluates the **soundness** of the Dudley Local Plan (DLP) based on the criteria outlined in **NPPF Paragraph 35**. The key points of the evaluation are:

1. **Positively Prepared**:
The DLP does not meet Dudley’s **objectively assessed housing needs**. There have been discussions with neighboring authorities, but no formal agreements to accommodate unmet need elsewhere. As a result, the DLP is not considered **positively prepared**.

2. **Justified**:
The site assessment methodology in the DLP is **insufficient** and does not evaluate sites outside the urban area. There is no strong justification for this approach, meaning the DLP is not **justified**.

3. **Effective**:
The DLP fails to address **unmet housing needs** within Dudley’s boundaries and defers this issue to neighboring authorities, which is not an effective approach. There is no **Statement of Common Ground (SoCG)** with neighboring authorities, so the DLP is not **effective**.

4. **Consistent with National Policy**:
The DLP does not meet local housing needs or support the Government’s goal of boosting housing supply. It does not align with national policy on **sustainable development**, meaning the DLP is not **consistent with national policy**.

The Foundation concludes that the DLP fails the soundness test, and suggests that the Council should **amend the Green Belt boundaries** to meet housing needs fully, as exceptional circumstances exist due to the plan’s **unjustified supply** and pressing housing demand.

Object

Representation ID: 1517

Received: 29/11/2024

Respondent: Feoffess of Oldswinford Hospital (Foundation)

Agent: Turley

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

The Foundation raises concerns about the **review mechanism** for the Dudley Local Plan (DLP) in light of the upcoming **new NPPF** (National Planning Policy Framework). Key points include:

1. **Lack of Clear Review Mechanism**:
The DLP does not specify how or when it will be reviewed once adopted. According to **Regulation 10A** of the Town and Country Planning Regulations 2012, local plans must be reviewed at least once every **5 years** to ensure they remain relevant and address local needs.

2. **Timing and NPPF Compliance**:
The DLP is scheduled to be submitted in **Spring/Summer 2025**, while the new NPPF is expected in **December 2024**. The draft NPPF (Paragraph 226a) requires a review of local plans if they have a **shortfall of more than 200 homes**. The DLP currently has a **shortfall of 699 homes**, meaning it would need to be **revised** to comply with the new NPPF policies.

3. **Council’s Strategy**:
The Council plans to submit the DLP by **December 2024** to benefit from Paragraph 226c of the draft NPPF, which allows plans submitted within one month of the new NPPF’s publication to avoid applying the updated policies. However, this would trigger a need for a **new plan** to address the housing shortfall if the plan falls more than 200 homes short of the **local housing need (LHN)**, as stated in **Paragraph 227** of the draft NPPF.

In summary, the Foundation stresses the importance of incorporating a clear review mechanism in the DLP to ensure it remains compliant with national policy and effectively addresses Dudley’s housing needs.

Comment

Representation ID: 1526

Received: 29/11/2024

Respondent: Canal and River Trust

COMMENT ON GLOSSARY

Reiterate previous Regulation 18 comments.

Request inclusion of the canal network within the definition of blue infrastructure and green infrastructure.

Comment

Representation ID: 1527

Received: 29/11/2024

Respondent: Canal and River Trust

COMMENTS ON APPENDIX 1, 2 AND 3

Reiterate previous Regulation 18 comments.

Note contents of Appendix 1, 2 and 3 and have no further comments to make.

Comment

Representation ID: 1542

Received: 29/11/2024

Respondent: Canal and River Trust

GENERAL COMMENT ON HOUSING, GYPSY AND TRAVELLER AND EMPLOYMENT ALLOCATIONS (PART TWO PLAN)

Reiterate previous Regulation 18 comments.

Where not explicitly referenced in the allocation policies general reference to Policy DLP36 Canals should be included within the justification text.

GENERAL COMMENT ON LOCAL GREEN SPACES

No comments to make on this matter.

GENERAL COMMENT ON BIODIVERSITY NET GAIN OFFSETTING SITES

Request reference to Fens Pool as Council-owned is changed to reflect the majority owned by the Trust.

Comment

Representation ID: 1543

Received: 29/11/2024

Respondent: Historic England

We consider that the policy approach the Council has taken to both Section 14 of Local Plan Part One and the additional area specific historic environment policies within Local Plan Part Two provide a positive strategy for the historic environment and respond both to the requirements for heritage assets but also to protecting and enhancing the unique, special character of Dudley. The policies are supported by an extensive evidence base and go into relevant detail that will ensure the policies are effective and a practical resource for prospective developers. We support the policy approach contained within the Regulation 19 consultation version.


When reading through the Plans, we could not locate any reference to the Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) document prepared by the Council, either referenced specifically in relation to site allocation policy or listed as an evidence base that had informed a policy approach. We consider that the Local Plan should reference this document so that once the Plan is adopted, it can be utilised and aid in future planning applications.
We are unclear how the HIA has been utilised within the site allocations approach in the Plan. At times there is reference in the Local Plan to some of the mitigation measures highlighted within the HIA and at other times we could either not locate a HIA for a site, or there is a table approach listing allocations by name only. There is no connection with the HIA, or any assessment/ mitigation measures for these sites. We would welcome understanding how this approach has been taken and to assess if there are positive opportunities to refer to the mitigation measures listed for the sites to ensure the policies/ allocations are effective and justified.


We note Section 8 of the HIA and that it was considered that there were no amendments required to the Local Plan. However, we remain unclear on the approach for sites and ensuring that any harm will be fully mitigated, through the Local Plan, at the appropriate time. We are available for a discussion on this subject.

Support

Representation ID: 1544

Received: 29/11/2024

Respondent: Historic England

Profile of the Borough

We welcome the many references to the cultural heritage of the Borough and the role heritage plays within Dudley.

Object

Representation ID: 1568

Received: 16/11/2024

Respondent: Mr and Mrs Bissell

Number of people: 2

Agent: Goldfinch Town Planning Services (West Midlands)

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

The clients assert that Dudley Council is not promoting environmentally sustainable development in its emerging Local Plan Review, and its approach conflicts with key sustainability principles outlined in the Revised NPPF (December 2023). They argue that there is a clear limit to how much new development can be accommodated in the Halesowen area, which is already overloaded with unsustainable development patterns. This overdevelopment is harming the local environment and negatively impacting the health and well-being of residents. The clients express concern about the spatial imbalance in development across the Dudley Borough, warning that the increasing trend of urban cramming is damaging both the environmental quality and character of the area, as well as the health of its population.