"Housing growth in this part of the district will be driven by a large-scale extension in the Open Countryside to the north of Penkridge. This larger scale development will deliver significant housing growth alongside a mix of other uses, including a new first school, local retail and a country park.

This recognises the recommendations for a large-scale extension north of Penkridge in the GBHMA Strategic Growth Study, the non-Green Belt land available in this area of the village and the greater level of services and facilities in Penkridge compared to other villages in the district, including a railway station. The Council has increased the level of growth proposed in this location since the previous Local Plan review consultation to ensure the delivery of sustainable non-Green Belt land in this location is maximised, and to ensure that the necessary infrastructure to support housing growth in this area can be delivered. 4.23

The delivery of the existing non-Green Belt safeguarded land in the village will also be brought forward, to ensure that sustainable non-Green Belt sites in the district are delivered. "

Currently, the land north of Penkridge is privately owned open country side with very limited access, bar a few public paths. The council intends to build a national park along the River Penk. This would be open fields and woodlands that the residents of Penkridge could use freely.

Sam would make sure this commitment is honoured, while also ensuring that this county park is protected from future development. He would do this by making sure the council set up a community land trust to own this land.

What this would do is put the people of Penkridge in ownership of the land rather than a government body. By taking it out of government ownership, governments and councils of the future would not be able to develop on this land, regardless of any policy changes as the land would be privately owned by the community land trust. To find out more about community land trusts visit this informational website: here

The council have committed to the building of sustainable sites, with a clause that all new sites must result in a net positive for bio diversity,. However, they have given themselves a get out clause.

"Net-gain is to be delivered on-site wherever possible. If this cannot be achieved and where the ecological benefits are greater through enhanced off-site provision then a financial contribution will be sought and directed to offsite projects informed by the most up-to-date Nature Recovery Network mapping prepared by the Staffordshire Wildlife Trust."

So effectively, what will happen with sites across the district is; developers will first self assess themselves and judge biodiversity as low, they will then self assess that they cannot achieve net positive bio diversity, and then effectively bribe the council with a sum of money to get out of this clause.

Regardless of whether these funds are spent on other nature projects, the local wildlife in Penkridge will be permanently damaged.

Sam will make sure this loop hole is closed. If developers cannot commit to net gain biodiversity, then they should not be given permission to build.

The District Council are proposing a minimum of 168 homes to be built in Acton Hill.

Any development in this area will cause major highways issues. The council even recognised this, but are still planning to build a 168 minimum housing estate.

Stating "This recognises the sensitive landscape and potential highways concerns that larger scale growth in this South Staffordshire Council Local Plan Review – Preferred Options 35 September 2021 location could cause, as well as the lack of unmet housing needs in Stafford and the location’s remoteness from areas of unmet needs in the wider GBHMA. Instead, a smaller scale extension to the adjacent town of Stafford will be delivered in this area."

Find out more on page 34-35 here

Sam would fully oppose this housing development as the strain on the local community would be too much to bare, especially considering there is no committed investment in infrastructure proposed as part of the plan.

Currently, the Districts Policy "HC3 - Affordable Housing" only commits developers to building 7.5% of homes on the development for First Time Buyers - I.e. Freehold houses for sale under the Help to Buy cap of £252,000, compared to 15% being for Social Rent and another 7.5% being for Shared Ownership.

Sam will make sure this policy is reviewed, if we are building houses because of a housing shortage for First Time Buyers, why are only 7.5% available to them? This figure needs to be increased.