Council chiefs will decide next week whether to push ahead with a proposal to build thousands of new homes across Lichfield and Burntwood by 2040.
The Local Plan 2040 was initially deferred to allow Lichfield District Council to assess proposals against its own climate change targets.
But a meeting of the local authority’s cabinet next week will decide whether or not to submit the document to the next stage of the process of it being formally adopted.
Among the detail within the Local Plan 2040, which covers the period from 2018, are details of how many homes will need to be built – and where:
| Settlement | Net completed dwellings (1st April 2018 to 31 March 2020) | Committed supply of dwellings (at 1st April 2020) | Strategic housing allocations | Total |
| Lichfield city | 741 | 3304 | 7345 | |
| Burntwood | 172 | 400 | | 572 |
| East of Rugeley | 0 | 800 | 800 | |
| North of Tamworth | 83 | 1000 | 0 | 1083 |
| Alrewas | -8 | 169 | 0 | 161 |
| Armitage with Handsacre | -4 | 204 | 0 | 200 |
| Fazeley, Mile Oak & Bonehill | 7 | 130 | 800 | 937 |
| Fradley | 189 | 966 | 500 | 1655 |
| Shenstone | 0 | 55 | 0 | 55 |
| Whittington | 1 | 20 | 75 | 96 |
| Other rural | 140 | 262 | 0 | 402 |
| Total | 1321 | 7310 | 4675 | 13,306 |
The Local Plan 2040 document explains why it is proposed that 3,500 more homes than are needed are being proposed.
“This demonstrates the provision of approximately 13,300 dwellings through the Local Plan.
“Such supply is in excess of the minimum housing requirement of 9,727 homes identified – this ‘buffer’ provides flexibility in the housing supply across the plan period which will ensure that should circumstances change and a development is not delivered or is delivered at a slow rate than anticipated the housing requirement is still delivered.”
Local Plan 2040 report to Lichfield District Council’s cabinet
The report also reveals the reasoning behind the minimum number of new homes required to meet future population growth.
“By 2040 a minimum of 9,727 dwellings will be planned for. This consists of 7,062 to meet our local housing need and 2,665 homes towards meeting the unmet housing needs arising from the Greater Birmingham and Black Country housing market area.”
Local Plan 2040 report to Lichfield District Council’s cabinet
A report from Cllr Iain Eadie, cabinet member for the Local Plan at Lichfield District Council, has also outlined the risks of not pushing ahead with the process.
“A delay in submission could increase the risk of the council being vulnerable to applications for development which do not accord with the adopted Local Plan and that these might be lost at appeal, given the commitment to submit a new Local Plan by the end of December 2021.
“The Government has also reiterated the requirement for local planning authorities to have up to date plans in place by December 2023 and that they will intervene where plans are not in preparation.”
Cllr Iain Eadie, Lichfield District Council
The meeting of Lichfield District Council’s cabinet will take place on Tuesday (10th May).
Guys, it’s a done deal. It’s all stitched up behind the scenes before we even get to hear about it. The Council have discussions with developers and they basically decide at that stage which land will be allocated for development in the forthcoming local plan. The rest is a formality.
Take Fradley, Barratt have just put forward a consultation for yet ANOTHER 500 homes to be build north of Hay End Lane. Guess where the site is on which the houses will be built? Yep, the same land that has magically been proposed for allocation in the 2040 local plan. So the consultation has completed for this development before the local plan 2040 allocating that site has even been approved. A similar thing happened in relation to the “Canalside” development in Fradley. The idea that residents get any real say in what happens to their areas is laughable.
Why do we need a buffer of some 3,600 homes? Will that not inevitably lead to more of the countryside being built upon, and the Council allowing more homes to be built than are actually needed? Surely a buffer of 1,000 homes is sufficient if one or two developments flounder? 3,600 is a joke!
Come to Lichfield developers, it’s open season here, we don’t care a jot for our countryside, build here!! Oh wait…you’re already all here.
If I am still living in Lichfield in a few years. I expect to hear Ian Eadie say we have built already built 13,000 extra houses long before the 2040 deadline.
Lets build thousands and thousands more.
There appears to be a race to hit this limit. Rather than a slow increase in housing, with appropriate infrastructure built at the same time.
My god here we go again supplying houses at our expense for Birmingham and the Black Country … as mentioned nothing will stop this erosion of our city and it’s once pleasant surrounding. Someone’s making a lot of money out of these stitched up deals.
This is a disgrace. What Lichfield really needs is more retirement villages!
Sadly, we are not able to change the council in tomorrow’s local elections, but people have long memories. Next time, don’t vote for the councillors who want to turn our beautiful city into a dormitory for Birmingham and London commuters, just to increase their Council Tax haul.
Lichfield council are just being greedy the community charge from all the new houses must be a fortune without the ones they still want to build. Sardines comes to mind….
Yes, I hope we all vote these clowns out at the next election. Mind you, Labour and Lib Dems are no better. They’d just fill the same area with small, 2 bed social houses instead. They’re just as obsessed with building houses everywhere as the Conservatives. I’m voting independent next time in the hope that they’ll actually put the best interests of this area first for a change, and fight for the people they represent, not the developers, like Cllr Cross of Fradley and Cllr Eadie.
Well we’re do i begin. I know it’s nothing to do with Housings. But I live in Hammerwich Burntwood. We have no post office for 2 years. They have just Decided to give us a mobile one For Half hour on Friday morning. Then they decided to take the post Box away today 🤬🤬
What proportion of these vast numbers of new homes are purchased by residents of Lichfiekd district? I suspect not the majority. Lichfield district will be ruined the way this council is going.
OMG not more, we can’t cope with what we have already built
Enough is enough we don’t have the infrastructure to support anymore new build, no more section 106 monies
More homes again, but what about providing more infrastructure.
Burntwood is still waiting for it’s promised shops and new town centre. The facilities are sadly lacking, and it’s a disgrace
These councillors and planning staff are beyond bad. Dreadfully incompetent.
Oh what is it wrong with all these councillors? and how many actually live in LICHIELD,?? and also – do they have to wait weeks for an appointment to see a doctor or dentist because they are all chocca! & What will it be like- after a few thousand more descend on the city ; and all flock to these same facilities!! Not to mention more flood risks! as water doesn’t go through concrete!! Just use your brains councillors!!
No point building more domestic dwellings if the infrastructure isn’t there to support them – it’s difficult enough now to get a Dr appointment without more pressures placed on the existing surgeries .. constant construction projects with the Tories… HS2.. house building.. it’s not what we want.
Democracy is broken.
In addition to the comments above, all I ever see on these new large developments are more primary schools. Where are all these children going once they leave primary school, as NO new secondary schools are being built. Or are we just going to have 40 pupils a class in our existing schools, so that they go downhill too, like everything else around here. Can’t we have our local elections today, PLEASE?!
Simon… The backroom boys are always advising the council that the existing infrastructure can cope. There seems to be a clandestine plan to radically change Lichfield and bring it in line with other Birmingham suberbs; both Solihull and Sutton Coldfield have lost their autonomy in this way and Tamworth is essentially fully integrated.
Change happens, often driven by financial considerations. We are impotent to prevent this, and controlled development is, of course, desirable. What we have seen is the demise of a historical gem in pursuit
of government dogma while ruthless developers grow rich and pay the Tories their dues by way of contributions.
I came to Lichfield 12 years ago and it was and still is a beautiful city. However, its city centre, shopping and roads have gone backwards during that time and surrounding countryside being slowly eaten away. The little nature reserve on Eastern avenue is a mess. And all I continually hear is housing, build more, and more, but the wrong type. I rent and soon will retire. Where will I rent then? Not around here. I can’t afford the crazy priced now being asked. No, after enjoying and donating to this beautiful city I will have to move away. When is the cinema, bowling ally, new swimming facilities, new transport hub and friary development coming again. Ask Mr Fabricant and the councillors for a response that doesn’t include housing!
It is strange the 1500 homes at Alrewas are not included in these numbers. This appears to be a done deal.
An agreement has been reached as part of a plan which could see a new community of 1,500 homes created in Alrewas.
https://lichfieldlive.co.uk/2020/09/23/agreement-reached-in-latest-stage-of-plan-to-build-new-1500-home-community-in-alrewas/
In the time that I’ve been living in Lichfield, I’ve often seen election literature from the local Conservative Party emphasising their commitment to protecting Lichfield’s (and presumably Burntwood’s) green belt. I assume that, at the very least, they won’t be inclined to include this commitment in future election materials since it’s a patently false claim. I recommend instead that they replace this commitment with something along the lines of ‘work closely with developers to meet district home-building targets’; which would at least have the benefit of a refreshing level of honesty.
Part of the problem is that cuts in central government funding for local authorities have left many of the latter dependent on the income from development in order to come close to balancing their budget. Sustaining this income requires continually approving more development, especially where a local authority is committed to keep council tax (which by itself can’t cover the loss of central government funding anyway) low. There’s every financial incentive to keep approving development, but no real financial incentive to build the additional infrastructure necessary to support that development.
Put another way, many local authorities have become addicted to development income streams; but it’s a short-term fix that requires more and more hits in order to maintain the same funding high.
Lichfield is hardly unique in facing this problem, though acknowledging as much hardly absolves the local governing party of their responsibility in how they’ve chosen to address it. Ultimately, resolving this issue requires changes in approach at both the national and local government levels.
You need to look beyond the locality, the published global plan calls for the populations of the world to be housed in mega conurbations. The regionalisation of the EU was the start and carries on as the smart cities policy.
As far as numbers go, we are expecting 100,000 boat people to cross the channel this year. Boris is anxious to offer an amnesty so we will be keeping them. Also he has offered 5 million HongKongese a home and now 100,000 Ukranians plus Afghans etc…
Many of the cabinet are acolytes of the Young Global Leaders Forum, as were Blair, Brown and Cameron. Swap now for Liebour and you get Starmer, a Rockerfeller minion from the Trilateral Commission.
In short, this is already planned and agreed so no, you have no say in the matter!
Thank you for explaining the world to us, Bigscreen. The Trilateral Commission’s interest in Lichfield is a revelation.
I’m only surprised that you didn’t try and fit in the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, the Freemasons, the Merovingians, and the Rosicrucians somewhere while you were busy misspelling ‘Rockefeller’. Maybe next time?
@Bigscreen: “the published global plan calls for the populations of the world to be housed in mega conurbations. The regionalisation of the EU was the start and carries on as the smart cities policy.” “In short, this is already planned and agreed so no, you have no say in the matter!”
And your information sources are … ?
Sahure, Clare, thank you for your astonishing ignorance and failure to even try a cursory search. All this is published by organisations such as the WEF and it’s offspring the Young Global Leaders Forum. You will even find such agendas deep within .Gov if you take the time to read.
BTW Sahure, picking fault with grammar and spelling is the full admission that you have no other coherent argument. I guess you have taken the English language course and skipped the Politics module?
You should all hang your heads in shame,what’s the betting those making the decisions we have to live with live out of the areas…those that have live here along time don’t recognize Lichfield and surrounding areas ,and please don’t say its progress,it’s a blight on where we live,no wonder we have problems getting footfall into Lichfield and we have all these empty shops as those moving into these monstrousities shop elsewhere do Lichfield actually gains nothing,more congestion,no infrastructure,no drs apps,they want to close hospitals,but I know let’s bring in 1800 more homes with around 6000 people who want be able to get anywhere,do anything,cants see a Dr,or dentist,but hey the councillors with be rubbing their greedy little hands together…. Disgraceful
In the 30 years I’ve lived in Burntwood it has already changed immensely from the small market town, and now we are to expect a further 120+ houses. The doctors has already gone from being able to get an appointment on the day your Ill to being almost impossible to get an appointment at all! How can they possibly add even more houses when there is no infrastructure to support so many people. I am a local girl but sadly we are beginning to contemplate moving out of the area due to the above plus the soaring crime rate due to lack of decent policing- we have had to fit extra security due to having had a car stolen and another damaged due to a failed attempt to steal that one.
Just to be totally clear, Bigscreen, I’m not attempting to debate you; I’m _ridiculing_ you. I see no particular need to engage seriously with someone advancing not-so-subtly anti-Semitic global conspiracy theories as the basis for planning decisions in Lichfield and Burntwood.
Or at least that’s what my trans-dimensional lizard overlords have told me to type from their mind control centre at the Pyramids of Giza. And yes, they’ve also taught me how to spell ‘Rockefeller’ properly.
@Sahure : why on earth do you want ridicule big screen on their post. You missed the point , LL is for debate, people from both sides putting across their views or is it just one way with you. Also to pick big screen on a small spelling mistake is shameful.
@Bigscreen: “Clare, thank you for your astonishing ignorance and failure to even try a cursory search.”
You still haven’t told us what “plan” you are referring to. I asked you what your sources were, and you chose to respond by insulting me. I didn’t insult you; I asked a question, and I expected a straight answer. It seems you can’t provide that. If you can’t back up what you say with any evidence, then I have to assume you have none and this “published global plan” that “calls for the populations of the world to be housed in mega conurbations” does not exist. If such a document does exist, then it has a name, so kindly supply that name.
I’ve not long moved to Lichfield and I want to leave already. I always heard that Lichfield was a great place to live, but that must have been referring to the Lichfield of 20/30 years ago. Not now. It has undoubtedly declined due to the idiots in the Council. People like Cllr Derick Cross especially. I’ll be leaving again in the next year or two for sure.
Come on, local councillors or anyone from planning. Come on here and try to justify the destruction, that you are responsible for, of the green belt in our district.
We’re all waiting.