Comment
Sandwell Local Plan Main Modifications Consultation
Representation ID: 1697
Received: 02/03/2026
Respondent: Natural England
Main Modification response detail
MM12 - SNE1.7 – Amendment to criterion 7 that acknowledges that the ecological value of habitat
sites may change over time:
… and will amend existing designations in accordance with this evidence. Consequently, sites may
receive new or increased, amended levels of protection over the Plan period, including occasionally
their de-designation as a SINC or SLINC.
NE advice: We urge caution around the use of the negative term de-designation, favouring the use
of … re-designation which offers both options to amend both positively and negatively. For example, a current SINC could become a Local Nature Reserve or other higher or lower designation.
Support
Sandwell Local Plan Main Modifications Consultation
Representation ID: 1704
Received: 17/03/2026
Respondent: Rattlechain Redevelopments Ltd
Agent: Ms Altine Elias
We support the flexible approach outlined in the revised text
Object
Sandwell Local Plan Main Modifications Consultation
Representation ID: 1715
Received: 20/03/2026
Respondent: Friends of Sheepwash Local Nature Reserve
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
We still do not believe that any currently designated sites should have designation removed to meet housing targets or constraints to development. The interface with potential sites of importance for nature conservation being speedily judged is also now important with the additional paragraph 4.9, as the authority could deliberately delay assessment in strategic site areas like rattlechain. This is not positively prepared and implies de-designation rather than new designation with the removal of that word.
Object
Sandwell Local Plan Main Modifications Consultation
Representation ID: 1736
Received: 27/03/2026
Respondent: Mrs Sara Lovell
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
We are concerned that the policy clarification unnecessarily focuses and emphasises the possibility of de-notifying sites. However it is also possible that ecological value increases and therefore new designations may be appropriate, necessary and relevant. Therefore we suggest the proposed wording isn't appropriate or sound and an alternative, more balanced, clearer alternative considered as follows: '… and will amend existing designations in accordance with this evidence. Consequently, sites may receive amended levels of protection over the Plan period.'