Sandwell Local Plan Main Modifications Consultation

Support

Representation ID: 1712

Received: 20/03/2026

Respondent: Friends of Sheepwash Local Nature Reserve

Support this change

Comment

Representation ID: 1713

Received: 20/03/2026

Respondent: Friends of Sheepwash Local Nature Reserve

This sentence should also include "potential sites of importance for nature conservation" as per added paragraph 4.9
suggest "a local nature conservation site (Sites of Local Importance for Nature Conservation), potential sites of importance for nature conservation, protected or priority species, habitat, or geological feature damage must be minimised …"

Support

Representation ID: 1714

Received: 20/03/2026

Respondent: Friends of Sheepwash Local Nature Reserve

Support

Object

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.

Support

Representation ID: 1716

Received: 20/03/2026

Respondent: Friends of Sheepwash Local Nature Reserve

Support

Comment

Representation ID: 1717

Received: 20/03/2026

Respondent: Friends of Sheepwash Local Nature Reserve

Support this new paragraph as suggested by BBC Wildlife Trust at the examination hearing and specifically in relation to rattlechain site as was identified already by local experts surveys, photographs and observations including established pre 2016 small blue butterfly colony, kidney vetch, tower mustard, Narrow-leaved Everlasting-pea. NB since the examination hearing, these flora are now classified on the New GB Red List for vascular plants November 2025. The council must retain a list of sites identified as PSI's and considered as a constraint to development where prima facie evidence of designation is supported.

Comment

Representation ID: 1719

Received: 23/03/2026

Respondent: Friends of Sheepwash Local Nature Reserve

Support. The three themes of "nature recovery", "delivering wider environmental benefits" and "enabling delivery for nature recovery" should be supported. It is difficult however to see how this can apply to strategic site SSH3 Rattlechain where the opposite remains.

Support

Representation ID: 1720

Received: 23/03/2026

Respondent: Friends of Sheepwash Local Nature Reserve

Previous map was sound, but the current link to this site and details do not appear to be working on the WNCA site

Comment

Representation ID: 1721

Received: 23/03/2026

Respondent: Friends of Sheepwash Local Nature Reserve

There are problems with this map and data access. It is a shame that the previous recovery strategy map work has been superseded, but we also note that several areas that were in the SSH3 area retain some recovery strategy, even though this is against the plan to build houses on most of it.

Comment

Representation ID: 1722

Received: 23/03/2026

Respondent: Friends of Sheepwash Local Nature Reserve

Still believe Sandwell council choice of sites is unsound. Sheepwash was rejected according to planning policy because nit all of the site is owned by SMBC. We see no legal reason as to why this was rejected, it is already designated within a wildlife canal corridor area and would directly benefit the council as well. Tividale Park is too far away from the strategic site allocation SSH3 and would not support loss of habitat from this area.