Draft Regulation 18 Sandwell Local Plan
Search representations
Results for Friends of Sheepwash Local Nature Reserve search
New searchObject
Draft Regulation 18 Sandwell Local Plan
Housing Allocations
Representation ID: 644
Received: 16/11/2023
Respondent: Friends of Sheepwash Local Nature Reserve
SH35 (SA85) SH36 (SA86) Unsustainable and threat to biodiversity and Sheepwash Nature Reserve wildlife corridor with canal. Rattlechain lagoon contains tens of tonnes of white phosphorus and is not fully remediated with unstable ground and sediment. Unthinkable of building homes on this site. Equally the former Duport's tip requires significant and unsustainable remediation unsuited to development due to disgraceful dumping of foundry sand- unstable after 30 years of tipping. This site never came forward from the 2011 plan and should be removed. Rhodia/Solvay claimed a period of at least 25 years of monitoring in 2013 when undertaking limited remediation.
SH35 (SA85) SH36 (SA86) Unsustainable and threat to biodiversity and Sheepwash Nature Reserve wildlife corridor with canal. Rattlechain lagoon contains tens of tonnes of white phosphorus and is not fully remediated with unstable ground and sediment. Unthinkable of building homes on this site. Equally the former Duport's tip requires significant and unsustainable remediation unsuited to development due to disgraceful dumping of foundry sand- unstable after 30 years of tipping. This site never came forward from the 2011 plan and should be removed. Rhodia/Solvay claimed a period of at least 25 years of monitoring in 2013 when undertaking limited remediation.
Object
Draft Regulation 18 Sandwell Local Plan
DUDLEY PORT AND TIPTON
Representation ID: 646
Received: 22/11/2023
Respondent: Friends of Sheepwash Local Nature Reserve
3.34 OBJECT. The public purse should NOT pay for remediation of privately owned land. Rattlechain is not suitable for housing and is nit sustainable to deliver it. The same owners of the Coneygree site were the ones for failed to bring forward the Rattlechain site- namely Mintworth. The polluter has not paid! You fail to identify that yet know this, so what confidence in the residential proposals? A planner in Sandwell previously identified the sewage works site tied to rattlechain as "a crap site for residential"- what confidence of soundness in this daft plan for 2023!
3.34 OBJECT. The public purse should NOT pay for remediation of privately owned land. Rattlechain is not suitable for housing and is nit sustainable to deliver it. The same owners of the Coneygree site were the ones for failed to bring forward the Rattlechain site- namely Mintworth. The polluter has not paid! You fail to identify that yet know this, so what confidence in the residential proposals? A planner in Sandwell previously identified the sewage works site tied to rattlechain as "a crap site for residential"- what confidence of soundness in this daft plan for 2023!
Object
Draft Regulation 18 Sandwell Local Plan
Table 4 - Summary of regeneration projects
Representation ID: 647
Received: 22/11/2023
Respondent: Friends of Sheepwash Local Nature Reserve
The proposal for the Dudley port garden city 2034 does not accord with the housing allocation Rattlechain timeline of 2040. You have therefore no chance of delivering this based upon the known constraints and fact that the owners of the Rattlechain lagoon, (Rhodia/Solvay), separate to the owners of those promoting their land at SH35 (SA 85) have yet to make their plans for this site known.
The proposal for the Dudley port garden city 2034 does not accord with the housing allocation Rattlechain timeline of 2040. You have therefore no chance of delivering this based upon the known constraints and fact that the owners of the Rattlechain lagoon, (Rhodia/Solvay), separate to the owners of those promoting their land at SH35 (SA 85) have yet to make their plans for this site known.
Comment
Draft Regulation 18 Sandwell Local Plan
Policy SNE1 – Nature Conservation
Representation ID: 648
Received: 22/11/2023
Respondent: Friends of Sheepwash Local Nature Reserve
You do not define "harm". In terms of Sheepwash, the delivery of the proposed 500 plus houses at Rattlechain would do serious harm to wildlife habitat at our site, as well as at Rattlechain. Wildlife Cannot exist in human habitation settings like this without loss, and this cannot be mitigated fully as you claim. We have already lost wintering stonechat from Rattlechain since the sewage works development at Temple Way. Wildlife corridors are not just canals as you appear to think, but linked passageways in trees and flora between sheepwash and rattlechain/Temple Way. Housing would impede this linkage.
You do not define "harm". In terms of Sheepwash, the delivery of the proposed 500 plus houses at Rattlechain would do serious harm to wildlife habitat at our site, as well as at Rattlechain. Wildlife Cannot exist in human habitation settings like this without loss, and this cannot be mitigated fully as you claim. We have already lost wintering stonechat from Rattlechain since the sewage works development at Temple Way. Wildlife corridors are not just canals as you appear to think, but linked passageways in trees and flora between sheepwash and rattlechain/Temple Way. Housing would impede this linkage.
Comment
Draft Regulation 18 Sandwell Local Plan
Justification
Representation ID: 649
Received: 22/11/2023
Respondent: Friends of Sheepwash Local Nature Reserve
You are not justifying what you claim to be protecting or creating. The opportunities map clearly showed the Rattlechain area South of Sheepwash to be such an opportunity, and yet proposals of housing would destroy any chance of this, as well as detract from the reserve at Sheepwash with further encroachment.
You are not justifying what you claim to be protecting or creating. The opportunities map clearly showed the Rattlechain area South of Sheepwash to be such an opportunity, and yet proposals of housing would destroy any chance of this, as well as detract from the reserve at Sheepwash with further encroachment.
Object
Draft Regulation 18 Sandwell Local Plan
Policy SNE2 – Protection and Enhancement of Wildlife Habitats
Representation ID: 650
Received: 22/11/2023
Respondent: Friends of Sheepwash Local Nature Reserve
You cannot measure biodiversity! You cannot take away from one area to give to another without destroying habitats in that area. We object in the strongest terms to giving "credits" to privately owned estate. Menzies no longer exists and that school is run by a company educational provider. The millpool is so polluted it would cost millions to desilt.
You cannot measure biodiversity! You cannot take away from one area to give to another without destroying habitats in that area. We object in the strongest terms to giving "credits" to privately owned estate. Menzies no longer exists and that school is run by a company educational provider. The millpool is so polluted it would cost millions to desilt.
Object
Draft Regulation 18 Sandwell Local Plan
Biodiversity net gain
Representation ID: 651
Received: 22/11/2023
Respondent: Friends of Sheepwash Local Nature Reserve
Fundamentally object to BNG. You cannot allow destruction of habitat under the fake guise of "creating" it somewhere else. This is a phoney policy and one created for shilling for developers to usurp green space. It is a fraud to pretend they are then enhancing it somewhere else when this process will be manmade and interfere what is already there.
Sandwell should have no desire to protect fens pool nature reserve. That site has been mismanaged by Dudley council and the CRT for years through anglers destroying the site.
Fundamentally object to BNG. You cannot allow destruction of habitat under the fake guise of "creating" it somewhere else. This is a phoney policy and one created for shilling for developers to usurp green space. It is a fraud to pretend they are then enhancing it somewhere else when this process will be manmade and interfere what is already there.
Sandwell should have no desire to protect fens pool nature reserve. That site has been mismanaged by Dudley council and the CRT for years through anglers destroying the site.
Object
Draft Regulation 18 Sandwell Local Plan
Figure 2 - Extract from report - location of high and medium value sites for BNG
Representation ID: 652
Received: 22/11/2023
Respondent: Friends of Sheepwash Local Nature Reserve
Object to the choice of these sites and the evidence on which they are based which appears very flimsy. You cannot measure biodiversity or "bank" it. What a stupid term and one created by office based idiot table top planners , and this policy appears to favour relocation of biodiversity away from the original Sandwell Nature Recovery Network map, which includes our area.
Object to the choice of these sites and the evidence on which they are based which appears very flimsy. You cannot measure biodiversity or "bank" it. What a stupid term and one created by office based idiot table top planners , and this policy appears to favour relocation of biodiversity away from the original Sandwell Nature Recovery Network map, which includes our area.
Support
Draft Regulation 18 Sandwell Local Plan
Black Country Local Nature
Representation ID: 653
Received: 22/11/2023
Respondent: Friends of Sheepwash Local Nature Reserve
This is at odds with most of the other policies which you are in parallel promoting such as BNG credits. Priority Network Restoration Zones should be the basis on Sandwell's local plan, and not computer generated nonsense like credits.
This is at odds with most of the other policies which you are in parallel promoting such as BNG credits. Priority Network Restoration Zones should be the basis on Sandwell's local plan, and not computer generated nonsense like credits.
