Object

Representation ID: 14478

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: John Rowley

1. Re Site Allocation WHO 274 WTNA
The former Wolverhampton Environment Centre (the WEC) appears in Table 43 (Site allocations) page 608 as a site for potential development. The WEC should never have been added to the draft Black Country Plan (BCP).
The proposal to build houses on the WEC was controversial when it was first mooted in 2015. It is contrary to the Local Neighbourhood Plan of 2014. National, regional and local planning regulations had to be manipulated or ignored for it to be recommended to WCC Planning Committee of 20th March 2018.
Site allocation WHO 274 WTNA the WEC was included in the draft BCP because ‘Outline planning permission had been previously granted for 14 houses on the WEC site. Permission lapsed in the face of concerted public opposition in April 2021.
The proposal to build fourteen houses in the middle of the Smestow Valley Local Nature Reserve conflicts with the concept of climate change [CC1] in the draft BCP, with protection for wildlife[ENVI-9], with desire for exercise and recreation in a traffic-free environment[CC4, ENV8-9, CSP1, HW1, CEN5, TRAN 1-8] as well as with the principles of sustainable transport [TRAN1-8] and a diverse economy [EMP1-5].
Abuse of Local Democracy
The Tettenhall Neighbourhood Plan (TNP) had been passed in a local referendum in 2014 by 92% of the voters of the two wards. TNP policy 6 explicitly excluded commercial or residential development on the WEC yet outline permission was granted for houses.
The policy to exclude housing on the WEC could have been changed by evidence of ‘Community Involvement and Consultation’, as set out in TNP policy 7.
A form of ‘consultation’ was conducted in 2016-17. It was an embarrassment. It failed to meet the high standards required by Policy 7. An external consultant persuaded two small unrepresentative local associations to facilitate five public meetings. The lack of transparency was glaring. Residents were denied knowledge of the real reasons for the proposal – the intention, it transpires, was to sell 14 houses in a desirable location, the Local Nature Reserve, to raise money to build social housing elsewhere in the city, but this was never made clear to residents.
The essential question, ‘Do you want houses to be built on the WEC?’ was never put to any of the five meetings.
A total of forty-eight residents out of some 30,000 in the two wards attended the five ‘Engagement’ meetings. They were not persuaded to vote for the proposal. Furthermore, a 2,885 people in the autumn of 2017 signed a petition against the proposal for housing on the WEC. The Planning Committee of March 2018 ignored both the detailed objections to the application and the weight of public opposition to the proposal. Outline planning permission was granted.
Abuse of the National Planning Policy Framework
A key element in the Report to Committee was the claim that the WEC was a previously developed site (brownfield land) which allowed an exception to Green Belt policy. This interpretation of National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) on the Green Belt turned out to be highly questionable.
“The fundamental aim of Green Belt policy is to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open”. (NPPF paragraph 79 / para.133 in 2019 version)
The Smestow Valley Local Nature Reserve is in the Green Belt. The BBC Local Sites Report of 26th July 2015 states that WEC is essentially part of the Smestow Valley Local Nature Reserve (LNR). It is surrounded on all sides by the LNR. If houses are built on the WEC, the nearest urban area the Finchfield estate will spread into the Green Belt. The Green Belt will no longer be open.
In their Design & Access Statement for 18/00078/OUT the developer claimed that ‘the WEC is surrounded on three sides (sic) by the LNR, and on the fourth by houses’. This is incorrect. The former GWR line, purchased by WCC on 1970s and incorporated into the LNR in 1998, clearly separates the WEC from houses on Westacre Crescent, in Finchfield.
Use of Ambiguity : ‘Agricultural’ of ‘Brownfield’
The 2018 Report to the Planning Committee repeated the same grammatical / topographical error, and added a number of its own. It asserted that the WEC is ‘previously developed site (brownfield land)’ and therefore an exception to Green Belt policy was allowed in paragraph 80.5 of the NPPF.
However, this assertion is surely incorrect. The WEC site had four large glasshouses, a brick bungalow and two small ancillary buildings for horticultural/agricultural use. In the TNP (2014) the WEC is designated for agricultural use. It had not been identified for development in any strategic policy. Wolverhampton’s Unitary Development Plan paras.8.3.1 and 8.4.5 explicitly exclude the WEC from development. By March 2018 there had been no formal change of use from the ‘agricultural’ designation.
Although in September 2017 there was an application,17/01141/FUL, entitled ‘Change of Use’. It changed little. It merely moved 90% of the WEC from an enclosed site to ‘a public open space and nature reserve’. The application did not change the designation of the WEC from agricultural to Brownfield.
The WEC was not in the Black Country Core Strategy as a site for potential development. It was not on the National Land Use Database. When Wolverhampton’s Brownfield Land Register (BLR) replaced the national register of land for development in April 2019 it showed the WEC to be a site for development in 2016. This appears to have been added retrospectively, perhaps to cover up an administrative omission.
Whatever the reason for the late addition to the BLR, the public was unaware that a change had been made. No ‘CHANGE of USE’ notices were posted on the gates of the WEC. No formal application was made in 2016 for a change of use.
Private developers, unless they were ‘in the know’, would also have been ignorant of the change, since the WEC was not on the National Land Use Database, the official national Brownfield Register at the time.
WVLiving, CWC’s development arm, should have known of the change of use. The implications of the lack of transparency about the change must be a cause for concern. Sandwell is doubtless not the only council in the Black Country where slack planning procedure allows corrupt practice to happen (report in Express & Star 11th October 2021)
It was not until 2019 that members of the public were aware that the WEC had been officially designated as a ‘brownfield site for development.’ Even in 2019 the information was given reluctantly; it had to be gained by a FOI request.
Residents were denied an opportunity to challenge the change of use, to hold the council to account.
Strangely, even the council’s developer, WVLiving, seemed unaware that the site had been declared brownfield in 2016. Or perhaps WVLiving was unclear about the definition of ‘brownfield’?
The Design & Access Statement for 18/00078/OUT claimed that a brownfield site would be created by demolishing the four glass-houses, after outline planning permission had been granted!
Outline planning permission should never have been granted in 2018. The attempt by WVLiving, the council’s development arm, to build the 14 houses in the next three years exposed apparent collusion with the planning department. This raised public awareness of the travesty of the planning process and the threat to the Local Nature Reserve. It aroused wide spread opposition to the proposal for houses in the middle of the city’s only local nature reserve and, positively, a wider realisation of how much of an asset the WEC is as a green space.
BCP Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation. (Page 262)
“Factors which may lead to the exacerbation of climate change (through the generation of more greenhouse gases) must be avoided (e.g. pollution, habitat fragmentation, loss of biodiversity) and the natural environment’s resilience to change should be protected.”
Wolverhampton has the least green space of any city of comparable size in the UK. Cllr Ian Brookfield, CWC’s Council Leader, acknowledges that only 11% of Wolverhampton is green space. South Staffs Spatial Housing Strategy has identified land in the Smestow Valley for housing. This will close off the Local Nature reserve from open country to which it is now connected. Preservation of what little green space the city still has is important in the challenge to mitigate climate change.
The WEC – formal and informal education about climate change and the natural environment
Protection of the Smestow Valley Local Nature Reserve (LNR) will help Wolverhampton to learn formally and informally how to adapt to climate change. The WEC could be a Field Study area for the city, Black Country and south Staffordshire. Ten schools and a college are within easy walking distance of the LNR; many more can reach it by public transport and by green and blue routes.
The WEC should be an information resource for visitors, community and educational groups.
The environmental reasons for keeping the WEC as a green space, for leaving the LNR intact include :
• [text redacted]
• bio-diversity of the site. For example, a shallow wetland has emerged.
• Smestow Valley is a wildlife corridor, a migratory route for animals and birds to rest and recover, while by-passing the West Midlands conurbation
• [text redacted]

BCP Linkages between Health and the Natural Environment
The Black Country has lower rates of physical activity and higher rates of obesity than most to the UK. [HW1 - 5.10 page 73] Poor air quality has a detrimental effect on health. There are lower rates of both life expectancy and healthy life expectancy than the rest of England. There are higher rates of multiple deprivation, of children living in poverty and of unemployment than the rest of England, as well as some of the poorest academic achievement of school leavers. All contribute to poor health and are influenced by the built and natural environment. [HW1, HW3 pages 73 and 84]
The WEC – Promotion of Health and Wellbeing
“Properly designed and well-located open spaces will help mitigate flood risk, provide space for wildlife and encourage informal recreation for local people.” [CSP4 page 42]
The WEC and the LNR are commercially free and accessible to everyone.
“Key transport corridors will be prioritised through the delivery of infrastructure to support active travel (walking, cycling)” [TRAN1 page 177]
“Creating an environment that encourages sustainable travel requires new developments to link to existing walking and cycling networks. The links should be safe, direct and not impeded by infrastructure provided for other forms of transport.” [TRAN5 page 191]
The WEC and the wider LNR ..
• are accessible to all,
• encourage social interaction – some of the most deprived and the wealthiest areas of the city border the LNR
• manage the negative effects of traffic by keeping vehicular traffic out,
• contain allotments and leisure opportunities etcetera beneficial to physical and mental well-being.

The WEC – Promotion of improved Air Quality [CC4 pages 277 – 278]
“Air pollution is the top environmental risk to human health in the UK”(DEFRA 2019). The main cause of poor air quality in the Black Country is traffic.
The Smestow Valley is called Wolverhampton’s ‘green lung’. It is relatively free of traffic. It is less than two miles from the city centre. Cleaner air helps reduce work place absence. It creates and sustains a pleasant and attractive living and working environment, which is more likely to encourage growth and investment in the area.
• Housing and traffic in the WEC will affect the air quality of the site and of the Railway Walk
• Housing and traffic will make the LNR a less desirable place to visit and Wolverhampton will be a less desirable place to live and work.
The WEC - Increased efficiency and resilience to Climate Change [CC1 pages 265 - 267]
The former line of the GWR is now a Railway Walk, listed in the Guardian among the ‘Top Ten Railway Walks in Britain.‘ The Railway Walk links the local Tier 3 Centres of Compton - Finchfield - Castlecroft; it reduces the need to use a car. Creation of a PRoW from Wightwick Mill Lock to the Bridgnorth Road would open up pedestrian/ access to Tettenhall Wood as well.
The Railway Walk is a popular commuting route from South Staffs to the i54 and to the city centre. It links up with National Cycle route 81, the tow paths of the Staffs –Worcester and Birmingham Canal Navigation and is part of a 30 mile circular cycle route through Wolverhampton – Dudley –south Staffordshire.
• Housing on the WEC will interrupt the traffic-free Railway Walk.
• Housing in the WEC will also set a precedent for housing elsewhere in the LNR.
The WEC – Mitigating flood risk to adapt to Climate Change [CC5 & CC6 pages 284 -286, 288]
“To pass the Exception Test, developments will need to:
8 a) provide a demonstrable benefit to the wider sustainability of the area. Matters such as biodiversity, green infrastructure, historic environment, climate change adaptation, flood risk, green energy, pollution, health and transport should be considered;” [CC5 page 284]

• In the case of the WEC, which is within the Green Belt and the LNR, this test should be more stringent than elsewhere because flooding will affect the Finchfield Brook, the Smestow and ultimately the River Stour and the Severn.

“8 b) detail the sustainability issues the development will address and how doing so will outweigh the flood risk concerns for the site;”
• Building on the WEC will affect a wetland and two pools [text redacted]
• Driveways to houses are often impermeable. Water runs off into drains and into the rivers.
• Water from a developed WEC will run off into the Finchfield Brook which is incapable of holding it at present without flooding.
• Permeable driveways would allow some rainwater to be absorbed by the ground, and refill aquifers, otherwise it will run into the Finchfield Brook, and cause flooding
“8 d) prove that the development can be achieved without increasing flood risk elsewhere and, where possible, will result in a reduced flood risk.”
• a difficult test to pass. Development on the WEC will result in increased flood risk, which will have an impact on places downstream.
2. Re Black Country Plan
The draft Black Country Plan builds on earlier planning regulations to give order and stability to future development. Regulation by Green Belt policy has protected our city from the flight from the centre which happened to American cities in the post-war period, until now.
Since compilation of the draft Plan began our high streets have emptied of shops, office blocks have emptied of staff. The Covid-19 pandemic has also accelerated public recognition of the benefits of clean air and green spaces. The Black Country Plan needs to be more radical to deal with these changes.
Conversion of city centre shops and offices to accommodation, cultural and leisure use must be encouraged. The challenge of climate change will encourage local shopping centres at the expense of the city centre. The challenge to reduce traffic pollution may encourage working from home. For these and many other reasons green spaces are likely to be invaluable for the immediate future.
I use ‘invaluable’ in the non-financial sense of the benefits of exercises, of the peace and tranquillity that green spaces bring. However, a financial value can be placed benefit from our green space of exercise etcetera. The Dasgupta Review published in February for the CO26 conference at Glasgow, analyses the ‘Economics of Biodiversity’. It will. I hope, encourage planners to consider the opportunity cost to the NHS, to Social Services, to Anti-Social Behaviour teams….., to society, of elimination of green spaces in our urban areas. Preservation of green space will save our city millions of pounds.
The draft BCP is not robust enough to protect the city’s natural environment from development.
1. CSP 2, on page 26, seeks to deliver growth and development by …..e) ‘Protecting the openness, integrity and function of the Black Country’s designated and retained Green Belt by resisting inappropriate development;’
This aim has been lifted word for word from the BCCS. It appears in similar form in Wolverhampton’s UDP, yet outline planning permission for an inappropriate development of 14 houses was nevertheless allowed on the former Wolverhampton Environment Centre (the WEC) in March 2018. [Table 43 ]
The definition of ‘exceptional circumstances’ in paragraph 3.14 of the Justification needs to be strengthened. It is difficult to see how building expensive houses on Green Belt land can be justified by the need to raise cash, as happened with the WEC, especially when there are brownfield sites and sites with previous planning permission waiting to be developed in Wolverhampton.
2. Paragraph 3.15 accepts that green spaces should be assessed…with regard to the wider area but I could find no consideration in the BCP of the impact South Staffs Spatial Housing Strategy will have on Wolverhampton’s Green Belt - context CSP , paragraph 3.49. We may be ‘surrounded’ by open countryside on north, west and south at the moment but not for ever.
Victorian planners had the vision to protect the green spaces of East and West Park before urbanisation enclosed them. We need stronger protection for all our green spaces, but especially for the Smestow Valley Local Nature Reserve, before the pressure for houses in SStaffs, over which voters and council taxpayers of Wolverhampton have little influence, becomes too great to be stopped.
The draft BCP recognises the benefit of open space, yet the WEC has been included in the Plan as a site for potential development. For example…..
“ENV 8 2) - Development that would reduce the overall value of the open space, sport and recreation network in the Black Country will be resisted.” BUT: Houses on the WEC will reduce the value of the wider Smestow Valley Local Nature Reserve
“10.111 The provision of high-quality open space to serve the ….improvement of existing open spaces is critical to the overall aims of urban renaissance and environmental transformation across the Black Country.” BUT: The WEC has a high level of bio-diversity, it has a rare shallow wetland and is home to a protected species [text redacted]. It is integral to the LNR.
“10.115 Greenways are defined as linear features of mostly open character, including paths through green spaces, canal corridors and disused railway lines (although some of these could be brought back into rail use in the future), which act as wildlife corridors and provide attractive and safe off-road links for pedestrians and cyclists. They form an important network throughout the Black Country but in some cases are of poor quality or are severed by other infrastructure or barriers. The restoration of towpaths, bridges, public rights of way and the creation of cycle and pedestrian links to enhance the greenway network will be sought through planning conditions and obligations, transportation funding, and the support of other organisations such as the Canal & River Trust. Blue infrastructure features such as rivers and streams also provide opportunities for physical activity. BUT: Voluntary organisations the BBC Wildlife Trust, WREN, Wildside Activity Centre, Finchfield Waterside Care work to improve habitat and the infrastructure of paths and streams of the LNR. This green network will be severed at the southern end by housing development on the WEC
“10.116 To promote healthy living, it is important that open space and sports facilities, and places that people visit every day such as shops and schools, are located and designed so that people are encouraged to walk or cycle to them from their homes.” Local centres at Compton, Finchfield and Castlecroft are accessible along the traffic-free route of the former GWR line through the LNR, the Railway Walk. There are 10 schools and a college within easy reach of the Railway Walk; to my knowledge it is used as a traffic-free route to school for parents and pupils at Smestow, Castlecroft and Bhylls Acre schools. It is part of a commuter route from S.Staffs to the i54 and to city centre. The Railway Walk links to NCR 81 and is part of a 30 mile circular cycle route through the Black Country. BUT: traffic will cross the Walk if houses are built on the WEC.
Houses should not be built on the WEC. The WEC should not be in the BCP as a site for potential development.
Inclusion of the WEC in the draft Black Country Plan raises doubts about whether Wolverhampton was ever serious about ……
1. observing environmental policies if they conflict with goals to make money
2. the importance of health and well-being
3. sustainable and active transport
4. local democracy as represented by the Tettenhall Neighbourhood Plan, NPPF Green Belt policy, Black Country Core Strategy (BCCS) and Wolverhampton’s Unitary Development Plan
…..and whether CWC will be serious about meeting the challenge of climate change.
Accountability and the Black Country Plan
It was disturbing to read in today’s Express & Star of serious malpractice, corruption, Sandwell Council (E&S 11.10.2021) is at the core of democratic government. We rely on our councillors to hold officers to account.
There is much that is constructive about the draft BCP. It is an impressive piece of work. But the Consultation on the BCP is complicated and daunting for many of us. It is unlikely to be a true reflection of what people want. We rely on our elected representatives to hold our planners to account.
Accountability is at the core of democratic government. We rely on our councillors to hold officers to account. Therefore it is disturbing to read that some councillors cannot be trusted.
Planning regulations are so lengthy and complex - at 735 pages the draft BCP was too much for this amateur - it is no wonder that councillors get lost. An Aide Memoire to the Black Country Plan will help. It could also help the public understand the planning process.
Clearly no Summary will replace professional officers. At all levels of bureaucracy there is mismanagement. Unfortunately Councillors can easily be misled by Officers, especially when a lack of transparency is part of the culture of the planning department, as I have discovered over the last six years while exploring the reasons for granting outline planning permission for houses on the WEC.
What is needed is a change in bureaucratic culture: line managers at all levels of seniority must be made to understand that they will be publicly held responsible for serious mishaps and expected to resign.
Nolan’s Seven Principles of Public Life should form the basis of a Code of Conduct for all council officers.
Finally, front-line officers should be able to admit to mistakes without fear of reprisal, and should be encouraged to critically question planning decisions in order to arrive at decisions which are just and fair, and in line with the Black Country Plan.