Why do I even bother when a rich guy can unfortunately everything I work for and more?

[BirminghamWildlifeAdvocate]

My local council has had an application submitted to remove a massive portion of woodland which connects two nature reserves, is alongside a river which acts as a corridor for nature. Deer, badgers, hedgehogs even otters use this area to move through birmingham. For food, to breed, to live.
And someone has decided they would like to build houses on that area and destroy hundred year old trees, homes and food sources of countless animals.

The planning application includes these words "the site must be checked every morning for trapped or dead deer." So they know and expect to kill wildlife.

This is the middle of Birmingham by the way, a major city with limited green space. Why can't they build on the countless empty unused carparks? The dilapidated buildings and warehouses? Why here? Why this magical piece of land that contains so much? For 14 houses?
I know there is a housing crisis but these won't be houses for socal housing, they will be really expensive and massive and nobody i know will be able to afford them.

This site will most likely cause flooding, the area was purposely left over a hundred years ago to act as a flood plain.

There have been over 60 objections so far. I started a petition and got over 700 people to sign it. I was told by my local mp that it probably won't be enough and even though they are supporting me and raised an objection themselves, it will probably go ahead as the developers have a right to appeal of they are refused but 3rd parties don't if it is accepted.

I don't know how I can live in a world where I can spend all of my time and money trying to be eco friendly, when someone else with more money can say "right let's destroy this so I can get even more money!" I can't believe it. I feel sick and so worried for my children's future. For their safety.
There have been 2 similar developments on green spaces in my local area in the last decade. Why?

I'll Show you the link. If anyone can spend the time to object. This goes against the National planning policy framework for England, and it goes against the Air Quality Action Plan for Birmingham 2021-2026.
But that doesn't matter because money can be made.

eplanning.birmingham.gov.uk/Northgate/PlanningExplorer/Generic/StdDetails.aspx?PT=Planning%20Applications%20On-Line&TYPE=PL/PlanningPK.xml&PARAM0=1169190&XSLT=/Northgate/PlanningExplorer/SiteFiles/Skins/Birmingham/xslt/PL/PLDetails.xslt&FT=Planning%20Application%20Details&PUBLIC=Y&XMLSIDE=/Northgate/PlanningExplorer/SiteFiles/Skins/Birmingham/Menus/PL.xml&DAURI=PLANNING

It is awful that humans are destroying so much around them. Yes we have a housing crisis but why should wildlife have to suffer as a result. We have become a very selfish species.

I think planners often given far less weight to comments from people who live 100s of miles from the application site, so you would best of posting this in local sites rather than on Mumsnet

@leatmarmite the deadline is today

Tweet or email chris packham, try to bring his attention to it

Also, unfortunately the Tory government has made the NPPF so development friendly over the years that it gets harder and harder for councilors from any party to refuse applications - worth people bearing in mind at the next general election

OP, the new Environment Act requires all new developments to have a Biodiversity Net Gain of a minimum of 10%.

If this plan will be destroying mature woodlands and other habitats I don't see how it can achieve that?

You need to speak to the planning officer and council ecologist, and make sure any objections reference that.

Also you can continue to submit comments even after the consultation deadline has passed.

I'm a keyboard worrier @KeyboardWorriers
I'm posting in here because I just spent ages crying about it and need a little space to say 'fuck those guys'
I've spent hours and hours doing basically nothing but 'trying' by contacting everyone i could.
I didn't even know the name of the local mps and councillors before. but its all for nothing. The site will be cleared. that will be it.

Isnt Sajid javud an monfor one of the neighbouring areas? Email him, worth a shot.

I'm local to this and know the site. Haven't objected, but I will, now.

*an MP for...

The council should of asked for an ecology report. The applicant will be expected to pay for this along with other pre planning reports . What you need to find is some rare Great Crested Newts as thier habitat is protected . Its really sad that these developers bulldoze so much green space but it's very profitable not like brownfield sites that have a whole host of issues

Honestly it's more like 13/14 of the houses that will go over the existing car park and the disused car park area. It's not a huge area that is being cleared, mostly just the scrubland around the car park. They are leaving in trees at the end nearest the canal.

Sorry if you already understood exactly what the boundaries are and are upset on that basis, but hopefully this helps you see that it's not as huge an area as you were imagining.

@bert3400

The council should of asked for an ecology report. The applicant will be expected to pay for this along with other pre planning reports . What you need to find is some rare Great Crested Newts as thier habitat is protected . Its really sad that these developers bulldoze so much green space but it's very profitable not like brownfield sites that have a whole host of issues

The PEA is included within the documents supplied as part of the application - it's on the website.

Miscounted the houses, I meant to say it's about half of the houses over the car park area. There's definitely some nice wild space being lost here which is a shame but it's also providing needed housing and making use of wasteland.

I’ve objected for you - no idea if it will help as I am no where near local.

So looks as if they are actually using a brownfield site for most of the development?

[quote BirminghamWildlifeAdvocate]@leatmarmite the deadline is today[/quote]
I will object. Not because of nimbyism as a pp said, but because I value a world with wildlife in it. There is actually very little social housing being built, it's all about profit.

I am very short on time today, and don't have time to pore over the details but my understanding with objections is that you have to tie it to existing planning legislation, @BirminghamWildlifeAdvocate do you have any points I could include in my objection?

OP,
Most councils have a Wildlife Officer, so you could encourage people to contact them.

Also the local press will probably run a story on it if you let them know the situation..

I hate this.

Housing is the new sacred cow of politics and no one will look objectively at how much is needed and what price we'll all be paying in the years to come for the fucking concrete monsters everywhere.

Those calling her a NIMBY haven't got a clue! People that live in this area definitely are not NIMBY types.
Not even sure who the developer thinks are going to buy luxury homes there, either
As OP says, there are literally dozens of empty homes within a mile radius of that site.

Who is the councillor? Do you come under Brandwood or KH there?

You need every one of the 700 to object individually. MP won't get involved but your local councillors especially the Green party would. Any local and national conservation groups? Protected species such as bats, dormice, newts etc? Presumably it is not greenbelt or aonb? Can it be registered as an Asset of Community value?

Exactly OP. With an unlimited supply of money a developer can apply for planning and be rejected, then tweak the application slightly and reapply. Over and over for decades until they get what they want. And once they get permission nobody else can appeal, that’s the end of it. Meanwhile the local community has to fight the same developer over and over, endlessly.

We had similar in my local area where we fought dozens of repeated applications on the same site for 25 years until the developer finally got their own way. It’s disgraceful and imo once planning has been rejected the same developer shouldn’t be allowed to apply again for the same site for at least ten years.

Contact CPRE, if the impact on wildlife or the countryside us significant they sometimes object. It's also worth checking whether it's been designated as any sort of protected habitat or as a nature recovery area. Your county council will have details of these sorts of designations on line.

@InsanityRocks

yes the area is situated inbreeding 2 nature reserves and acts as a wildlife corridor.

the National planning policy framework for England states that irreplaceable habbitats (this counts) shouldn't be destroyed.

The air quality action plan for Birmingham states that pollution levels are above legal limits and need to be lowered. This goes against the aqap and will cause more pollution increasing the already high levels.

flood risks

loss of biodiversity
wildlife corridor

thank you for objecting. it makes me feel a bit better that other people care top

OP you are an inspiration. Ignore the idiot NIMBY comments, some people won’t be happy until England is one big concreted mass.

Keep fighting and if this doesn’t end up going your way (and I sincerely hope it does) you’ll know you did everything in your power to try and stop it.

I really hope you get the result you want

and the carpark is a tiny portion. The trees will be cleared for the back gardens. plus the road.
its not about the size of the development. it is the area. This area is the only way for wildlife to cross birmingham. its like a road for the animals. it stretches from Walsall all the way across Birmingham and the muntjac deer use it.

not to mention flooding risks.

One mature tree can hold 30% of the rainwater for the area it stands without that water even touches the ground. The roots act as a drain letting water into the ground rather than sitting on top. losing that many mature trees and replacing them with a road will increase run off. you dont know the effects that will have in surrounding areas. its madness.