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

ChardonnaysPetDragon I agree with you.

Oh and I am Post Graduate qualified Ecologist with over 30 years experience just while we are throwing around qualifications and snotty comments about people's ignorance.

Ecology reports need to be written by an independent body and planning fees must be amended to fund this.

Oh please.

Of course it matters who pays you. You cannot be independent if the developer pays you. You are in their pockets.

Sorry, not you personally, but as a principle.

I don’t know you and I’m not saying you personally are in someone pockets.

@Redcart21

I’m sorry you sound like a NIMBY. There is a housing shortage and people need houses to live in. It’s not as easy as saying build on brownfield sites as very often these sites are not fit for purpose for housing, they don’t attract families to live in those areas, lack of outdoor/green space and parking for houses. It can also be far more costly to build on brownfield sites.

It’s easy for you to say this sat in your home in a lovely area surrounded by greenery. There are thousands of families who need appropriate housing which there is a lack of.

Couldn't disagree more. There is plenty of brownfield land and if it costs more to develop, tough. Green field development should be an absolute last resort. We also need more housing suitable for couples and seniors so that we can free up some of the existing housing stick for families. Older people don't want to move into tiny flats but many probably would move into easy to maintain bungalows with room for hobbies and guests.

There are also thousands of empty houses that could be brought back into use.

@ChardonnaysPetDragon

Oh please.

Of course it matters who pays you. You cannot be independent if the developer pays you. You are in their pockets.

Am I really, my species licences are mine personally, so are my licence returns. They are not owned by any developer they have been paid for by myself and gained over years of hard work and I answer to Natural England if I breach my licence conditions. If we do anything illegal not only does the the developer end up in court, so do I. Site licences are my responsibility and I am just as liable also as the named ecologist under the licences, so once again you don't know what your talking about. If you think people like me studied and worked so hard for years to become ecologists and hate nature you are seriously deluded.

@KeflavikAirport

Fucking hell. Cutting down trees to put water in plastic bottles. The planet is fucked.

My word isn't it just.

@MapleMay11

Is this a site that was committed to develop in the LDP? What does the Phase 1 PEA state about the likely ecological impact? What mitigations have been proposed in the planning application? Based on this, why not try to schedule a call with the ecologist at the planning department to discuss your concerns so you can construct a meaningful evidence -based objection before the consultation period ends.

This is pretty much what I was going to say. If the labs had already been designated the housing on the LDP, then you may well bf fighting a loosing battle. What you could influence with comments and petition is Biodiversity Net Gain, which is brand new law under the Government’s 25 year environmental strategy - in principal it strives to make all development sites richer in biodiversity than before. I don’t know if it will apply to sites already designated under the LDP, but I would imagine so. Flooding is also a genuine issue. If the site is in the flood zone of a main river the Environment Agency flood risk management must be consulted; unfortunately our comments are advisory rather than statutory and may be ignored, although it is likely that the the planning authority will impose conditions on ground floor construction and use (eg not living space).

Anyone's credibility can be called into question when they are being paid by the Developer.
Whether it is for a pre- planning survey or on site monitoring.
Post planning monitoring and enforcement also needs to be addressed. Its like the planning wild West where I live, people do what they like because they know enforcement have no resources or backbone.

I am sure all these nimbys also complain about lack of housing every waking hour of the day.

The council employs its own ecologists to check the report that will be submitted by the developer's ecologist with the planning application.

If the council ecologist does not support the findings of the report, they will object to the application. Ecology & biodiversity carry a lot of weight in planning applications these days, thanks to the new Environment Act.

As I said in a previous post, the applicant must be able to demonstrate a Biodiversity Net Gain of at least 10%. OP, what does the planning application say on that?

Lack of houses - you mean like lack of the fuel a few weeks back?

In my village 200 new homes were supported as young people who lived in the village were struggling to stay and the Developer bigged this up and sailed through planning. The new builds are 60 to 70K more than other comparable older houses on the market. So 300K for an older semi £379 for a new build. Yup you've guessed it all of the houses have been bought by people out of the area - no locals can afford them.

Council ecologists check the report that has been written by an ecologist paid by a developer - usually conducted in November where I live and usually inaccurate.

I really hope that the Biodiversity Net Gain of at least 10% will make a difference. It also needs to be monitored post planning and enforced though large developer fines, otherwise it is useless.

My question for the other ecologists on this thread, as anyone's credibility can be called into question. Just out of curiosity besides consultancy how many infrastructure projects and residential projects have you actually project managed from pre-construction (early works), right through to post construction as the senior ECoW on the project, pushing for design change, mitigation, monitoring, organising site licensing and working with natural England and other involved parties not just the local council ecologist and I'm not talking just watching brief through the whole lifecycle of the project? As is seems some are purely talking from a consultant ecologist point of view . From my experience many consultants don't have a clue what it means to project manage as development from an onsite ecologist/ECoW role.

Lol @Evergreenblue, how many would make you happy? How much professional detail would you like . You may be good or bad at your job who knows - I very much hope that you are good. But until ecologists are independent of the developers purse then why shouldn't their impartiality be queried?

OP, contact your local Councillors regrading this planning application ASAP. Find out the Planning Committee members and contact them too.

@Mangowood exactly the answer I was expecting from you.

I’m in Birmingham as well and same thing has happened to the huge ex golf course behind my house, it hasn’t been used for donkeys years so is full of wildlife, streams and trees that are hundreds of years old. Bloor homes put numerous planning applications in that were all rejected by Birmingham council, they then made a donation to the Tory party and suddenly the government overruled the council and now we have 700 new homes being build in an area already congested and with a shortage of schools, doctors and dentists. It really is all just about money.

@Evergreenblue I love the passion you have for your work, hopefully you don't end up as jaded as me .

Keep fighting op, but don't expect to win. The rich always win and we will end up living on concrete, covered in water because of floods. That's your children's future folks. Start building a boat, not a house.

This story shows just how much developers care about valuable wildlife habitats - ie they don't give a damn!

It’s happening where I live too. If you’ve got the money the local council planning dept is in your hands. There was a really sad photo a couple of years ago showing a deer standing in the middle of a cleared section of woodland looking bewildered. The local millionaire builder was given permission to build a housing estate there. I despair of it all.

@Evergreenblue

Op speaking as an ecologist myself who works on big projects, please DO NOT do what some of the previous posters have been suggesting with regards to GCN, bat boxes ect as these are species that are heavily protected and you will be breaking the law yourself, interfering with these species if they are present with out a personal licence. On projects like this we spend years/months/hours monitoring/surveying and planning these areas for species and have very strict licencing procedures we have to follow and to comply with Natural Englands strict licencing requirements. The ecologist involved won't reply to you, so don't expect them to. More often than not people protesting and complaining are not aware of mitigation and ecological works and nearly always do more harm than good without realising the harm they are doing to wildlife due to a lack of understanding and knowledge of the work being carried out. If you really want to assist you honestly have to main options, the first work with the developer and local community groups try to identify enhancements to the development and offer community engagement as good publicity they and the council will listen. Alternatively retrain as an ecologist, just like I did and make changes from within, no projects I have worked on are influenced by protesting they just hinder and cause more issues, quiet often claiming wins if our design changes or works stop quite unaware it's is honestly nothing to do with them in the first place, It's just pure coincidence.

What a bizarre post. You can stop developments by protesting. We did. There was a plan to build on fields behind our house that are a wildlife corridor for foxes, badgers and deer. Owls roost in the trees beyond. We have bats. We protested and they sloped off to build somewhere less environmentally damaging.

If you’ve got the money the local council planning dept is in your hands.

This just isn't true, although lots of people believe it to be. Policies exist for a reason and are rigorously applied.

But planning recommendations by Planning Officers can be overridden by being voted on at Planning Committee by District Councillors who quite often are local and have a lot of local connections.

Also council funds are not endless when faced with aggressive companies like Gladman.

Brownfield developments could be exempt from CIL for example to encourage redevelopment of these sites.

There also needs to be appeals system against positive planning decisions (rather than just developers being able to appeal if their application is refused) and away from Ministers and potential influence from large party donors.

@sst1234

I am sure all these nimbys also complain about lack of housing every waking hour of the day.

What a load of shit.