Councillors back protestors to reject controversial Dudley housing plan

More than 200 objections had been submitted against a proposal to build three homes on land on Culverhouse Drive, Brierley Hill, which forms part of the Clockfields Site of Local Importance for Nature Conservation (SLINC).

Planning officers had recommended approval of the scheme but during a fractious meeting of the authority’s planning committee on Monday, Dudley’s deputy leader, Councillor  Paul Bradley urged rejection.

Councillor Bradley said: “I was very disappointed to learn they had recommended approval for a valuable green space for development.

“Even the Wildlife Trust have strongly objected to this application, they don’t put SLINC protection or deeds of protection on no value brownfield land – this site has both.

“We have always collectively been a brownfield first council so can I ask again to save this essential, well-enjoyed green space, once it’s gone, it’s gone forever.”

Protestors applauded from the public gallery at the end of Councillor Bradley’s speech prompting calls for quiet from committee chairperson, Councillor Donna Harley.

The committee was told areas of the site are historically unstable and houses previously built in the area had been demolished due to subsidence.

Councillors also heard the application site was on top of an old quarry high wall which marked the edge of a coal seam and development could lead to mining related instability.

A report for the committee from officers said there were no objections from the coal authority to the plans as long as  approval came with a condition of appropriate site investigations and appropriate ground works.

The council’s ecologist also had no objections because of proposed mitigation of tree losses and a predicted 60 percent net gain in biodiversity.

Councillor Bex Collins was concerned about the SLINC designation and asked: “Why have officers now decided it’s OK to approve plans to build on a location with such a designation?”

Officers pointed out a previous application to build on the land had been rejected and an appeal to The Planning Inspectorate had also been turned down.

The planning inspector had however said with appropriate mitigation development could be approved and officers believed the applicant had made sufficient changes to overcome previous concerns.

Councillor Collins added: “I just feel if we approve this we are creating a precedent that may later lead to development on other SLINC sites.”

Councillor Asif Ahmed said: “One thing I have learned over the years is – any comments by The Planning Inspectorate go a very long way.

“I understand where the officers are coming from, I think should this application go to The Planning Inspectorate it would be unlikely for this to be refused.”

The scheme was put to a vote and refused because the committee did not believe mitigation in the application was enough.

A point from Councillor Shaun Keasey on the cost to the council of defending an appeal to the inspectorate prompted shouts of ‘residents don’t want this’ from the public gallery before more applause when Councillor Harley confirmed the application had been refused.