One of the maim aims of this website is to oppose new build housing around the edges of the nature reserve, and of course, on the site itself. The nature corridors linking Sheepwash, the canals and The River Tame are vitally important and are not going to be protected by new build housing and the false claims of politicians and their lackies intent on cramming in as many houses as they can into urban areas.
The main threat lies in ludicrous plans in the Lower Tividale area, in the so called “Sandwell Plan”, which has seen many guises but the main one being politically driven quotas in poorer areas to protect so called “green belt” land- where of course they and their deluded servants of the public sector civil service all live. They are not “on your side” and they do not care about overcrowding, lack of services or anything else, as it merely serves to increase council tax so they can cover up corruption in public office and pure incompetence such as THIS.
Sandwell does not care about managing Sheepwash Local Nature Reserve, as we can repeatedly evidence from the number of issues reported and the number failed to be dealt with by the council. It is almost as if they do not want any nature reserves any more- and maybe that is their real aim through the utterly corrupt planning system, so stacked in favour of developers that it is almost now impossible to object. Again, it is the political class and their civil servants who have made it this way.
One case in point in John’s Lane appears to have recently been mooted to be resurrected after failure to materialise back in 2015.
The fieldhouse has been occupied by various uses over time, with the two most recent, a coppersmiths, and another that deals with scrap cars. The area is fairly extensive within this compound and borders the River Tame feeder known as The Tipton Brook.
This former business decided to attempt to sell the land some time ago, with a prospective buyer who just happened to be one of those I previously mentioned in that former UKIP MEP Mike Nattrass was one of the directors of this company. Nattrass lost his seat in 2014 after splintering away, but this deal was certainly on the anvil for some time.
DC/15/58189 Land off Johns Lane Proposed residential (C3) and care home development (C2) – (outline application with all matters reserved). Revised application.
The application by “Nattrass Booth Commercial” via a planning agent can be viewed below.
DC_15_58580-APPLICATION_FOR_OUTLINE_PLANNING_PERMISSION-804889
The first thing to be said is that “Nattrass Booth Commercial” never existed as a UK registered company with Companies House. Nattrass and a Chris Booth however set up a company with the named “winking fairy Limited”– probably one they bought dirt cheap off the internet in 2015. It is now known as
NATTYZAP LTD (09879603)
Booth holds a string of directorships at dissolved companies, including “Nattrass Booth Limited” which is the closest to the non existent NBC which can be viewed at the link below.
This company was dissolved in 2020. As with his business partner, Booth had political ambition standing as a candidate alongside Nattrass in something called “Independence from Europe”. ChrisBooth
Standing in the 2015 General Election, they both lost their deposits.
And so to the officer report. At the time, The Friends of Sheepwash made representations opposing the scheme given that it would threaten the site with puncturing into it, increasing the likely hood of fly-tipping and anti social behaviour as well as pointing out the protected status of the site.
We reminded the council that they had put in a barrier several years earlier to stop the car dumping and reversing into the cul-de-sac at the entrance to Sheepwash to dump vast quantities of all sorts. Some of the land in this area is council owned, the other private, but a right of way exists through the site, as it well knows.
Despite this, we get this utter bullshit by Anjun Dey which appears to have been informed by either an imbecile, or a planning shill in planning policy in favour of house building and stating outright lies to achieve that aim. It is malfeasance in public office and a disgrace. Any other application that officer dealt with, particularly that delegated by colleagues should be called in for scrutiny based on this fabricated statement of inaccuracy.
DC_15_58580-DELEGATED_OFFICER_REPORT-830730
“With regards to the second point of objection it should be considered that Planning Policy has stated that Sheepwash Park is not designated as a Site of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC). They have commented on the proposal and have not asked for additional information to be submitted with reference to nature conservation. Furthermore, The Wildlife Trust had been previously consulted but had not commented on the proposal. Therefore there is no obligation on the applicant to comply with policy ENV1 (Nature Conservation).”
Not only does this show the complete lack of knowledge of Sandwell Council’s planning policy, but we are expected to believe that this scum are interested in protecting what little green space that we have left in the borough, that is what it has not sold off to corrupt ex councillors and their well connected offspring, cronies or for themselves at dirt cheap rates!
As for the Wildlife trust, a statutory consultee, and God knows why and why and whom gave them that role, their interest in wildlife only appears to exist around the Sutton Park/Solihull area where they all live- strange that isn’t it?
What is more bizarre is that the status of Sheepwash is even shown on Sandwell Council’s planning portal for this application! Maybe Mr Dey should have read that instead of emailing his dick head colleagues.
A “SINC” is A site of Importance for Nature Conservation. Local authorities in theory hold information on SINCs within their area and include policies in their Local Plans and Local Development Frameworks to safeguard these sites from inappropriate development.
The application was approved in outline as seen by the decision notice which can be viewed below.
DC_15_58580-GRANT_OUTLINE_PERMISSION_WITH_CONDITIONS-823281
The permission granted gave the applicants a certain amount of time to submit a reserved matters application before starting the development- in this case three years from the date of granting the outline consent.
No further application took place and no activity on the site in terms of building development ever took place. Therefore with no start on this development, there is no current valid planning permission for this scheme or its change of use, and any attempt to resurrect it would require a new application.
In light of this episode and when we heard of the renewed intentions, a freedom of information request was put in to Sandwell Council to formerly ask them of the status of Sheepwash and the definitive right of way via John’s Lane.
“(i)Please provide by electronic means a map of the Local Nature Reserve with its designation boundaries.
(ii) Within this map or separate, please also show areas within the site designated as SINC or SLINCS, and could you confirm when these designations were made?
(iii) Please also provide a map showing the definitive right of way via John’s Lane Tipton onto the site.”
The council responded with a map of the Local Nature Reserve which you can view HERE
The council also provided a map of the status of the site which can be viewed HERE.
Just to add to this, you can clearly see the buff cross hatched area covers the whole site, and also is headed by the council
“Sheepwash Site of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC) Endorsed 1999.”
I.E THESE MAPS ARE IDENTICAL IN THAT THE WHOLE OF THE NATURE RESERVE HAS THE STATUS OF A SINC.
The council also in the request in black and white stated
“Just to clarify, the designation date of the SINC was 1999.
This should be identified on the map which states that the SINC was endorsed in 1999.”
Therefore we can see that whoever in planning policy falsely stated it had no designation in 2015 was talking out of the crack of their arse.
In relation to the rights of way, the council provided a clear map of these which run or cross through Sheepwash and this can be viewed HERE.
This confirms that a part of RP97 exists through the site via John’s Lane across the area that would require considerations affected by the proposals in the planning application from 2015.
We will keep a watching brief of any further developments in this case, but will certainly object if it materialises again. The council officers in planning policy will never get away with making false statements like these again, and when it comes to The Sandwell Plan, we will be informing the planning inspector at examination of how they did.