Birmingham Friends of the Earth Action Briefing Dec 98/Jan 99

Quinton Meadows

In the last issue (Oct/Nov), Quinton Meadows campaigner Tim Weller outlined the City Council's proposal to sell and exchange 18 acres of their land for the damaged 8 acre Site of Local Interest for Nature Conservation (SLINC) owned by property developers St Modwen.

Following a huge objection to this proposal, the City Council held a long awaited public consultation meeting on October 20th. Here, around 150 concerned (and often angry) members of the public delivered an overwhelming condemnation of the scheme to Councillor John Chapman. Indeed only one person, Neil Wyatt, Director of The Urban Wildlife Trust, spoke in favour of the proposals.

The debate began with Councillor Chapman outlining the City Council's proposal to swap 13 acres of their land for St Modwen's 8 acres and in addition to sell them a further 5 acres for around £2m. The justification for this swap was that it would enable the SLINC, which was now to be upgraded to a SINC (Site of Importance for Nature Conservation), to be permanently protected. This, he felt, was extremely important because if this land were lost to development the loss of the remaining acreage would in his view eventually follow.

Peter Beck of the Quinton Meadows Action Group responded. This was not a favourable swap. Obviously it was preferable that none of the land should be developed, but, if it came to it, then St Modwen should be left to develop their 8 acres. Instead part of the 18 acres of Council land should be set aside for nature conservation, which could be developed into a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI). He suggested that the 8 acre site was too small to make it worthwhile for St Modwen to develop it anyway and that this swap was playing right into their hands. The conclusion was drawn that the City Council, despite previous promises to the contrary, really did want to develop the land, especially since the £2m sale of the additional 5 acres would add some much needed funds to their coffers.

The meeting opened to the floor. Councillor Chapman was given a hard time by the people who had elected him, who accused him of reneging on explicit promises that the Quinton Meadows land would not be built on.

It was questioned why the previously designated SLINC area was now going to be upgraded to a SINC (Site of Importance for Nature Conservation), when during previous arguments to save the land, the City Council refused to recognise it as such. It was suggested that this change of heart over the designation rather conveniently gave weight to the City Council's argument that they were actually acting to save important nature conservation land rather than allowing the land to be developed for their own and St Modwen's mutual benefit.

On the subject of who would benefit from this deal, the matter of whether the people of Quinton would see any of the £2m received for the sale of the additional 5 acres was raised. Councillor Chapman was unable to give a guarantee that any of the proceeds would be targeted at Quinton.

Neil Wyatt (Urban Wildlife Trust) spoke of the important nature conservation value of the 8 acre site that was to be saved. Evidence was received from other conservationists disputing the conservation value being attributed to the land stating that it was not worth the huge amount of land that would have to be sacrificed to save it. The overwhelming feeling of the meeting was that it was the amount of land that could be saved that was of paramount importance.

Councillor Chapman announced that he had clearly recognised the overall feeling of the meeting, and promised to take all comments back to the relevant committees. The meeting ended.

As I write (December 4th) the swap proposals have passed through the planning machinery unchanged and permission for the land exchange is about to be granted.

The campaigners have lost this fight. They expressed their disappointment that the outcome of the public consultation did not appear to have been considered in the decision. They also condemned The Urban Wildlife Trust (UWT), who advise the Council, for not consulting the local experts in respect of Quinton Meadows, before reaching their conclusions. Indeed some went as far as to suggest that UWT were acting on the Council's behest.

For their part, UWT feel they are being pragmatic and are trying to get as sustainable a development as possible. This would include porous asphalt, ponds, rainwater collection, solar panels etc.

There does seem to be an increasing chasm between the Quinton Meadows Action Group and The Urban Wildlife Trust and it would be useful for everyone (including the City Council) to explain their positions to this newsletter. We hope to hear from all parties before the next newsletter.

Brett Rehling