Create or Sign a Petition

  • Details
  • Signatures
  • Response to Petition
Oppose the demolition of 135 Erdington Road
Petition has closed and a response from the council has been published.
We oppose the demolition of 135 Erdington Road. Although the application was initially refused we've now been advised that it could be approved, and we stand against this for the following reasons:
1. Residents concerns about increased traffic congestion on the Erdington Road have yet to be addressed. Many of us have written to councillors but we've received no answers.
2. Many residents face the real prospect of houses being built directly behind their back gardens. This will cause a huge amount of air, noise and sound pollution.
3. Council Officers made a recommendation to refuse the application to demolish the property. However, the Planning Committee approved the demolition subject to a number of conditions. Guidelines state that there must be a 13 metre distance between gardens and habitable windows, but residents have identified that there can only be a maximum of 11 metres. When this was presented to a planning officer we were informed that new residents will simply 'avoid opening their windows'. We seek a more open, rational and constructive approach from council officials.
Not Specified
Tuesday, 25 July 2017
Wednesday, 2 August 2017
Samuel Crawford
This petition currently has 55 signatures in total.
Petition Signatories
55 electronic signatures
 Page 1 of 6, items 1 to 10 of 55.
Marissa Bayley
Lorraine Betts
Jeffrey Bird
Jill Bird
James Bird
pat bowman
Jackie Brown
Sarah Cartwright
Emily Collis
Elaine Cox
This petition has been reviewed and the following response has been offered:
Apologies for the late response to the petition. The matters raised in the petition, namely the concerns around increased traffic congestion on Erdington Road; pollution arising from new development to the rear of existing properties; and the decision of Planning Committee to approve the application despite a recommendation approved by Committee formed part of the consideration of Planning Application 16/1153. Each of these matters is addressed below. Through the consideration of this Planning Application, the Council considered the impact that the development may have on the highway network, arising from the increase in properties on the site from the three additional dwellings (1 demolished and 4 new homes built) was not of a level to sustain a refusal of the application at an appeal With regard to the concerns around noise and disturbance arising from the proximity of the development, it was assessed through the consideration of the Planning Application that the impacts arising from the development would not be at such a level, that there would be conflict with adopted policies relating to environmental impact. Although the recommendation of officers was to refuse, Planning Committee can reach a different decision depending on the weight they feel appropriate to give to each material planning consideration and in this case, the view of the Committee was to approve the development. With regard to the separation distance between the proposed buildings and the existing properties in Hayfield Grove, the building to building distance is just in excess of the 13.0 metre distance set out in Annex D of the Council’s adopted Design Guide. Whilst the Council is mindful of the public interest in this Planning Application and the concerns raised, these have been considered in the context of adopted policies, and the level of harm arising from the development was not considered a significant level to justify withholding planning permission in line with the advice in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).
DateUserDescriptionStatus
 Page 1 of 7, items 1 to 10 of 66.
30/04/2018 16:53 Deborah Longley Response ApprovedResponse Published
30/04/2018 16:53 Deborah Longley Response submitted for approvalResponse Awaiting Approval
03/08/2017 00:04(System Event)Petition Closed (responder emailed requesting response)Response Pending
02/08/2017 07:24Unregistered UserPetition Signed: PHILIP TWINEPetition Active
02/08/2017 07:20Unregistered UserPetition Signed: Ann TwinePetition Active
31/07/2017 17:05Unregistered UserPetition Signed: James BirdPetition Active
29/07/2017 22:47Unregistered UserPetition Signed: Elaine CoxPetition Active
29/07/2017 20:57Unregistered UserPetition Signed: Leanne GallagherPetition Active
29/07/2017 20:53Unregistered UserPetition Signed: Janet SimPetition Active
29/07/2017 10:40Unregistered UserPetition Signed: Peter Josebury Petition Active

Search for Petitions