APOCALYPSE GOW!- The Gower Tip spin show – WHAT LOCAL RESIDENTS REALLY NEED TO KNOW

Zoiks, we have been here before…..  🙄

I had read in the phoenix entity “Rhodia limited” directors report document that they had intended to carry out remediation work on some of their sites in 2020, but had been foiled by “the pandemic”.

With dodgy activities that had taken place on the Gower Tip in 2019, it was fairly evident to me that this was one of the sites that they were referring to.

A brief recap is in order here to explain “the next steps” at this site and how this relates to a bigger more insidious picture that this company and those at Sandwell Council are behind.

I had contacted SMBC on seeing significant ground works taking place on the site, and was told by Alsion Bishop of the planning department, (who I am informed has now left the authority) that

 “I was satisfied following a walk over the site that these works do not constitute commencement of restoration works but are merely to inform the planning application.  I am informed that the planning application will be submitted early next year following analysis of the test results and full design being prepared.”

Obviously the planning application was delayed, but the explanation was crap. A large amount of material nearest to homes in George Wood Avenue- named after a brick manufacturer, had been scrapped back. Some 5 metres according to admissions from Rhodia themselves

They had started this in 2014 when I noted it on this blog , when sinking boreholes, and compare the picture above with that which I took then to see the further movement of soil away from the houses. Of course, this gives the impression that the buried materials on the site are further away from the houses and residents, BEFORE any soil tests are carried out in the planning application and published. They had therefore ample time to do this , and such a process where they can do this is absolutely bent- but so was the granting of planning permission to build these homes to start with next to such a hazardous waste dump!

I had noticed that signs on the frontage to the Birmingham Canal had also been changed earlier in the year.

SMBC were remiss in their monitoring of this site and the actual activities taking place on there, which as far as I am concerned put residents at risk when soils and dust were being carried around in the air and on the ground whatever Bishop or anyone else wants to think. 

But that is where the new planning application being proposed can be challenged, and where I for one will be objecting to it. 

I was sent the leaflet below by a local resident , and it appears that a website and newsletter were also set up , as they had been at Rattlechain when they knew that I was putting out the real truth and asking awkward questions about this Albright and Wilson hazardous waste dump. Let’s deconstruct this to show what their comms team are trying to do with the psychology of it.

“IMPROVEMENT WORKS”?

This is the same bullshit phrase that they used for the 2013 cover up works at Rattlechain , which were really about compliance with legislation for site closure- AND NOTHING ELSE. 

I would urge local residents to read the history of the Gower Tip site, which is far more definitive than these liars or their consultants would like to tell you. Of most importance is the timeline of key legislative actions at this site. Crucially Sandwell council via the EA confirmed in an FOI request that the site licence was surrendered in 1994- This was still under the Albright and Wilson era, and before the EA were set up in 1996- and therefore Sandwell council were fully involved here. 

Rhodia took over the site from A/W brand in 2001. Solvay took over from Rhodia in 2011. 

• The first question for “Rhodia”/Solvay spinners to answer is why do they need to carry out “improvement works” at this time, when there is no longer any site licence at the site, and no conditions on the site? Presumably, the regulators at the time- the useless West Midlands Hazardous waste unit run by Walsall council considered the state of the site satisfactory when they left it? But of course this was BEFORE any houses had been built right next to the border. 

Why did Albright and Wilson not consider “improvements” were needed at the site when surrendering the licence? Why did Rhodia for the next 10 years not consider that “improvement works” were needed at this site? Why has it taken Solvay Solutions UK Limited, a further 10 years to consider that “improvement works ” are now needed?

Also please bear in mind that directors like Tom Dutton, have worked throughout this period for all of this time under the three different company names from the same site in Trinity Street, so WHY HAVE THEY CONSIDERED THAT “IMPROVEMENT WORKS” WERE ONLY NEEDED 27 YEARS after the licence was surrendered? 

IS IT, MAYBE SOMETHING THAT THEY FOUND OR WERE HIDING IN THE MONITORING RESULTS THAT THEY THINK THEY NEED TO “IMPROVE” TO PROTECT RESIDENTS FROM HARM? IF NOT, AND THE SITE IS AS SAFE AS HOUSES, DO THEY NEED TO CARRY ANY “IMPROVEMENT WORKS” OUT? 

• They try to sell this as “attractive landscaping”. If it were the case, then why would they need planning permission just for that?
• “The community information event” or public exhibition is another spin tactic which has been used for years in order to claim that there has been some community participation, When anyone asks any awkward questions they will not answer them, or pretend not to know. It is a way of obtaining community concerns, and then systematically attempting to rebut them in planning documents.

PLANNING APPLICATION.

• No planning application would be needed for such works on an ordinary site, but this is no ordinary landfill site, and they of course do not elaborate as to what harmful chemicals are buried there or those capable of causing significant harm.
• For “Environmental sustainability” of the site, read “saleable package opportunity”.
• “Custodians”, “specialist”, “rigorous”– why are such grandiose terms used here, and why would “specialist contractors” be needed or “rigorous health and safety legislation” be needed if the site poses no risk to local residents in either its present state or that between which they intend for it to be?
• “The minimal” impact on wildlife and local residents is a matter for debate in terms of the health risks posed during and after works.

FUTURE USE OF THE SITE

• Note that “our” and “we” suddenly becomes “I” for inexplicable reasons. Who are you “I”?
• This appears to be a direct quote which came lifted from one of the newsletters put out under the name of “site redevelopment manager” John “quicksilver” Moorhouse, (or The Mercury Man). You will note however as I have that this director left the company in December of 2020, so anything HE stated then is not exactly any longer relevant, unless someone else named in any position at the company states it now.

• In the same June 2020 newsletter they claim that works would last “about 8 months”

 

STAYING IN TOUCH

• “We welcome comments regarding the improvement programme and will answer any questions you may have” Hey folks let’s see if they do.  😉 

WHAT IS THE GOWER LANDFILL SITE? 

Well , it’s a hazardous waste site for starters FFS!  😛 

I have outlined the real history of the site, and the chemicals of concern in the PDF below, but do realise that in the original site licence application it was admitted that “some radioactive wastes” had been dumped at the Gower Tip.

GOWER TIP FACTUAL HISTORY

“I Background

This site is a former clay marl hole which has been used as an industrial tip since 1938. The site has received large quantities of toxic and hazardous waste since this time. These are mostly comprised of various compounds of phosphorus together with some radio-active wastes, laboratory chemicals, solvents e.t.c. The site represents the major disposal outlet for the Company’s waste phosphorus pentasulphide and phosphorus susquisulphide.

These waste arisings are the main problem associated with this site since they are highly reactive especially with water. “

On this note, neither The Environment Agency or Sandwell council were in possession of any of the facts as to what type and what quantities, or how if at all this had been remediated when asked about the matter in freedom of information requests. HAD THE WASTES BEEN REMEDIATED, IS IT STILL THERE? Remember how Albright and Wilson had been fined for enriching phosphorus during their disastrous “remediation” of their Portishead site IN 1989. DID ANY OF THIS GET DUMPED AT THE GOWER WHICH CLOSED IN 1994? 

It is also news to me that this site received any waste from British Industrial plastics (B.I.P), and this information was not contained in the original licence application as evidenced above. Are Solvay trying to pull a fast one here in any liabilities caused by another company? I would like to know the source of this claim and the validity of it, as it throws into doubt the type of chemicals present at the site, and potential impact for co disposal.

THE REAL (ESTATE) STORY

We know this landscaping tale is bullshit because we can see from the joke Dudley port Supplementary Planning Document that there are ambitions for land conversion to housing all around the Gower tip site- to create more houses for site allocations. I have marked the said Solvay site with a relevant poison symbol so you can clearly see what I am talking about. The problem is The Gower Tip – a hazardous waste tip is piggy in the middle between the two areas either side of it. 

The recently published Black Country plan, (of more which I will be writing about soon), spells out these land parcels surrounding the Gower Tip site, and let’s therefore look at all of them. The policies map can be viewed below.

09d – Appendix D – BCP Policies map

You can see from this that parcels of land are numbered. Obviously you can see the areas around rattlechain lagoon and the Temple Way estate, but there are four more in close proximity to The Gower tip.

 

SAHO76 forms a direct land border with this site, and is currently an industrial area.

The Black country plan states the following about this area.

 

This states that some landowners on this site are looking to bring the site forward, anticipate that it could be ready between 2036-2038 with an area capable of supporting 64 homes. 

“HOU2” is a policy contained within the vast Black country plan which states thus.

What this basically means, is that these proposals would be unlikely to get planning permission as a result of this policy because the houses are too densely packed. We can therefore see in this context what “Rhodia’s” phoney Gower planning application is really about, and that is attempting to overcome this obstacle with them able to sell off this land eventually to the greedy neighbours who want to cash in. 

The other land parcels are

SAH227. Only 106 houses are thought to be available on this industrial site.

SAH099 Summerton Road-  32 claimed houses could be built here.

SAH229 Brades Road- submitted as a call for site- basically any industrialists who want to fuck off and leave behind contaminated land paid to be “cleaned up” by Andy Street’s tax payer rip off fund.

 

Taken together then let’s add up those numbers, and you can see how densely packed they are within a small area.

64+106+32+51= 253 new houses in this small area. When you add this to the nonsense proposed by rattlechain of 322 and 32, that adds up to 607 new houses in a mile square of Tividale. 

THIS IS NOT SUSTAINABLE AND THE AREA IS ALEADY SWAMPED WITH HOUSING. 

Obviously, I will be objecting to these allocations in the Black country plan which is currently out for consultation at the link below. PLEASE STAND UP FOR YOUR URBAN AREA AND COMMENT ON THIS PLAN, AS THE “GREEN BELT” LANDBANKERS, PLANNERS AND CORRUPT POLITICIANS ARE BANKING THAT YOU WON’T. THIS COULD BE AS SIMPLE AS STATING THAT YOU OPPOSE THE ALLOCATION OF HOUSING IN THE AREAS SHOWN ABOVE. 

Black Country Plan (dudley.gov.uk)

I will also be objecting to the planning application that is mentioned here.  I can only urge people living in this area to do the same, and also to lobby their local MP and councillors to get this shit thrown out.

So go along to the public exhibition and ask some awkward questions of “Rhodia”, but above all do not believe the spin they are trying to put out here, as if you have only half of a brain you will surmise from all this that this is no simple “landscaping” exercise for the common good.

YOUR FUTURE HEALTH SUFFERS FOR A FUTURE BENT HOUSING CONSTRUCTION LAND BUSINESS DEAL, AND THAT’S THE BOTTOM LINE.