It has been some time since I wrote about this satellite waste dump of Albright and Wilson connected to The Birmingham Canal navigations in the same way that rattlechain lagoon received waste originally by boat.
In early 2022, following a disgraceful planning situation, Sandwell council once again rolled over for this Oldbury polluter as they always have in planning matters giving them the opportunity to claim some form of belated “remediation” over two decades after the shit from Oldbury had basically mothballed the site. I am still mystified why they are NOW keen on doing something with this land, and still speculate that they intend to sell it off for housing, though in every communication they have ever put out, and below here are the screenshots, they claim that this is not their intention.
not a possibility- but why is the question?
The website they set up and the pre cursor PR bullshit they will put out is a direct reaction to the truth of the matter that I have investigated and put on this website for local residents to read, AND NOTHING ELSE. Like with the 2013 cover up works at Rattlechain, they also set up a website, and that has now apparently mysteriously disappeared, where they again stated that they had no intention of using the lagoon for housing but these were “improvement works”- so I wonder if they have changed their minds on that one, or are just keen to hide what they claim to have done on their white phosphorus contaminated shit hole previously?
DC/21/66208 | Proposed remediation works including re-profiling of site, installing cap above underlying waste material to uplift site by 1.4m, with new sub-surface cut off boundary wall along eastern boundary and landscaping. | Land Adjacent Former Sportsground (The Gower Tip) Lower City Road Tividale Oldbury.
This application was approved by delegation, to which the officer of the council denied the opportunity of any real scrutiny of being put before the planning committee. It was a stitch up in that three objections HAD been received to qualify for that, and yet this was by passed with some rolling dialogue between the Canal and Rivers Trust and the council.
The conditions attached to this matter gave the company, whatever they call themselves now for this site as a holdings company, three years from the date to begin the work. With just days to go, it now suddenly appears that “Rhodia” have submitted more detail to discharge the conditions and begin the spin show cover up. WHY HAS IT TAKEN THEM THIS LONG?
Machines felling trees at Gower Tip February 2025
I had dissected the bullshit lies of Rhodia/Solvay and their agents in this post going over the documents and also asking many unanswered questions. I also pointed this out to the planning officer, CARL MERCER in objection, as well as emailing him, as well as sending the same email to the contaminated land officer for Sandwell, and an individual at The Environment Agency who deals with sites such as The Gower Tip. NONE OF THEM BOTHERED TO REPLY OR ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
There has been another chainsaw massacre to rival that that we have seen on the adjacent Duport/”rattlechain tip” just down the road.
The view from George Wood Avenue
We see some of the old familiar hall marks of Albright and Wilson/Rhodia lurking around above the surface.
In terms of the documents let’s go through them, in reference to the decision notice conditions listed below which Rhodia/Solvay now wish to be discharged- if ever there was an apt pun to describe such a site. 
DC_21_66208-GRANT_PERMISSION_SUBJECT_TO_CONDITIONS-1183876 (1)
DOC/25/00855|Proposed discharge of conditions 3a, 3b, 4a and 4b of planning permission DC/21/66208.|Land Adjacent Former Sportsground (The Gower Tip) Lower City Road Tividale Oldbury
The application for this is shown below. It is noted that this is made by the consultancy ERM and not Rhodia/Solvay and that Carl Mercer of SMBC advised them to submit this form.
DOC_25_00855-DISCHARGE_OF_CONDITIONS_APPLICATION_FOR_PLANNING_PERMISSION-1373885
A noise management survey has been submitted in Line with 3a and 3b. This is of course entirely theoretical and it will be left to local affected residents to complain about such matters. With work between 8am to 6pm allowed, good luck if you are a night worker.
DOC_25_00855-CONSTRUCTION_ENVIRONMENTAL_MANAGEMENT_PLAN-1373891
The main thrust of conditions 4a and 4b are once again theoretical with little regard for specific site contaminants and issues, which is very convenient in terms of avoiding mentioning the real reason for these pointless works.
DOC_25_00855-CONSTRUCTION_ENVIRONMENTAL_MANAGEMENT_PLAN-1373889
“Project construction is expected to commence in 2025 and last three years” !!!
What the hell does this even mean? Why would it take three years to supposedly stop rainwater getting into existing site conditions? Are they seriously not expecting anyone to raise eyebrows at this statement and length of time if this is some routine site maintenance job?
“The purpose of the CEMP is:
• To provide a mechanism for ensuring that measures to mitigate potentially adverse
environmental impacts are implemented;
WHAT ARE THESE POTENTIALLY ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS, AND IS IT NOT A BIT LATE IN THE DAY TO BE ADDRESSING THESE, 21 FUCKING YEARS AFTER THEY WERE GIVEN THE GREEN LIGHT TO SURRENDER THE LICENCE?
• To ensure that standards of good construction practice are adopted;
• To provide a framework for mitigating impacts that may be unforeseen or unidentified until construction is underway;
OH HOW WONDERFUL, THEY DO NOT EVEN APPEAR TO KNOW WHAT IS UNFORSEEN ON A SITE THAT HAD RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL BURIED WITHIN IT ACCORDING TO THE ORIGINAL SITE LICENCE APPLICATION. THERE DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE ANY IDENTIFIED CHEMICALS WITHIN THIS CEMP.
• To provide assurance to third parties that their requirements with respect to environmental performance will be met; and
• To provide a framework for compliance auditing and inspection to enable Solvay to be
assured that its aims with respect to environmental performance during construction are being met by the contractor”
OF COURSE, WE GET SOLVAY AS THE CLIENT IN THIS REPORT, AND YET RHODIA REMAIN ON THE NOTICES, EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE NOW CALLED “SYENSCO”. CONFUSED? YES VERY.
“3.11 PROTECTION OF WATER RESOURCES
Contractors will be required to take all necessary precautions to prevent the pollution of
controlled waters. Solvay will develop, in consultation with the EA, its advisors and relevant contractors, a site water management and drainage procedure for contractors setting out the measures to be implemented to control of the relevant construction activities. “
OH I’LL BE ASKING TO SEE THAT ONE.
the risk assessment is not site specific to the chemicals buried beneath the surface. It is a standard checklist and could apply to any building site, where at least in that regard you know what the end purpose will be- with this you don’t.
DOC_25_00855-RISK_ASSESSMENT-1373890
I can only warn residents living close to this site to keep detailed records of nuisance and airborne dusts arising from this site whenever works start and a daily log of events. Do not rely on a company that failed over decades to protect its own employees, yet alone the environment and public health whist dumping waste that they now want to cover up.