Don’t miss out!

Get all the most important news and events to your inbox.

Organisers of a meeting protesting against plans to remove land in Burntwood from the Green Belt says the “outrage” amongst residents was clear to see.

Lichfield District Council has earmarked a change of status for farmland bordered by Coulter Lane, Nether Lane, Rugeley Road and Church Road.

A map of the area Burntwood Action Group says is “under threat”

A meeting was called by Burntwood Action Group earlier this month where representatives from the local authority as well as Burntwood Town Council.

A spokesperson for Burntwood Action Group said:

“The public meeting helped to demonstrate local outrage at Lichfield District Council’s proposal 

“Over 200 people attended the meeting to listen to and comment on both perspectives, with many of the audience critical of the proposal.     

“Following the meeting we have received hundreds of objection letters and they will be forwarded to the council before the consultation period deadline of the 24th of January.”

Burntwood Action Group spokesperson
Part of the land which could be moved out of the Green Belt

The campaign group has also urged residents to make sure they have their say directly during the consultation. The spokesperson added:

“Whether your concerns are increased traffic density, the belief that there is sufficient brown field land already available, that the loss of this land further destroys the rural setting of Burntwood, or that the council have not made a case that there are exceptional circumstances for the removal of this land from the Green Belt, then please make every effort to object now. 

“Every single objection is very important and will have to be acknowledged and counted by Lichfield District Council.

Burntwood Action Group spokesperson


Founder of Lichfield Live and editor of the site.

5 replies on “Campaigners say public meeting showed "outrage" of Burntwood residents over plan to remove Green Belt status from land”

  1. Just build more houses in Burntwood!!
    Don’t build any schools or doctors or build or organise any thing for youths to do!! Just build and make money for Lichfield residents to benefit from. Personally I think the council needs a good shake up and get rid of the oaps who are stuck in there ways and bring some youth on to the council who know what living life is at the moment low paid jobs Overcrowded schools overcrowded doctors nothing for the children to do unless you’re earning megabucks to pay for them to go iceskating cinema et cetera et cetera when you’re on a low wage this is impossible so where did the children end up on the streets causing chaos. But I guess Litchfield won’t listen again and build more houses saying they are cheap for the young ones but on minimum wage these houses are realistically out of reach

  2. I completely agree with C Hughes’s comment. It’s not just about bu8ld7ng more houses. If we need to create homes that are more affordable and attract and encourage the younger demographic to live in Burntwood there needs to be a complete overhaul of doctors local shops, banks, infrastructure etc etc. All extra housing will do is make money for greedy landowners and councils and create an undesirable and unhealthy environment for all living in the Burntwood, Hammerwich areas. If houses need to be built they should be kept to a minimum and developers only given the option of all brown field sites of which there is plenty. There is absolutely NO need to take away green belt which sets the area aside and allows all that live here a healthy and cleaner life. The green belt is what attracts the residents to the area in the first place and once spoilt by greed it can never be replaced and developers will just move on to ravage the next town!!! Please wake up to the realities of what irreversible and unnecessary damage this action has the potential to do!!

  3. I completely agree that we need services rather than ever more houses. That’s why I welcome the proposal by LDC to look at the possibility of a new settlement in the District and brownfield sites in the rural areas rather than here in Burntwood. It’s why we need to get our Neighbourhood Plan in place after years of delay. It’s also why we need to work together as a town to protect the whole of our Green Belt, not just one section of it, and not simply say, “Keep our part of the town as it is and put all the houses at the other end of the town.”

    I didn’t see “outrage” at the meeting. In fact, most people were considered, interested and respectful. However, I expressed my own outrage at the innuendo that councillors were somehow in the pockets of developers and the disgraceful “brown envelopes” comment by one BAG Committee member which has yet to be refuted. I told the meeting that Cllrs Pullen and Eadie are honourable men (not of the same Party as me, by the way) and that it is important to work with councillors rather than make such jibes – and I repeat it here. I hope BAG will refute and apologise.

  4. Why does the country need more houses, if you visit some towns such as Accrington you can find whole estates boarded up. In fact nearer the same in the Potteries

  5. Burntwood health centre cannot cope with any more patients its reach its limits. You have to wait nearly a month now for none emergency treatment. I agree with the other comments they need to change the leadership at the council. If think burntwood has had enough of them now.

Comments are closed.