Furious Wolverhampton residents wage war on ‘devastating’ warehouse plans just yards from their gardens

The Pendeford Business Park Residents’ Action Group wants to halt proposals for the 10-acre former Lloyds Banking Group site off Wobaston Road.

Disruption began for locals in January, when what they claim was a ‘vague’ leaflet came through the door for ‘Pulse’, with no mention of what the new development would be used for.

Residents originally took issue with the likely disruption and damage to the area which this type of site could cause, however, a lack of communication from the council has inflamed frustrations.

Teresa Owen, a representative of Pendeford Business Park Residents’ Action Group, lives very close to the site, but has friends who are struggling as the prospect of a delivery hub at the end of their gardens looms.

She said: “I've got a friend who lives there whose husband, whose partner is very, very ill at the moment and going through treatment.

“So having all this worry on top isn't good. They should be focusing on their treatment, focusing on getting better. It's just devastating

“I'm trying my best for the area, for my friends. All my neighbours, we deserve better, really.

“Also you've got to remember as well that a lot of the houses closest, they're all private houses, so they're all mortgaged.

“One of the frustrating things when you are objecting to planning applications is that what is not classed as a material objection is ‘loss of value to your home, which is crazy!”

While trying to make their voices heard, residents also raised questions regarding how the £12 million loan from West Midlands Combined Authority to the developers was approved, alongside whether they are being purposefully ignored.

Teresa said: “When the leaflet had come through the door, I knew straight away that that was going to be the worst possible type of development that could be proposed for this area.”

She has worked in the architectural industry for the last 20 years and has never faced so many challenges while dealing with a planning council.

“I'm kind of used to working with lots of different councils. Some of them are better than others. Some of them are very good, some of them are a little bit more lacking in their robustness,

“But I've never ever come across a planning council that operates the way that Wolverhampton does. And I think that's what's been the hardest part through all of this, really, is because we just don't have confidence.”

A City of Wolverhampton Council spokesperson said: “The planning application has been published on our council website since 19 March 2026, where the submitted plans and documents can be viewed.

“To date, the Council has received a significant number of representations of objection. All relevant planning issues raised by objectors will be considered before the application is determined.

“If anyone has any additional comments about the proposed development, they can raise planning issues online. It is likely that the application will be reported to the next scheduled Planning Committee in January 2027.”

The action group, however, have not felt like their objections are being properly considered.

Teresa, after obtaining the consultation comments through a request for environmental information, said: “I don't feel in the statutory consultation comments that some of the consultees had done their job and scrutinised that and asked for further information.

“I know that they have on the noise front but I don't feel on some of the other things, like traffic and the air quality, that they've actually pushed for that. And this is where I've raised issues that it's not compliant with local and national policies.”

Many residents are concerned, alongside the traffic, noise and air pollution, with the size of the buildings being imposing. Teresa said: “What they've done is they've submitted a little statement with some CGIs. All done from an angle away from the houses.

“Basically, saying it's policy compliant. But which policies is it compliant with? And it's just those things,

“But the council isn't pushing back and saying, ‘Well, you've made this statement, but you need to provide evidence.’

“I've got many emails between myself, the council. Local ward councillors, all raising these points, but we're not getting anything back. We've just completely been shut out.”

The action group are concerned about the proposed site being so close to “an established residential area and existing businesses, including a private SEND school and SpaMedica Hospital”, but they also have concerns about the council’s operation.

Residents believe there are questions to be raised about the publicly-funded £12.2 million loan to the developers, alongside the alleged overlapping positions held by Wolverhampton's Council Leader, Stephen Simkins, who is Chair of the WMCA Investment Board which approved loans to the developer.

However, a West Midlands Combined Authority (WMCA) spokesperson has said: “The £12.2 million publicly funded loan was approved by the WMCA in February 2026.

“The planning application was published on the council’s website in March 2026 and we understand it will go to the planning committee in January 2027 for a decision.

“Councillor Stephen Simkins was not a member of the Investment Board in February 2026. He became chair of the investment board and attended his first meeting in June 2026.”

As of time of publication, the online planning portal to view applications was not accessible to the public. While struggling to nail down details on the planning process from the council, Teresa has been filing EIR requests (Environmental Information Regulations) to find out what’s going on.

She added: “Unfortunately, Wolverhampton Council do not publish their statutory consultancy comments online, like all other councils do.

“I've requested them via an EIR, because I kept being shut down from every other possible request that I'd done. I don't feel that they sent me everything. I think they just sent me historic stuff.

“But what was missing from that pack was, actually, the planning officers’ comments on the development. Pretty much there were lots of other comments on there, but there wasn't his.”

Teresa insists the group is pro-development, but are after the ‘right kind’ of development.

Despite what developers say, Teresa believes there are other options than a distribution centre which could see lorries passing through the residential area at all hours.

She added: “COVID changed a lot of working practices, especially within offices and things like that. But I still feel that there definitely is a need for smaller, flexible office spaces or even start-up business suites.

“If you think about it as well, one of the things that I've mentioned is about the different strategies and policies that the council have got in their growth strategy. That outlines all those sorts of things.

“It outlines that their plan is that they want to see more professional services, digital industries, research led businesses, all coming into the city. So to do that, you need these smaller, flexible office spaces.”

Teresa added: “A lot of action groups just oppose development altogether. I do disagree with that. I'm obviously pro development, but the right type of development.”

The Express & Star has reached out to Pulse for comment regarding the plans.