Publication Plan November 2022

Object

Representation ID: 3987

Received: 23/11/2022

Respondent: Inland Waterways Association (IWA)

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

The housing allocation at Boscomoor Lane, Penkridge has had no public consultation as it was not proposed in the 2021 Preferred Options plan. It is unnecessary given the major housing allocation North of Penkridge. It is Green Belt land, the suggestion that it has lower value is subjective, and no very special circumstances have been demonstrated. Despite a key requirement being to retain and reinforce trees and hedgerow to protect views from the Staffordshire & Worcestershire Canal Conservation Area, it will significantly damage its open rural setting. This is not justified nor consistent with national policy on Green Belt.

Comment

Representation ID: 3988

Received: 23/11/2022

Respondent: Inland Waterways Association (IWA)

The northern part of the Land at Cross Green strategic development housing allocation borders the Staffordshire & Worcestershire Canal, although the Indicative Concept Plan (Appendix F) shows this as “green space network with biodiversity improvements”. The canal is a historic waterway and a valuable amenity and recreational corridor providing leisure boating, walking, angling, cycling and nature conservation benefits to the area. It is designated as a Conservation Area for its special architectural and historic interest. IWA is content that in principle the green space will protect the canal and its Conservation Area, subject to more detailed plans and consultation.

Comment

Representation ID: 3989

Received: 23/11/2022

Respondent: Inland Waterways Association (IWA)

Requirement e) includes active travel links to “the nearby canal towpath network”. However, the canal towpath is on the opposite (west) side of the Staffordshire & Worcestershire Canal from the allocation site with the only bridges at Cross Green Bridge 71 and Brinsford Bridge 70 being outside the allocation boundary, so it is not clear how this will be achieved. Any proposal for a new foot/cycle bridge crossing of the canal should be of high quality design to respect the canal’s Conservation Area status and be subject to early consultation with CRT and IWA.

Object

Representation ID: 3990

Received: 23/11/2022

Respondent: Inland Waterways Association (IWA)

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Penkridge site 006 Land at Boscomoor Lane has had no public consultation as it was not proposed in the 2021 Preferred Options plan. It is unnecessary given the major housing allocation North of Penkridge. It is Green Belt land, the suggestion that it has lower value is subjective, and no very special circumstances have been demonstrated. Despite a key requirement being to retain and reinforce trees and hedgerow to protect views from the Staffordshire & Worcestershire Canal Conservation Area, it will significantly damage its open rural setting. This is not justified nor consistent with national policy on Green Belt.

Comment

Representation ID: 3991

Received: 23/11/2022

Respondent: Inland Waterways Association (IWA)

Gypsy and Traveller sites GT05 Granary Cottage and GT23 Glenside are both within sight of the Staffordshire & Worcestershire Canal Conservation Area and the Key Requirements of pitch positioning and of tree and hedge boundary reinforcement to protect the setting of the listed canal bridge and the Conservation Area are supported. GT08 Brinsford Bridge is directly canalside and has a history of ignoring planning conditions so the Key Requirement to establish a hedged boundary along the canal bank should be enforced.

Note that Inset Plan 51 wrongly labels site GT23 as GT05, and site GT05 is not labelled.

Comment

Representation ID: 3992

Received: 23/11/2022

Respondent: Inland Waterways Association (IWA)

The criteria in d) that sites be designed to ensure privacy of adjacent users including residential canal side moorings is supported.

Object

Representation ID: 3993

Received: 23/11/2022

Respondent: Inland Waterways Association (IWA)

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

The statement that a Conservation Area Management Plan has been published for each of the Conservation Areas in the district is untrue. There are no CAMPs for the 3 canal Conservation Areas in the district. The only documents on the Council website are the original Conservation Area designation documents for the Staffordshire & Worcestershire Canal (1978), the Shropshire Union Canal (1984) and the Stourbridge Canal (undated). The absence of an updated assessment and management plan for the Staffordshire & Worcestershire Canal resulted in a failure to properly characterise and defend the Conservation Area against the West Midlands Interchange NSIP.

Comment

Representation ID: 3994

Received: 23/11/2022

Respondent: Inland Waterways Association (IWA)

The Key Evidence list includes Conservation Area Appraisals and Management Plans 2010, but these are not included in the Evidence Base in Appendix A or on the website.

Comment

Representation ID: 3995

Received: 23/11/2022

Respondent: Inland Waterways Association (IWA)

IWA is content with the policy and its supporting text on the development of canal side facilities, recognition of the heritage and recreational value of canals, and safeguarding the route for restoration of the Hatherton Canal.

However, Inset Plan 54 is labelled Lichfield Hatherton Canal Protection Line and the word “Lichfield” is superfluous and should be deleted.
Also, this plan does not cover the full extent of the protected route. The previous Inset Plan 50 of the 2018 Site Allocations Document was in landscape format and included its continuation west of Four Crosses to Hatherton Junction at Calf Heath.