Comment

Representation ID: 23540

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Historic England

This section of the Plan contains several tables that set out potential site allocations for development within the four Council areas of the Black Country. The tables include newly proposed site allocations as well as site allocations that have been carried through from existing development plan documents, as well as sites with planning permission and in some cases under construction. The Council have confirmed that all proposed allocations are available for consultation at this time.

Within the ‘further information’ column of the tables in this section of the Plan, there is rarely a reference to whether the significance of any heritage assets may be affected as a result of the proposed development. Occasionally, this is referenced but there does not appear to be a system with which this is the case. As a result it is difficult to ascertain whether the potential
harm to the historic environment has been considered in line with Section 16 of the NPPF.

Further, in the Plan there is a section which details site specific policies. For example, Paragraph A65 sets out that there is harm for the historic environment in Policy DSA1 and that any impact will be a material planning consideration. Applicants are also required to support their proposals with a Statement of Significance. We welcome a reference within this policy to the historic environment, however, we are unclear about what is meant by any impacts will be a material planning consideration and that applicants will need to support their proposals with a Statement of Significance. Is this material anticipated to be available at the next stage of the Local Plan consultation or is there an expectation that this information will be available during the development management stage? Historic England are keen to ensure that all sites are assessed at the Local Plan stage to ensure that the ‘in principle’ allocation of sites is acceptable and that any avoidance/mitigation/enhancement measures are set out at the outset within site specific policies. We do not support an approach that leaves the detail to the development management stage; however, it is unclear as to what is meant within the Local Plan currently. This site used as an example has the potential to affect a Grade II* asset and we need to be clear what the harm is and whether this can be overcome or not, in order to make an informed judgement and offer appropriate advice to the Council.

Paragraph A90 and A91 relating to Policy DSA2 uses the same language as above and sets out that there could be harm for the historic environment but relates that it will be a material planning considerations and applications are required to submit a Statement of Significance. Our comments can be reiterated for above and whilst we welcome the inclusion of a section for the
historic environment it is not yet clear how the impacts have been assessed and how any harm can be avoided or overcome or whether the site is suitable in principle.

Policy DSA3 contains more detail about the potential mitigation measures that could be appropriate but there is no requirement for a Statement of Significance to be attached to this proposed application. It is not yet clear what heritage assessment has
been undertaken and whether the mitigation measures identified are the most appropriate and whether development is suitable for this site.

There are four site allocation site specific policies included for Dudley within this stage but we are not aware of site specific policies for all potential allocations listed in the tables.

Within the Sandwell section we could not find any site specific policies or detail as to how the historic environment has been assessed.

Within the Section on Walsall the site specific policy details are written in a different way. For example, Policy WSA4 states that there is a Grade II heritage asset within the site boundary of the proposed allocation. The design principles set out the need for the heritage asset to be conserved and enhanced and must be informed by a ‘detailed heritage character assessment for the proposal’. Historic England requires an assessment to be undertaken to inform the Local Plan allocation and to assess whether allocating this site for new development is appropriate, through understanding the harm to the significance of the heritage asset and whether there are any suitable avoidance/ mitigation measures. The requirement for a detailed heritage character assessment is different to the requirement for a statement of significance requested within the proposed Dudley allocations. Further, Policy WSA8 for example is wholly within a Conservation Area yet there is no reference within the policy text to whether there is harm for the Conservation Area and whether development in this location is appropriate. How has this been assessed? There is a note that there is a listed building adjacent to the site but we have no understanding of how this heritage asset may be affected and the policy requires an assessment to be submitted with a future proposal only. It is possible that Historic England will wish to object to specific proposed allocations but it is not possible to raise specific issues given the lack of information available at this stage. There are not site specific policies available for all of the sites listed in the tables referenced to Walsall.

When considering the proposed allocations Wolverhampton presents a differing approach. For example, Policy CSA1 sets out which heritage sites may be affected within a wider setting than the previous approaches have demonstrated. Paragraph D43 sets out a list of heritage assets including landscape areas and designations that could be affected. However, in this case there is no requirement for a specific assessment to be accompanied by a proposal. What is the impact for the heritage assets listed? Is their harm to the significance of these heritage assets, including their setting as a result of proposed development and as such is this a suitable site allocation? We require the assessment to be undertaken at this stage in order to be able to make an informed judgement about each proposed allocation and offer the Council’s detailed advice. There are not site specific policies available for all of the sites listed within the tables.

Additionally, for all of the areas within this section there is also listed information about potential waste facilities yet this is not accompanied by any assessment data or site specific policies.

Based on the information provided currently we have concerns about the proposed site allocations and whether they are
suitable for development. Given the lack of available heritage assessment at this time we are unable to raise detailed comments on all of the proposed site allocations in order to ascertain which proposed site allocations we may object to or not. As a result of this we are concerned about the overall approach to assessing heritage and seek a meeting with each of the four Council’s to go through all of the proposed site allocations individually and consider how the Council can best assess the proposed site allocations that may harm the historic environment and whether all reasonable alternatives have been considered at the outset.

Further, we are aware that the Strategic Environmental Assessment/ Sustainability Appraisal (SEA/SA) has considered the historic environment within its assessment. However, the site references contained within the Plan are different to the site references contained within the SEA/SA assessment. There is one table that lists the SEA/SA site references and the site addresses but it is too time consuming for us as a statutory consultee to navigate the table assessments in the SEA/SA to understand the reference numbers linked to site addresses and then to locate the site addresses within the Plan and then locate the site number which is then located under a different policy number within the Plan. We have spent a considerable time
trying to understand what assessment has been undertaken and what the implications are for the historic environment at this stage but we have a limited resource given our regional responsibility. It would be helpful if at the next iteration of the Plan there was a transparent way of linking the SEA/SA assessment with the proposed site allocations within the Plan. Please see separate comments on the SEA/SA.