Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council

Showing comments and forms 1 to 4 of 4

Comment

Draft Regulation 18 Sandwell Local Plan

Representation ID: 923

Received: 18/12/2023

Respondent: Canal and River Trust

Representation Summary:

The Trust is content that canal-specific implications arising from the Council’s draft Minerals and Waste policies and allocated sites (identified as being preferentially within Local Employment Sites) can be adequately addressed through the issues-specific polices identified elsewhere in this response, and in particular the use of Policy SNE6 - Canals (as requested amendments above refer). However, inclusion of the canal network within relevant policy and allocation maps (ACTION REQUEST) will enable developers to identify canal-related constraints at an early stage and engage with us accordingly. The Trust therefore requests on-going engagement from the Council on submitted pre-application enquiries, and also encourages developers to seek pre-application advice from us direct:

https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/specialist-teams/planning-and-design/our-statutory-consultee-role/what-were- interested-in/pre-application-advice (ACTION REQUEST).

See also comments on Appendix E and Appendix F below.

Full text:

1. Sandwell 2041: Spatial Vision, Priorities and Objectives

The ten ambitions for a successful Sandwell as set out in the Sandwell Vision 2030 continue to represent a set of aspirations to which the waterway network can successfully contribute, particularly:

- Ambition 1 (delivering strong policy support to combatting climate change adaptation and mitigation; and protecting and enhancing the natural environment, nature conservation and open spaces; and delivering opportunities for biodiversity net gain, landscaping and tree planting)
- Ambition 2 (protecting, enhancing and making accessible land for sport and leisure including active and passive recreation; and providing clear policy support for development aimed to deliver health and welfare infrastructure)
- Ambition 5 (promoting the development and improvement of attractive, safe and accessible public realm, support services and community infrastructure as part of new development and project delivery)
- Ambition 6 (delivering a co-ordinated and strategic travel and transport network through Sandwell that links communities to opportunities both within and beyond its boundaries, supported by appropriate planning policies and land use designations), and,
- Ambition 8 (promoting and supporting sustainable development that helps to meet local need/demand; and providing for sufficient services and facilities in locations accessible to all in Sandwell's communities.)

As such the Trust endorses the Sandwell Local Plan Vision 2041 and its emphasis on tackling climate change, and the promotion of the natural and historic environments, active and passive recreation and leisure opportunities, access to district and low-cost energy and heating projects, delivery of sustainable drainage, and emphasis on active and sustainable travel opportunities. In particular we support and acknowledge our allied role in delivering a number of the draft Plan’s key priorities and objectives under the headings of:

- Climate Change (notably Objective 1: Ensure new development takes a proactive approach to climate change mitigation, adaptation and carbon reduction, and that development is resilient to climate change, and Objective 2: Deliver sustainable development in locations where people can access jobs and services, delivering wider positive social and economic outcomes and protecting and enhancing local built and natural environments)
- Enhancing our natural environment (notably Objective 3: To protect and enhance Sandwell's natural environment, natural resources, biodiversity, wildlife corridors geological resources, countryside and landscapes, whilst ensuring that residents have good access to interlinked green infrastructure)
- Enhancing our historic environment (notably Objective 4: To protect, sustain and enhance the quality of the historic built environment, ensuring the retention of distinctive and attractive places and beautiful buildings, including listed parks, scheduled monuments and their settings, and Objective 5: To manage and maintain the wider historic environment across Sandwell, including parks and gardens, areas of industrial heritage value, sites of geological and archaeological interest and locally listed buildings, structures and historic assets)
- Improving the Health and Wellbeing of residents and promoting social inclusion (notably Objective 10: To provide a built and natural environment that supports the making of healthier choices through provision for physical activity and recreation, active travel, encouraging social interaction and discouraging harmful behaviours; Objective 11: Ensure new development and open spaces support health and wellbeing for all, reduce health inequalities and encourage active and healthy lifestyles, and Objective 12: To provide a built and natural environment that protects health and wellbeing through minimising pollution (air, noise and other forms), providing healthy homes, reducing the negative health effects of climate change and providing streets safe for active travel, and low emission travel for all)
- Good Design (notably Objective 13: Require new development to deliver a high standard of design reflecting local character and distinctiveness and that creates greener and safer places that people feel proud to live and work in)

- Promoting sustainable transport and active travel (notably Objective 16: To prioritise sustainable and active travel and seek to improve transport infrastructure to ensure efficient and sustainable accessibility within an integrated network), and,
- Meeting our resource and infrastructure needs (notably Objective 18: Ensure development is supported by essential infrastructure and services and promotes safe movement and more sustainable modes of travel through promoting greener travel networks for walking, cycling and public transport)

2. Spatial Strategy

2.18 The Trust endorses the ‘key issues addressed in the SLP’ as including Nature Conservation; Nature Recovery Network and Biodiversity Net Gain; Provision, retention and protection of trees, woodlands and hedgerows; Historic Character and Local Distinctiveness of the Black Country; Geodiversity and the Black Country UNESCO Global Geopark; Canals; The protection and enhancement of designated and undesignated heritage assets; and, Rejecting poor design.

2.30 As such we acknowledge the approach of Balanced Green Growth in forming the basis of the Sandwell Local Plan's Development Strategy (Policy SDS1). However, the Trust requests that our canal network be included within Figure 2 - Sandwell Spatial Map so that the contribution our network makes towards the delivery of Sandwell’s Spatial Strategy and overall Sandwell Local Plan Vision 2041 can be fully appreciated and realised by citizens and developers alike. (ACTION REQUEST)

3. Development Strategy

As set out within our response to the Issues and Options consultation the Trust welcomes the retention and enhancement of a canal-specific policy (Policy SNE6) within the Reg 18 SLP and as such does not seek the addition of replica canal-specific wording within every other relevant policy wording within the SLP. However, where specified we request cross-referencing to Policy SNE6 as identified in the requests below as a means of identifying the needs and opportunities of the waterway network in delivering Sandwell’s vision.

Specifically, the Trust notes Policy SDS2 – Regeneration in Sandwell and the extent to which the Dudley Port and Tipton, Wednesbury and Smethwick Regeneration Areas interact with the canal network. The Trust welcomes mention of our network within both policy wording and justification text for these areas and requests continued engagement through existing (e,g, Smethwick-Birmingham Corridor Framework and Rolfe Street Masterplans) and newer stakeholder engagement groups and the implementation and development of associated Supplementary Planning Documents resulting throughout the plan period (ACTION REQUEST).

Placemaking – achieving well-designed places

The Trust requests incorporation of cross-referencing to Canal Policy SNE6 within the justification text to Policy SDS4 - Achieving Well-designed Places, for example at para 3.64, to reflect the role active incorporation of the canal network can have in delivering good design, well-being, and sustainable travel and the need to take the canal into account when designing new development near it (ACTION REQUEST).

We believe protection and enhancement of the canal network through design, layout and integration into developments should always be an expectation for canal-side sites, as this is consistent with the NPPF chapters on design and the historic environment and the National Design Guide on integrating nature and public spaces. The avoidance of fly-tipping and anti-social behaviour reduction can also be achieved through the use of good design techniques. Future local Design Codes can also provide developers with detailed guidance encouraging high quality design, following on from the principles advocated within the National Design Guide and Design

Code. Given the importance and extent of canals within the borough such codes will need to address waterside developments specifically and various key design principles for successful canal-side developments could be outlined within them, including creating activation with the canal, natural surveillance and appropriate landscaping. The Trust requests consultation on any local design codes which are to be developed (ACTION REQUEST). We acknowledge that positive place-making next to a canal, waterway or water body is often site-specific on a case- by-case basis, and therefore early consultation with the Trust is recommended to receive guidance on the best approach to achieving good design. This could be through stakeholder-led master planning approaches or through individual pre-application engagements. The Trust requests on-going engagement from the Council on submitted pre-application enquiries, and can also encourage developers to seek pre-application advice from us direct:

https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/specialist-teams/planning-and-design/our-statutory-consultee-role/what-were- interested-in/pre-application-advice (ACTION REQUEST)

Cultural Facilities and the Visitor Economy

The Trust welcomes inclusion of the canals within both Policy SDS5 - Cultural Facilities and the Visitor Economy and its justification text.

Green and Blue Infrastructure

The Trust welcomes inclusion of the canals within Policy SDS7 - Green and Blue Infrastructure in Sandwell and its introductory and justification texts. We also request partner engagement with the Council in the forthcoming preparation, adoption and implementation of a Green Infrastructure Strategy as identified in Policy SDS5 sub- section 1a.

The Trust reiterates its Issues and Options advice in relation to Green Infrastructure improvements, “There are opportunities for developers and other agencies to contribute towards further GI improvements through a variety of mechanisms, such as developer contributions through the planning process, corporate partnerships https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/donate/partner-with-us/corporate-partnerships or adopting a section of canal https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/donate/partner-with-us/volunteering-in-partnership . Improvements could also be made through the design of canal-side developments providing open space and landscaping adjacent to the waterside. Any future policy should acknowledge such opportunities and will need to set out the requirements for GI developer contributions consistent with para 34 of the NPPF.

GI Improvements could also be made through the provision of recreation facilities for use by the public. In the context of the canal network this could range from paddle craft launching provision and fishing pegs, including wheelchair accessible pegs, to larger visitor attractions, such as at the Roundhouse (albeit not an example within Sandwell), which provides for guided tours, visitors centre with exhibitions, events, and a café within a canal-side Grade II* Listed Building.

The Plan should recognise that GI improvement opportunities can come about through future development providing a policy framework for securing improvements whether that be through the design and layout of a site, through financial contributions or other means. It is also important to acknowledge that the quality of GI is dependent on its ongoing maintenance, which should be addressed in policy and considered early on at the design stage, to ensure it continues to provide benefits for users.”

4. Sandwell's Natural and Historic Environment

Nature Conservation

This section contains a number of policies in relation to Nature Conservation (SNE1), Protection and Enhancement of Wildlife Habitats (SNE2 including Biodiversity net gain, Local Nature Recovery Network Strategy, and Local opportunities for habitats and wildlife); Provision, Retention and Protection of Trees, Woodlands, And Hedgerows (SNE3); Geodiversity and the Black Country UNESCO Global Geopark (SNE4); and The Rowley Hills (SNE5).

In relation to Policy SNE2 – Protection and Enhancement of Wildlife Habitats the Trust considers that the value of the canal network to Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG) will manifest itself as the implementation of BNG gains traction in 2024 and beyond. For example, canals are part of the local Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) and as such will provide an increasing value and essential role in the Local Nature Recovery Strategy. Canals more broadly play a crucial role within Sandwell for nature conservation and provide large populations of urban dwellers with access to nature. As such Sandwell's canals should be recognised for the crucial role they facilitate in priority species movements and recovery through the West Midlands.

More specifically, and as an example, the Great Canal Orchard project potentially includes spaces for BNG orchards both as pockets and linear habitats along the canal, incorporated into developments where national priority habitats are not already present. Orchard trees also provide air quality improvements, a role in flood prevention, shade for climate adaption, free healthy fruit resources for communities, and potential for green economy gain if scaled up. Species recovery strategies under the Environment Act 2021 consider species of importance for Sandwell to include water vole, otter and soprano pipistrelle bats along canal corridors. As commented elsewhere in this response, water quality should be protected and improved, air quality must be protected from degradation and more broadly improved, and dark corridors should be protected from light pollution where these protected species are present, or could be recoverable.

Accordingly, we seek on-going engagement in the evolution of BNG-related policy wording throughout the plan preparation stages over 2024, including Examination stages (ACTION REQUEST)

Canals in Sandwell – SNE6

The Trust welcomes the inclusion of canal-specific Policy SNE6 – Canals within the draft plan, and further that it enhances the previous ENV4 policy wording within the adopted Black Country Core Strategy. In particular, clear reference has been added in relation to the importance of assessing impact on structural integrity, maintaining opportunity for canal restoration, and in identifying the role the canal network can play in delivering good design. We further welcome mention of delivery of integrated sustainable travel through towpath and way-faring enhancements. In relation to design quality, the canal network presents also opportunities for positive placemaking and the reduction of anti-social behaviour.

In terms of additions the Trust requests the following:

- Amend ‘reinstate and/or upgrade towpaths,’ to ‘reinstate, introduce and/or upgrade towpaths and access points’ within sub-heading 2(g)
- Add ‘To be delivered through the reasonable use of planning conditions or S106/CIL obligations’ to the end of 2(g)
- Add 2(h) for ‘use of canals for surface water management purposes, provided that SuDS and other mitigation measures are built into a scheme’
- Add into 3(a), “and delivery of the wider well-being agenda”
- Include an additional sub-section specifying, ‘Facilitate continued access to Trust assets for inspection and maintenance purposes’
- In relation to Residential Moorings, add to 10 that moorings also should not be permitted near existing uses which currently give rise to adverse amenity impacts, noise for example, in accordance with ‘agent of change’ principles
- The justifying text on 4.101 should identify that the assessment of ‘all necessary boating facilities’ should consider bin storage, collection and waste disposal, water and power supplies, and car parking provision

on a case-by-case basis to allow greater flexibility in relation to site-specific needs. Para 4.101 should also state that need for parking and access requirements for residential moorings is to be assessed against other relevant SLP policies and SLP car parking standards on a case-by-case basis.
- The justification text within 4.102 and 4.103 should state that the identified Trust and non-Trust residential mooring sites may not remain in existence for the whole duration of the Plan until 2041, and up-to-date statistics for our own moorings are available from us on request. (ACTION REQUEST)

The Historic Environment

This section includes a number of policies in relation to Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas (SHE1), Development in the Historic Environment (SHE2), Locally Listed Buildings (SHE3), and Archaeology (SHE4).

In particular the Trust welcomes mention of ‘the canal network and its associated infrastructure, surviving canal- side pre-1939 buildings and structures, and archaeological evidence of the development of canal-side industries and former canal routes’ within SHE2 5e. Similarly, we welcome the addition of Chances Glassworks, Smethwick Engine Arm Aqueduct, and Smethwick Engine House within the list of Scheduled Ancient Monuments within Sandwell and acknowledges the protection afforded to them under SNE4 - Archaeology.

The Trust also requests cross-referencing to Canal Policy SNE6 within the justification text to this section of the Policy SHE2 – Development in the Historic Environment, to reflect the role of canal network can have in conserving locally distinctive historic aspects of Sandwell, both designated and non-designated (ACTION REQUEST).

5. Climate Change

This section contains a number of policies in relation to Increasing efficiency and resilience (SCC1), Energy Infrastructure (SCC2), Managing Heat Risk (SCC3), Flood Risk (SCC4), Sustainable drainage and surface water management (SCC5), and Renewable and Low Carbon Energy and BREEAM Standards (SCC6).

The Trust notes that retrofitting is only briefly mentioned in Section 5, para 5.15, of the justification text to Policy SCC1 – Increasing efficiency and resilience, namely: ‘where possible and appropriate, the retrofitting of residential and other properties to achieve higher standards of energy and water efficiency will be encouraged and supported.’ The Trust considers that for a high proportion of heritage property stock, as well as modern up to the early 21st century stock (prior to BREEAM standards), retrofitting will be the substantial mainstay for making a property energy efficient and sustainable. The design and installation of solar panels, heat source pumps and triple glazing etc., their position on a building or location on site can be significantly detrimental, and risks degrading a building that makes a positive contribution through its architectural attributes or local distinctiveness. Accordingly, we request that para 5.15 be augmented to reflect this reality and to require that development proposals ensure that the chosen approach considers any consequential visual impacts on the canals' setting, heritage significance, or amenity value. (ACTION REQUEST). Reference is also drawn to advice contained within Historic England Advice Notes, in particular that to be found within the HEAN on Heat Pumps within Historic Buildings (2023) ( https://historicengland.org.uk/advice/find/latest-guidance/ )

The Trust welcomes mention of the canals as a potential component of heat risk management within Policy SCC3 – Managing Heat Risk, and associated text within para 5.43.

Given the increasing susceptibility of the historic canal network to climate change stress the Trust welcomes the inclusion of ‘there is an extensive canal network throughout the Sandwell area, including culverts and feeder streams’ within 5.48 of the justification text to Flood Risk Policy SCC4. Given this we request that Canal and River

Trust are listed within the bodies to be consulted on site-specific requirements within sub-section 16 of SCC4 and that citizens and developers can access our open source mapping data to identify our assets here:

https://data-canalrivertrust.opendata.arcgis.com/ (ACTION REQUEST).

The Trust also considers that a similar list of bodies to be consulted should be included within the policy text for Policy SCC5 - Sustainable drainage and surface water management, and that Canal and River Trust be listed within them given the risk of polluting ground and surface water to our network, and other watercourse, from the ‘legacy of contaminated land created by heavy industry and extractive activities in Sandwell’ identified in para
5.56 (ACTION REQUEST).

The Trust reiterates its Issues and Options stage advice in relation to flood risk and surface water management, “Subject to the Trust’s owner agreement to technical and commercial details, surface water can potentially be sustainably discharged to the canal network. Water levels in the canal network are managed by the Trust using control structures such as weirs and sluices to maintain a suitable depth for navigation by boats, but also to try to avoid water levels becoming too high in periods of heavy rainfall where runoff from hard surfaces can lead to excess water passing into the canals. Given this, surface water discharge to canals can be a highly effective way of managing local surface water flood risk and may allow development of sites that would otherwise not be viable due to concerns with alternative site drainage options.

SUDs adjacent to or connecting to canals will need to be maintained to ensure they function as they were designed to and do not cause pollution or excess flows. In the interests of local flood risk management and the protection of water quality, where a site proposes SUDs, this system should be designed in a way that if it were to fail the canal would not be inundated with water.

In many areas canals will also provide developers with opportunities to dispose of surface water drainage, noting that drainage to surface water bodies, such as canals is higher up the drainage hierarchy than discharge to sewers and drains. With the right investment they could also play a role in some places in mitigating flood risks. Accordingly, canals as an option for surface water drainage should be listed within forthcoming drainage policies provided that SuDS and appropriate pollution control and mitigation measures are built into the development scheme.”

Finally, the Trust welcomes inclusion of our network within Policy SCC6 – Renewable and Low Carbon Energy and BREEAM Standards sub-section 5 and justification text para 5.61 in relation to the potential for use of our network for water-source heat pumps.

6. Health and Wellbeing in Sandwell

This section contains a number of policies in relation to Health Impact Assessments (SHW1), Healthcare Infrastructure (SHW2), Air Quality (SHW3), Open Space and Recreation (SHW4), Playing Fields and Sports Facilities (SHW5), and Allotments (SHW6),

Given our request above that the canal network’s contribution to the broader well-being agenda be explicitly included with the wording of Policy SNE6 - Canals in Sandwell, the Trust requests the incorporation of cross- referencing to Canal Policy SNE6 within the introductory text to this section, for example after para 6.11. (ACTION REQUEST).

In relation to Air Quality the Trust welcomes the inclusion of ‘Emissions from Construction Sites’ within the wording of policy SHW3 (sub-section 7) as this aligns to our regular requests for Construction and Environmental Management Plans within our statutory consultation responses to planning applications.

The Trust also welcomes mention of canal corridors within para 6.50 of the justification text for Policy SHW4– Open Space and Recreation and the restoration of towpaths as a component of enhancing green networks through the mechanisms of planning conditions and obligations.

7. Sandwell's Housing

The Trust is content that canal-specific implications arising from the Council’s draft Housing need and supply policies and allocated sites can be adequately addressed through the issues-specific polices identified elsewhere in this response, and in particular the use of Policy SNE6 - Canals in Sandwell (as requested amendments above refer). However, inclusion of the canal network within relevant policy and allocation maps (ACTION REQUEST) will enable developers to identify canal-related constraints at an early stage and engage with us accordingly, ideally at pre-application stage. The Trust therefore requests on-going engagement from the Council on submitted pre-application enquiries, and also encourages developers to seek pre-application advice from us direct:

https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/specialist-teams/planning-and-design/our-statutory-consultee-role/what-were- interested-in/pre-application-advice (ACTION REQUEST).

See also comments on Appendix B below.

In relation to towpath improvement aspirations the Trust has identified the Tame Valley Canal, Walsall Canal and the Old Wednesbury Canal as priority areas for upgrading over the plan period, and will seek to request Section 106/CIL monies from appropriate schemes where they arise in proximity to these stretches of the network.

The Trust also advises that it has some specific critical assets within the Sandwell area such as Spouthouse Embankment, Titford Pools feeder, and Netherton Tunnel which will require careful assessment of allocations for impact and mitigation under the provisions of SNE6 – Canals, particularly in relation to matters of land stability and infrastructure maintenance, cross-referenced with historic coal mining activity within Sandwell.

8. Sandwell’s Economy

The Trust is content that canal-specific implications arising from the Council’s draft Economy policies and allocated sites can be adequately addressed through the issues-specific polices identified elsewhere in this response, and in particular the use of Policy SNE6 - Canals (as requested amendments above refer). However, inclusion of the canal network within relevant policy and allocation maps (ACTION REQUEST) will enable developers to identify canal-related constraints at an early stage and engage with us accordingly, ideally at pre- application stage. The Trust requests on-going engagement from the Council on submitted pre-application enquiries, and also encourages developers to seek pre-application advice from us direct:

https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/specialist-teams/planning-and-design/our-statutory-consultee-role/what-were- interested-in/pre-application-advice (ACTION REQUEST).

See also comments on Appendix C below.

9. Sandwell's Centres and 10. West Bromwich

The Trust is content that canal-specific implications arising from the Council’s draft Centres policies and allocated sites can be adequately addressed through the issues-specific polices identified elsewhere in this response, and in particular the use of Policy SNE6 - Canals (as requested amendments above refer). However,

inclusion of the canal network within relevant policy and allocation maps (ACTION REQUEST) will enable developers to identify canal-related constraints at an early stage and engage with us accordingly, ideally at pre- application stage. The Trust requests on-going engagement from the Council on submitted pre-application enquiries, and also encourages developers to seek pre-application advice from us direct:

https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/specialist-teams/planning-and-design/our-statutory-consultee-role/what-were- interested-in/pre-application-advice (ACTION REQUEST).

See also comments on Appendix D below.

11. Transport

The Section contains a number of polices in relation to transportation, including the promotion of active and sustainable travel through modal shift. The canal network can provide robust opportunities for promotion of these agendas and the Trust welcomes the inclusion of the canal network within sub-section 3 of Policy STR5 – Creating Coherent Networks for Cycling and Walking. However, the Trust requests inclusion of the canal network within Figure 13 - Transport Key Diagram, overlaying with cycle and walking networks, to enable its role in the delivery of sustainable transport and modal shift to be more readily identified in conjunction with the implementation of Policy STR5 – Creating Coherent Networks for Cycling and Walking (ACTION REQUEST).

Similarly, the Trust welcomes mention of encouragement of use of the waterways within sub-section 1 of Policy STR4 – The Efficient Movement of Freight and Logistics as a sustainable alternative to road-based freight movement.

12. Infrastructure and Delivery

The Trust welcomes mention of the potential for use of canal towpaths for the provision of 5G network infrastructure within sub-section 3d of Policy SID1 - Promotion of Fibre to the Premises and 5G Networks and requests additional wording as follows, ‘To be delivered through the reasonable use of planning conditions or S106/CIL obligations.’ (ACTION REQUEST).

13. Minerals and Waste

The Trust is content that canal-specific implications arising from the Council’s draft Minerals and Waste policies and allocated sites (identified as being preferentially within Local Employment Sites) can be adequately addressed through the issues-specific polices identified elsewhere in this response, and in particular the use of Policy SNE6 - Canals (as requested amendments above refer). However, inclusion of the canal network within relevant policy and allocation maps (ACTION REQUEST) will enable developers to identify canal-related constraints at an early stage and engage with us accordingly. The Trust therefore requests on-going engagement from the Council on submitted pre-application enquiries, and also encourages developers to seek pre-application advice from us direct:

https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/specialist-teams/planning-and-design/our-statutory-consultee-role/what-were- interested-in/pre-application-advice (ACTION REQUEST).

See also comments on Appendix E and Appendix F below.

14. Development Constraints and Industrial Legacy

The Trust is content that canal-specific implications arising from the Council’s draft Development Constraints and Industrial Legacy policies can be adequately addressed through the issues-specific polices identified elsewhere in this response, and in particular the use of Policy SNE6 - Canals (as requested amendments above refer). Accordingly, we request the incorporation of cross-referencing to Canal Policy SNE6 within the introductory text to this section, for example after para 14.5. or more specifically in the justification texts for Policies SCO2 - Pollution Control and Policy SCO3 - Land contamination and instability (ACTION REQUEST).

Similarly, we request para 14.17 of the justification text lists potential receptors of light pollution impact and includes the canal network within that list. (ACTION REQUEST).

15. Development Management

The Trust is content that canal-specific implications arising from the Council’s draft Development Management policies can be adequately addressed through the issues-specific polices identified elsewhere in this response, and in particular the use of Policy SNE6 - Canals (as requested amendments above refer). Accordingly, we request the incorporation of cross-referencing to Canal Policy SNE6 within the introductory text to this section, or more specifically in the justification texts for Policy SDM1 – Design Quality, Policy SDM2 – Development and Design Standards, and Policy SDM3 – Tall Buildings and Gateway Sites.

In relation to design quality, the canal network also presents opportunities for positive placemaking and the reduction of anti-social behaviour as commented on above in relation to Policy SDS4 - Achieving Well-designed Places.

In relation to tall buildings and gateway sites the Trust requests that Policy SDM3 – Tall Buildings and Gateway Sites sub-heading 5(c) specify that this relates to both designated and non-designated heritage assets (ACTION REQUEST). The associated justification text should also contain reference to the need for impact of tall buildings within typically lower height profile canal environments to be a material consideration, to enable assessment of impact on the prevailing visual environment and character of the canal network (ACTION REQUEST).

Delivery, Monitoring, and Implementation

The Trust requests opportunity to engage with the Council on an on-going basis throughout the plan period to secure the benefits to the canal network envisaged by the Plan’s suite of policies (ACTION REQUEST).

Furthermore, the Trust notes that use, delivery and monitoring of Section 106 and CIL payments is not included within the policy wording and queries its absence (ACTION REQUEST).

APPENDIX A – Nature Recovery Network and Biodiversity Net Gain

The Trust seeks to maintain engagement with the Council on the evolution of BNG delivery within Sandwell in its forthcoming formative roll-out stages (2024/25) and thereafter on an implementation basis throughout the plan period (ACTION REQUEST).

APPENDIX B - Sandwell Site Allocations

SH7 - The Boat Gauging House and adjoining land, Factory Road, Tipton – development proposals should have particular regard to the heritage assets on site in scale, form and impact on character

SH14 - Langley Maltings, Western Road, Langley – development proposals should have full regard to adjacent heritage assets in scheme layout, design and appearance

SH19 - Land at Horseley Heath, Alexandra Road, and Lower Church Lane, Tipton – development proposals where adjacent to the canal should have full regard to the nature conservation needs of the SLINC

SH21 - Dudley Road East, Oldbury – development proposals where adjacent to the canal should have full regard to the nature conservation needs of the adjacent SINC

SH30 - Land to east of Black Lake, West Bromwich - development proposals where adjacent to the canal should have full regard to the nature conservation needs of the adjacent SINC

SH35 - Rattlechain site - land to north of Temple Way, Tividale – development proposals where adjacent to the canal should have full regard to the land contamination, water quality and land stability issues arising from this site

SH36 - Land between Addington Way and River Tame, Temple Way (Rattlechain) – comments as SH35 above

SH41 - North Smethwick Canalside – development proposals where adjacent to the canal should pay full regard to Smethwick-Birmingham Corridor Framework (2022) and the Rolfe Street Masterplan (2023)

SH53–58 – various sites within the Part of Grove Lane Masterplan – comments as SH41 above

SM1 - Chances Glass Works, Land west of Spon Lane, north of Palace Drive – development proposals should have particular regard to the heritage assets on site in scale, form and impact on character

APPENDIX C – Employment Allocations – vacant land

SEC1-10 - Brandon Way/ Albion Road - development proposals where adjacent to the canal should have full regard to the land stability issues of the canal

APPENDIX D – West Bromwich Masterplan and Carter's Green Framework Plan

The Trust has no comment to make on these proposals.

APPENDIX E – Strategic Waste Sites

The Trust notes the identification of the existing Strategic Waste Sites within the Black Country authorities, (rather than just Sandwell) and raises no additional comments subject to statutory consultation on any forthcoming planning applications on any of these sites within our notified areas, and assessment in line with the emerging Policy SNE6 - Canals (for any sites within Sandwell) if applicable.

APPENDIX F – Minerals

The Trust notes the identification of existing Key Mineral Infrastructure sites and raises no additional comments

subject to statutory consultation on any forthcoming planning applications on any of these sites within our notified areas, and assessment in line with the emerging Policy SNE6 – Canals, for sites within Sandwell, if applicable.

APPENDIX G – Site allocations - changes

The Trust notes the changes in allocations, largely from housing to employment uses, and raises no additional comments subject to statutory consultation on any forthcoming planning applications on any of these sites within our notified areas, and assessment in line with the emerging Policy SNE6 - Canals.

It is noted that in principle some employment uses may give rise to additional assessment needs and mitigation requirements in relation to operational pollution control e.g. air and water quality.

APPENDIX H – Rowley Hills

The Trust has no comments to make on the proposed Extent of Strategic Open Space Designation.

APPENDIX I – Sandwell Local Plan Housing Trajectory

The Trust has no comments to make.

APPENDIX J – Sandwell Playing Pitch and Outdoor Sports Strategy (extract)

The Trust has no comments to make.

APPENDIX K – Open space and play provision standards for development

The Trust has no additional comments to make on the proposed standards.

APPENDIX L – Transportation Policy

The Trust has no comments to make on the proposed parking standards.

APPENDIX M – Glossary

The Trust has no comments to make on the proposed definitions.

Comment

Draft Regulation 18 Sandwell Local Plan

Representation ID: 966

Received: 18/12/2023

Respondent: West Midlands Resource Technical Advisory Body

Representation Summary:

Although at the bottom of the waste hierarchy, non-hazardous landfill is still an important type of waste management that needs to be planned for and WMRTAB notes that there is little consideration of this matter in the Draft SLP, with no mention how non-hazardous landfill would be planned for.

A report prepared for WMRTAB on landfill in the West Midlands indicates the following for 2019:

There are five landfill sites for inert, non-hazardous & hazardous waste in the Black Country. At the end of 2019, active inert landfill capacity was estimated at 690,000 (m3), non-hazardous LF capacity estimated at 11,666,401 (m3) and non-hazardous LF capacity with SNRHW cell estimated at 418,953 (m3). Landfill sites have been allocated in Walsall5 which allow a further increase inert landfill capacity of 3,000,000 (m3) in future.

WMRTAB notes that it is important that the future management of waste requiring disposal is planned for in the SLP and recognises that this should be resolved via the ongoing Duty to Cooperate engagement.

Full text:

Duty to Cooperate

The Draft SLP notes that there is significant movement of waste into and out of Sandwell as follows:

‘13.20 The BCWS waste projections also considered net waste imports. Around 1.35 million tonnes of waste were received at permitted waste sites (including landfill sites) and operational incinerators in Sandwell in 2021 (BCWS Table 2.10). The total imports into Sandwell originating from the West Midlands Region was 746 tonnes, representing 68% of the total waste received.

[N.B. WMRTAB notes paragraph 2.8.7 of the updated Black Country Waste Study for Sandwell states that 'The total imports into Sandwell originating from the West Midlands region (excluding the waste originating in Sandwell) was 746,000 tonnes’ and so the ‘746’ value included in paragraph 13.20 shown above is an error.]

13.21 More than 80% of the waste received at permitted waste facilities in Sandwell (excluding incinerators) in 2021 by tonnage originated within the former West Midlands region (BCWS Appendix J, Table J4). However, the originating authority of 29.5% of this waste is not known. 15% of the waste is recorded as originating from within the Black Country, and 15% from Birmingham.

13.22 Similarly, more than 80% of the waste received at permitted sites in England which was recorded as having originated in Sandwell in 2021 (by tonnage) did not travel beyond the former West Midlands region. Outside the West Midlands, the East Midlands, Southwest and East of England were the three largest importers of waste into Sandwell, importing 9% of total waste.

13.23 In 2021 nearly 608kt of waste originating in Sandwell were exported to permitted sites in England and Wales.’

The distribution of waste arising in Sandwell to authorities in the West Midlands is set out in Figure 2.3 of the updated Back Country Waste Study for Sandwell (2023) 2 which is set out below: (See attached Letter)

In light of the above, WMRTAB notes that meaningful dialogue between Sandwell and other Waste Planning Authorities is likely to be important to ensure it meets its obligations under the Duty to Cooperate.

The Sandwell Duty to Cooperate (DtC) Statement (published November 2023),3 paragraph 61 ‘Effect of new development on waste disposal’, notes that ‘The Council has been involved in waste discussions through the West Midlands Resource Technical Advisory Body (RTAB), a body set up to support and promote cooperation between Waste Planning Authorities (WPAs) and others. The Council sent DtC letters out to those Waste Planning Authorities where waste movements were above the agreed thresholds for waste movements. Letters were set out on the 19th April 2023 and were followed up on the 25th May 2023. Staffordshire, Dudley and Walsall Councils consider the matter to be significant enough to warrant a SoCG, whereas Cheshire East and Chester Council would like further discussions on the matter’.

It is understood that engagement related to ensuring compliance with the DtC is ongoing and that application of the WMRTAB Duty to Cooperate protocol has revealed that there are very few waste movements to WPAs which exceed the 20% threshold for movement to one authority and there are no movements within the last year that exceed the 40% threshold. At this stage WMRTAB notes that whilst a DtC statement4 has been prepared this does not set appear to out the purpose of the DtC correspondence that has taken place so far and whether there were any outcomes, particularly in terms of whether the Local Plans of other areas allowed for, or would allow for, the meeting of any future unmet waste management capacity requirements that currently exist or might exit in the future in Sandwell. The inclusion of such information is not essential, however WMRTAB wish to draw attention to the Planning Inspectorate ‘Procedure Guide for Local Plan Examinations’ which includes the following (with emphasis added):

‘Has evidence to demonstrate compliance with the Duty to Co-operate been prepared?
1.15. In order to demonstrate compliance with the duty to co-operate (section 33A of the PCPA), the most helpful approach is for the LPA to submit a statement of compliance with the duty. The statement of compliance should identify any relevant strategic matters and how they have been resolved – or if they have not, why not. It should detail who the LPA has co-operated with and on which strategic matter(s), the nature and timing of the co-operation (e.g. by including meeting notes), and the outcomes of the co-operation, including how it has influenced the plan’

In any event it is recommended that the outcomes of the application of WMRTAB protocol to identifying strategic waste movements be documented. In this regard WMRTAB notes that it is important that information within the evidence base concerning the need for Duty to Cooperate engagement (and, if required, nature, reason and any outcomes of the engagement) is included to allow consultees to comment on whether engagement with other Waste Planning Authorities is necessary and, if it has taken place, whether this has been sufficient to meet the legislative requirements. WMRTAB appreciates that any dialogue may be ongoing and, in any event, is pleased to confirm that Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council is an active member of WMRTAB and an officer from the Council regularly attends the group’s meeting and contributes to its work. WMRTAB has therefore facilitated discussion between Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council and other neighbouring waste planning authorities to assist with meeting its Duty to Cooperate (DtC) on matters pertaining to the planning for waste management.

Planning for Sufficient Waste Management Capacity
Paragraphs 13.17 to 13.28 set out estimated arisings and whether capacity gaps (surpluses) will exist in future. This is essentially the key findings of the ‘Updated waste needs assessment to support preparation of emerging Local Plans for each Black Country Authority – Sandwell’. This report provides an updated assessment of the likely future waste management capacity gaps (and surpluses) for Sandwell based on 2021 data. WMRTAB notes that a previous study had been prepared in 2022 for the Black Country following advice from WMRTAB that waste needs assessments should be based on the latest available data. WMRTAB notes that more recent data, for 2022, is now available via the Environment Agency Waste Data Interrogator 2022 that was published in November.

WMRTAB notes that paragraph 13.17 of the Draft SLP states that ‘under current projections, the quantity of waste Sandwell is projected to manage increases from
1.75 mt in 2021 to 2.2 mt in 2040 – 41, equating to an increase of 26% or 1.2% per annum. An ongoing emphasis on waste reduction has seen a 7.5% reduction in waste per household since 2006 - 07 and this trend could have a significant influence on future waste growth. However, there are emerging changes in the need for different types of waste management capacity’.

Paragraph 13.20 of the Draft SLP states that ‘the BCWS waste projections also considered net waste imports. Around 1.35 million tonnes of waste were received at permitted waste sites (including landfill sites) and operational incinerators in Sandwell in 2021 (BCWS Table 2.10). The total imports into Sandwell originating from the West Midlands Region was 746 tonnes, representing 68% of the total waste received’. WMRTAB supports the recognition of Sandwell’s role in managing waste from other areas.

[see comment about the ‘746’ error above – this should read 746,000]

Paragraph 13.39 further notes that the ‘quantity of waste Sandwell is projected to manage (included imported waste) is predicted to increase from 1.75 million tonnes (mt) in 2021 to 2.1 mt in 2040-41, equating to an increase of 23% or 1.1% per annum. However, this does not appear consistent with data in paragraph 13.17 which states (inconsistencies highlighted):

‘Under current projections, the quantity of waste Sandwell is projected to manage increases from 1.75 mt in 2021 to 2.2 mt in 2040 – 41, equating to an increase of 26% or 1.2% per annum. An ongoing emphasis on waste reduction has seen a 7.5% reduction in waste per household since 2006 - 07 and this trend could have a significant influence on future waste growth. However, there are emerging changes in the need for different types of waste management capacity.’

WMRTAB recommends that the figures highlighted are checked to ensure they are consistent, or an explanation of the inconsistency is provided. In any event WMRTAB supports the approach to recognising waste imports in calculation of arisings to be planned for.

Future waste management ‘capacity gaps’ for the Black Country (Sandwell, Dudley, Wolverhampton and Walsall) are identified over the plan period. The Draft SLP states, at paragraph 13.26, that Table 4.9 of the Black Country Waste Study (BWCS) ‘predicts that the following additional waste management capacity will need to be delivered in the Black Country between 2021 and 2041 to maintain net self- sufficiency’:

a. re-use / recycling (non-hazardous municipal waste) – 813 kt to 4tpa [Note that a value of ‘4 tonnes per annum’ suggests that data is being presented with ‘spurious precision’ which national policy advises against].
b. energy recovery (residual municipal waste) – 335 to 663 kt tpa’

The BCWS (updated 2023) (Updated waste needs assessment to support preparation of emerging Local Plans for each Black Country Authority – Sandwell) identifies a range of waste management capacity gaps for recycling, recovery and landfill calculated using the following three scenarios:

Existing capacity is set out in paragraph 2.6.3 of the updated BCWS as follows: ‘in 2021 the capacity of permitted waste sites in Sandwell was estimated to be:
• Recycling and Recovery – 922,000 tonnes per annum
• Transfer – 394,000 tonnes per annum
• Inert Landfill – 0 cubic metres/ 0 tonnes
• Non-Hazardous Landfill – 5.6 million cubic metres/ 4.8 million tonnes
• Hazardous Landfill – 0 cubic metres/ 0 tonnes

…..This gives a total baseline capacity of around 6.1 million tonnes’.

The capacity gaps are identified in the updated BWCS as follows:

The commentary relating to Table 3.9 is set out in the following paragraphs which state (with emphasis added):

‘3.5.25 Table 3.9 shows us that the waste management capacity gaps over the Plan Period are more apparent for recycling sites under WMS option 2 and 3 as more waste is sent for recycling in line with government targets. There is also a capacity deficit for recovery sites up until 2025 over all three options, more so for WMS3; however, after 2025 extra recovery capacity comes online and there is no longer a recovery deficit. Given the internal increase in waste sent for recycling, and the reduced requirement on waste sent for recovery, it is expected that waste imported for recovery to be slightly higher under WMS2 than WMS3. Under WMS3 the internal demand for recovery capacity is higher with less waste sent for recycling, but the recovery projections for C&D waste are higher under WMS2 option. There is sufficient disposal capacity over most of the plan period under all three options, in particular under WMS2 and WMS3 as less waste is sent for disposal. From 2039 onwards however, WMS1 has a disposal deficit closely followed by WMS2 and WMS3 in 2040’.

3.5.26 Housing growth will put pressure on existing household waste management capacity, and as this is largely managed outside Sandwell under current contractual arrangements this is an important focus going forward. Sandwell may also need to accommodate some of the waste capacity requirements of other waste planning authorities, especially as they are a net importer of waste, putting greater pressure on an already saturated waste management infrastructure capacity.

3.5.27 There are limited options for residual waste disposal with few quarries in Sandwell likely to come forward for restoration by infilling with inert or non-hazardous waste during the Plan Period. There are also limited options for CD&E waste recycling and organic waste treatment; there are no composting or anaerobic digestion facilities within the area.

3.5.28 In order to achieve ‘net self-sufficiency’ Sandwell would be expected to provide for extra waste capacity of the types it can in theory accommodate (e.g. re-use, recycling, MRS, energy recovery, waste treatment, inert and non- hazardous landfill) to make up for the types of waste capacity it cannot accommodate because of being a largely built-up area (e.g. composting, AD, hazardous landfill).

WMRTAB notes that capacity gaps are therefore identified in the updated BWCS, however it has the following observations:

1. Due to the use of different terms, it is not absolutely clear how the capacity gaps identified in Table 3.9 translate to the capacity it is stated could be accommodated (in theory) in Sandwell in paragraph 3.5.28; and,
2. while the capacity gaps are clearly set out on the updated BWCS they are not clearly stated in the Draft SLP.

WMRTAB recommends that the Draft SLP should clearly state and indicate how the quantum of additional capacity, of each different waste management capacity type is being planned for by the SLP. In particular, the SLP should state clearly what the future requirement for landfill capacity will be and how that requirement is to be met. This should include any expectation that waste to be managed by landfill will be exported to other areas.

Notwithstanding the fact that the maintenance of net self-sufficiency (in terms of provision for waste management) appears to have been taken into account in the estimates of capacity gaps, it is not included as an objective within the Draft SLP. For the avoidance of doubt, WMRTAB consider that such an objective should be clearly included within the SLP.

Locations for Waste Management
WMRTAB notes that no specific sites for new waste management facilities have been allocated in the Draft SLP. Paragraph 13.47 (Identification of Preferred Sites) states: ‘it is not proposed to allocate specific sites for waste in the Local Plan because no new sites likely to be deliverable within the plan period have been identified, apart from sites that already have planning permission (NPPF, 16, 35, Annex 2). To have sufficient confidence to allocate a site, it would need to be actively promoted for a waste management use by the Council, a landowner and / or a commercial waste operator’.

However, paragraph 13.38 of the Draft SLP states: ‘The identification and delivery of new waste management facilities will make a significant contribution towards meeting new capacity requirements set out above and will meet the aims and objectives of the Plan.’

Policy SWA3 states: ‘The preferred locations for waste management facilities are the Local Employment Areas shown on the Sandwell Local Plan Policies Map.’

Paragraph 13.57 goes into further detail explaining that (with emphasis added): ‘Several broad locations suitable for the development of new waste management facilities in Sandwell have been identified in Table 13 of Policy SWA3’

WMRTAB acknowledge that the choice of the ‘Preferred Areas’ identified in the BWCS ‘as being most suited to the development of new waste recovery, treatment, and transfer infrastructure’ was based on a series of locational considerations and constraints to identify the most appropriate likely future location for new waste facilities.

WMRTAB understand Sandwell has undertaken numerous Call for Sites exercises during the preparation of the current Local Plan and as part of its involvement in the former Black Country Plan.

WMRTAB acknowledges that the approach of not allocating specific sites reflects the local circumstances/nature of the Black Country whereby waste sites frequently feature within general employment areas across the urban area and these are located within large urban areas that are constrained in terms of opportunities for new developments overall. WMRTAB recommends that the approach, of not allocating specific sites and relying on general areas and areas of employment land, be robustly justified within the evidence base.

Landfill
Although at the bottom of the waste hierarchy, non-hazardous landfill is still an important type of waste management that needs to be planned for and WMRTAB notes that there is little consideration of this matter in the Draft SLP, with no mention how non-hazardous landfill would be planned for.

A report prepared for WMRTAB on landfill in the West Midlands indicates the following for 2019:

There are five landfill sites for inert, non-hazardous & hazardous waste in the Black Country. At the end of 2019, active inert landfill capacity was estimated at 690,000 (m3), non-hazardous LF capacity estimated at 11,666,401 (m3) and non-hazardous LF capacity with SNRHW cell estimated at 418,953 (m3). Landfill sites have been allocated in Walsall which allow a further increase inert landfill capacity of 3,000,000 (m3) in future.

WMRTAB notes that it is important that the future management of waste requiring disposal is planned for in the SLP and recognises that this should be resolved via the ongoing Duty to Cooperate engagement.

Waste management development considerations
WMRTAB generally supports the development considerations set out in Policies SWA1, SWA2, SWA3, SWA4 and SWA5 in relation to employment areas, minimising harm to human health and the environment, and other impacts of waste management proposals such as on surrounding buildings, resources and constraints on development.

WMRTAB suggests that the meaning of Policy SWA1-Waste Infrastructure Future Requirements could be clarified. Currently this states (with emphasis added):

‘Waste Infrastructure Future Requirements:

1. Proposals for relevant, major development shall evidence how its operation will minimise waste production, as well as facilitating the re-use and recovery of waste materials including, for example, through recycling, composting and energy from waste.
2. Waste operators will be expected to demonstrate that the greenhouse gas emissions from the operations involved and associated transport of waste from source to processing facility have been minimised, in line with national and local targets for the transition to a net zero carbon economy.
3. Proposals for waste management facilities will be supported based upon the following principles;
a. managing waste through the waste hierarchy in sequential order. Sites for the disposal of waste will only be permitted where it meets a need which cannot be met by treatment higher in the waste hierarchy;
b. promoting the opportunities for on-site management of waste where it arises and encouraging the co-location of waste developments that can use each other’s waste materials;
c. ensuring that sufficient capacity is located within Sandwell to accommodate the waste capacity requirements during the plan period and reducing the reliance on other authority areas;
d. enabling the development of recycling facilities across Sandwell, including civic amenity sites, and ensuring that there is enough capacity and access for the deposit of municipal waste for re-reuse, recycling, and disposal;
e. waste must be disposed of, or be recovered in, one of the nearest appropriate facilities, by means of the most appropriate methods and technologies, to ensure a high level of protection for the environment and public health;
f. ensuring new waste management facilities are located and designed to avoid unacceptable adverse impacts on the townscape and landscape, human health and well-being, nature conservation and heritage assets and amenity;
g. working collaboratively with neighbouring authorities with responsibilities for waste who import waste into, or export waste out of, Sandwell, to ensure a co-operative cross boundary approach to waste management is maintained.

Firstly, regarding clause 1, the term ‘relevant major development’ has not been defined. WMRTAB suggest additional clarity could be provided within the SLP to make it clearer what ‘relevant major development’ consists of and so therefore what type of proposal would this part of the policy apply to. Point 1. Also states that there is a need to demonstrate how ‘operation’ of the facility will ‘minimise waste production’, however, the construction phase seems to have been not considered within the policy whereas this is frequently a source of significant quantities of waste.

Part 2 of the policy expects that greenhouse gas emissions will be minimised ‘in line with national and local targets for the transition to a net zero carbon economy’, however there is no indication of what these targets are and so it is recommended that information be included to provide clarity and in turn allow proper implementation of the policy.

WMRTAB strongly supports part 3, clause ‘g’ of the policy, however the extent to which Sandwell will rely on other areas in future to meets its needs and how it is meeting the capacity requirements of other areas it is not clear with the Draft SLP (see comments above concerning the Duty to Cooperate) but WMRTAB recognises that this should be resolved via the ongoing Duty to Cooperate engagement activity.

Safeguarding
Paragraph 13.39 of the Draft SLP states that the ‘The Sandwell Local Plan is a strategic plan and therefore it focuses on safeguarding strategic waste sites.
The approach of protecting existing/safeguarding waste facilities from other development which may impact on their operation is implemented by Policy SWA2 (Waste Sites). WMRTAB notes that this is an important consideration, especially in an area where it is difficult to find suitable land for waste management development. In addition, it is further noted, in paragraph 13.25, that: ‘The Council will look to identify development sites for waste infrastructure, with priority placed upon the safeguarding of existing and allocated sites for continued use.’

Policy SWA2 states that (with emphasis added):
1. Sandwell will safeguard all existing strategic and other waste management facilities from inappropriate development, to maintain existing levels of waste management capacity and meet Strategic Objective 17, unless it can be demonstrated that:
a. there is no longer a need for the facility; and
b. capacity can be met elsewhere; or
c. appropriate compensatory provision is made in appropriate locations elsewhere in the Black Country; or
d. the site is required to facilitate the strategic objectives of the Sandwell.

2. This policy will also apply to all new waste management sites that are implemented within the lifetime of the plan.

New development near existing waste facilities

3. Proposals for housing and other potentially sensitive uses will not be permitted near to or adjacent to an existing waste management site where there is potential for conflict between the uses,

a. unless a temporary permission for a waste use has expired, or the waste management use has otherwise ceased, and the site or infrastructure is considered unsuitable for a subsequent waste use;
b. or redevelopment of the waste site or loss of waste infrastructure would form part of a strategy or scheme that has wider environmental, social and / or economic benefits that outweigh the retention of the site or infrastructure for the waste use and alternative provision is made for the displaced waste use;
c. or a suitable replacement site or infrastructure has otherwise been identified and permitted.
4. Waste Site Impact Assessments will be expected to demonstrate that at least one of the above criteria applies. Applications should also identify any 'legacy' issues arising from existing or former waste uses, and how these will be addressed through the design of the development and the construction process.

WMRTAB generally supports the approach in the Draft SLP to safeguarding existing waste management capacity but has the following observations:

• Clause 1 of Policy SWA2 mentions ‘other waste sites’ but it is not clear what these are. Should this make it clear that this means all other waste sites which are allowed to operate by planning legislation?
• The identified ‘strategic waste sites’ and ‘other waste sites’ appear to have the same level of safeguarding protection and so it is unclear why a distinction has been made between strategic and other waste sites. If the intention is to safeguard all waste sites, regardless of whether they are considered strategic or not, then WMRTAB recommend that the policy states this clearly.
• Clause 1. d. appears to introduce a contradiction as the ‘strategic objectives’ include Draft SLP Strategic Objective 17 that states: ‘To manage waste as a resource and minimise the amount produced and sent to landfill, including ensuring that the reliance on primary minerals during construction and development are kept to a minimum and that greater use is made of recycled or alternative building materials’. In addition, paragraph 13.2 outlines ‘the key objective for waste across Sandwell is to minimise its generation across all sectors and increase the re-use, recycling, and recovery rates of waste material.

Other matters
Policy SCC4 – Flood Risks, identifies waste (and mineral) facilities as the only types of development where all such proposals would require a flood risk assessment and surface water drainage strategy as outlined below:

‘7. All new developments in the following locations should be accompanied by a flood risk assessment and surface water drainage strategy that sets out how the development will provide a betterment in flood risk terms i.e., help to reduce flood risk both on and off site:…

• where the site is a minerals or waste development;’

While proposals for certain types of waste facilities may need such assessment, WMRTAB suggest that the Draft SLP check whether this blanket approach is justified.

The Reg 18 Sandwell Local Plan – Reg 18 Consultation Spatial Strategy Paper (published November 2023), Corporate Plan Objectives includes the objectives as set out in paragraph 3.6 below.
‘Para 3.6 The objectives summarised below for the Core Strategy sought to deliver the Vision by 2026 and promoted: -
i. Sufficient waste recycling and waste management facilities in locations’

WMRTAB suggest that the text regarding the year 2026 above needs to be re- checked as the SLP period is until 2041.

Support

Draft Regulation 18 Sandwell Local Plan

Representation ID: 967

Received: 18/12/2023

Respondent: West Midlands Resource Technical Advisory Body

Representation Summary:

WMRTAB generally supports the development considerations set out in Policies SWA1, SWA2, SWA3, SWA4 and SWA5 in relation to employment areas, minimising harm to human health and the environment, and other impacts of waste management proposals such as on surrounding buildings, resources and constraints on development.

WMRTAB suggests that the meaning of Policy SWA1-Waste Infrastructure Future Requirements could be clarified. Currently this states (with emphasis added):

‘Waste Infrastructure Future Requirements:

1. Proposals for relevant, major development shall evidence how its operation will minimise waste production, as well as facilitating the re-use and recovery of waste materials including, for example, through recycling, composting and energy from waste.
2. Waste operators will be expected to demonstrate that the greenhouse gas emissions from the operations involved and associated transport of waste from source to processing facility have been minimised, in line with national and local targets for the transition to a net zero carbon economy.
3. Proposals for waste management facilities will be supported based upon the following principles;
a. managing waste through the waste hierarchy in sequential order. Sites for the disposal of waste will only be permitted where it meets a need which cannot be met by treatment higher in the waste hierarchy;
b. promoting the opportunities for on-site management of waste where it arises and encouraging the co-location of waste developments that can use each other’s waste materials;
c. ensuring that sufficient capacity is located within Sandwell to accommodate the waste capacity requirements during the plan period and reducing the reliance on other authority areas;
d. enabling the development of recycling facilities across Sandwell, including civic amenity sites, and ensuring that there is enough capacity and access for the deposit of municipal waste for re-reuse, recycling, and disposal;
e. waste must be disposed of, or be recovered in, one of the nearest appropriate facilities, by means of the most appropriate methods and technologies, to ensure a high level of protection for the environment and public health;
f. ensuring new waste management facilities are located and designed to avoid unacceptable adverse impacts on the townscape and landscape, human health and well-being, nature conservation and heritage assets and amenity;
g. working collaboratively with neighbouring authorities with responsibilities for waste who import waste into, or export waste out of, Sandwell, to ensure a co-operative cross boundary approach to waste management is maintained.

Firstly, regarding clause 1, the term ‘relevant major development’ has not been defined. WMRTAB suggest additional clarity could be provided within the SLP to make it clearer what ‘relevant major development’ consists of and so therefore what type of proposal would this part of the policy apply to. Point 1. Also states that there is a need to demonstrate how ‘operation’ of the facility will ‘minimise waste production’, however, the construction phase seems to have been not considered within the policy whereas this is frequently a source of significant quantities of waste.

Part 2 of the policy expects that greenhouse gas emissions will be minimised ‘in line with national and local targets for the transition to a net zero carbon economy’, however there is no indication of what these targets are and so it is recommended that information be included to provide clarity and in turn allow proper implementation of the policy.

WMRTAB strongly supports part 3, clause ‘g’ of the policy, however the extent to which Sandwell will rely on other areas in future to meets its needs and how it is meeting the capacity requirements of other areas it is not clear with the Draft SLP (see comments above concerning the Duty to Cooperate) but WMRTAB recognises that this should be resolved via the ongoing Duty to Cooperate engagement activity.

Full text:

Comment

Draft Regulation 18 Sandwell Local Plan

Representation ID: 1268

Received: 24/01/2024

Respondent: City Of Wolverhampton Council

Representation Summary:

The City Council is a member of the West Midlands Resource Technical Advisory Body (WMRTAB) which helps member authorities to meet their DtC obligations regarding strategic waste management. WMRTAB has submitted responses to the Sandwell Local Plan consultation on behalf of the member authorities which cover technical issues regarding strategic waste management.

Full text:

It is welcome that good progress has been made with the SLP under the current Plan system, that it is underpinned by work undertaken to prepare the Black Country Plan (BCP), particularly the shared evidence base and associated policy development, and that the SLP timetable is aligned with the emerging WLP and Plans for other neighbouring authorities. This is important given the need to progress a regional solution to addressing unmet housing and employment land needs, a significant proportion of which originate in Sandwell.

It is recognised that Sandwell Council have fully explored all opportunities within the Borough to maximise development capacity, including increased densities and sites in centres, whilst protecting viable employment land and premises as necessary, given the evidenced shortfall of employment development land across the Black Country Functional Economic Market Area (BC FEMA). It is accepted that it will not be possible to meet all development needs within the Borough, and that it is necessary for Sandwell to ask other authorities if they are able to contribute towards meeting Sandwell needs through the allocation of land in their Local Plans.

The current Wolverhampton position on housing and employment land need and supply is set out in the Wolverhampton Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) 2022, the Black Country Economic Development Needs Assessment (BC EDNA) 2023 and the Draft BCP (2021). On the basis of the December 2022 consultation version of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), the Leader of the Council committed to excluding any green belt land from development allocations in the emerging Wolverhampton Local Plan (WLP).

Taking into account potential capacity on non-green belt land in the Draft BCP, and an extended Plan period to 2042, the WLP is likely to generate a shortfall of around 11,500 homes and 50 ha of employment development land.

In terms of employment development land, the BC EDNA concludes that the BC FEMA as a whole has a shortfall of 152ha, however contributions secured through current Statements of Common Ground between the BC FEMA authorities and Shropshire and South Staffordshire Councils have potential to provide 133.6 ha towards BC FEMA needs, which would reduce that shortfall to 18.4 ha.

Given the existing housing and employment development land shortfalls set out above, Wolverhampton will not be in a position to provide land within the emerging WLP to meet either housing needs arising in Sandwell, or employment development land need arising in the BC FEMA.

Regarding housing, it is recommended that Sandwell Council continues to engage with the work of the Greater Birmingham and Black Country Housing Market Area (GBBCHMA) officer group and the programme of work contained within the Statement of Common Ground as circulated by South Staffordshire Council in 2022. Clearly, given the scale of the Sandwell shortfall, a regional approach is required. Any solution should be based on an understanding of the pattern of functional and physical relationships across the GBBCHMA including migration and travel to work data so that, where practicable, needs are addressed as close as possible to where they arise.

Regarding employment development land, it is recommended that Sandwell should continue to work together with the other BC authorities to close the BC FEMA employment development land shortfall through ongoing DtC activity, with a focus on those areas having a strong or moderate functional economic relationship with the Black Country (as defined in the BC EDNA), and other areas where there is evidence of a functional relationship.

The City Council is a member of the West Midlands Resource Technical Advisory Body (WMRTAB) which helps member authorities to meet their DtC obligations regarding strategic waste management. WMRTAB has submitted responses to the Sandwell Local Plan consultation on behalf of the member authorities which cover technical issues regarding strategic waste management.