habitat regulations assessment: lichfield district

Habitat Regulations Assessment: Lichfield District & Tamworth Borough

May 2012

3Introduction1

4Methodology2

5Report Structure3

53.1 Description of Lichfield District & Tamworth Borough's LocalPlans

83.2 Relevant plans, programmes and projects to be considered incombination

103.3 Table of Natura 2000 and Ramsar sites potentially affected bythe emerging Core Strategies

173.4 Significance of any effects on Natura 2000 sites

25Conclusions and Summary4

27The Next Steps5

Appendices

28Relevant PlansA

31Locations of Natura 2000 sites & Ramsar sitesB

32Relevant CorrespondenceC

37Review of Proposed Policies in Lichfield District Local Plan: StrategyD

51Review of Proposed Policies in Tamworth Borough Local PlanE

55Critical Friend Review of HRAF

60Glossary

May 2012


1 Introduction

1.1 The purpose of this report is to assess the impacts of the land use plans against theconservation objectives of Natura 2000 wildlife sites. The assessment must determinewhether the plans would adversely affect the integrity of a site(s) in terms of its natureconservation objectives. Where negative effects are identified other options should beexamined to avoid any potential damaging effects.

1.2 The requirement for Appropriate Assessment of plans is outlined in Article 6(3) and(4) of the European Communities (1992) Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservationof natural habitats and of wild flora and fauna (Habitats Directive). This has been transposedinto UK law as the Conservation (Natural Habitats & c.) Regulations (1994: “HabitatsRegulations”). Natura 2000 sites include Special Areas of Conservation (SAC’s), SpecialProtection Areas (SPAs) and Offshore Marine Sites (OMSs). In line with Government policythis assessment also relates to Ramsar sites, although these are not part of Natura 2000;these sites support internationally important wetland habitats and are listed under theWetlands of International Importance especially as Waterfowl Habitat (Ramsar Convention,1971).

1.3 Lichfield District Council intends to publish its Local Plan: Strategy in July 2012 (formerlyreferred to as the Core Strategy) for a six week consultation. It has already been establishedthat the Cannock Chase SAC could potentially be affected by land-use proposals within theLocal Plans of Lichfield, Cannock and Stafford and studies to consider potential impact andmitigation are currently being undertaken, being led by a Cannock Chase SAC Partnership.Tamworth Borough Council published its Local Plan (formerly referred to as the Core Strategy)for a six week consultation period during June-July 2012.

3May 2012

2 Methodology

2.1 There are 4 main stages involved in completing an Appropriate Assessment. Theoutcome of each stage indicates whether the next stage is required.

Screening: Determining whether the plan (alone or in combination with other plans) islikely to have a significant effect on a European site.Scoping: Preparation for the Appropriate Assessment (this stage aims to identify moreprecisely what impacts the Appropriate Assessment should cover to ensure that theAppropriate Assessment can be carried out. This stage is only required where thescreening exercise has indicated that there is a likely significant impact upon a EuropeanSite.Appropriate Assessment: Evaluating the evidence gathered on impacts andconsidering whether changes to the plan will be needed to ensure that it will not havean adverse impact on any European site.Assessment of alternative options:Where the plan is assessed as having an adverseeffect, or risk of this, then alternative options should be assessed.Assessment of compensatory measures:Where in light of an assessment ofimperative reasons of overriding public interest, it is deemed that a plan should proceed.

2.2 This report primarily considers the first stage and involves gathering evidence andscreening for likely impacts unless more information is known. It has been prepared in lightof information from Natural England and the Joint Nature Conservation Committee(i) as wellas the Environment Agency and the local water and sewage undertakers. The purpose ofthis initial screening is to:

identify those European sites that could possibly be affected by the Lichfield Districtand Tamworth Borough Local Plans, the qualifying features of those sites, and keyenvironmental conditions to support the sites’ integrity;identify the possible impacts on the sites arising from the implementation of the LichfieldDistrict Local Plan and Tamworth Borough Local Plan;identify impacts, which on the basis of the initial evidence gathering could be screenedout, and those which are likely to require more detailed appropriate assessment; andoutline a number of conclusions regarding the “in combination” effects if implementingthe Lichfield District Local Plan and Tamworth Borough Local Plan alongside otheridentified land use plans being prepared by neighbouring authorities on European natureconservation sites.

2.3 Where an uncertainty exists as to whether effects on the Natura site identified aresignificant, an informed judgement will be made and the Authorities will need to assume thata significant effect is possible in line with the precautionary principle and the next step in theAppropriate Assessment process will be followed.

i http://www.jncc.gov.uk

May 20124


http://www.jncc.gov.uk

3 Report Structure

3.1 Description of Lichfield District & Tamworth Borough's Local Plans

Regional Plan

3.1 Following the election of the new government proposed changes to the planning systemare seeking to abolish the regional spatial strategies, and are seeking the setting of localtargets for employment and housing provision. The legislation is not yet formally in placeand for the purposes of assessing cumulative impact the figures published by the localauthorities will be used and where these are not available then figures incorporated in themost recent version of the West Midlands Regional Spatial Strategy will be used. It shouldbe noted hat significant local evidence has been published that is more up to date than thatwhich informed

Description of Lichfield District Local Plan: Our Strategy

3.2 Lichfield District have undertaken a number of informal consultations that have informedthe emerging Local Plan: Strategy, including the 'Shaping our District,' consultation in 2010/11and this screening report has helped to inform the proposed submission Local Plan: Strategy,due to be published in July 2012. The Local Plan: Strategy is an important component ofthe development plan for the District that will be complemented by a subsequent Allocationsdocument. It is a strategic district–wide plan that will put the key strategies and policies inplace and form part of the development plan for the District, guiding development to 2028and beyond.

3.3 The Local Plan sets out what the District Council would like to achieve in Lichfield City,Burntwood and the rural areas and broadly what type of development is required in theDistrict, how much and where. It is broader than a traditional land use planning documentin that it will have a significant influence on the physical environment; the way people liveand work; and will help deliver the needs of the District’s residents, employers, retailers andvisitors. The Local Plan identifies the following levels of growth:

Housing: 8,700 homes.

Employment Land: 79.1 to 89.1 hectares of readily available land for generalemployment uses between 2008 and 2028.

Retail: Up to an additional 36,000sqm of retail floorspace (gross) within Lichfield Cityand up to 14,000sqm (gross) in Burntwood.

Offices: Up to 30,000sqm of floorspace focused on Lichfield City Centre and allowingup to 5,000sqm within Burntwood town centre.

3.4 The Local Plan incorporates the spatial strategy and a number of polices that dealwith the following topics: sustainable communities; infrastructure provision; sustainabletransport; homes for the future; economic development and enterprise; healthy and safecommunities; natural resources; and the built and historic environment. The Strategy also

5May 2012

incorporates a monitoring framework. A number of changes have been made in light of thecomments received to the 'Shaping our District' consultation and specific polices are includedfor the Cannock Chase SAC and River Mease SAC.

3.5 Significant changes to the 'Shaping our District' consultation is the inclusion of anadditional broad location for development located to the north of Tamworth to be built inassociation with the Anker Valley Sustainable Urban Neighbourhood which lies to the southand is within the Tamworth Borough administrative area.

3.6 The Lichfield Local Plan: Strategy includes a desire to reinstate the Lichfield Canal,in its entirety this extends from Huddlesford Junction to the Hatherton Canal, this wouldimpact significantly on the Cannock Extension Canal SAC, however there are manyconstraints which are yet to be addressed in order to achieve this, so within this plan periodthe proposal is to construct the first 3 phases of the Canal which will extend it fromHuddlesford to Fosseway Lane. This will result in no impact upon the Cannock ExtensionSAC and any future ambitions are not prejudiced without full consideration of all the aspectsconcerned.

3.7 The Lichfield District Local Plan will lead to the preparation of further documents thatwill provide more detailed consideration of site development policies and proposals, inparticular a Local Plan: Allocations document.

Description of Tamworth Borough Council Local Plan: Proposed Spatial Strategy

3.8 The Local Plan sets out the basic principles and policy direction for planning anddevelopment in Tamworth up to 2028 and which will be locally distinctive. It is part of aportfolio of documents that together will form the Local Development Framework for Tamworth.It covers a range of topic areas, including housing, employment, green spaces, biodiversity,leisure and retail. It is considered that it represents the most appropriate way of achievingthe spatial vision and objectives for the borough whilst delivering identified future developmentneeds in the most appropriate and sustainable way.

3.9 Tamworth Borough Council intends to publish their Local Plan in June 2012. A changeto the scope and content of the Local Plan has arisen in response to government amendmentsto the proposed scope of Local Development Frameworks. Consequently, the Local Plan’sremit has been broadened to include site allocations.

3.10 The evidence base for the Local Plan proposes that Tamworth should seek toaccommodate at least 5,500 new dwellings (4,500 within the borough boundary), 36 hectaresof employment land, 20,000sqm of office floorspace and 38,400sqm of comparison retailfloorspace up to 2028.

3.11 The proposed spatial strategy remains broadly similar to the approach set out inprevious consultation versions of the Core Strategy. The one strategic housing site-the AnkerValley Sustainable Urban Neighbourhood remains albeit with an extended site boundary.The Strategic employment sites previously identified are also carried forward along with theexisting network of local and neighbourhood centres.

May 20126


3.12 Tamworth Town Centre is reinforced as the focus for new retail, leisure, tourism andcultural, office and high density residential development resulting in a number of strategicdevelopment sites being allocated to accommodate future growth. The borough’s networkof local and neighbourhood centres are identified for protection and future enhancement.

3.13 The reliance on one greenfield strategic housing site-the Anker Valley SustainableUrban Extension has resulted in a number of sustainability related disadvantages. Toovercome these; and to ensure that the borough makes the most efficient use of land, aseries of regeneration priority areas are now proposed. These include The WilnecoteRegeneration Corridor; focusing on a comprehensive approach to housing and employmentled regeneration and in the Post War Social Housing Estates. The latter builds on the currentLocality Working initiative to support housing led regeneration within some of the borough’smost deprived neighbourhoods.

3.14 With the overall goal of reducing the need to travel by locating transport generatingdevelopment in sustainable locations and/or supporting ameasures to encourage sustainablemodes of transport, the transport policies aims to deliver priorities to tackle congestion hotspots contained within the Local Transport Plan and junction improvements along the A5.Other key objectives relate to supporting the cycle and pedestrian cycleways across theborough and expansions to the capacity and appearance of the two railway stations.

3.15 Existing high quality open space is retained; to deliver the character of the boroughas ‘Urban Green’. Green and blue (rivers and canal) linkages are emphasised to both projecta positive image of the town and deliver health related benefits.

3.16 Existing historic assets remain protected and a policy requiring high quality designof new development is included.

3.17 The Council has assessed planning measures needed in response to climate change.This includes an assessment of renewable energy generation potential and a flood mitigationstrategy.

3.18 Whilst the spatial strategy seeks to accommodate as much development withinTamworth’s boundaries, not all of it is capable of being accommodated without impactingnegatively on the quality of life of Tamworth’s communities. The scarcity of developable landwithin the borough (as a result of constraints such as flood risk areas, biodiversity designatedsites, greenbelt designation and a general lack of brownfield land) restricts the amount ofnew dwellings that Tamworth is capable of delivering within its boundary to 4,500. Thisresults in land outside the borough’s boundary, to the north of the borough in Lichfield districtand within North Warwickshire being identified for up to 1,000 dwellings.

Nature of Impacts

3.19 The main areas which could have an impact upon nature conservation interests ofNatura 2000 sites are physical impacts from development proposed on the sites themselvesand associated infrastructure such as roads, public transport, water abstraction, sewage,surface water run-off, pollution, energy and flood alleviation schemes and impacts such asincreased air pollution from increased levels of traffic passing through the sites.

7May 2012

3.2 Relevant plans, programmes and projects to be considered in combination

3.20 The following list has been identified as plans, programmes and projects which couldpotentially impact upon the Natura 2000 sites identified within this scoping report. A briefdescription of each of the following documents is included as Appendix A and their effectsin combination are considered when the sites are assessed later in this document.

West Midlands Regional Spatial Strategy and Phase II RevisionStaffordshire Minerals Core StrategyStaffordshire and Stoke on Trent Waste Core Strategy 2010-2026Staffordshire Local Transport Consultation Plan 2011-2026 (LTP3)Cannock Chase AONB Management Plan 2009 – 2014Evidence Base relating to Cannock Chase SAC and the Appropriate Assessment ofLocal Authorities Core Strategies. November 2009Cannock Chase Visitor Impact Mitigation Strategy November 2009.Cannock Chase Local PlanThe Plan for Stafford Borough - Strategic Policy ChoicesSouth Staffordshire District Core Strategy: Proposed ModificationsEast Staffordshire emerging Local PlanBlack Country Joint Core StrategyBirmingham Core Strategy 2026 : March 2011Big City Plan: Birmingham City CouncilSouth Derbyshire emerging Core StrategyNorth West Leicestershire Pre-Submission Core Strategy May 2012North Warwickshire Core Strategy: Draft Pre-Submission June 2012Rugeley Power Station Flue Gas Desulphurisation (FGD) plansEnvironment Agency consents for water extractionSevern Trent Water: Water Resources PlanSouth Staffs Water Resources Plan 2009Tame, Anker and Mease Catchment Abstraction Management Strategy. March 2008River Mease Water Quality Management Plan, Nutrient Management Plan and RiverRestoration PlanRiver Mease Developer Contribution Strategy July 2012Staffordshire Trent Valley Catchment Abstraction Management Strategy July 2007National Forest Strategy 2009-2014Humber River Basin Management Plan 2009

Natura 2000 and Ramsar sites potentially affected by the Local Plans, including theconservation objectives of each site and the potential sensitivities of each site toadverse impacts.

3.21 The sites included within this assessment have been identified using informationwithin the RSS Scoping and Screening Report, by identifying all those sites within a 20kmbuffer of the Districts’ boundaries as listed on the JNCC website and through consultationwith Natural England.

May 20128


3.22 A list of sites in a 20km radius of Lichfield District and Tamworth Borough are shownon the map at Appendix B and are included within the table. Some sites are only within the20km radius of one of the Districts in this joint report, however should any effects arise fromeither Local Plan which effect any of the Natura 2000 sites identified these have also beenconsidered. In addition the Humber Estuary SAC and Ramsar site have been incorporated,this is following consultation with Natural England who have advised that the water from theRiver Trent and Tame which flows within Lichfield and Tamworth District flows to the HumberEstuary.

9May 2012

3.3Tableof

Natura2000

andRam

sars

itespo

tentially

affected

bytheem

erging

CoreStrategies Iden

tifiedIm

pacts

Distanc

efrom

Lich

field

DistrictB

ound

ary&

Tamworth

Borou

ghBou

ndary

Con

servation

Objectiv

esReaso

nforD

esigna

tion

Nam

eof

Site

TheRiver

Mea

seisan

unusua

llysemi-n

aturalsystem

inalargelyrural

land

scap

e,do

minated

byintensive

WithinLichfieldDistrict

Tamworth:

Maintaintheriver

asa

favourab

leha

bitatfor

floatingform

ations

ofwater

Crowfoot

Ann

exIh

abitatspresen

tasaqu

alifying

feature,

butn

otaprimaryreason

for

selectionof

thissite

River

Mease

SAC

agriculture.W

ater

quality

andqu

antity

arevitaltotheEurop

eaninterests,

4,50

0m(ran

unculus),

popu

lations

ofbu

llhe

ad,spine

dloachan

d

Water

coursesof

plainto

mon

tane

levelswith

theRan

unculionfluitantis

andCallitricho

-Batrachion

vege

tation

whilstcom

petitionforw

ater

resources

ishigh

.Diffusepo

llutionan

dexcessive

sedimen

tationarecatchm

ent-w

ide

issues

which

have

thepo

tentialto

white

claw

edcrayfish

andtheriver

and

Ann

exIIspeciesthatareaprimaryreason

fors

electionof

thissite

affectthesite.T

heSSSIa

ssessm

ent

repo

rtun

derta

kenin20

07no

testhe

site’sad

versecond

ition

andiden

tifies

adjoiningland

asha

bitatfor

popu

lations

ofotter.

thefollowingissues:draina

ge,invasive

Spine

dloach

Cob

itistaen

iafre

shwater

species,water

pollution–

Bullhea

dCottusgo

bio

agriculture/ru

n-off,water

pollution–

Ann

exIIspeciespresen

tasaqu

alifying

feature,

butn

otaprimaryreason

fors

iteselection

discha

rge.Sign

ificantne

wde

velopm

ent

couldtake

placewithinthecatchm

ent

asaresultof

newho

usingan

dem

ploymen

tdevelop

men

tin

North-W

estL

eicestershire

,Sou

thWhite-clawed

(orA

tlanticstream

)crayfishAustro

potamob

iuspa

llipe

sDerbyshire

andEastS

taffs

which

may

impa

ctup

onwater

quality

andqu

antity.

Otte

rLu

tralutra

Thecontinuing

crea

tionoftheNationa

lFo

restwilllead

tofurth

ercatchm

ent

widechan

gesinland

use.

Thepo

pulationof

Luronium

natans

inthiscul-d

e-saccana

lisde

pend

entupo

naba

lanced

levelofb

oattraffic.Ifthe

Lichfield

1,10

0mMaintainfavourab

lecond

ition

asthisis

considered

tobe

oneof

thebe

starea

sinthe

UnitedKingd

om.

Ann


fors

electionof

thissite

Can

nock

Extens

ion

Can

alSA

C

cana

lisno

tused,theab

unda

ntgrow

thof

othe

raqu

aticmacroph

ytes

may

Tamworth

Floa

tingwater-plantain

Luronium

natans

shad

e-ou

tthe

Luronium

natans

unless

routinelycontrolledby

cutting

.An

16,000

m

May 201210


Iden

tifiedIm

pacts

Distanc

efrom

Lich

field

DistrictB

ound

ary&

Tamworth

Borou

ghBou

ndary

Con

servation

Objectiv

esReaso

nforD

esigna

tion

Nam

eof

Site

increa

seinrecrea

tiona

lactivity

wou

ldbe

tothede

trimen

tofLuron

iumna

tans.

Existingdischa

rges

ofsurfa

cewater

run-off,principa

llyfro

mroad

s,cause

someredu

ctioninwater

quality.

Visitorp

ressures

includ

edo

gwalking

,ho

rserid

ing,

mou

ntainbiking

and

off-track

activities

such

asorientee

ring,

Lichfield

2,40

0mMaintaininfavourab

lecond

ition

Northern

Atlanticwethe

aths

with

Ericatetra

lixforw

hich

Ann

exIh

abitatsthatareaprimaryreason

fors

electionof

thissite

Can

nock

Cha

seSA

C

allofw

hich

causedisturba

ncean

dresultinerosion,

newtra

ckcrea

tion

Tamworth

Europ

eandryhe

aths

thearea

isconsidered

tosupp

orta

sign

ificant

presen

ce.

Ann

exIh

abitatspresen

tasaqu

alifying

feature,

butn

otaprimaryreason

for

selectionof

thissite

andvege

tationda

mag

e.Bracken

invasion

issign

ificant,b

utisbe

ing

controlled.

Birchan

dpine

scrub,

much

ofthelatte

rfrom

surrou

nding

>20,00

0m

Europe

andryhe

aths

for

which

thisisconsidered

tobe

oneof

thebe

starea

sintheUnited

Kingd

om

commercialplan

tations,iscontinua

llyinvading

thesite

andha

sto

becontrolled.

Highvisitoru

sage

andthe

factthat

asign

ificant

prop

ortionof

the

site

isCom

mon

Land

,req

uirin

gSecretary

ofState

approvalbe

fore

NorthernAtlanticwet

heaths

with

Ericatetra

lix

fencingcantake

place,mea

nsthatthe

reintro

ductionof

sustaina

ble

man

agem

entintheform

oflivestock

grazingha

sman

yprob

lems.Can

nock

Cha

seoverliescoalmea

sureswhich

have

been

deep

-mined

.Miningfissures

continue

toap

pear

across

thesiteeven

thou

ghminingha

sceased

andthisis

thou

ghttode

trimen

tally

affectsite

hydrolog

y.

Furth

ermoretheun

derlyingShe

rwoo

dSa

ndston

eisamajor

aquiferw

ithwater

abstracted

forp

ublic

andindu

stria

luses

11May 2012

Iden

tifiedIm

pacts

Distanc

efrom

Lich

field

DistrictB

ound

ary&

Tamworth

Borou

ghBou

ndary

Con

servation

Objectiv

esReaso

nforD

esigna

tion

Nam

eof

Site

andtheeffectsof

thison

thewetland

features

oftheCha

seareno

tfully

unde

rstood

.

Thisinland

saltm

arsh

isde

pend

ent

upon

traditiona

lagricultural

man

agem

ent,with

livestock

grazing

Lichfield

4,20

0m

Maintainthesaltm

arsh

infavourab

leAnn

exIh


fors

electionof

thissite

PasturefieldsSa

ltMarsh

SAC

andno

,orm

inimaluse,

ofag

ricultural

Inland

saltmea

dows*Prio

rity

feature

chem

icals.Itisalso

depe

nden

tupo

nthebrinesource

beingmaintaine

dTamworth

and,whilstthe

hydrog

eology

ofthesite

>20,00

0misno

tfullyun

derstood

,itw

ouldbe

likely

tobe

vulnerab

leto

anyab

stractions

ofwater

from

theun

dergroun

daq

uifer.

Thesite

isman

aged

byStaffo

rdshire

WildlifeTrustw

ithsupp

ortfromNatural

Eng

land

'sReserve

Enh

ancemen

tSchem

e.

Sitethreaten

edby

nutrien

tenrichm

ent,

includ

ingatmosph

ericde

positionof

nutrien

ts.A

Man

agem

entA

gree

men

t

Lichfield

4,50

0m

Maintainna

tural

dystroph

iclakesan

dpo

nds,forw

hich

thisis

considered

tobe

oneof

Ann

exIh


fors

electionof

thissite

WestM

idland

Mos

ses

&Cha

rtleyMos

sSA

CNaturaldystroph

iclakesan

dpo

nds

controlsag

riculturalrun

-offat

Cha

rtley

Moss.Tree

sat

thissite

trapairborne

Tamworth

thebe

starea

sinthe

UnitedKingd

oman

dtra

nsition

mire

san

dqu

akingbo

gs.

Tran

sitionmire

san

dqu

akingbo

gsnu

trien

tsan

dprovideroosta

reas

for

birds,bu

tthe

enrichm

ente

ffectof

both

ison

lylocalised

.Allpa

rtsof

that

site

>20,00

0m

arevulnerab

leto

recrea

tiona

ldisturba

nce,

particularly

theno

rthern

portion

which

isascou

tcam

p.

May 201212


Iden

tifiedIm

pacts

Distanc

efrom

Lich

field

DistrictB

ound

ary&

Tamworth

Borou

ghBou

ndary

Con

servation

Objectiv

esReaso

nforD

esigna

tion

Nam

eof

Site

Thecrayfishwou

ldbe

vulnerab

leto

pollutionan

dintro

ductionofno

n-na

tive

crayfish,

throug

hun

controlledaccess.

Lichfield:

>20,00

0m

Maintainfavourab

lecond

ition

asarefuge

site,o

neof

thebe

starea

sintheUnited

Kingd

om

Ann


fors

electionof

thissite

Enso

rsPo

olSA

C

White

claw

ed(ora

tlanticstream

)crayfishAustro

potamob

iuspa

llipe

sTo

addressthis,since

1995

thearea

hasbe

enleased

byNun

eatonan

dBed

worth

Borou

ghCou

ncilan

dis

man

aged

asaLo

calN

atureReserve.

Tamworth:

14,900

m

Thegrea

tercrested

newtpop

ulationat

thissite

isde

pend

ento

nthecontrolof

fish,

mainten

ance

ofad

equa

tewater

Lichfield:

19,200

m

Maintainfavourab

lecond

ition

,as

considered

tobe

oneof

thebe

starea

sinthe

UnitedKingd

om

Ann


fors

electionof

thissite

Fens

Pool

SAC

Greater

crestedNew

t(or

Triturus

cristatus)

quality

andtheprotectionof

surrou

ndingterrestrialha

bitatfrom

Tamworth:

major

grou

nddisturba

nce.Th

enu

mbe

rofpo

ndsarebe

ingexpa

nded

toredu

cevulnerab

ilityalthou

ghland

contam

inationmay

befuture

issue.

>20,00

0m

TheHum

berE

stua

ryissubjecttothe

impa

ctsof

human

activities

(pasta

ndpresen

t)as

wellason

goingprocesses

Lichfield:

>20,00

0m

San

dban

kswhich

are

slightlycoveredby

sea

water

allthe

time-for

which

thearea

isconsidered

tosupp

orta

sign

ificant

presen

ce.

Ann

exIh


fors

electionof

thissite

Hum

berE

stua

ry

such

assealevelrisean

dclimate

chan

ge.M

anag

emen

tinterventionis

thereforene

cessaryto

enab

lethe

Tamworth:

Estua

ries

Mud

flatsan

dsand

flatsno

tcovered

byseaw

ater

atlowtide

estuaryto

recovera

ndto

secure

the

>20,00

0mAnn

exIh

abitatspresen

tasaqu

alifying

feature,

butn

otaprimaryreason

for

selectionof

thissite

ecolog

icalresiliencerequ

iredto

respon

dto

both

naturaland

anthropo

genicchan

ge.K

eyissues

includ

ecoastalsqu

eeze,impa

ctson

thesedimen

tbud

get,an

d

Estuaries,forw

hich

this

isconsidered

tobe

one

ofthebe

starea

sinthe

UnitedKingd

om.

San

dban

kswhich

areslightly

coveredby

seawater

allthe

time

geom

orph

olog

icalstructurean

dfunctionoftheestuary(due

tosealevel

rise,

flood

defenceworks,d

redg

ing,

Mud

flatsan

dsand

flats

notcovered

byseaw

ater

atlowtide,

ofwhich

thisisconsidered

Coa

stallago

ons*Prio

rityfeature

13May 2012

Iden

tifiedIm

pacts

Distanc

efrom

Lich

field

DistrictB

ound

ary&

Tamworth

Borou

ghBou

ndary

Con

servation

Objectiv

esReaso

nforD

esigna

tion

Nam

eof

Site

andtheconstru

ction,

operationan

dmainten

ance

ofpo

rts,p

ipelines

and

othe

rinfrastructure),cha

nges

inwater

tobe

oneof

thebe

starea

sintheUnited

Kingd

om.

Salicorniaan

dothe

rann

uals

colonising

mud

andsand

Atlanticsaltmea

dows(G

lauco-

Puccine

llietaliamaritimae

)qu

ality

andflows,pressure

from

additiona

lbuiltde

velopm

ent,an

dCoa

stallago

ons,

Embryonicshiftingdu

nes

damag

ean

ddisturba

ncearisingfro

mShifting

dune

salon

gtheshoreline

with

Ammop

hilaaren

aria(`white

dune

s`)

access,recreationan

dothe

ractivities.

Coa

stalsque

ezeisbe

ingad

dressed

throug

hthede

velopm

enta

nd

forw

hich

thearea

isconsidered

tosupp

orta

sign

ificant

presen

ce.

Fixeddu

neswith

herbaceo

usvege

tation(`grey

dune

s`)*Prio

rity

feature

implem

entationof

theHum

berF

lood

RiskMan

agem

entS

trategy.A

llprop

osalsforflood

defence,

Salicorniaan

dothe

ran

nualscolonising

mud

andsand

,for

which

the

Dun

eswith

Hippo

phae

rham

noides

developm

ent,dred

ging

,abstra

ctions

anddischa

rges

which

requ

ireconsen

tAnn

exIIspeciespresen

tasaqu

alifying

feature,

butn

otaprimaryreason

fors

iteselection

area

isconsidered

tosupp

orta

sign

ificant

presen

ce.

from

anystatutorybo

dy,a

ndland

use

plan

swhich

may

have

impa

ctsup

onthesite

aresubjecttoassessmen

tun

derthe

Con

servation(Natural

Atlanticsaltmea

dows

(Glauco-Puccine

llietalia

maritimae

)

Sea

lamprey

Petromyzon

marinus

Hab

itats,&

c.)R

egulations

1994

(the

“Hab

itatsReg

ulations”).D

iffuse

pollutionwillbe

addressedthroug

ha

River

lamprey

Lampe

trafluviatilis

Greyseal

Halicho

erus

grypus

forw

hich

thearea

isconsidered

tosupp

orta

sign

ificant

presen

ce.

rang

eof

mea

suresinclud

ing

implem

entationof

theWaste

Water

Fram

eworkDire

ctivean

dCatchmen

tSen

sitiveFa

rminginitiatives.

Embryonicshifting

dune

s,which

are

considered

tobe

rare

Other

issues

aread

dressedviaarang

eof

mea

suresinclud

ingregu

lationof

on-site

land

man

agem

entactivities

and

asits

totalexten

tinthe

implem

entationof

theHum

ber

UnitedKingd

omis

Man

agem

entS

chem

e,de

velope

dby

estim

ated

tobe

less

May 201214


Iden

tifiedIm

pacts

Distanc

efrom

Lich

field

DistrictB

ound

ary&

Tamworth

Borou

ghBou

ndary

Con

servation

Objectiv

esReaso

nforD

esigna

tion

Nam

eof

Site

than

1000

hectares,for

which

thearea

isconsidered

tosupp

orta

sign

ificant

presen

ce.

allrelevan

tstatutorybo

dies

toassistin

thede

liveryof

theird

utiesun

derthe

Hab

itatsReg

ulations.

Shiftingdu

nesalon

gthe

shorelinewith

Ammop

hilaaren

aria

(“white

dune

s”),for

which

thearea

isconsidered

tosupp

orta

sign

ificant

presen

ce.

Fixeddu

neswith

herbaceo

usvege

tation

(“grey

dune

s”),for

which

thearea

isconsidered

tosupp

orta

sign

ificant

presen

ce.

Dun

eswith

Hippo

phae

rham

noides,w

hich

isconsidered

tobe

rare

asits

totalexten

tinthe

UnitedKingd

omis

estim

ated

tobe

less

than

1000

hectares,for

which

thearea

isconsidered

tosupp

orta

sign

ificant

presen

ce.

Petromyzon

marinus,

forw

hich

thearea

isconsidered

tosupp

orta

sign

ificant

presen

ce.

15May 2012

Iden

tifiedIm

pacts

Distanc

efrom

Lich

field

DistrictB

ound

ary&

Tamworth

Borou

ghBou

ndary

Con

servation

Objectiv

esReaso

nforD

esigna

tion

Nam

eof

Site

Lampe

trafluviatilis

forw

hich

thearea

isconsidered

tosupp

orta

sign

ificant

presen

ce.

Halicho

erus

grypus

forw

hich

thearea

isconsidered

tosupp

orta

sign

ificant

presen

ce.

Table3.1Sitespo

tentially

effected

bytheem

erging

LocalP

lans

May 201216


3.4 Significance of any effects on Natura 2000 sites

3.23 The likelihood of significant effects have been assessed in relation to the specificfeatures and environmental conditions of the protected sites, as could be effected by theLichfield Local Plan and the Tamworth Local Plan, or in combination with other known plansand projects listed previously, taking particular account of the site’s conservation objectives.As part of establishing what effects are significant, the probability of impact, duration of theimpact, frequency of any impact and reversibility of impact have been considered.

17May 2012

River

Mease

SAC

Con

clus

ion:

Nosign

ificant

effects

Invasive

Species

Cha

ngein

Surrou

ndingLa

ndUse

Water

Qua

ntity

Recreationa

lPressu

reWater

Qua

lity

AirQua

lity

Impa

cton

protected

species

Dire

ctHab

itat

loss

No

No

No

No–theLo

cal

Plans

dono

t

Poten

tial

No

Poten

tial

No

Are

Local

Plan

slikelyto

containan

yim

pact

upon

thissite

prop

osalsinthe

Nationa

lForest

area

Potentialim

pactas

aresultof

Poten

tialw

iththe

continuing

crea

tion

Poten

tial

impa

ctas

aresultof

Poten

tialimpa

ctdu

eto

increa

sed

pressure

on

Possible

effectsin

combina

tion

compe

titionfor

oftheNationa

lne

wwaste

water

with

othe

rplan

swater

supp

lyarisingfro

mne

wFo

restwilllead

tofurth

ercatchm

ent

housingan

dem

ploymen

ttre

atmen

tworks

untilup

grad

esareachieved

.ho

usingan

dem

ploymen

twidechan

gesin

land

use

developm

ent

inNorth

developm

entin

west

Swad

lincote

and

Leicestersh

ire,

Coa

lvillean

dSou

thPoten

tialrisk

Derbyshire

iden

tifiedinESBC

andEast

AAScoping

Staffs

until

Rep

ort.RSS

upgrad

essugg

ests-W

ater

are

achieved

.ne

utralityrequ

ired

inne

wde

velopm

ent

Site

iswithinLichfieldDistrictan

dwithin1kilometre

ofTamworth

Borou

gh.T

hevulnerab

ilityof

thesite

from

siltation,

runoff,diffu

sepo

llution,

excessivesedimen

tationan

dinvasive

freshwater

species;theprop

osalsfor8

,700

homes

inLichfieldDistrictan

d4,50

0forT

amworth

willha

veno

Assessm

ent

ofeffectsan

dsign

ificant

impa

cton

thesefactors.Th

eSou

thernStaffo

rdshire

Water

CycleStudy

hasiden

tifiedissues

relatingto

thewaste

water

treatmen

tworks

why

not

whe

retheMea

seisthereceivingwatercourse.T

here

couldpo

tentially

besign

ificant

effectup

ontheSACfro

mde

velopm

entintheaffected

area

s.co

nsidered

sign

ificant

Noallocations

ofland

areprop

osed

withinthesearea

sby

either

LocalP

lan.Th

eLichfieldLo

calP

lan:Stra

tegy

includ

espo

liciestoen

sure

prop

osals

dono

thaveane

gativeimpa

ctup

onwater

quality

andtheRiver

Mea

seSACan

dha

spo

liciesto

protecta

nden

hancebiod

iversity,p

rotected

species

May 201218


River

Mease

SAC

Con

clus

ion:

Nosign

ificant

effects

andtheirh

abitats.E

vide

nceha

sbe

enprep

ared

which

iden

tifiesmitiga

tionispo

ssiblethroug

havarie

tyofmea

nsinclud

ingaDevelop

erCon

tribu

tions

Schem

eprep

ared

byajointw

orking

grou

p.Atm

osph

ericpo

llutionmay

bege

neratedfro

mtheincrea

sedvehicularm

ovem

entsassociated

with

new

developm

enta

spa

rtof

theLo

calP

lan,

thisisge

nerally

restrictedto

road

swithin20

0mof

thesite.W

iththeexceptionof

theM42

,the

reareno

major

routes

passingcloseto

theSACan

dthereforedu

eto

thedistan

cean

yprop

osed

developm

entw

ouldbe

from

theRiver

Mea

sethereisun

likelyto

bean

ysign

ificant

impa

ctarisingan

dan

yincombina

tionassessmen

tsareno

texpectedto

arisefro

mimplem

entingtheprop

osed

LocalP

lans

and

othe

rplans

andprop

osalslistedpreviously,

andimprovem

entsshou

ldoccur.

Table3.2River

Mease

SACsign

ificant

effectstable

Can

nock

Extens

ionCan

alSA

C

Con

clus

ion:

Nosign

ificant

effects

Invasive

Species

Cha

ngein

Surrou

ndingLand

Use

Water

Qua

ntity

Recreationa

lPressu

reWater

Qua

lity

Air

Qua

lity

Impa

cton

protected

species

Dire

ctHab

itat

loss

No

Yes-

increa

sed

run-offfrom

No

Yes–throug

hincrea

sed

Yes-increa

sed

run-offfrom

No

Non

eNo

Are

Local

Plan

slikely

adjacentland

could

popu

lationwithin

2.9km

ofsite.

adjacent

land

couldcause

toim

pact

upon

this

site

causechan

gesin

water

quality.

chan

gesin

water

quality.

TheRSSiden

tifiedlevelsof

recrea

tiona

luse

oftheCan

nock

Exten

sion

Can

alareexpe

cted

togo

upas

aresultof

policiesintheRSS,the

Visitor

Econo

myStra

tegy

andReg

iona

lHou

sing

Stra

tegy.S

ignifican

teffe

ctsarepo

ssibleifthistra

nslatesinto

increa

sesinbo

attra

ffican

dassociated

physicaldisturba

nce.Increa

sedlevelsofde

positionofatmosph

ericpo

llutantsarelikely,bu

tthe

seareno

texpectedtotra

nslateintosign

ificantchan

ges

Possible

effectsin

combina

tion

inwater

chem

istry.A

degree

ofdisturba

nceisde

sirableinterm

sof

maintaining

habitatfor

floatingwater-plantain(JNCCsite

notification),w

here

low

with

othe

rplan

slevelsof

boat

trafficha

vesupp

ressed

thegrow

thof

emerge

ntvege

tation,

whilsta

llowingop

en-water

plan

tsto

flourish.

Increa

sedlevelsof

boat

disturba

ncemay

causeade

clineinthepo

pulationof

open

-water

plan

ts,a

swellasredu

cing

water

quality.N

umbe

rsof

boatsshou

ldthereforebe

regu

lated,

theRSSconclude

dthat

boat

trafficlevels'sho

uldbe

controllableat

locallevel'A

nApp

ropriate

Assessm

entisbe

ingun

derta

kenas

part

oftheCan

nock

Cha

seLo

calP

lan,thefinding

softhisha

veno

tyetbe

enpu

blishe

d.LichfieldDistrictLo

calP

lan:Stra

tegy

supp

ortsprop

osalstorestore

theLichfieldCan

al,h

owever

durin

gthisplan

perio

dthiswillno

tjointheHathe

rtonCan

alan

dwillno

tthe

refore

have

animpa

ctup

ontheCan

nock

Exten

sion

Can

al.

19May 2012

Can

nock

Extens

ionCan

alSA

C

Con

clus

ion:

Nosign

ificant

effects

Site

is1.1km

from

LichfieldDistrictan

dap

prox

16km

from

Tamworth

Borou

gh.T

hevulnerab

ilitiesof

thesite

arefro

mrecrea

tiona

lpressure,

water

quality

throug

hincrea

sedrunofffrom

adjacent

land

andatmosph

ericpo

llution.

Theprop

osalsfor4

,500

homes

byTamworth

Borou

ghwillha

veno

sign

ificant

impa

cton

thisdu

eto

thedistan

cefro

mthesite.T

hedirections

ofgrow

thprop

osed

arou

ndBurntwoo

daresomedistan

cefro

mthesite

and

Assessm

ent

ofeffects

andwhy

not

anyimpa

ctwou

ldbe

from

associated

vehiclemovem

entsusingtheA5an

dwou

ldbe

from

atmosph

ericpo

llution,

however

thisisno

tcon

side

redto

cons

idered

sign

ificant

translate

tosign

ificant

chan

gesinwater

chem

istry.R

ecreationpressure

which

wou

ldresultinan

increa

seinbo

attra

fficcouldbe

detrimen

tal–

the

numbe

rofb

oatsshou

ldthereforebe

regu

latedat

locallevel.S

tudies

have

iden

tifiedthat

run-offfrom

theA5do

esno

tdrainto

theCan

nock

Exten

sion

Can

alan

dtheeffectson

water

quality

from

implem

entingtheprop

osalsintheLichfieldDistrictLo

calP

lanshou

ldno

tbesign

ificant.N

either

shou

ldtherebe

anyincombina

tioneffectsfro

mimplem

entingtheLichfieldLo

calP

lanan

dothe

rplans

andprop

osalslistedpreviously,

specifically

theBlack

Cou

ntry

JointC

oreStra

tegy

andtheCan

nock

Cha

seLo

calP

lan.

Table3.3Can

nock

Extens

ionCan

alSA

C

Can

nock

Cha

seSA

C

Con

clus

ion:

Potentialsignific

ante

ffects

Invasive

Species

Cha

ngein

Surrou

nding

Land

Use

WaterQua

ntity

Recreationa

lPressu

reWater

Qua

lity

AirQua

lity

Impa

cton

protected

species

Dire

ctHab

itat

loss

No

No

No

Yes

No

Poten

tial

Poten

tial

Poten

tial

Are

Local

Plan

slikely

toim

pact

upon

this

site

Thesite

isinfluen

cedby

traffican

dvisitors

from

awidearea

.The

prop

osed

increa

seinho

usingan

dem

ploymen

tide

ntified

intheRSSan

dinothe

rplan

sforthe

districtssurrou

ndingtheSACwillresultinan

increa

seinbo

thvisitors

andcarm

ovem

entsto

theSACwhich

wou

ldbe

detrimen

taltoit

Possible

effectsin

unless

approp

riate

mitiga

tionisinplace.

Workha

sbe

enun

derta

kento

consider

theimpa

ctup

onthewater

environm

ento

fthe

SACan

dthisha

sco

mbina

tion

resultedinane

edto

mon

itorthe

effectsbu

tnodirectimpa

ctattribu

tableto

future

developm

entinLichfieldDistrictan

dTamworth

canbe

iden

tified

atpresen

t.with

othe

rplan

s

Site

is2.4km

from

theclosestp

arto

fLichfieldDistrictan

dover

20km

from

Tamworth

Borou

gh.T

hevulnerab

ilitiesof

thesite

areto

chan

gesinwater

quality

andwater

quan

tity,da

mag

eto

thesite,itsspeciesan

dha

bitatfrom

visitors

andairp

ollutionfro

mincrea

sedtra

fficbo

thvisitingan

ddriving

Assessm

ent

ofeffects

throug

hthesites.Arepo

rtha

sbe

enprep

ared

toad

vise

localautho

ritieson

theimpa

ctsof

developm

ento

ntheSAC.Ith

asestablishe

dthat

therewill

andwhy

not

May 201220


Can

nock

Cha

seSA

C

Con

clus

ion:

Potentialsignific

ante

ffects

cons

idered

sign

ificant

beno

grea

terimpa

cton

theSACfro

mwater

abstractionassociated

with

newde

velopm

enta

nditha

siden

tifiedazone

ofinfluen

cean

dcriteria

tomitiga

teforthe

impa

cton

theSACfro

man

increa

seinvisitors

andairp

ollution.

Theprop

osalsfor8

,700

homes

inLichfieldDistrictcouldha

vea

sign

ificantimpa

cton

theCan

nock

Cha

seSA

Cdu

etotheproximity

oftheprop

osalsbe

ingwithinan

iden

tifiedzone

ofinfluen

cean

dstrategicallocations

withinTamworth

i.e.tho

seof

over

100dw

ellings

thestud

yad

viseswillalso

need

toincorporateavisitorimpa

ctstrategy.H

owever

neither

ofthe

districtsareinazone

whe

reno

netincreaseinreside

ntialprope

rties

shou

ldbe

perm

itted

.Inorde

rtoassess

ifde

velopm

entw

illha

vean

impa

cton

theSAC,a

ndto

iden

tifywha

tmea

suresarene

cessaryto

preven

tdam

agingimpa

ct(either

throug

hprovidingalternativesites(SANG)o

rthrou

ghfinan

cialcontrib

utions

totheCan

nock

Cha

seVisitorM

itiga

tionStra

tegy),an

dthesestud

iesarebe

ingun

derta

ken.

Thestud

yrecommen

dedpo

licies

beincorporated

inLo

calP

lans

includ

ingtheinclusionof

apo

licyto

ensure

that

theimpa

cton

theSACcanbe

adeq

uatelymitiga

tedan

dthat

there

willbe

adeq

uate

mon

itorin

gof

theeffectsof

mitiga

tionto

maintaintheSAC.T

heLichfieldDistrictLo

calP

lan:

Stra

tegy

also

incorporates

additiona

lpo

liciesto

protecta

nden

hancebiod

iversity,p

rotected

speciesan

dtheirh

abitats,w

hich

incombina

tionwith

othe

rplans

couldde

liver

improvem

ents

totheSAC.

Table3.4Can

nock

Cha

seSA

Csign

ificant

effectstable

PasturefieldsSa

ltmarsh

SAC

Con

clus

ion:

Nosign

ificant

effects

Invasive

Species

Cha

ngein

Surrou

nding

Land

Use

WaterQuantity

Recreationa

lPressu

reWater

Qua

lity

AirQua

lity

Impa

cton

protected

species

Dire

ctHab

itat

loss

No

No

No

No

No

No

Non

eNo

Are

Local

Plan

slikelyto

impa

ctup

onthissite

TheRSSiden

tifiesthattherearesitespe

riodically

affected

byflood

water

fromRiver

Tren

twhich

hashigh

sewag

eload

ings

andad

ditiona

lloa

ding

sfro

msurfa

cewater

runo

ff.Th

isprob

lem

couldbe

exacerba

tedby

housingde

velopm

entu

pstre

am.T

here

arealso

possibleimpa

ctsassociated

with

water

abstraction.

Possible

effectsin

combina

tion

with

othe

rplan

s

Site

is4.2km

from

LichfieldDistrictan

dover

20km

from

Tamworth

Borou

gh.T

hevulnerab

ilitiesof

thesite

areto

chan

gesinwater

quality

andwater

quan

tity.Th

eprop

osalsfor8

,700

homes


d4,50

0inTamworth

Borou

ghwillha

veno

sign

ificant

impa

cton

thissite

dueto

the

Assessm

entof

effectsan

d

21May 2012

PasturefieldsSa

ltmarsh

SAC

Con

clus

ion:

Nosign

ificant

effects

why

not

cons

idered

sign

ificant

distan

cefro

mthesite

andbe

ingdo

wnstre

amof

theTren

t.Th

eSou

thernStaffo

rdshire

Water

CycleStudy

hasiden

tifiedpo

tentialincombina

tion

effectsarisingfro

mincrea

seduseofLichfieldWwTW

,further

enqu

iries

with

thesewag

eun

derta

kersha

veconclude

dthatthene

cessaryimprovem

ents

totheWwTW

areab

leto

beimplem

entedto

addressne

edsarisingfro

mde

velopm

ent,as

such

sign

ificant

in-com

bina

tionassessmen

tsareno

texpe

cted

toarisefro

mimplem

entingtheprop

osed

LocalP

lans

andothe

rplans

andprop

osalslistedpreviously.

Table3.5Pa

sturefieldsSa

ltmarsh

sign

ificant

effectstable

WestM

idland

Mos

sesan

dCha

rtleyMos

sSA

C

Con

clus

ion:

Nosign

ificant

effects

Invasive

Species

Cha

ngein

Surrou

nding

Land

Use

WaterQua

ntity

Recreationa

lPressu

reWater

Qua

lity

AirQua

lity

Impa

cton

protected

species

Dire

ctHab

itat

loss

No

No

No

No

No

No

Non

eNo

Are

Local

Plan

slikelyto

impa

ctup

onthissite

TheRSSiden

tifiesthat

housingde

velopm

entu

nder

Pha

seIIislikelyto

crea

tewater

deficitprob

lems,althou

ghitisno

tcurrentlyknow

nto

wha

textent

thiswou

ldaffectsites.Th

esite

isalso

over

itscriticalloa

dforN

itrog

enan

dacidpo

llution,

themaincontrib

utorsof

which

wou

ldbe

throug

hPo

ssible

effectsin

increa

sedatmosph

ericpo

llutionarisingthroug

hincrea

sesinvehiclemovem

entsne

arthesite.T

hesiteisalso

vulnerab

letorecrea

tiona

ldisturban

ce,

particularly

theno

rthernpa

rtwhich

isaScout

camp.

combina

tion

with

othe

rplan

s

Site

is4.5kmfro

mLichfieldDistrictan

dover

20km

fromTamworth.T

hevulnerab

ilityofthesitearises

fromlocalised

agriculturalrun

off,water

quality,

water

quan

tityan

drecrea

tiona

ldisturban

ce.T

heprop

osalsfor8

,700

homes


d4,50

0inTamworth

Borou

gharebe

yond

the

Assessm

ent

ofeffectsan

dbo

unda

riesof

thesite

andareso

fara

way

that

recrea

tiona

lpressurewillno

tbege

neratedfro

mthede

velopm

ents.Inad

ditiontheprop

osalswill

why

not

utilise

water

from

beyond

thecatchm

entfor

thissite

andwillthereforeha

veno

sign

ificant

impa

cton

this.A

tmosph

ericpo

llutionmay

bege

nerated

cons

idered

sign

ificant

fromtheincrea

sedvehicularm

ovem

entsassociated

with

newde

velopm

entaspa

rtoftheLo

calP

lans,aga

indu

etothedistan

ceinvolved

nosign

ificant

incombina

tioneffectsareexpe

cted

toarisefro

mimplem

entingtheprop

osed

LocalP

lans

andothe

rplans

andprop


Table3.6WestM

idland

Mos

sesan

dCha

rtleyMos

ssign

ificant

effectstable

May 201222


Enso

r’sPo

olSA

C

Con

clus

ion:

Nosign

ificant

effects

Invasive

Species

Cha

ngein

Surrou

nding

Land

Use

Water

Qua

ntity

Recreationa

lPressu

reWater

Qua

lity

AirQua

lity

Impa

cton

protected

species

Dire

ctHab

itat

loss

No

No

No

No

No

No

Non

eNo

Are

LocalP

lans

likelyto

impa

ctup

onthissite

TheRSSiden

tifiesthat

thesite

iscurren

tlyman

aged

asaLo

calN

atureReserve.Itw

ouldbe

vulnerab

leto

alterations

tothewater

quality

and

quan

tity.Itha

sbe

enconclude

dthat

theprop

osalsof

theRSSwereno

tlikelyto

impa

cton

theseaspe

cts.

Possibleeffectsin

combina

tionwith

othe

rplans

Site

isover

20km

from

LichfieldDistrictan

dap

proximately15

kmfro

mTamworth

Borou

gh.D

evelop

men

tpropo

salswithinLichfieldan

dTamworth

willha

veno

sign

ificant

impa

cton

this.S

ignifican

tin-combina

tionassessmen

tsareno

texpectedto

arisefro

mimplem

entingthe

prop

osed

LocalP

lans

andothe

rplans

andprop


Assessm

ento

feffectsandwhy

not

cons

idered

sign

ificant

Table3.7En

sor's

Pool

sign

ificant

effectstable

Hum

berE

stua

ry

Con

clus

ion:

Nosign

ificant

effects

Invasive

Species

Cha

ngein

Surrou

nding

Land

Use

WaterQua

ntity

Recreationa

lPressu

reWater

Qua

lity

AirQua

lity

Impa

cton

protected

species

Dire

ctHab

itat

loss

No

No

No

No

No

No

Non

eNo

Are

Local

Plan

slikelyto

impa

ctup

onthissite

Thesiteiscurren

tlyman

aged

asaNationa

lNatureReserve.Itw

ouldbe

vulnerab

letoon

siteph

ysicalalterations

andalterations

tothewater

quality

andqu

antity.Th

ereareman

yplan

sstillbe

ingde

velope

dalon

gtheleng

thof

thetheRiver

system

.Po

ssible

effectsin

combina

tion

23May 2012

Hum

berE

stua

ry

Con

clus

ion:

Nosign

ificant

effects

with

othe

rplan

s

Site

isover

20km

from

both

LichfieldDistrictan

dTamworth

Borou

gh.D

evelop

men

tpropo

salswithinbo

thlocalautho

rityarea

swillno

taffe

ctthe

site

physicallyan

dan

yeffectswou

ldbe

throug

hdischa

rges

into

theRiver

Tamean

dTren

tasthiseven

tuallyflowsto

theHum

ber.Th

elocalw

ater

Assessm

ent

ofeffectsan

dprovidersan

dfoulwaste

compa

nyha

vebe

encontactedan

dha

veup

toda

teplan

sag

reed

with

EAwith

rega

rdto

theimpa

cton

theRiver

Tame

why

not

andRiver

Tren

t.Th

eyha

vead

visedthat

noad

ditiona

ltreatmen

tworks

orchan

gesto

anyof

theire

xistingconsen

tswou

ldbe

necessaryto

cons

idered

sign

ificant

accommod

atetheprop

osed

levelofg

rowth

inthebroa

dlocations

curren

tlyiden

tified,

nora

nyincrea

seprop

osed

bytheRSS.A

sthereareno

large

scalede

velopm

entswhich

wou

ldha

vean

impa

ctdirectlyon

either

oftheseRiversprop

osed

ineither

LocalP

lanthereislikelyto

beno

sign

ificant

impa

ctarisingfro

mincombina

tioneffectsfro

mimplem

entingtheprop

osed

LocalP

lans

with

othe

rplans

andprop

osals.

Table3.8Hum

berE

stua

rysign

ificant

effectstable

Fens

Pool

SAC

Con

clus

ion:

Nosign

ificant

effects

Invasive

Species

Cha

ngein

Surrou

nding

Land

Use

Water

Qua

ntity

Recreationa

lPressu

reWater

Qua

lity

AirQua

lity

Impa

cton

protected

species

Dire

ctHab

itat

loss

No

No

No

No

No

No

Non

eNo

Are

LocalP

lans

likelyto

impa

ctup

onthissite

TheRSSan

dtheBlack

Cou

ntry

CoreStra

tegy

iden

tifythat

thesite

isvulnerab

leto

furth

erland

take

ofsupp

ortingha

bitat,an

dthisshou

ldbe

preven

tedto

avoidad

verseimpa

cts.

Possibleeffectsin

combina

tionwith

othe

rplans

Site

isover

19km

from

LichfieldDistrictan

dover

20km

from

Tamworth

Borou

gh.D

evelop

men

tpropo

salswithinbo

thlocalautho

rityarea

swillha

veno

sign

ificant

impa

cton

this.S

ignifican

tin-combina

tionassessmen

tsareno

texpectedto

arisefro

mimplem

entingtheprop

osed

LocalP

lans

andothe

rplans

andprop


Assessm

ento

feffectsan

dwhy

not

cons

idered

sign

ificant

Table3.9Fe

nsPo

olsign

ificant

effectstable

May 201224


4 Conclusions and Summary

4.1 For most of the sites the Lichfield District Local Plan and the Tamworth Borough LocalPlan will result in no significant effects and no in-combination effects on the Natura 2000sites and Ramsar sites identified. The most likely effects of the Local Plans on the Natura2000 sites are related to additional homes and how these may increase traffic within closeproximity to the sites or result in additional recreational pressure, causing an increase in airpollution, habitat disturbance, species disturbance and nutrient enrichment. In the case ofCannock Chase SAC and for the River Mease SAC, no specific allocations are includedwithin the Lichfield Local Plan, however the rural areas are expected to deliver some housingdevelopment during the plan period and impacts could arise either directly on the Mease orthrough increased discharges from sewage works/waste water treatment works within thewater catchment. With regard to the Cannock Chase SAC a specific scoping and screeningreport identified that there could be significant effects on this SAC, and the next stages ofseparate Appropriate Assessment have therefore been undertaken. The River Mease SACand the Cannock Extension SAC are the other most likely Natura 2000 sites affected by theLichfield District and Tamworth Borough Local Plans.

4.2 The Evidence Base relating to Cannock Chase SAC and the Appropriate Assessmentof Local Authority Local Plans and accompanying Visitor Mitigation Report, carried out byFootprint Ecology, has concluded that the impact from the pressures of the surroundingLocal Plans can be mitigated with appropriate levels of financial support and/or alternativealternative natural greenspace provision. Further visitor surveys have been identified by theCannock Chase SAC Partnership and are currently being commissioned to be carried outover a 12 month period. The published Footprint Ecology report recommended that policiesare incorporated within the Local Plans of local authorities within the 'zone of influence' ofthe SAC in order to support this, and strategic allocations beyond this distance will have todemonstrate they will have no adverse effect on the integrity of the SAC.

4.3 The River Mease SAC lies within Lichfield District; neither Tamworth Borough Councilnor Lichfield District Council are responsible for its management. Any pressure on the RiverMease will arise from development mainly upstream, and potentially through outflows fromsewage treatment works which are already at capacity. Severn Trent Water Authority (STWA)are the waste water undertakers for both Local Plan areas and have recently had theirconsents reviewed by the Environment Agency. There is no requirement to alter their consentsin light of the proposed levels and locations of development in either of the Local Plans. TheLichfield District Local Plan: Strategy does include specific policies which enable protectionof water quality, quantity and biodiversity of the SAC to be safeguarded from development.It is therefore considered that the impacts on the River Mease arising from the Lichfield LocalPlan and Tamworth Local Plan will not be significant, however this is based on the informationknown at the present time and does not preclude the need to undertake further assessmentwork when more information is known and other plans such as Lichfield District Local PlanLand Allocations are prepared. It should be noted that as the River Mease passes throughLichfield District there is potential for the Local Plan to contribute positively to the health ofthe River Mease SAC through the policies within the Local Plan and supplementarydocuments, such as supporting the creation of linked habitat corridors and the NationalForest. A River Mease Developer Contribution Strategy has been published for consultation.

25May 2012

4.4 The Cannock Extension Canal SAC lies close to Lichfield District and is approximately16km from Tamworth Borough. Increases in recreational pressure could affect the SAC inaddition to run-off from adjacent land. Following studies undertaken it has been agreed thatno affect on the SAC will arise from the increase in traffic within 200m of this site and thereis no need for the next stages of Appropriate Assessment to be followed (see Appendix C).Local management of the recreational pressure should address the effects of increased boattraffic. Beyond the plan period if the aspiration to join the Lichfield Canal to the Wyrley andEssington Canal is to be realised an Appropriate Assessment will be necessary.

May 201226


5 The Next Steps

5.1 The results of the Appropriate Assessment for Cannock Chase SAC require the localauthorities to include a policy to require financial contributions or other mitigation measuresto alleviate impact on the SAC from the impacts of the Local Plans, and a policy has beenincluded in the Lichfield District Local Plan: Strategy which seeks to achieve this. As partsof Tamworth Borough are beyond the 'zone of influence' this will only apply to large scaledevelopments i.e those of over 100 dwellings, which will then have to be assessed on anindividual basis, and the policy for the Anker Valley Sustainable Urban Extension incorporatesthis requirement.

5.2 If the local authority does not incorporate a policy then each future planning proposalis likely to require an Appropriate Assessment itself to assess its impact using the evidencegathered for the visitor mitigation strategy. Lichfield District Council is one of the partnerson the Cannock Chase AONBPanel which incorporates the Cannock Chase SAC designationand has helped fund the joint study and monitor the effectiveness of the policy. The LocalPlans for both Tamworth and Lichfield District have considered these impacts, includedappropriate policies including general policies to protect and enhance biodiversity, protectedspecies and their habitats and monitoring of the impact on the Cannock Chase SAC and noadditional work as part of the compliance with the Habitat Regulations will be required.

5.3 With regard to the impacts upon the River Mease SAC no specific allocations aremade which directly impact upon the River Mease. Evidence shows that mitigation is possiblefor potential small scale impacts which may arise through the Lichfield District Local Plan:Strategy, this is to be delivered through appropriate policies within the Lichfield District LocalPlan and by working with our partners to deliver a variety of methods and a developercontributions scheme. Further work will need to be undertaken to establish any specificmitigation required when allocations are made through the Lichfield District Local PlanAllocations document. The Local Plan for Tamworth will have no impact upon the MeaseSAC and the Lichfield District Local Plan: Strategy has considered impacts and includedappropriate policies including general policies to protect and enhance biodiversity, protectedspecies and their habitats and monitoring of the impact on the Mease SAC. No additionalwork as part of the compliance with the Habitat Regulations will be required.

5.4 In addition it can be concluded that no further work as part of the compliance with theHabitat Regulations is required for the other Natura 2000 sites and Ramsar sites referredto as part of this assessment.

27May 2012

Appendix A Relevant Plans

Identifies the need to locate 365,600 new homes within the West Midlandsregion to 2026. The Plan identifies impacts are likely and further work has

WM Regional Spatial Strategyand Phase II Revision

been commissioned, the effects have been considered in detail in thepreparation of more specific and local development plans.

This is the transport plan for Staffordshire County area, it is a strategicdocument based on the themes - supporting growth and regeneration;

Staffordshire Local TransportConsultation Plan 2011-2026(LTP3) maintaining the highway network; promoting equality of access and

opportunity; maintaining safety and security; reducing road transport andemissions and its effect on the highway network; improving health and qualityof life; respecting the environment. The plan is not yet adopted. HRAundertaken for the document and effects on Cannock Chase SAC and arebeing considered as part of the joint study.

This document sets out a long-term spatial vision for the development ofminerals within Staffordshire County and will indicate where minerals can

Staffordshire Minerals CoreStrategy

be worked. The Plan identifies broad areas of search where new mineralsdevelopment could take place. Whilst proposed areas of search are locatedin both districts they are not close to areas of significant growth. Given thisfact, the Local Plans are not expected to give rise to in combination effectsalongside this or other strategies.

This document is expected to be adopted in September 2012. Significant incombination assessments are not expected to arise as a consequence ofimplementing the Local Plans for Lichfield and Tamworth.

Staffordshire and Stoke onTrentWaste Core Strategy 2010- 2026

The West Midlands RSS Phase 2 Preferred Option sets out a draftrequirement for 5,800 new homes to 2026 together with 84 hectares of

Cannock Chase Local Plan

employment land. Cannock Chase D.C are currently undertaking work aspart of the Habitats Regulations and in combination effects have beenconsidered for both the Cannock Extension SAC and Cannock Chase SAC.

A review of the Appropriate Assessment identifies there is potential risk towater resources and air pollution in combination due to the proximity of

East Staffordshire LocalDevelopment

development to the Mease the effects are unlikely. Further AA work is likelyto be necessary as work on the plan progresses..Framework

The current consultation is proposing 500 dwellings per year upto 2031. Incombination effects on Cannock Chase SAC are possible and are beinginvestigated with a joint assessment.

The Plan for Stafford Borough- Strategic Policy Choices

A review of the Appropriate Assessment for the document incorporates thepreferred spatial strategy and policies for steering and shaping development

South Staffordshire DistrictCore Strategy Development

as well as defining areas where development should be limited. The planPlan Document : ProposedModifications period is 2008-2026.The Appropriate Assessment review considered that

with the provisions in the policies it is unlikely that there will be an adverseimpact on any of the European sites. However in combination effects onCannock Chase SAC are being investigated with a joint assessment.

The joint core strategy for Dudley, Sandwell, Walsall and Wolverhampton,will provide 63,000 houses upto 2026. There is potential for in combination

Black Country Joint CoreStrategy

effects on the Cannock Extension SAC which are being investigated withCannock Chase District Council and the Cannock Chase SAC which arebeing investigated with a joint assessment.

May 201228


The emerging Core Strategy seeks to provide 50,600 homes and deliver100,000 new jobs upto the period 2026. There is potential for in combination

Birmingham Core Strategy2026: March 2011

effects on the Cannock Chase SAC and these are being investigated witha joint assessment.

The plan states the population will grow by 100,000. With over 5,000 homesin the City Centre. Increase the size of the City centre. No in combination

Big City Plan: Birmingham

effects are likely due to the proximity of the Natura 2000 sites and thestrategic growth points contained within the Lichfield and Tamworth LocalPlans.

Plan covering Derby City, South Derbyshire and Amber Valley District CouncilPotential urban extensions to Swadlincote are being considered. There are

South Derbyshire emergingCore Strategy

potential in combination effects on the Mease SAC as a result of combinednew housing growth in North-west Leicestershire and East Staffordshire.

The plan seeks a requirement for 9,700 houses from 2006-2031. There arepotential in combination effects on the Mease SAC as a result of combinednew housing growth in North-west Leicestershire and South Derbyshire

NorthWest Leicestershire CoreStrategy: Consultation May2012

Housing and employment land is beyond the catchment of the River Mease.No in combination effects are likely due to the proximity of the Natura 2000

North Warwickshire emergingCore Strategy

sites and the strategic growth points contained within the Lichfield andTamworth Local Plans.

Plan setting out the importance of Cannock Chase and how the area shouldbe managed with regard to landscape, visitors, education and awareness

Cannock Chase AONBManagement Plan 2009-2014

and quality. The plan is now agreed. The plan has undertaken as AppropriateAssessment and concluded that there could potentially be positive effectsupon the biodiversity in the area and that certain policies could have harmfulimpacts from increase in visitor usage, this could lead to trampling ofvegetation and erosion, these aspects will be monitored and mitigationmeasures will be put into effect to reduce the impact. In combination effectson Cannock Chase SAC are possible and are being investigated with a jointassessment.

Joint study and research on the impact of the surrounding CoreStrategies/Local Plans on the Cannock Chase SAC and appropriatemitigation.

Evidence Base relating toCannock Chase SAC and theAppropriate Assessment ofLocal Authorities CoreStrategies. Nov 2009 - ongoing

Study to identify how the impact of changes to the the SAC can be mitigatedfor both on-site and off-site.

Cannock Chase Visitor ImpactMitigation Strategy

Rugeley Power Station is presently installing a flue gas desulphurisationplant in order to comply with European Union Large Combustion Plant

Rugeley Power Station FlueGas Desulphurisation (FGD)plans Directive, which aims to apply tighter limits on sulphur dioxide emissions.

The 2002 Rugeley Power Station Proposed FGD Plant – EnvironmentalStatement states that the plant may lead to an increase in carbon dioxideemissions, but these should be insignificant. The process will result indecreased Sulphur emissions but there will be an increase in Nitrogen. Theseeffects will be considered in the further in relation to the in combination effectson the Cannock Chase SAC.

The purpose of The Tame, Anker and Mease Catchment AbstractionManagement Strategy Consultation Draft 2007 plan is to enable theEnvironment Agency to manage water resources at the local level in order

Environment Agency consentsfor water extraction

that the need for water for housing, employment and agricultural users can

29May 2012

be balanced with the needs of the water environment. The existing CAMSindicated that there is no water available for abstraction from the River Measeto serve additional abstraction need.

Looks to 2030, but specifically covers the period to 2010. It considers keyissues, which could have an impact on water supply, and sets out objectives

Severn Trent Water Limited:Water Resource Plan AssetManagement Period 2005-10 to ensure STW can deliver its planned level of service. The plan considers

drought management, abstraction reductions, leakage water efficiency etc.

The report identifies that there is sufficient capacity for the proposed increasein population during the 25 year period 2010-2035. Sets out objectives to

South Staffordshire Water PLCWater Resources Plan 2009

improve service, reduce leakage and improve resource development to meetfuture needs. Also reports on performance of previous water managementplan including efforts to reduce the impact of water abstraction from sensitivesites. The report identifies that work is needed to consider a reduction inwater abstraction licences on the River Mease and River Humber and thatEnvironment Agency will be involved in this process.

Strategy which considers the impact of abstraction on the Tame, Anker andMease Rivers. Existing abstraction licences, including those for public water

Tame, Anker and MeaseCatchment AbstractionManagement Strategy March2008

supply in the Mease catchment, were assessed for their impact on the SACduring the review of consents process.

Various strategies to deliver an improvement in water quality and otherimprovements to the River Mease SAC to enable it to achieve a 'favourable

River Mease NutrientManagement Plan, WaterQuality Management Plan andMease Restoration Plan 2012

condition' and to comply with the Water Framework Directive to achieve a'good status' status by 2015. There is potential for significant positiveincombination impacts on the River Mease.

Sets out a strategy to achieve favourable status for the River Humber SAC.No incombination effects are expected to arise as a consequence ofimplementing the Local Plans for Lichfield and Tamworth.

Humber River BasinManagement Plan 2009

Sets out a strategy to increase tree cover from 6% to around 33% acrossan area of around 200 square miles of Staffordshire, Derbyshire and

National Forest Strategy2009-2014

Leicestershire. Parts of the National Forest lie within Lichfield District andTamworth. To date over 7 million trees have been planted in the entireNational Forest since 1994 increasing woodland cover to 16%. The strategyalso promotes the development of woodland related tourism and businessdevelopment throughout the National Forest. The strategy also promotesthe development of woodland related tourism and business developmentthroughout the National Forest.

Table A.1 Relevant Plans

May 201230


Appendix B Locations of Natura 2000 sites & Ramsar sites

West Midlands MossesPasturefields Salt Marsh

CannockChase

LichfieldDistrict

TamworthBorough

River Mease

Fens Pool Ensor's Pool

Cannock CanalExtension

20km Buffer Tamworth Borough 20km Buffer Lichfield District

Reproduced from The Ordnance Survey Mapping with the permission of the Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Offices (C) Crown Copyright : License No 100017765 Dated 2012

Picture B.1 Natura 2000 and Ramsar sites and a 20km buffer around Lichfield District and TamworthBorough

31May 2012

Appendix C Relevant Correspondence

May 201232


Lichfield District Council District Council House Frog Lane Lichfield Staffordshire WS13 6YZ

Our ref: UT/2009/107002/01-L01 Your ref: SAC Enquiry Date: 23 October 2009

Dear Madam, JOINT SCOPING AND SCREENING FOR RIVER MEASE SAC ABSTRACTION AND INFLOW FROM TREATMENT WORKS. LICHFIELD DISTRICT COUNCIL FROG LANE LICHFIELD STAFFS Thank you for consulting us with this information which we received on 16 September 2009. We apologise for the delay in replying. Water Resources The impact of abstraction on the Mease SAC is and has already been considered as part of the abstraction licensing and Habitats Directive legislation. Existing abstraction licences, including those for public water supply in the Mease catchment, were assessed for their impact on the SAC during the review of consents process. If more water is required to meet future demands, any proposed changes to the existing licences or any new licence proposals would be assessed for impact on the Mease and Natural England would be consulted too. Proposals that impacted upon the Mease would not be permitted. South Staffs Water would need to provide comments on their ability to meet future demands given the constraints on abstraction imposed by the licences they hold. (Incidentally in Appendix A, Relevant Plans, it mentions the Tame, Anker and Mease Catchment Abstraction Management Strategy (CAMS) Consultation document. This document has been superseded by the Tame Anker and Mease CAMS which was published in March 2008.)

Environment Agency response to Screening Report page 1

33May 2012

Environment Agency response to Screening Report page2

May 201234


-----Original Message----- From: Matthew J. Hudson [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 29 October 2009 12:46 To: Hollins, Heidi Subject: RE: Habitat Regs for Lichfield District Heidi, Impact of Our Existing Abstraction Licences on the Mease,Humber and Lichfield Canal SAC's The impact of the company's existing abstraction licences on the SAC's you identified has been undertaken by the Environment Agency and Natural England. This Review of Consents has concluded that there are no issues, with the exception of an emergency licence we have associated with our Chilcote groundwater source in the Mease catchment. We are proposing to revoke this unused component of our licence. Impact of the Proposed Housing Growth on the Mease,Humber and Lichfield Canal SAC's I can confirm that the RSS housing proposals will not have a material impact on our long term supply demand forecast. We recently published our Final Water Resources Plan (August 2009), which included the latest (Nathanial Lichfield) RSS housing forecasts. Our plan shows a healthy surplus of supply over demand for the entire 25 year period, so even modest changes to the reported RSS will not result in a requirement for any additional water resource development. As such there can be no additional impact on the SAC's that you identified. I trust this response is sufficient, however if you require further information please do not hesitate to contact me. Matt Matt Hudson Water Resources Manager South Staffs Water 01922 638282

Letter from South Staffs Water PLC regarding impact on SAC

35May 2012

Date: 17 November 2009 Our ref: Your ref: JRM/LDF/CECAA

Mr John Morgan Principal Planning Officer – Planning Policy Cannock Chase Council Civic Centre PO Box 28 Beecroft Road Cannock WS11 1BG

Attingham Park Shrewsbury Shropshire SY4 4TW T 0300 060 0684 F 01743 709303

Dear John Cannock Extension Canal SAC Habitats Regulations Assessment I refer to your letter dated 27 August 2009 and our subsequent meetings and exchanges of correspondence. I am able to confirm that, after the preliminary investigations, it is now clear that any road drainage reaching the canal is only off a very short stretch of the B4154 and, as consequence, any increase in road traffic along this road resulting from the proposal of either your own authorities core strategy or that of The Black Country authorities. Indeed, it is now clear that the polluted water originates off Wyrley Common and matter are now in hand to resolve that issue. As a consequence, Natural England agrees that it is not necessary for you to proceed to the next stages of the HRA in terms of this particular issue. However, I must take this opportunity to remind you that this does not mean that the two Core Strategies do not require a HRA as all documents forming part of the LDF should be assessed to ensure they comply with the Habitats Regulations ie are not proposing development or other activities that would compromise an international site. Yours sincerely

G J Walker Senior Specialist SSSI Management

Natural England letter confirming no further action required for Cannock Extension SAC

May 201236


Appendix D Review of Proposed Policies in Lichfield District LocalPlan: Strategy

Any likely significant effects on European Sitesanticipated as a result of the policy?

Description of PolicyPolicy Number

No: Not locationally specific, policy includes reference toconserve and enhance natural assets.

Identifies the principles forsustainable development

Core Policy 2Principles forSustainableDevelopment

No: The policy does not propose specific sites, so it isimpossible to assess any likely significant effects. The policy

Careful use of energy andresources, including wasteminimisation andmanagement

Core Policy 3Use of EnergyandResources does propose use of SuDs and other techniques, however

it does not incorporate safeguards for the SAC or referenceto the natural environment. Policy can be improved by crossreference to the development management policies.

No: Does incorporate a requirement for the assessmentupon the biodiversity value. Locations are incorporated within

Renewable Energy includingsetting out the criteria for

DevelopmentManagementPolicy SC1 the policy in relation to wind energy, none of these will resultgenerating energy from

biomass and wind in direct loss of land within either the Cannock Chase SAC,Cannock Extension Canal SAC or Mease SAC.

No: Policy seeks to lower the demand for energy and water,and refers to the need identified in the Water Cycle Study

Policy identifies minimumsustainability standards for new

DevelopmentManagementPolicy SC2 and Surface Water Management Plan, which could have

positive effect upon the Mease SAC.build and retrofitting.Development and SustainableConstruction

No: The policy refers to the Infrastructure Delivery Planwhich has identified strategic infrastructure requirements.

Policy requires the provision ofinfrastructure at appropriatestages in development.

Core Policy 4Delivering ourInfrastructure These include water and sewage which could protect water

quality and quantity and visitor mitigation required to protectthe Cannock Chase SAC

No: The policy will not itself lead to development as it relatesto how the developer should contribute to the provision ofadditional infrastructure and community facilities

Policy requires infrastructureprovision

DevelopmentManagementPolicy IP1

No: Refers to provision of one-off payments where on-sitecarbon reductions are prohibitive, whilst not specifically

Policy for the establishment ofa Carbon Investment Fund to

DevelopmentManagementPolicy IP2 referred to this may include harmful effects on the SAC, andensure developments canmeet

carbon reductions targets could thus have positive impacts although these areimpossible to assess due to the lack of site specificinformation

No: The policy does not propose development it seeks theprovision of sustainable transport opportunities and the

Policy seeks to reduce theneed to travel, encourage use

Core Policy 5SustainableTransport reduction of use of the private car, which could have positiveof sustainable transport,

effects upon SAC vulnerable from air-borne pollution. Townimprove road safety and aircentre improvements in Burntwood are referred to in thequality and includes schemes

which improve public transport policy, these alone will not lead to increased traffic, and seekto reduce trips by private car, comments should beconsidered in relation to Core Policy 8 Our Centres

37May 2012



No: The policy is not site specific and seeks to securesustainable transport

Seeks to secure moresustainable travel patterns

DevelopmentManagementPolicy ST1

No: No details of locations or type of construction areproposed, it is therefore impossible to assess any impact

Policy requires appropriateprovision of parking

DevelopmentManagementPolicy ST2 from the policy, it needs to be considered in association with

other policies

Yes: The locations specified included those within the 12mile zone of influence for Cannock Chase SAC. Reference

Identifies the level and strategiclocations for the provision ofhousing upto 2026

Core Policy 6HousingDelivery is made within the policy which requires the delivery of social,

physical and green infrastructure and reference to theStrategic Development Location Insets which contain detailsof infrastructure and will contain mitigation for CannockChase SAC when these have been established through thestudies currently being undertaken.

No:Not site specific and does result in development directlySeeks to deliver a range ofdwelling types

DevelopmentManagementPolicy H1

No: Policy incorporates having regard to other policies inthe Core Strategy (Core Policy 13 and NR7)

Policy to secure affordablehousing


No: Policy incorporates requirement to have regard to otherpolicies in the Core Strategy (Core Policy 13 and NR7)

Sets criteria for sites forGypsies, Travellers andTravelling Showpeople


No: The locations specified are within the 12 mile zone ofinfluence for Cannock Chase SAC. Whilst policies seek to

Identifies levels and sites foremployment

Core Policy 7Employment

reduce the use of the private car, further studies will needand EconomicDevelopment to be undertaken to assess if there will be any impact through

air pollution from increased traffic generation on the SAC.Policy includes reference to diversifying the rural economyand supports the re-use of rural buildings where this doesnot conflict with other core policies (Core Policy 13 and NR7)

No: The locations specified are within the 12 mile zone ofinfluence of Cannock Chase SAC. Whilst policies within the

Identifies levels of floorspacegrowth for Burntwood and

Core Policy 8Our Centres

plan seek to focus development in accessible locations,Lichfield City and a hierarchyfor other centres further studies will be required to assess any impact through

air pollution from increased traffic generation on the SAC.

Yes: The policy focuses tourism in the most sustainablelocations where these do not conflict with other Core Policies

Supports sustainable tourismand focuses tourism in LichfieldCity

Core Policy 9Tourism

and thus the SAC are protected by Core Policy 13 anddevelopmentmanagement policy NR6. Cannock Chase Areaof Outstanding Natural Beauty is mentioned specifically fortourism, no reference is made to the potential impact uponthe Cannock Chase SAC, should the current study identifythat SANG are an acceptablemethod to divert tourism impactfrom the SAC.

May 201238




No: The policy relates to assessing the impact upon theviability and vitality of retail proposals on other retail centres

Identifies thresholds for retailassessments

DevelopmentManagementPolicy E1

No: The policy requires no decline in air quality and seeksto enable better access to open space, sport and recreation,

Encourages people to livehealthy and safe lifestyles

Core Policy 10Healthy and

play facilities, cultural assets and facilities for localSafeCommunities communities, thus reducing the need to travel. The policy

also supports energy efficiency.

No: No direct impact and the locations identified will haveno impact upon the conservation objectives for the SAC

Encourage, protect andenhance existing sport facilities

Core Policy 11Participation inSport and identifies the need for a

new leisure facility servingLichfield City

No: No direct impact and the policy includes reference toconsideration of other policies and objectives within the LDF,

Protects and supports culturalassets and events

Core Policy 12CulturalAssets Core Policy 13 and NR7 which seek to protect and enhance

the natural environment

No: The policy identifies the potential threat to CannockChase from increased visitor numbers and states this will

The policy seeks provision ofadequate quantity, quality and

DevelopmentManagementPolicy HSC1 be monitored to ensure that no harm is caused, it alsoaccessible open space, and

supports the provision of new semi-natural greenspacewhere appropriate opportunities arise.

supports the creation of greencorridors

No: The policy seeks to protect designates sites whichincludes SAC. It specifically identifies the Cannock Chase

Protects and enhances whereappropriate all designated and

Core Policy 13Our NaturalResources SAC and states it will contribute to the management and

protection of it.non-designated priority habitatsand historic landscapes, andencourages linkages to addressthe impacts of climate change

No: The policy is not site specific, and as it is a developmentmanagement policy it does not override Core Policy 13 above

Aims to protect the countrysideand recognises its economic

DevelopmentManagementPolicy NR1 role, supports preparation of

Parish Plans

No: The policy seeks to protect biodiversity and would thusprevent harm to the SAC

Only allows development wherethe impacts on biodiversity and

DevelopmentManagementPolicy NR2 protected / locally important

species can be compensatedfor

No: The policy seeks to protect trees, tree planting canremove impurities from soil and air. The policy is a

Ensures protection of trees,woodland and hedgerow and

DevelopmentManagementPolicy NR3 development management policy and does not override

Core Policy 13 above.seeks space for large treeswithin new developments

No: The policy is not site specific, and as it is a developmentmanagement policy it does not override the Core Policy 13above

Seeks to prevent negativeimpacts upon geological,archaeological and historicallyimportant landscapes

DevelopmentManagementPolicy NR4

39May 2012



No: The policy refers to river corridors and green corridors,however the policy is to read in conjunction with Core Policy

Encourages habitats to belinked and multi-functionalgreen spaces

DevelopmentManagementPolicy NR5 13 and seeks to enhance biodiversity and to mitigate against

climate change

No: The policy seeks to safeguard the SAC and identifiesthat development within a 12mile radius may have an impact

Seeks to protect the CannockChase SAC and identifies a 12mile zone of influence

DevelopmentManagementPolicy NR6 and needs to identify what that impact is and demonstrate

how that impact will be mitigated, including provision ofalternative natural green recreational space. The policyshould have a positive impact upon the SAC

No: The Mease SAC is sensitive to changes in water qualityand this policy seeks to prevent a negative impact uponwater quality and abstraction

Identifies watercoursecatchments which may beimpacted by water abstraction

DevelopmentManagementPolicy NR7

and wastewater treatmentlimitations. Seeks to prevent anegative impact on waterquality

No: The policy relates to the built fabricSeeks to protect and improvethe built and historic

Core Policy 14Our Built &

environment and their naturaland historic landscapes

HistoricEnvironment

No: The policy relates to the built fabricEnsures high qualitysustainable built environmentcan be achieved

DevelopmentManagementPolicy BE1

Table D.1 Assessment of policies from proposed submission Lichfield District Local Plan: Strategy



Yes: The locations and levels of development willhave a significant effect upon the Cannock Chase

The overall approach to providing fornew homes, jobs, infrastructure and

Core Policy 1: TheSpatial Strategy

SAC however evidence has been gathered whichcommunity facilities over the planhas identified that mitigation is possible and canperiod and the broad approach tobe delivered by the development, this will bemanaging development and change

to 2028. delivered through adherence to other policieswithin the Local Plan.

No: Policy refers to securing development whichimproves environmental condition in the area

Will have a positive approach thatreflects presumption in favour ofsustainable development.

Core Policy 2:Presumption inFavour of which is in accordance with other policies in the

Local PlanSustainableDevelopment

No: Not locationally specific, policy includesreference to conserve and protect natural assets.

Identifies the principles forsustainable development

Core Policy 3:DeliveringSustainableDevelopment

May 201240




No: The policy refers to the Infrastructure DeliveryPlan which has identified strategic infrastructure

Policy requires the provision ofinfrastructure at appropriate stagesin development.

Core Policy 4:Delivering ourInfrastructure requirements. These include water and sewage

which could protect water quality and quantity andvisitor mitigation required to protect the CannockChase SAC

No: The policy does not propose development itseeks the provision of sustainable transport

Policy seeks to reduce the need totravel, encourage use of sustainable

Core Policy 5:SustainableTransport opportunities and the reduction of use of thetransport, improve road safety and

private car, which could have positive effects uponair quality and includes schemeswhich improve public transport SAC vulnerable from air-borne pollution and road

run-off. Town centre improvements in Burntwoodare referred to in the policy, these alone will notlead to increased traffic, and seek to reduce tripsby private car, comments should be consideredin relation to Core Policy 8 Our Centres

Yes: The locations specified included those withinthe 12 mile zone of influence for Cannock Chase

Identifies the level of housingincluding strategic locations for theplan period to 2028

Core Policy 6:Housing Delivery

SAC. Reference is made within the policy whichrequires the delivery of social, physical and greeninfrastructure and reference to the StrategicDevelopment Allocation Insets which containdetails of infrastructure and will contain mitigationfor Cannock Chase SAC when these have beenestablished through the studies currently beingundertaken.

No: The locations referred to are within the zoneof influence for Cannock Chase SAC. Evidence is

Identifies levels for employmentCore Policy 7:Employment &

not identifying any significant effects arising fromthe economic strategy of the Local Plan.

EconomicDevelopment

No: The locations referred to are within the zoneof influence for Cannock Chase SAC. Evidence is

Identifies Burntwood and LichfieldCity as commercial centres anddefines a hierarchy for other centres

Core Policy 8: OurCentres

not identifying any significant effects arising fromthe economic strategy of the Local Plan.

Yes: The policy focuses tourism in the mostsustainable locations where these do not conflict

Supports sustainable tourism andfocuses tourism in Lichfield City

Core Policy 9:Tourism

with other Core Policies and thus the SAC areprotected by Core Policy 13 and developmentmanagement policy NR7 and 8. Cannock ChaseArea of Outstanding Natural Beauty is mentionedspecifically for tourism, no reference is made tothe potential impact upon the Cannock ChaseSAC, this is however addressed within Core Policy13 and NR7, research shows that mitigation ispossible and further research is being undertakento assess if SANG are an acceptable method todivert tourism impact from the SAC.

No: The policy requires no decline in air qualityand seeks to enable better access to open space,

Encourages people to live healthyand safe lifestyles

Core Policy 10:Healthy & SafeLifestyles sport and recreation, play facilities, cultural assets

41May 2012



and facilities for local communities, thus reducingthe need to travel. The policy also supports energyefficiency.

No: No direct impact and the locations identifiedwill have no impact upon the conservationobjectives for the SAC

Encourage, protect and enhanceexisting sport facilities and identifiesthe need for a new leisure facilityserving Lichfield City

Core Policy 11:Participation inSport & PhysicalActivity

No: No direct impact and the policy includesreference to consideration of other policies and

Protects and supports cultural assetsand events

Core Policy 12:Provision for Arts &Culture objectives within the LDF, Core Policy 13 and NR7

and 8 which seek to protect and enhance thenatural environment

No: The policy seeks to protect designates siteswhich includes SAC. It specifically identifies the

Protects and enhances whereappropriate all designated and

Core Policy 13: OurNatural Resources

Cannock Chase SAC and states it will contributeto the management and protection of it.

non-designated priority habitats andhistoric landscapes, and encourageslinkages to address the impacts ofclimate change

No: The policy relates to the built fabricSeeks to protect and improve thebuilt and historic environment andtheir natural and historic landscapes

Core Policy 14: OurBuilt Environment

No: Policy seeks to lower the demand for energyand water, and refers to the need identified in the

Policy identifies minimumsustainability standards for new build

Policy SC1:Sustainable

Water Cycle Study and Surface Waterand retrofitting. development andsustainable construction.

Standards forDevelopment Management Plan, which could have positive

effect upon the Mease SAC.

No: Does incorporate a requirement for theassessment upon the biodiversity value. Locations

Renewable Energy including settingout the criteria for generating energyfrom biomass and wind

Policy SC2:Renewable Energy

are incorporated within the policy in relation towind energy, none of these will result in direct lossof land within either the Cannock Chase SAC,Cannock Extension Canal SAC or Mease SAC.

No: The policy will not itself lead to developmentas it relates to how the developer should contribute

Policy requires infrastructureprovision

Policy IP1:Supporting &

to the provision of additional infrastructure andcommunity facilities

Providing ourInfrastructure

No: The policy is not site specific and seeks tosecure sustainable transport

Seeks to secure more sustainabletravel patterns

Policy ST1:Sustainable Travel

No: No details of locations or type of constructionare proposed, it is therefore impossible to assess

Policy requires appropriate provisionof parking

Policy ST2: ParkingProvision

any impact from the policy, it needs to beconsidered in association with other policies

No: Not site specific and does result indevelopment directly

Seeks to deliver a range of dwellingtypes

Policy H1: ABalanced HousingMarket

May 201242




No: Policy incorporates having regard to otherpolicies in the Local Plan (Core Policy 13 andNR7,NR8)

Policy to secure affordable housingPolicy H2:Provision ofAffordable Housing

No: Policy incorporates requirement to haveregard to other policies in the Local Plan (CorePolicy 13 and NR7, NR8)

Sets criteria for sites for Gypsies,Travellers and TravellingShowpeople

Policy H3: Gypsies,Travellers &TravellingShowpeople

No: The policy relates to assessing the impactupon the viability and vitality of retail proposals onother retail centres.

Identifies thresholds for retailassessments

Policy E1: RetailAssessments

No: The policy identifies the potential threat toCannock Chase from increased visitor numbers

The policy seeks provision ofadequate quantity, quality and

Policy HSC1: OpenSpace Standards

and states this will be monitored to ensure that noaccessible open space, and supportsthe creation of green corridors harm is caused, it also supports the provision of

new semi-natural greenspace where appropriateopportunities arise.

No: No direct impact upon the conservationobjectives for the SAC

Encourage, protect and enhanceexisting sport facilities.

Policy HSC2:Playing Pitch &Sport FacilityStandards

No: The policy is not site specific, and as it is adevelopment management policy it does not

Aims to protect the countryside andrecognises its economic role,supports preparation of Parish Plans

Policy NR1:CountrysideManagement override Core Policy 13 and would be read in

conjunction with other policies in the Local Plannamely NR7 and NR8.

No: The policy is not site specific, and as it is adevelopment management policy it does not

Seeks to enhance the beneficial useof the Green Belt, retaining itscharacter and openness.

Policy NR2:Development in theGreen Belt override Core Policy 13 and would be read in

conjunction with other policies in the Local Plannamely NR7 and NR8.

No: Policy seeks to protect biodiversity and wouldthus prevent harm to the SAC.

Aims to protect and enhancebiodiversity and/or geodiversity in

Policy NR3:Biodiversity,

the district with particular contributionProtected Species& their Habitats towards the United Kingdom

Biodiversity Action Plan (UK BAP)

No: The policy seeks to protect trees andhedgerows Tree planting is identified within

Aims to protect and enhance trees,woodland and hedgerows in thedistrict.

Policy NR4: Trees,Woodland &Hedgerows evidence as having a beneficial effect upon the

River Mease SAC, and as it is a developmentmanagement policy would be rad in associationwith other policies in the Local Plan namely NR7and NR8 and Core Policy 13, a significant effecton the SAC would therefore be avoided.

No: Reference to the Cannock Chase SAC ismentioned within the policy and protection of theintegrity of the SAC.

Aims to protect geological,archaeological and historicallyimportant landscapes in the District.

Policy NR5: Natural& HistoricLandscapes

43May 2012



No: Policy refers to river and green corridors andtheir uses including for biodiversity, ecology,

Considers creation of new habitatsand links between habitats to

Policy NR6: LinkedHabitat Corridors &

species movement in line with the Biodiversityenhance biodiversity and to mitigateagainst climate change.

Multi-functionalGreenspaces Opportunity Mapping, Lichfield Biodiversity

Strategy and Local Environmental Action Plan(SBAP)

No: The policy seeks to safeguard the SAC andidentifies that development within a zone of

Seeks to protect the Cannock ChaseSAC

Policy NR7:Cannock Chase

influence may have an impact and needs toSpecial Area ofConservation identify what that impact is and demonstrate how

that impact will be mitigated, including provisionof alternative natural green recreational space.The policy should have a positive impact upon theSAC

No: The policy identifies that impact may ariseeither directly but may also arise by development

Aims to protect and enhance theintegrity of the Mease Special Areaof Conservation (SAC)

Policy NR8: RiverMease Special Areaof Conservation within the water catchment. Development will have

to show no adverse impacts and how it canmitigate in line with the Nutrient Management Plan.The policy should have a positive impact upon theSAC.

No: The Mease SAC is sensitive to changes inwater quality and this policy seeks to prevent a

Identifies watercourse catchmentswhich may be impacted by water

Policy NR9: WaterQuality

negative impact upon water quality andabstraction.

abstraction and wastewatertreatment limitations. Seeks toprevent a negative impact on waterquality

No: The policy relates to the built fabricEnsures high quality sustainable builtenvironment can be achieved

Policy BE1: HighQualityDevelopment

No: Lichfield City lies within the zone of influenceof Cannock Chase SAC and further studies will

Aims to maintain and enhanceLichfield City as a separate,

Policy Lichfield 1:LichfieldEnvironment identify appropriate mitigation. Evidence has

shown mitigation is possible.freestanding community, surroundedby Green Belt and open countryside,offering a high quality environmentin which to live, work and visit.

No: Policy seeks to reduce the need to travel.Aims to protect and enhanceservices and facilities in Lichfield

Policy Lichfield 2:Lichfield Services& Facilities City, meeting the needs of residents,

businesses and visitors..

No: Evidence is not identifying any significanteffects arising from the economic strategy of the

Aims to promote Lichfield CityCentre as a strategic centre, whilst

Policy Lichfield 3:Lichfield Economy

Local Plan. Policy seeks to reduce the need totravel.

sustaining and enhancing thesignificance of its historicenvironment and heritage assets andtheir setting.

May 201244




Yes: Lichfield City lies within the zone of influenceof Cannock Chase SAC and further studies will

Identifies quantity and area ofhousing growth within and aroundLichfield City by 2028.

Policy Lichfield 4:Lichfield Housing

identify appropriate mitigation. Evidence hasshown mitigation is possible.

Yes: Site forms part of the spatial strategy andCore Policy 6. The site lies within the zone of

Identifies area to the north ofStreethay for mixed use

Policy Lichfield 5:East of Lichfield(Streethay) influence of Cannock Chase SAC and furtherdevelopment to be delivered by

2028. studies will identify appropriate mitigation.Evidence has shown mitigation is possible. Policyrequires adherence to all other policies in the LocalPlan this will include Core Policy 13 and NR7.Appendix D relates to this site and requiresprotection of habitats of biological interest.


Identifies area south of Lichfield Cityfor mixed use development to bedelivered by 2028.

Policy Lichfield 6:South Lichfield

influence of Cannock Chase SAC and furtherstudies will identify appropriate mitigation.Evidence has shown mitigation is possible. Policyrequires adherence to all other policies in the LocalPlan this will include Core Policy 13 and NR7.Appendix C relates to this site and requiresprotection of habitats of biological interest.

No: Policy specifically mentions having regard tothe SAC.

Aims to maintain and enhanceBurntwood's role as a separate and

Policy Burntwood1: BurntwoodEnvironment freestanding community, bounded

by the Green Belt and functioning asa town which offers range of servicesand facilities.

No: Policy seeks to reduce travel.Aims to protect and enhanceservices and facilities in Burntwood.

Policy Burntwood2: BurntwoodServices &Facilities

No: Evidence is not identifying any significanteffects arising from the economic strategy of the

Aims to create a vibrant and diversetown centre, through regeneration.

Policy Burntwood3: BurntwoodEconomy Local Plan. With regard to any new residential

development delivered as part of a mixed usescheme, mitigation would be required to bedelivered as the location is within the zone ofinfluence of Cannock Chase SAC. An element ofhousing has been incorporated within the spatialstrategy of the Local Plan and evidence has shownthat mitigation is possible.

Yes: Sites fall within zone of influence andmitigation will be sought to compensate for these

Aims to accommodate new housingin and around Burntwood, with

Policy Burntwood4: BurntwoodHousing effects. Evidence prepared for the Core Strategy

has shown mitigation is possible.redevelopment of existing brownfieldsites to be encouraged.


Seeks creation of a sustainable, safeand well designed mixed usedevelopment by 2028.

Policy Burntwood5: East ofBurntwood Bypass influence of Cannock Chase SAC and further

45May 2012



studies will identify appropriate mitigation.Evidence has shown mitigation is possible. Policyrequires adherence to all other policies in the LocalPlan this will include Core Policy 13 and NR7.Appendix F relates to this site and requiresprotection of habitats of biological interest.

No: Site forms part of the spatial strategy and CorePolicy 6. The site lies beyond the zone of influence

Seeks to creation of a sustainable,safe and well designed mixed usedevelopment by 2028.

Policy North ofTamworth 1

of Cannock Chase SAC and River Mease SAC Asthe site is a large site evidence will need to beprepared to establish if there will be an impactupon Cannock Chase SAC and further studies willidentify appropriate mitigation. Evidence hasshown mitigation is possible. Policy requiresadherence to all other policies in the Local Planthis will include Core Policy 13 and NR7, NR8.


Seeks to creation of a sustainable,safe and well designed mixed usedevelopment by 2028.

Policy East ofRugeley1

influence of Cannock Chase SAC and furtherstudies will identify appropriate mitigation.Evidence has shown mitigation is possible. Policyrequires adherence to all other policies in the LocalPlan this will include Core Policy 13 and NR7.Appendix G relates to this site and requiresprotection of habitats of biological interest.

Yes: This forms part of the spatial strategy andCore Policy 6. Evidence has shown that mitigation

Seeks creation of approximately29% of District's local housing

Policy Rural 1:Rural Areas

for these levels of growth are possible for effectsgrowth within rural areas. Newupon the Cannock Chase SAC and River Measeallocations in key rural settlements

identified. SAC. Mitigation will be delivered throughadherence to policies within the Local Plan.

No: Policy does not propose development whichwill have a significant effect upon the SAC.

Aims to provide high quality greeninfrastructure incorporating physical

Policy Frad1:FradleyEnvironment and visual connections to the

countryside and a variety of naturalhabitats.

No: Policy does not propose development whichwill have a significant effect upon the SAC

Identifies various provisions andimprovements including land for new

Policy Frad 2:Fradley Services &Facilities health care facility, sports pitches

etc.

No: Evidence is not identifying any significanteffects arising from the economic strategy of theLocal Plan.

Proposes that Fradley remains as amajor focus for employment throughthe implementation of existingcommitments and redevelopment.

Policy Frad 3:Fradley Economy


Proposes that Fradley plays asignificant role in meeting ruralhousing needs.

Policy Frad4:Fradley Housing

influence of Cannock Chase SAC and furtherstudies will identify appropriate mitigation.Evidence has shown mitigation is possible. Policy

May 201246




requires adherence to all other policies in the LocalPlan this will include Core Policy 13 and NR7.Appendix E relates to this site and requiresprotection of habitats of biological interest.


Proposes that Alrewas maintains itsrole as a separate, freestanding,

Policy Alr1:AlrewasEnvironment healthy, safe and stable community

offering a range of services andfacilities for the village and itshinterland.


Proposes that Alrewas functions asa Key Rural Centre. Initiatives to

Policy Alr2:Alrewas Services &Facilities improve, enhance and deliver local

facilities and amenities to besupported.

No: Evidence is not identifying any significanteffects arising from the economic strategy of theLocal Plan.

Importance of local employment inthe settlement to be recognised.New business, services and facilitiesto be supported.

Policy Alr3:Alrewas Economy

Yes: An allocation in Alrewas of the size identifiedforms part of the spatial strategy and Core Policy

Seeks to provide a range of between90-180 homes for the local

Policy Alr4:Alrewas Housing

6. Alrewas village lies within the zone of influencecommunity, with particular emphasison affordable homes. of Cannock Chase SAC and further studies will

identify appropriate mitigation. Evidence hasshown mitigation is possible. Policy identifies thatthe final numbers and locations will be identifiedvia the Local Plan Allocations document. Anydevelopment in advance of this will be required toadhere to all other policies in the Local Plan thiswill include Core Policy 13 and NR7.


Proposes that Armitage maintainsand enhances its role as a

Policy Arm1:Armitage with

freestanding settlement, whichHandsacreEnvironment functions as a local service centre

serving the village and its hinterland.


Proposes that Armitage will functionas a Key Rural Centre, with a range


of services and facilities which serveHandsacreServices& Facilities the local community and its

hinterland.


The importance of local employmentin the settlement to be recognised.


New and existing business, servicesand facilities to be supported.

HandsacreEconomy

Yes: An allocation in Armitage of the size identifiedforms part of the spatial strategy and Core Policy

Seeks to provide a range of between120-210 homes to provide for the

Policy Arm4:Armitage withHandsacreHousing 6. Armitage village lies within the zone of influenceneeds of the local community with

of Cannock Chase SAC and further studies will

47May 2012



identify appropriate mitigation. Evidence hasshown mitigation is possible. Policy identifies that

particular emphasis on affordablehomes.

the final numbers and locations will be identifiedvia the Local Plan Allocations document. Anydevelopment in advance of this will be required toadhere to all other policies in the Local Plan thiswill include Core Policy 13 and NR7.


Seeks to maintain its role as aseparate, freestanding and stable

Policy Faz1:FazeleyEnvironment community, functioning as a local

service centre offering a range ofservices and facilities.


Proposes that Fazeley, Mile Oak andBonehill will function as a Key Rural

Policy Faz2:Fazeley Services &Facilities Centre, with a range of services and

facilities which serve the localcommunity and its hinterland.


The importance of local employmentand retail in the settlement to be

Policy Faz3:Fazeley Economy

recognised with initiatives to ensureit links positively and in a way whichis relevant to the local communitywill be supported.

Yes: An allocation in Fazeley of the size identifiedforms part of the spatial strategy and Core Policy

Seeks to provide a range of between280- 350 homes to provide for the

Policy Faz4:Fazeley Housing

6. Fazeley village lies within the zone of influenceneeds of the local community, withof Cannock Chase SAC and further studies willparticular emphasis on smaller

affordable homes. identify appropriate mitigation. Evidence hasshown mitigation is possible. Policy identifies thatthe final numbers and locations will be identifiedvia the Local Plan Allocations document. Anydevelopment in advance of this will be required toadhere to all other policies in the Local Plan thiswill include Core Policy 13 and NR7.


Seeks to maintain Shenstone as aseparate, freestanding, healthy and

Policy Shen1:ShenstoneEnvironment stable community offering a high

quality local living environment andfunctioning as a local service centreoffering a range of services andfacilities.


Proposes that Shenstone willfunction as a Key Rural Centre, with

Policy Shen2:ShenstoneServices& Facilities a range of services and facilities

which serve the local community andits hinterland.


The importance of local employmentin the settlement will be recognised

Policy Shen3:ShenstoneEconomy and initiatives to ensure it links

May 201248




positively and in a way which isrelevant to the local community willbe supported. Measures to improverail services and facilities in thevillage to be supported.

Yes: An allocation in Shenstone of the sizeidentified forms part of the spatial strategy and

Seeks to provide a range of around50-150 homes to provide for the

Policy Shen4:ShenstoneHousing

Core Policy 6. Shenstone village lies within theneeds of the local community withzone of influence of Cannock Chase SAC andparticular emphasis on affordable

homes. further studies will identify appropriate mitigation.Evidence has shown mitigation is possible. Policyidentifies that the final numbers and locations willbe identified via the Local Plan Allocationsdocument. Any development in advance of thiswill be required to adhere to all other policies inthe Local Plan this will include Core Policy 13 andNR7.


Seeks to maintain Whittington as aseparate, freestanding, safe, healthy

Policy Whit1:WhittingtonEnvironment and stable community offering a high

quality local living environment andfunctioning as a local service centreoffering a range of services andfacilities.


Proposes that Whittington willfunction as a Key Rural Centre, with

Policy Whit2:Whittington

a range of services and facilitiesServices &Facilities which serve the local community and

its hinterland.


Propose thatWhittington will functionas a Key Rural Centre, with a range

Policy Whit3:WhittingtonEconomy of economic functions with serve the

local community and its hinterland.Initiatives to ensure it links positivelyand in a way which is relevant to thelocal community will be supported.

Yes: An allocation in Whittington of the sizeidentified forms part of the spatial strategy and

Proposes that a range of between35-110 homes will be provided to

Policy Whit4:WhittingtonHousing Core Policy 6. Whittington village lies within theprovide for the needs of the local

zone of influence of Cannock Chase SAC andcommunity, with particular emphasisfurther studies will identify appropriate mitigation.on affordable homes, starter homes

etc.. Evidence has shown mitigation is possible. Policyidentifies that the final numbers and locations willbe identified via the Local Plan Allocationsdocument. Any development in advance of thiswill be required to adhere to all other policies inthe Local Plan this will include Core Policy 13 andNR7.

49May 2012



Yes: This forms part of the spatial strategy andCore Policy 6. Evidence has shown that mitigation

Rural Settlements wishing to providesmall scale developments to meetlocal needs, will be supported.

Policy Rural 2:Other Rural Areas

for these levels of growth are possible for effectsupon the Cannock Chase SAC and River MeaseSAC. Mitigation will be delivered as developmentis required to be in accordance policies within theLocal Plan.

Table D.2 Assessment of policies from Lichfield District Local Plan: Strategy (Proposed Submission)

May 201250


Appendix E Review of Proposed Policies in Tamworth BoroughLocal Plan

Any likely significant effects onEuropean Sites anticipated as aresult of the policy?

Remit of PolicyPolicyDescription

No: The strategy is based on deliveringdevelopment in sustainable locations

Provides a guide to how the spatial vision andstrategic objectives will be achieved in practical

SP1: A SpatialStrategy forTamworth supplemented by improvements to theterms. The role of the spatial strategy is to set out

natural environment. The impact of thehow much development there will be, broadlyAnker Valley allocation is covered inthe assessment of Policy SP6.

where it will go, when it will take place and who willdeliver it. It emphasises the ‘centres first’ objective,spatial direction for delivering housing andemployment needs whilst identifying key spatialpriorities for infrastructure and environmentalimprovements.

No: The town centre lies outside of the12 mile zone of influence for Cannock

Identifies strategic sites and opportunities for retail,leisure, culture/tourism & office development along

SP2: Supportinginvestment in

Chase SAC and no proposals whichexceed 100 dwellings are proposed.

with encouraging higher density residential andimproved linkages within the town centre and to

Tamworth TownCentre

the out of centre retail areas. It also identifies thekey gateway sites and introduces design andconservation principles.

No: No large scale developments areproposed by this policy.

Sets out guidance for achieving environmental andaccessibility improvements and where applicable

SP3: Supportinginvestment in

linked to delivering community regenerationobjectives.

local &neighbourhoodcentres

No: The employment areas are locatedoutside of the 12mile zone of influence

Identifies the employment land requirement alongwith main employment sites, and introduces a

SP4: Sustainableeconomicgrowth

for Cannock Chase SAC and noproposed two tiered approach; ‘strategic sites’ andproposals which exceed 100 dwellingsare proposed.

‘local sites’ to ensure Tamworth has sufficientcapacity to serve need whilst offering a degree offlexibility over allowing future housing developmentin the more poorly performing local sites. The policyalso sets out environmental and accessibilityrelated improvements required to regenerate andenhance employment sites.

No: Notwithstanding Anker Valleystrategic location, no other strategichousing sites are proposed

This policy will set out the overall future housingneed release of land to achieve a balanced deliveryover the plan period to meet identified housing

SP5: Housingdelivery

need including the criteria for achieving high qualitydevelopment in sustainable locations.

Yes: The proposal exceeds 100dwellings and will be required to

Includes a criteria based policy for delivering theproposed strategic housing site including the

SP6: AnkerValley

include an assessment of measureshousing numbers and associated infrastructureSustainableto mitigate any impacts on therequired to deliver a new sustainable

neighbourhood.UrbanNeighbourhood Cannock Chase SAC. Reference is

made within the policy which requiresthe delivery of social, physical andgreen infrastructure including a SANG.

51May 2012



No: The Regeneration Priority Areasare located outside of the 12 mile zone

Identifies Regeneration Priority Areas: Post WarSocial Housing areas, and the Wilnecote Corridor

SP7:RegenerationPriority Areas of influence for Cannock Chase SACas a result of them demonstrating high levels of

and no proposals which exceed 100dwellings are proposed.

deprivation and/or a poor quality environment. Setsout a series of priorities to address in each areaand commits the council and its partners to workin partnership to deliver spatial interventions toimprove the physical environment and deliver socialand economic renewal.

No: However, the policy seeks toprotect and enhance natural

Maps green and blue infrastructure and identifiesa series of priority areas and schemes and policy

SP8:EnvironmentalAssets infrastructure which have the potentialprinciples to deliver enhancements and

to act as alternative destinations toimprovements. These include improving andCannock Chase SAC thus mitigatingimpacts.

enhancing the network of green linear linkagesacross the town and to the, canal and river network.

No: The policy seeks to enable betteraccess to facilities through alternative

Identifies the supporting infrastructure required todeliver the sustainable pattern of growth identified

SP9: SustainableInfrastructure

to car use and ensuring developmentin the strategy. It refers to key strategic locationsis located in sustainable locationsfor transport improvements including to A5whilst tackling congestion. Thejunctions, Anker Valley Linkages, Tamworth &emphasis on low carbon developmentWilnecote stations, cycle and pedestrian routesand renewable energy should helpalong with general principles for improvingmitigate against the effects of climatechange.

accessibility. The policy also seeks to providecommunity facilities in accessible locations whilstpromoting opportunities for zero carbondevelopment and maximising opportunities forrenewable energy generation and mapping theareas at risk of flooding.

No: The policy relates to assessing theimpact upon the viability and vitality ofretail proposals on other retail centres.

Reinforces the ‘centre first’ approach to deliveringidentified future convenience and comparison retailneed and defines the hierarchy of centres and sets

CP1: Hierarchyof centres

out acceptable uses in each tier of centre. Sets outthe approach to retail & leisure proposals outsideof centres including floor space thresholds as abasis to undertake impact assessments. Sets outrestrictions on future retail/leisure expansion at outof town retail parks.

No: Not site specific and does resultin development directly.

This policy defines the acceptable uses within theemployment areas- B1 (b,c), B2 & B8.Provides

CP2:EmploymentAreas detail of environmental and accessibility

improvements. Promotes preferred location foroffices as being the town centre and edge of centrelocations and refers to identified strategic sites.Also introduces Local Development Orders aspotential delivery mechanisms for strategic sites.

No: No direct impact. The policypromotes and protects designated

Sets out support for tourism and culture leddevelopment; in particular related to the town

CP3: Supportinggrowth in culture& tourism nature and natural sites which may actcentre and its proposed leisure zone. Identified

as an alternative destinations (SANGs)supporting infrastructure including hotels andto Cannock Chase SAC therefore

May 201252




reducing visitor numbers andassociated impacts on the SAC.

accessibility improvements including to DraytonManor


This policy will establish thresholds and the levelof developer contribution towards the provision ofaffordable housing target.

CP4: AffordableHousing


The policy will establish standards for new housingdevelopment including the size and type of units,

CP5: Housingneeds

specific types based on evidence arising from theongoing update of the Housing Needs Study.


This will contain a banded density target forparticular borough wide locations including a higher

CP6: Housingdensity

density target for centres, transport nodes and alower target for elsewhere whilst respecting thelocal context.


Whilst not allocating specific sites, this policyestablishes criteria for assessing applications forsite proposals.

CP7: Gypsy&Travellerprovision

No: No direct impact identified.This provides and promotes a network of highquality sport and recreation facilities across the

CP8: Sport &Recreation

borough to meet needs whilst aiming to protectexisting facilities.

No: The policy seeks to protect andenhance the natural environment.

This seeks to protect the existing network of highquality open space across the borough and sets

CP9:OpenSpace

out criteria for assessing proposals which involvea loss of open space.

No: The policy relates to the existingbuilt fabric.

This policy introduces a number of principles toachieve high quality buildings and places.

CP10: Design ofnewdevelopment

No: The policy relates primarily to theexisting built fabric.

This includes a list of principles to be consideredwhen proposing development which impacts on

CP11: Protectingthe historicenvironment the historic environment including listed buildings,

Conservation Area & scheduled monuments.

No: The policy seeks to protectbiodiversity and would thus prevent

This aims to preserve sites and species, reinforcelinks between habitats and ensure appropriate

CP12: Protectingand enhancingbiodiversity harm to the SAC. The policy seeks toconsideration to development depending on status

safeguard the SAC and identifies thatof sites i.e. national and local. It also encouragesdevelopment over 100 dwellings radiushabitat restoration and creation, with emphasis on

community led initiatives and list priority schemes. may have an impact and needs toidentify what that impact is anddemonstrate how that impact will bemitigated including provision ofalternative natural green creationalspace. The policy should have apositive impact upon the SAC.

53May 2012



No: The policy does not proposedevelopment it seeks the provision of

The policy sets out priority measures for improvingaccessibility and linkages, particularly by public

CP13: DeliveringSustainableTransport sustainable transport opportunities andtransport, walking and cycling on a borough wide

the reduction of use of the private car,basis and to/from strategic development sites. andwhich could have positive effects uponsets out the criteria for the requirement for transport

assessments and travel plans. SACs vulnerable from air-bornepollution.

No: Not site specific and does resultin development directly. Policy seeks

This supports measures to achieve carbon zerodevelopment including renewable energy proposalsand resource management.

CP14:SustainableDevelopment & to lower the demand for energy whichClimate ChangeMitigation

could have a positive effect upon theMease SAC.

No: The Mease SAC is sensitive tochanges in water quality and this policy

This policy requires new development to considerareas susceptible to fluvial and pluvial flooding

CP15: WaterManagement

seeks to prevent a negative impactupon water quality and abstraction.

including the application of SUDs and sustainableurban design.


This sets out support for community facilities andinfrastructure to be located in accessible locations

CP16: Providingand protecting

and encourages dual use to be considered whereappropriate in sustainable locations.

CommunityInfrastructure

No: The policy refers to theInfrastructure Delivery Plan which has

This policy includes the key infrastructure requiredto deliver the strategy and introduces theInfrastructure Delivery Plan.

CP17:Infrastructure &DeveloperContributions

identified strategic infrastructurerequirements. These include waterand sewage which could protect waterquality and quantity and visitormitigation required to protect theCannock Chase SACandRiverMeaseSAC.

Table E.1 Assessment of policies from Tamworth Borough Local Plan

May 201254


Appendix F Critical Friend Review of HRA

55May 2012

May 201256


57May 2012

May 201258


Picture F.1

59May 2012

Glossary

An assessment of potential effects of a proposed plan,in-combination with other plans and projects, on one or moreNatura 2000 sites or Ramsar sites

AAAppropriateAssessment

The statutory adviser to Government on UK and internationalnature conservation

JNCCJoint NatureConservationCommittee

The plan for the future development of the local area, drawn upby the local planning authority in consultation with the community.

Local Plan

In law this is described as the development plan documentsadopted under the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

Includes sites which are designated as Special Areas ofConservation, Special Protection Areas and Offshore Marine Sites

Natura 2000

Specific site designated for supporting internationally importantwetland habitats and are listed under theWetlands of International

Ramsar Site

Importance especially asWaterfowl habitat, (Ramsar Convention,1971

A Strategy for how a region should look over a 15-20 year period.It identifies the scale and distribution of new housing, indicates

RSSRegional SpatialStrategy

areas for regeneration, expansion or sub-regional planning andspecifies priorities for the environment, transport, infrastructure,economic development, agriculture, minerals and waste treatmentand disposal.

Strictly protected sites for rare or threatened species and habitatson land or sea as designated by the EC Habitats Directive

SACSpecial Area ofConservation

Sites classified in accordance with Article 4 of the EC BirdsDirective April 1979, classified for rare and vulnerable birds as

SPASpecial ProtectionArea

listed in Annex 1 of the Directive and for regularly occurringmigratory species.

Specific features or environmental conditions which are likely tohave a significant effect on a protected site

Significant EffectsIndicators

Waste Water Treatment WorksWwTwWaste WaterTreatment Works

Table .1

May 201260


habitat regulations assessment: lichfield district

Documents