CULTURAL HERITAGE 12

CONTENTS

Introduction ...... 12-1 Methodology ...... 12-2 Scope and sources of baseline data ...... 12-2 Sources ...... 12-3 Detailed assessment of indirect impacts ...... 12-3 Legislation and planning policies ...... 12-7 Legislation ...... 12-7 Planning Policy ...... 12-9 Baseline conditions ...... 12-10 The application site...... 12-10 Nature and date of designated heritage assets ...... 12-10 The nature and date of locally-listed (HER) sites ...... 12-10 Synthesis: the historic landscape ...... 12-12 Assessment of impacts ...... 12-16 Description of the proposed scheme ...... 12-16 Unmitigated impacts ...... 12-17 Proposed mitigation ...... 12-17 Residual impacts ...... 12-17 Conclusions ...... 12-22

CULTURAL HERITAGE 12

INTRODUCTION

12.1 This section of the ES provides an assessment of the significance of the impact which the proposed development, which has been described in Section 3 above, would have on cultural heritage features.

12.2 The term ‘cultural heritage’ comprises many different elements of the historic environment. These are principally below-ground and above-ground archaeological remains, historic buildings and conservation areas, together with their settings, but can also include intangible aspects, such as associations with famous people or cultural perceptions; sacred sites and place-names: customs and craft industries; where appropriate to the scope of the study. Impacts on cultural heritage may be direct (for example, physical removal of archaeological remains during excavation) or indirect (for example visual impact of a scheme on the settings of nearby designated heritage assets). Impacts may be beneficial or detrimental, and short-term or long- term.

12.3 Amongst the complete range of cultural heritage elements, the term ‘designated heritage assets’ is used in this section to cover the following:

 world heritage sites;  scheduled monuments;  listed buildings;  registered parks and gardens;  registered battlefields; and  conservation areas.

12.4 SLR is a registered organisation with the Institute for Archaeologists (IfA), and work has been carried out where relevant for the baseline study according to the IfA Standard and Guidance for Archaeological Desk-Based Assessments (2001).

12.5 The archaeology and cultural heritage assessment within this section is structured as follows:

 a brief description of the legislation, national guidance and planning policies applying to the cultural heritage elements addressed in this assessment;  details of the methodology used in this assessment;  description of the baseline data relating to the site and vicinity;  description of the scheme and mitigation of impact;  residual impact following mitigation; and  conclusions.

Kingswood ERF – Volume 3 12-1 SLR Consulting Limited CULTURAL HERITAGE 12

METHODOLOGY

Scope and sources of baseline data

12.6 Legislation and national planning guidance, and regional and local planning policies require consideration of potential impacts on the historic environment from new development in two main categories: direct impacts through physical modification, and indirect impacts on settings of nationally- designated heritage assets and others of national importance which have no national designation.

12.7 The starting point of this part of the EIA has therefore been the mapping of designated heritage assets within 5km of the application site.

12.8 Almost all these assets proved to be of medieval or post-medieval date down to the 19th century (with two exceptions). Acquisition of further data has been focused on providing sufficient information to characterise their contemporary settings and assess the degree of change in their surroundings which has occurred since their construction.

12.9 In addition, data sources have therefore been acquired to assess whether there are any other locally-listed sites which are currently without such designation but still of national importance.

12.10 Analysis of the function and relationships between the assets has been carried out in order to identify any particular relationships between individual designated heritage assets (such as manor house and church in the same village), or designated heritage assets with a particular intended long distance outlook (such as prospect towers).

12.11 The designated heritage assets potentially subject to indirect impact have then been subjected to desk-based impact assessment including ZTV analysis, historic and modern mapping and satellite imagery showing surface features and relief 1.

12.12 Following detailed assessment of those within 2km, it was concluded that there would be a negligible level of impact from the proposed scheme, and that there were no other long-distance specific relationships between those assets and any other more distant from the application site. The level of impact indicated by the desk-based assessment has suggested that site inspection would be unnecessary and site inspection has therefore not been carried out.

12.13 The extensive extraction which has occurred throughout the application site will have removed all physical remains of historic assets which might have existed there. There could thus be no direct impact on any historic assets from the proposed scheme, and there has been no attempt to assess the potential for unknown sites to have existed within the application site.

1 Google earth, accessed on 10th January 2010. Kingswood ERF – Volume 3 12-2 SLR Consulting Limited CULTURAL HERITAGE 12

Sources

12.14 The baseline data gathered includes extracts from the Staffordshire Historic Environment Record (‘HER’), Ordnance Survey mapping and on-line satellite imagery, and earlier mapping held at the Staffordshire Record Office and elsewhere, and published historical works of synthesis.

12.15 Locations and descriptions of designated heritage assets have been obtained from a variety of sources2.

12.16 Details of conservation areas have been obtained from Cannock Chase District Council3:

12.17 For clarity in this section, the designation number of the following types of asset have been prefixed as follows:

 HER - HER sites;  LB - listed buildings; and  SM - scheduled monuments

12.18 Designated heritage assets within 5km of the application site and HER sites within 2km are described in summary in Appendix 12/1.

Detailed assessment of indirect impacts

12.19 Impacts upon cultural heritage resources may be categorised in a number of ways. Direct impacts are those which involve physical removal or alteration of the fabric of the feature. Indirect impacts are those which affect the setting of the feature, i.e. those elements of its surroundings which contribute to its special historical or archaeological interest/importance. Positive / negative impacts enhance / detract from the special archaeological or historical importance of the feature. Impacts may be short term, long term or permanent.

12.20 Each impact is quantified in terms of the significance of the impact, a product of the magnitude of the impact of the development and the sensitivity of the feature. The magnitude is itself a product of the scale and the nature of the development, while the sensitivity is dependent upon the importance or heritage value of the feature.

12.21 Visual impact assessment for any particular designated heritage asset, or group of such assets, has been based on the identification of the key viewpoints from where the special qualities of the asset and its setting may best be seen and appreciated.

12.22 The likely scale of impact on the views to or from the proposed asset has been assessed initially using the ZTV (zone of theoretical visibility) analysis

2 Locations of assets at http://services.english-heritage.org.uk/NMRDataDownload; detailed descriptions at http://www.magic.gov.uk. and http://www.heritagegateway.org.uk/gateway. 3 Obtained from Cannock Chase Interactive mapping at http://mapping.cannockchasedc.com Kingswood ERF – Volume 3 12-3 SLR Consulting Limited CULTURAL HERITAGE 12

presented in detail in the Landscape and Visual Assessment section (Section 7 of this ES); for mapping of designated heritage assets and ZTV see Drawings KW 12/1 and 12/2. ZTV methodology is described in detail in that section, but in summary it maps the visible vertical angle (VVA) - a useful general indicator of the extent of visibility of the development from any point around the application site.

12.23 The VVA categorisation may be used to grade the potential scale of visual change as follows.

Table 12-1 Visible vertical angle and scale of visual change

Visible vertical Potential scale of visual Distance for equivalent angle (degrees) change VVA from 8m-tall building (e.g. two-storey house) <0.25 Not visible or insignificant 2km (0.23 ) 0.25-1.00 small 500m (0.92 ) >1.00-3.00 medium 200m (2.29 ) >3.00 large 100m (4.58 )

12.24 The ZTV addresses only the dimensional aspect of the development and its relationship with the surrounding landform. It does not take into account the character of the development, and excludes consideration of intervening vegetation and buildings, and in this respect it presents a worst case scenario. It excludes consideration of the apparent width of the development from a given viewpoint, so a narrow feature, such as a single building or flue stack, is rated the same as a wide development such as a large building or quarry.

12.25 Potential effects from any alteration of the hydrology and traffic levels and routing are dealt with in the relevant sections of this ES. It is expected that they would be minimal.

Assessment of importance / heritage value

12.26 The presence on a national list shows an existing judgement that a designated asset is of national importance. Not all sites of national importance are so designated, and the remains of other archaeological sites in the vicinity listed in the HER have been considered in relation to the Secretary of State's non-statutory criteria for scheduling ancient monuments4. These criteria can be used as a basis for the assessment of the importance of historic remains and archaeological sites. They include period, rarity, documentation, group value, survival / condition, fragility / vulnerability, diversity and potential.

4 Department for Culture Media and Sport, 2010. Scheduled Monuments: Identifying, Protecting, Conserving and Investigating Nationally Important Archaeological Sites under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979, Annex 1. Kingswood ERF – Volume 3 12-4 SLR Consulting Limited CULTURAL HERITAGE 12

12.27 The categories of local and regional importance are less clearly established than that of national, and implicitly relate to local and regional priorities which themselves will vary within and between regions.

Table 12-2 Criteria for judging importance and sensitivity of sites and settings

Importance Designated heritage Other cultural heritage features Sensitivity assets and settings International  world heritage high sites National  cheduled  well-preserved historic s high monuments landscapes  listed buildings  well-preserved settings of  registered internationally / nationally- historic important designated heritage battlefields assets (degraded settings have a  registered proportionately lower sensitivity historic parks and rating) gardens  unscheduled archaeological sites of national importance Regional  conservation  moderately well-preserved medium areas historic landscapes  well-preserved settings of regionally-important designated heritage assets  the bulk of archaeological sites with reasonable evidence of occupation, ritual, industry etc. Local  archaeological sites with some low evidence of human activity, but in a fragmentary or poor state  buildings of local importance  dispersed elements of historic landscapes Unimportant  destroyed sites none  mistaken non-antiquities  random stray finds  buildings of no architectural merit Uncertain  insufficient evidence to judge uncertain importance.

Assessment of magnitude of impact

12.28 The discussion of the significance of visual impact on the existing settings of designated heritage assets in this assessment includes consideration of the six aspects of settings set out in English Heritage’s Wind Energy and the Historic Environment (2005):

 the intended visual dominance of the asset  the scale of the proposed development compared with that of the asset  any intended intervisibility between designated heritage assets  intended vistas and sight-lines connected with designated heritage assets  movement, sound and light effects of the proposed development

Kingswood ERF – Volume 3 12-5 SLR Consulting Limited CULTURAL HERITAGE 12

 any unaltered settings of designated heritage assets.

12.29 The magnitude of each noted impact is assessed, in order to determine the likely outcome of development upon each cultural heritage feature. The following table shows the definitions used in determining the magnitude of impact, both direct and indirect.

Table 12-3 Definitions of magnitude of impact

Level of Definition (direct impacts) Definition (indirect impacts) magnitude High Total or major physical loss to Fundamental changes to the setting cultural heritage feature of the cultural heritage feature Medium Moderate physical damage to Partial change to the setting of the cultural heritage feature; does not cultural heritage feature fundamentally change feature Low Minor physical damage to cultural Minor intrusion on setting of the heritage feature or immediate cultural heritage feature surroundings Negligible Barely perceptible or no change to Barely perceptible or no change to baseline condition setting of the cultural heritage feature

12.30 The effect of the permitted development of Kingswood Business Park for B1, B2 and B8 uses has been included in the baseline condition when assessing magnitude of impact of the proposed scheme.

12.31 Photomontages prepared for the Landscape and Visual Impact section of this ES have also been used as a general guide to the magnitude of impact of the proposed scheme.

Assessment of significance of impact

12.32 The final assessment is of the significance of impact, i.e. of the overall impact of the development from a combination of the importance / sensitivity of the assets and the magnitude of the impact of development.

Table 12-4 Table for assessing significance of impact

Magnitude Sensitivity to impact of cultural heritage element of impact High Medium Low None High Major Major Moderate None Medium Major Moderate Minor None Low Moderate Minor Negligible None Negligible Minor Negligible Negligible None

Kingswood ERF – Volume 3 12-6 SLR Consulting Limited CULTURAL HERITAGE 12

Consultations

12.33 In response to a consultation with Staffordshire County Council dated 23rd July 2009 (refer to Section 1 above) the Planning Officer confirmed that:

There are no recorded archaeological issues associated with the proposals outlined in the proposal. 12.34 The response also stated that there were no historic built environment constraints affecting the proposals, but also that a Heritage Statement would be required in support of the planning application. The following advice was appended:5

For applications either related to or impacting on the setting of heritage assets a written statement that includes plans showing historic features that may exist on or adjacent to the application site including listed buildings and structures, historic parks and gardens, historic battlefields and scheduled ancient monuments and an analysis of the significance of archaeology, history and character of the building/structure, the principles of and justification for the proposed works and their impact on the special character of the listed building or structure, its setting and the setting of adjacent listed buildings may be required.

12.35 In subsequent telephone consultation with the Staffordshire County Council Historic Environment Officer, it was agreed that the potential for direct impact on archaeological remains from the proposed scheme was negligible, but that assessment of indirect impacts was required. Subsequently, there have been changes to the site layout, but these have not altered the extent of ground disturbance.

LEGISLATION AND PLANNING POLICIES

Legislation

12.36 The importance of cultural heritage is clearly recognised at both national and local levels. Certain features that are deemed to be of particular importance are given legal protection through various statutes including the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979 (scheduled monuments), the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (listed buildings) and the Hedgerows Regulations 1997.

Scheduled Monuments

12.37 Under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979, the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport is required to compile and maintain a Schedule of Monuments considered to be of national importance. The consent of the Secretary of State is required before any works are carried out which would have the effect of demolishing, destroying,

5 as set out in the A to Z Guide to Planning Applications Submitted to Staffordshire County Council (section H: Heritage Statements): Kingswood ERF – Volume 3 12-7 SLR Consulting Limited CULTURAL HERITAGE 12

damaging, removing, repairing, altering, adding to, flooding or covering up a scheduled monument.

Listed Buildings

12.38 Under the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, the Secretary of State is required to compile a list of buildings of special architectural or historic interest. There is a presumption against development that would adversely affect the character of a listed building or its setting and planning authorities and the Secretary of State are required to have special regard for the desirability of preserving listed buildings or their settings and any features of special architectural or historic importance they possess.

12.39 In addition, listed buildings are protected by law, and any alteration of a listed building requires Listed Building Consent administered by the Local Planning Authority (LPA).

12.40 Consideration is given to the settings of listed buildings as set out in the Historic Buildings and Monuments Act 1953, Local Government Act 1985 (paragraph 3 (1) of Schedule 2), and Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990.

Conservation Areas

12.41 Under the terms of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, areas of special architectural or historic interest can be designated as conservation areas, the character or appearance of which it is desirable to preserve or enhance. Planning authorities are required to consider planning applications affecting the appearance, character or setting of conservation areas.

12.42 Consideration is given to the settings of conservation areas as set out in the Historic Buildings and Monuments Act 1953, Local Government Act 1985 (paragraph 3 (1) of Schedule 2), and Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990.

Registered Parks and Gardens

12.43 The effect of a proposed development on a designated historic garden or designed landscape as maintained in the Register of Parks and Gardens of Special Historic Interest in England by English Heritage is a material consideration in the determination of a planning application, although the designation is non-statutory. Local authorities are required by central government to make provision for the protection of historic resources in planning policy. Registration is a material consideration in planning terms and as such, following a planning application which would affect a registered park or garden, local planning authorities must take into account the historic interest of the site when determining whether or not to grant planning permission.

Kingswood ERF – Volume 3 12-8 SLR Consulting Limited CULTURAL HERITAGE 12

Planning Policy

12.44 Section 4 above has set out the various planning policy considerations relevant to the development proposals. In relation to Cultural Heritage, the following is of note.

National

12.45 National planning policy relating to the historic environment is set out in PPS56, amplified by its accompanying practice guide7. In PPS5 it is stated that the historic environment and its designated heritage assets should be conserved and enjoyed for the quality of life that they bring to this and future generations8. A heritage asset is defined there as ‘a building, monument, site, place, area or landscape positively identified as having a degree of significance meriting consideration in planning decisions’.

12.46 Policies HE7 to HE10 guide the determination of planning applications. HE9.1 states that there should be a presumption in favour of the conservation of designated heritage assets, and that the more significant the asset the greater the presumption in favour of its conservation should be. HE9.2 allows LPAs to weigh necessary harm to, or loss of, heritage value of an asset against public benefits from an application. HE8.1 states that the effect of an application on non-designated heritage assets or their settings is a material consideration in determining the application.

12.47 The practice guide states clearly that ‘all heritage assets have a setting’9. Policy HE10.1 requires LPAs to treat favourably applications that would preserve the positive aspects of the setting of a heritage asset, or would better reveal its heritage value. For an application which would not do this, LPAs should weigh any detrimental impact in this respect against its wider benefits.

Local Planning Policies

12.48 The site is located within Cannock Chase District. The following sections summarise the planning policies related to archaeology and cultural heritage and relevant to the proposed development.

12.49 Local planning policies are set out in the Cannock Chase Local Plan (1997). The following policies are relevant to archaeology / cultural heritage.

 Policy B2: Safeguarding the setting of listed buildings  Policy B4 :New development affecting the setting or views into and out of conservation areas  Policy B5: Ancient monuments and archaeology

6 PPS5: Planning Policy Statement 5 Planning for the Historic Environment (DCLG 2010). 7 PPS5 Planning for the Historic Environment: Historic Environment Planning Practice Guide (Department for Communities and Local Government, Department for Culture Media and Sport, and English Heritage, 2010). 8 PPS5 Introduction, paragraph 7. 9 Practice Guide, 113. Kingswood ERF – Volume 3 12-9 SLR Consulting Limited CULTURAL HERITAGE 12

BASELINE CONDITIONS

The application site

12.50 The application site is currently occupied by the remains of former opencast mining that has been infilled with site derived materials and landscaped along the southern edge. Nature and date of designated heritage assets

12.51 Designated heritage assets within 5km of the proposed building are listed in Appendix 12/1. They comprise forty-two listed buildings and structures, two scheduled monuments and two conservation areas10.

12.52 The listed buildings include the parish churches and related structures, chapels and a memorial, inns, farmhouses and related buildings, rural and urban cottages and houses, and halls and country houses. The churches and rural buildings date from medieval times onwards, but most are from the 18th century and later. The two scheduled monuments both relate to structures which are also listed.

12.53 There are no designated heritage assets or parts thereof within the application site.

12.54 The settings of these buildings will be relevant elements of the historic landscape; consideration of that aspect of cultural heritage provided below has therefore been limited to the medieval period onwards.

The nature and date of locally-listed (HER) sites

12.55 The HER contains a database of locally-listed sites. The eighty-seven which are located within 2km of the application site have been mapped (Figure 12- 1) and are listed in summary in Appendix 12/1.

12.56 Watling Street has been a major highway since Roman times. Within the vicinity of the application site its course has been little altered and its original distinctive straight character is still apparent in the line of the A5. Its fabric may survive beneath and adjacent to the A5 but it is likely to be in a much- truncated state. In addition its surrounding context has been much altered, particularly by the expansion of the Cannock and Great Wyrley urban areas, by extraction within the application site and neighbouring areas to the north, and the adjacent construction of the M6 Toll. Any surviving fabric of Watling Street in the vicinity of the application site is thus not considered to be of national importance.

12.57 The other locally-listed sites which have no national designation within 2km of the application site in general terms comprise chiefly industrial buildings and structures, including mining and transport infrastructure though brick, tile

10 Conservation area boundaries have been obtained from Cannock Chase Interactive mapping at http://mapping.cannockchasedc.com Kingswood ERF – Volume 3 12-10 SLR Consulting Limited CULTURAL HERITAGE 12

and tool manufacturing are also represented, and some rural dwelling sites are known only from mapping. These sites are mainly of 19th century date. Most are no longer visible above ground, their sites and surroundings having been redeveloped.

12.58 Amongst the criteria used by the Secretary of State for determining national importance in relation to scheduling of monuments, they would have neither rarity nor any special preservation, so none has any clear claim to national importance, in the current state of knowledge, and most are no longer visible above ground. Figure 12-1 HER sites within 2km of the application site

Reproduced by permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of HMSO. Crown copyright and database right August 2010. All rights reserved. Ordnance Survey licence number AI 100012293.

Kingswood ERF – Volume 3 12-11 SLR Consulting Limited CULTURAL HERITAGE 12

Synthesis: the historic landscape

12.59 Little is recorded within 2km of the application site which relates to the prehistoric periods. An earlier prehistoric macehead (HER1083) came from Great Wyrley, and HER4438 west of Norton Canes may be a prehistoric or Roman trackway and enclosure (although later study concluded that the features were of post-medieval origin).

Medieval

12.60 Watling Street (A5; HER4697), a major highway of Roman Britain, retained its importance in the post-Roman period (Figure 12-2). It links London with the West Midlands and Wales, meeting another key route of Roman origin, the Exeter-Lincoln Fosse Way, at Wall.

12.61 The application site and its vicinity lie within the historic bounds of Cannock Forest which at its greatest extent in the 13th century extended west from the river Tame for about 40km. Divisions in the forest were often termed hays, and those parts which later passed into private ownership were known as chases such as the enclave in Cannock Forest known as Cannock Chase11. Lodge names are common referring in some cases to hunting lodges. Within the Forest area, forest law prevailed, directed chiefly towards the protection of game, but settlements existed and the area was not completely covered in trees12. A game enclosure (Old Ehglish haga) existed at Hatherton, haga forming the first element in Hatherton13. Disafforestation became widespread from the 16th century, a process largely completed by the parliamentary enclosures of the 18th and 19th centuries.

12.62 Places mentioned in Domesday Book within approximately 5km of the application site are Hatherton, Cannock, Great Saredon,. Little Saredon, Norton Canes, Hilton and Wyrley, and provide some indication of the location and density of the chief settlements by the 11th century, though the entry for Norton Canes refers only to land. The scarcity of recorded settlement reflects the predominance of hamlets and farms over nucleated villages in this period

12.63 The late medieval settlement pattern, which prevailed over most of the West Midlands and beyond, was one of hamlet settlement with occasional villages and many dispersed farms; open fields were associated with the villages14.

12.64 Known medieval sites recorded in the HER within 2km of the application site include a record of ‘hall’ in field names south-east of Cannock historic core (HER17353) and a bridge site to the east (HER17337). Cannock contains two listed medieval houses (LB271286 and 271293) and a wayside cross (271278). Norton Canes has a medieval church (HER5206) and moat (HER1086) indicating the historic core, with evidence for a pottery kiln to the north-east (HER1930 & 4021) and open field cultivation (ridge and furrow) to

11 D. Hooke, England’s Landscape: The West Midlands (2006), p.77. 12 S. Friar, The Local History Companion (2001) pp.169-170. 13 D. Hooke in note 6, p. 56. 14 B. Cunliffe et. al. (ed.) The Penguin Atlas of British and Irish History (2001), p. 93. Kingswood ERF – Volume 3 12-12 SLR Consulting Limited CULTURAL HERITAGE 12

the south (HER5344). Other lesser settlement centres absent from the highly-summarised Domesday record are suggested by Leacroft hall demolished pre-1851 (HER5776) and a moat at Great Wyrley (HER1082). Six sites are farms or hamlets of 18th century date known mainly from documents. Walk Mill churchbridge (HER4491)

Post-medieval

12.65 The earliest mapping to show useful detail in the vicinity of the application site is that of Emmanuel Bowen (1747; Figure 12-2). On this map settlement is seen to be sparse beyond the main centres of Penkridge, Cannock and Rugeley, with extensive woodland particularly to the north although the application site stands in an area locally-devoid of trees. The bold line shown to the east of the application site is the boundary of Cuttlestone Hundred (i.e. historic local government area). Figure 12-2 Extract from Emmanuel Bowen’s Map of Staffordshire, 1749

12.66 Industrial development began relatively early in the vicinity of the application site. The woods of Cannock Chase were decimated by 16th- and 17th- century charcoal burning for iron making. In 1686 the removal of the trees

Kingswood ERF – Volume 3 12-13 SLR Consulting Limited CULTURAL HERITAGE 12

had exposed the light soils which were rapidly converted to man-made heath suitable only for grazing of sheep15. Cannock Chase was the last woodland area to be affected by Parliamentary Act, enclosed after 1853, including 1200ha of Cannock and 356 ha of Norton Canes16.

12.67 The Ordnance Survey First Series map of 1836 (1in scale; Figure 15-3) shows a ‘rail road’ linking the early coal works of the Cannock Chase coalfield at Wyrley Bank and Great Wyrley (Cheslyn Hay on modern mapping) with Watling Street at Churchbridge. Brick kilns are mapped at Holly Bank and Rumer Hill. The Wyrley and Essington canal and its early branches was constructed in the 1790s. Figure 12-3 Designated heritage assets superimposed on extract from Ordnance Survey First Series map of 1836, original scale 1in:1mile

12.68 By the later 19th century industrial development was extensive. In 1887 coal mines were said by a contemporary writer to be extensive around Cannock17,

15 D. Hooke in f.n. 6, 167. 16 D. Hooke in f.n. 6, p. 99-100. 17 John Bartholomew's Gazetteer of the British Isles 1887. Kingswood ERF – Volume 3 12-14 SLR Consulting Limited CULTURAL HERITAGE 12

to the north-west and south-west of the application site18, and a number of brickworks are also recorded19. The London and North-Western (Norton Branch Extension) railway was constructed to the east of the application site (HER4492, 5778), linking with the existing Cannock Branch Railway which links Walsall and Cannock , built in 1858 to exploit the coalfields of Cannock Chase coalfield, and closed to passenger traffic in 1965. The Cannock extension of the Wyrley and Essington Canal, (HER 2216), which ran through the application site, was fully open by 1863. The site was subjected to opencast mining from c. 1964, and infilled from c. 1970.

12.69 The main built-up area of Cannock was established from the 1970s, mirroring the vast expansion of Birmingham and Wolverhampton to the south20. The M6 Toll road was opened in 2003. The extent of post-war change in the landscape in the vicinity of the application site is shown clearly in the summary of Staffordshire County Council’s Historic Landscape Characterisation, presented in Figure 15-4. This diagram shows the period in which each separately-defined land parcel reached its current form.

18 HER 4722, 4723, 5745, 5746, 5747, 5748, 5749, 5751, 5752, 5755, 5756, 5777, 5779, 5790, 11302, 12212, 17318. 19 HER 11288, 11289, 11299, 11304, 17338 20 D. Hooke, England’s Landscape: The West Midlands (2006) Figure 7.49. Kingswood ERF – Volume 3 12-15 SLR Consulting Limited CULTURAL HERITAGE 12

Figure 12-4 Listed buildings, scheduled monuments and summary of Historic Landscape Characterisation

ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS

Description of the proposed scheme

12.70 The application site covers about 8ha. The scheme would involve the construction of an energy recovery facility (ERF) approximately 180m in length and 40m high, with a double-flue stack 90m in height. The remainder of the site would be occupied by ancillary buildings, parking areas, access roads and landscaping. The scheme has been described in detail in Section 3 of this ES.

Kingswood ERF – Volume 3 12-16 SLR Consulting Limited CULTURAL HERITAGE 12

Unmitigated impacts

Direct impacts Designated heritage assets

12.71 Within the application site there are no designated heritage assets, and there would be no direct impact on any such sites. Archaeological remains

12.72 A stretch of the Cannock Extension of the Wyrley and Essington Canal (1860s – 1963) passed through the application site (HER 2216) but it has been removed by subsequent coal extraction. Other (unknown) archaeological remains may have existed within the application site. However, the probability of any archaeological remains now surviving within the application site is negligible due to the quarrying which has taken place there. The likelihood of any direct impact on archaeological remains from the proposed scheme is therefore negligible.

Indirect impacts

12.73 The necessary size of the ERF building is such that it could not be hidden, and as a modern intrusive feature, it could have a potential adverse visual impact on the settings of intervisible designated heritage assets, though this effect would decrease with distance. Proposed mitigation

12.74 In the absence of any direct impacts, no mitigation of direct impacts is necessary.

12.75 In order to lessen potential indirect visual impacts, including those on designated heritage assets, the scheme has been designed taking into account its appearance in relation to its site and surroundings and the views of it from local areas.

Residual impacts

Indirect impacts

12.76 Compared against the permitted baseline, no significant changes to the permitted traffic volumes are proposed and there would be no indirect impacts on designated heritage assets from traffic.

12.77 Potential indirect impacts would therefore be solely related to changes in the visual aspect of the settings of designated heritage assets.

12.78 The impacts on designated heritage assets located within 2km of the proposed development are assessed in the following paragraphs, with more

Kingswood ERF – Volume 3 12-17 SLR Consulting Limited CULTURAL HERITAGE 12

general consideration of designated heritage assets between 2-5km distant from the application site. Cannock town centre

12.79 The Cannock Town Centre conservation area appraisal is not yet completed but SLR has obtained21 a copy of the notes submitted with the proposal to designate the conservation area in 1991. The area then proposed contained 12 listed buildings dating chiefly from the mid 18th to early 19th century (no list is given); the town centre’s spaciousness is particularly noted, originally created by the market place, together with the grounds of St Luke’s church at the east end of the area which is a valuable open space. There are no comments regarding views out from the conservation area.

12.80 The thirteen listed buildings in Cannock town centre are not described in detail here, but briefly they comprise the medieval church of St. Luke with medieval wayside cross and post-medieval churchyard gates and railings (LB271277-271279), the 18th-century Council House (LB271281) with later gates and railings (LB271282), and the Tank Building of the Conduit Trust (LB271283 and SM ST50). Other buildings are 16th-19th-century houses: 79 High Green (LB271286), 8 and 8a Mill Street (LB271293) 10 Mill Street (LB271294), 71-75 High Green (LB271284) and a bank (LB271285). Nos. 71-79 High Green form a group according to the Listing. In addition there is a 19th-century Congregational Chapel and Manse (LB430776, LB430808).

12.81 The buildings in Cannock centre are best appreciated from close to the individual buildings, and there is little capacity for experiencing their significance from outside the town centre; their wider setting has clearly been significantly degraded by the surrounding development of extensive recent built-up areas. The ERF would provide a VVA of 0.25-1° for the mass and 1- 3° for the stack.

12.82 Amongst these assets only the church of St. Luke has any special intended outlook implicit in its design, as the tower has a parapet. The intervening existing landfill would hinder any intervisibility with the church of Norton Canes (a 19th-century re-build), about 3.7km to the south-east. The setting towards the ERF of the buildings and conservation area in Cannock centre is therefore judged to be of low sensitivity, the magnitude of impact from the proposed scheme negligible adverse, and the resulting significance of impact thus negligible adverse.

Cannock Outliers

12.83 The Crystal Fountain public house (LB471651) was built in 1937 for Mitchells and Butlers brewers by Linford's of Cannock, in Neo-Georgian style. It has two storeys. It stands in an area of 1914-1945 housing which it no doubt served, and which therefore formed its immediate setting. The Ordnance Survey map of 1938 shows the area then to have been built-up on the road frontages around a central area of allotments (to the north-east of

21 From Cannock Chase District Council Kingswood ERF – Volume 3 12-18 SLR Consulting Limited CULTURAL HERITAGE 12

the public house). The allotments have subsequently been infilled with more recent school buildings thus partly masking the original layout. What remains of the original setting and the public house itself can only be experienced from the immediate vicinity of the building, and some of this area has been subject to the noted detrimental change. The application site lies 1.7km to the south-east of the public house and it is likely that the stack (but not the mass) would be visible intermittently between the buildings. The VVA of the stack would be 1-3o and about 1 o for the mass: much less than that of a two-storey building at a distance of 10-20m, a typical viewpoint within the conservation area. The view of the Crystal Fountain towards the ERF would be of the gable end; the main view, square-on to the frontage, would point towards the north-east, away from the application site. The setting of the building is therefore judged to be of medium sensitivity, the magnitude of impact from the proposed scheme negligible adverse, and the resulting significance of impact thus negligible adverse.

12.84 Cannock Mill (LB271289) is of 18th-century build though probably of 17th- century origin. It is still in use as a corn mill, retaining much of the original machinery. The height of three storeys was required to accommodate the milling process rather than intended to provide any particular outlook. The Mill House (LB271290) is probably late C18, and of three storeys. The two buildings are located about 600m south-east of the historic settlement core of Cannock in what was in the 18th century open country, on the road from Cannock to Lichfield. The Mill House was part of a courtyard farm, L-shaped in plan (HER14129) now known only from mapping (date not stated in HER). Early 20th-century building has encroached to the immediate west and east and south, and the mill pond recorded in 19th century mapping (HER17319) has now been filled in and is perceptible only in property boundaries. The mill used a tributary of the Saredon Brook which flowed from Hednesford Hills 3.5km to the north-east, to Saredon and beyond, 4km to the south-west, much of which runs underground in the vicinity of the mill. Something of an open setting remains to the north of the buildings, from where the view towards the buildings would point towards the south away from the application site. The VVA of the stack from this location would be 1-3o, but would be less than 0.25o for the mass, which would possibly not be visible at all. The stack might be visible to either side or beyond the buildings from certain viewpoints to the north, but from those locations existing modern encroachment to the west and east would be much more detrimental to the setting.

12.85 The setting of the buildings is therefore judged to be of low sensitivity, the magnitude of impact from the proposed scheme negligible adverse, and the resulting significance of impact thus negligible adverse.

Kingswood ERF – Volume 3 12-19 SLR Consulting Limited CULTURAL HERITAGE 12

North Street, Bridgtown Conservation Area

12.86 The North Street, Bridgtown conservation area was designated in 1988, and an appraisal has been completed22. Bridgetown was laid out by 1876. The buildings in the conservation area are of late-19th and early 20th-century date: mainly houses and shops of two storeys; outhouses often used for small-scale manufacturing. It contains no listed buildings, trees or green spaces. Preservation of much original detailing in the buildings is specifically mentioned in the Conservation Area Appraisal, and the way the buildings follow the curve of the street. From the conservation area the ERF stack would have a VVA of 1-3o, while that of the mass would lie towards the centre of the range 0.25-3 o. It is possible that there would be views of the stack between the buildings, but North Street is orientated north-east/south- west while the ERF building would lie to the east, so there would be no view of it in either direction down the street.

12.87 The setting of the conservation area is therefore judged to be of low sensitivity, the magnitude of impact from the proposed scheme negligible adverse, and the resulting significance of impact thus negligible adverse.

New Hall Farmhouse

12.88 This building, a 'modest farmhouse of red brick' (LB271291) was at the time of its construction in the late-18th-century, located in open country, though its name suggests that it may have had a predecessor and there is an area of piecemeal enclosure to the south-east which may represent assarting from the forest at which time the New Hall could plausibly have been established. Now, aside from the area of piecemeal enclosure already noted, its location has been entirely enclosed by post-1945 settlement to the north, post-1945 plantation, golf course and former extraction areas to the south towards the application site. There is a modern building adjacent to the east and a car- park to the west, with woodland close by in all directions. There might be a view from open country within the golf course from the south-west, but this would point away from the application site. Views of the farmhouse from the north, towards the application site would only be available close-to; from this location the ZTV gives a VVA of 1-3o for the stack and 0.25-1o for the mass.

12.89 The setting of the building is therefore judged to be of low sensitivity, the magnitude of impact from the proposed scheme negligible adverse, and the resulting significance of impact thus negligible adverse.

Norton Canes

12.90 The parish church of St James, Norton Canes (LB271296; HER 5206) lies about 1.5km east of the application site. The church was rebuilt in 1832-3 (replacing an earlier church), and again in 1888 following a fire; little is visible of its medieval predecessor. Domesday Book (1086) records land only at Norton Canes but because the place is mentioned, a settlement is likely to

22 Cannock Chase Council. North Street Bridgtown Conservation Area Appraisal (undated), Kingswood ERF – Volume 3 12-20 SLR Consulting Limited CULTURAL HERITAGE 12

have existed, silently incorporated in the record of another place. A moated site (HER1086) lies 250m to the south-east, now wooded; the medieval village is likely to have lain between the two sites, where it was located in detailed historic mapping from the 19th century.

12.91 Due to surrounding vegetation there would be a clear view towards the proposed ERF only from the top of the church tower, which has a parapet. To the east of the historic core of Norton Canes, where the church and moat now stand, lies the extensive area of modern Norton Canes and Norton East which have grown up since 1945. To the south the M6 Toll passes within 400m of the church between it and Watling Street. The field boundaries of the immediately adjacent open land to the north, west and a small area to the east, date mainly to the 19th or 20th centuries, though small pockets of earlier piecemeal enclosures of probable late-medieval or early post- medieval date have survived. Little therefore remains of the medieval setting of the church and moat, in both the settlement-area and the field boundaries. The VVA of the stack would be about 3o and between 1 and 3o for the mass, but the magnitude of impact is greatly reduced when the existing Unilever building and the permitted surrounding development of Kingswood Business Park are taken into account. The flue of the proposed ERF building would lie about 370m away from any line of intervisibility between St James’s church, Norton Canes and the parish church of St. Luke in Cannock.

12.92 The setting of the church is therefore judged to be of low sensitivity, the magnitude of impact from the proposed scheme low adverse, and the resulting significance of impact thus negligible adverse.

Other more distant designated heritage assets

12.93 Other buildings located more than 2km from the application site comprise chiefly farmhouses, houses, and cottages, inns, and bridges barns and other utilitarian structures. These would have no obvious intended intervisibility with any of the buildings considered above in detail, and no intended outlook along sight-lines.

12.94 Amongst these, a small country house, Hatherton Hall built 1817 (LB271779), is shown set in parkland on the Ordnance Survey map of 1834 (Figure 15-3) and may be related to the approximately-contemporary Longford Lodge (LB271777) on Watling Street. Although the hall is still set in parkland, there is no obvious designed vista apparent in the grounds, the house looks south-south-west over ornamental lakes, and views from the house towards the application site are screened by mature trees next to the house, and a large area of early 20th-century housing and then 19th and 20th-century industrial areas between the house and the application site.

12.95 Although the war-memorial (LB502486) is 8.5m tall and stands on a local eminence, it is closely surrounded by trees permitting only a single focused view (towards the north-east) from the gates. The memorial itself is clearly intended to be the sole focus of the site and views out are not relevant. The view from Cannock to the memorial .would not be affected.

Kingswood ERF – Volume 3 12-21 SLR Consulting Limited CULTURAL HERITAGE 12

CONCLUSIONS

12.96 The application site is located within a historic landscape of medieval and post-medieval date, most of much which post-dates 1945.

12.97 No designated heritage assets or parts thereof lie within the application site.

12.98 Only one locally-listed site, now destroyed, lay within the application site (the Cannock extension of the Wyrley and Essington Canal).

12.99 There is negligible potential for the survival of archaeological remains within the application site due to the extraction which has been carried out there.

12.100 The settings of the designated heritage assets in the vicinity of the site have already generally been adversely affected by more recent urban development.

12.101 The proposed development would have no direct impact on archaeological remains.

12.102 The proposed development would have only negligible indirect impact on the settings of designated heritage assets.

12.103 The proposed development would be consistent with planning policy and guidance relating to archaeology and cultural heritage.

Kingswood ERF – Volume 3 12-22 SLR Consulting Limited APPENDIX 12/1

APPENDIX 12/1 Listed buildings within 5km of the proposed building

Build LB_UID Name Grade Easting Northing century Summary description Group Wryley Essington Canal Pelsall Works 219181 Bridge II 401459 304323 19 Canal bridge Wyrley-Essington canal Wyrley and Essington Canal Footbridge at 219182 Pelsall Junction II 401975 304438 EM19 Towpath Bridge Wyrley-Essington canal Late Perpendicu lar 16 19 271277 Parish Church of St Luke B 398144 310147 20 Parish Church of St Luke CannockCentre 271278 Wayside Cross in St Luke's Churchyard II 398133 310126 14 Wayside cross CannockCentre Railings and gates at South Side of St 271279 Luke's Churchyard II 398128 310069 18/19 Churchyard railings and gates CannockCentre 271280 Prospect Place II 400160 311264 18 19 House Hednesford 271281 Council House The Green II* 397935 310242 18 House CannockCentre Gates, railings and gate piers of Council Gates railings gate piers to 271282 House High Green II* 397950 310222 19 COU CannockCentre Tank Building of The Conduit Trust High Tank building for conduit [SM 271283 Green II 397942 310208 18 ST50] CannockCentre 271284 71, 71a, 73 and 75 High Green II 397944 310173 19 Houses[?] CannockCentre [Bank / house?] grouped with 271285 National Westminster Bank High Green II 397933 310176 19 71-79 (odd) CannockCentre 271286 79 High Green II 397913 310183 16 House CannockCentre 271287 Cross Keys Inn Hill Street II 400802 311075 18 Inn Hednesford 271288 Cross Keys Farmhouse Hill Street II 400337 311327 16 House? Hednesford 271289 Cannock Mill Lichfield Road II 398817 309903 17 18 Mill still used CannockOutlier 271290 Cannock Mill House Lichfield Road II 398800 309929 18 House [Mill House?] CannockOutlier

Kingswood ERF – Volume 3 i SLR Consulting Limited

APPENDIX 12/1

Build LB_UID Name Grade Easting Northing century Summary description Group 271291 New Hall Farmhouse Lichfield Road II 399956 309931 18 Farmhouse 271292 Anglesey Hotel Market Street II 400065 312388 19 House 271293 8 and 8a Mill Street II 398197 310064 16 House CannockCentre 271294 10 Mill Street II 398206 310075 18 House CannockCentre Wallhouse National School New Penkridge 271295 Road II 397339 310506 19 House and School CannockOutlier Earyl Decorated; 271296 Church of St James C 400975 307840 restored 19 Parish church of St James 271297 Little Wyrley Hall II* 401202 305934 15/16 17 Mansion Little Wyrley 271298 Barn to South of Little Wyrley Hall II 401194 305878 17 Tithe barn Little Wyrley 271775 14 and 16 Dundalk Lane II 397866 306740 17 18 20 3 Cottages 271776 Landywood Farmhouse Upper Landywood II 398393 305657 16 19 Farmhouse 271777 Longford Lodge Watling Street II 396603 309189 19 20 Lodge Hatherton Hall 271778 The Four Crosses Inn Watling Street II 395423 309491 17 18 Inn 271779 Hatherton Hall II 395989 310815 19 Small Country House Hatherton Hall Saredon Hall Farmhouse and Attached 271787 Cowhouse II 395301 308112 18 19 Farmhouse and cowhouse Saredon 271788 Great Saredon Farmhouse II 394951 308551 18 Farmhouse Saredon High View Cottage and Farm Cottage and 271789 Attached Barn II 395069 308532 16+ House cottage and barn Saredon 271790 Hilltop Farmhouse II 395095 308511 19 Farmhouse Saredon 271791 Hilltop Cottages II 395104 308441 17 19 House Saredon 271792 Little Saredon Dairy Farmhouse II 394819 307237 18 Farmhouse Saredon 271793 Little Saredon Manor II 394724 307204 16 18 19 House Saredon 271810 Chapel Farmhouse Bursnips Road II 397170 304486 18 19 Farmhouse 272618 Church of St Anne Church Street II* 404391 309346 19 Chapel of Ease 430776 Congregational Chapel Stafford Road II 397908 310343 19 Congregational chapel CannockCentre

Kingswood ERF – Volume 3 ii SLR Consulting Limited

APPENDIX 12/1

Build LB_UID Name Grade Easting Northing century Summary description Group Manse Immediately South of Manse to Congregational 430808 Congregational Chapel Stafford Road II 397905 310330 19 Chapel CannockCentre Crystal Fountain Public House St Johns 471651 Road II 397875 309651 20 Public House for M&B CannockOutlier Hednesford war memorial and gates, 502486 Rugeley Road II 400447.5 312528 20 Memorial

Table 12-6 Scheduled monuments within 5km of the proposed building

Monument number Name Easting Northing Description Churchyard Cross, St 21598 Luke's churchyard 398133 310125 Hexagonal conduit Head of 1736 built for water brought by pipe line from Stringer's ST50 Conduit head in High Green 397938 310210 Meadow Rumer Hill (SJ 9809) Leacroft [=LB271283]

Table 12-7 HER sites within 2km of the proposed building HER no Above-ground Name Mon type Date NGRE NGRN visibility 1082 no Moated site, West of Walsall Road, Moat Med 399075 307464 Great Wyrley 1083 no Macehead, Near Ivy House, Bloxwich Findspot Pre 399400 307500 Road, Great Wyrley 1084 no Church Bridge, Cannock Road bridge Med 398560 308280

Kingswood ERF – Volume 3 iii SLR Consulting Limited

APPENDIX 12/1

HER no Above-ground Name Mon type Date NGRE NGRN visibility 1086 yes Moated Site, Laburnum Farm, Norton Moat Med 401214 307638 Canes 1930 no Common Bridge Pottery Kiln, Norton Pottery kiln Med 401400 308200 Canes 2201 part Cannock (Hatherton) Branch, Canal L19 industrial 396443 308253 Staffordshire and Worcestershire Canal 2216 no Cannock Extension of the Wyrley and Canal 19 industrial 400856 307923 Essington Canal 2515 no Norton Canes / Norton (Placename) Site Med 401250 307750 3152 no Norton Farm, Norton Canes Farmhouse 19 industrial 401241 309125 3153 no Swan Farm, Norton Canes Farmhouse 18 agricultural 400720 307487 4021 no Common Bridge Pottery Kiln Pottery kiln, Med 401280 308100 findspot 4438 no Cropmark Features, Norton Hall Farm Ditch, field drain, Pre-Rom 400638 307859 ridge and furrow, enclosure, trackway 4465 no Hawkin's Basin, Hatherton Branch Aqueduct, canal L19 industrial 397586 308206 Canal wharf, canal basin 4479 no Linear Features, Norton Canes Linear feature No date 400976 307197 4480 part Overflow Channel, Wash Brook, Conduit Pmed 398394 308167 Cheslyn Hay 4489 no Gilpin's Canal Basin and Wharf, Canal basin, canal 19 industrial 398461 308236 Hatherton Branch Canal wharf 4491 possibly Walk Mill, Churchbridge Watermill, leat 18 industrial 398060 308267 4492 to be checked Railway Bridge and Accommodation Accommodation 19 industrial 398437 308285 Bridge, Gilpins Basin bridge, railway bridge 4697 reflected Watling Street (Gailey Wharf to Norton Road Rom 397782 308539 Canes) 4717 no Mill Green Windmill Windmill No date 398940 310090 4722 possibly Mill Green North Mine Coal workings 19 industrial 399140 310360

Kingswood ERF – Volume 3 iv SLR Consulting Limited

APPENDIX 12/1

HER no Above-ground Name Mon type Date NGRE NGRN visibility 4723 possibly Mill Green South Mine Coal workings post-medieval 399170 310320 5206 yes Church of St. James, Norton Canes Church, cemetery, Med 400955 307857 church 5344 yes Ridge and Furrow, Norton Canes Ridge and furrow Med 400846 307272 5745 no Old Coal Shaft, Great Wyrley Mine L19 industrial 399068 308035 5746 no Old Coal Shaft, Belmont Close Mine, Mine L19 industrial 399066 307867 Great Wyrley 5747 no Old Coal Shafts, Great Wyrley Mine Mine L19 industrial 398914 306892 5748 no Great Wyrley Colliery Number 3 Plant, Mine L19 industrial 398502 306879 Landywood Lane, 5749 no PITSHAFT Mine 19 industrial 400036 306631 5751 no Fennel Close Mine Colliery L19 industrial 397880 307403 5752 no Old Coal Shafts, Cheslyn Hay Coal workings L19 industrial 397863 307358 5755 no Old Coal Shafts, Great Wyrley Colliery, Mine L19 industrial 398326 307052 Cheslyn Hay 5756 no Rosemary Tileries / Cannock Old Colliery, tile works, L19 industrial 397401 307887 Coppice Colliery blacksmiths workshop, magazine 5776 no Leacroft / Leacroft Old Hall / Leacroft Building, country Med 399600 309346 Hall house 5777 no Old Coal Pit, Leacroft, Cannock Chase Mine L19 industrial 399459 308994 5778 no London & North Western Railway Railway 19 industrial 401262 308931 (Norton Branch Extension) 5779 no Mine Shaft, Norton Canes Mine shaft L19 industrial 400888 308257 5790 no Cannock and Leacroft Colliery Colliery 19 industrial 399686 309513 6190 no Norton Hall (Park) Landscape park 20 rural 401141 307418 11285 no Leacroft Hill Farm, Leacroft, Cannock FarHERead 17 rural 400375 309563 11286 no Leacroft Farm, Norton Canes FarHERead, 19 industrial 400288 309357 house 11287 no Churchbridge Locks, Cannock Canal, canal lock L19 industrial 398828 308664 Extension of the Wyrley and Essington

Kingswood ERF – Volume 3 v SLR Consulting Limited

APPENDIX 12/1

HER no Above-ground Name Mon type Date NGRE NGRN visibility Canal 11288 no Brick and Tile Works at Rumer Hill Brick and 19 industrial 399117 309467 tilemaking site 11289 no Brick and Tile Works at Rumer Hill Brick and L19 industrial 398925 309353 tilemaking site 11290 no High Bridge / Leacroft Wharf, Cannock Canal wharf L19 industrial 399391 308894 Extension of the Wyrley and Essington Canal 11291 no Cannock and Leacroft Colliery Tramway Tramway tunnel L19 industrial 399425 309026 Tunnel 11292 no Cannock and Leacroft Colliery Tramway Tramway L19 industrial 399538 309185 11293 no Unnamed house House 19 rural 399436 309389 11294 no Unnamed house House 19 rural 399452 309375 11295 no Unnamed house House 19 rural 399479 309395 11296 no Unnamed house House 19 rural 399476 309421 11297 no Unnamed house House 19 rural 399453 309408 11298 no Unnamed houses House 19 rural 399087 309476 11299 no Brick and Tile Works at Rumer Hill Brick and Early Industrial 398789 309234 tilemaking site 11300 no Park Farm FarHERead 19 rural 399264 310011 11301 no Unnamed house House 19 rural 399306 309815 11302 no Mid Cannock Colliery Colliery, colliery, 19 industrial 398599 309146 colliery, colliery 11303 no Mid Cannock Colliery Tramway Tramway L19 industrial 398814 309394 11304 no Brick Yard, Rumer Hill, Cannock Brickyard 19 industrial 398895 309556 12212 no Old Coal Shaft, Chestnut Drive, Mine shaft 19 industrial 398708 307043 Cheslyn Hay 12239 no Methodist Chapel, Park Street, Methodist chapel L19 industrial 398335 308583 Bridgetown 12282 no Offices, Cannock Associated Collieries Office L19 industrial 398344 309261 Limited, 119 Walsall Road, Cannock 12283 no Outbuilding, Cannock Associated Outbuilding L19 industrial 398370 309258

Kingswood ERF – Volume 3 vi SLR Consulting Limited

APPENDIX 12/1

HER no Above-ground Name Mon type Date NGRE NGRN visibility Collieries Limited, Walsall Road 12734 no Barn, Swan Farm, Norton Canes Barn 18 agricultural 400734 307473 13072 no Pits, Mill Green North, Cannock Pit PMed 399069 310331 13208 no Edge-Tool Works, Church Bridge, Great Edge tool works E19 industrial 398558 308159 Wyrley 13486 no Field Drains, West of Walsall Road, Field drain Pmed 398493 308040 Great Wyrley 13487 no Unstratified Ceramics, West of Walsall Findspot PMed 398620 308183 Road, Great Wyrley 14129 no Mill House Farm, Cannock FarHERead 19 agricultural 398792 309919 17305 yes Bethel Church, Union Street, Bridgford Methodist chapel L19 industrial 398175 308665 17307 yes Edge Tool Works, East Street/Walsall Edge tool works, L19 industrial 398336 308688 Road, Bridgtown edge tool works 17309 no Site of Edge Tool Works, Watling Edge tool works 19 industrial 397997 308593 Street, Bridgtown 17318 no Site of Rumer Hill Colliery, Cannock Colliery 19 industrial 398810 309740 17319 no Site of Mill Pond, Cannock Mill, Mill pond 19 industrial 398857 309982 Cannock 17330 yes FarHERead on Rumer Hill Road, FarHERead 18 agricultural 398749 309397 Cannock 17331 no Site of farHERead, Rumer Hill, Cannock FarHERead, 19 industrial 398791 309459 farHERead 17332 no Site of Long House, Bridgtown FarHERead, 18 agricultural 397746 308625 farHERead 17337 no Site of Ridings Bridge, Cannock Bridge, bridge Med 398710 309887 17338 no Site of 19th century brick & tile works, Brickworks, tile 19 industrial 397506 308577 Bridgtown works 17339 possibly Site of Urban Manure Works, Bridgtown Fertilizer works 19 industrial 397787 308326 17340 yes Former buildings associated with Fertilizer works 19 industrial 397758 308335 Manure Works, Bridgtown 17350 yes Springvale Primary School, Walhouse Primary school L19 industrial 398395 309788 Street, Cannock

Kingswood ERF – Volume 3 vii SLR Consulting Limited

APPENDIX 12/1

HER no Above-ground Name Mon type Date NGRE NGRN visibility 17351 no Burial Ground, off Girton Road, Cemetery 19 industrial 398406 309763 Cannock 17352 yes Former Sunday School, Girton Road, Sunday school L19 industrial 398397 309726 Cannock 17353 no Site of Hall croft, Walsall Road, Manor house?, Med 398299 309775 Cannock messuage?, croft 17354 yes Former St Paul's Church, Church Church 19 industrial 397951 308671 Street, Bridgtown 17355 no Methodist New Connexion Chapel, Park Methodist new L19 industrial 398324 308563 Street, Bridgetown connexion chapel

Kingswood ERF – Volume 3 viii SLR Consulting Limited