M6 Junction 10 Improvement Scheme Heritage Statement

04 August 2017

Mott MacDonald 35 Newhall Street Birmingham B3 3PU United Kingdom

T +44 (0)121 234 1500 F 44 (0)121 200 3295 mottmac.com

M6 Junction 10 Improvement

370629-MMD-REP-ES-0010-01 Scheme http://pims01/pims/llisapi.dll?func=ll&objId=2119213024&objAction=browse&viewType=1 Mott MacDonald Heritage Statement

04 August 2017

Mott MacDonald Limited. Registered in and Wales no. 1243967. Registered office: Mott MacDonald House, 8-10 Sydenham Road, Croydon CR0 2EE, United Kingdom

Mott MacDonald | M6 Junction 10 Improvement Scheme Heritage Statement

Issue and Revision Record

Revision Date Originator Checker Approver Description A 04/04/17 K Luker P Riccoboni J Timothy First draft for internal comment J. Stroud B 27/04/17 K. Luker P. Riccoboni J. Timothy For client comment R. Mackay E. Lunt C 04/08/17 K. Luker P. Riccoboni J. Timothy Capturing client comments E Lunt

Document reference: 370629-MMD-REP-ES-0010-01

Information class: Standard

This document is issued for the party which commissioned it and for specific purposes connected with the above-captioned project only. It should not be relied upon by any other party or used for any other purpose.

We accept no responsibility for the consequences of this document being relied upon by any other party, or being used for any other purpose, or containing any error or omission which is due to an error or omission in data supplied to us by other parties.

This document contains confidential information and proprietary intellectual property. It should not be shown to other parties without consent from us and from the party which commissioned it.

This report has been pr epared sol el y for use by the party which commissi oned it (the ‘Client’) i n connecti on with the capti oned proj ect. It should not be used for any other purpose. N o person other than the Client or any party who has expressl y ag reed ter ms of r eliance with us (the ‘Reci pient(s)’) may rel y on the content, i nformati on or any views expressed i n the repor t. We accept no duty of care, responsi bility or liability to any other r eci pient of thi s document. T his r eport is confi denti al and c ontains pr opri etar y intell ectual property.

No representati on, warranty or under taking, expr ess or i mplied, is made and no responsi bility or liability is accepted by us to any party other than the Cli ent or any Reci pient(s), as to the accuracy or completeness of the i nformati on contai ned i n this r eport. For the avoidance of doubt this r eport does not in any way purport to i nclude any legal , insur ance or fi nanci al advice or opi nion.

We disclai m all and any liability whether arising i n tort or contract or other wise which it might otherwise have to any party other than the Cli ent or the Reci pient(s), in r espect of this report, or any infor mation attri buted to i t.

We accept no r esponsibility for any error or omission i n the r eport which is due to an error or omission i n data, infor mation or statements supplied to us by other par ties incl udi ng the client (‘D ata’). We have not i ndependentl y verified such D ata and have assumed it to be accurate, complete, reli abl e and current as of the date of such infor mation.

Forecasts presented i n this document were pr epared usi ng Data and the report is dependent or based on D ata. Inevitabl y, some of the assumptions used to develop the for ecasts will not be realised and unantici pated events and circumstances may occur. C onsequentl y M ott MacDonal d does not guarantee or warr ant the concl usi ons contained i n the repor t as there are li kel y to be differ ences between the for ecasts and the actual results and those di ffer ences may be material. Whil e we consi der that the infor mation and opini ons gi ven i n this r eport are sound all parti es must rel y on their own skill and j udgement when making use of it.

Under no circumstances may this report or any extr act or summar y ther eof be used in connection with any public or pri vate sec urities offering i ncluding any rel ated memorandum or prospectus for any securities offering or stock exchange listing or announcement.

370629-MMD-REP-ES-0010-01 | 04 August 2017 http://pims01/pims/llisapi.dll?func=ll&objId=2119213024&objAction=browse&viewType=1

Mott MacDonald | M6 Junction 10 Improvement Scheme Heritage Statement

Contents

Abbreviations 1 Executive Summary 2

1 Introduction 3 1.1 Introduction to Cultural Heritage 3 1.2 Overview of the M6 Junction 10 Improvement Scheme 3 1.3 Legislation Policy and Guidance 5

2 Approach and Methodology 9 2.1 Assessment Methodology 9 2.2 Study Area 9 2.3 Site Visit 9 2.4 Assumptions and Limitations 9

3 Baseline 10 3.1 Introduction 10 3.2 Existing conditions of the and Bentley 10 3.3 Historical Background of the Anson Branch and 10 3.4 Historic Map Regression of the Anson Branch and Bentley Canal 11

4 Heritage Significance of the Anson Branch and Bentley Canal 15

5 Impact Assessment 16

6 Conclusions 17 6.1 Summary of Assessment 17

7 References 18

Appendices 19

A. Selected photographs from the site visit of the study area 20

370629-MMD-REP-ES-0010-01 | 04 August 2017 http://pims01/pims/llisapi.dll?func=ll&objId=2119213024&objAction=browse&viewType=1

Mott MacDonald | M6 Junction 10 Improvement Scheme 1 Heritage Statement

Abbreviations

Abbreviation Definition CIfA Chartered Institute for Archaeologists DMRB Design Manual for Roads and Bridges EAR Environmental Assessment Report EIA Environmental Impact Assessment ES Environmental Statement GPA Good Practice Advice HER Historic Environment Record J10 Junction 10 NPPF National Planning Policy Framework UDP Unitary Development Plan

370629-MMD-REP-ES-0010-01 | 04 August 2017 http://pims01/pims/llisapi.dll?func=ll&objId=2119213024&objAction=browse&viewType=1

Mott MacDonald | M6 Junction 10 Improvement Scheme 2 Heritage Statement

Executive Summary

This Heritage Statement presents the heritage significance of the Anson Branch of the Canal and the Bentley Canal, and an assessment of the impact the development at the M6 Junction 10 (herby referred to as ‘the Scheme’) would have on the significance of these assets. It acts as a supporting document to the Environmental Statement.

Both are non-designated heritage assets, meaning although they have no statutory protection they been identified as having a degree of significance meriting consideration in planning decisions (National Planning Policy Framework, 2012).

An Environmental Assessment Report (EAR) has assessed the impact the Scheme would have on all known and potential cultural heritage assets within a study area comprising up to 200m from the site boundary. The EAR concluded that during construction and operation the Scheme would have neutral or neutral/slight adverse effects on all heritage assets within the study area. It was therefore recommended in the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Scoping Report that Cultural Heritage was not taken forward to EIA stage for either construction or operational phases. However, the EIA Scoping Report further recommended that it would be appropriate to produce a desk based assessment, focussing on the potential impact on the Anson Branch and Bentley Canal. This Heritage Statement fulfils this requirement.

This assessment concludes that both assets have low heritage significance and that the Scheme would have less than substantial harm on them.

370629-MMD-REP-ES-0010-01 | 04 August 2017 http://pims01/pims/llisapi.dll?func=ll&objId=2119213024&objAction=browse&viewType=1

Mott MacDonald | M6 Junction 10 Improvement Scheme 3 Heritage Statement

1 Introduction

1.1 Introduction to Cultural Heritage 1.1.1 This Heritage Statement presents the results of the assessment of impact the Scheme would have on the Anson Branch of the and the Bentley Canal. These are both non- designated heritage assets, meaning although they have no statutory protection, they have been identified as having a degree of significance meriting consideration in planning decisions (National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF, 2012). This Heritage Statement will act as a supporting document to the Environmental Statement.

1.1.2 An Environmental Assessment Report (see Appendix 2.1 in Volume II of this ES) has assessed the impact the Scheme would have on all known and potential cultural heritage assets within a study area comprising a 200m radius from the Scheme. This assessment found that it is considered that during construction and operation the Scheme would have neutral or neutral/slight adverse effects on all heritage assets within the study area. It was therefore recommended in the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Scoping Report (see Appendix 1.1 in Volume I of this ES) that Cultural Heritage was not taken forward to EIA stage for either construction or operational phases. However, the EIA Scoping Report further recommended that:

‘it is however proposed to undertake a Desk-Based Assessment focussing only on the Anson Branch Canal feature, using information from the design to understand more fully any potential impacts to this feature and if any specific mitigation measures are required to feed into the design’. 1.1.3 The Scoping Opinion Response from Walsall Council included comments from the Conservation Officer and the Canals and River Trust. The Walsall council Conservation Officer stated that the methodology employed in the EIA Scoping Report was appropriate, and as such had no further comments.

1.1.4 The Canals and Rivers Trust commented that the recommended Desk-Based Assessment focussing on the Anson Branch should also include and assessment of the Bentley Canal and the impact the Scheme would have on this asset.

1.1.5 This Heritage Statement fulfils the requirement for a Desk-Based Assessment focussing on the potential impacts the Scheme may have on the non-designated Anson Branch of the Walsall Canal and the Bentley Canal.

1.2 Overview of the M6 Junction 10 Improvement Scheme 1.2.1 M6 Junction 10 (J10) connects the A454 Black Country Route, A454 Road, B4464 Wolverhampton Road West and Bloxwich Lane with the M6 Motorway. The junction forms a primary access route between Walsall, Wolverhampton and the M6, and provides a key interchange within the . Highways England’s London to Scotland (West) Route Strategy Evidence Report (2014) identified the section of the M6 around J10 as one of the least- reliable journey-time locations, with the lowest average speeds and greatest junction capacity problems. Congestion at the signal-controlled J10 not only affects motorway traffic wishing to access and exit the M6, but causes significant disruption on the local road network. The main objectives of the Scheme are to: provide a more free-flowing network, support economic growth in the area, and provide a safe and serviceable junction with improved access.

370629-MMD-REP-ES-0010-01 | 04 August 2017 http://pims01/pims/llisapi.dll?func=ll&objId=2119213024&objAction=browse&viewType=1

Mott MacDonald | M6 Junction 10 Improvement Scheme 4 Heritage Statement

1.2.2 The Scheme is for an increase in capacity at J10 of the M6. In order to achieve this, two new overbridges will be constructed to the outside of the existing bridges, and these will be four- lanes wide each. The existing two-lane bridges will be demolished. These bridges will be of a single-span (removing the need for a central pier in the M6 motorway central reservation), constructed primarily of concrete and steel, and will be of a curved design (when compared with the current straight bridges). Some sections of road adjoining the junction will also have some lane increases (comprising new feeder lanes) as follows:

● The northbound M6 off-slip increases from four to five lanes at the approach to J10; ● The westbound Black Country Route, going west from the J10 roundabout, increases from two to three lanes as far as the junction with Marshland Way; ● Wolverhampton Road West, where the eastbound lane approaches J10, there will be an increase from two to three vehicle lanes; ● The southbound M6 off-slip increases from four lanes to five where it meets the roundabout; ● Where Wolverhampton Road meets J10 on the east side of the roundabout, there is a lane increase from three to four; and ● At the junction between Bloxwich Lane and Wolverhampton Road, the overall road width will increase on Bloxwich Lane due to the installation of an enhanced pedestrian crossing, incorporating an island in the road. 1.2.3 The Junction 10 roundabout and the junction between Wolverhampton Road and Bloxwich Lane will continue to be fully-signalised. Pedestrian crossings will be incorporated into the signal phasing in a way which would not result in additional driver delay.

1.2.4 Pedestrian facilities will be upgraded compared with current situation, so that users will no longer have to cross at a non-signalised point of the northbound M6 on-slip road from the junction. Instead, users will be directed to the centre of the roundabout, by use of signalised crossing points. This removes the need to cross motorway slip roads without traffic signals.

1.2.5 Retaining walls will be constructed in each of the four corners of the roundabout, as shown on Figure 1.2 in Volume III of this ES. The retaining walls will be as follows:

● In the north-west corner of the roundabout, in the area where Wolverhampton Road West and the northbound on-slip road to the M6 adjoin the roundabout, the retaining wall will be approximately 11m in length and up to approximately 2.4m in height; ● In the north-east corner of the roundabout, the area where the southbound off-slip from the M6 and Wolverhampton Road adjoin the roundabout, the retaining wall will be approximately 38m in length and up to approximately 6m in height, extending as far as the Bloxwich Lane junction; ● In the south-east corner of the roundabout, in the area where Wolverhampton Road and the southbound M6 on-slip adjoin the roundabout, the retaining wall will be approximately 203m in length, and up to approximately 2.1m in height; ● In the south-west corner of the roundabout, where the northbound off-slip from the M6 and the Black Country Route adjoin the roundabout, the retaining wall will be approximately 20m in length and up to approximately 4.3m in height; and ● On the west side of the junction, the southern side of the A454 Wolverhampton Way, where the westbound lane leaves the M6J10 roundabout (in the vicinity of the northern end of Bentley Mill Lane), a noise barrier will be installed, 2m above the existing walling (which will be retained). Figure 1.2 in Volume III of this ES shows the location and extent of this feature.

370629-MMD-REP-ES-0010-01 | 04 August 2017 http://pims01/pims/llisapi.dll?func=ll&objId=2119213024&objAction=browse&viewType=1

Mott MacDonald | M6 Junction 10 Improvement Scheme 5 Heritage Statement

1.2.6 A lighting design has been prepared for the Scheme, which is shown in Figure 1.2 of Volume III of this ES. This will be similar in nature to the existing layout, but with some additions of new lighting columns, whilst some existing lighting columns will be removed. Lighting will be of similar-strength to present conditions.

1.2.7 Up to nine gantries will be installed to provide signage to vehicle users, as the wider highway widths necessitate some above-road signage to ensure visibility to all drivers. These have been located to minimise the visual intrusion for residents where possible, making use of existing screening. The locations are shown on Figure 1.2 of Volume III of this ES. Gantries will be up to approximately 8.5m in height (from ground level to the top of signage).

1.2.8 Other road signage will be similar to as-present, with other being signage parallel to the roadway rather than above it. The exact locations and nature of this signage will form part of the detailed design process.

1.2.9 The construction period is proposed to be 2018 to 2020. During this time there will be vegetation clearance works, some temporary traffic management, new bridge construction, old bridge demolition, planting of a landscaping scheme and highway enlargement. Carriers Close to the west of the south-west of the Scheme will temporarily be utilised for plant and other associated vehicles to carry out works in this part of the Scheme. Up to two construction compounds will be used, as shown on Figure 1.1 in Volume III of this ES.

1.3 Legislation Policy and Guidance

Legislation 1.3.1 Legislation regarding the historic environment only relates to designated assets. As this Heritage Statement will only assess the impact the Scheme would have on non-designated heritage assets, this Heritage Statement does not require accordance with any legislation.

Policy

National planning policy 1.3.2 The NPPF came into effect in March 2012. This provides a framework for the management of the historic environment in planning decision making. Of particular relevance to the Scheme are the following policies:

1.3.3 ‘128. In determining applications, local planning authorities should require an applicant to describe the significance of any heritage assets affected, including any contribution made by their setting. The level of detail should be proportionate to the assets’ importance and no more than is sufficient to understand the potential impact of the proposal on their significance. As a minimum the relevant historic environment record (HER) should have been consulted and the heritage assets assessed using appropriate expertise where necessary. Where a site on which development is proposed includes or has the potential to include heritage assets with archaeological interest, local planning authorities should require developers to submit an appropriate desk-based assessment and, where necessary, a field evaluation’;

1.3.4 ‘135. The effect of an application on the significance of a non-designated heritage asset should be taken into account in determining the application. In weighing applications that affect directly or indirectly non designated heritage assets, a balanced judgement will be required having regard to the scale of any harm or loss and the significance of the heritage asset’.

370629-MMD-REP-ES-0010-01 | 04 August 2017 http://pims01/pims/llisapi.dll?func=ll&objId=2119213024&objAction=browse&viewType=1

Mott MacDonald | M6 Junction 10 Improvement Scheme 6 Heritage Statement

1.3.5 The Road Investment Strategy was published by the Department for Transport in 2014 and ‘outlines a long-term programme for our motorways and major roads with the stable funding needed to plan ahead’. It states that the strategy promotes work to ‘enhance the setting and condition of cultural heritage and historic features in the Company’s ownership in proximity to the Strategic Road Network’.

Local planning policy 1.3.6 The Black Country Core Strategy was adopted by Walsall Council in 2011, and ‘sets out the vision, objectives and strategy for future development in the Black Country up to 2026 and beyond’. Policy ENV2 ‘Historic Character and Local Distinctiveness’ considers the protection and promotion of the historic character and areas of local distinctiveness as a key element of transformation.

1.3.7 The Walsall Unitary Development Plan (UDP) was adopted by Walsall Council in 2005. The original UDP outlined development in Walsall up to 2011, however a number of saved policies remain in use today. Of relevance to the Scheme are the following policies:

1.3.8 ‘Policy ENV25. Archaeology: (b) Proposals for development which affect archaeological sites will normally need to be accompanied by an evaluation of the archaeological resource. An evaluation will normally comprise a desk-based assessment and fieldwork. The scope of the work will be set out in a brief prepared on behalf of the Council. It should be carried out by a suitably qualified archaeologist or professional organisation.’

1.3.9 ‘Policy ENV26. Industrial Archaeology: (c) The Council will seek to protect and improve the Borough’s canal heritage, including canalside buildings and structures or sites associated with the history of the canal. New development adjacent to canals should:

● Where applicable, retain and incorporate surviving canalside buildings, structures and features of heritage value. ● Take full account of the opportunities created by this setting, in terms of design, layout, landscape detail and boundary.’ 1.3.10 ‘Policy ENV32. Design and Development Proposals: (a) Poorly designed development or proposals which fail to properly take account of the context or surroundings will not be permitted. This policy will be applied to all development but will be particularly significant in the following locations:

● Within or adjacent to transport corridors, including canals, railways, motorways and major roads.’ 1.3.11 ‘Policy ENV40. Conservation, Protection and Use of Water Resources: (d) The environment of rivers, canals, lakes and ponds will be protected, and enhanced in a comprehensive way. Any developments affecting, or near to, these water spaces should make a positive contribution, as appropriate, to the nature conservation, landscape, heritage, fisheries, amenity or recreational value of the water space.’

Relevant guidance 1.3.12 Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Volume 11; Section 2; Part 4 (2008). This Advice Note provides guidance for the scoping of environmental impact assessment for any type of trunk road project, and provides guidance on whether an assessment should adopt a detailed or simple methodology.

370629-MMD-REP-ES-0010-01 | 04 August 2017 http://pims01/pims/llisapi.dll?func=ll&objId=2119213024&objAction=browse&viewType=1

Mott MacDonald | M6 Junction 10 Improvement Scheme 7 Heritage Statement

1.3.13 Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Volume 11; Section 3; Part 2 (2007). This Advice Note provides guidance on the assessment of the impacts that road projects may have on the cultural heritage resource.

Supplementary Planning Guidance

Planning Practice Guidance 1.3.14 The Department for Communities and Local Government published Planning Practice Guidance to accompany national planning policy. The document provides guidance on how the national planning policy found in NPPF should best be applied.

Historic England Good Practice Advice in Planning Note 2 (GPA2) – Managing significance in decision taking in the historic environment, 2015 1.3.15 This good practice advice provides guidance relating to the significance of heritage assets subject to development1. Paragraph six of the guidance outlines the steps which should be taken to establish potential impact of the proposed development on the significance of the heritage assets and where appropriate justify any harmful impacts and identify mitigation and enhancements. These steps are:

● Understand the significance of the affected assets; ● Understand the impact of the proposal on that significance; ● Avoid, minimise, and mitigate impact in a way that meets the objectives of the NPPF; ● Look for opportunities to better reveal or enhance significance; ● Justify any harmful impacts in terms of the sustainable development objective of conserving significance and the need for change; and ● Offset negative impacts on aspects of significance by enhancing others through recording, disseminating and archiving archaeological and historical interest of the important elements of the heritage assets affected. 1.3.16 Section 4 assess the heritage significance of the Anson Branch of the Walsall Canal and the Bentley Canal.

1.3.17 Section 5 of this Heritage Statement assesses the impact the proposed development will have on the heritage significance of the identified assets.

Historic England Good Practice Advice in Planning Note 3 (GPA3) – the Setting of Heritage Assets, 2015 1.3.18 The good practice advice provides guidance on how the change within the settings of heritage assets should be managed2. It provides a staged approach to proportionate decision making regarding the contribution setting makes to the significance of a heritage asset, and how impact on a setting can impact the significance of the heritage asset.

1.3.19 Section 4 of this Heritage Statement identifies the heritage assets within and surrounding the Application Site and the contribution their settings make to their significance.

1 Historic environment Good Practice Advice in Planning Note 2 (GPA2) – Managing significance in taking in the historic environment, https://historicengland.org.uk/images-books/publications/gpa2-managing-significance-in-decision-taking/, 2015. Historic England 2 Historic England Good Practice Advice in Planning Note 3 (GPA3) – The Setting of Heritage Assets, https://historicengland.org.uk/images-books/publications/gpa3-setting-of-heritage-assets/, 2015. Historic England

370629-MMD-REP-ES-0010-01 | 04 August 2017 http://pims01/pims/llisapi.dll?func=ll&objId=2119213024&objAction=browse&viewType=1

Mott MacDonald | M6 Junction 10 Improvement Scheme 8 Heritage Statement

1.3.20 Section 5 of the Heritage Statement assesses the impact the proposed development will have on the settings of the identified assets including the surrounding designated and non-designated heritage assets.

Historic England Conservation Principles, Policies and Guidance for the Sustainable Management of the Historic Environment, 2008 1.3.21 This document outlines guidance and advice on making logical decisions regarding all aspects of the historic environment3. This Heritage Statement has been produced in accordance with the guidance set out of the subjects of conservation principles, understanding heritage values, assessing heritage significance and making change to significant places.

CIfA Standard and Guidance for Historic Environment Desk-Based Assessment, 2014 1.3.22 This Heritage Statement has been produced in accordance with the guidance outlined in this document published by The Chartered Institute for Archaeologists (CIfA). This document defines good practice for the production of historic environment desk-based assessment, in accordance with the CIfA Code of Conduct4.

3 Conservation Principles, Policies and Guidance, 2008. Historic England (then English Heritage) 4 Standard and Guidance for Historic Environment Desk-Based Assessment, 2014. Chartered Institute for Archaeologists

370629-MMD-REP-ES-0010-01 | 04 August 2017 http://pims01/pims/llisapi.dll?func=ll&objId=2119213024&objAction=browse&viewType=1

Mott MacDonald | M6 Junction 10 Improvement Scheme 9 Heritage Statement

2 Approach and Methodology

2.1 Assessment Methodology 2.1.1 This methodology is compliant with the standards outlined by the NPPF (Paragraph 128), Historic England (Good Practice Advice in Planning Note 2 [GPA2] – Managing significance in decision taking in the historic environment) and the Chartered Institute for Archaeologists (CIfA; Standard and Guidance for Historic Environment Desk-Based Assessment). A summary of the works undertaken to create this Heritage Statement are as follows:

● A search of the City of Wolverhampton Archaeology and HER database for information on the Anson Branch and Bentley Canal; ● A historic map regression exercise; ● An assessment of relevant published and unpublished archaeological sources; ● An examination of local, regional, and national planning policies and guidance in relation to the historic environment; and ● A site visit of the study area on 20th March 2017.

2.2 Study Area 2.2.1 The study area has been defined as a distance of 200m from the Scheme area. The parts of the Anson Branch of the Walsall Canal and the Bentley Canal which fall within this study area are assessed within this Heritage Statement. The extent of the study area is commensurate with the guidelines provided in DMRB (Volume 11; Section 3: Part 2).

2.2.2 Figure 2.1 in Volume II of this ES shows the location of the Scheme elements, and the 200m distance from the red line boundary used for this Heritage Statement.

2.3 Site Visit 2.3.1 A site visit of the study area was undertaken on 20 March 2017. The accessible parts of the Anson Branch and Bentley Canal which fall within the study area were observed.

2.4 Assumptions and Limitations 2.4.1 Information provided by the HER can be limited because it depends on available opportunities for research, fieldwork and discovery. Where nothing of historic interest is shown in a particular area, this can be down to a lack of research or investigation rather than no assets being present.

370629-MMD-REP-ES-0010-01 | 04 August 2017 http://pims01/pims/llisapi.dll?func=ll&objId=2119213024&objAction=browse&viewType=1

Mott MacDonald | M6 Junction 10 Improvement Scheme 10 Heritage Statement

3 Baseline

3.1 Introduction 3.1.1 The following sections set out the baseline conditions, the historical background and a historic map regression of the parts of the Anson Branch and Bentley Canal which fall within the study area.

3.2 Existing conditions of the Anson Branch and Bentley Canal 3.2.1 Both the Anson Branch and Bentley Canal are non-designated heritage assets.

3.2.2 The Anson Branch of the Walsall Canal is part of the Birmingham Canal Navigations. The Walsall Canal is situated in Walsall, West Midlands, and runs for 11km from Ryders Green Junction to Walsall Town Wharf.

3.2.3 The junction connecting the Walsall Canal with the Anson Branch is situated to the south of the study area, approximately 1km south of the M6 Junction 10. From the junction, the Anson Branch extends approximately 2km north-east, intersected by the M6 Junction 10 roundabout. Approximately 1.2km of the Anson Branch falls within the study area.

3.2.4 The Anson Branch is currently disused. Shallow stretches of water remain in some parts of the branch, but these stretches of water are interspersed by expanses of water reeds and abandoned refuse. Parts also serve as a watercourse for surface water. The majority of the branch has been left dry and has been overgrown by dense vegetation. Other parts, such as adjacent to the Showcase Cinema car park, have been infilled with rocks. A public footpath used to run adjacent to the branch, but today no part of the footpath is accessible and as not visible, may not survive.

3.2.5 The Bentley Canal was once situated to the west of the Anson Branch, connected to it by a right-angled junction. It extended westwards for 5.5km, and approximately 650m of the old Bentley Canal is situated within the western extent of the study area. The Bentley Canal is also disused, having been closed in 1960s and filled in along the entire route except for a very short section in Wolverhampton. The part of the Bentley Canal which falls within the study area has been infilled and used as allotments or incorporated into open green spaces amongst residential streets and industrial estates.

3.3 Historical Background of the Anson Branch and Bentley Canal 3.3.1 Both the Anson Branch and Bentley Canal were authorised by the Birmingham Canal Act of 1768. The Birmingham Canal Navigations is a network of canals which, at its working peak in the 19th century expanded for approximately 160 miles across Birmingham, Wolverhampton and the eastern part of the Black Country. The network expanded under different acts passed from 1768 to 1818, until alternative methods of transport, namely railway then highways, made large sections of canal networks redundant.

3.3.2 The construction of these canals better linked the various industrial establishments, such as collieries, quarries and brick works, that dominated the landscape in the mid-19th century near Walsall. They formed part of a wider network of canals featuring the , and others in the West Midlands. During this period, a complex canal network was crucial for the transportation of heavy goods across the country.

370629-MMD-REP-ES-0010-01 | 04 August 2017 http://pims01/pims/llisapi.dll?func=ll&objId=2119213024&objAction=browse&viewType=1

Mott MacDonald | M6 Junction 10 Improvement Scheme 11 Heritage Statement

3.3.3 The Anson Branch was authorised by the Birmingham Canal Act in 1768 but not completed until 1830. The Bentley Canal, also authorised by the Birmingham Canal Act, was built in 1834. Both canals were built to connect to the Walsall Canal. This was achieved by the Bentley Canal being connected to the Anson Branch to the west, and the Anson Branch being connected to the Walsall Canal to the south.

3.3.4 The Anson Branch was built specifically to connect the Bradford Colliery and other Bentley mines and quarries with the Walsall Canal. The branch had no locks, but had to cross the River Tame (located just north of the junction with the Walsall Canal – south of the study area) which required an aqueduct and embankment.

3.3.5 A towing path bordered the southern edge of the Anson Branch, and historic mapping (see Table 3.1) suggests very sparse trees lined it. The immediate surroundings of the Anson branch appear as open fields on historic mapping, until vast development infilled these fields with buildings in the late 20th century.

3.3.6 The Anson Branch was connected to the Bentley Canal at a right-angled junction. The Bentley Canal was much longer than the Anson Branch, extending 5.5km westwards through ten locks. The section included in the study area was surrounded by the Hopyard Colliery to the south and open fields to the north. Like the Anson Branch, a towing path bordered the southern edge of the Bentley Canal.

3.3.7 Both the Anson Branch and Bentley Canal were abandoned in the 1960s. The development of railway and highways meant goods could be transported in less time, and therefore more cheaply. The Anson Branch and Bentley Canal are just small parts of the wider canal network which became obsolete for the transportation of goods in the late 19th to early 20th centuries.

3.3.8 Neither the Anson Branch or Bentley Canal are navigable; parts of the Anson Branch and all of the Bentley Canal have been infilled and developed upon. Large parts would have been truncated by the A454 and M6 Junction 10, however in some stretches parts of the historic fabric such as retaining walls and mooring posts main remain under the infill.

3.3.9 No part of the tow paths which used to run adjacent to either the Anson Branch or Bentley Canal are accessible, but parts of these may remain under infill. Nonetheless the tow paths cannot be used.

3.3.10 Development surrounding both the Anson Branch and Bentley Canal comprises the M6 Junction 10, residential and industrial estates. From the 1950s onwards, Walsall to the east and Wolverhampton to the west expanded, meaning new industrial and residential estates were built surrounding the study area. The expansion of these areas, as well as in Birmingham to the south, demanded the development of the existing road network which was predominantly achieved with the introduction of the M6 in the 1960s. Industrial and residential estates expand up to the boundaries of the Anson Branch and Bentley Canal and in parts have intersected the assets. This has resulted in heavy traffic, especially at the M6 Junction 10, surrounding them. This has had a major impact on the settings of both the Anson Branch and Bentley Canal. As such, the settings of both the Anson Branch and Bentley Canal do not contribute to the significance of the assets.

3.4 Historic Map Regression of the Anson Branch and Bentley Canal 3.4.1 The following historic map regression in Table 3.1 details the development of the Anson Branch and Bentley Canal and the surrounding study area between 1885 and 1960.

370629-MMD-REP-ES-0010-01 | 04 August 2017 http://pims01/pims/llisapi.dll?func=ll&objId=2119213024&objAction=browse&viewType=1

Mott MacDonald | M6 Junction 10 Improvement Scheme 12 Heritage Statement

Table 3.1: Historic Map Regression Date Name Description 1885 Staffordshire This map shows the northern part LXIII.NW of the study area. It details the limestone quarry situated to the west of the Anson Branch. The quarry was owned by the Earl of Lichfield, and providing a connection from the quarry to the Walsall Canal was one of the reasons the Anson Branch was commissioned. The immediate surroundings of the northern part of the Anson Canal are shown here as primarily open fields. No trees are shown bordering the canal.

1886 OS First Ed. This map shows the southern part Staffordshire of the study area. It details the LXIII.SW Anson Branch extending from the Walsall Canal, and the Bentley Canal extending from the Anson Branch. By the date this map was published, the Anson Branch had been operational for over 50 years. Past the junction with the Bentley Canal, Bentley Mill Bridge is shown. None of the historic fabric of this bridge survives today, but a modern bridge stands in its place. The original bridge carried Bentley Mill Lane across the Anson Branch, connecting Bentley Flour Mill (south-east of the Anson branch) with Bentley House (west of the Anson Branch). Further north along the Anson Branch is Bradford Colliery. This map details a number of ‘Shafts’ and ‘Old Shafts’, situated alongside Halfway House and another bridge crossing the Anson Branch which does not remain today. The map indicates sparse trees bordered the western part of the canal, and a ‘Towing Path’ bordered the southern side of Bentley Canal. This map indicates that in 1886, the immediate surroundings of both canals comprised primarily open fields, sporadically interspersed with industrial establishments.

370629-MMD-REP-ES-0010-01 | 04 August 2017 http://pims01/pims/llisapi.dll?func=ll&objId=2119213024&objAction=browse&viewType=1

Mott MacDonald | M6 Junction 10 Improvement Scheme 13 Heritage Statement

Date Name Description 1903 Staffordshire This map shows the northern part LXIII.NW of the study area. This map indicates little development had taken place surrounding the Anson Branch between 1885-1903. This map details a towing path south of the Anson Canal and additional shafts to the west.

1904 Staffordshire This map shows the southern part LXIII.SW of the study area. It shows that by 1904, the hopyard Brick Works had been established south of the Anson Branch/Bentley Canal junction. The remainder of the study area remains unaltered, with the canal’s surroundings remaining primarily as open fields.

1945 Staffordshire This map shows the northern part LXIII.NW of the study area. This map shows that no considerable development to or surrounding the Anson Branch took place between 1903-1945.

370629-MMD-REP-ES-0010-01 | 04 August 2017 http://pims01/pims/llisapi.dll?func=ll&objId=2119213024&objAction=browse&viewType=1

Mott MacDonald | M6 Junction 10 Improvement Scheme 14 Heritage Statement

Date Name Description 1946 Staffordshire This map shows the southern part LXIII.SW of the study area. This map shows that no considerable development to or surrounding the Anson Branch or Bentley Canal took place between 1904-1946.

1960 O.S Sheet This map shows the whole of the 130 study area. It demonstrates the Kidderminster A454 road which remains today and makes up part of the current M6 Junction 10. This map demonstrates the development of the road network surrounding the Anson Branch and Bentley Canal and how this in turn encouraged building development. New industrial and residential estates are shown on this map, extending up to the borders of both assets. The A454 is shown to cross the Anson Branch, as it does today. This map demonstrates the expanse of development and the impact this had on the settings of both the Anson Branch and Bentley Canal from the mid-1940s to 1960.

370629-MMD-REP-ES-0010-01 | 04 August 2017 http://pims01/pims/llisapi.dll?func=ll&objId=2119213024&objAction=browse&viewType=1

Mott MacDonald | M6 Junction 10 Improvement Scheme 15 Heritage Statement

4 Heritage Significance of the Anson Branch and Bentley Canal

4.1.1 Both the Anson Branch and Bentley Canal are undesignated heritage assets. Although once of importance to the local area and wider canal network, today they are no longer navigable and large parts have been buried beneath the M6. It is possible that the historic fabric, such as parts of the tow paths and canal walls, may remain under the infill. However any historic fabric would have been compromised and is likely to be in a state of poor preservation.

4.1.2 If present, any remaining historic fabric would assign evidential5 value to the canals. Combined with their historic value through the connection with the wider Birmingham Canal Network, this may conclude a medium heritage significance being assigned to both assets. However this is offset by the expansive development, comprising of the M6, and industrial and residential estates surrounding both. This has resulted in the historic and evidential value being compromised by poor preservation and non-sympathetic development. As a result the Anson Branch and Bentley Canal have been assigned low heritage significance, and it is considered that their settings do not contribute to their significance.

5 the potential to yield evidence about past human activity.

370629-MMD-REP-ES-0010-01 | 04 August 2017 http://pims01/pims/llisapi.dll?func=ll&objId=2119213024&objAction=browse&viewType=1

Mott MacDonald | M6 Junction 10 Improvement Scheme 16 Heritage Statement

5 Impact Assessment

5.1.1 Below is an assessment of potential impacts which are anticipated to occur due to the implementation of the Scheme.

5.1.2 The construction of the Scheme has the potential to cause disturbance to the historic fabric of the Anson Branch and Bentley Canal, through activities such as the excavation required to construct the proposed new bridges or in widening the roads in the Scheme area. All of the Bentley Canal has been infilled – parts of the historic fabric of the canal, such as retaining walls, mooring posts or towing paths, may remain under the infill. However, any historic fabric relating to the part of the Bentley Canal which crosses the A454 would have been truncated, and is likely to have been removed entirely.

5.1.3 As such, road widening by 1-2m in this area is very unlikely to impact on any of the surviving historic fabric of the Bentley Canal. Likewise the part of the Anson Branch which falls under the current M6 Junction 10 would have been truncated by this development. Road widening in this area is unlikely to have any impact on surviving historic fabric relating to the Anson Branch, as it would almost certainly have been previously removed. Should any surviving pockets of canal structure remain, it is likely this would have been damaged and separated from its surrounding context resulting in any remains having a limited value. The temporary use of Carriers Close for plant vehicles, situated parallel to the south-western part of the Anson Branch, by plant and construction vehicles will have a negligible impact on this asset, as this road is currently used as an access road to the boundary Mills shopping centre. The proposal for the two new bridges will not fall within the footprint of either the Anson Branch or Bentley Canal and therefore will have no impact on any surviving historic fabric of these assets.

5.1.4 As the settings of both the Anson Branch and Bentley Canal do not contribute to their significance, any vegetation clearance surrounding the assets will have no impacts.

5.1.5 The operational impacts of the newly developed M6 Junction 10 would derive from the road widening by 1-2m, and therefore traffic falling 1-2m closer to the north-eastern section of the Anson Branch. The traffic would still fall approximately 10m from the Anson Branch, having a negligible impact on this asset.

370629-MMD-REP-ES-0010-01 | 04 August 2017 http://pims01/pims/llisapi.dll?func=ll&objId=2119213024&objAction=browse&viewType=1

Mott MacDonald | M6 Junction 10 Improvement Scheme 17 Heritage Statement

6 Conclusions

6.1 Summary of Assessment 6.1.1 This Heritage Statement has assessed the impacts the proposed development at M6 Junction 10 would have on the non-designated assets of Anson Branch and Bentley Canal. In accordance with NPPF, the conclusions are that the Scheme would have less than substantial harm on the non-designated heritage assets. This is primarily due to the adverse effects of the previous developments in the area, comprising the existing M6 Junction 10 and other residential and industrial estates. These developments are likely to have truncated much of the historic fabric of the assets, and have altered the settings so that they do not contribute to their significance. In summation, this assessment concludes that there are no significant impacts to heritage assets as a result of the Scheme, and therefore mitigation is not considered necessary.

370629-MMD-REP-ES-0010-01 | 04 August 2017 http://pims01/pims/llisapi.dll?func=ll&objId=2119213024&objAction=browse&viewType=1

Mott MacDonald | M6 Junction 10 Improvement Scheme 18 Heritage Statement

7 References

● Birmingham Canal Navigations Society. http://bcnsociety.com/ ● Britain From Above: The Wolverhampton Metal Works and Bentley Canal. http://www.britainfromabove.org.uk/image/eaw041048 ● Canal & Rivers Trust: Walsall Canal. https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/enjoy-the- waterways/canal-and-river-network/walsall-canal ● Design Manual for Roads and Bridges, Volume 11; Section 3; Part 2. 2007. ● Historic England Good Practice Advice in Planning Note 2 (GPA2) – Managing Significance in Decision Taking in the Historic Environment, 2015. ● Historic England Good Practice Advice in Planning Note 3 (GPA3) – the Setting of Heritage Assets, 2015. ● National Library of Scotland: Historic Mapping. http://maps.nls.uk/ ● Walsall Council Historic Environment Record Data Service.

370629-MMD-REP-ES-0010-01 | 04 August 2017 http://pims01/pims/llisapi.dll?func=ll&objId=2119213024&objAction=browse&viewType=1

Mott MacDonald | M6 Junction 10 Improvement Scheme 19 Heritage Statement

Appendices

A. Selected photographs from the site visit of the study area 20

370629-MMD-REP-ES-0010-01 | 04 August 2017 http://pims01/pims/llisapi.dll?func=ll&objId=2119213024&objAction=browse&viewType=1

Mott MacDonald | M6 Junction 10 Improvement Scheme 20 Heritage Statement

A. Selected photographs from the site visit of the study area

Figure 1: Looking south-west. The infilled Anson Branch in the car park of the showcase Cinema, to the south-west of M6 Junction 10.

Source: MM 2017.

370629-MMD-REP-ES-0010-01 | 04 August 2017 http://pims01/pims/llisapi.dll?func=ll&objId=2119213024&objAction=browse&viewType=1

Mott MacDonald | M6 Junction 10 Improvement Scheme 21 Heritage Statement

Figure 2: Looking south-west. The Anson Branch to the immediate north-east of the M6 Junction 10.

Source: MM 2017.

370629-MMD-REP-ES-0010-01 | 04 August 2017 http://pims01/pims/llisapi.dll?func=ll&objId=2119213024&objAction=browse&viewType=1

Mott MacDonald | M6 Junction 10 Improvement Scheme 22 Heritage Statement

Figure 3: Looking north-east. The Anson Branch under Bentley Mill Way, to the south- west of the M6 Junction 10.

Source: MM 2017.

370629-MMD-REP-ES-0010-01 | 04 August 2017 http://pims01/pims/llisapi.dll?func=ll&objId=2119213024&objAction=browse&viewType=1

Mott MacDonald | M6 Junction 10 Improvement Scheme 23 Heritage Statement

Figure 4: Looking north-west. The site of the Bentley Canal, now filled in and used as allotments.

Source: MM 2017.

370629-MMD-REP-ES-0010-01 | 04 August 2017 http://pims01/pims/llisapi.dll?func=ll&objId=2119213024&objAction=browse&viewType=1

Mott MacDonald | M6 Junction 10 Improvement Scheme 24 Heritage Statement

Figure 5: Looking north-west, the Anson Branch to the south-west of the M6 Junction 10, overtaken with dense vegetation and reeds.

Source: MM 2017.

370629-MMD-REP-ES-0010-01 | 04 August 2017 http://pims01/pims/llisapi.dll?func=ll&objId=2119213024&objAction=browse&viewType=1

Mott MacDonald | M6 Junction 10 Improvement Scheme 25 Heritage Statement

370629 -MMD-REP-ES-0010-01 | 04 August 2017 http://pims01/pims/llisapi.dll?func=ll&objId=2119213024&objAction=browse&viewType=1 mottmac.com