“The Canal & River Trust (“The Trust”) has previously provided comments to the Applicant on the route options for the pipeline and now wishes to register and comment as an Interested party for the Examination relating to the above Application. The Trust is a statutory undertaker for the purposes of s.127 Planning Act 2008 (“the 2008 Act”) and a statutory party for the purposes of s.88(3)(c) of the 2008 Act. The Trust has operational land, infrastructure and other interests affected by the works and powers proposed. The Trust has a duty under the Trust Agreement with the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (28 June 2012) to operate and manage the waterways and towpaths for public use and enjoyment. Additionally, the Trust has a duty under s.105 Transport Act 1968 to maintain commercial and cruising waterways in a suitable condition for use by the public. Background The Trust is the charity which looks after and brings to life 2000 miles of canals & rivers. Our waterways contribute to the health and wellbeing of local communities and economies, creating attractive and connected places to live, work, volunteer and spend leisure time. These historic, natural and cultural assets form part of the strategic and local green-blue infrastructure network, linking urban and rural communities as well as habitats. By caring for our waterways and promoting their use we believe we can improve the wellbeing of our nation. The Trust is a prescribed consultee in the Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects (NSIP) process pursuant to Schedule 1 of the Infrastructure Planning (Application: Prescribed Forms & Procedure Regulations 2009). The Trust owns and manages the Shropshire Union Canal, which is within the designated Chester Canal Conservation Area and is a County Wildlife site. The proposed route of the pipeline would have one interface/crossing (underground) with the Trust owned waterway, just north of the Trust owned Bridge 134 (Caughall). A section of the proposed pipeline would also run parallel to the canal corridor here. This is a rural stretch of canal with a mixture of open fields, mature hedgerows and pockets of woodland. The canal corridor is well used for leisure and recreation and the towpath here also carries National Cycle Route 5 (NCR5). The representations made here are without prejudice to any further/amended representations which the Trust may make following a comprehensive review of the Application as part of the Examination Process. Currently the Trust intends to make submissions in relation to the following: • Compulsory Acquisition of Trust Land • The draft Development Consent Order (DCO) • Protective Provisions for the Trust • The Trust’s Third Party Works Code of Practice • Surface water drainage to the canal • Environmental Mitigation and the Outline Landscape Environmental Management Plan • The Construction Environment Management Plan • The Construction Traffic Management Plan • Landscape and Visual Impact Compulsory Acquisition of Trust Land We refer to the Applicant’s Book of Reference and note that the Trust is listed as owner of 2 plots of land which would either be subject to permanent or temporary acquisition. The Order seeks to permanently acquire the subsurface of the canal, bank, verge, towpath and NCR5 lying to the east of Caughall Road (plot 8-03) in relation to Work No.18. This is held under our title CH569303. The Order also seeks temporary possession of land, woodland and track lying to the east of Liverpool Road (plot 9-06) in relation to Work No.23A (this should be Work No.23B as the Order as drafted contains two Work No.23A’s). This is held under our title CH503654. Land Plan Sheet 8 of 37 (Document Reference D2.2) also shows the red line between plots 8-02 and 8-06 including the Shropshire Union canal. These parcels of land are required temporarily in relation to Work No 18A and include a section of canal. It is understood that in terms of the red line including the canal corridor that this is a drafting error. It is understood that the Applicant will be correcting this during the course of the Examination process. The Trust hereby formally objects to the Compulsory Acquisition of Trust Land. This is on the basis that there is not a compelling case in the public interest for compulsory purchase powers to be acquired in the manner sought by the Applicant. Such powers are intended to be used as a matter of last resort and the Applicant has failed to use reasonable efforts to voluntarily acquire the land and rights they require from the Trust. Based on the submitted Land Plans we also question the justification for the extent of our land they seek to acquire for a single pipeline crossing of the canal. We consider acquiring a right over a narrow section of subsoil at least 3.5m below the bed level of the canal would be sufficient for the pipeline. The Trust is a statutory undertaker which has specific duties to protect the waterways. Accordingly, we have a duty to resist the use of compulsory purchase powers which may negatively affect our land or undertakings. Alternatively, should any compulsory acquisition powers over the Trust’s land be retained in the Order, such acquisition should only be with the consent of the Trust. As set out below, the Trust are further prejudiced in relation to this matter as the draft Order does not contain any protective provisions for the Trust to safeguard and protect our undertakings. The Trust is willing to engage with the Applicant to enter into an agreement in respect of the rights which the Applicant requires to deliver the works. As the Trust owned land related to the waterway is registered as Infrastructure Trust Property (plot 8-03) then the separate consent of DEFRA would also be required. We would advise that the timeframe for obtaining such DEFRA consent can take between 3-6 months. The draft Development Consent Order (DCO) There are a number of provisions within the draft DCO which will impact on the Trust and interests it seeks to protect and promote as owner and operator of the Shropshire Union Canal and associated infrastructure. The draft DCO was not shared with the Trust as part of a pre-application consultation. The Trust are in the process of reviewing this document with the aim of providing initial comments to the Applicant. On first review we would have concerns with Article 6 (limits of deviation); Article 19 (discharge of water); Article 21 (survey and investigate land); Part 5 powers of acquisition and Article 24 (compulsory acquisition of land); Article 31 (acquisition of subsoil); Article 34 (temporary use of land); Article 36 (statutory undertakers) and Article 39 (removal of hedgerows) – this list is not exhaustive. The Trust do require further opportunity to consider the detail of these provisions in light of the documents now submitted by the Applicant, before any further representations are made on these matters. Protective Provisions for the Trust The draft DCO as submitted does not contain any specific protective provisions for the Trust as a statutory undertaker. The Trust notes that other statutory undertakers have been afforded protective provisions within the Order under Schedule 10. Following the acceptance of this application for Examination, the Applicant has indicated in writing separately to the Trust that they have no objection in principle to including protective provision for the Trust within the Order and that the omission was only because they had not had the opportunity to discuss these with the Trust. To aid the Examination we have provided the Applicant with a set of protective provisions which would resolve and satisfy our principal concerns. The protective provisions have been adapted from the Keadby 3 (Carbon Capture Equipped Gas Fired Generating Station) Order 2022 (made 7 December 2022), being the most recent NSIP to be examined and which contains provisions relevant to the Trust land and assets. A copy of these are appended to this letter. The Trust reserves the ability to add to and amend the draft protective provisions as part of the examination process as may be required following a full review of the Application. The Trust’s Third Party Works Code of Practice The Applicant has agreed with the Trust that any works that interface with our waterways would be carried out in accordance with the Canal & River Trust Third Party Works Code of Practice (CoP) and indeed application forms have already been provided to the Trust in relation to Work No.18. As with previous DCOs authorising works affecting the Trust’s land or assets, the Trust requires an express obligation obliging the Applicant to have regard to the CoP in the detailed design, construction and approval of the relevant works. The protective provisions enclosed with this representation contain appropriate wording. The Trust’s CoP is designed to safeguard our assets and to deal with the nuances of developing adjacent to a 200-year-old waterway heritage asset which is not built to modern engineering standards. These features have an inherent fragility and the extent to which development adjacent to or under them may affect their stability can reach far beyond any narrow waterway corridor. Ensuring that development is appropriately located and controlled on land adjacent to our network is crucial to limit the potential for failure of our infrastructure and the associated economic, environmental and social consequences of this. Through the CoP, developers engage with the Trusts engineers. The Trust’s engineers are specialists in canal engineering and the protection and safeguarding of our specialist waterway assets. It is essential that the proposals incorporate appropriate measures to protect the structural integrity of our waterways and their users both during and after construction for all temporary and permanent works affecting our waterways. Engaging with the Trust’s engineers ensures the appropriate measures are taken. In terms of Work 18, relating to the pipeline crossing of the canal, we welcome that this would be undertaken via trenchless techniques. Submission document 6.2.3 (ES Chapter 3, Description of DCO proposed development), paragraph 3.6.61: sets out that trenchless techniques include “Horizontal Directional Drilling (HDD), Auger Boring Guided (GAB) and Unguided (UAB)) and Micro-Tunnelling are three types of trenchless installation techniques that are most likely to be utilised by the Construction Contractor(s) once the Detailed Design has been completed”. From prior discussion with the Applicant it is understood that the underground canal crossing would be installed using horizontal directional drilling with the launch pit and reception pit set well away from the canal corridor. We look forward to reviewing the technical drawings in accordance with the mechanisms to be contained in the protective provisions in relation to these works in due course and in terms of the launch and reception areas for the canal crossing, ensuring appropriate measures are put in place to protect and safeguard our assets. Surface water drainage to the canal The Trust would not accept any silt laden or potentially contaminated surface water from dewatering of excavations from the construction works or discharge from wheel washing etc. The Trust would however consider the acceptance of clean surface water from above ground installations to the Trust owned canal. The Trust is not a land drainage authority and such discharges are not granted as of right but would be the subject of the separate agreement with the Trust. Any flows would need to be attenuated and result in no net increase in flows. We would also need to be satisfied that there would be no net increase in flows as a result of the works to any watercourses which are culverted underneath the canal. The submission documents show that the drainage for the Rock Bank Block Valve Station (BVS) (Work No.20) would appear to connect to a ‘canal ditch’ which would appear to have an outfall to the canal next to bridge 134. Clarification has been sought from the Applicant in relation to this drainage. The route and direction of the ditch flow are unknown, but it appears that the ditch discharges to the canal. If this is the case then the surface water discharge would need to be reviewed and a discharge licence will be needed. Environmental Mitigation and the Outline Landscape Environmental Management Plan Work No.57G relates to the creation of environmental mitigation north of the Shropshire Union canal and would include woodland planting. It is essential that any tree planting here is offset from the canal by a minimum of 5m to ensure that the roots of the trees do not interfere with the clay lining of the canal and cause leakage or undermine the stability of the canal. Tree root barriers or similar may be required to be installed. We would also wish to be consulted on the native species mix to be provided here. In terms of the Outline Landscape Environmental Management Plan (LEMP) the Trust would wish to be consulted further on the specific and detailed landscaping to be provided in the vicinity of the canal corridor to ensure that such planting is appropriate to the setting of the canal conservation area and would not impact the structural integrity of the canal. In terms of Biodiversity Net Gain it is not entirely clear whether there will be any waterway credits to be spent. In principle if there are we would welcome further discussions with the Applicant in terms of any enhancement to the canal corridor here. The Arboricultural Impact Assessment shows that a number of trees within the vicinity of the canal corridor may be removed to facilitate the works. Any tree removal within 5m of the canal corridor would need to be carried out under supervision of the Trust to ensure that the waterway infrastructure would be safeguarded. The tree roots should be retained in situ and treated to prevent regrowth as opposed to being grubbed out/removed. The Construction Environment Management Plan A high level generic Construction Environment Management Plan (CEMP) has been submitted with the application documentation. We welcome that the document states that the contractor will engage with the Trust to minimise impacts to the canal. However, it will be important that the Trust is fully engaged on these measures and given sufficient time for review of the CEMP and subsequent detailed CEMP’s. All CEMPs relating to works with the potential to affect the canal will need to be robust and comprehensive and include specific canal protection measures. They will need to include aspects of how materials, fuels, chemicals and wastes will be stored and where; measures for the prevention of dust generation and windblown litter and debris; measures to prevent run off into the canal and culverts (e.g. of silty water, contaminated water, fuels and chemicals); pollution response emergency procedures (including training of individuals, reporting as well as the physical mitigation and incident clean up); measures to be taken to ensure noise and vibration from drilling would not affect canal/towpath users; details of any planned water abstractions and /or discharges from or which may impact upon the canal and details of any oil interceptors and the steps to be taken if any unknown contamination is encountered during the works. We note that the Outline Soil Management CEMP sets out that stockpiles will be set away from ditches and watercourses by a minimum of 10m. We welcome that stockpiles will be a minimum of 10m away from watercourses but it will also be important that dust suppression is deployed and stockpiles are sheeted to prevent generation of dust and silty water affecting watercourses and the canal corridor. The route of the pipeline crosses a number of watercourses which appear to be culverted under the canal, this includes Backford Brook, which is managed by the Environment Agency, by development associated with Work No.23. During the works such watercourses could be at risk of siltation during any land clearance and construction works associated with the pipeline. The culverts flow north to south to discharge on the towpath side and as such any silt from the works on the offside could block the culverts, which would be of concern to the Trust and measures will need to be taken to prevent this and protect these watercourses. The Construction Traffic Management Plan The details set out that access to the Chorlton Lane Compound via the canal crossing Pretty Bridge (Bridge 134 Caughall) over the canal has been discounted due to the bridge having a 3.5T weight limit. We welcome that Figure 17-4 Construction Traffic Route Sheet 2 of 8 shows that both construction routes CC CTR2 and CC CTR3 would be directed to avoid crossing the canal in this location to access the construction compounds. Landscape and Visual Impact The Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment appears to provide an appropriate consideration of the canal corridor and waterway users. There would be some temporary localised impacts associated with the construction works but given that the crossing of the canal would be underground and carried out via a horizontal directional drilling technique then the impact on the immediate environs of the waterway and towpath hedgeline should be limited. The mitigation planting and landscaping to be undertaken should also reduce the long-term visual impacts associated with the works. In terms of the permanent works the Rock Bank BVS would be the closest permanent above ground installation to the canal corridor, but this would be far enough away from the canal corridor to not have an adverse visual impact and would be screened by existing vegetation and land topography. The above comments are given without prejudice to other matters/comments that may be raised by the Trust at a later stage following a full review of the application documents. Please do not hesitate to contact me with any queries you may have.”

---

Atodiad 1