ronez quarry, st johns - iema quarry... · planning application in respect to land adjoining ronez...

Ronez Quarry, St Johns

Proposed Western Extension to the Quarry and

Reconfiguration of Moto-Cross Track

Volume 2C - Non Technical Summary

SLR Ref: 403.00275.00146

Version No: DRAFTv2 May / 2016

Ronez Limited i 403.00275.00146 Non Technical Summary May 2016

SLR

CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................. 1

APPLICATION SUBMISSION PACKAGE ............................................................................ 1

PLANNING AND EIA ............................................................................................................ 2

THE SITE .............................................................................................................................. 2

THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ...................................................................................... 4

PLANNING POLICY ............................................................................................................. 5

ALTERNATIVES .................................................................................................................. 6

LANDSCAPE AND VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT ......................................................... 6

TRAFFIC .............................................................................................................................. 7

AIR QUALITY ....................................................................................................................... 8

NOISE .................................................................................................................................. 9

VIBRATION ........................................................................................................................ 10

ECOLOGY .......................................................................................................................... 10

WATER............................................................................................................................... 11

ARCHAEOLOGY AND CULTURAL HERITAGE ................................................................ 12

CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ................................................................................................... 13

FIGURES

Figure 1 - Site Location ...................................................................................................... 3 Figure 2 - Application Site and Ownership Boundaries ................................................... 4 Figure 3 – Restoration Concept Proposals for western extension area (A3 drawing)

Ronez Limited 1 403.00275.00146 Non Technical Summary January 2016

SLR

INTRODUCTION

1. This document comprises a Non Technical Summary (‘NTS’) and has been prepared by SLR Consulting Limited (‘SLR’) on behalf of Ronez Limited (‘the applicant’). The NTS forms part of a package of documents being formally submitted in support of a planning application in respect to land adjoining Ronez Quarry, St Johns.

2. The applicant is submitting a planning application to develop land under Art. 9 of the

Planning and Building (Jersey) Law 2002 for a westerly extension to the existing quarry workings. The proposals would release some 2.5 million tonnes (Mt) of high quality granite, extending the life of the quarry by around 15 to 20 years (dependant on rate of production). As part of the development scheme it would be necessary to re-configure the moto-cross track that (in part) lies within the area to be developed.

APPLICATION SUBMISSION PACKAGE

3. This NTS comprises Volume 2C of a larger multi volume submission submitted to the States of Jersey (Department of the Environment, DoE) to accompany the planning submission. In addition to the formal planning application forms and certificates, the full submission comprises:

Volume 1- Planning Statement;

Volume 2- Environmental Impact Statement (‘EIS’); o Volume 2A – EIS Text; o Volume 2B – EIS Technical Appendices; and o Volume 2C – A Non-Technical Summary of the EIS.

4. The NTS has been produced as a separate, standalone document in line with best

practice prescribed by the Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment (IEMA) to accompany the planning submission, being a mandatory part of the EIS. The purpose of the NTS is to provide, in non-technical language, a brief summary of the likely significant effects that the proposed development would have on the environment.

5. Paper copies of the EIS can be obtained from SLR at the following address:

Aspect House Aspect Business Park Bennerley Road Nottingham NG6 8WR

6. The EIS is available in both paper and CD-ROM format, for which a charge of £250

and £25 is applicable respectively. A copy of the NTS is available free of charge on request. In addition, the application documents will also be available to download from the States of Jersey website (www.gov.je) under the “Planning Register” page1.

1 https://www.mygov.je/Planning/Pages/Planning.aspx?_ga=1.32558526.1287686934.1441201288

http://www.gov.je/

https://www.mygov.je/Planning/Pages/Planning.aspx?_ga=1.32558526.1287686934.1441201288

Ronez Limited 2 403.00275.00146 Non Technical Summary January 2016

SLR

PLANNING AND EIA

7. European legislation (the Environmental Impact Assessment Directive or ‘EIA Directive’ for short) requires that, before granting ’development consent’ for projects authorities should carry out a procedure known as environmental impact assessment (or “EIA”) of any project which is likely to have significant effects on the environment. For Jersey, development consent includes the grant of planning permission. The EIA Directive is translated in Jersey law through the Planning and Building (Environmental Impact)(Jersey) Order 2006 (the EI Order).

8. An EIS is a report of an EIA that is required to be submitted with a planning application.

9. An integral aspect of the EIA process is to clearly identify or ‘scope’ the main environmental issues, as this allows for more detailed and targeted assessment to be carried out. The applicant submitted a formal request to the DoE for their opinion as to the issues that needed to be addressed in the EIA and the opinion was issued on 15 June 2010 and re-affirmed on 25 October 2012.

THE SITE 10. Ronez Quarry is located on the northern coastline of Jersey, approximately 8.6km to

the north of St Helier. More specifically, the settlements St John and St Mary lie 1.8km and 2.6km to the southeast and southwest respectively2. The closest settlements to Ronez Quarry are Sorel and Le Grand Mourier, both lying within 500m of the boundary of the quarry and associated ancillary land. Figure 1 shows the location of the application site.

11. The application site lies on the western side of the quarry, contiguous with the

boundary of the quarry. It extends to some 3.1 hectares (approximately 17 vergée) of land which is currently used in part for grazing and in part with the adjoining moto-cross track (operated by Jersey Motor Cycle and Light Car Club).

12. Within the application site are the following distinct areas:

gently sloping pasture fields currently used for horses, with privet hedging in places, post and wire fencing, feed and drinking troughs; and

an established motorbike moto-cross track, with post and rail/picket fencing and other signage and ‘portaloos’, on a gently sloping headland, but with localised jumps, bumps and turns.

13. Chapter 2 within the EIS (Volume 2A) provides further information on the

application site and its environs. Figure 2 illustrates the extent of the planning permission and land controlled by the applicant (based on drawing RQ 2/2 in the EIS). Of note on Figure 2 is the extent of land required for the proposed western extension to the quarry workings (which equates to 1.5 hectares (8.2 Jersey vergée) and the remainder of the application site which is required for the reconfiguration of the moto-cross track.

2 All distances measured from centre of settlement to centre of quarry using Google Earth

Ronez Limited 3 403.00275.00146 Non Technical Summary May 2016

SLR

Figure 1 Site Location


SLR

Figure 2 Application Site and Ownership Boundaries

THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

14. The applicant is submitting a planning application for a westerly extension to the quarry workings at Ronez Quarry, which would release around 2.5Mt of high quality granite. Extracted rock would be processed into aggregates using the existing processing plant located close to Ronez Point. The processed aggregates are either exported off site, or used in the manufacture of concrete, concrete products or coated roadstone (also known as asphalt) within plants located at the quarry. The extent of the proposed development is shown on Figure 3 (located at the end of this document),


SLR

along with the proposals for reconfiguring the moto-cross track and relationship with the existing quarry and associated infrastructure.

15. The application site would be stripped of soils and overlying overburden: soils would

be placed into store for later use in restoration operations whilst the overburden would be transported to the existing quarry void for use in restoration of the extant quarry workings. Following the removal of the superficial deposits the granite would be progressively worked in a series of 10m high faces, relocating the haul road linking the site entrance to the plant site to the western edge of the application site. As the workings progress the existing quarry faces on the western side of the quarry would be advanced into the extension area.

16. Ultimately, the workings in the extension area would reach the level of the quarry floor

in the existing quarry area. At this point, the extended quarry workings would continue to be progressively deepened by around 20m (in common with the permitted scheme).

17. It is proposed to work the extension using the same techniques currently employed in

the quarry. All rock extracted from the extension would be transported to the plant site by dump trucks, initially using the existing haul road, and then, as the workings progress to depth, via a new haul road located along the western edge of the workings (within the quarry void). The excavated rock would be fed into the primary crusher, which in turn passes through secondary and tertiary crushers and screens to produce the final graded aggregates.

18. In order to demonstrate the acceptability of the development proposals, a

comprehensive development scheme has been prepared and is described in this chapter. The scheme addresses the establishment and phased operation of the quarry. As an extension to an existing quarry, the proposals make use of existing plant, machinery and associated infrastructure. In view of this, only passing reference is made to this infrastructure.

19. Chapter 3 within the EIS (Volume 2A) provides more details of the planning application.

PLANNING POLICY

20. Chapter 4 of the EIS sets out how the proposed development has been considered against relevant planning policy contained in the Island Plan3. Other chapters of the EIS also touch on relevant planning policy and guidance, and where appropriate (because there is no equivalent policy/guidance in force for Jersey) reference is made to UK policy.

21. Jersey, like the UK, has a ‘plan-led’ planning system which means that the Island Plan should be the primary consideration in any planning-related decision-making, unless there is sufficient justification for granting planning permission that is inconsistent with the Island Plan.

22. The Island Plan was originally adopted in c. 2011 and revised in 2014. The Plan covers the period between 2011 and 2020. It forms the basis for determining all planning applications, including those relating to minerals. In many cases, policies refer to the protection of the environment or amenity of local residents from unacceptable harm or intrusion as a result of a proposed development. In this respect,

3 Island Plan 2011, Revised (2014). States of Jersey


SLR

policies often require a demonstration that no unacceptable significant effect would result: in the context of mineral developments, paragraph 10.42 of the Island Plan acknowledges that some adverse impacts may occur, commenting that “it is important, therefore, that any proposals look to minimise any potential adverse impacts and prevent an unacceptable degree of harm, through careful planning and design and appropriate mitigation measures”.

23. The Island Plan seeks to reconcile the development needs of society against

safeguarding the environment and amenity of local communities. In so doing, the Island Plan sets out a series of policies which seek to guide developments in terms of acceptable limits and design, whilst ensuring interests of archaeological, cultural heritage, ecological interest and importance are protected, and that the local amenity and environment of communities are not derogated through pollution to air, land or water.

24. Through the EIA process, it has been possible to demonstrate that the development

proposals would not conflict with the stated aims and policies of the Island Plan. This is explored in greater detail within the Planning Statement which also accompanies the planning application.

ALTERNATIVES

25. Chapter 5 of the EIS sets out the alternatives to the proposed scheme have been considered as part of the EIA. The EI Order requires that an outline of the main alternatives studied and an indication of the main reasons for this choice, taking into account the environmental effects should be included in an EIS.

26. In the absence of the development reserves of easily workable granite (estimated at around 0.5Mt) would become exhausted in c. 2020. This would then mean that the current processing plant, asphalt plant and associated ancillary infrastructure would need to be demolished. The asphalt plant would need to be relocated and new crushing and screening plant purchased before it would be possible work the remaining reserves. In the longer term, consideration would need to be given to either establishing a new quarry elsewhere on the Island, or importing aggregates from overseas. Consideration was not given to such options in the EIA as the Island Plan indicates a preference to continue operations at Ronez Quarry provided any ‘harm’ is within acceptable limits.

LANDSCAPE AND VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

27. Chapter 6 of the EIS considers the potential landscape and visual implications of the proposed development. The assessment follows recognised guidance issued jointly by the Landscape Institute and Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment.

28. This assessment included a baseline study of the existing site and its surroundings, a

study of the landscape and visual characteristics of the development and an assessment of the residual landscape and visual effects likely to be generated after mitigation has been considered and their significance.

29. Overall the assessment has not identified any significant landscape or visual effects as

a result of the proposed western extension.

30. There would be limited loss of agricultural fields and associated vegetation, with enlargement of the existing quarry and relocation of the moto-cross track and


SLR

consequently a small alteration to elements/ features/ aesthetic or perceptual aspects or characteristics along the boundary of the local “character area”. Locally, this change would be discernible but the broad underlying landscape character would be similar to baseline. The mitigation proposal also seeks to replace this vegetation with similar planting.

31. The proposed development is already visually well contained and in conjunction with the additional mitigation planting, already completed, it is unlikely that changes to views would be noticeable to all but brief, glimpsed locations and involving features either already present in the view or part of sequential views locally.

32. The addition of the relatively small proposed quarry extension to the medium to large scale existing quarry would not give rise to changes in the landscape character of the surrounding area of such an extent as to have major effects on its key characteristics or transform it into a different character type or area; it is not considered that the proposed western quarry extension (and enlarged quarry workings) “tips the balance” through any additional effects.

33. The proposed development is sensitive to the threats to local character identified in the Countryside Character Appraisal (op cit), in particular by not destroying important exposures of rocks (North Coast Heathland) as the extension area is set back from the cliffs. Also, the proposed development would not increase heavy vehicle movements and therefore adversely impact on the remoteness of the wider area, as the extension aims to release new reserves and thereby extend the operational life of the quarry, rather than increase output rates.

34. There would be a loss of a small area of agricultural (equine) land from part of the

Coastal National Park, although this is not a key or valued characteristic of this rugged and wild area. In visual terms this is also mitigated through boundary planting and management, which would offer effective screening along the road corridor and cliff path.

35. The scheme would ensure no net loss of the Protected Open Space associated with the moto-cross track, although it would be reconfigured and this contributes to some of the loss of agricultural land at the site. It is considered that this could be reversible, should the track cease to be used and thereby enabling its restoration in the future

TRAFFIC

36. The EIS, in Chapter 7, determines the significance of the potential transport impacts associated with the proposed extension to Ronez Quarry. In accordance with the scoping opinion, this chapter is written as a Transport Statement which:

reviews the existing conditions on-site and on relevant parts of the local road network;

describes the proposed development in the context of highways and transport;

analyses the scale and composition of traffic movements associated with the proposed development; and

assesses the likely traffic related impacts associated with the proposed development.

37. The proposed development would lead to no change in vehicular trip generation at the

quarry and would instead be a continuation of the existing situation. Without the proposed extension reserves at the quarry would be exhausted much sooner. Whilst


SLR

this would result in a reduction of HGV movements exporting dry-stone aggregates (averaging around 37,500tpa) there would be an increase in HGV movements associated with importing aggregates to the various value added plants (concrete and coated roadstone) on-site (averaging around 110,000tpa).

38. The assessment examined the suitability of the local road network in its ability to accommodate the scale and composition of traffic associated with the Ronez site. The study included analysis of traffic survey data, review of the existing road network geometry and a review of the historical accident record.

39. The review of traffic demand data indicates that the Route du Nord, which supports all traffic generated by Ronez Quarry, is a rural road that supports up to around 120 vehicle movements per hour (two-way) during the week, equivalent to around one movement per direction per minute. During the week HGVs represent approximately 7% of total traffic demand; this reduces considerably during the weekend, to around 1% of total traffic.

40. The existing operations at Ronez Quarry generate around a quarter of total traffic demand along the Route du Nord during the week and the majority of the HGV movements observed. The quarrying operations comprise less than half of all trips generated by Ronez Quarry as a whole.

41. Review of the local road network suggests that it is suitable for use by traffic associated with Ronez Quarry. This is confirmed by virtue of the long operating history of the site.

42. The review of historical accident data confirms that the local road network currently operates without significant safety issues. All recorded accidents were attributed to road user error, or were isolated incidents not related to the layout or condition of the road network. The accident record shows no evidence that site related traffic travelling throughout the local road network lead to any adverse safety issues beyond those already generated by other traffic.

43. The assessment has confirmed that the existing operations at Ronez Quarry have no material adverse impact on the operation or safety of the local road network. As the proposed development would lead to no change in traffic generation compared to the existing situation, the extension of Ronez Quarry to provide aggregates for an additional 15 - 20 years would continue to have no material adverse impact on the operation or safety of the local road network. The proposed development is therefore considered acceptable in terms of highways and transport.

AIR QUALITY

44. Chapter 8 of the EIS considers the potential for the proposed developments to impact upon air quality in the vicinity of the application site.

45. The chapter describes the scope, relevant legislation, assessment methodology and

the baseline conditions at the application site and the surroundings area. The assessment considers any potential significant environmental effects that the proposed development would have on the baseline environment; the mitigation measures required to prevent, reduce or offset any significant adverse effects; and the likely residual impacts after these mitigation measures have been employed.


SLR

46. Impacts on local air quality from traffic emissions have been screened out of further assessment as traffic generated by the proposed development would be below the relevant criteria and therefore considered to be insignificant.

47. The potential impacts of the development have been assessed in terms of potential emissions of particulates (dust). Two assessments have been undertaken: the first to assess the fine fraction (having a diameter less than ten microns, referred to as PM10) for which Air Quality Limit Values exist, and the second to assess the coarse fraction dust, which is typically associated with amenity issues.

48. An assessment of PM10 was completed following appropriate guidance considering background particulate matter levels and distance to receptors. Available annual mean background levels for St Helier are ‘well below’ the limit. The proposed extension to the quarry operations is not considered to result in a significant increase in PM10 emissions which would lead to an exceedance of the Air Quality Limit Values.

49. A qualitative assessment of deposited dust was undertaken identifying the potential sources of dust onsite. Risk of dust impact at receptors was determined based on the potential sources of dust, the distance from the site, the frequency of wind direction and proposed site operations. The dust impact assessment has identified that mitigation measures are required due to the potential risk of impact at Sorel Farm, particularly when working at a high level within the quarry and during soil and overburden removal. With the effective implementation of mitigation measures onsite in accordance with best practice the residual impact is considered to be acceptable. The residual impact at all other receptors is considered to be insignificant.

50. The potential for dust impacts on the surrounding ecological sites has been assessed as insignificant.

51. Mitigation measures have been proposed and are in accordance with those recommended within the relevant guidance. With the implementation of these measures it is considered that the potential dust impacts at receptors would be insignificant or acceptable.

52. All potential dust impacts from the proposed development are considered to be reversible i.e. the risk of impact would cease on completion of the extraction activities at the site. The proposed extension is not considered to lead to an increase in the sources of dust but would increase the length of potential exposure at receptors. The impacts from the proposed quarry are considered to be long term with no significant impacts on local air quality on the completion of the proposed development.

NOISE

53. Chapter 9 of the EIS considers the potential for the proposed extension to Ronez Quarry to impact upon the noise environment in the vicinity of the application site. The chapter describes the scope, relevant legislation, assessment methodology and the baseline conditions that exist around the application site.

54. The noise assessment has used measured background noise levels at three locations around the application site and made a series of noise level predictions based in accordance with relevant standards and guidelines. The predicted noise levels have then been assessed against criteria in accordance with recognised guidance. Predicted noise levels are based on a ‘worst case’ scenario when operations are being


SLR

undertaken simultaneously at their closest approach to the noise-sensitive receptor being assessed or highest elevation with the quarry.

55. Noise levels during temporary operations (such as soil stripping and overburden removal) would remain within the 70dB LAeq,1hr criterion adopted for the assessment at all locations assessed. In view of this no mitigation measures are deemed necessary.

56. Noise levels generated by quarrying operations within the extension area would remain below limits derived in accordance with the relevant guidance. The cumulative effects of existing measured noise levels and predicted worst-case future noise levels would not show a significant change and the predicted future ambient noise levels would remain below the derived noise limits adopted for the assessment.

57. Noise levels generated during a moto-cross meet on the re-aligned track would not be

significantly greater than those currently experience during a moto-cross meet.

58. Based on the results of the assessment, the EIS has concluded that noise should not pose a material constraint for the proposed extension to the quarry.

VIBRATION

59. The EIS (at Chapter 10) reports the findings of a quantitative assessment of the potential impact upon nearby receptors from vibration generated by blasting operations within the application site. The assessment identifies a range of measures which may be used to enable any identified impacts to be minimised and mitigated.

60. In the absence of any specific guidance issued by the States of Jersey, the assessment has used guidance that prevails in the UK. It is considered that this guidance is appropriate for assessing the likely significance of effects from blast induced vibration.

61. The predictions are based on measured vibration levels at various locations at, and around, Ronez Quarry between the 17th January 2013 and the 28th September 2015.

62. Using the measured data a blast regression line has been plotted and a maximum

instantaneous charge weight of 40kg has been derived.

63. The assessment has shown that the criterion of 6.0mm/s peak particle velocity at 95% confidence can be achieved by suitable blast design using the suggested instantaneous charge weights.

64. Therefore, the EIS has concluded that vibration generated by blasting events is not

considered to be a limiting factor in continued blasting within the Ronez Quarry.

ECOLOGY 65. Chapter 11 of the ES assesses the potential impacts on valued ecological receptors

resulting from the proposed changes to the approved scheme.

66. The assessment provides a summary of relevant policy and legislation, the assessment methodology that has been adopted and the ecological baseline. The scope of the assessment and a detailed assessment of the likely significant effects are then presented, along with details of environmental measures (additional mitigation) to avoid, minimise, mitigate or compensate for any remaining adverse effects (where


SLR

required). The assessment concludes with a summary of residual effects and an evaluation of their significance, following incorporation of these environmental measures (where required) into the scheme.

67. The proposal would result in loss of two small horse paddocks, some short hedgerows

and planted bund boundaries in the ownership of the applicant and an area of close-cropped grassland, disturbed ground and ‘islands’ of scrub in the ownership of the States of Jersey used as a moto-cross track. These habitats are evaluated to be of low overall nature conservation significance in a Jersey context.

68. Peripheral screen bunds and screen planting would serve to reduce visual impact of the quarrying operations and moto-cross track and to provide structurally complex wildlife corridors around the landward side of the application site.

69. Breeding bird species identified using the application site comprises a limited diversity of essentially widespread and/or common species, typically associated with the habitats present and those found within the wider local landscape.

70. Jersey protected / Jersey Biodiversity Action Plan small mammal, amphibian and reptile species were recorded present in low numbers, reflecting the limited habitats present and their generally degraded management condition.

71. The conservation of these species can be successfully carried out through dispersal, trapping and translocation to a managed receptor site in compliance with the Conservation of Wildlife (Jersey) Law 2000. Management would seek to increase the site’s carrying capacity and ecological functionality.

72. Neither existing consented extraction nor proposed future extraction would directly or indirectly result in impacts to valued habitats located at the peripheries of the quarry.

73. There is no evidence to suggest that the function, cohesion or dynamics of populations of protected species would be compromised consequent to their removal to the Sorel Farm receptor site.

WATER

74. Chapter 12 of the EIS describes the scope, relevant legislation, assessment methodology and the baseline conditions currently existing at the application site and its surroundings. It then considers any potential significant environmental effects the proposed extension to the quarry could have on this baseline environment, the mitigation measures required to prevent, reduce or offset any significant adverse effects, and the potential residual effects after these measures have been employed.

75. The rocks at the quarry are an important aquifer for private groundwater supplies on

Jersey. They have negligible primary porosity and permeability. Groundwater typically within the upper c.40m, associated with secondary permeability and porosity developed where the bedrock is weathered and/or jointed and fractured.

76. Groundwater flow direction in the vicinity of the Ronez Quarry is northerly toward the

coast with the hydraulic gradient increases in the vicinity of the coastline as a direct consequence of the steep topographic gradients between the higher ground across the northern central part of the island and the sea.


SLR

77. In terms of abstractions the closest four water sources are located within 100m of the southern boundary of the application site. Three are boreholes used to meet the water supply requirements of private properties; the fourth water is reported as ‘not used’. All other ‘licensed’ and ‘registered’ water sources (except those of the applicant) are located more than 235m from the southern boundary of the application site.

78. A small unnamed stream is located within the immediate vicinity of the application site.

The stream originates from a spring located within the land ownership boundary of Ronez Limited, some 260m to the south-east of the southern boundary of the application site.

79. The proposed extension would not have any significant effect on the regional

groundwater flow regime within the bedrock aquifer, either during future quarrying activities or following restoration. On a localised scale, the proposed extension has the potential to lower the groundwater levels below the area of wet woodland and small pond, and the four abstractions located closest to the southern edge of the western extension. The proposed extension would not have any significant direct effect on surface water flows and flood risk within Ronez Quarry, either during future quarrying activities or following restoration.

80. During the operational and restoration phases of the application site there is a risk of

contaminated runoff being generated from the potential sources, such as spillage of fuels. The significance of potential direct effect to groundwater quality would be ‘negligible’, and consequently there is no requirement for additional mitigation measures to protect surface water receptors.

81. Mitigation measures have been identified. Visual monitoring of water quality would

continue to be carried out, where present within the low points on the quarry floor. In addition a monitoring programme is proposed in order to provide an early warning system to potential significant drainage impacts on the pond and wet woodland located in close proximity to the southern boundary of the proposed extension.

82. Overall therefore the continuation of the existing pollution prevention measures for the

quarry would continue to safeguard the water quality of both groundwater and surface water receptors. No effects are expected on the hydrology and hydrogeological flow regimes and flooding.

ARCHAEOLOGY AND CULTURAL HERITAGE 83. The potential impact the proposed development of a western extension to Ronez

Quarry on archaeology and cultural heritage is set out in Chapter 13 of the EIS. Impacts in terms of cultural heritage may be direct (for example the physical removal of archaeological remains) or indirect (for example the impact of a scheme on the settings of nearby designated heritage assets). As with other assessments, impacts may be beneficial or detrimental, and short-term, long-term or irreversible.

84. Six visible sites were identified during the walkover survey including three sites

associated with the World War II German occupation of the island between 1940 and 1945, and two sites relating to a distinct field system. There is also a demolished public house within the application site. The three World War II sites stand outside the boundary of the proposed extension and therefore these sites would not be directly impacted upon by quarrying. Furthermore, and using recognised criteria on setting, the indirect impact on these sites is considered Negligible to Low, giving an overall significance of Minor. This assessment is based upon the intervisibility between each


SLR

site and the area of land where the proposed extension would be quarried. The German observation position and German Searchlight Position would not be itervisible with quarry working within the proposed extension. However, there would be a slight indirect impact of the German Gun Emplacement. The indirect impact is considered to be Low, with an overall significance of Minor, owing to the fact that there is already invisibility between this site and current quarry operations. Furthermore, the distance between this site and the proposed extension is considerable.

85. The direct impacts to the field system would be severe and would result in substantial harm to at least five of the seven field embankments located within the southern section of the proposed extension. However, as the heritage significance of these features is Low, the overall significance is considered to be Minor.

86. In terms of minimising the harm to identified archaeological and cultural heritage sites and creating a preservation-by-record account of the known and yet unknown sites within the proposed extension, it is recommended that the area is archaeologically monitored via a watching brief during stripping operations.

87. This programme of work can be undertaken as a single phased piece of work that would involve a soil strip over the proposed extension area or as a periodic scheme that would involve the removal of surface remains if and when quarrying was targeted within a specific area.

CUMULATIVE IMPACTS

88. The final chapter of the ES considers the potential cumulative impacts arising as a result of the proposals to extend the operations at the Ronez Quarry.

89. Chapters 6 to 13 of the EIS set out the findings of the EIA for a range of environmental

topics, and in particular, ascertained the potential significance of identified impacts. It is possible for a number of the environmental topics to impact upon nearby receptors; whilst individually, the impacts may be within accepted limits, collectively, and the impacts could potentially be more significant. These are referred to as “inter-relationships between impacts”. At the same time, potential impacts associated with the proposed development may be acceptable in isolation, but when considered in the context of other developments in the immediate vicinity, may become more significant. These are referred to as “Cumulative Impacts”.

90. The potential cumulative impacts arising through the proposed extension of the quarry

have been considered and none have been identified. This is principally due to the existence of the extant planning permission for the quarry and that the proposed extension is small in comparison.

91. No significant impacts have been identified for any of the environmental topics

considered as part of the EIA. Thus, no receptors are likely to experience any significant accumulated impacts from two or more sources.

30

30

30

30

30

30

30

30

30

30

30

30

30

30

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

2020

2020

20

20

20

10

10

1010

10

10

10

10

10

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

00

0

0

0 0

0

40

40

40

40

40

4040

40

40

40

40

40

50

50

50

50

50

50

50

50

50

50

50

50

50

60

60

60

60

60

60

60

60

60

60

607070

80

80

80

80

80

80

80

80

80

80

80

90

90

90

90

90

90

90

90

90

90

90

70

70

70

70

70

70

70

70

70

70

101010

10

10

10

10

10

20

20

20

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

0

00

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

60

100

90

90

0

70

20

50

70

60

60

60

60

40

40

30

30

30

20

20

10

10

10

0 0

0

100

20

0

0

90

90

73500N 73500N

73600N 73600N

73700N 73700N

73800N 73800N

73900N 73900N

74000N 74000N

74100N 74100N

38300E38300E

38400E38400E

38500E38500E

38600E38600E

38700E38700E

38800E38800E

38900E38900E

39000E39000E

39100E39100E

Rue de Sorel

60

Scale Date

ASPECT HOUSEASPECT BUSINESS PARK

BENNERLEY ROADNOTTINGHAM. NG6 8WR

T: 01159 647280F: 01159 751576

www.slrconsulting.com

LEGEND

1512

23_0

0275

.001

46.2

9.00

1_R

ES

TO

RA

TIO

N_S

M.d

wg

FOR NTS ONLY

1:2,500 @ A3 DEC 2015

RESTORATION CONCEPT PROPOSALSFOR WESTERN EXTENSION AREA

PROPOSED WESTERN EXTENSION

RONEZ QUARRY

N

W

S

E

PROPOSED LIMIT OFEXTRACTION

ADVANCE HEDGE PLANTING(2015)

PROPOSED CONTOURS(AT 2M INTERVALS)

EXISTING VEGETATION(HEDGES/TREES/SCRUB)

© This drawing and its content are the copyright of SLR ConsultingLtd and may not be reproduced or amended except by prior writtenpermission. SLR Consulting Ltd accepts no liability for anyamendments made by other persons.

APPLICATION SITE BOUNDARY

RIDGE LINE

AREA OF BACKFILL WITHINEXISTING QUARRY VOIDUSING OVERBURDEN ANDSOIL FROM EXTENSION AREA

2m HIGH TOPSOIL MOUND

2m HIGH TOPSOIL BUND SCREEN MOUND

RELOCATEDMOTO-CROSSTRACK TO ALLOWCONTINUED USE ASEXISTING; THERE ISNO PROPOSAL TOALTER THE LENGTHOR POTENTIAL USEOF THE TRACK

EXISTING PLANT

EXISTING QUARRY

NEW MINERAL

ABERDEEN 214 Union Street, Aberdeen AB10 1TL, UK T: +44 (0)1224 517405 AYLESBURY 7 Wornal Park, Menmarsh Road, Worminghall, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire HP18 9PH, UK T: +44 (0)1844 337380 BELFAST Suite 1 Potters Quay, 5 Ravenhill Road, Belfast BT6 8DN, UK, Northern Ireland T: +44 (0)28 9073 2493 BRADFORD-ON-AVON Treenwood House, Rowden Lane, Bradford-on-Avon, Wiltshire BA15 2AU, UK T: +44 (0)1225 309400 BRISTOL Langford Lodge, 109 Pembroke Road, Clifton, Bristol BS8 3EU, UK T: +44 (0)117 9064280 CAMBRIDGE 8 Stow Court, Stow-cum-Quy, Cambridge CB25 9AS, UK T: + 44 (0)1223 813805 CARDIFF Fulmar House, Beignon Close, Ocean Way, Cardiff CF24 5PB, UK T: +44 (0)29 20491010 CHELMSFORD Unit 77, Waterhouse Business Centre, 2 Cromar Way, Chelmsford, Essex CM1 2QE, UK T: +44 (0)1245 392170

DUBLIN 7 Dundrum Business Park, Windy Arbour, Dundrum, Dublin 14 Ireland T: + 353 (0)1 2964667 EDINBURGH 4/5 Lochside View, Edinburgh Park, Edinburgh EH12 9DH, UK T: +44 (0)131 3356830 EXETER 69 Polsloe Road, Exeter EX1 2NF, UK T: + 44 (0)1392 490152 GLASGOW 4 Woodside Place, Charing Cross, Glasgow G3 7QF, UK T: +44 (0)141 3535037 GRENOBLE BuroClub, 157/155 Cours Berriat, 38028 Grenoble Cedex 1, France T: +33 (0)4 76 70 93 41 GUILDFORD 65 Woodbridge Road, Guildford Surrey GU1 4RD, UK T: +44 (0)1483 889 800 LEEDS Suite 1, Jason House, Kerry Hill, Horsforth, Leeds LS18 4JR, UK T: +44 (0)113 2580650 LONDON 83 Victoria Street, London, SW1H 0HW, UK T: +44 (0)203 691 5810 MAIDSTONE 19 Hollingworth Court, Turkey Mill, Maidstone, Kent ME14 5PP, UK T: +44 (0)1622 609242

MANCHESTER 8th Floor, Quay West, MediaCityUK, Trafford Wharf Road, Manchester M17 1HH, UK T: +44 (0)161 872 7564 NEWCASTLE UPON TYNE Sailors Bethel, Horatio Street, Newcastle-upon-Tyne NE1 2PE, UK T: +44 (0)191 2611966 NOTTINGHAM Aspect House, Aspect Business Park, Bennerley Road, Nottingham NG6 8WR, UK T: +44 (0)115 9647280 SHEFFIELD Unit 2 Newton Business Centre, Thorncliffe Park Estate, Newton Chambers Road, Chapeltown, Sheffield S35 2PW, UK T: +44 (0)114 2455153 SHREWSBURY 2nd Floor, Hermes House, Oxon Business Park, Shrewsbury SY3 5HJ, UK T: +44 (0)1743 239250 STAFFORD 8 Parker Court, Staffordshire Technology Park, Beaconside, Stafford ST18 0WP, UK T: +44 (0)1785 241755 STIRLING No. 68 Stirling Business Centre, Wellgreen, Stirling FK8 2DZ, UK T: +44 (0)1786 239900 WORCESTER Suite 5, Brindley Court, Gresley Road, Shire Business Park, Worcester WR4 9FD, UK T: +44 (0)1905 751310

ronez quarry, st johns - iema quarry... · planning application in respect to land adjoining ronez...

Documents