East Riding of Yorkshire and Kingston upon Hull

Summer 2015

East Riding of Yorkshire

and Kingston upon Hull

Joint Minerals Local Plan

Background Paper 3

Site Selection

Summer 2015

Summer 2015

East Riding of Yorkshire and Hull City Council

Joint Minerals Local Plan

Background Paper 3 Site Selection

Summer 2015

Notice

This report was produced by Atkins Limited for East Riding of Yorkshire Council and Kingston upon Hull City Council for the specific purpose of the Joint Minerals Local Plan. This report may not be used by any person other than East Riding of Yorkshire Council and Kingston upon Hull City Council without East Riding of Yorkshire Council and Kingston upon Hull City Council’s express permission. In any event, Atkins accepts no liability for any costs, liabilities or losses arising as a result of the use of or reliance upon the contents of this report by any person other than East Riding of Yorkshire Council and Kingston upon Hull City Council.

Joint Minerals Local Plan Background paper 3

Summer 2015 3

Contents

Section Page

1. Candidate Site Assessment Methodology 1

2. Candidate Site Descriptions and Summary of Assessment 12

3. Recommended Sites 52


Summer 2015 1

1. Candidate Site Assessment Methodology

Introduction

1.1 The Candidate Site Assessment Methodology applies a criteria based assessment,

drawing on the site visits and data collated in respect of all candidate sites. The

methodology was used in the 2012 Site Selection and has been refined to take

account of comments made in response to that document.

1.2 For each type of aggregate mineral, the methodology is designed to identify those

sites which can be recommended as proposed Preferred Areas or proposed Areas

of Search to provide for the maintenance of the landbank during the life of the plan

in accordance with advice in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). Thus

the methodology is designed to establish appropriate contributions from the different

aggregate minerals whilst also achieving a distribution of sites that is well related to

potential aggregate markets. In this way, the methodology has been developed to

sift through the candidate sites and select the best prospects to identify as proposed

‘Preferred Areas’ and ‘Areas of Search’, as appropriate for sand and gravel and for

crushed rock in order to meet the calculated demand.

1.3 It should be noted that one criterion draws its results directly from the Habitats

Regulations Assessment (HRA) that has been undertaken and the findings of the

Sustainability Appraisal (SA) have been considered in the application of value

judgements on the relative merits of the candidate sites.

1.4 SA/SEA criteria are derived from a detailed review of policies, plans and

programmes, many of which are aimed at the consideration of development that is

more footloose/flexible in terms of its location compared to Minerals development.

Minerals can only be worked where they naturally occur in the ground, resulting in a

need to interpret SA/SEA findings in relation to identifying appropriate mineral sites

with some element of qualitative discretion. In simple terms, there is a need for

weighting or prioritisation to be applied that reflects the inability to exercise

preference over the physical location in which mineral extraction may occur.

1.5 It is the purpose of the SA to identify potential positive and negative effects of

Minerals development on identified sites as a means of identifying where mitigation

is needed. Whereas the site selection methodology specifically takes into account

the potential mitigation that might be applied to address these effects. It will then be

for the Joint Minerals Local Plan (JMLP) and Development Management Policies

within it to set an appropriate framework through which these factors can be

managed and mitigated.

Key Factors

1.6 The identification process has involved several sources of information; geological

data on the mineral resource; planning and environmental constraints identified from

a range of sources; and information received from operators. The operator

submission, site visits and desk top appraisals have captured data to enable the

following issues to be considered, in line with the key considerations expressed in

Planning Practice Guidance:

Mineral resource;

Proximity to sensitive uses;


Summer 2015 2

International ecology and nature conservation designations;

National and local ecology and nature conservation designations;

Impact on landscape character;

Visual impact;

Impact on cultural heritage;

Land quality;

Transportation implications; and

Water environment.

1.7 In addition to selecting sites that exhibit favourable characteristics in relation to the

factors identified above, the appraisal framework considers the requirements of the

proposed spatial approach for aggregates, as described in Chapter 4 of the JMLP.

This spatial element of the selection takes into account issues relating to the

principle of extraction in the wider area, as follows;

The location of the site and its proximity to the areas and markets where the

material is likely to be required. The aim is to have a geographical spread of

sites to serve the main locations of future development and construction activity,

including maintenance of the existing built-up areas;

Any potential cumulative impact from current extraction activities and other

candidate sites, whether worked in parallel or in series;

Where the site represents a last opportunity to extract minerals from an area

because of a relationship with another operation currently approaching the end

of its working life, or due to future surface development that would otherwise

lead to sterilisation of the mineral.

Assessment Scoring

1.8 The Site Assessment has been designed to determine the suitability of each

candidate site for minerals development. The proposed approach is based on a

graded system for the selection of the best sites. In most cases, there are four

different grades defined for each criterion, although occasionally it has been

necessary to include five to make effective distinctions to assist in defining the

relative merits of sites. The grades have been assigned a letter value – this has been

chosen in preference to numerical references to avoid potential pitfalls associated

with adding up scores within a set of criteria where some aspects may be

showstoppers for a site with otherwise favourable characteristics in other respects.

1.9 Where the desk-top appraisal has indentified constraints, the assessment considers

potential mitigation that could be employed. The table below sets out the approach

to assigning of grades. In general terms, a grade of A indicates the optimum

conditions against an individual criterion, with conditions being considered

progressively less favourable as grades B, C then D are assigned. A grade of F for

any site represents a ‘show stopper’ and indicates that this site should not be

considered further in the assessment.


Summer 2015 3

Proposed Grading Structure

Grade Description

F The site fails to meet minimum requirements to be considered as an allocation.

D High sensitivity/ It is considered that there is an impact or issue and there is doubt that it could be adequately mitigated, without detailed

further study.

C Medium sensitivity/It is considered that there is a moderate impact or issue that may be acceptable (in most cases with mitigation).

B Low to medium sensitivity/ It is considered that there is a low to moderate impact or issues that should be acceptable with

mitigation.

A Low sensitivity/It is considered that there is no impact / issues OR the impacts/issues are considered to be acceptable without

mitigation.

1.10 Following grading of the sites, the amount of resources that each can contribute to

meeting the respective supply provision has been assessed against the overall

requirement, and a spatial consideration as described above in para 1.7 applied

seeking to achieve a source of supply within the catchments of each of the main

settlements in the region, including those in adjacent administrative areas.

1.11 Sites are recommended as proposed ‘Preferred Areas’ where they score well

against the grading criteria taking account of the prospect of achieving any assumed

mitigation measures within the plan period, and against the spatial consideration,

and where a suitably limited area can be identified within a candidate site.

1.12 Sites are recommended as proposed ‘Areas of Search’ either where they score well

against the grading criteria taking account of the prospect of achieving any assumed

mitigation measures within the plan period, against the spatial consideration, and

where sites have been nominated specifically as Areas of Search. Further ‘Areas of

Search’ are recommended to contribute to ongoing supply requirements after the

end of the plan period.

1.13 For each site recommended as a Preferred Area or an Area of Search, an Identified

Area Site Brief has been prepared, setting out how the site’s development should be

planned. This describes the considerations to be taken into account in addressing

site constraints applicable to the site. The site requirements also provide guidance

on how the site should be restored during and/or following extraction. The level of

detail for each site varies, depending on the level of information currently available

about proposals and constraints. This does not preclude further considerations or

constraints from being applied when proposals come forward during the plan period.

1.14 In each case it is important to note that not all of the areas identified will necessarily

be extracted; for example land will be required for stand-offs or screening from

nearby sensitive land uses, to avoid loss of archaeological, nature conservation or

geological features or to meet adequate access or landscaping requirements. In

some cases the extent of extraction will also be constrained by the availability or

quality of the mineral deposit itself.


Summer 2015 4

Criterion 1: Mineral Resources and Timetable

1.15 This criterion assesses the fundamental factors of whether the resource is available,

workable and suitable for extraction within the timescale of the JMLP. Generally an

extension to an existing operating quarry scores better than the opening of a new

quarry, or an operation adjacent to a dormant quarry, because of the possible

enabling works required to facilitate the development of the site.

1.16 The assessment also takes account of the nature and quantity of mineral and

anticipated rate of extraction as an indicator of the likely life expectancy and

availability of mineral during the plan period and beyond.

1.17 Any score of F against this criterion precludes the candidate site from being given

further consideration in the assessment process.

Grading for Criterion 1: Mineral Resources and Timetable

Grade Description

F Site not workable within plan period.

B Site workable with the plan period.

A Site already partially worked/adjacent to operating quarry (inapplicable for crushed rock).

1.18 The primary sources of data used to inform the assessment against this criterion are

as follows:

Information about current quarrying operations;

Data sourced from the site nominator;

Site Visit.

Criterion 2: Proximity to Sensitive Uses

1.19 This criterion has been designed to capture the suitability of the site in relation to the

known sensitivity of land uses supporting human receptors that have the potential to

be affected by the mineral operation. This could be by virtue of direct effects

associated with the mineral operation being proximate to sensitive receptors

experiencing elevated levels of noise, dust, visual intrusion etc, as well as off-site

impacts arising from the transportation effects of the operation.

1.20 For the purposes of assessment, sensitive uses have been identified and mapped

using GIS and include the following:

Schools;

Residential development;

Recreation areas;

Hospital, nursing or care home;

Incompatible business premises.

1.21 The mapping exercise has informed professional judgement of the likely potential

for adverse effects and the opportunities for mitigation, should adverse effects

appear likely. This has also taken account of the nature of the potential mineral

operations considering, for example, whether or not there is a need for blasting.


Summer 2015 5

Grading for Criterion 2: Proximity to Sensitive Uses

Grade Description

F Sensitive human receptors on whom the potential impacts of the mineral operation cannot be adequately mitigated.

C Sensitive human receptors on whom the potential impacts of the mineral operation are unlikely to be adequately mitigated without

detailed further study.

B Sensitive human receptors on whom the potential impacts of the mineral operation can be adequately mitigated.

A No sensitive human receptors anticipated to be adversely affected by the mineral operation.


as follows:

Site Visit;

Surrounding Land Use;

Mapping exercise.

Criterion 3: International Ecology and Nature Conservation

Designations

1.23 This criterion has been designed to reflect the importance of considering potential

impacts of proposed sites on Natura 2000 sites, defined as Special Protection Areas

(SPAs), Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) and Ramsar sites. The Habitats

Regulations Assessment (HRA) process provides the formal mechanism whereby

such impacts are more fully considered and the overall JMLP will be subject to HRA.

1.24 The assessment score for this criterion is derived from the findings of the HRA

screening of the candidate sites, which is reported separately.

Grading for Criterion 3: International Ecology and Nature Conservation

Designations

Grade Description

F The potential impacts of the mineral operation on a Natura 2000 site cannot be adequately mitigated.

C The potential impacts of the mineral operation on Natura 2000 sites are complex and adequate mitigation is uncertain.

B There is confidence that the potential impacts of the mineral operation on Natura 2000 sites can be adequately mitigated.

A No Natura 2000 sites anticipated to be adversely affected by the mineral operation.


as follows:

HRA;


Summer 2015 6

Criterion 4: National and Local Ecology and Nature Conservation

Designations

1.26 In addition to internationally designated sites, minerals working have the potential to

affect ecological assets of national and local importance such as Sites of Special

Scientific Interest (SSSIs), Local Wildlife Sites (LWS), Local Nature Reserves

(LNRs), Marine Nature Reserves (MNRs) and Ancient Woodlands; through the loss

or degradation of habitat and other factors.

1.27 Criterion 4 seeks to relate the potential effects of mineral operations to the known

presence of features of nature conservation value. Although the presence of a

nationally protected species or habitat that may be adversely affected by a mineral

operation will not necessarily preclude development, this criterion reflects the

preference to minimise potential effects on nature conservation value.

Grading for Criterion 4: National and Local Ecology and Nature Conservation

Designations

Grade Description

F The potential impacts of the mineral operation on an ecological asset of national and/or local importance cannot be adequately

mitigated.

D The potential impacts of the mineral operation on an ecological asset of national and/or local importance are unlikely to be

adequately mitigated without detailed further study.

C The potential impacts of the mineral operation on an ecological asset of national and/or local importance are complex and

adequate mitigation is uncertain.

B There is confidence that the potential impacts of the mineral operation on an ecological asset of national and/or local importance

can be adequately mitigated.

A No ecological assets of national and/or local importance are anticipated to be adversely affected by the mineral operation.


as follows:

Local Nature Reserves;

National Nature Reserves;

Sites of Special Scientific Interest;

Local Wildlife Sites database;

Biodiversity Priority Habitats;

Habitat Inventory Data;

Living Landscapes.

Criterion 5: Landscape Character

1.29 Minerals operations have the potential to form a significant presence in the

landscape. In certain environments, the character of open mineral workings would

be incongruent with the surrounding landscape and could give rise to significant


Summer 2015 7

adverse effects on the landscape character. Landscape sensitivity is a measure of

the ability of the landscape to absorb significant changes in character without undue

effects and has been used as an indicator in the suitability of sites for inclusion in

the JMLP.

1.30 It should be noted that the ‘F’ grade has not been included against this criterion.

This is on the basis that high sensitivity of landscape character is not considered an

absolute constraint when applied to Areas of Search that cover extensive

geographical areas and potentially extend over several landscape areas. The

assignment of scoring against this criterion takes the advice in Planning Practice

Guidance into consideration as it relates to designated landscape areas,

conservation of the natural beauty of the landscape and landscape quality and

character.

Grading for Criterion 5: Landscape Character

Grade Description

D High sensitivity

C Medium sensitivity

B Medium-Low sensitivity

A Low sensitivity


as follows:

Landscape designations;

Landscape character assessment;

Landscape management initiatives.

Criterion 6: Visual Impact

1.32 This criterion reflects that mineral workings, irrespective of their extent, will

necessarily give rise to adverse effects on visual impact. In this respect, the

assessment assigns a grade based on the potential for the proposed site to be

mitigated (for example, screened from view either by topography or barriers such as

landscaping and tree belts); and the amount of receptors likely to be affected in terms

of being able to view the minerals operation and any ancillary effects such as

increased HGV movements. In respect of receptors, the presence of permanent

residences with a line of sight to the site would take precedence over visitors to the

landscape, such as walkers or equestrians.

1.33 The grade assigned is based on a combination of GIS and site visit notes –

professional judgement has been used to predict the sensitivity of the area in terms

of potential visual impact of minerals operations. It should be noted that the ‘F’ grade

has not been included against this criterion. This is on the basis that high sensitivity

to visual impact is not considered an absolute constraint when applied to Areas of

Search that cover extensive geographical areas and potentially extend over several

areas.

Grading for Criterion 6: Visual Impact


Summer 2015 8

Grade Description

D High

C Medium

B Medium-Low sensitivity

A Low


as follows:

Surrounding land uses;

Degree of visibility from local roads and public rights of way;

Site visit.

Criterion 7: Cultural Heritage

1.35 The presence of archaeology, whether known, suspected or as yet unknown, forms

an important consideration in the selection of sites for the JMLP. In addition, mineral

workings have the potential to affect the settings of other heritage assets in the

vicinity.

1.36 The NPPF and Planning Practice Guidance provide guidance on how impacts on

designated heritage assets should be assessed. This criterion has been designed

to align with the principles underpinning this guidance.

Grading for Criterion 7: Cultural Heritage

Grade Description

F The potential impacts of the mineral operation on a designated heritage asset of the highest significance (defined in NPPF as

scheduled monuments, protected wreck sites, battlefields, grade I and II* listed buildings and grade I and II* registered parks and

gardens and world heritage sites) are unacceptable.

C The potential impacts of the mineral operation on a designated heritage asset are complex and adequate mitigation is uncertain.

B There is confidence that potential impacts of the mineral operation on a designated heritage asset can be adequately mitigated.

A The nomination site does not affect any known heritage assets.


as follows:

Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas;

Registered Battlefields;

Registered Parks and Gardens;

Scheduled Monuments;

World Heritage Sites.


Summer 2015 9

Criterion 8: Agricultural Land Quality

1.38 The NPPF expresses the commitment to the protection of the Best and Most

Versatile (BMV) Agricultural Land from development that would sterilise productive

use. The guidance promotes a sequential approach to the siting of development,

encouraging proposals to make use of land of lower grades (3b, 4 and 5) in

preference to the BMV grades of 1, 2 and 3a. However it has not been possible to

obtain sufficiently detailed maps of agricultural land grades to differentiate between

grade 3a, which is BMV and grade 3b, which is not. Therefore the grading presented

in support of this criterion refers to actual grades, rather than whether or not the land

is BMV.

1.39 It should be noted that the ‘F’ grade has not been included against this criterion.

This is on the basis that loss of high grade agricultural land to mineral workings is

not considered an absolute constraint, albeit that it is not desirable.

Grading for Criterion 8: Agricultural Land Quality

Criteria Description

D The candidate site is wholly grades 1 and 2.

C The candidate site is predominantly grades 1 and 2, but includes some lower grade land.

B The candidate site is wholly or predominantly grade 3 agricultural land.

A The nomination site is a Brownfield site.

1.40 The primary source of data used to inform the assessment against this criterion is

as follows:

Agricultural Land Classifications;

Site visit.

Criterion 9: Transportation

1.41 The ability to transport worked minerals from the extraction point in a safe and

efficient manner is a key consideration in selecting sites. Where no non-road

transport option is available, consideration must be given to the suitability of the

roads along which minerals traffic will need to be routed prior to accessing the main

highway network (i.e. A-roads and motorways), particularly taking a view on the

potential impacts of traffic on the established communities through which likely

routes pass. Adverse effects can arise from, amongst other factors, sub-standard

road widths; poor visibility; undulating topography/steep routes; noise; vibration and

pollutants. Similar considerations also apply to non-road transport options where

available.

1.42 The assessment of sites against this criterion takes into account that in some cases

it will be possible to deliver improvements that overcome poor access issues.

However, it also reflects a presumption in favour of minimising the need for ancillary

improvements to the highway or other routes in allocating sites within the JMLP,

taking into account that impacts of transport improvements could give rise to

unacceptable environmental consequences. An ‘F’ grade does not necessarily


Summer 2015 10

indicate that some means of addressing the access issue may not be available in

the future, but that this is unlikely within the plan period.

1.43 Consideration should be given to the potential effects of minerals sites on the

surrounding highway network, therefore sites should be assessed in relation to

whether they are accompanied by a Transport Statement or Transport Assessment

and any identified likely impacts of the development on the local road network.

Grading for Criterion 9: Transportation

Grade Description

F Connection to the main highway network can only be gained via unsuitable roads that are unlikely to be capable of improvement without

significant disruption/disturbance.

C Connection to the main highway network can be gained via unsuitable roads that are capable of improvement, as informed by a Transport

Assessment.

B Connection to the main highway network can be gained via suitable roads, or new access.

A Site has direct access to the main highway network via a suitable junction.


as follows:

Proximity to main highway network;

Advice from Highway Officers;

Site Visit.

Criterion 10: Water Environment

1.45 The process of working minerals involves excavation and dewatering inevitably

affects the water environment. The significance and degree of impact will depend on

the nature of the ground water, its proximity and geological relationship with water

features, whether or not the site is within an area liable to flood, or a source

protection zone, and if so, the proximity to the source being protected. In addition,

quarrying itself can be vulnerable to flooding, or can affect the vulnerability of

neighbouring land and property. Planning Practice Guidance advises that sand and

gravel workings are less vulnerable to flooding.

1.46 The Environment Agency has prepared maps showing the locations of aquifers and

of source protection zones. This information, information on flood risk and the

distances to the nearest watercourses noted on the OS maps have been used to

inform the assessment of the various candidate sites in accordance with the criteria

in the table below.

Grading for Criterion 10: Water Environment

Criteria Description

D The potential impacts of the mineral operation on surface water and/or on groundwater are such that the mineral operation are unlikely to be

permitted except in exceptional circumstances following comprehensive risk assessment or demonstrable mitigation.


Summer 2015 11

C The potential impacts of the mineral operation on surface water and/or on groundwater are such that comprehensive risk assessment or mitigation

will be necessary.

B There is confidence the potential impacts of the mineral operation on surface water and/or on groundwater can be adequately mitigated.

A The potential impacts of the mineral operation are unlikely to adversely affect surface water and/or groundwater conditions.


as follows:

Environment Agency Flood Maps;

Environment Agency source protection policy and maps;

ERY and Hull Strategic Flood Risk Assessments;

Proximity to water courses.

Evaluation of Site Suitability

1.48 The grades are used in the assessment together with a written summary of findings

for each of the sites. This will outline the key assets of the site in terms of the relevant

selection criteria, and takes account of the implications of any criterion against which

the site has scored less favourably (i.e. a grade of C or D) in terms of the complexity

of overcoming potential development constraints. The assessment also makes

reference to the potential contribution of the site in terms of meeting the respective

aggregate supply requirements and to achieving the desired geographic spread of

sites.


Summer 2015 12

2. Candidate Site Descriptions and Summary of

Assessment

2.1 This section of the report details the assessment for each of the candidate sites.

The findings are preceded by a general site description, incorporating criteria-

specific comments, following which the criteria gradings are presented as a tabular

summary. The site descriptions are completed with a summary that outlines the

principal assets and constraints associated with the site, and the potential

contribution of the site to a good geographic spread across the East Riding of

Yorkshire area as described above at paragraph 1.7.

2.2 The information is presented in Tables 2.1 and 2.2 below.

2.3 As a result of the assessment, a number of sites are recommended to be carried

forward as proposed Preferred Areas or Areas of Search in the next stage of the

JMLP.

2.4 The overall selection is presented at the end of this appendix.


Summer 2015 13

Table 2.1 - Sand and Gravel Sites - Summary Review Comments and Assessment

Site Summary Review Comments and Assessment

SG1 - Willowcroft Farm, Catwick

675,000 tonnes

The site comprises low lying flat farmland which is located immediately to the North of the existing Little Catwick Quarry, it is approximately 18 hectares. The site lies within an Area of Search identified in the adopted JMLP 2004.

Since being nominated the site has been granted planning permission.

On this basis the site has not been assessed further. Its resources are included in the landbank.

Table continues on next page


Summer 2015 14

SG2 – Land at Barff House, Brandesburton

Potential mineral yield:

850,000 tonnes:

280,000 t in northern parcel and 570,000 t in southern parcel.

The site comprises undulating agricultural land located to the west of Brandesburton and extends to some 162ha. The nomination is bisected by Hempholme Lane, which runs in a north-west/south-east direction through the site. The Northern parcel is generally surrounded by farmland, although approximate 135m to the north-east of the site is a residential development, to the east a golf course and fishing ponds to the South.

The Southern area is bordered by the fishing ponds along the northern boundary but is surrounded by agricultural land on all other sides. The nearest residential property is situated approximately 130m to the west with 26 residential properties within 2km of the site. A public right of way crosses the southern part of the site from Heigholme Lane and may require diversion due to its location and visibility of the site.

Both parcels of the site are grade 2 agricultural land. There are no ecological designations in the vicinity that would be affected by extraction at the site, although the site has been identified as requiring Stage 2 HRA.

There are 21 listed buildings within 2km of the site and scheduled monuments within 1 km. There is a RIGS within 1 km.

The site lies within Flood Zones 2 and 3, and iswithin the indicative flood plain for the Burshill and Barff Drain which runs through the candidate site. Additionally, the River Hull Flood Risk Management Strategy indicates that an area to the south of Leven is shown to be at risk in 1 in 25 year and 1 in 100 year floods with the existing pumping station regime in place and if the pumps were withdrawn in the future.

The current access to the site is via a narrow single vehicle width lane leading from the road linking Brandesburton and Leven, although the nominator has suggested a new access could be provided along Heigholm Lane. The Highways Officer has advised that neither access is suitable without substantial improvement which will have adverse implications for local residents. Possible mitigation cannot be assessed without a Transport Assessment, which has not been undertaken at this stage.

The site formed part of the Leven and Brandesburton Area of Search identified in the adopted JMLP 2004, the nomination site extends slightly beyond the eastern side of the north western finger. The anticipated rate of extraction is 100,000 tpa.

Spatially, the site is within the catchment of Beverley and Hull, but given the poor access and lower scores on other criteria is considered less suitable than other sites also within this catchment.

Criteria 1 Mineral resources

2 Proximity to sensitive uses

3 Int’tional ecology desig’ns

4 National & local ecology desig’ns

5 Landscape character

6 Visual Impact

7 Cultural Heritage

8

Ag’l land quality

9

Access & t’portat ion

10

Water env’ment

Assessment B C B A A/B C B C F B

On the basis of the poor access via Hempholme Lane, and Heigholm Lane therefore in relation to criterion 9, and lower scores on other criteria, it is not recommended that the site should be identified as a proposed Preferred Area in the Revised Approach version of the JMLP. However this part of the adopted JMLP 2004 Leven and Brandesburton Area of Search should be carried forward to provide for anticipated supply beyond the plan period and the edge of the Area of Search adjusted to reflect the nominated site boundary (see SG11 below).


Summer 2015 15

SG3 – Routh’s Carr and Monksbridge Plantation, Leven, Routh

900,000 tonnes

The nominated site is located 1km north east of Routh and 1km south of Leven. The site extends to 65ha and is surrounded by flat low lying farmland graded as 2 and 3 agricultural land. The site itself is predominantly grade 3 agricultural land. Other uses in proximity to the site are the former Routh Quarry, which has been restored to a holiday home development; and Monkbridge Plantation, which is situated on the southern boundary. A Sewerage Treatment Works sits adjacent to the northern boundary. The nearest residential property is Leven House, a Grade II Listed Building located 200m to the east of the site.

The site is intersected by Cross Drain and a number of smaller drains are located within it. A large part of the site is located in a Flood Risk Zone 3 (this site is close to the River Hull Floodplain Living Landscape). The eastern site boundary is adjacent to two designated Main Rivers - Monk Dike/Foredyke Stream and Routh/Meaux East Drain. The site is located on a Secondary ‘A’ Aquifer. It is possible that in certain areas the Secondary ‘A’ Aquifer may be in hydraulic connectivity with the underlying Principal Aquifer.

Within 2km of the site is Routh Quarry (RIGS), Leven Canal SSSI and 14 Listed Buildings.

Opportunities for nature conservation through the restoration process are evident at this site, including restoration to wetland habitats for nature conservation. This site is within the River Hull Valley Biodiversity Priority Area as identified in the adopted East Riding of Yorkshire Biodiversity Action Plan.

The site is currently accessed via an agricultural gateway direct onto the A1035, or onto Carr Lane, a minor trackway running along the northern boundary of the site. The Nominator has indicated that possible access options would be an improved access onto the A1035, or via an improved junction to Carr Lane onto Beverley Road leading south from Leven. This is a busy road with some residential properties adjacent. Of the two options, the former is considered preferable, with the standard of the access and any improvements in the highways to be determined through a Transport Assessment. Any new access should be closed off and abandoned after extraction is completed.

The anticipated rate of extraction is 100,000 tpa.

The site lies within the Leven and Brandsburton Area of Search identified in the adopted JMLP 2004.

Spatially, the site is within the catchment of Beverley and Hull, and the main part of the candidate site (omitting the northern section north of Cross Drain) is considered suitable to be recommended as a Preferred Area to contribute to meeting the demand for sand and gravel calculated in Background Paper 1 as being required to maintain supplies during the plan period.

Great care should be taken in framing any proposals for quarrying to address the constraints of the site and its surrounding area. Any proposals would need to be most carefully sited and screened to minimise impact on the landscape and local residents, and any working areas should be worked progressively to minimise the exposed area at any one time.

Further details are provided in the Identified Site Brief in Appendix C of the Revised Preferred Approach JMLP.



3 Int’ nal ecology desig’ns

4 Nat & local ecology desig’ns

5 L’scape character

6 Visual Impact

7 Cultural Heritage

8 Ag’l land quality

9 Access & t’portat ion

10 Water env’ment

Assessment B B B A A A B B B C


Summer 2015 16

On the basis of the demand for supplies of sand and gravel during the plan period, and the scores and location of the site, it is recommended that the nominated site SG3 should be identified as a proposed Preferred Area for sand and gravel in the plan.

SG4 Gransmoor Lane and Gembling Area of Search (AOS)


Summer 2015 17

3,600,000 tonnes (comprising 2,400,000 in Northern part and 1,200,000 in Southern part).

The nominated site partially overlaps with the Gransmoor Lane and Lissett Area of Search identified in the adopted JMLP 2004. The nominated Area of Search, which is a revision from the site nominated for the 2012 Site Selection report, forms a large area centred on the small settlement of Gransmoor, covering an area of 685 ha. An Area of Search indicates that some areas within the defined area could be suitable for mineral extraction (but not all of it); works would not take place close to existing settlements, individual dwellings and farmsteads.

The nominated site is low lying and gently undulating agricultural land, predominantly Grade 3. The site does not include any designated features of environmental importance; however some of the site is designated as an Environmental Stewardship Area.

The area has revealed archaeological evidence in past workings and it is considered likely to reveal further archaeology. There are 2 Scheduled Monuments and 2 Listed Buildings within 8km of the site. A public right of way and track crosses the site.

The site is intersected by Flood Zones 2 and 3 and the June 2007 flood outline. The site is also close to the River Hull Headwaters SSSI and the River Hull Living Landscape. It does not lie within a Source Protection Zone. The site is located on a Secondary ‘A’ Aquifer. It is possible that in certain areas the Secondary ‘A’ Aquifer may be in hydraulic connectivity with the underlying Principal Aquifer.

From Natural England’s Habitat Inventory data and aerial photographs it appears that there is some deciduous woodland in the search area. The habitat inventory data also highlights an area of lowland meadows close to the search area. There are 2 Local Wildlife Sites present within the site at Barf Hill Wood and Little Kelk Wetland.

The existing quarry at Gransmoor has been shown to contain in situ archaeological deposits of Upper Palaeolithic date. These are exceptionally rare, this far north. In addition to the Palaeolithic deposits, the wider extraction area includes other heritage assets which are of regional significance (e.g. a Lake Village, several Iron Age square barrows, and a rare Iron Age metal working site).

This nominated site lies within the larger Area of Search identified in the JMLP, referred to as Gransmoor and Lissett AOS. A wind farm has been installed within the larger identified area to the east of the nominated site, and the coastal part of the original Area of Search is also intersected by the 200 year indicative tidal floodplain associated with the main water courses Barmston Sea Drain, Kelk Drain and of the North Sea.

The Nominator advises that any future extraction would form an extension to one of the existing quarries in the nominated Area of Search and would represent a continuation of ongoing operations there, using the same access.

The presence of two existing quarries suggests that some constraints are technically capable of being mitigated.

Spatially the nominated site offers the prospect of continued supply to the catchments of Bridlington and Driffield and is considered suitable to be recommended as an area of search to contribute to meeting the calculated demand for sand and gravel as determined in Background Paper 1 to maintain supplies during the plan period.





3 Int’ nal ecology desig’ns

4 Nat & local ecology desig’ns

5 L’scape character

6 Visual Impact

7 Cultural Heritage



10 Water env’ment


Summer 2015 18

Assessment A/B A A B A/B B C B A/B B/C

On the basis of the calculated demand for supplies of sand and gravel during the plan period, and the scores and location of the site, it is recommended that the nominated site SG4 should be identified as a proposed Area of Search for sand and gravel in the plan.

The extent of the nominated area largely overlaps the Gransmoor Lane and Lissett Area of Search from the JMLP 2004 (Candidate site SG12), so identifying the nominated SG4 logically means that Area of Search SG12 would be extended to also cover the additional area in candidate site SG4. Hence SG4 is not identified on its own, but as an extension to SG12.



Summer 2015 19

SG5 – Land South of A63, Common Lane, North Cave AOS

3,400,000 tonnes

The Common Lane nominated site lies to the south of the A63. It extends to some 50 hectares and comprises flat low lying farm land of agricultural grade 3. Two PROW follow along the outside of the site and have views into it.

Access is afforded via Common Lane onto the B1230 which gives good access a 4 way intersection on the M62 / A63, passing some industrial units to the north-west of the nominated site.

There are a number of residential properties along Common Lane and within the nominated site.

There are no designated ecological features within the site, however it has been identified as requiring a Stage 2 HRA due to being within 7 km of the Humber Estuary SPA and Ramsar site. The nearest SSSIs are Everthorpe Quarry and South Cliffe Common. The former is a geological SSSI. North Cave Wetlands RIGS is within 2km as well as other local features of interest.

This is one Grade I listed building within 5km of the site (Church of All Saints), 74 Grade II listed buildings within 5km of the site and four Grade II* listed buildings within 5km of the site. The closest listed buildings are 3 properties in Westgate, North Cave, 1.3 km away.

Skelfleet Drain is located adjacent to the western boundary and various smaller drains within the site. The site is within Flood Zones 2 and 3, but it does not lie within a Source Protection Zone.

Extraction at this site would represent the opening of a new quarry. The nominator has indicated that the site may contain up to 3.4 million tonnes of sand and gravel, and the anticipated rate of extraction is 600,000 tpa.

Spatially, the site is within the catchment of Beverley and Hull. However it is considered that other sites within the same catchment are better suited to contributing to ongoing demand during the plan period as calculated in Background Paper 1 and therefore this site is not recommended to be identified as a Preferred Area or Area of Search within the plan.

Criteria 1

Mineral resources


3

Int’tional ecology desig’ns

4

National & local ecology desig’ns

5

Landscape character

6

Visual Impact

7

Cultural Heritage

8

Ag’l land quality

9


10

Water env’ment

Assessment B B C A B C C B A/B B

There are already sufficient resources in other identified areas considered more suitable to meet the calculated demand for supplies of sand and gravel during the plan period

On the basis that there is no immediate need to identify further areas for extraction of sand and gravel to meet this calculated demand, it is not recommended that the site is identified as a Preferred Area or Area of Search within the plan. The wider sand and gravel resources should be safeguarded by inclusion in a Mineral Safeguarding Area.


Summer 2015 20

SG6 Preston Road, Sproatley WITHDRAWN

The nominated site comprises farmland situated adjacent to the B1240 approximately 500m south of Sproatley village. The southern part of the site is identified as a Mineral Consultation Area in the Holderness Local Plan. The nomination extends to 14ha. A new high pressure gas main has since been built through the nominated site and the operator has withdrawn the nomination.

This site has not therefore been considered further.

On this basis the site has not been assessed further. The wider sand and gravel resources should be safeguarded by inclusion in a Mineral Safeguarding Area.



Summer 2015 21

SG7 - Land at Pollington (West and East)

The western site has 1,020,000 tonnes and the eastern site has approx 300,000 tonnes.

Two adjacent sites to the north-west of Pollington Village have been put forward by different nominators. They lie south of Heck and Pollington Lane and comprise the partially extracted Pollington Block Work Sand Pit (West) and the partially extracted and in-filled Pollington Quarry (East) extending to approximately 11.5ha and 6.5 ha respectively. The agricultural land in the locality predominantly has a grading of 3, but the nominated sites are both essentially brownfield.

Industrial and commercial development is to the east and to the west is the Pollington Block Works. A water works and depot on a former airfield are to the north. Residential development lies a short distance to the south, including the listed property Pollington Hall. The topography falls gently toward New Fleet and Drain North, which is situated to the south. Historically a large screening bund has been formed on the southern boundary of the former mineral workings; however the sites are open to view from the lane along their northern boundary.

There are no Scheduled Monuments or archaeological features within the sites. The southern edge of the site lies within 200m of two Grade II Listed Buildings (Pollington Hall and Dovehouse Farmhouse).

The nearest SSSI is Went Ings Meadows which is approximately 3.7 km distance. There are no LWS within the Nominated Site, and one within 1km. There are 5 East Yorkshire LWS between 1km and 8km of the Nominated Site.

The sites are located to the north of the flood risk area. The site lies within Flood Zone 1. The sites are located on a Principal Aquifer and within a Source Protection Zone 2 (SPZ2).

Some illegal tipping has recently taken place on part of the eastern site, and the Environment Agency considers that the risk of contamination would be heightened if attempts were made to remove it. For this reason, a planning application to remove the illegal tipping was recently refused.

The sites both have unmade access points onto Heck and Pollington Lane.

The Nominators advise that the sites contain building and terracing sand. The anticipated rate of extraction from each site would be 60,000 tpa. Spatially the material would predominantly serve Goole and other settlements to the west including Doncaster, although Doncaster Council advises that it does have access to other sources of soft sand.

Although identification of one or other of the sites would meet the criteria for a spatial spread of sources of aggregate, and the calculated demand for sand and gravel during the plan period, as calculated in Background paper 1, there is not considered to be sufficient justification to identify both sites in the plan. Accordingly, only the western part is identified, because it has higher reserves and mitigation of impact on nearby sensitive uses, and on groundwater and other water interests is simpler to achieve.

This western site is considered suitable to be recommended as a preferred area to contribute to meeting the calculated demand for sand and gravel during the plan period.

Great care should be taken in framing any proposals for quarrying to address the constraints of the site and its surrounding area. Any proposals would need to be most carefully sited and screened to minimise impact on the landscape and local residents.


Criteria 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10


Summer 2015 22

Mineral resources

Proximity to sensitive uses



Landscape character

Visual Impact

Cultural Heritage

Ag’l land quality


Water env’ment

Assessment(West)

A A A A A A B A A/B B

Assessment (East)

A B A A A A B A A/B C

On the basis of the calculated demand for supplies of sand and gravel during the plan period, and the scores and location of the site, it is recommended that the westernmost nominated site SG7W should be identified as a proposed Preferred Area for sand and gravel in the plan.



Summer 2015 23

SG8 – Land South of A166, Garton on Wolds

2,000,000 tonnes

The nominated site has been reduced in size since 2012, and now comprises a kidney shape covering about 84 hectares lying about 500m south of the A166 across open and gently sloping agricultural land. It was nominated as an Area of Search. An AoS indicates that some areas within the defined area could be suitable for mineral extraction, but not all of it, and works would not take place close to any existing settlements, or individual dwellings and farmsteads, and current access to properties would need to be maintained.

The site is located approximately 1km south of Garton on the Wold and 2km west of Driffield, and lies within an area designated as Wolds Area of Landscape Protection. The land is classified as grade 2 agricultural land.

There are no Sites of Special Scientific Interest or other designated nature conservation areas in the immediate vicinity of the nominated site. There are 12 scheduled monuments including round barrows and bowl barrows located west of the nominated site and the revised area excludes these.

The site is within Flood Zone 1 and does not overlie a Source Protection Zone.

The nominated site crosses a lane that gives access to Kirkburn Grange.

It is likely that highway improvements would be required to access any future mineral operation and the best prospect is a new access onto the A166 as the access point suggested by the nominator, the entrance to Low Farm, is not considered suitable, so an alternative access will need to be found, if the site is to be worked. The solution would need to be informed by a full TA.

The Nominator has indicated that the site offers the prospect of continuing supply of material known locally as Garton Slack in the long term, after the existing quarry to the north of the A166 is worked out. It is unlikely that all the tonnage indicated would be extracted. The anticipated rate of extraction is 100,000 tpa subject to demand.

Spatially this site falls within the catchment of Driffield, and access to the A166 offers prospect of wider distribution of this particular material. Although the site is exposed visually and lies in a sensitive, designated landscape, the level of demand, as calculated in Background Paper 1, is notably higher than was the case in 2012, so given the reduction in the nominated area and subject to most careful detailed attention to the constraints in shaping the proposals, there is considered to be sufficient justification to identify this site as an Area of Search, within which some limited mineral working may be acceptable during the later stages of the plan period to contribute to meeting the calculated demand for sand and gravel calculated in Background Paper 1 as being required to maintain supplies during the plan period.


Further details are provided in the Identified Site Brief in Appendix C of the Revised Preferred Approach JMLP..


Summer 2015 24

Criteria 1

Mineral resources

2


3


4


5

Landscape character

6

Visual Impact

7

Cultural Heritage

8

Ag’l land quality

9


10

Water env’ment

Assessment B B A A D D C D C A/B

On the basis of the calculated demand for supplies of sand and gravel during the plan period, and the scores and location of the site, it is recommended that the site should be identified as a proposed Area of Search for Sand and Gravel in the plan to offer continuity of supply of this particular material once the nearby quarry to the north is worked out.



Summer 2015 25

SG9 - Land East of B1249, Cruckley Lane, Brigham

Total tonnage 1,130,000 tonnes; Approx 530,000 tonnes in north part and 600,000 tonnes in south part.

The nominated site extends to 48.24 hectares comprising two parcels of agricultural land either side of Cruckley Lane. The northern parcel of land lies adjacent to the eastern boundary of Brigham Quarry; the southern parcel sits to the south of Cruckley Lane. The areas are proposed as an Area of Search for extensions to Brigham Quarry, which is currently accessed from the B1249. An AoS indicates that some areas within the defined area could be suitable for mineral extraction, but not all of it.

The land is classified as grade 3 agricultural land. The southern parcel of land includes an area of land that has been historically landfilled with a variety of wastes.

The site is located approximately 0.5 km to the North East of Brigham and 1.5 km to the North West of North Frodingham. The nearest properties are Grange Farm, 30m to the west of the southern parcel and Cruckley Farm, 165m to the east of the northern parcel. There is a public footpath running through part of the northern parcel.

The topography of the area is low lying with gentle undulations. The northern parcel falls from south to north and the southern parcel falls from west to east to meet White Dyke, which forms the eastern boundary to both sites. The southern parcel and the westernmost part of the northern parcel are open to view, but the remaining parts of the northern parcel are less open due to either the topography or by screening from the existing Brigham Quarry.

The site is within Flood Zones 2 and 3 but does not overlie a Source Protection Zone. The site is located on a Secondary ‘A’ Aquifer. It is possible that in certain areas the Secondary ‘A’ Aquifer may be in hydraulic connectivity with the underlying Principal Aquifer. The site boundary is adjacent to a designated Main River, White Dike, and there are other watercourses in the surrounding area.

The River Hull Headwaters Sites of Special Scientific Interest lies approximately 0.5 km to the east of the site (including the River Hull Living Landscape). Brigham Quarry contains a Regionally Important Geological and Geomorphological Site (RIGS).

There are known crop-marks to the west of the site which clearly indicates the potential for past human activity in this area. There are no registered features of archaeological interest in the site; the closest SM is about 3km to the south (Rotsea deserted village).

The anticipated total tonnage available in both sites is approximately 1.13m tonnes. The mineral available is the same as at Brigham Quarry, namely building and tarmaccing sand, rather than for concreting. The anticipated rate of extraction is 75,000 tonnes per year. The northern parcel could form a possible extension to the existing quarry and could be worked with less impact than the southern one.

Spatially the nominated site is centrally located within reach of the catchments of Beverley, Driffield and Bridlington, and given the calculated demand for sand and gravel as set out in Background Paper 1, there is considered to be sufficient justification to identify a part of the nominated site as an ongoing source of this more specialist mineral for continuation of supply currently served by the existing Brigham quarry.

The northern part of the nominated site is considered slightly less constrained than the southern part and therefore more suitable to be recommended as an area of search in the plan.

Great care should be taken in framing any proposals for quarrying to address the constraints of the site and its surrounding area. Any proposals would need to be most carefully sited and screened to minimise impact on the landscape and local residents, and any working areas should be worked progressively to minimise the exposed area at any one time. Potential benefits exist in relation to restoration to nature conservation as the site lies within the River Hull Biodiversity Priority Area and would be an ideal site for restoration to wetland nature conservation after use. As the area is also within Flood Zones 2 and 3 the restoration could be designed to have a flood alleviation function.


Summer 2015 26


Criteria 1

Mineral resources

2


3


4


5

Landscape character

6

Visual Impact

7

Cultural Heritage

8

Ag’l land quality

9

Access & t’portation

10

Water env’ment

Assessment (North)

A B A B B/C C/D B B A B

Assessment (South)

B B A B B/C C/D B B B B

On the basis of the calculated demand for supplies of sand and gravel during the plan period, and the scores and location of the site, it is recommended that the northern part of the nominated site should be identified as a proposed Area of Search for sand and gravel in the plan to offer continuity of supply of this particular material as the adjacent quarry is worked out.



Summer 2015 27

SG10 – North Side of Leven Canal, Heigholme WITHDRAWN

2,500,000 tonnes

The site was nominated as an Area of Search but has since been withdrawn.

It has therefore not been assessed further.

The site has been withdrawn by the nominator, so it has not been considered further in the Revised Approach version of the JMLP. However the site should be safeguarded by inclusion in a Mineral Safeguarding Area.



Summer 2015 28

SG11 - Leven and Brandesburton AOS

It is not appropriate to identify a total available tonnage or anticipated rate of supply to assign to this extensive Area of Search.

The Area of Search was identified in the adopted Minerals Local Plan 2004. It covers a large area of agricultural land, including several roads and dwellings, plus operating and former quarries in the vicinity of Brandesburton and Leven villages. The A1035 passes through it.

There are a number of Grade II Listed Buildings within the Area of Search and several conservation areas on its periphery (Seaton, Sigglesthorne, Brandesburton, Catwick and Leven). This very large area includes substantial areas not subject to quarrying in recent years where there is still a large number of surviving archaeological deposits. The date range of archaeology within the area ranges from the Upper Palaeolithic (at Brandesburton) to medieval moated sites and rural settlements (e.g. the earthworks near Catfoss Hall); whilst the level of significance includes sites of major regional significance (such as the defended hill-top enclosure at The Yarrows, or the Middle Bronze Age urn cemetery at Catfoss).

Approximately half of SG11 is within 5 km of Hornsea Mere SPA which lies to the east of the AOS, (the closest point of SG11 is 200m and the furthest point is approximately 9 km from the designation). Therefore any proposals within this eastern portion will require a Stage 2 HRA. The Leven Canal SSSI is also close to the AOS. The Habitat Inventory data indicates that there are some areas of deciduous woodland within this area (important BAP habitat). There are two overlapping candidate LWS with the area of search: (Catwick Pits and Brandesburton Pits).

Parts of the River Hull Floodplain Living Landscape and Brandesburton and Hornsea Mere Living Landscape are also in this area.

There are two overlapping candidate Local Wildlife Sites with the Area of Search. These are Catwick Pits and Brandesburton Pits. This site is within the River Hull Biodiversity Priority Area. The Habitat Inventory data indicates that there are some areas of deciduous woodland within this area (important BAP habitat).

The area is intersected by Flood Zones 2 and 3, and is located on a Secondary ‘A’ Aquifer. It is possible that in certain areas the Secondary ‘A’ Aquifer may be in hydraulic connectivity with the underlying Principal Aquifer.

There are a number of archaeological deposits within this area.

The nominated sites SG2 and SG3 reviewed above fall within this Area of Search, and an additional nominated area SG14 reviewed below is immediately adjacent to part of it.

Together the sites recommended for identification as Preferred Areas or Areas of Search within which the amount of aggregate that might be available within the plan period can be assessed, together with already consented sites elsewhere, are capable of supplying sufficient resources to meet the level of demand calculated in Background Paper 1 for the duration of the plan period.

Further resources are, nevertheless required in order to meet ongoing landbank requirements at the end of the plan period. For this reason, it is recommended that the Leven and Brandesburton Area of Search should be retained in the plan.

The site is considered suitable to be recommended as an area of search to contribute to meeting the calculated demand for sand and gravel calculated in Background Paper 1 as being required to maintain supplies during the plan period. It is also recommended that adjustments are made to the boundary of the Area of Search in line with the recommendations made in the assessments for SG2, SG3 and SG14.


Summer 2015 29


The area is too large to be specifically assessed against the assessment criteria.


The sites proposed above as identified sites, together with sites in the existing sand and gravel landbank, can provide all of the sand and gravel supply requirement for the plan period.

It is recommended that the Leven and Brandesburton Area of Search should be retained in the plan in order to contribute to the maintenance of the sand and gravel landbank after the plan period. It is also recommended that the extent of the Area of Search should be adjusted to include the whole of SG2 and SG14.



Summer 2015 30

SG12 - Gransmoor Lane and Lissett AOS


The Area of Search was identified in the adopted Minerals Local Plan. Its area extends from Barmston on the coast north of Earl’s Dike, to the West round the villages of Gransmoor and Lissett to Great Kelk and includes a number of existing and historical mineral operations. The area is low lying and gently undulating agricultural land which includes areas of grades 2 and 3.

This Area of Search encompasses, or is immediately adjacent to, a number of properties, including Park House, Gransmor Low House, Turtle Hill Farm, Hill Farm, Gransmoor Lodge, High Stonehills, and Hamiltonhill Farm. There are many other properties close to the boundary of the Area of Search, including those within the settlements of Great Kelk and Little Kelk, Gransmoor, Lissett, and Fraisthorpe. There are 809 dwellings within 1km of the Area of Search.

The Area of Search encompasses a number of roads including the A165 Gransmoor Road, Gransmoor Lane and Kelk Lane.

A number of drains run through the AOS, notably Gransmoor Drain, Nutholmes Dike, Burton Drain, Yew Dike, Stonehills Drain and The Earl’s Dyke. In addition there are multiple unnamed drains.

There are 5 East Yorkshire LWS within the Nomination Site, or within 1km.

The route of the NSIP proposed Carbon Capture Scheme pipeline runs through the area potentially sterilising an approximately 50m strip either side of the pipeline. The landowners are in discussion with the developers about this matter.

The area has revealed archaeological evidence in past workings, and it is considered likely to reveal further.

The site is intersected by flood zones 2 and 3 and the June 2007 flood outline and lies within the 1 in 100 year indicative fluvial flood plain and 1 in 200 year indicative tidal floodplain associated with the main watercourses Barmston Sea Drain, Kelk Drain and of the North Sea.

The area does not include any designated features of environmental significance, although, the River Hull Headwaters SSSI is located to the West of Great Kelk. In addition, there are some non designated features including scattered woodland and the network of watercourses.

The nominated site SG4 partly overlaps this Area of Search.

The sites recommended for identification as Preferred Areas or Areas of Search within which the amount of aggregate that might be available within the plan period can be assessed, together with already consented sites elsewhere, are capable of supplying sufficient resources to meet the level of demand calculated in Background Paper 1 for the duration of the plan period.

Further resources are, nevertheless required in order to meet ongoing landbank requirements at the end of the plan period. For this reason, it is recommended that the Gransmoor and Lissett Area of Search should be retained in the plan.

The site is considered suitable to be recommended as an area of search to contribute to meeting the calculated demand for sand and gravel calculated in Background Paper 1 as being required to maintain supplies during the plan period. It is also recommended that adjustments are made to the extent of the Area of Search to include SG4.



Summer 2015 31

The area is too large to be specifically assessed against the Assessment criteria.


The sites proposed above as identified sites, together with sites in the existing sand and gravel landbank, can provide all of the sand and gravel supply requirement for the plan period.

It is recommended that the Gransmoor and Lissett Area of Search should be retained in the plan in order to contribute to the maintenance of the sand and gravel landbank after the plan period. It is also recommended that the extent of the Area of Search should be adjusted to include SG4.



Summer 2015 32

SG13 - North Farm, Thorpe Le Street

5,000,000 tonnes

The site is nominated as an Area of Search. It extends to 115 hectares and comprises grade 3 agricultural land. It lies in a rural area of farmland and farmsteads. It lies immediately adjacent to A1079 duelled road which runs along the north-eastern side of the nominated area. The settlement of Hayton is approximately 250m from the northern edge of the site.

Thorpefield Farm lies within the site and North Farm is located a short distance outside to the east. Other farms in the vicinity are Clarkes Common Farm to the south, Grove Farm to the north, and Trenwick Farm which is located on the far side of the A1079. A public footpath runs through the centre of the site, from north to south.

Neither of the existing accesses off the A1079 onto Thorpe Le Street and onto the lane that leads to Thorpefield Farm are considered suitable for use or adaption for use to serve a quarry. It will be necessary for a Transport Assessment to be undertaken to identify whether a satisfactory alternative solution can be identified.

The nearest watercourse is Hayton Beck located to the north of the site.

There are a number of small watercourses/drains crossing the site. The Environment Agency has records of a surface water abstraction used for spray irrigation at Thorpefield Farm. Flood Zone 1

There are strong indications from fieldwalking and aerial photography of the presence of remains within the site related to the line of the former roman road now the A1079, and historic occupation on the site of Hayton Village and the deserted medieval village of Thorpe-Le-Street which show the site as an area of archaeological interest. There are 2 Listed Buildings within 1km of the site, Old Village School (0.68km) and Church of St Martin (0.78km). There are 11 Listed Buildings within 2 km of the site, the closest being Field House (1.21km). The closest Scheduled Ancient Monument is Cleaving Hall moated site which is 2.4km away.

There are 2 East Yorkshire LWS within the Nomination Site, or within 1km.

The site is underlain by Glaciolacustrine sand and gravel deposits which yield soft sand suitable for use as building and tarmaccing sand. It is estimated to contain some 5 million tonnes of aggregate. No rate of extraction has been suggested, but the level of demand for this more specialist type of material is lower than that for concreting sand and gravel.

The area is considered too large to be specifically assessed against the assessment criteria.

Spatially the site lies in the central part of the west of the plan area, within the hinterland of Beverley and other towns in the plan area via the A road network. The A1079 leads to York in the west.


Due to this and the level of constraint on this site, particularly as regards access, the site is not recommended to be identified as a Preferred Area or Area of Search within the plan.

The sites proposed as identified sites, together with sites in the existing sand and gravel landbank, can provide all of the sand and gravel supply requirement for the plan period.

It is not recommended that the nominated site is identified as a proposed Area of Search in the plan.

The resources within it should be safeguarded by inclusion in a Mineral Safeguarding Area.


Summer 2015 33

SG14 - Land at Leven Grange

No tonnage provided

The site is nominated to be included in the Leven and Brandesburton Area of Search. It is about 21 hectares in size and comprises grade 3 agricultural land. It lies to the south east of Levin village immediately adjacent to the dualled section of the A165 and has a frontage onto the Beverley Road. A public footpath follows around the edges of the area, except along the frontage onto Beverley Road.

The site is surrounded by a mixture of land uses; primarily agriculture with the nearby residential area of Leven to the north. The nearest residential property is a farm directly adjacent to the northern edge of the area. The outskirts of the residential area of Leven starts from here. To the east of the site and on the other side of the A165 is an existing sand and gravel quarry, operated by the site nominator.

Access could be obtained from the Beverley Road. A new access will need to be formed, informed by a Transportation Assessment.

RIGS within 2km of the site are Routh Quarry and Brandesburton Gravel Pit. There are no East Yorkshire LWS within the area, or within 1km. The Leven Canal SSSI is within 2km.

There are 8 Listed Buildings within 1km, the closest being Leven House (0.19km). The closest Scheduled Ancient Monument is 2.8km away.

There are a number of small watercourses/drains bordering or crossing the site. A large proportion of the area is covered by Flood Zone 3. The site is located on a Secondary ‘A’ Aquifer. It is possible that in certain areas the Secondary ‘A’ Aquifer may be in hydraulic connectivity with the underlying Principal Aquifer.

The nominator has not provided an anticipated tonnage of sand and gravel within the site, or the rate of output.

Spatially, the site is within the catchment of Beverley and Hull, and is considered suitable to be recommended for inclusion in the plan as part of an Area of Search for sand and gravel by extending the extent of the Leven and Brandesburton Area of Search.


Further resources are, nevertheless required in order to meet ongoing landbank requirements at the end of the plan period. For this reason, it is recommended that the Leven and Brandesburton Area of Search should be retained in the plan.


Further details of the requirements for any proposals within the Leven and Brandesburton Area of Search (SG11) are provided in the Identified Site Brief in Appendix C of the Revised Preferred Approach JMLP.



3 Int’tional ecology desig’ns

4 National & local ecology desig’ns

5 Landscape character

6 Visual Impact

7 Cultural Heritage



10 Water env’ment

Assessment B B B B A/B A B B B C


Summer 2015 34

The sites proposed as identified sites, together with sites in the existing sand and gravel landbank, can provide all of the sand and gravel supply requirement for the plan period.

It is recommended that the nominated site SG14 should be included in the Leven and Brandesburton Area of Area of Search, SG11, in the plan in order to contribute to the maintenance of the sand and gravel landbank after the plan period.

Table continues on next page.


Summer 2015 35

SG15 – Land South of Brook Farm North Cave

3,400,000 tonnes

The site lies to the north of the B1230 approximately 1.1 km from North Cave and approximately 3.2 km from South Cave. The land is primarily flat low lying Grade 3 agricultural land.

The site has a frontage onto the B1230, but the indicative working proposals are that the site would be worked as an extension to the current Dryham Lane Quarry immediately adjacent to the east, and that material from the Brook Farm site would be processed at the existing processing area at Dryham Lane Quarry and removed from there via the existing access onto Crosslands and thence to the B1230.

The site surrounds the Brook Farm farmhouse. Further residential properties are situated between the site and the B1230, the nearest is immediately adjacent to the site.

There are no designated ecological features within the site, however it has been identified as requiring a Stage 2 HRA due to being within 7 km of the Humber Estuary SPA and Ramsar site. Here are 11 SSSIs within 8km of the site, the nearest are South Cliffe Common and Hotham Meadow. SSSI. North Cave Wetlands RIGS is within 2km as well as other local features of interest.

There is one Grade I listed building within 5km of the site (Church of All Saints), Seventy six Grade II listed buildings within 5km of the site and four Grade II* listed buildings within 5km of the site. The closest listed buildings are within North Cave 1.7km away.

Skelfleet Drain is located adjacent to the western boundary and a number of smaller drains cross the site.

The north west part of the site is within Flood Risk Zone 3. It does not lie within a Source Protection Zone. The site is located on a secondary ‘A’ aquifer. There is also a number of groundwater abstractions located within the immediate area for spray irrigation.

Extraction at this site would represent an extension to an existing operating quarry. The nominator has undertaken a detailed mineral assessment indicating indicated that the site contains approx 2.2 million tonnes of sand and gravel, and the anticipated rate of extraction is 500,000 tpa.

Spatially, the site is within the catchment of Beverley and Hull. The nearby Dryham Lane Quarry does not have sufficient reserves to continue to operate at its current rate of output throughout the plan period. The Brook Farm site therefore offers prospect of being an alternative source of sand and gravel within the catchment after Dryham Lane is worked out to contribute to meeting the calculated demand for sand and gravel calculated in Background Paper 1 as being required to maintain supplies during the plan period.

Great care should be taken in framing any proposals for quarrying to address the constraints of the site and its surrounding area. Any proposals would need to be most carefully sited and screened to minimise impact on the landscape and local residents, and any working areas should be worked progressively to minimise the exposed area at any one time. In addition, to address potential cumulative impacts, the site should be worked in series, rather than at the same time as The Outgang, SG16, which is also identified as a Preferred Area.


Criteria 1

Mineral resources

2 Proximity to

3 4

National & local

5 6

Visual Impact

7

Cultural Heritage

8

Ag’l land quality

9 10

Water env’ment


Summer 2015 36

sensitive uses


ecology desig’ns

Landscape character


Assessment A B B B B B C B A B

On the basis of the calculated demand for supplies of sand and gravel during the plan period, and the scores and location of the site, it is recommended that the nominated site SG15 should be identified as a proposed Preferred Area for sand and gravel in the plan.

Table continues on next page.


Summer 2015 37

SG16 – The Outgang

3,400,000 tonnes

The site lies to the north of the A63 approximately 825m from North Cave and approximately 1.5 km from South Cave. The land is primarily flat low lying Grade 3 agricultural land, the eastern part is grade 2.

Myres Lane, a single track road, runs along the northern boundary of the site. This meets Station Road, two track, at its eastern end, and Lower Mill Lane, single track, at its western end. Indicative working proposals are that access onto the B1230 would not be gained via these roads, but instead via an existing extraction area to the west. The latter arrangement is preferable to the intensification of use Myres Lane and either Station Road or Lower Mill Lane to reach the B1230.

The nearest residential properties is a farm on the southern side of the A63, others are situated approx. 70m to the north and east. Further residential properties are within 100 to 200m.

There are no designated ecological features within the site, however it has been identified as requiring a Stage 2 HRA due to being

within 7 km of the Humber Estuary SPA and Ramsar site. There are 12 SSSIs within 8km of the site, the closest being Everthorpe Quarry (2.48 km) and Drewton Lane Pits (3.0 km). North Cave Wetlands RIGS is within 2km as well as other local features of

interest.

This is one Grade I listed building within 5km of the site (Church of All Saints), 82 Grade II listed buildings within 5km of the site and four Grade II* listed buildings within 5km of the site. The closest listed buildings are within North and South Cave.

Mires Beck (a ‘main’ river) runs adjacent to the eastern boundary of the site. Water Furs and South Ings Drain crosses the site from north to south and a smaller drain joins it within the site. There is a small pond on the southern boundary of the site.

A large portion of the site is within Flood Risk Zone 3. It does not lie within a Source Protection Zone. The site is located on a secondary ‘A’ aquifer. There is also a number of groundwater abstractions located within the immediate area for spray irrigation.

Extraction at this site would provide a satellite site providing material to be processed at an existing operating quarry. The nominator has undertaken a mineral assessment indicating indicated that the site contains approx 850,000 tonnes of sand and gravel, and the anticipated rate of extraction is 500,000 tpa.

Spatially, the site is within the catchment of Beverley and Hull. The nearby Dryham Lane Quarry does not have sufficient reserves to continue to operate at its current rate of output throughout the plan period. The Outgang site therefore offers prospect of being an alternative source of sand and gravel within the catchment after Dryham Lane is worked out to contribute to meeting the calculated demand for sand and gravel set out in Background Paper 1 as being required to maintain supplies during the plan period.

Great care should be taken in framing any proposals for quarrying to address the constraints of the site and its surrounding area. Any proposals would need to be most carefully sited and screened to minimise impact on the landscape and local residents, and any working areas should be worked progressively to minimise the exposed area at any one time. In addition, to address potential cumulative impacts, the site should be worked in series, rather than at the same time as Brook Farm SG15, which is also identified as a Preferred Area.



Summer 2015 38

Criteria 1

Mineral resources


3


4


5

Landscape character

6

Visual Impact

7

Cultural Heritage

8

Ag’l land quality

9


10

Water env’ment

Assessment A B B B B B C B A B

On the basis of the calculated demand for supplies of sand and gravel during the plan period, and the scores and location of the site, it is recommended that the nominated site SG16 should be identified as a proposed Preferred Area for sand and gravel in the plan.


Summer 2015 39

Table 2.2 - Crushed Rock Sites - Summary Review Comments and Assessment

Site Summary Review Comments and Assessment

CR1 - Greenwick Quarry Huggate

Estimated 4,300,000 tonnes

The nominated site is farmland which extends to 16ha and forms an extension to the adjacent chalk quarry, Greenwick Quarry, which lies approximate 0.5 km south of the A166. The nomination lies within the Greenwick Quarry Area of Search for Crushed Rock identified in the adopted JMLP 2004, reviewed below as CR7. This Area of Search is recognised as having several environmental constraints, including falling within the Wolds Area of Landscape Protection, proximity to Millington Wood & Pastures SSSI and the presence of archaeological features.

The nearest residential property at Cold Skin Farm is approximately 250m to the east of the nominated site with 13 other dwellings within 2 km.

The site is very open to view from the lane along the west boundary. This could only be overcome by a combination of bunding, planting and standoff from the road. Planting will take time to establish in this elevated location.

The site is located in an extremely important archaeological landscape. There are 12 Scheduled Monuments within 1km of the site. Immediately on the other side of the road is a section of linear boundary dyke on Millington Lings which is a Scheduled Monument. This monument is part of a very extensive and important system of linear boundary dykes in this area of the Yorkshire Wolds, dating back to the Bronze Age several areas of which lie to thesouth, west and east of this Area of Search. There are also two round barrows within 150 metres of the boundary of this area. The line of the earthworks continues within the site. Any p[roposals should be accompanied by an archaeological assessment.

The agricultural land is graded 3.

The site is not subject to flooding. The nearest watercourses are more than 3km to the west and north-west. The aquifer underlying the site provides a public drinking water supply to a nearby village.

The nominated extension would be accessed through the existing operation, and traffic would be routed northwards to join the A166. The anticipated rate of extraction has not been advised.

Spatially, the site is further from settlements in the East Riding of Yorkshire than other nominated sites with lower or equivalent levels of constraint according to the assessment methodology.

Together the reserves in already consented sites are calculated as capable of supplying sufficient resources to meet the level of demand for crushed rock calculated in Background Paper 1 for the duration of the plan period. Further resources are, nevertheless required in order to meet ongoing landbank requirements at the end of the plan period.

For this reason it is not recommended that this site should be identified as a Preferred Area. However, it is recommended that the Greenwick Area of Search should be retained in the plan (see CR7 below). The site is considered a possible long term candidate once measures have been made to address the high visibility in this sensitive landscape.

Further details of the requirements for any proposals within the Greenwick Quarry Area of Search (CR7) are provided in the Identified Site Brief in Appendix C of the Revised Preferred Approach JMLP.


Summer 2015 40

Criteria 1

Mineral resources


3


4


5

Landscape character

6

Visual Impact

7

Cultural Heritage

8

Ag’l land quality

9


10

Water env’ment

Assessment A B A B D D C B A C

There are already sufficient reserves in currently consented areas to meet ongoing landbank requirements as calculated in Background Paper 1 during the plan period, on the basis that there is no immediate need to identify further areas for extraction of crushed rock to meet ongoing landbank requirements, it is not recommended that the site is identified as a Preferred Area within the plan.

However, the Greenwick Quarry Area of Search (CR7) within which this site falls should be carried forward as an option to provide for anticipated supply beyond the plan period.

CR2 - Riplingham Quarry, Riplingham WITHDRAWN

The site has been withdrawn and replaced by site CR9 – assessed below.

The site CR2 has not been assessed further.



Summer 2015 41

CR3 – Little Wold, Swinecaif (within CR8)

2,000,000 tonnes

The nominated site is immediately to the north of the existing chalk quarry at Swinescaif approximately 500m north-east of South Cave. It extends partly down the northern flank of a small hill called Little Wold. The nearest dwellings are about 500m to the west and 300m to the north.

The nomination lies within the Swinescaif Area of Search for Crushed Rock identified in the adopted JMLP 2004. The AOS is situated in an Area of High Landscape Value and the access is noted as sensitive to any increase in traffic levels above those associated with the current or past operation of the existing quarry. The AOS which the site lies in was also identified as requiring a Stage 2 HRA. These constraints also apply to the nominated site.

The site is partially screened from the north by a belt of woodland along its north-western edge, although views can be obtained from the byway which forms the south boundary of the nominated site.

There are no designated sites of nature conservation interest in the nominated site, or within its vicinity, nor any Scheduled Ancient Monuments. However, previous archaeological work within the existing quarry site has identified a number of Bronze Age, Iron Age and Romano-British features in the vicinity. Both the Bronze Age and Iron Age features are of regional archaeological significance, whilst the field system is of more local significance. It is considered highly likely, given the topography, that a similar level of archaeological activity would be present within any extensions to the existing working area.

The land is grade 3 Agricultural land.

The site is not within a Flood Zone, nor within a Source Protection Zone. It lies on a principal aquifer.


Spatially the site falls within the catchment for Hull and Beverley.


For this reason it is not recommended that this site should be identified as a Preferred Area. However, it is recommended that the Swinescaif Area of Search should be retained in the plan (see CR8 below).

Further details of the requirements for any proposals within the Swinescaif Area of Search (CR8) are provided in the Identified Site Brief in Appendix C of the Revised Preferred Approach JMLP.

Criteria 1

Mineral resources

2


3


4


5

Landscape character

6

Visual Impact

7

Cultural Heritage

8

Ag’l land quality

9


10

Water env’ment

Assessment A/B B B A B C B B B B


Summer 2015 42

There are already sufficient reserves in currently consented areas to meet ongoing landbank requirements as calculated in Background Paper 1 during the plan period, on the basis that there is no immediate need to identify further areas for extraction of crushed rock to meet ongoing landbank requirements, it is not recommended that the site is identified as a Preferred Area within the plan.

However, the Swinescaif Area of Search (CR8) should be carried forward as an option to provide for anticipated supply beyond the plan period.



Summer 2015 43

CR4 - Land North & East of North Cave, Castle Farm and Drewton Farm

7,500,000 tonnes

The nominated area of search extends to some 100ha of land bearing Oolitic Limestone. The nominated site is extensive, but it is not anticipated that the whole area would necessarily be excavated. An AoS indicates that some areas within the defined area could be suitable for mineral extraction, but not all of it, and works would not take place close to any existing settlements, or individual dwellings and farmsteads, and current access to properties would need to be maintained.

The site is located on both sides of the B1230, north-east of the village of North Cave on the escarpment of the Wolds and comprises mainly agricultural fields, predominantly grade 2, with some grade 3. Castle and Drewton Farms are located within the nominated area.

The B1230 Wold Hill runs through the centre of the nominated site and the A1034 is a short distance to the east.

The terrain is undulating, with the land rising from the south-west to the north-east. The land continues to rise to the north-east of the site resulting in it being highly visible from the surrounding area. Three PROW traverse the southern part of the nominated site creating a high visibility to the site. The site is generally open to view from the surrounding roads and from the higher ground to the east.

The site is situated in the Wolds Area of High Landscape Value and the southern corner of the site lies within a Mineral Consultation Area in the East Yorkshire BC Local Plan.

The nearest designated SSSI is Drewton Lane Pits which is situated approximately 200m away from the southern boundary of the site. The site has been identified as requiring a Stage 2 HRA.

There are no Scheduled Monuments within the site or its vicinity, but Castle Farm is listed grade 2.

Access to the strategic road network would be via the B1230 Wold Hill which meets the A1034 to the north-east of the site. However, the existing junction arrangement of the B1230/A1034 are very unlikely to be considered satisfactory given the likely vehicle movements/compromised visibility and likely to require significant improvement/mitigation. This and other options should be considered in a Transportation Assessment. It is anticipated that a solution will require land outside the nominated site.

The site is intersected by Flood Zones 2 and 3, and it is underlain by a Principal Aquifer.

The site would represent the opening of a new crushed rock quarry; the anticipated rate of extraction is 450,000 tpa.


There are no quarries in the plan area producing oolitic limestone, which is claimed to be suitable for applications that cannot be met by crushed rock produced from the poor quality and relatively soft local chalk. Whilst it is not considered sufficiently different to justify the calculation and maintenance of a separate landbank for this limestone aggregate, there is some justification for having a local source of supply of this material because it reduces the need to bring in materials from outside the plan area. Therefore, it is recommended that the northern portion of the site, which is furthest from the village and considered less constrained than the southern portion, be identified as an area of search within which some mineral exaction may be acceptable during the plan period.




Summer 2015 44

Criteria 1

Mineral resources

2


3


4


5

Landscape character

6

Visual Impact

7

Cultural Heritage

8

Ag’l land quality

9


10

Water env’ment

Assessment B B B A D D B B/C C C

There are already sufficient reserves in currently consented areas to meet ongoing landbank requirements as calculated in Background Paper 1 during the plan period, however, on the basis of the scope that the site offers for contributing to the range of types of crushed rock available in the plan area, the northern portion should be identified as a proposed Area of Search for limestone aggregate in the plan.



Summer 2015 45

CR5 – Land West of the B1249, Langtoft

1,200,000 tonnes

The nominated site would form an extension to the dormant chalk quarry, Langtoft Quarry, near Langtoft. The site extends to approximately 30 hectares of dale and farmland which are classified as grade 3.

The site is located in an area of undulating topography which falls from the north-west to the south-east. The area encompasses part of Crooked Dale which is a steep sided valley feature orientated east-west.

The village of Langtoft is located nearby to the north with a row of dwellings immediately adjacent to the north-east corner of the nominated site. Views into parts of the site can be obtained from the road along its eastern boundary.

The site lies within the Wolds Area of High Landscape Value. The eastern edge of the site is approximately 50m from the boundary of the Langtoft Conservation Area. Recent geophysics and monitored topsoil strips on development sites just to the east and south-east have demonstrated that much of this area was subject to intensive human activity during the later prehistoric, Romano-British and Anglo-Saxon periods; hence, there is potential for a similar level of activity within the nominated site.

There are no Sites of Special Scientific Interest or Scheduled Monuments within the site or its vicinity. There are 19 East Yorkshire LWS between 1km and 8km of the Nomination Site. The dormant Langtoft Quarry contains a Regionally Important Geological and Geomorphological Site (RIGS).

The former quarry has an established access onto the B1249 Driffield Road, however the visibility from this access is severely restricted and it is doubtful whether the level of improvements required to provide a suitable access for a quarry could be achieved.

There area is not affected by public rights of ways. The site lies within Flood Zone 1. The site is located on a Principal Aquifer.

Spatially the nominated site falls within the catchments of Bridlington and Diffield.

Together the reserves in already consented sites are calculated as capable of supplying sufficient resources to meet the level of demand for crushed rock calculated in Background Paper 1 for the duration of the plan period.

Although further resources are required in order to meet ongoing landbank requirements at the end of the plan period, the constraints at this site mean it is not considered suitable to be identified in the plan.

Criteria 1

Mineral resources

2


3


4


5

Landscape character

6

Visual Impact

7

Cultural Heritage

8

Ag’l land quality

9


10

Water env’ment

Assessment

B B A B C C B B F C

There are already sufficient reserves in currently consented areas to meet ongoing landbank requirements as calculated in Background Paper 1 during the plan period, on the basis that there is no immediate need to identify further areas for extraction of crushed rock to meet ongoing landbank requirements, and also because of the poor access to the site, therefore in relation to criterion 9, and other criterion it is not recommended that the site should be identified in the plan.

However the nominated site should be safeguarded by inclusion in a Mineral Safeguarding Area.


Summer 2015 46

CR6 – Land West of Wold Road, Nafferton

1,280,000 tonnes

The nominated site would form an extension to the dormant chalk quarry, Nafferton Wold Quarry. The site extends to 12.5 hectares of open farmland delineated by an intermittent hedgerow and is classified as grade 2 agricultural land.

The site is surrounded by farmland with farmsteads to the north and south. The settlement of Nafferton is located approximately 1.5 km to the south of the site. The existing quarry has an established access onto Wold Road, a narrow lane which meets the A614 just north of Nafferton.

Located within the Wolds Area of Landscape Protection, the site is situated near the top of the Nafferton Wold on a gentle slope which falls to the east. It is open to view from the lane and from a bridleway to the south/west and a route with public access to the north. The site is accessed from a long narrow length of single track lane.

There are 2 SSSIs within 8km of the site. The River Hull Headwaters is 3.2km to the east and 4.2km to the south. Cottam Well Dale is 7.5km to the west. Nafferton Wold Quarry, directly adjacent to the site, is a RIGS (now LGS). In addition there is 1 East Yorkshire LWS within the site, or within 1km.

Due to its historical context, including finds and features noted from aerial photographs in the vicinity of the site, it is considered highly probable that any ground-works in this area would encounter below-ground deposits relating to the occupation of the site in the Neolithic, Bronze Age, Iron Age and Romano-British periods, whilst there is also the potential for encountering material and deposits of early medieval and later date.

The site is within Flood Zone 1 and does not fall within a Source Protection Zone.


Spatially the nominated site lies within the catchments of Bridlington and Driffield.

Together the reserves in already consented sites are calculated as capable of supplying sufficient resources to meet the level of demand for crushed rock calculated in Background Paper 1 for the duration of the plan period.

Although further resources are required in order to meet ongoing landbank requirements at the end of the plan period, the constraints at this site mean it is not considered suitable to be identified in the plan.

Criteria 1

Mineral resources

2


3


4


5

Landscape character

6

Visual Impact

7

Cultural Heritage

8

Ag’l land quality

9


10

Water env’ment

Assessment

B B A B C C B C F B

There are already sufficient reserves in currently consented areas to meet ongoing landbank requirements as calculated in Background Paper 1 during the plan period, on the basis that there is no immediate need to identify further areas for extraction of crushed rock to meet


Summer 2015 47

ongoing landbank requirements, and also because of the poor access to the site, therefore in relation to criterion 9, it is not recommended that the site should be identified in the plan.




Summer 2015 48

CR7 - Greenwick Quarry, Huggate AOS


An Area of Search at Greenwick was identified in the adopted Minerals Local Plan 2004. An existing chalk quarry operates within the Area of Search with an access onto the minor road which leads northwards to the A166. It is situated a short distance from the A166 in an upland agricultural setting. The agricultural land is graded 3 and 4. The operators nominated a site to the south of the quarry, see CR1 above.

The nearest residential property at Cold Skin Farm is approximately 250m to the east. In total there are 17 dwellings within 2km, 2 of which are within 1km of the AOS.

This Area of Search sits within the Wold Area of High Landscape Value. The Millington Wood & Pastures SSSI noted principally for its geomorphological interest is in close proximity and the presence of numerous archaeological features has been noted in the vicinity, most notably to the west of the site. There are 2 East Yorkshire LWS within the AOS, or within 1km.

The site lies within Flood Zone 1 and is on a Principal aquifer. The aquifer underlying the site provides a public drinking water supply to a nearby village.

The site is located in an extremely important archaeological landscape. There are 12 Scheduled Monuments within 1km of the site. In the western part of the site is a section of linear boundary dyke on Millington Lings which is a Scheduled Monument. This monument is part of a very extensive and important system of linear boundary dykes in this area of the Yorkshire Wolds, dating back to the Bronze Age several areas of which lie to the south, west and east of this Area of Search. There are also two round barrows within 150 metres of the boundary of this area. The line of the earthworks continues within the site. Any proposals should be accompanied by an archaeological assessment. Parts of the area of search are also included within the Thixendale Living Landscape.



For this reason it is not recommended that this site should be identified as a Preferred Area. However, it is recommended that the Greenwick Area of Search should be retained in the plan, but that the extent of the area of search should be altered to omit the slivers on the far side of the road from the main part of the identified area.



There are already sufficient reserves in currently consented areas to meet ongoing landbank requirements as calculated in Background Paper 1 during the plan period, however, the Greenwick Area of Search should be carried forward as an option to contribute to maintaining the crushed rock landbank beyond the end of the plan period. The extent of the area of search should be amended to omit the slivers of land on the far side of the road from the main part of the identified area.


Summer 2015 49

CR8 - Swinescaif AOS


The Area of Search was identified in the adopted Minerals Local Plan. The site is located on a small hill approximately 500m north east of South Cave. The AOS is situated in an Area of Great Landscape Value. The land is grade 3 Agricultural land.

The access is via a narrow lane off the A1034 leading past the nearest dwellings 500m to the west. The track becomes unmade as it passes the inactive Little Wold Quarry. Further dwellings are about 300m to the north.

The AOS has been identified in the HRA as requiring a Stage 2 HRA.

The area is within the Ellerker Wolds Slopes Living Landscapes area. The Yorkshire Wolds Way National Trail passes close to the site.

There are no designated national sites of nature conservation interest in the AOS, or within its vicinity, nor any Scheduled Monuments. The Habitat Inventory data indicates that there are some areas of deciduous woodland within this area, and the ash dominated woodland to the south of Little Wold Quarry is subject to a blanket Tree Preservation Order and is a designated LWS. The site also lies within the South Wolds Biodiversity Priority Area. Little Wold Plantation LWS is immediately adjacent to the south-eastern and south-western sides of the existing quarry.

Previous archaeological work within the existing quarry site has already identified a number of Bronze Age, Iron Age and Romano-British features in the vicinity. Both the Bronze Age and Iron Age features are of regional archaeological significance, whilst the field system is of more local significance. It is considered highly likely, given the topography, that a similar level of archaeological activity would be present within any extensions to the existing working area. Any proposals should be accompanied by an archaeological assessment.

The site is not within the Flood Zone, nor within a Source Protection Zone. It lies on a Principal aquifer.



Together the reserves in already consented sites are calculated as capable of supplying sufficient resources to meet the level of demand for crushed rock calculated in Background Paper 1 for the duration of the plan period. Further resources are nevertheless required in order to meet ongoing landbank requirements at the end of the plan period.

For this reason it is recommended that the Swinescaif Area of Search should be retained in the plan, to provide possible opportunities for meeting the ongoing supply requirements after the end of the plan period should they be needed. The extent of the area of search should be amended to omit the woodland to the south of Little Wold Quarry.



There are already sufficient reserves in currently consented areas to meet ongoing landbank requirements as calculated in Background Paper 1 during the plan period, however, the Swinscaif Area of Search should be carried forward as an option to contribute to maintaining the crushed rock landbank beyond the end of the plan period. The extent of the area of search should be amended to omit the woodland to the south of Little Wold Quarry.


Summer 2015 50

CR9 – Land Adjacent to Riplingham Quarry (replacement for CR2)

3,500,000 m3 The nominated site would form an extension to the existing Riplingham Quarry, and replaces the earlier nominated site CR2. The site extends to approximately 16 hectares, surrounded by agricultural and wooded land classified as grade 2, 3 and 4 agricultural land.

The nearest residential property is Low Hunsley Cottage approximately 550m to the east. The site is within the Wolds Area of Landscape Protection. The site is close to the Ellerker Wolds Slopes Living Landscape which includes deciduous woodland and lowland meadows. The Yorkshire Wolds Way National Trail passes close to the site.

The site lies within Flood Zone 1. The nearest watercourse is a significant distance to the west. The site is located on a Principal Aquifer within a Source Protection Zone 3 (SPZ3).

There are 4 Sites of Special Scientific Interest within 8km of the site. There are 11 Regionally Important Geological and Geomorphological Site (RIGS) within 8km of the site.

The Humber Estuary (a RAMSAR site, Special Area of Conservation and Special Protection Area) is located within 8km of the site. This site is in very close proximity to existing good quality chalk grassland BAP habitat and the South Wolds Biodiversity Priority Area. The AOS has been identified as requiring a Stage 2 HRA.

There are numerous Scheduled Monuments within 8km of the site. This part of the Wolds contains the extensive remains of prehistoric and Romano-British occupation. The nominated site is a large wedge-shaped area on the west side of West Hill, adjoining Hunsley Dale wherein there is considered to be potential for the survival of below-ground deposits relating to early settlement and burial sites, any groundworks in this area may therefore encounter archaeological deposits ranging in date from the later Neolithic to the Romano-British period. Any proposals should be accompanied by an archaeological assessment.

Access to the Site is taken down a long access track, from Brick Dyke Lane. The site has access to the B1230 along a rural road in one direction, and no access to the Hull conurbation at A164 until after approximately 7 miles of narrow winding rural road. Here the road, Westoby Lane is narrower than two lorry widths. Along the east side of Westoby Lane, hedges and houses are 2 feet from the road edge, whilst on the west side a field of major archaeological value prevents widening.

The area is not affected by public rights of ways.

Spatially the site is within the catchment for Hull and Beverley.

However, together the reserves in already consented sites are calculated as capable of supplying sufficient resources to meet the level of demand for crushed rock calculated in Background Paper 1 for the duration of the plan period. The constraints at this site mean it is not considered suitable to be identified in the plan. Other sites that are less constrained than this site are considered more suitable to provide for ongoing demand thereafter.

Criteria 1

Mineral resources

2


3


4


5

Landscape character

6

Visual Impact

7

Cultural Heritage

8

Ag’l land quality

9


10

Water env’ment

Assessment A/B C B B C C B B F C


Summer 2015 51

There are already sufficient reserves in currently consented areas to meet ongoing landbank requirements as calculated in Background Paper 1 during the plan period, on the basis that there is no immediate need to identify further areas for extraction of crushed rock to meet ongoing landbank requirements, and also because of the poor access to the site, therefore in relation to criterion 9 and poor scores for other criteria, it is not recommended that the site should be identified in the plan.



Summer 2015 52

3. Recommended Sites 3.1 The sites recommended for identification in the next version of the JMLP are listed in the

tables below, together with the anticipated annual yield and from this the tonnage available

within the plan period (taken as 15 times the anticipated annual yield), and the total

tonnage available within the site. Location Plans for all the recommended sites are in the

JMLP appendix C.

Sand and Gravel

3.2 The calculations for the amount of sand and gravel resources that should be provided for

in the Revised Preferred Approach of the Joint Minerals Local Plan are as follows:-

Table 3.1 - Calculation to Show the Amount of Sand and Gravel Resources that need to be

identified in the JMLP

Tonnage required in identified sites to maintain production at 0.7 million tonnes per annum (mtpa) throughout the plan period, (0.7mt x 18 years)

12.6mt

Less permitted reserves (as at end of 2013)* 7.3mt

Sub total 5.3mt

Add amount to provide for 7 year landbank at the end of the plan period (apportionment rate x 7)

4.9mt

Total resources to be found 10.2mt

3.3 The sand and gravel sites that are recommended to be identified in the Revised Preferred

Approach of the Joint Minerals Local Plan are listed in table 3.2.

Table 3.2 - Sand and Gravel Sites Recommended for Identification

Site ref Anticipated annual

yield in 1,000tpa

Available tonnage in

plan period in 1,000t

(total available in site).

Recommended

status

SG3 Routh’s Carr and

Monksbridge Plantation,

Leven, Routh

100 900 (900) Proposed

Preferred Area

SG4 Gransmoor Lane &

Gembling as part of

SG12

Inc in SG12 below Inc in SG12 below Proposed Area

of Search as

part of extended

SG12

SG7 (W) Land at

Pollington West

60 900 (1,020) Proposed Preferred Area

SG8 Land South of the

A166, Garton on the

Wolds

100 1500 (2000) Proposed Area of Search

SG9 Land East of

B1249, Cruckley Lane,

Brigham

75 530 (530) Northern part to be Proposed Area of Search


Summer 2015 53

Site ref Anticipated annual

yield in 1,000tpa

Available tonnage in

plan period in 1,000t

(total available in site).

Recommended

status

SG11 Leven and

Brandesburton

Not known Not known Proposed Area

of Search

SG12 Gransmoor Lane

and Lisset (inc SG4)

160: 100 in N; 60 in S 2,400 (3,600) Proposed Area

of Search,

including SG4

SG15 Brook Farm 500 2,700 (2,700) Proposed

Preferred Area

SG16 The Outgang 500 850 (850) Proposed

Preferred Area

Total tonnage available in plan period (not

including SG11 Leven and Brandesburton)

9.780 mt (11.600 mt)

3.4 The identified sand and gravel sites together contribute some 9.78 million tonnes towards

the total requirement of 10.2 million tonnes to be found to cover extraction during the plan

period and to provide for a 7 year landbank at the end of the plan period. The amount

required to provide for extraction during the plan period is 5.3 million tonnes, and the

balance will cover 6.4 years of the additional 7 years. Any further requirements that may

arise during this 7 year period can be provided either from the further resources that would

be available from these sites up to a total of 11.6 million tonnes, or from resources within

the Leven and Brandesburton Area of Search.

Crushed Rock

3.5 The calculations for the amount of sand and gravel resources that should be provided for

in the Revised Preferred Approach of the Joint Minerals Local Plan are as follows:-

Table 3.3 - Calculation to Show the Amount of Crushed Rock Resources that need to be

identified in the JMLP

Tonnage required in identified sites to maintain production at 0.19 million tonnes per annum (mtpa) throughout the plan period (0.19mt x 18 years)

3.42mt

Less permitted reserves (as at end of 2013) 3.6mt

Sub total -0.18mt

Add amount to provide for 10 year landbank at the end of the plan period (0.19 mt x 10)

1.9mt

Total resources to be found 1.72mt

3.6 This shows that there are already sufficient reserves in sites with planning permission

within the plan area for crushed rock throughout the plan period, and that provision only

needs to be made for the maintenance of a 10 year landbank at the end of the plan period,


Summer 2015 54

or for the supply of material not available within the plan area to reduce the need to import

aggregates from outside of the plan area.

3.7 The crushed rock sites that are recommended to be identified in the Revised Preferred

Approach of the Joint Minerals Local Plan are listed in Table 3.4.

Table 3.4 – Crushed Rock Sites Recommended for Identification

Site ref Anticipated

annual yield

in 1,000tpa

Available tonnage

in plan period (total

available in site).

Recommended

status

CR4 Land North & East of North

Cave, Castle Farm and Drewton

Farm

450 3,300 in Northern

part (3,300)

Proposed Area of Search for Limestone aggregate

CR7 Greenwick Quarry, Huggate

AOS

Not known Not known Proposed Area of

Search for Chalk

aggregate

CR8 Swinecaif AOS Not known Not known Proposed Area of

Search for Chalk

aggregate

Total tonnage available in plan period 3.3mt (3.3 mt)

3.8 The LAA did not identify a specific requirement for a separate landbank for limestone

because, although the aggregate derived from the limestone deposit in the plan area has

different properties to the aggregate derived from chalk, it is not considered sufficiently

different to justify the calculation and maintenance of a separate landbank for this

limestone aggregate material as suggested in the last bullet point of para 145 of the NPPF1.

In addition, with only one potential site for this limestone it is not considered possible to

achieve currently acknowledged standards of confidentiality in a separate landbank.

3.9 Nevertheless in order to provide for a possible source of supply of limestone within the

context of a single crushed rock landbank CR4 contains sufficient resources to supply up

to some 3.3 million tonnes of limestone during the plan period and has therefore been

identified as a proposed Area of Search.

3.10 This site, together with the proposed modified Areas of Search at Greenwick and

Swinescaif together contain sufficient resources to meet the requirements to maintain a 10

year land bank of crushed rock at the end of the plan period and to provide for a possible

source of supply of limestone within the context of a single crushed rock landbank.

1 ‘calculating and maintaining separate landbanks for any aggregate materials of a specific type or quality which have a distinct and separate market’.

Date post:	22-Nov-2021
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	2 times
Download:	0 times

East Riding of Yorkshire and Kingston upon Hull

Documents