T H A M E S V A L L E Y ARCHAEOLOGICAL S E R V I C E S S O U T H W E S T Western Extension of Hillhead Quarry, Uffculme, Devon Archaeological Desk-based Assessment by Richard Tabor Site Code HQU16/46 (ST 0585 1366) Western Extension of Hillhead Quarry, Uffculme, Devon Archaeological Desk-based Assessment for Aggregate Industries UK Ltd 㼎㼥㻌㻾㼕㼏㼔㼍㼞㼐㻌㼀㼍㼎㼛㼞㻌 㼀㼔㼍㼙㼑㼟㻌㼂㼍㼘㼘㼑㼥㻌㻭㼞㼏㼔㼍㼑㼛㼘㼛㼓㼕㼏㼍㼘㻌㻿㼑㼞㼢㼕㼏㼑㼟㻌 㻔㻿㼛㼡㼠㼔㻌㼃㼑㼟㼠㻕㻌㻸㼠㼐 Site Code HQU 16/46 March 2016 Summary Site name: Western Extension of Hillhead Quarry, Uffculme, Devon Grid reference: ST 0585 1366 Site activity: Archaeological desk-based assessment Project manager: Steve Ford Site supervisor: Richard Tabor Site code: HQU 16/46 Area of site: c. 15.1ha Summary of results: The assessment found no known heritage assets within the site but there is some evidence for features visible from aerial photography and Lidar hence it may be judged to be of moderate archaeological potential. Mineral extraction is necessarily destructive, therefore it is recommended that a programme of suitable archaeological work be undertaken in advance of extraction to preserve the site’s archaeological resource by record. This report may be copied for bona fide research or planning purposes without the explicit permission of the copyright holder. All TVAS unpublished fieldwork reports are available on our website: www.tvas.co.uk/reports/reports.asp. Report edited/checked by: Steve Ford 01.04.16 Steve Preston 01.04.16 i TVAS (South West),Unit 21, Apple Business Centre, Taunton TA2 6BB Tel. (01823) 288 284; Fax (01823) 272 462; email [email protected]; website : www.tvas.co.uk Western Extension of Hillhead Quarry, Uffculme, Devon Archaeological Desk-based Assessment by Richard Tabor Report 16/46 Introduction This report is an assessment of the archaeological potential of approximately 15.1ha of land located to the north west of Uffculme in Devon (centred on NGR ST 0585 1366; Fig. 1). The project was commissioned by Mr Clive Tompkins of Aggregate Industries UK Ltd, Stoneycombe Quarry, Bickley Road, Kingskerswell, Newton Abbot, Devon TQ12 5LL, and comprises the first stage of a process to determine the presence/absence, extent, character, quality and date of any archaeological remains which may be affected by the development. Permission for the western extension of Hillhead Quarry in the area around Houndaller Farm was granted in 1990 and is restated in Devon County Minerals Local Plan (DCC 2004). Under the provisions of the Review of Old Mineral Permissions (ROMP), the Mineral Planning Authority (Devon County Council) requires an Environmental Impact Assessment in order to update conditions for these old consents. This report forms a contribution to that assessment relating to the effects of the extraction on archaeological and heritage issues. Site description, location and geology The site is located c. 1km north west of Uffculme, on the south west fringe of the Blackdown Hills which straddle the border with Somerset (Fig. 1). The site comprises a polygonal block of four contiguous fields, designated as areas 5, 6, 7 and 8. The fields form part of New Houndaller Farm and are within the civil parish of Burlescombe, although the core village of that name is 3km to the north-east. The east boundaries of Areas 5 and 6 are immediately west of the limit of former quarrying (Fig. 2). In general, the site undulates with a number of small coombes present. It varies in height from c. 126m above Ordnance Datum (aOD) in the north-east of Area 8 to c. 107m aOD in the south west corner of Area 6. The site is centred on NGR ST 0585 1366. The site lies on sedimentary deposits of Triassic conglomerate Budleigh Salterton Pebble Beds Formation (BGS 2012). The soil over the greater part of the site is characterized as free-draining, slightly acid loam of low fertility but with naturally high groundwater on the western fringe (NSRI 2016). The site was visited on 17th March 2016, when all four fields were being grazed by a small herd of cattle, leaving the grass short (Plates 1-8). A dilapidated brick building stood towards the south end on the boundary between areas 7 and 5 (Pl. 4). A gate through a brick and stone wall in the north west corner of Area 7 provided 1 access to New Houndaller farmyard and house (Pl. 5). All the fields were surrounded by well-developed hedges including several established examples of oak. Several of the hedges had formed over stone walls (Pl. 9) but in most places the hedge was too thick to determine whether or not there was an underlying wall. A kink with a gate in the south west corner of Area 7 was on the course of a track shown on the First and Second Edition Ordnance Survey maps (Pl. 10; figs. 8 and 9). Planning background and development proposals Permission for this westward extension of the quarry which is now being re-activated was granted in 1990 (DCC 2004). An Environmental Impact Assessment has been implemented in response to the Minerals Planning Guidance 14 in the Environment Act 1995: Review of mineral planning permissions (HMSO 1995). This report forms a contribution to that assessment, in order to permit a scheme to be drawn up to mitigate the effect of extraction on the heritage assets of the area, in this case specifically the archaeological resource. The Department for Communities and Local Government’s National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF 2012) sets out the framework within which local planning authorities should consider the importance of conserving, or enhancing, aspects of the historic environment, within the planning process. It requires an applicant for planning consent to provide, as part of any application, sufficient information to enable the local planning authority to assess the significance of any heritage assets that may be affected by the proposal. The Historic Environment is defined (NPPF 2012, 52) as: ‘All aspects of the environment resulting from the interaction between people and places through time, including all surviving physical remains of past human activity, whether visible, buried or submerged, and landscaped and planted or managed flora.’ Paragraphs 128 and 129 state that ‘128. In determining applications, local planning authorities should require an applicant to describe the significance of any heritage assets affected, including any contribution made by their setting. The level of detail should be proportionate to the assets’ importance and no more than is sufficient to understand the potential impact of the proposal on their significance. As a minimum the relevant historic environment record should have been consulted and the heritage assets assessed using appropriate expertise where necessary. Where a site on which development is proposed includes or has the potential to include heritage assets with archaeological interest, local planning authorities should require developers to submit an appropriate desk-based assessment and, where necessary, a field evaluation. ‘129. Local planning authorities should identify and assess the particular significance of any heritage asset that may be affected by a proposal (including by development affecting the setting of a heritage asset) taking account of the available evidence and any necessary expertise. They should take this assessment into account when considering the impact of a proposal on a heritage asset, to avoid or minimise conflict between the heritage asset’s conservation and any aspect of the proposal.’ A ‘heritage asset’ is defined (NPPF 2012, 52) as 2 ‘A building, monument, site, place, area or landscape identified as having a degree of significance meriting consideration in planning decisions, because of its heritage interest. Heritage asset includes designated heritage assets and assets identified by the local planning authority (including local listing).’ ‘Designated heritage asset’ includes (NPPF 2012, 51) any ‘World Heritage Site, Scheduled Monument, Listed Building, Protected Wreck Site, Registered Park and Garden, Registered Battlefield or Conservation Area designated under the relevant legislation.’ ‘Archaeological interest’ is glossed (NPPF 2012, 50) as follows: ‘There will be archaeological interest in a heritage asset if it holds, or potentially may hold, evidence of past human activity worthy of expert investigation at some point. Heritage assets with archaeological interest are the primary source of evidence about the substance and evolution of places, and of the people and cultures that made them.’ Specific guidance on assessing significance and the impact of the proposal is contained in paragraphs 131 to 135: ‘131. In determining planning applications, local planning authorities should take account of: the desirability of sustaining and enhancing the significance of heritage assets and putting them to viable uses consistent with their conservation; the positive contribution that conservation of heritage assets can make to sustainable communities including their economic vitality; and the desirability of new development making a positive contribution to local character and distinctiveness. ‘132. When considering the impact of a proposed development on the significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight should be given to the asset’s conservation. The more important the asset, the greater the weight should be. Significance can be harmed or lost through alteration or destruction of the heritage asset or development within its setting. As heritage assets are irreplaceable, any harm or loss should require clear and convincing justification. Substantial harm to or loss