Mineral Sites Plan 2019 Sustainability Appraisal Main Report

Purbeck Stone: PK17 Home Field, Langton Matravers Assessment (February 2018)

Site Area : approximately 10.5 ha Updated Site Area approximately Nominee: National Trust 8.5ha, but no more than 1ha of land Site Name/Location : Agent : Land and Mineral Management (in addition to areas already being PK17 Home Field, Langton worked) expected to be worked Local Authority : Purbeck District Council Matravers during the life of the Plan. Mineral Type : Purbeck Stone Production : 2,000 tpa Reserve : approximately 340,000 tonnes

Impact Assessment Scoring

Strong Minor Minor - Strong Positive Negligible or Negative - Negative + Positive ++ 0 ? Uncertain - Impact No Effect Impact Impact Impact

Timescales for effects: P/W: Preparation and Working R/A : Restoration and Afteruse

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

1. To move waste • This Objective is not relevant to this site management N/A N/A • N/A nomination up the waste hierarchy

European/International Designations • No impacts expected. • Ensure appropriate 0 0 stand-off is included. • Suitable stand-off to protect the SAC grassland immediately to the west will be required.

2. To maintain, Annex 1 Bird Species conserve and 0 0 • No action required. • enhance No impacts expected. biodiversity National Designations 0 0 • No action required. • No impacts expected.

Protected species 0 0 • No action required. • No impacts expected

Page 289 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

Local recognitions/designations, including 0 0 ancient woodland and veteran trees • No action required. • No impacts expected

• The Purbeck limestone group has an important • association with the geology of the Jurassic Note potential for Coast World Heritage Site. Working quarries in quarries to yield Purbeck have been known to yield important fossils or other fossils, including dinosaur footprints. They are material of also of ongoing interest for the study of early geodiversity interest. 3. To maintain, Cretaceous stratigraphy. • Visits or other conserve and • investigation of + + ? These interests should be acknowledged with the enhance assumption that geologists and the Jurassic working sites may be geodiversity. Coast Team hosted by DCC will respond requested. positively to any opportunities to recover fossils • Investigate potential or record and study unusual features if they are and/or benefits of discovered. In terms of geodiversity there is a leaving quarried face presumption in favour of an appropriate level of open after quarrying activity continuing in order to sustain restoration. these ongoing interests.

• Hydrological assessment required Groundwater to determine possible impacts, on ground and surface waters, with _ • Impact would vary from ‘Less appropriate mitigation to be Significant Adverse Impact’ to implemented. ‘Significant Adverse Impact’ • Appropriate arrangements should 4. To maintain, depending on determined impact for be put in place to ensure that the conserve and 0 the groundwater spring issues rising water leaving the site and entering enhance the 80 m to the west of the site. These the watercourses or groundwater quality of springs must be protected. is of an acceptable quality. ground, • Site overlies Secondary aquifers. No _ _ • surface and impact on Source Protection Zones. Any fuel on site should be sea waters No licenced supplies. properly stored to avoid and manage contamination in case of spillage. the • Appropriate arrangements should consumption be installed for surface water and of water in a silt collection and fuel storage to sustainable prevent contamination of way. Surface Water groundwater resources. • There are watercourses/springs to ? 0 • The combined impacts of Purbeck the west of the site, nearest is Limestone Quarries should be approximately 80 m from the site. assessed where a number of sites affect the same water resource or receiving water course.

Page 290 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

5. To reduce Flooding/Coastal Stability flood risk and 0 0 • • No action required. improve flood Site is entirely in Flood Risk Zone 1, no risk of management. flooding.

Archaeology • There is a Scheduled Monument to the west of • Archaeological survey the site (SM33164 – ‘Pillow mound 145m south of the area required as east of Eastington Farm’). part of planning application to assess • The discovery of Iron Age and Roman period possible presence and remains at the Blacklands site to the east and significance of non- north-east of the site indicates the present site’s designated remains high potential for below-ground archaeology. and to assess • There is also potential for industrial whether/how these archaeological evidence of early quarrying. should be protected ? 0 Archaeological assessment (including of the during working – no impact on the setting of SM33164 and other further work required

6. To maintain, Scheduled Monuments in the area) and at site allocation conserve and evaluation would be required before an stage. enhance the informed planning decision could be made. historic • All necessary • environment Archaeological assessment and evaluation mitigation to be (including would be required before an informed planning implemented prior to archaeological decision could be made. Only when these have working. been undertaken would the archaeological sites, historic • Adequate provision to impact be understood – at present it could be buildings, be made for anywhere from ‘Very Significant’ to ‘No conservation preservation, Significant’ impact. areas, historic excavation or parks and recording, as Historic Landscapes gardens and appropriate. other locally • The local landscape bears the imprint of • Further consideration distinctive previous quarrying dating from the Roman to be given to features and period onwards. It could be argued that the ? 0 restoration proposals, their settings). present site would be a continuation of the in terms of historic process, and if the site is to be restored landscapes. afterwards the impact would be limited in time anyway.

Historic Buildings • This site is part of a characterful landscape of • Heritage Assessment which the quarrying activities help to form its required to assess character. Buildings are not immediately _ 0 level of impact and adjacent to the site but derive character from identify appropriate the overall landscape. mitigation • The quarry will have no significant impact on the listed buildings.

Page 291 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A • Potential impact on Acton Conservation Area and its setting

Landscape Capacity • This site is primarily within the zone of least landscape and visual impact so it will be how the area is worked which will determine its _ 0 capacity. 7. To maintain, • Small areas, quantities, progressive restoration conserve and and in short campaigns with low stockpiles is enhance the recommended. • Site to be developed landscape, as suggested to including Designated Landscapes minimise impacts. townscape, • This site is primarily within the zone of least seascape and landscape and visual impact, resulting is a less the coast. significant adverse impact for most of the _ 0 proposed site. • The boundary of the site has been pulled back to remove the south-western corner of the site which was outside the zone of least landscape and visual impact.

• Impacts on air quality expected to be negligible. • No AQMAs will be affected by the working of this 8. To protect site proposal. Any dust resulting from working • Environmental and improve will be controlled through normal dust- protection measures to air quality and 0 0 suppression measures. reduce dust and ensure reduce the noise is appropriately impacts of • Noise mitigation will be addressed at the mitigated. noise. planning application stage, with appropriate mitigation to be included in the development of the site.

• Soils are somewhere between good to • Soil to be properly 9. To maintain, moderate to very poor. Any soil removed will stripped and stored conserve and be protected during working and either re-used prior to working; _ 0 enhance soil on site or taken elsewhere to be used. Further protected during quality. assessment may be required to determine soil working; and re-spread quality. on site after working.

Page 292 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

• No specific action required; site 10. To conserve • The site would make an important contribution development to take and safeguard + + 0 to the supply of Purbeck Stone for Bournemouth, into consideration mineral Dorset and Poole and all other potential markets. relevant impacts and resources. mitigate where appropriate.

11. To promote the use of • This proposal does not promote the use of _ 0 • No action required. alternative alternative materials. materials.

• Development of this site would provide a 12. To provide an benefit in terms of contributing to the provision • Ensure principles of adequate and of a supply of minerals to meet society’s needs. sustainable affordable • Ensuring a sustainable supply will depend on development are supply of + 0 the development and management of the site. incorporated into the minerals to Providing site development takes into account development of this meet society's relevant principles of sustainable development site. needs. it is expected this will contribute to complying with this objective.

• Developing land as a quarry is expected to have • some negative impacts regarding climate Use energy efficient change, due primarily to machinery used and plant and machinery. 14. To adapt to transportation of mineral away from site. • and mitigate Implement restoration However, these will in relative terms be the impacts of _ 0 which provides negligible. climate appropriate habitats to change. • The Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Minerals help to increase Strategy seeks to address and minimise such resilience of impacts through Policy CC1 which requires flora/fauna. operators to take into consideration climate

Page 293 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

• • Access is proposed via the existing service area Any proposal for this and the C135 to the B3069. From here vehicles site would need to be will travel to the A351 either west, past Kingston, accompanied by a 15. To minimise or east, through Langton Matravers. Vehicle Transport Assessment the negative movements here are expected to be low and will which will need to impacts of not exceed that which currently exists. provide access details waste and and consider vehicle • minerals While access to the strategic network will involve routing. transport on _ 0 travel through existing settlements, the low • the transport number of trips plus the B class of the road used The TA should be network, means that there will be limited impact. scoped with the mitigating any Therefore the site is considered to have a ‘Less Transport Development residual Significant Adverse Impact’. Management Team and is intended to identify impacts. • Policies DM 1 and DM 8 of the Minerals Strategy opportunities for actively address this issue of minimising impacts reducing impacts on on the transportation network. the transport network.

16. To support and • encourage the Sites which may be developed in this field can use of only realistically be accessed by means of road sustainable transport, resulting in a negative impact under • Mitigate impacts where transport this Objective during development and working. _ 0 identified and modes, • As far as reasonably possible negative impacts appropriate. imposing no resulting from access and transport will be unmitigated mitigated, as required by Policies DM1 and DM8 negative of the Minerals Strategy. impacts on them.

Impact on Sensitive Human Receptors • Provision of • There are properties within 100 m to north-west; appropriate mitigation, 250 m to west and approximately 300 m to the following assessment 17. To sustain the north. Campsites at approximately 400 m and of likely impacts. health and 600 m to north/north west. • Restoration to improve quality of life _ 0 • Context is small quarries in an area with a long landscape of site where of the history of Purbeck Stone quarrying. National possible; and to seek to population Trust will control rate of quarrying. Only small facilitate public access. areas within the overall field will be quarried – • Screening, bunding, exact sites not known yet. Appropriate standoffs will be used mitigation (screening) to be determined. to mitigate impacts

Page 294 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A where considered Impact on Existing Settlements necessary. • Acton is approximately 300 m to the north; • Transport impacts to Langton Matravers is approximately 750 m to be considered through north-west. Transport Assessment, • Impacts are expected to be minimal, given the as noted above. rate of quarrying and context of the site proposals. 0 0 • There are already two permitted and working quarries within the overall site. The National Trust, as landowners, will control the rate at which the site is worked to minimize impacts and maintain the appearance of a range of smaller quarries on their land. • Transport issues are considered above.

Impact on Airport Safety • Site is approximately 23 km from airport, with 0 0 • No action required. no wet working or restoration. • No impacts expected.

Impact on Recreational Land 0 0 • Site is agricultural land, not use for • Assessment of formal/informal agricultural purposes. impacts, with 18. To enable safe appropriate mitigation access to Impact on Public Rights of Way identified. countryside • Bridleway runs along northern edge of site • Restoration to include and open nomination. Given the context of the site there considering how it spaces. _ 0 is no need for realignment of the route and might be possible to probably no need for special screening. improve public access in the area. • Further assessment required of possible impacts and appropriate screening.

Preliminary Hydrological Risk Assessment

Further Controlled Waters Issues/Risks Mitigation information/approval required

• Potential for • Appropriate • • Full hydrogeological risk Watercourses contamination of arrangements to be assessment will be required controlled waters made for ensuring

Page 295 of 583

• Ponds/lakes, (groundwater) that runoff from the as part of a planning including wet through spillage or site does not enter application. habitats seepage of pollutants the groundwater • Flood Risk Assessment such as fuel. unless any silt or • Groundwater other pollutant has • Water Framework • Contamination of first been removed. Assessment water supplies or reduction in amount • Fuel stored on site • Further assessment of of water available for to be appropriately potential impacts on water licenced supplies. bunded and sealed quality and levels, to prevent any particularly for spillage from groundwater, is required entering ground or prior to development. surface waters. • Land Drainage Consent to • On-going be obtained from Dorset monitoring during County Council if works development and may affect flow of an working of the site. ordinary watercourse.

Flood Risk Commentary Site is entirely within Flood Zone 1. Limited risk of flooding from surface water. Flood Risk Assessment would be required at planning application stage, with a site specific strategy for surface water management that does not increase rates of runoff or generate off site worsening Suitable in flood risk terms for allocation in Draft Mineral Sites Plan.

Heritage Impacts The northern boundary of the site as identified is approximately 30m from the Acton Conservation Area. This proximity, and the impact the development of the site would have on the setting of these heritage assets must be carefully considered against the public and other benefits of aggregate production. Policy/Legislative Background The Historic England website notes: When making a decision on all listed building consent applications or any decision on a planning application for development that affects a listed building or its setting, a local planning authority must have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses. Preservation in this context means not harming the interest in the building, as opposed to keeping it utterly unchanged. This obligation, found in sections 16 and 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, applies to all decisions concerning listed buildings. The recent Court of Appeal decision in the case of Barnwell vs East Northamptonshire DC 2014(2) made it clear that in enacting section 66(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 (1) Parliament’s intention was that ‘decision makers should give “considerable importance and weight” to the desirability of preserving the setting of listed buildings’ when carrying out the balancing exercise'.

Section 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 (“ the 1990 Act ”) provides:

Page 296 of 583

“(1) In considering whether to grant planning permission for development which affects a listed building or its setting, the local planning authority or, as the case may be, the Secretary of State shall have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses.” Section 72 of the 1990 Act provides: “(1) In the exercise, with respect to any buildings or other land in a conservation area, of any of the provisions mentioned in sub-section (2), special attention shall be paid to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of that area. (2) The provisions referred to in sub-section (1) are the planning Acts …” A finding of harm to the setting of a listed building is a consideration to which the decision-maker must give “considerable importance and weight” ( The Bath Society v Secretary of State for the Environment [1991] 1 W.L.R. 1303, per Glidewell LJ at 1319; and see East Northamptonshire District Council v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2015] 1 W.L.R. 45 , per Sullivan LJ at [22]–[23] and [29]).

The relevant policies of the National Planning Policy Framework are paragraphs 128–135, the material parts of which provide: “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… 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… 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; …” 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. … 133. Where a proposed development will lead to substantial harm to or total loss of significance of a designated heritage asset, local planning authorities should refuse consent, unless it can be demonstrated that the substantial harm or loss is necessary to achieve substantial public benefits that outweigh that harm or loss, or all of the following apply: … 134. Where a development proposal will lead to less than substantial harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset, this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal, including securing its optimum viable use. 135. The effect of an application on the significance of a non-designated heritage asset should be taken into account in determining the application. In weighing applications that affect directly or indirectly non-designated heritage assets, a balanced judgment will be required having regard to the scale of any harm or loss and the significance of the heritage asset.” The National Planning Policy Framework (paragraph 144) also states: When determining planning applications, local planning authorities should: • give great weight to the benefits of the mineral extraction, including to the economy; Commentary In considering the potential development of the Home Field site, with potential impacts on a designated heritage asset, the following points have been taken into consideration.

Page 297 of 583

• There is “a strong presumption against harm to designated assets” (Barnwell [2014] EWCA Civ 137; Forge Field [2014] EWHC 1895 (Admin)) • “Considerable weight” must be given to harm to designated assets, however slight, if more than de minimis (Barnwell; Forge Field; Jones [2015] EWCA Civ 1243) • Mordue v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and others [2015] EWCA Civ 1243. Heritage assets have statutory protection, unlike other material considerations; and the NPPF has a complex template for their consideration. Both must be considered in an assessment. • Failure to assess alternative sites on appropriate public interest criteria (Forge Field; ENV4) • The policy presumption in favour of sustainable development does not apply to cases of harm to designated assets (Gladman [2016] EWHC 421 (Admin)) • Cumulative effects must be considered (PPG) • All recognised harm must be included in the recommended Planning balance (Barnwell) • Undue weight should not be given to the temporary nature of development (National Wind Power [1999] N.P.C. 128) Development of the extension would not be expected to cause substantial harm to the Conservation Area but could have an impact on its setting. If so, this would be expected to be ‘less than substantial’ harm, and for a temporary period. This potential for harm has been given great and considerable weight in this assessment. Sites nominated for allocation in the Mineral Sites Plan have been assessed on heritage and other grounds. A number have been rejected for various reasons, and the remaining sites have been included in the Draft Mineral Sites Plan. The proposal is for a temporary period, after which the site will be restored and the impact on the heritage asset setting will be removed. The more detailed assessment that would be carried out as part of any planning application would address heritage impacts and identify appropriate mitigation to offset any harm identified. Mitigation could include screening (an earth bund) and/or a standoff/buffer. If mitigation is not possible, or if the necessary standoff was such that it made the site uneconomic to develop, then the development would not go ahead. In considering potential impacts and mitigation, it must be remembered that this is not a planning application, but a nomination for allocation of a site in the Mineral Sites Plan. The evidence required and level of assessment carried out at this stage are considered to be proportionate and appropriate. At the current stage, the Mineral Planning Authority is considering whether the proposed nomination can reasonably be allocated through the Mineral Sites Plan, on the understanding that appropriately detailed assessment work will be carried out at a later date, and appropriate mitigation applied. Although inclusion in an adopted plan gives a site allocation greater weight and likelihood of development, it is not deemed planning permission. Any allocation in an adopted plan still needs to go through the full planning application process, and if impacts are identified that cannot be satisfactorily mitigated, the proposal will not receive permission. It is considered, taking into account: • the less than substantial harm to the setting of the heritage assets; • the great and considerable weight given to such harm, and the strong presumption against such harm; • the temporary nature of the harm • the great weight to be given to the provision of mineral • the fact that minerals must be worked where they are found • the fact that this is an extension site, with the processing plant and other infrastructure already available

Page 298 of 583

• the fact that the proposed development will be subject to planning application including Environmental Impact Assessment, and impacts on the setting will be assessed in detail and appropriate mitigation identified that the public benefit to be received from this proposed development, and the nature and duration of the development causing harm, together with the scope for mitigating this harm, are such that the site should be allocated in the Mineral Sites Plan.

Viability This proposal is about establishing the principle of quarrying across this site, to be released for actual quarrying as may be needed. There are two existing quarries on the site already. The National Trust own the land and will release it as required. Viability is not expected to be an issue.

Cumulative Impacts The combined impacts of Purbeck Limestone Quarries should be assessed where a number of sites affect the same water resource or receiving water course. Site nomination is a field within which there will be small-scale Purbeck Stone extraction. Site is owned by the National Trust who require small-scale and low impact working. Site is in an area where there are a number of other Purbeck Stone workings. There are already two 1 ha quarries at Home Field and provided the working does not intensify, no cumulative impacts are expected. It is expected that, given the proposal and the approach of the National Trust of low impact quarrying, it will be possible to possible to mitigate impacts. A modification is proposed to include an additional development guideline to ensure cumulative impacts are minimised. Traffic arising from the new residential development will add to general traffic levels in / around Swanage and on the A351. NB: Further work has been undertaken on cumulative impacts for all sites. This information is presented in a separate document that should be read alongside this report. There is potential for cumulative effects in relation to biodiversity; human health; air (noise/dust); climate/GHGs; landscape and amenity. Impacts are expected to be primarily during preparation/working, i.e. short to medium term; However the scale of working is controlled by the National Trust as landowners to minimise adverse landscape and amenity impacts and to ensure quarrying is of a traditional scale in the landscape setting. Restoration would maintain open landscape and provide ecological enhancement. There is potential for in-combination effects between receptors such as human health/amenity, landscape and cultural heritage (Listed Buildings) given the concentration of sites in this area and the Acton Conservation Area nearby. The DGs require cumulative impacts to be taken into consideration. The MPA is satisfied that identified impacts can be addressed by DGs and existing/proposed policy. Summary.

Potential Benefits Potential Impacts on…

• Provision of Purbeck Stone. • Bridleway to the north. Further assessment • Support for the Purbeck Stone industry and required, mitigation expected to be possible. employment, both locally and wherever Purbeck • Residents and settlements. Site is relatively close to Stone is exported and used, with associated some dwellings, and to settlements. In the context economic benefits. of the Purbeck plateau with its long history of • Use of the stone for heritage building works/repairs, quarrying, this is not expected to be a problem and and for new buildings. should be capable of satisfactory mitigation.

Page 299 of 583

• Geodiversity benefits, through exposures created • Transport Assessment will be required at planning and fossils found. application stage, but traffic impacts are expected to capable of mitigation. • Possibility of improved public access. • Scheduled monument to the west of the site. Not expected to suffer any impacts, provided the setting is considered carefully. Assessment is required to determine whether there will be any archaeology or other heritage issues, and what mitigation will be required. • Groundwater and surface water both have the potential to be impacted and will require a hydrological assessment to determine what mitigation will be required. • Acton Conservation Area and its setting

Overall Recommendation: Assessment already carried out has flagged up hydrogeology, heritage/archaeology and landscape/visual impact as key issues to be addressed as part of working this site. Further assessment will be required to identify satisfactory mitigation and to identify if there are any additional impacts that will require mitigation. Key issues for consideration are need for further hydrological assessment, given that springs rise in the vicinity; need for heritage/archaeological assessment, given that there is a Scheduled Ancient Monument in the vicinity; visual impact assessment, there is a bridleway to the north of the site, generally screened, and amenity as there are residences in the vicinity, and Acton is to the north. Access arrangements are already in place and would be expected to continue. As National Trust land, only small parts of the site will be worked at any one time and will be restored before other areas are worked, thereby minimising impacts.

Subject to the completion of all necessary assessments and providing that any impacts are capable of satisfactory mitigation, it appears reasonable on the basis of evidence available that the site nomination can reasonably be included in the Draft Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Mineral Sites Plan. Updated Recommendation (February 2019) An additional development guideline is proposed to ensure that consideration is given to cumulative impacts from proposals. This will provide an additional safeguard. The site therefore remains appropriate for allocation in the Bournemouth,

Page 300 of 583

Purbeck Stone: PK 18 Extension to Quarry 4, Acton Assessment (February 2019)

Nominee: National Trust Site Area : approximately 1.1 ha Site Name/Location : Agent : Land and Mineral Management Updated site area 1.3ha Extension to Quarry 4, Local Authority : Purbeck District Council Production : 2,000 tpa Acton Mineral Type : Purbeck Stone Reserve : approximately 40,000 tonnes

Impact Assessment Scoring

Strong Minor Minor - Strong Positive Negligible or Negative - Negative + Positive ++ 0 ? Uncertain - Impact No Effect Impact Impact Impact

Timescales for effects: P/W: Preparation and Working R/A : Restoration and Afteruse

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

1. To move waste • This Objective is not relevant to this site management N/A N/A • N/A nomination up the waste hierarchy

European/International Designations 0 0 • No action required. • No impacts expected.

Annex 1 Bird Species 0 0 • No action required. • No impacts expected.

2. To maintain, National Designations conserve and 0 0 • No action required. • enhance No impacts expected. biodiversity Protected species 0 0 • No action required. • No impacts expected.

Local recognitions/designations, including 0 0 ancient woodland and veteran trees • No action required. • No impacts expected.

Page 301 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

• The Purbeck limestone group has an important • association with the geology of the Jurassic Note potential for quarries to yield + Coast World Heritage Site. Working quarries in Purbeck have been known to yield important fossils or other fossils, including dinosaur footprints. They are material of also of on-going interest for the study of early geodiversity interest. 3. To maintain, Cretaceous stratigraphy. • Visits or other conserve and • investigation of + These interests should be acknowledged with the enhance assumption that geologists and the Jurassic working sites may be geodiversity. Coast Team hosted by DCC will respond requested. positively to any opportunities to recover fossils 0 • Investigate potential or record and study unusual features if they are and/or benefits of discovered. In terms of geodiversity there is a leaving quarried face presumption in favour of an appropriate level of open after quarrying activity continuing in order to sustain restoration. these on-going interests.

• Hydrological assessment required to determine possible impacts, on Groundwater ground and surface waters, with appropriate mitigation to be • Site overlies Secondary Aquifer. implemented. Private or local water interests • Appropriate arrangements should be 4. To maintain, identified within 250 m of the site. _ 0 No impact on source protection put in place to ensure that the water conserve and leaving the site and entering the enhance the zones. watercourses or groundwater is of an quality of • Impact ranges from ‘Significant acceptable quality. ground, Adverse Impact’ to ‘Less surface and Significant Adverse Impact’. • Any fuel on site should be properly sea waters stored to avoid contamination in case and manage of spillage. the • Appropriate arrangements should be consumption installed for surface water and silt of water in a collection and fuel storage to prevent sustainable contamination of groundwater way. Surface Water resources. 0 0 • • No watercourses within 500 m. The combined impacts of Purbeck Limestone Quarries should be assessed where a number of sites affect the same water resource or receiving water course.

5. To reduce Flooding/Coastal Stability flood risk and 0 0 • • No action required. improve flood Site is entirely in Flood Risk Zone 1, no risk of management. flooding.

Page 302 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

Archaeology • Archaeological survey of the area required as part of • It is considered that the site has high planning application to assess potential for below-ground archaeology possible presence and and possibly industrial archaeological significance of non- evidence of early quarrying. designated remains and to • Archaeological assessment and assess whether/how these ? 0 evaluation would be required before an should be protected during informed planning decision could be working – no further work 6. To maintain, made. Only when these have been required at site allocation conserve and undertaken would the archaeological stage. enhance the impact be understood – at present it • All necessary mitigation to be historic could be anywhere from ‘Very implemented prior to environment Significant’ to ‘No Significant’ impacts. working. (including archaeological Historic Landscapes • Adequate provision to be sites, historic made for preservation, • The local landscape bears the imprint of buildings, excavation or recording, as previous quarrying dating from the conservation appropriate. Roman period onwards. It could be areas, historic 0 0 argued that the present site would be a • Further consideration to be parks and continuation of the process, and if the given to restoration gardens and site is to be restored afterwards the proposals, in terms of historic other locally impact would be limited in time anyway. landscapes. distinctive features and Historic Buildings their settings). • This site is part of a characterful landscape of

which the quarrying activities help to form its character. Buildings are not immediately • Heritage Assessment _ 0 adjacent to the site but derive character from the required to assess overall landscape. level of impact and identify appropriate • The quarry will have no significant impact on the mitigation listed buildings. • Potential impact on Acton Conservation Area

• Assessment of potential visual impacts Landscape Capacity will be required at 7. To maintain, planning application • conserve and _ 0 The key issue is the potential cumulative stage. enhance the adverse impacts on the amenity of users of • landscape, Priests Way. All appropriate including mitigation to be townscape, included, including seascape and restoration of other the coast. sites in the vicinity, as Designated Landscapes appropriate. 0 0 • ‘Less Significant Adverse Impact’ on designated • Appropriate restoration landscapes from this proposal. proposals in line with

Page 303 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A Landscape Management Guidelines referred to in Minerals Strategy.

• Soil to be properly • Soils are good to moderate in quality. Any soil 9. To maintain, stripped and stored removed will be protected during working and conserve and prior to working; _ 0 either re-used on site or taken elsewhere to be enhance soil protected during used. Further assessment may be required to quality. working; and re-spread determine soil quality. on site after working.

11. To promote the use of • This proposal does not promote the use of _ 0 • No action required. alternative alternative materials. materials.

Page 304 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

• Developing land as a quarry is expected to have some negative impacts regarding climate change, due primarily to machinery used and transportation of mineral away from site. • However, these will in relative terms be Use energy efficient negligible. plant and machinery. 14. To adapt to • and mitigate • The Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Minerals Implement restoration the impacts of _ 0 Strategy seeks to address and minimise such which provides climate impacts through Policy CC1 which requires appropriate habitats to change. operators to take into consideration climate help to increase change impacts and their possible mitigation for resilience of any proposed minerals development. flora/fauna. • The development management policies, e.g. DM 1, also address and seek to minimise the issue of sustainable development and climate change.

• Access is proposed via the existing quarry and • Any proposal for this the C135 to the B3069. From here vehicles will site would need to be travel to the A351 either west, past Kingston, or accompanied by a 15. To minimise east, through Langton Matravers. Transport Assessment the negative which will need to • Vehicle movements here are expected to be low impacts of provide access details and will not exceed that which currently exists. waste and and consider vehicle While access to the strategic network will involve minerals routing. The TA should travel through existing settlements, the low transport on _ 0 be scoped with the number of trips plus the B class of the road used the transport Transport Development means that there will be limited impact. network, Management Team. mitigating any • Site is considered to have a ‘Less Significant • Transport Assessment residual Adverse Impact’. impacts. will identify • Policies DM 1 and DM 8 of the Minerals Strategy opportunities for actively address this issue of minimising impacts reducing impacts on on the transportation network. the transport network.

Page 305 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

16. To support and • encourage the The proposed extension can only realistically be use of accessed by means of road transport, resulting in sustainable a negative impact under this Objective during • Mitigate impacts where transport development and working. _ 0 identified and modes, • As far as reasonably possible negative impacts appropriate. imposing no resulting from access and transport will be unmitigated mitigated, as required by Policies DM 1 and DM 8 negative of the Minerals Strategy. impacts on them.

Impact on Sensitive Human Receptors • Provision of • Properties within 100 m to north west and 500 m appropriate mitigation, to the north. Campsites within 500 m to following assessment north/north west. of likely impacts. _ 0 • Context is small quarries in an area with a long • Restoration to improve history of Purbeck Stone quarrying. National landscape of site where Trust will control rate of quarrying. possible; and to seek to facilitate public access. • Appropriate screening to be determined. • Screening, bunding, 17. To sustain the Impact on Existing Settlements standoffs will be used health and to mitigate impacts • quality of life Acton is approximately 380 m to the north; where considered of the Langton Matravers is approximately 650 m to necessary. population _ 0 north east. • Transport impacts to • Minimal impacts expected, given rate of be considered through quarrying and context of the site proposals. Transport Assessment, • Transport issues considered above. as noted above.

Impact on Airport Safety • Site is approximately 23 km from airport, with 0 0 • No action required. no wet working or restoration. • No impacts expected.

Impact on Recreational Land • Assessment of impacts, with 0 0 • Site is agricultural land, not used for appropriate mitigation 18. To enable safe formal/informal recreational purposes. access to identified. countryside • Impact on Public Rights of Way Restoration to include and open considering how it • spaces. _ 0 Bridleway (Priest’s Way) runs approximately 40 might be possible to m north of the northern edge of site improve public access nomination. in the area.

Page 306 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A • Further assessment required of possible impacts and appropriate screening.

Preliminary Hydrological Risk Assessment

Further Controlled Waters Issues/Risks Mitigation information/approval required

• Appropriate • Full hydrogeological risk arrangements to be assessment will be required made for ensuring as part of a planning that runoff from the application. • Potential for site does not enter • contamination of the groundwater Flood Risk Assessment unless any silt or controlled waters • Water Framework other pollutant has • Watercourses (groundwater) Assessment through spillage or first been removed. • Ponds/lakes, • Further assessment of seepage of pollutants • Fuel stored on site including wet potential impacts on water such as fuel. to be appropriately habitats quality and levels, • bunded and sealed Contamination of particularly for • Groundwater to prevent any water supplies or groundwater, is required spillage from reduction in amount prior to development. of water available for entering ground or • licenced supplies. surface waters. Land Drainage Consent to be obtained from Dorset • On-going County Council if works monitoring during may affect flow of an development and ordinary watercourse. working of the site.

Page 307 of 583

Heritage Impacts The northern boundary of the site as identified is approximately 32m from the Acton Conservation Area. This proximity, and the impact the development of the site would have on the setting of these heritage assets must be carefully considered against the public and other benefits of aggregate production. Policy/Legislative Background The Historic England website notes: When making a decision on all listed building consent applications or any decision on a planning application for development that affects a listed building or its setting, a local planning authority must have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses. Preservation in this context means not harming the interest in the building, as opposed to keeping it utterly unchanged. This obligation, found in sections 16 and 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, applies to all decisions concerning listed buildings. The recent Court of Appeal decision in the case of Barnwell vs East Northamptonshire DC 2014(2) made it clear that in enacting section 66(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 (1) Parliament’s intention was that ‘decision makers should give “considerable importance and weight” to the desirability of preserving the setting of listed buildings’ when carrying out the balancing exercise'.

Section 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 (“ the 1990 Act ”) provides: “(1) In considering whether to grant planning permission for development which affects a listed building or its setting, the local planning authority or, as the case may be, the Secretary of State shall have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses.” Section 72 of the 1990 Act provides: “(1) In the exercise, with respect to any buildings or other land in a conservation area, of any of the provisions mentioned in sub-section (2), special attention shall be paid to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of that area. (2) The provisions referred to in sub-section (1) are the planning Acts …” A finding of harm to the setting of a listed building is a consideration to which the decision-maker must give “considerable importance and weight” ( The Bath Society v Secretary of State for the Environment [1991] 1 W.L.R. 1303, per Glidewell LJ at 1319; and see East Northamptonshire District Council v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2015] 1 W.L.R. 45 , per Sullivan LJ at [22]–[23] and [29]).

Page 308 of 583

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. … 133. Where a proposed development will lead to substantial harm to or total loss of significance of a designated heritage asset, local planning authorities should refuse consent, unless it can be demonstrated that the substantial harm or loss is necessary to achieve substantial public benefits that outweigh that harm or loss, or all of the following apply: … 134. Where a development proposal will lead to less than substantial harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset, this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal, including securing its optimum viable use. 135. The effect of an application on the significance of a non-designated heritage asset should be taken into account in determining the application. In weighing applications that affect directly or indirectly non-designated heritage assets, a balanced judgment will be required having regard to the scale of any harm or loss and the significance of the heritage asset.” The National Planning Policy Framework (paragraph 144) also states: When determining planning applications, local planning authorities should: • give great weight to the benefits of the mineral extraction, including to the economy; Commentary In considering the potential development of the Quarry 4 Extension site, with potential impacts on a designated heritage asset, the following points have been taken into consideration. • There is “a strong presumption against harm to designated assets” (Barnwell [2014] EWCA Civ 137; Forge Field [2014] EWHC 1895 (Admin)) • “Considerable weight” must be given to harm to designated assets, however slight, if more than de minimis (Barnwell; Forge Field; Jones [2015] EWCA Civ 1243) • Mordue v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and others [2015] EWCA Civ 1243. Heritage assets have statutory protection, unlike other material considerations; and the NPPF has a complex template for their consideration. Both must be considered in an assessment. • Failure to assess alternative sites on appropriate public interest criteria (Forge Field; ENV4) • The policy presumption in favour of sustainable development does not apply to cases of harm to designated assets (Gladman [2016] EWHC 421 (Admin)) • Cumulative effects must be considered (PPG) • All recognised harm must be included in the recommended Planning balance (Barnwell) • Undue weight should not be given to the temporary nature of development (National Wind Power [1999] N.P.C. 128) Development of the extension would not be expected to cause substantial harm to the Conservation Area but could have an impact on its setting. If so, this would be expected to be ‘less than substantial’ harm, and for a temporary period. This potential for harm has been given great and considerable weight in this assessment. Sites nominated for allocation in the Mineral Sites Plan have been assessed on heritage and other grounds. A number have been rejected for various reasons, and the remaining sites have been included in the Draft Mineral Sites Plan. The proposal is for a temporary period, after which the site will be restored and the impact on the heritage asset setting will be removed. The more detailed assessment that would be carried out as part of any planning application would address heritage impacts and identify appropriate mitigation to offset any harm identified. Mitigation could include screening (an earth bund) and/or a standoff/buffer.

Page 309 of 583

If mitigation is not possible, or if the necessary standoff was such that it made the site uneconomic to develop, then the development would not go ahead. In considering potential impacts and mitigation, it must be remembered that this is not a planning application, but a nomination for allocation of a site in the Mineral Sites Plan. The evidence required and level of assessment carried out at this stage are considered to be proportionate and appropriate. At the current stage, the Mineral Planning Authority is considering whether the proposed nomination can reasonably be allocated through the Mineral Sites Plan, on the understanding that appropriately detailed assessment work will be carried out at a later date, and appropriate mitigation applied. Although inclusion in an adopted plan gives a site allocation greater weight and likelihood of development, it is not deemed planning permission. Any allocation in an adopted plan still needs to go through the full planning application process, and if impacts are identified that cannot be satisfactorily mitigated, the proposal will not receive permission. It is considered, taking into account: • the less than substantial harm to the setting of the heritage assets; • the great and considerable weight given to such harm, and the strong presumption against such harm; • the temporary nature of the harm • the great weight to be given to the provision of mineral • the fact that minerals must be worked where they are found • the fact that this is an extension site, with the processing plant and other infrastructure already available • the fact that the proposed development will be subject to planning application including Environmental Impact Assessment, and impacts on the setting will be assessed in detail and appropriate mitigation identified that the public benefit to be received from this proposed development, and the nature and duration of the development causing harm, together with the scope for mitigating this harm, are such that the site should be allocated in the Mineral Sites Plan.

Cumulative Impacts The combined impacts of Purbeck Limestone Quarries should be assessed where a number of sites affect the same water resource or receiving water course. Site nomination comprises an extension to an existing quarry in an area where there is a high concentration and long history of mineral extraction. The cumulative effect of the number of quarries operating in this area should be taken into consideration, and as far as possible no new quarry areas should be opened unless others have been restored. A modification is proposed to include an additional development guideline to ensure cumulative impacts are minimised. The site is within 5Km from a town (Swanage) where allocations for the development of 200 dwellings, employment and retail facilities have been made in the Purbeck Local Plan Part 1 (adopted Nov 2012) (Policy SE) and the Swanage Local Plan (Policy SS). Traffic arising from the new residential development will add to general traffic levels in / around Swanage and on the A351. NB: Further work has been undertaken on cumulative impacts for all sites. This information is presented in a separate document that should be read alongside this report. There is potential for cumulative effects in relation to biodiversity; human health; air (noise/dust); climate/GHGs; landscape and amenity. Impacts are expected to be primarily during preparation/working, i.e. short to medium term; However the scale of working is controlled by the National Trust as landowners to minimise adverse landscape and amenity impacts and to ensure quarrying is of a traditional scale in the landscape setting. Restoration would maintain open landscape and provide ecological enhancement. There is potential for in-combination effects between receptors such as human health/amenity, landscape and cultural heritage (Listed Buildings) given the concentration of sites in this area and the Acton Conservation Area nearby. Page 310 of 583

The DGs require cumulative impacts to be taken into consideration. The MPA is satisfied that identified impacts can be addressed by DGs and existing/proposed policy.

Summary

Potential Benefits Potential Impacts on…

• Intensification of impacts on bridleway (Priests Way) to the north, and potentially also on properties to the north. Further assessment required, with • Provision of Purbeck Stone. appropriate mitigation identified. • • Support for the Purbeck Stone industry and There is potential for impact on the Acton employment, both locally and wherever Purbeck Conservation Area and its setting. Stone is exported and used, with associated • Archaeological assessment required to identify economic benefits. possible impacts and any required mitigation. • Use of the stone for heritage building works/repairs, • Transport Assessment will be required at planning and for new buildings. application stage, but generally traffic impacts are • Geodiversity benefits, through exposures created not expected to cause a problem. As an extension, and fossils found. new traffic levels should not exceed current levels. • Potential for groundwater impacts on water interests will require a hydrological assessment to determine impacts and what mitigation might be required.

Overall Recommendation: Assessment already carried out has flagged up heritage, archaeology and local amenity (including impacts on Priest’s Way, residential properties and campsites) as the key issues to be addressed as part of working this site. Further assessment will be required to identify satisfactory mitigation and to identify if there are any additional impacts that will require mitigation. As the site is an extension of an existing site, it is expected that any impacts should be capable of satisfactory mitigation.

Page 311 of 583

Purbeck Stone: PK19 Broadmead Field, Gallows Gore, Worth Matravers (February 2019)

Nominee: National Trust Site Name/Location : Site Area : approximately 9.56 ha Agent : Land and Mineral Management PK19 Broadmead Field, Production : 2,000 tpa Local Authority : Purbeck District Council Langton Matravers Reserve : approximately 380,000 tonnes Mineral Type : Purbeck Stone

Impact Assessment Scoring

Strong Minor Minor - Strong Positive Negligible or Negative - Negative + Positive ++ 0 ? Uncertain - Impact No Effect Impact Impact Impact

Timescales for effects: P/W: Preparation and Working R/A : Restoration and Afteruse

Effects Sustainability Commentary Mitigation P/ Objectives R/A W

1. To move waste • This Objective is not relevant to this site management N/A N/A • N/A nomination up the waste hierarchy

European/International Designations 0 0 • No action required. • No impacts expected.

Annex 1 Bird Species 0 0 • No action required. • No impacts expected.

2. To maintain, National Designations conserve and 0 0 • No action required. • enhance No impacts expected. biodiversity Protected species • Greater Horseshoe Bat has been recorded from • Ecological surveys the area immediately adjacent to this site. required, with ? 0 Without further investigation the implications of appropriate mitigation quarrying on this rare species are not known, if required. although it is likely that appropriate mitigation could be put in place if necessary.

Page 312 of 583

Effects Sustainability Commentary Mitigation P/ Objectives R/A W

Local recognitions/designations, including • A modification is 0 0 ancient woodland and veteran trees proposed to ensure appropriate • No impacts expected. protection of the SNCI.

• The Purbeck limestone group has an important association with the geology of the Jurassic • Note potential for Coast World Heritage Site. Working quarries in quarries to yield Purbeck have been known to yield important fossils or other fossils, including dinosaur footprints. They are material of also of on-going interest for the study of early geodiversity interest. 3. To maintain, Cretaceous stratigraphy. • Visits or other conserve and • + 0 These interests should be acknowledged with investigation of enhance the assumption that geologists and the Jurassic working sites may be geodiversity. Coast Team hosted by DCC will respond requested. positively to any opportunities to recover fossils • or record and study unusual features if they are Investigate potential discovered. In terms of geodiversity there is a and/or benefits of presumption in favour of an appropriate level of leaving quarried face quarrying activity continuing in order to sustain open after restoration. these on-going interests.

Groundwater • Simple hydrological assessment • Groundwater spring rises 240m required to determine possible 4. To maintain, from the site. Impacts on this impacts, on ground and surface waters, conserve and spring could vary from ‘Less with appropriate mitigation to be enhance the Significant Adverse Impact’ to implemented. quality of ‘Significant Adverse Impact’ – • Appropriate arrangements should be ground, further assessment required. put in place to ensure that the water surface and • leaving the site and entering the sea waters ? 0 The combined impacts of watercourses or groundwater is of an and manage Purbeck Limestone Quarries acceptable quality. the should be assessed where a consumption number of sites affect the same • Any fuel on site should be properly of water in a water resource or receiving stored to avoid contamination in case sustainable water course. of spillage. way. • Site overlies Secondary aquifers. • Appropriate arrangements should be No impact on Source Protection installed for surface water and silt Zones. No licenced supplies. collection and fuel storage to prevent

Page 313 of 583

Effects Sustainability Commentary Mitigation P/ Objectives R/A W contamination of groundwater resources. • The combined impacts of Purbeck Surface Water Limestone Quarries should be assessed where a number of sites affect the • There is a watercourse same water resource or receiving water approximately 240m from the ? 0 course. site. Proposed development could have Significant Impact, • An additional development further assessment required. guideline is proposed to ensure retention and protection of water mains and other water related infrastructure.

5. To reduce Flooding/Coastal Stability flood risk and 0 0 • • No action required. improve flood Site is entirely in Flood Risk Zone 1, no risk of management. flooding.

Archaeology • Archaeological survey of • There are various archaeological sites in the the area required as part of area, most notably an Iron Age and Roman planning application to 6. To maintain, period settlement and shale-working site assess possible presence conserve and just to the north-west. There is also and significance of non- enhance the potential for industrial archaeological designated remains and to evidence of early quarrying. assess whether/how these historic ? 0 should be protected environment • Archaeological assessment and evaluation during working – no (including would be required before an informed further work required at archaeological planning decision could be made. Only site allocation stage. sites, historic when these have been undertaken would buildings, the archaeological impact be understood – • All necessary mitigation to conservation at present it could be anywhere from ‘Very be implemented prior to areas, historic Significant’ to ‘No Significant’ impact. working. parks and • Adequate provision to be gardens and Historic Landscapes other locally made for preservation, • distinctive The local landscape bears the imprint of excavation or recording, as features and previous quarrying dating from the Roman appropriate. period onwards. It could be argued that the their settings). 0 0 • Further consideration to be present site would be a continuation of the given to restoration process, and if the site is to be restored proposals, in terms of afterwards the impact would be limited in historic landscapes. time anyway.

Page 314 of 583

Effects Sustainability Commentary Mitigation P/ Objectives R/A W

Historic Buildings • All necessary • Listed building adjacent to site proposal, further assessment and assessment will be required to determine _ ? 0 mitigation to be potential impacts. implemented prior to • Acton Conservation Area 235m east of the site - working. any impacts expected to be minimal.

Landscape Capacity • Site is in the zone of least landscape and visual 7. To maintain, impact so it will be how the area is worked • Site to be developed conserve and 0 0 which will determine its capacity. as suggested, to enhance the minimise impacts. landscape, • Small areas, quantities, progressive restoration including and in short campaigns with low stockpiles is townscape, recommended. seascape and the coast. Designated Landscapes 0 0 • No action required. • Less significant adverse impact.

• • Soils are good to moderate. Any soil removed Soil to be properly 9. To maintain, will be protected during working and either re- stripped and stored conserve and prior to working; _ 0 used on site or taken elsewhere to be used. enhance soil protected during • quality. Further assessment may be required to working; and re-spread determine soil quality. on site after working.

Page 315 of 583

Effects Sustainability Commentary Mitigation P/ Objectives R/A W

11. To promote the use of • This proposal does not promote the use of _ 0 • No action required. alternative alternative materials. materials.

• • 15. To minimise _ 0 Details of the exact point of access from this site Any proposal for this the negative on the highway network will be required. It is site would need to be Page 316 of 583

Effects Sustainability Commentary Mitigation P/ Objectives R/A W impacts of expected that access will be gained on the accompanied by a waste and southern side of the site. Any proposal would Transport Assessment minerals need to provide details of the access including which will need to transport on visibility, geometry and surfacing. provide access details the transport and consider vehicle • While routes from the site to the A351 will go network, routing. through either Langton Matravers or Kingston, mitigating any the route is via a B class road and the number of • The TA should be residual trips will be low. Provided that trip numbers are scoped with the impacts. low, as expected, there will be little adverse Transport Development impact and the site is considered to have a ‘Less Management Team and Significant Impact’ rating. is intended to identify opportunities for • Policies DM 1 and DM 8 of the Minerals Strategy reducing impacts on actively address this issue of minimising impacts the transport network. on the transportation network.

Impact on Sensitive Human Receptors • Provision of • Residential properties adjacent, within 250m and appropriate mitigation, 500m. The local context is small quarries in an following assessment area with a long history of Purbeck Stone of likely impacts. ? 0 quarrying. The National Trust as landowner will • Restoration to improve control rate of quarrying. landscape of site where 17. To sustain the • Only small areas within the overall field will be possible; and to seek to health and quarried – exact sites not known yet. facilitate public access. quality of life Appropriate screening to be determined. • Screening, bunding, of the standoffs will be used population Impact on Existing Settlements to mitigate impacts • Acton approximately 250m to east; Langton where considered Matravers within 750m further east. necessary. ? 0 • • Sites will be relatively low impact. Limited Transport impacts to visibility towards the east. With appropriate be considered through screening, visual impacts would be further Transport Assessment, reduced. as noted above.

Page 317 of 583

Effects Sustainability Commentary Mitigation P/ Objectives R/A W • The National Trust, as landowners, will control the rate at which the site is worked to minimize impacts and maintain the appearance of a range of smaller quarries on their land. • Transport issues are considered above.

Impact on Airport Safety • Site is approximately 23 km from airport, with 0 0 • No action required. no wet working or restoration. • No impacts expected.

Impact on Recreational Land • Site is agricultural land, not use for • 0 0 Assessment of formal/informal agricultural purposes. impacts, with 18. To enable safe • No impacts expected. appropriate mitigation access to identified. countryside Impact on Public Rights of Way • Restoration to include and open • Statutory right of way crosses nominated field. considering how it spaces. Since whole field will not be worked, statutory might be possible to _ 0/+ right of way may not need to be diverted. improve public access in the area. • Further assessment required of possible impacts and appropriate mitigation.

Page 318 of 583

Preliminary Hydrological Risk Assessment

Further Controlled Waters Issues/Risks Mitigation information/approval required

Heritage Impacts The northern boundary of the site as identified is approximately 350m west of the Acton Conservation Area. This proximity, and the impact the development of the site would have on the setting of these heritage assets must be carefully considered against the public and other benefits of aggregate production. Policy/Legislative Background The Historic England website notes:

Page 319 of 583

When making a decision on all listed building consent applications or any decision on a planning application for development that affects a listed building or its setting, a local planning authority must have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses. Preservation in this context means not harming the interest in the building, as opposed to keeping it utterly unchanged. This obligation, found in sections 16 and 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, applies to all decisions concerning listed buildings. The recent Court of Appeal decision in the case of Barnwell vs East Northamptonshire DC 2014(2) made it clear that in enacting section 66(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 (1) Parliament’s intention was that ‘decision makers should give “considerable importance and weight” to the desirability of preserving the setting of listed buildings’ when carrying out the balancing exercise'.

Page 320 of 583

134. Where a development proposal will lead to less than substantial harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset, this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal, including securing its optimum viable use. 135. The effect of an application on the significance of a non-designated heritage asset should be taken into account in determining the application. In weighing applications that affect directly or indirectly non-designated heritage assets, a balanced judgment will be required having regard to the scale of any harm or loss and the significance of the heritage asset.” The National Planning Policy Framework (paragraph 144) also states: When determining planning applications, local planning authorities should: • give great weight to the benefits of the mineral extraction, including to the economy; Commentary In considering the potential development of the Broadmead Field site, with potential impacts on a designated heritage asset, the following points have been taken into consideration. • There is “a strong presumption against harm to designated assets” (Barnwell [2014] EWCA Civ 137; Forge Field [2014] EWHC 1895 (Admin)) • “Considerable weight” must be given to harm to designated assets, however slight, if more than de minimis (Barnwell; Forge Field; Jones [2015] EWCA Civ 1243) • Mordue v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and others [2015] EWCA Civ 1243. Heritage assets have statutory protection, unlike other material considerations; and the NPPF has a complex template for their consideration. Both must be considered in an assessment. • Failure to assess alternative sites on appropriate public interest criteria (Forge Field; ENV4) • The policy presumption in favour of sustainable development does not apply to cases of harm to designated assets (Gladman [2016] EWHC 421 (Admin)) • Cumulative effects must be considered (PPG) • All recognised harm must be included in the recommended Planning balance (Barnwell) • Undue weight should not be given to the temporary nature of development (National Wind Power [1999] N.P.C. 128) Development of the extension would not be expected to cause substantial harm to the Conservation Area but could have an impact on its setting. If so, this would be expected to be ‘less than substantial’ harm, and for a temporary period. This potential for harm has been given great and considerable weight in this assessment. Sites nominated for allocation in the Mineral Sites Plan have been assessed on heritage and other grounds. A number have been rejected for various reasons, and the remaining sites have been included in the Draft Mineral Sites Plan. The proposal is for a temporary period, after which the site will be restored and the impact on the heritage asset setting will be removed. The more detailed assessment that would be carried out as part of any planning application would address heritage impacts and identify appropriate mitigation to offset any harm identified. Mitigation could include screening (an earth bund) and/or a standoff/buffer. If mitigation is not possible, or if the necessary standoff was such that it made the site uneconomic to develop, then the development would not go ahead. In considering potential impacts and mitigation, it must be remembered that this is not a planning application, but a nomination for allocation of a site in the Mineral Sites Plan. The evidence required and level of assessment carried out at this stage are considered to be proportionate and appropriate. At the current stage, the Mineral Planning Authority is considering whether the proposed nomination can reasonably be allocated through the Mineral Sites Plan, on the understanding that appropriately detailed assessment work will be carried out at a later date, and appropriate mitigation applied. Page 321 of 583

Although inclusion in an adopted plan gives a site allocation greater weight and likelihood of development, it is not deemed planning permission. Any allocation in an adopted plan still needs to go through the full planning application process, and if impacts are identified that cannot be satisfactorily mitigated, the proposal will not receive permission. It is considered, taking into account: • the less than substantial harm to the setting of the heritage assets; • the great and considerable weight given to such harm, and the strong presumption against such harm; • the temporary nature of the harm • the great weight to be given to the provision of mineral • the fact that minerals must be worked where they are found • the fact that this is an extension site, with the processing plant and other infrastructure already available • the fact that the proposed development will be subject to planning application including Environmental Impact Assessment, and impacts on the setting will be assessed in detail and appropriate mitigation identified that the public benefit to be received from this proposed development, and the nature and duration of the development causing harm, together with the scope for mitigating this harm, are such that the site should be allocated in the Mineral Sites Plan.

Cumulative Impacts The combined impacts of Purbeck Limestone Quarries should be assessed where a number of sites affect the same water resource or receiving water course. Site nomination is a field within which there will be small-scale Purbeck Stone extraction. Site is owned by the National Trust who require small-scale and low impact working. Site is in an area where there are a number of other Purbeck Stone workings. Key issues for consideration are need to ensure no impacts on Greater Horseshoe Bats in the vicinity; need for further archaeological and hydrological assessment; and amenity impacts on residences in the vicinity and users of the footpath that crosses the field. It is expected that, given the proposal and the approach of the National Trust of low impact quarrying, it will be possible to possible to mitigate impacts. Site nomination comprises a new proposal in an area where there is a high concentration and long history of mineral extraction. A modification is proposed to include an additional development guideline to ensure cumulative impacts are minimised. The proposal is within 5Km (by road) of a town (Swanage) where allocations for the development of 200 dwellings, employment and retail facilities have been made in the Purbeck Local Plan Part 1 (adopted Nov 2012) (Policy SE). (Site details not yet available). Traffic arising from the new residential development will add to general traffic levels in / around Swanage and on the A351. Traffic arising from the new residential development will add to general traffic levels in / around Swanage and on the A351. Output from this site will be managed through the requirements of the landowners, the National Trust, and it is not expected that the site will lead to visual or road transport related cumulative effects. NB: Further work has been undertaken on cumulative impacts for all sites. This information is presented in a separate document that should be read alongside this report. There is potential for cumulative effects in relation to biodiversity; human health; air (noise/dust); climate/GHGs; landscape and amenity. Impacts are expected to be primarily during preparation/working, i.e. short to medium term; However the scale of working is controlled by the National Trust as landowners to minimise adverse landscape and amenity impacts and to ensure quarrying is of a traditional scale in the landscape setting. Restoration would maintain open landscape and provide ecological enhancement.

Page 322 of 583

There is potential for in-combination effects between receptors such as human health/amenity, landscape and cultural heritage (Listed Buildings) given the concentration of sites in this area and the Acton Conservation Area nearby. The DGs require cumulative impacts to be taken into consideration. The MPA is satisfied that identified impacts can be addressed by DGs and existing/proposed policy.

Summary

Potential Benefits Potential Impacts on…

• Ensure no impacts from working this site on Greater Horseshoe Bats. A modification is proposed to require consideration is given to the provision of bat roosts. • Right of way passing through site area. Further assessment required, mitigation expected to be possible. • Potential impact on landscape capacity of the site. Recommended working approach is small areas, • Provision of Purbeck Stone. quantities, progressive restoration and in short campaigns with low stockpiles. • Support for the Purbeck Stone industry and • employment, both locally and wherever Purbeck Nominated site is relatively close to residential Stone is exported and used, with associated properties, with potential impacts on local amenity. economic benefits. In the context of the Purbeck plateau with its long history of quarrying, this is not expected to be a • Use of the stone for heritage building works/repairs, problem and should be capable of satisfactory and for new buildings. mitigation. Assessment of possible impacts required • Geodiversity benefits, through exposures created with appropriate mitigation identified. and fossils found. • Transport Assessment will be required at planning • Possibility of improved public access. application stage, with appropriate mitigation identified. • Groundwater and surface water both have the potential to be impacted and will require a hydrological assessment to determine what mitigation will be required. • Potential archaeological impacts and impacts on Listed Building, further assessment to be carried out at appropriate stage. • Acton Conservation Area and/or its setting.

Overall Recommendation: Assessment already carried out has flagged up heritage/archaeology, hydrology, landscape, local amenity and access (including impacts on right of way over site) as the key issues to be addressed as part of working land within this site nomination. Further assessment will be required at planning application stage to identify satisfactory mitigation and to identify if there are any additional impacts that will require mitigation.

Page 323 of 583

Subject to the completion of all necessary assessments and providing that any impacts are capable of satisfactory mitigation, it appears reasonable on the basis of evidence available that the site nomination can reasonably be included in the Draft Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Mineral Sites Plan. Updated Recommendation (February 2019) A series of additional development guidelines are proposed as modifications to the Mineral Sites Plan. These will provide an additional safeguards and mitigation to reduce the impacts of working. The site therefore remains appropriate for allocation in the Bournemouth.

Page 324 of 583

Other Building Stone: BS02 Marnhull Quarry, Whiteways Lane, (February 2019)

NB: No modifications are proposed to this site allocations

Nominee/Agent: Marnhull Stone Site Name/Location : Limited Site Area : 2.02 ha BS02 Marnhull Quarry, Local Authority : North Dorset District Production : approximately 1,500 tpa Council Whiteways Lane, Marnhull Reserve : approximately 25,000 tonnes Mineral Type : Limestone

Impact Assessment Scoring

Strong Minor Minor - Strong Positive Negligible or Negative - Negative + Positive ++ 0 ? Uncertain - Impact No Effect Impact Impact Impact

Timescales for effects: P/W: Preparation and Working R/A : Restoration and Afteruse

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

1. To move waste management • This Objective is not relevant to this site up the waste N/A N/A • N/A nomination hierarchy and promote net self sufficiency

European/International Designations 0 0 • No action required. • No impacts expected

Annex 1 Bird Species • 2. To maintain, 0 0 No action required. • No impacts expected conserve and enhance National Designations biodiversity 0 0 • No action required. • No impacts expected

Protected species 0 0 • No action required. • No impacts expected

Page 325 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

Local recognitions/designations, including 0 0 ancient woodland and veteran trees • No action required. • No impacts expected

• • This extension would continue an Operator to be asked to permit 3. To maintain, existing exposure of the Clavellata visits/access to view exposures conserve and Beds of the Corallian Group. This where possible during working. + + enhance should be considered an • Opportunities to leave faces geodiversity. enhancement to an existing Local exposed when working is Geological Site at this site. finished to be considered.

• Hydrological assessment required Groundwater to determine possible impacts, on ground and surface waters, with • No impact on Source Protection appropriate mitigation to be Zones and no licensed abstraction implemented. points within 500m. Site is within a 0 0 • 4. To maintain, Secondary Aquifer. Appropriate arrangements should conserve and be put in place to ensure that the • enhance the Environment Agency advise a water leaving the site and entering quality of Hydrogeological Risk Assessment the watercourses or groundwater is ground, will be required. of an acceptable quality. surface and • Any fuel on site should be properly sea waters stored to avoid contamination in and manage case of spillage. the consumption Surface Water • Appropriate arrangements should of water in a • Site boundary is within 250m of be installed for surface water and sustainable watercourse - Chivrick’s Brook. silt collection and fuel storage to way. prevent contamination of ? 0 • Assessment required to determine groundwater resources. possible impacts on hydrogeology. • Impacts to be appropriately Land Drainage Consent to be mitigated. obtained from Dorset County Council if works may affect flow of an ordinary watercourse.

• 5. To reduce Flooding/Coastal Stability Flood Risk Assessment flood risk and • (FRA) will be required. 0 0 Entire site is within Flood Risk Zone 1, no improve flood expected risk of flooding or contributing to • All necessary mitigation management. flooding. to be implemented.

Archaeology 6. To maintain, • Archaeological survey of conserve and • According to the Dorset Historic the area required as part of enhance the Environment Record, human remains were planning application to historic ? ? found nearby during quarrying about 200 assess possible presence environment years ago. From the description, they and significance of non- (including sound like part of a Christian cemetery of designated remains and to archaeological an indeterminate period. assess whether/how these

Page 326 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A sites, historic • Archaeological evaluation would be should be protected buildings, appropriate before determination of a during working – no conservation planning application to indicate the likely further work required at areas, historic archaeological impact of quarrying and the site allocation stage. parks and appropriate mitigation. Potentially the • All necessary mitigation to gardens and impact could be anywhere from ‘Very be implemented prior to other locally Significant Adverse Impact’ to ‘No working. distinctive Significant or Negligible Adverse Impacts’. features and • Adequate provision to be their settings). Historic Landscapes made for preservation, excavation or recording, as • The site lies in the Blackmore Vale. appropriate. Seemingly much of the Vale remained wooded until the Middle Ages, and so the • Further consideration to be field system on and around the site may given to restoration 0 0 well be Medieval in origin. proposals, in terms of historic landscapes. • The Mineral Planning Authority is not aware of anything particularly significant about these fields, hence ‘Less Significant Adverse Impact’ category seems appropriate.

Historic Buildings • 0 0 • Listed buildings are too far away to be affected. No action required. No significant impacts expected.

• Landscape Capacity Assessment of potential visual impacts • May be some adverse impacts but if mitigation will be required at - 0 designed to be sympathetic these can be planning application 7. To maintain, minimised to cause no significant adverse stage. conserve and effects. enhance the • All appropriate landscape, mitigation to be including included. townscape, • Appropriate restoration seascape and Designated Landscapes proposals in line with the coast. 0 0 • No significant/negligible impacts expected. Landscape Management Guidelines referred to in Minerals Strategy.

• Impacts on air quality expected to be negligible. 8. To protect • • Environmental and improve No AQMAs will be affected by the working of protection measures air quality and this site proposal. Any dust resulting from 0 0 to be put in place to reduce the working will be controlled through normal dust- reduce dust and noise impacts of suppression measures. impacts. noise. • Any impacts due to noise resulting from mineral working would be expected to be satisfactorily Page 327 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A minimised through normal noise mitigation measures, imposed at the planning application stage.

• Soil to be properly • 9. To maintain, Site is ‘Good to Moderate’ agricultural land. stripped and stored conserve and • prior to working; _ 0 Soils will be stripped and protected during enhance soil preparation and working and reused on site as protected during quality. part of restoration. working; and re-spread on site after working.

• No specific action required 10. To conserve • and safeguard • The site would make an important contribution Site development to + 0 mineral to the supply of building stone. take into resources. consideration relevant impacts and mitigate where appropriate.

11. To promote the use of • This proposal does not promote the use of _ 0 • No action required. alternative alternative materials. materials.

• Development of this site would provide a 12. To provide an benefit in terms of contributing to the provision • Ensure principles of adequate and of a supply of minerals to meet society’s needs. sustainable affordable Ensuring a sustainable supply will depend on development are supply of + 0 the development and management of the site. incorporated into the minerals to • Providing site development takes into account development of this meet society's relevant principles of sustainable development site. needs. it is expected this will contribute to complying with this objective.

• This site proposal is expected to contribute to economic development on two levels – directly through the provision of employment at the proposed extension and indirectly through the provision of building stone required for new 13. To promote build, repairs and maintenance, decorative and and • Seek further benefits, landscaping work. Both levels are expected to encourage such as improved + 0 maintain employment, skilled and unskilled. sustainable public access, where economic • Restoration to agriculture will offer some further appropriate. growth economic benefits. • Further benefits may be available if improved public access can be achieved, through the recreational attraction and use in the wider area (i.e. riding, walking).

Page 328 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

• Developing land as a quarry is expected to have some negative impacts regarding climate change, due primarily to machinery used and transportation of mineral away from site. • However, given the size of the proposed quarry Use energy efficient these will in relative terms be negligible. plant and machinery. 14. To adapt to • and mitigate • The Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Minerals Implement restoration the impacts of _ 0 Strategy seeks to address and minimise such which provides climate impacts through Policy CC1 which requires appropriate habitats to change. operators to take into consideration climate help to increase change impacts and their possible mitigation for resilience of any proposed minerals development. flora/fauna. • The development management policies, e.g. DM 1, also address and seek to minimise the issue of sustainable development and climate change.

• Entrance to the site will be gained via an • Any proposal for this site existing, suitable, access onto Whiteways would need to be 15. To minimise Lane. From here vehicles will use the accompanied by a Transport the negative local rural road network to access the Assessment which will need impacts of B3092. to provide access details and waste and • While this road does pass through some consider vehicle routing. The minerals local settlements, the very low numbers TA should be scoped with transport on _ 0 of predicted movements, less than one a the Transport Development the transport day, mean that the site has been given a Management Team. network, ‘Less Significant Adverse Impact’ rating. • mitigating any The Transport Assessment residual • Policies DM1 and DM 8 of the Minerals should identify impacts. Strategy actively address this issue of opportunities for reducing minimising impacts on the transportation impacts on the transport network. network.

16. To support and • encourage the The proposed extension can only realistically be use of accessed by means of road transport, resulting in sustainable a negative impact under this Objective during • Mitigate impacts where transport development and working. _ 0 identified and modes, • As far as reasonably possible negative impacts appropriate. imposing no resulting from access and transport will be unmitigated mitigated, as required by Policies DM1 and DM8 negative of the Minerals Strategy. impacts on them.

Page 329 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

Impact on Sensitive Human Receptors • Closest property is Toogoods farm, just over 500m to the north east. • Provision of 0 0 • Mitigation measures such as visual and noise appropriate mitigation, attenuation bunds can be used as needed – following assessment further assessment will be required to of likely impacts. determine what is needed. • Restoration to improve landscape of site where Impact on Existing Settlements possible; and to seek to • Nearest settlement is Marnhull, at increase public access. 17. To sustain the approximately 800m to north west. • Transport Assessment health and • It is likely that there will be impacts of lorries to be carried out, quality of life accessing the site. This is an extension and identifying of the 0 0 should not result in intensification of any opportunities for population impacts. reducing impacts on the transport network • Mitigation measures such as visual and noise where appropriate. attenuation bunds can be used as needed – further assessment will be required to determine what is needed.

Impact on Airport Safety • No impacts expected • 0 0 Site is approximately 37 km from Bournemouth and no action airport and approximately 24 km from required. Yeovilton, with no wet working or restoration.

Impact on Recreational Land 0 0 • Site is agricultural land, no formal or informal • recreational use. Assessment of impacts, with appropriate mitigation 18. To enable safe Impact on Public Rights of Way access to identified. • No rights of way on or immediately adjacent to countryside • Restoration to include site, but bridleway passes close to eastern edge. and open considering how it • spaces. _ 0 Assessment required to determine what might be possible to mitigation might be needed to protect improve public access bridleway – to be screened as may be required. in the area. • Opportunities for improvements to public access to be considered.

Page 330 of 583

Preliminary Hydrological Risk Assessment

Further information or Controlled Issues/Risks Mitigation approval that may be Waters required

• Water Framework • The Stour is the closest • Appropriate Assessment may be main river, some 2.5 km arrangements to be required. distant, and the River made for ensuring that Basin Management Plan • Hydrological risk runoff from the site South West River Basin assessment to consider does not enter the District identifies it being possible impacts of surface or of ‘Poor’ environmental working this site and any groundwater drainage quality in this area. required mitigation. • Watercourses unless any silt has first • The Chiswick Brook is been removed. • Further assessment of • Ponds/lakes, approximately 250 m potential impacts on water including wet • Fuel stored on site to from the site. quality and levels, habitats be appropriately particularly for • There is potential for bunded and sealed to • Groundwater groundwater, is required contamination from prevent any spillage prior to development. runoff from site along from entering ground with potential for or surface waters. • Land Drainage Consent to contamination of be obtained from Dorset • On-going monitoring controlled waters through County Council if works during development spillage or seepage of may affect flow of an and working of the pollutants such as fuel, or ordinary watercourse. site. silt in water. • Flood Risk Assessment

Cumulative Impacts Site proposal is an extension to an existing site in an area where there is other mineral working - a building stone quarry approximately 1.5km to the north at Todber – but the amounts of traffic generated are relatively small. In terms of cumulative impacts for mineral working, rating of ‘Less Significant Adverse Impact’ is justified. The proposal is within 5km of sites allocated in Sturminster Newton for residential development ( 380 dwellings in the town in total) in the Pre -Submission draft North Dorset Local Plan Nov 2013. Traffic arising from the new development will add to general traffic levels on the B3092.

Page 331 of 583

NB: Further work has been undertaken on cumulative impacts for all sites. This information is presented in a separate document that should be read alongside this report. There is potential for cumulative effects in relation to climate and amenity. There are also expected secondary effects for human health; water; air (noise/dust) and landscape. No in-combination effects between receptors are expected. Impacts are expected to be primarily during preparation/working, i.e. short to medium term; However the quarries are small, at a traditional scale in the landscape setting. Restoration would maintain open landscape and provide ecological enhancement. The MPA is satisfied that identified impacts can be addressed by DGs and existing/proposed policy.

Summary.

Potential Benefits Potential Impacts

• No ecological impacts expected. • Possible hydrological impacts, requiring further assessment, but no significant impacts expected. • Potential for archaeological impacts, and further assessment will be required. However, any • Provision of building stone. identified impacts expected to be capable of mitigation. • Support for the local economy and provision of • employment, through employment in quarrying and Possible limited landscape impacts, but expected to the construction industry. be capable of satisfactory mitigation. • • Development of site is expected to provide Site is agricultural land, which will be lost for a economic benefits, both directly at the site and in period of time. However, expected to be restored to the local area where the stone is expected to be current use, and is a relatively small area. used. • Limited climate change impacts would be expected, • Use of the stone for heritage building works/repairs, but site is small in scale and intensity of working is and for new buildings. low. • • Geodiversity benefits, through exposures created Developing the site will have transport related and fossils found. impacts. However, the level of vehicle movements is low and the site will be worked as an extension, so • Possibility of improved public access. there will be no intensification of working or cumulative impacts. • No expected issues regarding airfield proximity – no wet working or restoration. • There will be some impacts on the bridleway to the east, but it is expected that these can be mitigated.

Overall Recommendation: The site is an extension of an existing quarry and no intensification or cumulative impacts would be expected. The proposal would assist in securing a supply of local stone and would provide a benefit to the local economy. Assessment already carried out has flagged up archaeology, landscape, hydrology and access as issues requiring further assessment at planning application stage to identify satisfactory mitigation. Further assessment also required to identify if there are any additional impacts that will require mitigation.

Page 332 of 583

Subject to the completion of all necessary assessments and providing that any impacts are capable of satisfactory mitigation, it appears reasonable on the basis of evidence available that the site nomination can reasonably be included in the Draft Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Mineral Sites Plan. Updated Recommendation (February 2019) No modifications have been proposed to this site allocation. The site remains appropriate for allocation in the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Mineral Sites Plan.

Page 333 of 583

Other Building Stone: BS04 Frogden Quarry, north-east of Sherborne (February 2019) NB: No modifications are proposed to this site allocations

Site Name/Location: BS04 Frogden Quarry, north-east Nominee/Agent : Sherborne Castle Estate of Sherborne Local Authority: North Dorset District Council Mineral Type: Limestone

Production: 2500 tonnes building stone Site Area: 3 ha Reserve: c. 100,000 tonnes 1000 tonnes agricultural aggregate

Impact Assessment Scoring

Strong Minor Minor - Strong Positive Negligible or Negative - Negative + Positive ++ 0 ? Uncertain - Impact No Effect Impact Impact Impact

Timescales for effects: P/W: Preparation and Working R/A : Restoration and Afteruse

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

1. To move waste management • This Objective is not relevant to this site up the waste N/A N/A • N/A nomination hierarchy and promote net self sufficiency

European/International Designations 0 0 • No action required. • No impacts expected

Annex 1 Bird Species 0 0 • No action required. • No impacts expected

2. To maintain, National Designations conserve and 0 0 • No action required. enhance • No impacts expected biodiversity Protected species 0 0 • No action required. • No impacts expected

Local recognitions/designations, including 0 0 ancient woodland and veteran trees • No action required. • No impacts expected

Page 334 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

• There is a geological Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) at ST648183. However, the proposed extension is south of this, with the current permitted quarry coming between the • two. It is not expected that there will be any Operator to facilitate impact cause by the proposed extension. access to the exposures where • The inferior Oolite is the subject of on-going possible during paleontological research. The nature of Inferior working. 3. To maintain, Oolite stratigraphy, and of the paleontological • Faces to be left conserve and interest, means that any opportunity to study + + + exposed when enhance fresh sites and exposures are potentially of working is finished, geodiversity. great value. where possible. • Access must be provided to researchers and • specifically a nominated Inferior Oolite expert Existing geological (contact details available on request) with the SSSI to be assumption that important specimens will be appropriately retained for research purposes. protected. • At the point of restoration the retention of geological exposures may be desirable and this must be planned for.

Groundwater • Hydrological assessment required to determine possible impacts, on ground • Site is on a Principal Aquifer and and surface waters, with appropriate is not within any Source mitigation to be implemented. Protection Zone area. Not known whether there are any • Appropriate arrangements should be 4. To maintain, 0 0 licensed extraction facilities in put in place to ensure that the water conserve and the vicinity. leaving the site and entering the enhance the watercourses or groundwater is of an quality of • Environment Agency advise a acceptable quality. ground, Hydrogeological Risk surface and Assessment will be required. • Any fuel on site should be properly sea waters stored to avoid contamination in case and manage of spillage. the Surface Water • Appropriate arrangements should be consumption • There is a watercourse installed for surface water and silt of water in a approximately 430m from the collection and fuel storage to prevent sustainable site. contamination of groundwater way. 0 0 resources. • Assessment required to determine possible impacts on • Land Drainage Consent to be obtained hydrogeology. Impacts to be from Dorset County Council if works appropriately mitigated may affect flow of an ordinary watercourse.

Page 335 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

• Flood Risk Assessment Flooding/Coastal Stability 5. To reduce (FRA) will be required. flood risk and • Entire site is within Flood Risk Zone 1, no 0 0 • Any necessary improve flood expected risk of flooding or contributing to mitigation to be management. flooding. implemented.

• Survey/assessment of the area to be carried out as Archaeology part of planning • There are no indications of likely application, to further 0 0 archaeological impacts, and the proposal investigate possible 6. To maintain, could be rated ‘No Significant or Negligible archaeological and historic conserve and Adverse Impacts’. landscape impacts. enhance the • Any necessary mitigation historic to be identified and environment implemented prior to (including Historic Landscapes working. archaeological • There are no indications that the location sites, historic • Further consideration to be has any particular historic significance, buildings, 0 0 given to restoration although it might form part of the view conservation proposals, in terms of from locations such as Sherborne New areas, historic historic landscapes. parks and Castle and its grounds. gardens and Historic Buildings other locally distinctive • The nearest listed buildings are within a • Further assessment of features and settlement and the current quarry lies between potential impacts their settings). them and the proposed extension. There are required, with any 0 0 other listed buildings some 500 m to the south necessary mitigation east. to be identified and implemented prior to • It is not expected that the proposed extension working. will have unacceptable impacts on the listed buildings.

• Full assessment of Landscape Capacity potential visual • The potential exists that there could be an impacts will be 7. To maintain, impact on the amenity of users of the adjacent required at planning conserve and footpaths but apart from that the landscape and application stage. enhance the visual impacts will be limited. • landscape, All appropriate ? 0 • including It is recommended that the scale of mitigation to be townscape, development is minimised where possible and identified and seascape and that extraction takes the form of short implemented. campaigns and progressive restoration. the coast. • Appropriate • Stockpiles and other infrastructure must not be restoration proposals placed on skyline which must be protected. in line with Landscape Management

Page 336 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A Guidelines referred to in Minerals Strategy.

Designated Landscapes 0 0 • No action required. • Less significant adverse impact.

• Impacts on air quality expected to be negligible. • No AQMAs will be affected by the working of 8. To protect this site proposal. Any dust resulting from • Environmental and improve working will be controlled through normal dust- protection measures air quality and suppression measures. 0 0 to be put in place to reduce the • Any impacts due to noise resulting from mineral reduce dust and noise impacts of working would be expected to be satisfactorily impacts. noise. minimised through normal noise mitigation measures, imposed at the planning application stage.

• • Soil appears to be good to moderate quality Soil to be properly 9. To maintain, agricultural land. stripped and stored conserve and prior to working; _ 0 • enhance soil Soils will be protected during working and protected during quality. restoration could bring the land back into working; and re-spread agricultural production. on site after working.

11. To promote the use of • This proposal does not promote the use of _ 0 • No action required. alternative alternative materials. materials.

• 12. To provide an Development of this site would provide a • Ensure principles of adequate and benefit in terms of contributing to the provision sustainable affordable + 0 of a supply of minerals to meet society’s needs. development are supply of Ensuring a sustainable supply will depend on incorporated into the minerals to the development and management of the site.

Page 337 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A meet society's • Providing site development takes into account development of this needs. relevant principles of sustainable development site. it is expected this will contribute to complying with this objective.

• This site proposal is expected to contribute to economic development on two levels – directly through the provision of employment at the proposed extension and • 13. To promote indirectly through the provision of building stone required Seek further and for new build, repairs and maintenance, decorative and benefits, such encourage as improved + 0 landscaping work. Both levels are expected to maintain sustainable employment, skilled and unskilled. public access, economic where • growth Restoration to agriculture will offer some further economic appropriate. benefits. Further benefits may be available if improved public access can be achieved, through the recreational attraction and use in the wider area (i.e. riding, walking).

• Developing land as a quarry is expected to have some negative impacts regarding climate change, due primarily to machinery used and transportation of mineral away from site. • However, given the size of the proposed quarry Use energy efficient these will in relative terms be negligible. plant and machinery. 14. To adapt to • and mitigate • The Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Minerals Implement restoration the impacts of _ 0 Strategy seeks to address and minimise such which provides climate impacts through Policy CC1 which requires appropriate habitats to change. operators to take into consideration climate help to increase change impacts and their possible mitigation for resilience of any proposed minerals development. flora/fauna. • The development management policies, e.g. DM 1, also address and seek to minimise the issue of sustainable development and climate change.

• Access will be gained via the existing route • Any proposal for this site 15. To minimise along Brick Kiln Lane onto Castle Town would need to be the negative Way. From here vehicles can access the accompanied by a impacts of strategic network a short distance to the Transport Assessment waste and south on the A30. which will need to provide access details and consider minerals • Due to the very low extraction rates, which vehicle routing. transport on 0 0 are not expected to increase above current the transport levels, and the proximity to the strategic • TA to be scoped with the network, network, the site has been given a ‘No Transport Development mitigating any Significant or Negligible Adverse Impacts’ Management Team. residual rating. • impacts. The Transport Assessment • Policies DM1 and DM 8 of the Minerals should identify Strategy actively address this issue of opportunities for reducing

Page 338 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A minimising impacts on the transportation impacts on the transport network. network.

16. To support and • encourage the The proposed extension can only realistically be use of accessed by means of road transport, resulting in sustainable a negative impact under this Objective during • Mitigate impacts where transport development and working. _ 0 identified and modes, • As far as reasonably possible negative impacts appropriate. imposing no resulting from access and transport will be unmitigated mitigated, as required by Policies DM1 and DM8 negative of the Minerals Strategy. impacts on them.

Impact on Sensitive Human Receptors • Closest properties are approximately 430m, to edge of Sherborne. The Gryphon School is also approximately 430m at edge of Sherborne. Blackmarsh Farm to south east is approximately 500+m and Oborne to north/east is approximately 600m. • ? 0 Provision of • Rising ground screens views of the existing site. appropriate mitigation, Further assessment will be required to following assessment accurately assess potential impacts from the of likely impacts. proposed extension and can be undertaken at • Restoration to improve the appropriate stage. 17. To sustain the landscape of site where health and • Site will be screened as required. Site may be possible; and to seek to quality of life worked on a campaign basis, to limit impacts. increase public access. of the • Transport Assessment population Impact on Existing Settlements to be carried out, • Sherborne is closest settlement, within 500m. identifying Although impacts are expected to be minimal, opportunities for further assessment will be carried out as reducing impacts on required. the transport network • where appropriate. ? 0 Site traffic will be required to use Castle Town Way and could have an impact on Sherborne but amount of traffic expected to be low. • Site will be screened as required. Site may be worked on a campaign basis, to limit impacts. As an extension, there would be no intensification.

Page 339 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

Impact on Airport Safety • Site is approximately 33 km from Bournemouth • No impacts expected, 0 0 airport, and approximately 10 km from and no action Yeovilton with no wet working or restoration. required. • No impacts expected.

Impact on Recreational Land • • Site is agricultural land/former quarry and does Assessment of 0 0 not appear to be used for recreational purposes. impacts, particularly on bridleway, with • 18. To enable safe Restoration could seek to improve public appropriate mitigation access to access. identified. countryside • and open Impact on Public Rights of Way Restoration to include consideration of spaces. • No rights of way cross the site. A bridleway opportunities to ? 0 (N7/17) touches the south western corner. improve public access • Restoration could seek to improve access, in the area. to/from this route.

Page 340 of 583

Preliminary Hydrological Risk Assessment

Further information or Controlled Issues/Risks Mitigation approval that may be Waters required

• The River Yeo is the closest Main River. Other watercourses • approximately 470m Appropriate distant, that site would arrangements to be • Hydrogeological risk drain into. made for ensuring that runoff from the site assessment may be • The River Basin does not enter surface required at planning Management Plan South waters or groundwater application stage. West River Basin District unless any silt has first • Flood Risk Assessment identifies the Yeo as been removed. being of ‘Poor’ • Water Framework • • Watercourses environmental quality in Fuel stored on site to Assessment be appropriately • this area. • Ponds/lakes, bunded and sealed to Further assessment of • including wet There is potential for prevent any spillage potential impacts on water habitats contamination from from entering ground quality and levels, runoff from site and for particularly for • Groundwater or surface waters. contamination of groundwater, is required • controlled waters through On-going monitoring prior to development. spillage or seepage of during development • Land Drainage Consent to pollutants such as fuel, or and working of the be obtained from Dorset silt in water. site. County Council if works • • Contamination of water Relocation of surface may affect flow of an supplies or reduction in water features, ordinary watercourse. amount of water available provided this is for licenses supplies. feasible. • Impacts on or removal of surface water features.

Page 341 of 583

Cumulative Impacts Proposal is for an extension to an existing site and no intensification is expected. There is limited additional mineral working proposed or existing in vicinity of site. Cumulative impacts directly caused by this proposed extension are expected to be minimal. The proposal is within 5Km of sites allocated for mixed residential (279 dwellings) and employment development at Barton Farm, Sherborne (Policy SHER1) and for employment development (2.2Ha) at Sherborne Hotel, Sherborne, as set out in Policy SHER3 in the Pre -Submission draft West Dorset, Weymouth and Portland Local Plan (June 2012) as amended by Proposed Modifications (June 2013). Traffic arising from the new development will also add to general traffic levels on the A 30. (NB The Barton Farm site does now have planning permission but is retained as an allocation in the Plan.) NB: Further work has been undertaken on cumulative impacts for all sites. This information is presented in a separate document that should be read alongside this report. There is potential for cumulative effects in relation to climate and amenity. There are also expected secondary effects for human health; water; air (noise/dust) and landscape. No in-combination effects between receptors are expected. Impacts are expected to be primarily during preparation/working, i.e. short to medium term; However the quarries are small, at a traditional scale in the landscape setting. Restoration would maintain open landscape and provide ecological enhancement. The MPA is satisfied that identified impacts can be addressed by DGs and existing/proposed policy. Summary.

Potential Benefits Potential Impacts

• No ecological impacts expected. • Hydrological investigation will be required at planning application stage, but no significant impacts expected. No flooding risk. • Exposure of geological faces, during and possibly • Possibly limited potential for archaeological after working, expected to provide significant impacts, but further assessment will be required. geodiversity benefits. Any identified impacts would be expected to be capable of mitigation. • Development of site is expected to provide economic benefits, both directly at the site and in • Listed building impacts not expected, but the local area where the stone is primarily expected assessment will determine what mitigation if any to be used. may be required. • Development of the site secures a source of building • Possible limited landscape impacts, but expected to stone, primarily for the benefit of the local be capable of satisfactory mitigation. Method of area/economy. site working will contribute to limiting impacts • By-products are crushed to be used on the Estate, • Site is agricultural land, which will be lost for a providing a limited source of alternative materials. period of time. However, expected to be restored to current use, and is a relatively small area. • Restoration could offer limited improvements to public access. • Limited climate change impacts would be expected, but site is small in scale and intensity of working is low. • Developing the site will have limited transport related impacts, through extending the time the site is worked. However, the level of vehicle movements Page 342 of 583

Potential Benefits Potential Impacts

is low and the site will be worked as an extension, so there will be no intensification of working or cumulative impacts. • Impacts on sensitive human receptors and local settlements are expected to be limited, but will be assessed – expected to be capable of mitigation. • No expected issues regarding airfield proximity – no wet working or restoration. • There will be some impacts on the adjacent bridleway to the east, but it is expected that these can be satisfactorily mitigated.

Overall Recommendation: The site is an extension of an existing quarry and no intensification or cumulative impacts would be expected. The proposal would assist in securing a supply of local stone and would provide a benefit to the local economy. Assessment already carried out has flagged up archaeology, landscape, hydrology and amenity as issues requiring further assessment at planning application stage to identify satisfactory mitigation. Further assessment also required to identify if there are any additional impacts that will require mitigation.

Subject to the completion of all necessary assessments and providing that any impacts are capable of satisfactory mitigation, it appears reasonable on the basis of evidence available that the site nomination can reasonably be included in the Draft Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Mineral Sites Plan. Updated Recommendation (February 2019) No modifications have been proposed to this site allocation. The site remains appropriate for allocation in the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Mineral Sites Plan.

Page 343 of 583

Other Building Stone: BS05 Whithill Quarry Assessment (February 2019)

NB: No modifications are proposed to this site allocation

Site Name/Location: BS05 Whithill Quarry Nominee/Agent: Sherborne Castle Estates On D20518 approximately 1.5 km south-west of junction Land and Mineral Management Ltd with A352 Local Authority: West Dorset District Council Mineral Type: Forest Marble (Limestone)

Production (annual): 1000 tonnes building stone Reserve: c. 142,000 6,000 Site Area: c. 5 ha 500 tonnes agricultural aggregate tonnes.

Impact Assessment Scoring

Strong Minor Minor - Strong Positive Negligible or Negative - Negative + Positive ++ 0 ? Uncertain - Impact No Effect Impact Impact Impact

Timescales for effects: P/W: Preparation and Working R/A : Restoration and Afteruse

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

1. To move waste management • This Objective is not relevant to this site up the waste N/A N/A • N/A nomination hierarchy and promote net self sufficiency

European/International Designations 0 0 • No action required. • No impacts expected

Annex 1 Bird Species • 2. To maintain, 0 0 No action required. • No impacts expected conserve and enhance National Designations biodiversity 0 0 • No action required. • No impacts expected

Protected species 0 0 • No action required. • No impacts expected

Page 344 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

Local recognitions/designations, including 0 0 ancient woodland and veteran trees • No action required. • No impacts expected

• The Forest Marble Formation was traditionally quarried extensively in Dorset. There are several • Operator to be asked old workings that have been designated as to permit visits/access Local Geological Sites and new and fresh to view exposures 3. To maintain, exposures retain a level of interest for study and where possible during conserve and + + potential retention of better exposures. working. enhance • • geodiversity. It is recommended that if development Opportunities to leave proceeds the applicants be requested to allow faces exposed when access to geologists. Leaving exposed faces working is finished to after working is completed can also be be considered. investigated.

Groundwater • Site is on a Secondary Aquifer and is • Hydrological assessment not within any Source Protection Zone required to determine possible area. Not known whether there are impacts, on ground and surface any licensed extraction facilities in the waters, with appropriate vicinity. mitigation to be implemented. 0 0 • Environment Agency advise a • Appropriate arrangements Hydrogeological Risk Assessment will should be put in place to 4. To maintain, be required. ensure that the water leaving conserve and • Environment Agency had no objection the site and entering the enhance the to proposed extension of current watercourses or groundwater is quality of quarry, provided depth of extraction of an acceptable quality. ground, was controlled surface and • Any fuel on site should be sea waters properly stored to avoid Surface Water and manage contamination in case of the • Watercourse within 50m from the site spillage. consumption and assessment required to consider • Appropriate arrangements of water in a possible impacts on this stream. should be installed for surface sustainable • This site lies uphill and immediately water and silt collection and way. across the road from springs feeding fuel storage to prevent ? 0 tributaries of the River Wriggle. It contamination of groundwater should be confirmed whether the resources. proposed allocation would affect the • Land Drainage Consent to be headwaters in terms of quality or obtained from Dorset County quantity. Council if works may affect flow • Assessment required to determine of an ordinary watercourse. possible impacts on hydrogeology. Impacts to be appropriately mitigated

Page 345 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

Archaeology • Human burials were found in the adjacent existing quarry a few years ago, and were • Further recorded by Bournemouth Archaeology. survey/assessment of • Bournemouth Archaeology have undertaken a the area likely to be 0 0 further archaeological evaluation of this site in required for further support of the recent planning application. development, and subsequent • Their view is that putting in place an 6. To maintain, development to archaeological watching brief for future conserve and include archaeological development of the site would be adequate to enhance the watching brief, to mitigate damage to known and potential historic mitigation deposits. environment archaeological (including impacts. Historic Landscapes archaeological • Any other necessary sites, historic • The site is on the north-eastern end of Lillington mitigation to be buildings, Hill, which is also known at Knighton Hill at the identified and conservation opposite end by Knighton village, on the implemented prior to areas, historic western side of the Blackmore Vale. working. parks and • Seemingly much of the Vale remained wooded gardens and • Further consideration 0 0 until the Middle Ages, and so the field system other locally to be given to on and around the site may well be Medieval in distinctive restoration proposals, origin. features and in terms of historic their settings). • The Mineral Planning Authority is not aware of landscapes. anything particularly significant about these fields, resulting in a ‘Less Significant Adverse Impact’.

Historic Buildings • 0 0 • Listed buildings are too far away to be affected. No action required. No significant impacts expected.

Page 346 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

Landscape Capacity • • The proposed development may be open to Full assessment of expansive views in this rural landscape so potential visual mitigation measures will be critical to its impacts will be 7. To maintain, _ /? 0 integration. required at planning conserve and application stage. • It is recommended that the scale of enhance the • development is minimised where possible All appropriate landscape, through measures such as small scale mitigation to be including campaigns with progressive restoration. identified and townscape, implemented. seascape and • the coast. Appropriate restoration proposals Designated Landscapes in line with Landscape 0 0 • No significant impact/negligible. Management Guidelines referred to in Minerals Strategy.

• No specific action required 10. To conserve • The site would make an important • and safeguard Site development to take + 0 contribution to the supply of building mineral into consideration relevant stone. resources. impacts and mitigate where appropriate.

11. To promote the use of • This proposal does not promote the use of _ 0 • No action required. alternative alternative materials. materials.

Page 347 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

• Development of this site would provide a 12. To provide an benefit in terms of contributing to the provision • Ensure principles of adequate and of a supply of minerals to meet society’s needs. sustainable affordable Ensuring a sustainable supply will depend on development are supply of + 0 the development and management of the site. incorporated into the minerals to • Providing site development takes into account development of this meet society's relevant principles of sustainable development site. needs. it is expected this will contribute to complying with this objective.

• This site proposal is expected to contribute to economic development on two levels – directly through the provision of employment at the proposed extension and indirectly through the 13. To promote provision of building stone required for new • and build, repairs and maintenance, decorative and Seek further benefits, encourage such as improved + 0 landscaping work. Both levels are expected to sustainable maintain employment, skilled and unskilled. public access, where economic appropriate. • growth Restoration to agriculture will offer some further economic benefits. Further benefits may be available if improved public access can be achieved, to benefit the recreational attraction and use of the wider area (i.e. riding, walking).

• Developing land as a quarry is expected to have some negative impacts regarding climate change, due primarily to machinery used and transportation of mineral away from site. • However, given the size of the proposed quarry Use energy efficient these will in relative terms be negligible. plant and machinery. 14. To adapt to • and mitigate • The Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Minerals Implement restoration the impacts of _ 0 Strategy seeks to address and minimise such which provides climate impacts through Policy CC1 which requires appropriate habitats to change. operators to take into consideration climate help to increase change impacts and their possible mitigation for resilience of any proposed minerals development. flora/fauna. • The development management policies, e.g. DM 1, also address and seek to minimise the issue of sustainable development and climate change.

15. To minimise • the negative Entry will be via the existing adequate access • Any proposal for this impacts of onto the local rural network. Access to the site would need to be strategic network at the A352 is approximately waste and _ 0 accompanied by a minerals 1.5km north of the site access. Trip generation Transport Assessment transport on will be low and no greater than that currently which will need to the transport permitted at the site. provide access details network, Page 348 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A mitigating any • Due to the low traffic generation, the close and consider vehicle residual proximity of the strategic network, and the lack routing. impacts. of impact on local settlements between the site • TA to be scoped with and the strategic network, this site is considered the Transport to cause ‘No Significant or Negligible Adverse Development Impacts’. Management Team. • Policies DM1 and DM 8 of the Minerals Strategy • The TA should identify actively address this issue of minimising impacts opportunities for on the transportation network. reducing impacts on the transport network.

16. To support and • encourage the The proposed extension can only realistically be use of accessed by means of road transport, resulting in sustainable a negative impact under this Objective during • Mitigate impacts where transport development and working. _ 0 identified and modes, • As far as reasonably possible negative impacts appropriate. imposing no resulting from access and transport will be unmitigated mitigated, as required by Policies DM1 and DM8 negative of the Minerals Strategy. impacts on them.

Impact on Sensitive Human Receptors • Residential properties within 500m. School approximately 1km away, to south/east. Site is screened by hedges and by the topography. • Provision of Traffic levels expected to be as at present. appropriate mitigation, ? 0 • Site will be screened as required and worked on following assessment a campaign basis to limit impacts. Further of likely impacts. assessment likely to be required to accurately • Restoration to improve 17. To sustain the assess potential impacts from the proposed landscape of site where health and extension and can be undertaken at the possible; and to seek to quality of life appropriate stage. increase public access. of the • Transport Assessment population Impact on Existing Settlements to be carried out, • Lillington approximately 500m to south, identifying Longburton approximately 1.5 km south east, opportunities for Thornford approximately 2km to south west. reducing impacts on ? 0 No visible impacts. Longburton likely to get the transport network traffic impacts, if mineral is taken to A352 for where appropriate. distribution. Traffic levels expected to be as at present. • Site will be screened as required. Site likely to be worked on a campaign basis, to limit

Page 349 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A impacts. As an extension, there would be no intensification.

Impact on Airport Safety • Site is approximately 33 km from Bournemouth 0 0 airport, and 11 km from Yeovilton with no wet • No action required. working or restoration. • No impacts expected.

Impact on Recreational Land • Assessment of • Site is agricultural land/former quarry and does impacts, with 18. To enable safe 0 0 not appear to be used for recreational purposes. appropriate mitigation identified. access to • Restoration could seek to improve public countryside access. • Restoration to include and open considering how it spaces. Impact on Public Rights of Way might be possible to improve public access 0 ? • No rights of way cross the site. Restoration in the area. could seek to improve access in the area.

Page 350 of 583

Preliminary Hydrological Risk Assessment

Further information or Controlled Issues/Risks Mitigation approval that may be Waters required

• This site lies uphill and immediately across the road from springs feeding tributaries of the Wriggle River, the closest Main River. It should be confirmed whether the proposed allocation would affect the • Hydrogeological risk • Appropriate headwaters in terms of assessment may be arrangements to be quality or quantity. required at planning made for ensuring that application stage. • The Wriggle joins the Yeo, runoff from the site and the River Basin does not enter surface • Flood Risk Assessment Management Plan South waters or groundwater • Water Framework West River Basin District unless any silt has first • Watercourses Assessment identifies the Yeo as been removed. • Ponds/lakes, being of ‘Poor’ • Further assessment of • Fuel stored on site to including wet environmental quality in potential impacts on water be appropriately habitats this area. The Wriggle is quality and levels, bunded and sealed to ‘Bad’. particularly for • Groundwater prevent any spillage groundwater, is required • There is potential for from entering ground prior to development. contamination from or surface waters. runoff from site and for • Land Drainage Consent to • On-going monitoring contamination of be obtained from Dorset during development controlled waters through County Council if works and working of the spillage or seepage of may affect flow of an site. pollutants such as fuel, or ordinary watercourse. silt in water. • Contamination of water supplies or reduction in amount of water available for licenses supplies. • Impacts on or removal of surface water features.

Page 351 of 583

Viability As an extension to an existing operational site, viability is not considered to be an issue. The site will use existing processing facilities, road access and serve existing markets, and therefore these do not have to be provided. Cumulative Impacts Proposed site is an extension to existing site. There is another existing and proposed site, just over 5km away. Both sites would have relatively low traffic levels, impacts expected to be low. Both are proposed extensions and therefore no intensification of traffic levels is expected. The proposal is within 5Km of land allocated for major residential (279 dwellings) and associated development at Barton Farm, Sherborne (Policy SHER1) and for employment development (2.2Ha) at Sherborne Hotel, Sherborne (Policy SHER3) in the Pre -Submission draft West Dorset, Weymouth and Portland Local Plan (June 2012) as amended by Proposed Modifications (June 2013). Traffic arising from the new development will add to general traffic levels on the A30 and through the town. (NB The Barton Farm site does now have planning permission but is retained as an allocation in the Plan.) NB: Further work has been undertaken on cumulative impacts for all sites. This information is presented in a separate document that should be read alongside this report. There is potential for cumulative effects in relation to climate. There are also expected secondary effects for human health; water; air (noise/dust); amenity and landscape. No in- combination effects between receptors are expected. Impacts are expected to be primarily during preparation/working, i.e. short to medium term; However the quarries are small, at a traditional scale in the landscape setting. Restoration would maintain open landscape and provide ecological enhancement. The MPA is satisfied that identified impacts can be addressed by DGs and existing/proposed policy. Summary

Potential Benefits Potential Impacts

• No ecological impacts expected. • Hydrological investigation may be required at planning application stage, but no significant • Exposure of geological faces, during and possibly impacts expected. No flooding risk. after working, could provide geodiversity benefits. • Potential for archaeological impacts, further • Development of site is expected to provide assessment will be required. Use of an economic benefits, both directly at the site and in archaeological watching brief will be expected to the local area where the stone is primarily expected mitigate impacts. to be used. • No listed building or significant historic landscape • Development of the site secures a source of building impacts expected. stone, primarily for the benefit of the local • Possible limited landscape impacts, but expected to area/economy. be capable of satisfactory mitigation. Method of • By-products are crushed to be used on the Estate, site working will contribute to limiting impacts providing a limited source of alternative materials. • Site is agricultural land, which will be lost for a • Restoration could offer limited improvements to period of time. However, expected to be restored to public access. current use, and is a relatively small area. • Limited climate change impacts would be expected, but site is small in scale and intensity of working is low.

Page 352 of 583

• Developing the site will have limited transport related impacts, through extending the time the site is worked. However, the level of vehicle movements is low and the site will be worked as an extension, so there will be no intensification of working or cumulative impacts. • Impacts on sensitive human receptors and local settlements are expected to be limited, but will be assessed – expected to be capable of mitigation. • No expected issues regarding airfield proximity – no wet working or restoration. • No impacts on public access – restoration may offer opportunity to improve access.

Overall Recommendation: The site is an extension of an existing quarry and no intensification or cumulative impacts would be expected. The proposal would assist in securing a supply of local stone and would provide a benefit to the local economy. Assessment already carried out has flagged up archaeology (need for a watching brief at development), hydrology, landscape capacity and local amenity as issues requiring further assessment at planning application stage to identify satisfactory mitigation. Further assessment also required to identify if there are any additional impacts that will require mitigation.

Subject to the completion of all necessary assessments and providing that any impacts are capable of satisfactory mitigation, it appears reasonable on the basis of evidence available that the site nomination can reasonably be included in the Draft Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Mineral Sites Plan. Updated Recommendation (February 2019) No modifications have been proposed to this site allocation. The site remains appropriate for allocation in the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Mineral Sites Plan.

Page 353 of 583

Appendix B: Sites Not Being Taken Forward

Sand and Gravel: AS08 Horton Heath (west) and Redman’s Hill, Horton Road(east) Now referred to as AS27 (see above) NB: AS08 remains a site not promoted by the MPA. AS27 has been reassessed and can be found in Appendix A

Nominee/Agent : Site Name/Location: AS08 – Wessex Surveyors Site Area : To be confirmed AS08 Horton Heath (west) and AS27 – Wessex Surveyors Production/reserve : To be AS27 Redman’s Hill (east) Local Authority : confirmed Mineral Type : Sand/Gravel East Dorset District Council

Impact Assessment Scoring

Strong Minor Minor - Strong Positive Negligible or Negative - Negative + Positive ++ 0 ? Uncertain - Impact No Effect Impact Impact Impact

Timescales for effects: P/W: Preparation and Working R/A : Restoration and Afteruse

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

19. To move waste • This Objective is not relevant to this site management N/A N/A • N/A nomination up the waste hierarchy

European/International Designations 0 0 • No action required. • Not relevant to this site nomination.

20. To maintain, Annex 1 Bird Species conserve • and enhance Without mineral extraction, site has potential to biodiversity be restored to lowland heathland which would • Further information on 0 0 contribute locally to supporting Annex 1 birds. wildlife interests of Only in combination with other afforested areas SNCI to be sought. would it be likely to contribute to supporting 1% of any Annex 1 species, but in itself the Horton Common SNCI is small and rather isolated.

Page 354 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A • The site currently has no recreational access function to help reduce pressure on existing heathlands. There has to be a risk that the SNCI might be included in a revision to the Dorset Heathlands SPA, but it is not possible to evaluate that risk without further information on the wildlife interests of the SNCI.

National Designations 0 0 • No action required. • Not relevant to this site nomination.

• Ecological surveys Protected species required, with _ appropriate mitigation • The existing open heathland within Horton identified. Common SNCI may support European protected reptiles. The perimeter ancient • Restoration to include + woodland and boundary trees of the SNCI are consideration of very likely to support bats, and any mineral possible benefits for extraction should be designed to avoid this the SNCI and creation constraint. Common protected reptiles may be of appropriate found throughout on suitable open ground. habitats for these _ _ species.

Local recognitions/designations, including ancient woodland and veteran trees • Horton Common SNCI in its entirety within the • Ecological surveys western proposed site. Broad scale extraction required, with removing this nature conservation site would appropriate mitigation be inappropriate because it would be difficult identified. _ + or impossible to provide adequate mitigation • Proposed working for effects on wildlife and compensatory habitat area to be reviewed in provision would be substantial. light of this comment • Small-scale working within the least wildlife- and reduced in size. rich areas of SNCI might be feasible, following detailed evaluation of possible effects. The perimeter ancient woodland and boundary

Page 355 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A trees of the SNCI are effectively irreplaceable, and any mineral extraction should be designed to avoid this constraint. • The constraints around the Redman’s Hill area are unknown at this stage, though much of the _ _ land has been improved agriculturally. There may be important boundary features or individual veteran trees.

21. To maintain, • Exposures resulting from working may be of • Operator to be asked conserve interest. Benefits are only expected during + + to permit visits to view and enhance working, and are likely to be obscured or exposures as required. geodiversity. covered as part of restoration.

• Hydrological assessment required to determine possible impacts, on ground and surface waters, with appropriate mitigation to be Groundwater implemented. • There are water features within • Further assessment on possible 250m which could be impacted by impacts on water supplies and _ 0 development of the site. A stream appropriate mitigation if potential 22. To maintain, flows to north/west of Horton impacts identified. conserve Heath SNCI. Other streams • Where necessary mitigating and enhance rise/flow in close proximity to site. the quality of measures should be installed to ground, maintain groundwater levels and/or surface and monitor private water supplies. sea waters • Alternative arrangements should be and manage in place in case of a reduction in the supply. consumption • of water in a Appropriate arrangements should sustainable be put in place to ensure that the way. water leaving the site and entering Surface Water the rivers/watercourses is of an acceptable quality. _ 0 • There is a pond/ponds within the • site and streams in close proximity. Any fuel on site should be properly stored to avoid contamination in case of spillage. • Appropriate arrangements should be installed for surface water and silt collection and fuel storage to

Page 356 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A prevent contamination of groundwater resources. • Land Drainage Consent to be obtained from Dorset County Council if works may affect flow of an ordinary watercourse.

Flooding/Coastal Stability • 23. To reduce The entire site located within Flood Zone 1 with flood risk and Flood Zones 2 and 3 within 150 m of northern improve part of site. • Flood Risk Assessment 0 0 flood • Working is not considered to constitute, or (FRA) will be required. management exacerbate an existing, a flood risk. . • Negligible/No impact, during working and restoration.

24. To maintain, Archaeology • Archaeological survey conserve to assess Monuments • A barrow that is protected as a Scheduled and enhance and establish their Monument (SM29565 – ‘Bowl barrow 250m north the historic settings and how east of Monmouth’s Ash Farm’) lies in the south- environment these can best be eastern part of the western area. Several other (including protected during barrows and an earthwork that are also archaeologic working. protected as Scheduled Monuments lie close to al sites, _ + the site. The barrow within the site in particular is • Site working area to historic a major constraint and is afforded the highest be reviewed to buildings, protection. remove monuments conservation and their settings. areas, • A way forward could be the removal of some of historic parks the site from the extraction area. An • Archaeological survey and gardens archaeological assessment and if necessary an to assess possible and other evaluation of the site that considers all the presence and

Page 357 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A locally barrows mentioned above and their settings, as significance of non- distinctive well as other possible archaeological material on designated remains. features and the site, should help in making a decision on • Adequate provision to their this, as well as in understanding the wider be made for settings). archaeological impact of the extraction on this preservation, site. excavation or • Early discussion with English Heritage should recording, as _ _ also be helpful in the making of this decision. appropriate. • If a compromise can be determined that allows • Settings of the some quarrying within a fraction of this site, Monuments to be impacts could be reduced to an acceptable level. established prior to working and not to be • Appropriate restoration could improve the compromised during settings of the monuments. working.

• Archaeological survey Historic Landscapes to assess Monuments and establish their • Until relatively recently, most if not all of this site settings and how would have been heathland. The Scheduled these can best be Monuments mentioned above would have _ + protected during occupied prominent locations within this working. landscape. • Restoration to • Restoration to heathland could improve the heathland to benefit settings of these Monuments. Monuments and their settings.

Historic Buildings • 0 0 No listed buildings in the immediate vicinity of • No action required. the site. The nearest, Harts Farm, is well screened from the site. No impacts expected.

Page 358 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

Landscape Capacity • The whole area is within the Horton Common - • Landscape and visual Three Legged Cross Heath/Farmland Mosaic in impact assessment to the draft East Dorset District Council Landscape identify impacts; Character assessment. This assessment indicates adequate mitigation the importance of belts of trees and scrub and all of such impacts around the site these form key features with 25. To maintain, before and during mature oaks along the western edges which are conserve working. ancient boundaries. The site is also part of a and enhance • prominent ridge line with open views especially Protect and maintain the _ + to the east. the identified key landscape, features of the site. including • The site has significant landscape value and any • townscape, future extraction should be limited in extent and Appropriate seascape be based on a detailed and independent restoration proposals and the assessment of landscape character so any future in line with Landscape coast. operations conserve and enhance key features Management and views Guidelines referred to in Minerals Strategy. • Mitigation and restoration to reflect/enhance existing character.

Designated Landscapes 0 0 • No action required. • Negligible impact expected.

• Impacts on air quality expected to be negligible. • No AQMAs will be affected by the working of 26. To protect this site proposal. Any dust resulting from • Environmental and improve working will be controlled through normal protection measures air quality 0 0 dust-suppression measures. to be put in place to and reduce reduce dust and the impacts • Any impacts due to noise resulting from noise impacts. of noise. mineral working would be expected to be satisfactorily minimised through normal noise mitigation measures, imposed at the planning application stage.

• The site comprises agriculture (primarily pasture) woodland and heathland cover. The area is a • Soil is poor quality in former heathland area and so would be agricultural terms but expected to have relatively poor, acidic soils. valuable in terms of 27. To maintain, potential for conserve • Site preparation/working would require stripping _ 0 heathland restoration. and enhance and storage of the soils, with some impacts on soil quality. them. • Soils to be stored/protected • If the site is worked and restored to heathland during preparation this will require reinstatement/retention of acidic and working and soils.

Page 359 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A properly reinstated during restoration.

• In terms of encouraging/promoting the most efficient use of resources, this site has been previously used to a limited extent as a borrow pit during the construction of the adjacent golf course. • 28. To conserve In developing this site as a stand-alone quarry, • Further investigation and there are a number of constraints to be required to establish safeguard ? 0 overcome for what appears to be a relatively quality/quantity of mineral small reserve of mineral. mineral. resources. • The quality/quantity of minerals on this site needs to be proved before a score can be given for this site. However, a preliminary view would be that developing this site may not be the most efficient use of resources. • Further investigation is required.

29. To promote the use of • This proposal does not at present promote the _ 0 • No action required. alternative use of alternative materials. materials.

• 30. To provide Development of this site will provide a benefit in an adequate terms of contributing to the provision of a • Ensure principles of and supply of minerals to meet society’s needs. sustainable affordable • Ensuring a sustainable supply will depend on the development are supply of + 0 development and management of the site. incorporated into the minerals to Providing site development takes into account development of this meet relevant principles of sustainable development it site. society's is expected this will contribute to complying needs. with this objective.

• This site proposal is expected to contribute to 31. To promote economic development on two levels – directly • Further assessment and through the provision of employment at the site required to form a encourage 0 + to be developed and indirectly through the view as to what the sustainable provision of aggregate minerals required for the most appropriate economic maintenance of built environment and for new restoration could be. growth built development. Both levels are expected to maintain employment, skilled and unskilled.

Page 360 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A However given the expected size of the reserve this is likely to be a limited benefit. • Restoration to heathland and possibly agriculture will offer some economic benefits. + • If open access is available on the restored land, some limited benefits due to recreational attraction and use in the wider area (i.e. riding, walking, bird watching) may be realised.

• Developing land as a quarry is expected to have some negative impacts regarding climate _ 0 change, due primarily to machinery used and transportation of mineral away from site. However, these will in relative terms be negligible. • The Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Minerals • Use energy efficient Strategy seeks to address and minimise such plant and machinery. 32. To adapt to impacts through Policy CC1 which requires • Implement restoration and mitigate operators to take into consideration climate which provides the impacts change impacts and their possible mitigation for appropriate habitats of climate any proposed minerals development. change. to help to increase • The development management policies, e.g. DM resilience of 0 + 1, also address and seek to minimise the issue of flora/fauna. sustainable development and climate change. • Restoration to some form of vegetated environment will offer benefits in the form of climate change mitigation, including provision of habitat for wildlife, but again these will be relatively small.

• This proposal is for a new sand and gravel 33. To minimise extraction area north of the C2 Horton Road. • the negative Details of expected trip generation or point of Transport Assessment impacts of access are not yet known with certainty. Existing to be carried, waste and access onto the C2 is insufficient to serve the identifying minerals proposed sites and would be unsafe to use. The opportunities for transport on _ _ 0 access is very narrow, has poor forward visibility reducing impacts on the transport and geometry. the transport network. network, • • There has been some discussion regarding a new New access to be mitigating access to serve this area emerging to the east of provided to the east any residual the existing access. This has been promoted in a of current access. impacts. temporary form to serve a proposed solar farm although no consent has been issued to date.

Page 361 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A Once on the C2, there are good links to the A31 to the east. The A31 can also be reached to the south along the B3072 although this would involve travelling through West Moors. • Without a new, acceptable, access onto the C66 the Highways Authority would strongly object to 0 any extraction in this location on highway safety grounds. • If the required access improvements are provided then this objection could be removed.

34. To support and • encourage _ The proposed extension can only realistically be the use of accessed by means of road transport, resulting in sustainable a negative impact under this Objective during • Mitigate impacts transport development and working. 0 where identified and modes, • As far as reasonably possible negative impacts appropriate. imposing no resulting from access and transport will be unmitigated _ _ mitigated, as required by Policies DM1 and DM8 negative of the Minerals Strategy. impacts on them.

Impact on Sensitive Human Receptors 0 • There are a number of residences within 500m, the closest being approximately 100m. Mitigation is proposed, through diverting the • Provision of access road away from houses. appropriate 0 • Mitigation (noise attenuation and visual mitigation, following screening bunds) will be required but it is likely assessment of likely that there will still be impacts, including from impacts. 35. To sustain _ lorries on the access road. the health • and quality of Further assessment will be required to assess life of the impacts. population Impact on Existing Settlements • Transport Assessment • Verwood is approximately 1 km to the north- to be carried, east, and Three Legged Cross over 1km to the identifying possible south-east. These settlements are unlikely to _ 0 impacts and experience any visual impacts from working in opportunities for the vicinity of the site. reducing impacts on • Lorries travelling from the site to the A31 will the transport network. pass through Three Legged Cross and Ashley.

Page 362 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

Impact on Airport Safety • 0 0 Site is located within 13km safeguarding zone, • No action required. but not proposed for wet working. No impacts expected.

• No action required for working, apart from Impact on Recreational Land closing the area to public access. • Footpaths cross the site. There are signs that the • former, unrestored mineral workings are used for Restoration to open _ 0 cycling/motor cycling on an informal basis. space with public access should be • This access will be lost during working, but some considered for its form of public access may be possible on benefits, but could restoration. conflict with nature conservation 36. To enable aspirations. safe access to • Full assessment of countryside rights of way in the and open Impact on Public Rights of Way area, including those spaces. 0 • The site is crossed by rights of way, including directly affected by bridleways E59/15, E59/29 and E46/32 and the proposal, to footpath E59/33. Footpaths E59/17 and E59/30 consider whether it are adjacent to site boundary. will be _ _ feasible/possible to • These rights of way will be strongly impacted by carry out the the proposed development, requiring diversion necessary and/or screening. + stoppages/diversions. • Restoration will see these routes resumed, • Restoration to possibly with improvements. improve public access in the area.

Preliminary Hydrological Risk Assessment

Further Controlled Issues/Risks Mitigation information/approval Waters required

Page 363 of 583

• The River Basin Management Plan South • West River Basin District Full hydrogeological • identifies the Crane, the Appropriate assessment arrangements to be closest river, as being of • Flood Risk made for ensuring ‘good’ ecological quality. Assessment Potential for that runoff from the • contamination from runoff site does not enter Water Framework from site. the Crane or Assessment groundwater unless • • Groundwater is of vital Further assessment silt has first been of potential impacts importance in this removed. catchment and must be on water quality and • protected, as it supports a Fuel stored on site levels, particularly • Watercourses significant proportion of to be appropriately for groundwater, is • Ponds/lakes, the abstraction for public bunded and sealed required prior to including wet water supply and other to prevent any development. spillage from habitats uses, for example • Assessment of the entering ground or • aquaculture. feasibility of Groundwater surface waters. • Potential for relocating ponds • contamination of On-going and associated controlled waters through monitoring during habitats and species. spillage or seepage of development and • Land Drainage pollutants such as fuel, or working of the site. Consent to be silt in water. • Relocation or obtained from • Contamination of water recreation of surface Dorset County supplies or reduction in water features Council if works may amount of water available provided this is affect flow of an for licensed supplies. feasible. ordinary watercourse. • Impacts on or removal of surface water features.

Cumulative Impacts Although the area contains deposits of sand/gravel, there is no other working proposed in the immediate vicinity. Closest site proposal is at Purple Haze, southeast of Verwood. Purple Haze is not yet operational, but is likely to become so prior to Horton Heath being developed. Existing workings in Dorset are further away, although there are some workings just across the border in Hampshire. Horton Heath will be essentially a new greenfield site. The proposal lies within 5km of a site allocated for development in the Christchurch and East Dorset Consolidated Plan* May 2013, Policy VTSW4 N W Verwood – 230 dwellings. Traffic from this proposal will add to traffic on the B3081 and roads through Verwood. * The Consolidated Plan is an amalgamation of the Christchurch and East Dorset Core Strategy Pre submission draft April 2012 and the Christchurch and East Dorset Schedule of Proposed Changes November 2012.

Page 364 of 583

Summary.

Potential Benefits Potential Impacts

• Restoration to heathland would provide habitat for protected species and improve linkages • Scheduled Monuments and their settings could between other heathland in the area. be affected during Preparation/Working. • Provision of aggregates required for • Screening vegetation will need to be retained maintenance and construction. on visual impact and nature conservation • Restoration to heathland will benefit Scheduled grounds. Monuments and their settings and provide a • Noise/visual impacts on properties in the link to the historic landscape that would have vicinity. previously characterised the area around this site. • Very strong impacts on informal recreation uses and statutory rights of way. • Provision of improved public access would provide public benefits.

AS08 – Horton Heath This is a relatively small site with a number of constraints. On the basis of the evidence available it does not appear that there is sufficient certainty that the impacts identified in this sustainability appraisal are currently capable of satisfactory mitigation. The site remains part of the mineral resource of Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole but is not at this time included in the Draft Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Mineral Sites Plan. AS27 – Redman’s Hill This is a more open field to the east of the Horton Heath site. It has potential for working, but there is a high level of public rights of way in the area and rights of way run along two sides of the site area. The risks to, and impacts on, users of these rights of way are unacceptably high, so this site has not been included in the Draft Mineral Sites Plan.

Page 365 of 583

Purbeck Stone: PK08 Quarr Farm, Harman’s Cross No change – site is not proposed for inclusion in the Mineral Sites Plan

Nominee/Agent : Symonds and Site Area : approximately 3.3 ha Sampson Production : approximately 2,000 Site Name/Location : PK08 Local Authority : Purbeck District tpa Quarr Farm, Harman’s Cross Council Reserve : approximately 96,000 Mineral Type : Purbeck Stone tonnes

Impact Assessment Scoring

Strong Minor Minor - Strong Positive Negligible or Negative - Negative + Positive ++ 0 ? Uncertain - Impact No Effect Impact Impact Impact

Timescales for effects: P/W: Preparation and Working R/A : Restoration and Afteruse

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

1. To move waste • This Objective is not relevant to this site management N/A N/A • N/A nomination up the waste hierarchy

European/International Designations 0 0 • No action required. • No impacts expected.

Annex 1 Bird Species 0 0 • No action required. • No impacts expected.

National Designations 2. To maintain, 0 0 • No action required. conserve and • No impacts expected. enhance biodiversity Protected species • Greater Horseshoe Bat is known to inhabit the • area close to the proposed site. Whilst it is Ecological surveys required, with 0 0 unlikely there would be any effect on GHB which would result from quarrying at this location, appropriate mitigation information would be needed to support the to be implemented. allocation to demonstrate no likely significant effect.

Page 366 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

Local recognitions/designations, including ancient woodland and veteran trees • Further assessment required, including • If access from the main road would be via consideration of Haycraft Lane, which is recognised as a narrow alternatives to _ 0 lane with flower-rich verges. Haycraft Lane for • Consideration of the possible effects of vehicle access and options for movements, and any appropriate mitigation, mitigation for any would be required to ensure the verges are potential impacts. protected.

• The Purbeck limestone group has an important • association with the geology of the Jurassic Note potential for Coast World Heritage Site. Working quarries in quarries to yield Purbeck have been known to yield important fossils or other + fossils, including dinosaur footprints. They are material of also of ongoing interest for the study of early geodiversity interest. 3. To maintain, Cretaceous stratigraphy. • Visits or other conserve and • investigation of + These interests should be acknowledged with the enhance assumption that geologists and the Jurassic working sites may be geodiversity. Coast Team hosted by DCC will respond requested. positively to any opportunities to recover fossils • Investigate potential or record and study unusual features if they are and/or benefits of 0 discovered. In terms of geodiversity there is a leaving quarried face presumption in favour of an appropriate level of open after quarrying activity continuing in order to sustain restoration. these ongoing interests.

• Simple hydrological assessment required to determine possible impacts, on ground and surface 4. To maintain, waters, with appropriate mitigation Groundwater conserve and to be implemented. • Site overlies Secondary aquifers. No enhance the 0 0 • Appropriate arrangements should impact on Source Protection Zones. quality of be put in place to ensure that the No licenced supplies. ground, water leaving the site and entering surface and the watercourses or groundwater is sea waters of an acceptable quality. and manage • the Any fuel on site should be properly consumption stored to avoid contamination in of water in a case of spillage. sustainable Surface Water • Appropriate arrangements should way. 0 0 • Spring within 500m of site. No be installed for surface water and impacts expected on this. silt collection and fuel storage to prevent contamination of groundwater resources.

Page 367 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A • The combined impacts of Purbeck Limestone Quarries should be assessed where a number of sites affect the same water resource or receiving water course.

5. To reduce Flooding/Coastal Stability flood risk and 0 0 • • No action required. improve flood Site is entirely in Flood Risk Zone 1, no management. risk of flooding.

Archaeology • Archaeological survey of the area required as part of • It is considered that the site has high planning application to potential for below-ground archaeology assess possible presence and possibly industrial archaeological and significance of non- evidence of early quarrying. designated remains and to • Archaeological assessment and assess whether/how these ? ? 6. To maintain, evaluation would be required before an should be protected during conserve and informed planning decision could be working – no further work enhance the made. Only when these have been required at site allocation historic undertaken would the archaeological stage. environment impact be understood – at present it • All necessary mitigation to (including could be anywhere from ‘Very Significant’ be implemented prior to archaeological to ‘No Significant’ impacts. sites, historic working. buildings, Historic Landscapes • Adequate provision to be conservation made for preservation, • The local landscape bears the imprint of areas, historic excavation or recording, as previous quarrying dating from the parks and appropriate. gardens and 0 0 Roman period onwards. It could be • other locally argued that the present site would be a Further consideration to be distinctive continuation of the process, and if the site given to restoration features and is to be restored afterwards the impact proposals, in terms of their settings). would be limited in time anyway. historic landscapes.

Historic Buildings • This is a quarry set in a quarrying 0 0 landscape and the nearest listed buildings • No action required. are too far away to be affected. • No significant impact expected.

• 7. To maintain, Landscape Capacity Assessment of potential visual impacts will be conserve and • This site proposal is just within the area of required at planning enhance the _ ? 0 least landscape and visual sensitivity. The application stage and all landscape, capacity of the landscape to absorb the site appropriate mitigation to including is moderate and it is important to ensure the be included. townscape, northern boundary is sensitively designed

Page 368 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A seascape and e.g. relating to stockpiles to reduce impacts • Northern boundary of site the coast. from across the valley side. to be sensitively and carefully designed and worked. • Appropriate restoration Designated Landscapes proposals in line with _ ? 0 • Site proposal is expected to have a less Landscape Management significant adverse impact. Guidelines referred to in Minerals Strategy.

• Impacts on air quality expected to be negligible. 8. To protect • No AQMAs will be affected by the working of this • Environmental and improve site proposal. Any dust resulting from working will protection measures air quality and be controlled through normal dust-suppression to reduce dust and 0 0 reduce the measures. ensure noise is impacts of appropriately • Noise mitigation will be addressed at the planning noise. mitigated. application stage, with appropriate mitigation to be included in the development of the site.

• Soil to be properly • Soils are somewhere between good to moderate to stripped and stored 9. To maintain, very poor. Any soil removed will be protected prior to working; conserve and _ 0 during working and either re-used on site or taken protected during enhance soil elsewhere to be used. Further assessment may be working; and re- quality. required to determine soil quality. spread on site after working.

• No specific action required; site 10. To conserve development to • The site would make an important contribution to and safeguard take into + 0 the supply of Purbeck Stone for Bournemouth, mineral consideration Dorset and Poole and all other potential markets. resources. relevant impacts and mitigate where appropriate.

11. To promote the use of • This proposal does not promote the use of _ 0 • No action required. alternative alternative materials. materials.

12. To provide an • Development of this site would provide a benefit in • Ensure principles of adequate and terms of contributing to the provision of a supply sustainable affordable of minerals to meet society’s needs. development are supply of + 0 • Ensuring a sustainable supply will depend on the incorporated into minerals to development and management of the site. the development meet society's Providing site development takes into account of this site. needs. relevant principles of sustainable development it is

Page 369 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A expected this will contribute to complying with this objective.

• This site proposal is expected to contribute to economic development on two levels – directly through the provision of employment at the site to 13. To promote be developed and indirectly through the provision and of Purbeck Stone required for new build, repairs and encourage maintenance, decorative and monument work and + 0 • No action required. sustainable landscaping work. Both levels are expected to economic maintain employment, skilled and unskilled. growth • Restoration to agriculture will offer some further economic benefits through both the agriculture itself and the recreational attraction and use in the wider area (i.e. riding, walking).

• Developing land as a quarry is expected to have some negative impacts regarding climate change, due primarily to machinery used and transportation • Use energy efficient of mineral away from site. However, these will in plant and relative terms be negligible. machinery. 14. To adapt to • The Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Minerals • and mitigate Implement Strategy seeks to address and minimise such the impacts of _ 0 restoration which impacts through Policy CC1 which requires climate provides operators to take into consideration climate change change. appropriate habitats impacts and their possible mitigation for any to help to increase proposed minerals development. resilience of • The development management policies, e.g. DM 1, flora/fauna. also address and seek to minimise the issue of sustainable development and climate change.

• • If the site is accessed via Haycraft’s Lane, taking Any proposal for this site would need 15. To minimise vehicles to the B3069, approximately 400m to the to be accompanied the negative south or to the A351 approximately 1km to the by a Transport impacts of north, this would be expected to have a ‘Significant Assessment which waste and Adverse Impact’. will need to provide minerals • Access onto Haycraft’s Lane, presumed to be via the access details and transport on _ _ 0 same access that serves Avalon, is narrow and does consider vehicle the transport not have suitable geometry to accommodate HGVs. routing. network, This is compounded by the very narrow nature of • mitigating any Haycraft's Lane at this point. However, on the residual basis of these • impacts. The remainder of Haycraft’s Lane, to the north and comments it south, is very narrow, has limited passing appears unlikely opportunity and has poor forward visibility. To be that the proposed

Page 370 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A acceptable in highway terms any proposal for this route will be site would need to limit trips to and from the site to suitable for use as a the very low levels that could reasonably be quarry access. expected from the existing agricultural use of the • The TA should be land. Any proposal would also need to provide an scoped with the acceptable access from the site onto Haycraft’s Lane. Transport • If the site is limited to a very small number of trips Development as detailed above it can be assumed to have a Management Team ‘Significant Adverse Impact’ rating due to the poor and is intended to ? nature of Haycraft’s Lane. identify opportunities for • If the site is accessed southwards over adjacent land reducing impacts on directly to the B3069, this would be expected to the transport have much less impact and is the preferred access network. route. • Policies DM1 and DM 8 of the Minerals Strategy actively address this issue of minimising impacts on the transportation network.

16. To support and • encourage the The proposed site can only realistically be accessed use of by means of road transport, resulting in a negative sustainable impact under this Objective during development • Mitigate impacts transport and working. _ 0 where identified and modes, • As far as reasonably possible negative impacts appropriate. imposing no resulting from access and transport will be unmitigated mitigated, as required by Policies DM1 and DM8 of negative the Minerals Strategy. impacts on them.

• Provision of appropriate Impact on Sensitive Human Receptors mitigation, following assessment of likely impacts. • Site has residential properties immediately 17. To sustain the adjacent to it, within 50m and further out. • Restoration to improve health and Screening will be required. landscape of site where quality of life _ _ 0 possible; and to seek to • Although this site has been worked in the of the facilitate public access. past, this has not been for many years and population its development would make it seem like a • Screening, bunding, standoffs new site. It is in close proximity to a will be used to mitigate number of residences. impacts where considered necessary.

Page 371 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

• Transport Impact on Existing Settlements Assessment to be carried out, • Closest settlements are Acton at approximately identifying possible 600m south east and Langton Matravers at around impacts and 700m south/west. Site is not visible from these opportunities for settlements. _ 0 reducing impacts on • Harman’s Cross lies to the north, in the valley. The the transport site will be potentially more visible from the north, network. which will require sensitive treatment and proper • Visual impact screening of the northern edge of the site. assessment will also • Traffic impacts are expected to be minimal. be required, as referred to above.

Impact on Airport Safety • Site is approximately 22 km from airport, with no 0 0 • No action required. wet working or restoration. • No impacts expected.

Impact on Recreational Land • Assessment of impacts, with • Site is fenced agricultural land, used for livery 0 0 appropriate purposes. No informal or formal recreational use, mitigation 18. To enable safe apart from horses. access to identified. countryside • Restoration to and open include considering spaces. Impact on Public Rights of Way how it might be 0 0 • No rights of way cross the site or run adjacent to it. possible to improve public access in the area.

Preliminary Hydrological Risk Assessment

Further Controlled Waters Issues/Risks Mitigation information/approval required

• Full hydrogeological risk • Potential for • • Watercourses Appropriate assessment will be required contamination of arrangements to be as part of a planning • Ponds/lakes, controlled waters made for ensuring application. including wet (groundwater) that runoff from the • habitats through spillage or site does not enter Flood Risk Assessment seepage of pollutants • Groundwater the groundwater • Water Framework such as fuel. unless any silt or Assessment

Page 372 of 583

• Contamination of other pollutant has • Further assessment of water supplies or first been removed. potential impacts on water reduction in amount quality and levels, • Fuel stored on site of water available for particularly for to be appropriately licenced supplies. groundwater, is required bunded and sealed prior to development. to prevent any spillage from • Land Drainage Consent to entering ground or be obtained from Dorset surface waters. County Council if works may affect flow of an • On-going ordinary watercourse. monitoring during development and working of the site.

Cumulative Impacts Site is an extension to an existing quarry in an area where there is a high concentration and long history of mineral extraction. The proposal is within 5Km (by road) of a town (Swanage) where allocations for the development of 200 dwellings, employment and retail facilities have been made in the Purbeck Local Plan Part 1 (adopted Nov 2012) (Policy SE). (Site details not yet available). Traffic arising from the new residential development will add to general traffic levels in / around Swanage and on the A351.

Page 373 of 583

Summary

Potential Benefits Potential Impacts

• There are residences in close proximity, as well as further afield. Assessment of likely impacts will be required, along with appropriate mitigation. • Provision of Purbeck Stone. • Access and traffic impacts are key issues, given that • Support for the Purbeck Stone industry and Haycraft’s Lane is very narrow and has flower rich employment, both locally and wherever Purbeck verges. An alternative access route is likely to be the Stone is exported and used, with associated only way forward, although none is currently economic benefits. proposed. • • Use of the stone for heritage building Assessment is required to consider whether the local works/repairs, and for new buildings. landscape capacity can accommodate the development and what mitigation will be required. • Geodiversity benefits, through exposures created • and fossils found. The northern edge of the site will require careful assessment, to identify how any visual impacts on the downslope area and across on the other side of the • Possibility of improved public access. valley can be fully screened/mitigated. • Assessment is required to determine whether there will be any archaeology or other heritage issues, and what mitigation will be required.

Overall Recommendation: Assessment has flagged up archaeology, landscape/visual impact, local amenity impacts and access as key issues to be addressed as part of working this site. Further assessment will be required at planning application stage to identify satisfactory mitigation and to identify if there are any additional impacts that will require mitigation. To the south of, and immediately adjacent to, the nominated site are two Wessex Water reservoirs. Water mains are connected to these reservoirs. Development of this site must ensure that there are no impacts on these reservoirs and mains. Development of this site will require liaison with Wessex Water. Traffic access and likely impacts on Haycraft’s Lane and the road verges are particularly important. Unless it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Mineral Planning Authority further work is carried out to demonstrate that Haycrafts Lane can be used with no negative impacts, it appears that some alternative route will be required. If an alternative access route can be identified, then it is likely that the site has the potential to be worked. The site will be included in the Draft Mineral Sites Plan for the purposes of consultation, subject to alternative and suitable access being found.

Accessing this site via Haycrafts Lane is not considered appropriate. Site has not been included as a proposed allocation primarily on these grounds.

Page 374 of 583

Appendix C: Sites Not Being Taken Forward – Withdrawn or Permitted Aggregates: AS01 Binnegar No change – site is not proposed for inclusion in the Mineral Sites Plan as Planning Permission has been granted

Site Name/Location: AS01 Nominee/Agent: Raymond Brown Site Area: approximately 15 ha Binnegar Local Authority: Purbeck District Production/reserve: 250,000 tpa; Mineral Type: Sand Council approximately 5 mt

Impact Assessment Scoring

Strong Minor Minor - Strong Positive Negligible or Negative - Negative + Positive ++ 0 ? Uncertain - Impact No Effect Impact Impact Impact

Timescales for effects: P/W: Preparation and Working R/A : Restoration and Afteruse

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

1. To move waste management up the waste • This Objective is not relevant to this site N/A N/A • N/A hierarchy and nomination promote net self-sufficiency

European/International Designations • 0 • Dorset Heathlands SPA/SAC 300m to SE and Ecological surveys and 350m to NW. No impacts on European hydrological reports. 0 designations expected during working. • Heathland restoration • Restoration to heathland and/or public open or public open space or + space to mitigate human pressures elsewhere both. 2. To maintain, would both offer benefits post-extraction. conserve and enhance Annex 1 Bird Species • biodiversity Ecological surveys and 0 • Area currently contains few opportunities for hydrological reports. Annex 1 birds. No expected impacts on these • Consider revision to 0 during working. heathland SPA • Restoration to heathland and an open habitat boundary and + could make this area suitable for the birds, facilitating restoration offering post-extraction benefits. to heathland.

Page 375 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

Impact on National Designations 0 0 • No action required. • No impacts expected .

Other protected species • The site, and the wider area, is known to support a large population of the plant • Ecological surveys and 0 species Pennyroyal, fully protected under hydrological reports. Schedule 8 of the Wildlife & Countryside Act. • Careful assessment of • In reality the presence of the plant is unlikely possible risks to the to prevent mineral working, but its population Pennyroyal population will need to be carefully managed to preserve and any other relevant 0 and enhance it in the area. species. • At the moment there are no known • Appropriate strategy populations of other protected species, but for translocation, the site could support bat roosts in trees, and including preparation + reptiles in more open areas, most likely all of alternate locations capable of satisfactory mitigation . for the plant. • Restoration, or translocation to new areas, could offer enhanced habitats

Impact on local recognitions/designations, including ancient woodland and veteran • 0 0 trees. No action required. • No impacts expected

3. To maintain, • Exposures resulting from working may be of • Operator to be asked conserve and interest. Benefits are only expected during + 0 to permit visits to view enhance working, and are likely to be obscured or exposures as required. geodiversity. covered as part of restoration.

Page 376 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

• Further assessment on possible impacts on water supplies and Groundwater appropriate mitigation if potential • The site does not affect impacts identified. Source Protection Zones and • Where necessary mitigating measures sits on a Secondary Aquifer. It should be installed to maintain is not known at this stage groundwater levels and/or monitor whether there are any private water supplies. licensed/unlicensed supplies 0 0 in the vicinity. • Alternative arrangements should be in place in case of a reduction in supply. 4. To maintain, • Further information will be conserve and required but these are not • Appropriate arrangements should be enhance the considered to be such serious put in place to ensure that the water quality of issues as to preclude further leaving the site and entering the ground, consideration of this site. rivers/watercourses is of an surface and acceptable quality. sea waters and • manage the Any fuel on site should be properly consumption stored to avoid contamination in case of water in a of spillage. sustainable Surface Water • Appropriate arrangements should be way. installed for surface water and silt • There are two ponds in the 0 collection and fuel storage to prevent north-west of the site. It is contamination of groundwater feasible that these ponds and resources. associated species can be successfully relocated, subject • Land Drainage Consent to be _ to relevant assessments being obtained from Dorset County Council carried out. if works may affect flow of an ordinary watercourse. + • There will be an impact on these habitats, but it is • Ponds to be assessed and, as expected that in the longer appropriate, relocated. term impacts will be benefits.

Flooding/Coastal Stability 5. To reduce • The site is in Flood Risk Zone 1 and working is flood risk and not considered to constitute, or exacerbate an • Flood Risk Assessment 0 0 improve flood existing, a flood risk. (FRA) will be required. management. • Negligible/No impact, during working and restoration.

Page 377 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

Archaeology • Much of the site’s northern boundary is • defined by the line of an historic earthwork Archaeological survey known as Battery Bank, a Scheduled to determine nature Monument (1016273). This monument was and significance of probably a boundary in itself, most likely of non-designated Iron Age or Roman date, and possibly a remains. division between grazing units. Damage to • Adequate provision to this Monument needs to be avoided and be made for _ impact of any works on its setting needs to be preservation, carefully assessed. excavation or • A Scheduled Monument lies to the south-east recording, as of the site – ‘Two Bowl Barrows on South appropriate. Heath, 290m and 370m East of Binnegar Hall’ • Monuments, (1016276). The impact of any works on its 6. To maintain, particularly Battery setting needs to be carefully assessed. conserve and + Bank, to be properly enhance the • There is archaeological potential for human and appropriately historic burials beyond the scheduled areas, although protected during environment for much of the site the potential may be low preparation/working. (including since people would have used the heaths for • Settings of the archaeological grazing whilst living elsewhere. Monuments to be sites, historic • Potentially the impact of the development established prior to buildings, would be ‘Significant Adverse Impact’ working and not to be conservation without appropriate mitigation, and ‘Less compromised during areas, historic Significant Adverse Impact’ with it. working. parks and _ _ • gardens and • Since the monuments were likely originally set Restoration to other locally in an open heathland landscape, restoration heathland could distinctive of the site to open space/heathland, benefit the settings of features and depending on detail of design, would offer the Monuments. their settings). Mild/Strong benefits to the Monuments and their settings

Historic Landscapes • The site is likely to have been heathland since the Bronze Age. This would have formed the context for the scheduled barrows and perhaps Battery Bank. • Restoration to • heathland to benefit _ + Potentially the impact of the development would be ‘Significant Adverse Impact’ without the settings of the appropriate mitigation, and ‘Less Significant Monuments. Adverse Impact’ with it. • Restoration to heathland would provide Mild/Strong benefits, particularly in contributing to setting of the Monuments.

Page 378 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

Historic Buildings 0 0 • No action required. • No expected impact on Listed Buildings

Landscape Capacity • Appropriate restoration • Site is currently well screened by woodland proposals in line with and provided sufficient vegetation is retained Landscape to maintain this screening during Management 7. To maintain, 0 + preparation/working, impacts are expected to Guidelines referred to conserve and be negligible. in Minerals Strategy. enhance the • • Restoration to open heathland has already Maintain screening landscape, been identified as beneficial to the historic woodland around including environment. edges of site. townscape, seascape and Designated Landscapes the coast. • Dorset AONB lies approximately 200m south • Maintain screening 0 0 of site, but site is heavily screened. woodland around edges of site. • Negligible impacts on designated landscapes during and after working.

• Impacts on air quality expected to be negligible. 8. To protect and • No AQMAs will be affected by the working of • Environmental improve air this site proposal. Any dust resulting from protection measures to quality and working will be controlled through normal 0 0 reduce dust and ensure reduce the dust-suppression measures. noise is appropriately impacts of • Noise mitigation will be addressed at the mitigated. noise. planning application stage, with appropriate mitigation to be included in the development of the site.

• Soil is poor quality in • The site comprises primarily grassland and agricultural terms but woodland cover. The area is a former valuable in terms of 9. To maintain, heathland area and so would be expected to potential for heathland conserve and 0 0 have relatively poor, acidic soils. restoration. enhance soil • • quality. If the site is worked and restored to heathland Heathland restoration this will require reinstatement/retention of has already been acidic soils. identified as important after use.

• In terms of encouraging the most efficient use • No specific action 10. To conserve + 0 of resources, this site is considered to provide required; site and safeguard a mild/strong positive impact as it constitutes development to take an extension of an existing working. Impacts into consideration and

Page 379 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A mineral of developing this extension are expected to mitigate where resources. be relatively limited with no intensification. appropriate relevant impacts. + + • The site would make an important contribution to aggregate supply in Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole.

• In order to achieve desired restoration levels it may be necessary to install an inert waste material recycling facility. • Developing an inert 11. To promote • waste recycling facility the use of If this is done then this will provide a strong + + 0 will promote the use of alternative positive benefit during working. It is expected alternative materials materials. that the recycling facility would finish when or soon after the quarry is completed and on-site and elsewhere. restored, giving a negligible impact during afteruse.

• Development of this site will provide a strong benefit in terms of contributing to the 12. To provide an provision of a supply of minerals to meet • Ensure principles of adequate and society’s needs. sustainable affordable • development are supply of + + 0 Ensuring a sustainable supply will depend on incorporated into the minerals to the development and management of the development of this meet society's site. Providing site development takes into site. needs. account relevant principles of sustainable development it is expected this will contribute to complying with this objective.

• This site proposal is expected to contribute to economic development on two levels – directly through the maintenance of current employment at the minerals site adjacent to 0 the proposed development and indirectly • through the provision of aggregate minerals Restoration to forestry required for the maintenance of built could provide on-going economic benefits; 13. To promote environment and for new built development. however, restoration to and encourage Both levels are expected to maintain open access heathland sustainable + + employment, skilled and unskilled. is considered economic • Restoration to commercial forestry could preferable in growth provide direct and on-going economic biodiversity terms and benefits. However, the biodiversity benefits of could provide limited restoration to heathland in this area have economic benefits. + already been noted. If open access is available on the restored land, some limited benefits due to recreational attraction and use in the wider area (i.e. walking, bird watching) may be realised.

Page 380 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

• Developing land as a quarry is expected to have some minimal negative impacts regarding climate change, due primarily to machinery used and transportation of mineral away from site. However, these will in relative terms be negligible. • The Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Minerals • Use energy efficient Strategy seeks to address and minimise such plant and machinery. 14. To adapt to impacts through Policy CC1 which requires • Implement restoration and mitigate operators to take into consideration climate which provides the impacts of 0 0 change impacts and their possible mitigation appropriate habitats to climate for any proposed minerals development. change. help to increase • The development management policies, e.g. resilience of DM 1, also address and seek to minimise the flora/fauna. issue of sustainable development and climate change. • Restoration to some form of vegetated environment will offer benefits in the form of minimal climate change mitigation, but again these will be negligible.

• The proposal is an extension of an existing quarry – no intensification or other change in road transport is expected but the proposed extension will extend the life of the existing 15. To minimise development. This can be expected to • Processing plant to be the negative produce a mild negative impact on the moved nearer to impacts of transport network. waste and proposed extension. • The processing plant may be moved nearer to minerals • Transport Assessment the quarry extension itself – if this happens, transport on _ + to be carried, this will reduce impacts as lorries won’t be the transport identifying crossing Puddletown Road to get to the network, opportunities for existing plant site. mitigating any reducing impacts on residual • Policies DM1 and DM 8 actively address this the transport network. impacts. issue of minimising impacts on the transportation network. • Restoration to open countryside will be positive benefit to the local environment.

Page 381 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

16. To support and encourage • The proposed extension can only realistically the use of be accessed by means of road transport, sustainable resulting in a negative impact under this • transport Objective during development and working. Mitigate impacts where modes, _ 0 identified and • imposing no As far as reasonably possible negative impacts appropriate. unmitigated resulting from access and transport will be negative mitigated, as required by Policies DM1 and impacts on DM8 of the Minerals Strategy. them.

Impact on Sensitive Human Receptors • Nearest property is Binnegar Hall, just over 0 100m to the south of the site. Site is heavily • Retain screening screened and downwind in prevailing winds. vegetation, particularly It is also higher in elevation. Possible impacts along southern considered to be negligible to mild during boundary of site. 0 preparation and working. • Construct noise • Other properties within 250m of site. attenuation bunds • Retaining screening vegetation and use of along southern _ noise attenuation bunds will minimise impacts boundary of site. on these receptors. • No impacts during Restoration/Afteruse.

17. To sustain the • Retain screening health and vegetation, particularly quality of life along southern of the Impact on Existing Settlements boundary of site. population • • Properties along A352; Wareham lies Construct noise approximately 1km to the east. All are attenuation bunds 0 0 screened by vegetation/trees. Visual/noise along southern impacts expected to be negligible with boundary of site. mitigation, during working. • Dust minimisation as • Possible transport impacts are covered above. required. • Transport assessment to minimise potential impacts.

Impact on Airport Safety 0 0 • No action required. • No impacts expected.

Page 382 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

Impact on Recreational Land • No action required for working. 0 • Site is private land and has no recreational use. No impacts. • Restoration to open space with public • Restoration to open space with public access access should be 18. To enable safe 0 could be an important benefit in considered for its access to Restoration/Afteruse. benefits, but could countryside • However, restoration to open space with conflict with nature and open + public access could conflict with possible conservation spaces. nature conservation uses. aspirations.

Impact on Public Rights of Way • 0 0 • Development of this site does not affect any No action required. rights of way. No impacts.

Page 383 of 583

Preliminary Hydrological Risk Assessment

Further Controlled Waters Issues/Risks Mitigation information/approval required

• The site is located north of the Frome • Appropriate and south of the arrangements to be Piddle, and would made for ensuring • drain towards the that runoff from the Full hydrogeological risk Frome. The River site does not enter assessment will be Basin Management the Frome or required as part of a Plan South West River groundwater unless planning application. Basin District any silt has first • Flood Risk Assessment identifies the Frome been removed. and the Piddle as • Water Framework • being of ‘Poor’ Fuel stored on site Assessment environmental quality to be appropriately • Further assessment of in this area. There is bunded and sealed • potential impacts on water Watercourses some potential for to prevent any spillage from quality and levels, • Ponds/lakes, contamination from entering ground or particularly for including wet runoff from site. surface waters. groundwater, is required habitats • Potential for prior to development. • • contamination of On-going Groundwater • Assessment of the controlled waters monitoring during feasibility of relocating through spillage or development and surface water features and seepage of pollutants working of the site. associated habitats and such as fuel, or silt in • Relocation of species. water. surface water • Land Drainage Consent to • Contamination of features, provided be obtained from Dorset water supplies or this is feasible. County Council if works reduction in amount • Need to consider may affect flow of an of water available for compliance to the ordinary watercourse. licenses supplies. Restoration Plan for • Impacts on or the River Frome and removal of surface its floodplain. water features.

Cumulative Impacts This proposal is an extension to an existing site in an area where there is other mineral working (along the Puddletown road). However, the site would not be worked until current quarrying operations at Binnegar are complete. There would be no increase in the intensity of the operation but there would be an extension of time for mineral extraction/restoration. The proposal is within 5Km (by road) of a site allocated in the Purbeck Local Plan Part 1 (adopted Nov 2012) (Policy CEN) for development of 200 dwellings and community facilities, off Worgret Road, Wareham. Traffic arising from the new residential development will add to general traffic levels in Wareham and on the A352. Cumulative impacts are expected to be minimal and no specific mitigation is required.

Summary. Page 384 of 583

Key impacts and benefits are expected to include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following.

Potential Benefits Potential Impacts

• Provision of aggregates required for maintenance • Impacts on Scheduled Ancient Monuments adjacent and construction of the built environment, with or in vicinity. Impacts to be fully assessed and accompanying benefits to the economy. mitigated, but expected to be capable of mitigation. • Provision of employment, to the benefit of local • Impacts on Pennyroyal plant on site. It is expected economy. that these can be mitigated through translocation of • If inert waste is imported and processed on-site to affected plants. assist in restoration, this will contribute to supply of • Impacts on ponds on the site, but these can also be recycled aggregate. moved as required. • Improved public access may be possible as a part of • There will be some impacts associated with traffic site restoration. This could lead to reduced visitor serving the site – further assessment will be required. pressure on designated heathland sites in the vicinity. • Binnegar Hall and associated buildings lies to the south of the proposed site and could be impacted by • The proposed development is an extension to an noise or visual impacts. Such impacts are expected existing quarry and as such would not lead to an to be capable of mitigation. intensification of development.

Overall Recommendation: Key impacts are expected to be on the cultural heritage (Boundary Bank to the north and barrows to the south/east); ecology (the Pennyroyal plant and ponds on the site); and possibly of Binnegar Hall to the south. It is expected that these can be overcome through appropriate mitigation. Further assessment will be required to gain a better understanding of what the impacts might be and how best to mitigate. Should this site ultimately be developed, it is expected that detailed assessment of impacts and required mitigation will be covered through the required Environmental Impact Assessment. As an extension, development of the site is not expected to lead to intensification of impacts, but the time period of the impacts will be extended. If the processing plant is ultimately located at the site, some of these impacts (i.e. vehicles crossing the Puddletown Road) will be removed.

Planning permission has been issued for the development of this site and it therefore no longer forms part of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Mineral Sites Plan site identification process

Page 385 of 583

Aggregates: AS09 Hurn Court Farm

NB: This site has been permitted and therefore will not be allocated in the Mineral Sites Plan. This assessment has not been updated (November 2018)

Site Name/Location: AS09 Hurn Court Farm Extension Nominee/Agent: New Milton Sand & Ballast Mineral Type: Sand and gravel Local Authority: Christchurch District Council

Production: approximately 150,000 Site Area: approximately 15 ha Reserve: approximately 600,000 t tpa

Impact Assessment Scoring

Strong Minor Minor - Strong Positive Negligible or Negative - Negative + Positive ++ 0 ? Uncertain - Impact No Effect Impact Impact Impact

Timescales for effects: P/W: Preparation and Working R/A : Restoration and Afteruse

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

1. To move waste management up the waste • This Objective is not relevant to this site N/A N/A • N/A hierarchy and nomination promote net self-sufficiency

European/International Designations 0 0 • No action required. • Not relevant to this site nomination.

2. To maintain, conserve and Annex 1 Bird Species enhance 0 0 • No action required. • Not relevant to this site nomination. biodiversity

National Designations 0 0 • No action required. • Not relevant to this site nomination.

Page 386 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

Protected species • It is possible that common protected • Ecological surveys required, reptiles are present in the margins of 0 0 with appropriate mitigation the proposed area. identified. • If this is the case, mitigation would not be expected to be a problem.

Local recognitions/designations, including ancient woodland and veteran • 0 0 trees No action required. • Not relevant to this site nomination.

• Exposures resulting from working may 3. To maintain, be of interest. Benefits are only • Operator to be asked to permit conserve and + 0 expected during working, and are likely visits to view exposures as enhance to be obscured or covered as part of required. geodiversity. restoration.

Groundwater • Hydrological assessment required to determine possible • Site overlies a secondary aquifer. _ impacts, on ground and surface • There are water features – pond, waters, with appropriate watercourse - within 100m of site mitigation to be implemented. 0 boundary which could be impacted by • Where necessary mitigating development of the site. measures should be installed to • ? Assessment required to determine maintain groundwater levels. possible impacts on hydrogeology. • Appropriate arrangements 4. To maintain, Impacts to be appropriately mitigated. conserve and should be put in place to ensure enhance the that the water leaving the site quality of and entering the ground, rivers/watercourses is of an acceptable quality. surface and _ sea waters and • Any fuel on site should be manage the Surface Water properly stored to avoid consumption • Watercourse/pond within 100m of site contamination in case of of water in a boundary. spillage. sustainable • Appropriate arrangements way. 0 • Site drains to Leaden Stour and on into Stour. should be installed for surface water and silt collection and • Assessment required to determine fuel storage to prevent possible impacts on hydrogeology. contamination of groundwater ? Impacts to be appropriately mitigated. resources. • Land Drainage Consent to be obtained from Dorset County Council if works may affect flow of an ordinary watercourse.

Page 387 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

Flooding/Coastal Stability • Site is located entirely within FZ1, although it is adjacent to FZ2/3. It is an 5. To reduce • Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) extension to an aggregate site, and will flood risk and will be required, identifying 0 0 utilise exist plant located within FZ1. improve flood possible risks and all necessary management. • Working is not considered to constitute, mitigation. or exacerbate an existing, a flood risk provided all necessary mitigation is implemented.

Archaeology • As previous archaeological work has demonstrated, sites on the Stour valley gravels have archaeological potential in general, particularly for prehistoric material. There is also the potential for the presence of earthworks and ? 0 structures associated with previous 6. To maintain, water management. conserve and • enhance the Archaeological assessment and • Survey to assess possible historic evaluation will be required. When these presence and significance of environment have been undertaken archaeological non-designated remains. (including impacts, if any, will be better • archaeological understood. Adequate provision to be made sites, historic for preservation, excavation or buildings, Historic Landscapes recording, as appropriate. conservation • The site lies in the Stour valley, and areas, historic archaeological investigation of gravel parks and sites within the valley has shown that gardens and the rich resources of the valley were other locally ? 0 exploited throughout prehistory. distinctive features and • Further evaluation will be required. their settings). When this has been undertaken possible impacts, if any, will be better understood.

Historic Buildings • Full assessment of _ 0 • The proposed site forms an extension to the possible impacts existing Hurn Court Farm quarry. The southern required. boundary of the site as identified abuts the

Page 388 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A boundary of the garden of the Grade II listed • Detailed Heritage building known as Dales House. If the Assessment will be proposed site does not have a sufficiently required, to identify the broad buffer zone, Dales House and its setting setting of the Listed will be adversely impacted by the extraction. Buildings and the mitigation required to • However, if a buffer zone of sufficient breadth appropriately protect the is planned into the final scheme, then it is setting, taking into considered that the impact would be reduced. account the harm to the • It is expected that the proposed extraction setting and the weight would take place in phases throughout the given to the importance area, with quick restoration at a lower level of the Listed Buildings _ _ behind each phase. Any impact on the setting • Appropriate and of the listed building would therefore be adequate mitigation, temporary. such as screening, to be • Two other listed buildings, the Farmhouse and identified and Barn at Merritown Farm to the west of the implemented prior to proposed site are not considered to be at risk working. of substantial harm. • If the proposed • However, there will be an impact to the setting development cannot be of the heritage assets, causing less than satisfactorily mitigated it substantial harm, and this has to be given great will not proceed. and considerable weight.

Landscape Capacity • Site is enclosed • Important to maintain and enhance • Assessment of potential visual existing hedgerows around site and to 7. To maintain, impacts required. control heights of storage tips. conserve and _ + • Restoration to include enhance the • Opportunities to increase informal increasing public landscape, recreation/public open space in the access/informal recreation in including Stour Valley and to create links to the Stour Valley. townscape, existing public rights of way (The Green seascape and Infrastructure initiative) should be the coast. explored on restoration.

Designated Landscapes 0 0 • No action required. • No impacts expected.

• Impacts on air quality expected to be negligible. 8. To protect and • • Environmental improve air No AQMAs will be affected by the working of protection measures to quality and this site proposal. Any dust resulting from 0 0 reduce dust and ensure reduce the working will be controlled through normal dust- noise is appropriately impacts of suppression measures. mitigated. noise. • Noise mitigation will be addressed at the planning application stage, with appropriate Page 389 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A mitigation to be included in the development of the site.

• Site contains/comprises very good • Soil to be properly stripped and quality agricultural land. Working the stored prior to working; 9. To maintain, site will have impacts on this soil. conserve and protected during working; and _ 0 • enhance soil Restoration is expected to return the re-spread on site after working. land to, or near to, original ground quality. • Restoration to include high levels, and to restore the quality of the quality agricultural land. land.

• In terms of encouraging the most + efficient use of resources, this site is • No specific action required; site 10. To conserve considered to provide a mild/strong development to take into and safeguard positive impact as it constitutes an 0 consideration and mitigate mineral extension of an existing working. where appropriate relevant resources. • Impacts of developing this extension are ++ impacts. expected to be relatively limited with no intensification.

• In order to achieve desired restoration levels it may be necessary to install an inert waste material recycling facility. 11. To promote • If this is done then this will provide a • Impacts of a recycling facility to the use of + + 0 strong positive benefit during working. be assessed, and appropriate alternative mitigation put in place. materials. • It is expected that the recycling facility would finish when or soon after the quarry is completed and restored, giving a negligible effect during afteruse.

• Development of this site will provide a benefit in terms of contributing to the provision of a supply of minerals to 12. To provide an meet society’s needs. adequate and • • Ensure principles of sustainable affordable Ensuring a sustainable supply will development are incorporated supply of + 0 depend on the development and into the development of this minerals to management of the site. Providing site site. meet society's development takes into account needs. relevant principles of sustainable development it is expected this will contribute to complying with this objective.

Page 390 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

• This site proposal is expected to contribute to economic development on two levels – directly through the provision of employment at the site to + 0 be developed and indirectly through the provision of aggregate minerals required for the maintenance of built • environment and for new built Careful assessment of potential development. Both levels are expected negative impacts required, with to maintain employment, skilled and appropriate mitigation – this 13. To promote unskilled. However given the expected could include and encourage size of the reserve this is likely to be a buffering/screening and sustainable limited benefit. holding back quarry traffic economic during peak traffic times. • There is potential for negative economic growth • impacts, such as dust, noise and Further assessment required to increased traffic, which could affect form a view as to what the most appropriate restoration could _ + other businesses in the vicinity or even further away. be. • Restoration to agriculture with some element of public access will, if achieved, offer some economic benefits through both the agriculture and the recreational attraction and use in the wider area (i.e. riding, walking).

• Developing land as a quarry is expected to have some negative impacts regarding climate change, due primarily to machinery used and transportation of mineral away from site. However, these will in relative terms be negligible. • The Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Minerals Strategy seeks to address and • Use energy efficient plant and 14. To adapt to minimise such impacts through Policy machinery. and mitigate CC1 which requires operators to take • the impacts of _ 0 into consideration climate change Implement restoration which climate impacts and their possible mitigation provides appropriate habitats to change. for any proposed minerals development. help to increase resilience of flora/fauna. • The development management policies, e.g. DM 1, also address and seek to minimise the issue of sustainable development and climate change. • Restoration to some form of vegetated environment will offer benefits in the form of climate change mitigation, including provision of habitat for

Page 391 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

wildlife, but again these will be relatively small.

• This proposal is to extend an existing operation on the south side of the B3073 Parley Lane. The traffic generation of this site has been estimated at around 60 trips per day for a period of 4 years. Access is gained via 0 an existing signalised junction that also serves as the main access to Bournemouth Airport. Access to the strategic network is approximately 2 km 15. To minimise to the east at the junction with the A338 • Transport Assessment to be the negative Bournemouth Spur Road. carried out, identifying impacts of opportunities for reducing • The B3073 Parley Lane is subject to high waste and impacts on the transport levels of congestion at certain times of minerals network. transport on 0 the day and there are significant other • the transport housing and business site allocations This could include selected network, that will impact upon it. Overall, with vehicle routing, avoiding trips mitigating any mitigation towards improvements to through residential areas of residual Parley Lane, there are good connections Ferndown to the west of the site impacts. with the strategic network and where possible. potentially little impact on existing _ settlements. The proposed extension will extend the life of the existing development. • Impacts directly resulting from this proposal are expected to be minimal. • Policies DM1 and DM 8 actively address this issue of minimising impacts on the transportation network.

16. To support • The proposed extension can only and encourage realistically be accessed by means of the use of road transport, resulting in a negative sustainable impact under this Objective during transport development and working. • Mitigate impacts where modes, _ 0 • identified and appropriate. imposing no As far as reasonably possible negative unmitigated impacts resulting from access and negative transport will be mitigated, as required impacts on by Policies DM1 and DM8 of the them. Minerals Strategy.

Page 392 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

Impact on Sensitive Human Receptors _ • Site is immediately adjacent to residential properties, with other • Provision of appropriate 0 residences and businesses within 100m. mitigation, following Development would involve mitigation assessment of likely impacts. (visual and noise attenuation bunding, _ _ standoffs) to limit impacts to appropriate levels.

Impact on Existing Settlements • The nearest settlements are Throop/Muscliffe to the south (>1km distant) and East Parley at over 1km to 17. To sustain the • Transport Assessment to be the north-west and Hurn to the south- health and carried out, identifying possible east. quality of life _ 0 impacts and opportunities for of the • No visual or noise impacts will affect reducing impacts on the population these settlements, nor will there be an transport network. intensification of traffic along the B3073. However existing traffic levels generated by the current operation will continue for a longer period of time.

Impact on Airport Safety • Airport to be consulted on all • Site is immediately adjacent to airport, aspects of the site development but is an extension of a site that is and restoration. 0 0 worked satisfactorily without any • negative impacts on aircraft safety. All necessary mitigation required to rmove bird strike • The extension would be worked the risk to be implemented. same way, and restored dry.

Impact on Recreational Land • • Most of the site is in agricultural use. The No action required for western end is used as parking for the working. 0 + adjacent theme park. Development for • If restoration included some minerals will impact on this use, although public access, there would 18. To enable safe this will only be temporary. be an overall improvement. access to • countryside No formal/informal recreation on the site. and open Impact on Public Rights of Way spaces. • Assessment of impacts, with • There are no rights of way across the appropriate mitigation ? 0 site, although one passes close to the identified. western tip of the site. Screening • Restoration to improve public would be required, although the access in the area. impact would be relatively small.

Page 393 of 583

Preliminary Hydrological Risk Assessment

Further Controlled Waters Issues/Risks Mitigation information/approval required

• Appropriate • Full hydrogeological risk • arrangements to be The River Basin assessment will be required made for ensuring Management Plan as part of a planning that runoff from the South West River application. Basin District site does not enter • identifies the Stour, the Leaden Stour Flood Risk Assessment and Stour or the closest main river, • Water Framework groundwater unless as being of ‘poor’ Assessment environmental any silt has first • quality. Potential for been removed. Further assessment of • potential impacts on water Watercourses contamination from • Fuel stored on site quality and levels, • runoff from site. to be appropriately Ponds/lakes, particularly for • bunded and sealed including wet Potential for groundwater, is required to prevent any habitats contamination of prior to development. controlled waters spillage from • Groundwater • through spillage or entering ground or Assessment of the seepage of pollutants surface waters. feasibility of relocating surface water features and such as fuel, or silt in • On-going associated habitats and water. monitoring during species. • Contamination of development and • water supplies or working of the site. Land Drainage Consent to be obtained from Dorset reduction in amount • Relocation of County Council if works of water available for surface water may affect flow of an licensed supplies. features, provided ordinary watercourse. this is feasible.

Flood Risk Commentary Site is within Flood Zone 1, but close to Flood Zones 2 & 3. Some theoretical risk of flooding from surface water. Flood Risk Assessment would be required at planning application stage, with a site specific strategy for surface water management that does not increase rates of runoff or generate off site worsening Sand and gravel extraction is water compatible, so suitable in flood risk terms for allocation in Draft Mineral Sites Plan provided the appropriate hydrological assessment is carried out and a Flood Risk Assessment prepared. Climate Change predictions may result in flood outlines greater than existing Flood Zone 2. Processing plant/storage/stockpiles should preferably be located in Flood Zone 1, and should be located as far from Flood Zones 2 & 3 as reasonably possible.

Viability As an extension to an existing operational site, viability is accepted. Hurn Court Farm will use existing processing facilities, road access and serve existing markets, and therefore these do not have to be provided. Mineral has been proven. The site is considered viable, for allocation in the Plan.

Page 394 of 583

Heritage Impacts The southern boundary of the site as identified abuts the boundary of the garden of the Grade II listed building known as Dales House. Two other listed buildings, the Farmhouse and Barn at Merritown Farm to the west of the proposed site are not considered to be at risk of any detrimental impact. The proximity to Dales House, and the impact the development of the site would have on the setting of this heritage asset must be carefully considered against the public and other benefits of aggregate production. Policy/Legislative Background The Historic England website notes: When making a decision on all listed building consent applications or any decision on a planning application for development that affects a listed building or its setting, a local planning authority must have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses. Preservation in this context means not harming the interest in the building, as opposed to keeping it utterly unchanged. This obligation, found in sections 16 and 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, applies to all decisions concerning listed buildings. The recent Court of Appeal decision in the case of Barnwell vs East Northamptonshire DC 2014(2) made it clear that in enacting section 66(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 (1) Parliament’s intention was that ‘decision makers should give “considerable importance and weight” to the desirability of preserving the setting of listed buildings’ when carrying out the balancing exercise'.

Page 395 of 583

“• the desirability of sustaining and enhancing the significance of heritage assets and putting them to viable uses consistent with their conservation; …” 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. … 133. Where a proposed development will lead to substantial harm to or total loss of significance of a designated heritage asset, local planning authorities should refuse consent, unless it can be demonstrated that the substantial harm or loss is necessary to achieve substantial public benefits that outweigh that harm or loss, or all of the following apply: … 134. Where a development proposal will lead to less than substantial harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset, this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal, including securing its optimum viable use. 135. The effect of an application on the significance of a non-designated heritage asset should be taken into account in determining the application. In weighing applications that affect directly or indirectly non-designated heritage assets, a balanced judgment will be required having regard to the scale of any harm or loss and the significance of the heritage asset.” The National Planning Policy Framework (paragraph 144) also states: When determining planning applications, local planning authorities should: • give great weight to the benefits of the mineral extraction, including to the economy;

Commentary In considering the potential development of the Hurn Court Farm Extension site, with acknowledged impacts on a designated heritage asset, the following points have been taken into consideration. • There is “a strong presumption against harm to designated assets” (Barnwell [2014] EWCA Civ 137; Forge Field [2014] EWHC 1895 (Admin)) • “Considerable weight” must be given to harm to designated assets, however slight, if more than de minimis (Barnwell; Forge Field; Jones [2015] EWCA Civ 1243) • Mordue v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and others [2015] EWCA Civ 1243. Heritage assets have statutory protection, unlike other material considerations; and the NPPF has a complex template for their consideration. Both must be considered in an assessment. • Failure to assess alternative sites on appropriate public interest criteria (Forge Field; ENV4) • The policy presumption in favour of sustainable development does not apply to cases of harm to designated assets (Gladman [2016] EWHC 421 (Admin)) • Cumulative effects must be considered (PPG) • All recognised harm must be included in the recommended Planning balance (Barnwell) • Undue weight should not be given to the temporary nature of development (National Wind Power [1999] N.P.C. 128) Development of the site would not cause substantial harm to Dales House itself, but would have an impact on its setting. Development of the site would result in temporary harm to the setting of Dales House – this would be ‘less than substantial’ harm, for a temporary period. This harm has been given great and considerable weight in this assessment. A range of sites nominated for allocation in the Mineral Sites Plan for sand and gravel quarries have been assessed on heritage grounds and on a range of other grounds. A number have been rejected for reasons other than heritage issues. The remaining sites have been included in the Draft Mineral Sites Plan.

Page 396 of 583

The proposal is for a temporary period, after which the site will be restored and the impact on the heritage asset setting will be removed. The Heritage Impact Assessment that would be carried out as part of any planning application would identify the setting of the heritage asset and would identify appropriate mitigation to offset the harm to the setting resulting from development of the site to a level that would allow the development to go ahead. It is expected that the mitigation would be a combination of screening (an earth bund) and a standoff/buffer. If mitigation is not possible, or if the necessary standoff was such that it made the site uneconomic to develop, then the development would not go ahead. In considering potential impacts and mitigation, it must be remembered that this is not a planning application, but a nomination for allocation of a site in the Mineral Sites Plan. The evidence required and level of assessment carried out at this stage are considered to be proportionate and appropriate. At the planning application stage 13 a detailed Heritage Impact Assessment on the assets and their settings will be carried out, as part of an Environmental Impact Assessment, and the appropriate mitigation identified and applied. At the current stage, the Mineral Planning Authority is considering whether the proposed nomination can reasonably be allocated through the Mineral Sites Plan, on the understanding that appropriately detailed assessment work will be carried out at a later date, and appropriate mitigation applied. Although inclusion in an adopted plan gives a site allocation greater weight and likelihood of development, it is not deemed planning permission. Any allocation in an adopted plan still needs to go through the full planning application process, including Environmental Impact Assessment, and if impacts are identified that cannot be satisfactorily mitigated, the proposal will not receive permission. It is considered, taking into account: • the less than substantial harm to the setting of Dales House; • the great and considerable weight given to such harm, and the strong presumption against such harm; • the temporary nature of the harm • the great weight to be given to the provision of mineral • the fact that minerals must be worked where they are found • the fact that this is an extension site, and the processing plant and other infrastructure is already available • the fact that the proposed development will be subject to planning application including Environmental Impact Assessment, and impacts on the setting will be assessed in detail and appropriate mitigation identified that the public benefit to be received from this proposed development, and the nature and duration of the development causing harm, together with the scope for mitigating this harm, are such that the site should be allocated in the Mineral Sites Plan.

Cumulative Impacts Proposed site is an extension to an existing site – no traffic intensification is required. Although there is no other mineral working in the vicinity currently, there are aggregate deposits in the area and proposals for future working. There are existing waste management facilities in the area and the potential for future development at the Airport. If the site comes into operation in parallel with the existing extraction here, and thus increases the overall impact on Parley Lane, the Highway Authority will seek to secure contributions towards a package of schemes proposed to ease existing and expected congestion. However, no intensification of operation is expected and cumulative impacts are expected to be minimal or non-existent and no specific mitigation is required.

13 Dorset County Council is currently considering an application for the development of the Hurn Court Farm Extension Page 397 of 583

Quarry related traffic impacts can be mitigated by holding back quarry traffic during peak times. There is potential for cumulative visual impacts if the proposed extension is worked while the current site is still in restoration. This would be a time limited impact, and should be addressed at the planning application stage. The proposal lies within 5km of a site allocated for development in the Christchurch and East Dorset Consolidated Plan 14 May 2013, Policy BA2 Bournemouth Airport – Northern Business Parks – 60 Ha employment land. Traffic from this development will add to traffic levels on the B3073.

Summary. Key impacts and benefits are expected to include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following.

Potential Benefits Potential Impacts

• • Provision of aggregates required for Time-limited impacts on adjacent properties, particularly a maintenance and construction of the built listed building south of the site. Impacts to be fully environment, with accompanying benefits to assessed and appropriately mitigated. the economy. • Heritage asset impacts. • Provision of employment, to the benefit of • Potential impacts on hydrology/flooding, requiring further local economy. assessment. • If inert waste is imported and processed on- • Potential impact on adjacent airport, through bird-strike site to assist in restoration, this will contribute risk. Proposed development to be designed, worked and to supply of recycled aggregate. restored in a way that will not cause unacceptable impacts. • Improved public access may be possible as a • Site is high quality agricultural land, and development will part of site restoration. This could lead to have an impact on this use. It is expected that the site can reduced visitor pressure on designated be restored to an agricultural use. heathland sites in the vicinity. • Parley Lane has high traffic levels. However, the proposed • Nature conservation benefits may be achieved site would be worked as an extension and no as part of restoration. intensification is expected. A Transport Assessment would • The proposed development is an extension to be carried out, identifying opportunities to reduce traffic an existing quarry and as such is not expected impacts. to lead to an intensifications of development.

Overall Recommendation: Site is currently in intensive agriculture with no public access. It would be operated as an extension of an existing, adjacent quarry with mineral taken to existing plant to be processed. Current site is well run and no intensification of working is expected. Key impacts are expected to be on the airport operation (risk of bird-strike) and adjacent properties (residences and businesses), which include a listed building. The proposed development will cause less than substantial harm to the setting of the Listed Building but this harm is expected to be capable of mitigation. Full assessment of possible impacts will be required, including heritage impact assessment. It is expected that these can be overcome through appropriate mitigation, but this could lead to the sterilisation of a significant part of the proposed extension, for provision of a buffer.

14 The Consolidated Plan is an amalgamation of the Christchurch and East Dorset Core Strategy Pre submission draft April 2012 and the Christchurch and East Dorset Schedule of Proposed Changes November 2012.

Page 398 of 583

As an extension, development of the site is not expected to lead to intensification of impacts, but the time period of the impacts will be extended. Opportunities for improved public access and nature conservation benefits are to be considered as part of restoration of the site.

On balance, it appears reasonable on the basis of evidence available that the impacts identified in this sustainability appraisal are capable of satisfactory mitigation to the extent that the site nomination can reasonably be included as an allocation in the Draft Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Mineral Sites Plan.

This site has been permitted and therefore will not be allocated in the Mineral Sites Plan. This assessment has not been updated (November 2018)

Page 399 of 583

Aggregates: AS10 Moreton Plantation No change – site is not proposed for inclusion in the Mineral Sites Plan

Site Name/Location: AS10 Moreton Plantation Nominee/Agent: Aggregate Industries Mineral Type: Sand/Gravel Local Authority: Purbeck District Council

Site Area: approximately 194 ha Production: 500,000 tpa; Reserve: approximately 6-7 mt

Impact Assessment Scoring

Strong Minor Minor - Strong Positive Negligible or Negative - Negative + Positive ++ 0 ? Uncertain - Impact No Effect Impact Impact Impact

Timescales for effects: P/W: Preparation and Working R/A : Restoration and Afteruse

Effects Sustainability Commentary Mitigation P/ Objectives R/A W

1. To move waste N/ N/ • This Objective is not relevant to this site management • N/A A A nomination. up the waste hierarchy

European/International Designations • Ecological surveys and • Proposed area supports Annex 1 birds which may hydrological reports be functionally linked to Dorset Heathlands SPA required, with and area is well used as recreation site contributing appropriate to the network of areas which help to reduce mitigation. human recreational pressure on designated heathlands. • Heathland restoration 2. To maintain, and public access to conserve and • There are possible hydrological effects of working _ _ ? be created. enhance the area for mineral on the European wet heaths to biodiversity the south. Working this area could lead to • Nature conservation significant risk of adverse effects on European designations to be sites. removed from proposed • At the moment the area includes significant parts development area, of the Dorset Heaths SAC, Dorset Heathlands SPA with appropriate and Dorset Heathlands Ramsar; these areas must boundary established. be removed from the possible allocation to have any chance of being taken forward otherwise a

Page 400 of 583

Effects Sustainability Commentary Mitigation P/ Objectives R/A W conclusion of adverse effects on integrity of the sites is inevitable. • Restoration to heathland/forestry with open access has the potential to restore these benefits.

• Ecological surveys and hydrological reports required, with Annex 1 Bird Species appropriate mitigation. • Area supports Annex 1 birds as part of the existing forestry crop rotation. Clearance of trees would • Heathland restoration result in heathland regeneration and the open and public access to _ + habitat would rapidly become suitable for more be created. Annex 1 birds. • Nature conservation • The site has the potential to be included in a designations to be revision to the heathland SPA boundary. Risk removed from based approach essential here. proposed development area, with appropriate boundary established.

National Designations • Ecological surveys • In addition to comments made above, the area is required, with _ likely to support rich invertebrate assemblage in appropriate existing rides contributing to maintenance of mitigation. species within SSSI. • Restoration to include • At the moment the area includes parts of the creation of + Turnerspuddle Heaths SSSI; these areas must be invertebrate habitat. removed from the possible allocation to have any • chance of being taken forward as there is no case Areas of designation for directly damaging a nationally important site to to be removed from _ _ extract sand and gravel. working area, with appropriate boundary • Restoration should include appropriate habitats to established. support invertebrates.

Protected species • Ecological surveys • Existing rides support significant populations of required, with _ ? European protected species, Sand Lizard and appropriate mitigation Smooth Snake, and common protected reptiles. identified. Depending on population sizes it may be difficult to mitigate fully for effects on EPS and there is a

Page 401 of 583

Effects Sustainability Commentary Mitigation P/ Objectives R/A W risk that disturbance licences could be refused by • Restoration to include NE. appropriate habitats for these species. • Within the proposed area is a population of the fully protected Ladybird Spider; it is extremely • Further investigation unlikely that permission could ever be granted that into likelihood of _ _ would be shown to effect the population of this grant of disturbance great rarity. licences. • Depending on population sizes it may be difficult • Ladybird Spider and to mitigate fully for effects on these species and its habitat not to be there is a risk that disturbance licences could be affected by any refused by NE. development.

Local recognitions/designations, including ancient 0 0 woodland and veteran trees • No action required. • No impacts expected.

3. To maintain, • Exposures resulting from working may be of • Operator to be asked conserve and interest. Benefits are only expected during working, + 0 to permit visits to view enhance and are likely to be obscured or covered as part of exposures as required. geodiversity. restoration.

• Hydrological assessment Groundwater required to determine possible • Potential to impact on wet habitats in impacts, on ground and surface Turners Puddle Heath Site of Special waters, with appropriate Scientific Interest. No impact on Source mitigation to be implemented. 4. To maintain, Protection Zones. Overlies secondary _ _ ? • Appropriate arrangements conserve and aquifers. enhance the should be put in place to ensure quality of • EA concern over possible impacts of that the water leaving the site ground, extraction on groundwater flow patterns and entering the surface and within the site and down towards the rivers/watercourses is of an sea waters Frome. acceptable quality. and manage • Any fuel on site should be the properly stored to avoid consumption Surface Water contamination in case of of water in a • There are ditches/drainage/watercourses spillage. sustainable within and around the site boundary • Appropriate arrangements way. which would be impacted by _ _ ? should be installed for surface development of the site. water and silt collection and fuel • EA concern over impacts of extraction on storage to prevent surface water flow through the site and contamination of groundwater down towards the Frome. resources.

Page 402 of 583

Effects Sustainability Commentary Mitigation P/ Objectives R/A W • Land Drainage Consent to be obtained from Dorset County Council is works may affect flow of an ordinary watercourse.

Flooding/Coastal Stability 5. To reduce • Majority of site in FRZ 1, plant proposed to be flood risk located on high ground, approximately 1 km from and improve • Flood Risk Assessment 0 0 FRZ 2/3. Working is not considered to constitute, flood (FRA) will be required. or exacerbate an existing, a flood risk. management . • Negligible/No impact, during working and restoration.

• Archaeological survey Archaeology to assess Monuments • A Scheduled Monument consisting of two bowl and establish their barrows on Cloud’s Hill (SM33172) is situated on settings and how these can best be 6. To maintain, the north-eastern boundary of the proposed site. protected during conserve and The setting of the monument comprises the low working, as well as to enhance the hill/natural mound on which the barrows are assess possible historic situated and the surrounding lowland area which presence and environment they overlook. This area would have been significance of non- (including heathland for much of the life of the barrow. Part of designated remains. archaeologic this area has already been returned to heathland al sites, and is not proposed for extraction, thereby • Adequate provision to historic protecting this element. be made for buildings, • preservation, _ + The eastern area proposed for extraction lies south conservation of this. It is my view that in order to visually protect excavation or areas, the setting in its entirety this extraction area should recording, as historic parks be pulled back so as not to cross over the existing appropriate. and gardens track. Overall the potential impact on the setting • Settings of the and other of the monument would be temporary, for a period Monuments to be locally of approximately one year. During this time there established prior to distinctive would be extraction activity and lorry movements working and not to be features and south of the Scheduled Monument. compromised during their • working. settings). The eastern block is proposed to be restored to heathland at a slightly lower level than existing • If the boundary for the ground levels. The permanent removal of conifers eastern area is pulled would therefore have a positive impact on the back as suggested, the setting of Cloud’s Hill. impacts of the development would Page 403 of 583

Effects Sustainability Commentary Mitigation P/ Objectives R/A W • Positive management of the scheduled barrows be reduced. could be part of the mitigation for the Otherwise, the development. Archaeological potential for the proposal would be remainder of the site is likely to be low since people considered to have a would have used the heaths for grazing whilst living significant adverse elsewhere. impact.

Historic Landscapes • The heathland of the site forms a major element of • Survey to assess the setting of the scheduled barrows as discussed possible presence and above. significance of non- designated remains. • Unsympathetic extraction and quarrying could have • _ + a significant negative impact on the setting of these Adequate provision to barrows, but there is the potential for an be made for improvement in that setting through pulling back preservation, the quarry boundary and restoration to heathland. excavation or recording, as • Archaeological assessment and evaluation will be appropriate. required. When these have been undertaken archaeological impacts will be better understood.

Historic Buildings • Lawrence of Arabia’s 19th century cottage, which is Grade II listed, is located to the north-east of the proposed site. However the presence of Cloud’s Hill and an area of protected heathland between the site and the listed building means that the site • Further assessment would not impact on the setting of the cottage. required to ensure • Oaker’s Wood Cottage, which is also Grade II listed, adequate and lies to the north of the site on the Waddock Cross- appropriate screening Bovington Road. This is a thatched cottage, is in place, prior to probably of 18th century date, set within a wooded working. landscape. The cottage is currently undergoing • Strengthen screening _ 0 restoration and extension and the new owners have of the site where surrounded the site with a quick growing evergreen needed and dense hedge. This has changed the character of the appropriate. setting of the listed building. However skyward views of being within a woodland should remain as • Screening to include part of the historic character of the surrounding bunds to reduce noise environment of the building. impacts, where necessary. • The proposed site would involve extraction of sand and gravel to the south of Oaker’s Wood Cottage, on the other side of the road. Restoration would be at a lower level and would comprise some large bodies of water, shallow lake margins islands and reedbed over silt ponds. Due to the presence of the dense hedge and a tree belt that would be retained

Page 404 of 583

Effects Sustainability Commentary Mitigation P/ Objectives R/A W along the northern border of the proposed site, there would be little impact on the immediate setting of the listed building. However, thickening of the tree belt is likely to be required to ensure that the feeling of being within a wooded landscape is not lost and to ensure that any noise disturbance is minimal.

Landscape Capacity • Landscape and visual impact assessment • There are major concerns regarding the significant required, to identify negative landscape & visual impacts this proposal impacts; adequate would have on well used public rights of way and mitigation of such rural lanes as well as on the SPA/SSSIs. Parts of the impacts before and area are tranquil and sensitive from a landscape during working. and visual perspective. • If mitigation is not 7. To maintain, • Cumulative impact may also be an issue especially _ _ ? possible, a view will conserve and when viewed from Moreton Village and other areas have to be taken as to enhance the to the south in association with the Ministry of whether a time-limited landscape, Defence operations. including impact might be • townscape, The integrity of the distinctive mosaic landscape is acceptable. important in an area well used for recreation. There seascape and • Appropriate may be limited opportunity in smaller forested the coast. restoration proposals areas which can result in restoration to heathland in line with Landscape to help reduce fragmentation of this habitat. Management Guidelines referred to in Minerals Strategy. Designated Landscapes 0 0 • Maintain screening • No expected impacts on designated landscapes. woodland around edges of site.

• Impacts on air quality expected to be negligible. 8. To protect • No AQMAs will be affected by the working of this • Environmental and improve site proposal. Any dust resulting from working will protection measures air quality be controlled through normal dust-suppression to reduce dust and 0 0 and reduce measures. ensure noise is the impacts appropriately • Noise mitigation will be addressed at the planning of noise. mitigated. application stage, with appropriate mitigation to be included in the development of the site.

• Soil is poor quality in agricultural terms but 9. To maintain, • The site comprises primarily heathland, grassland valuable in terms of conserve and and woodland cover. The area is a former _ 0 potential for enhance soil heathland area and so would be expected to have heathland restoration. quality. relatively poor, acidic soils. • Soils to be stored/protected Page 405 of 583

Effects Sustainability Commentary Mitigation P/ Objectives R/A W • Site preparation/working would require stripping during preparation and storage of the soils, with some impacts on and working and them. properly reinstated during restoration. • If the site is worked and restored to heathland this will require reinstatement/retention of acidic soils.

• No specific action 10. To conserve required; site and • The site would make an important contribution to development to take safeguard + 0 aggregate supply in Bournemouth, Dorset and into consideration and mineral Poole. mitigate where resources. appropriate relevant impacts.

• This proposal does not at present promote the use 11. To promote of alternative materials. the use of 0 0 • • No action required. alternative It is possible that treated inert waste will be used in materials. restoration of the site, but this will not directly promote the use of alternative materials.

• 12. To provide Development of this site will provide a strong an adequate benefit in terms of contributing to the provision of • Ensure principles of and a supply of minerals to meet society’s needs. sustainable affordable • Ensuring a sustainable supply will depend on the development are supply of + + 0 development and management of the site. incorporated into the minerals to Providing site development takes into account development of this meet relevant principles of sustainable development it is site. society's expected this will contribute to complying with this needs. objective.

• This site proposal is expected to contribute to • Restoration to forestry 13. To promote economic development on two levels – directly could provide on- and through the provision of employment at the site to going economic encourage be developed and indirectly through the provision + 0 benefits; however, sustainable of aggregate minerals required for the maintenance restoration to open economic of built environment and for new built access heathland is growth development. Both levels are expected to maintain considered preferable employment, skilled and unskilled. in biodiversity terms

Page 406 of 583

Effects Sustainability Commentary Mitigation P/ Objectives R/A W • It is considered that this proposal will provide a and could provide strong benefit during site working. limited economic benefits. • Restoration to commercial forestry could provide direct and on-going economic benefits. However, • Some combination of the biodiversity benefits of restoration to heathland the two may be most + in this area have already been noted. appropriate. • If open access is available on the restored land, some limited benefits due to recreational attraction and use in the wider area (i.e. walking, bird watching) may be realised.

• Developing land as a quarry is expected to have some negative impacts regarding climate change, due primarily to machinery used and transportation of mineral away from site and loss of vegetation. _ 0 However, these will in relative terms be negligible. • The Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Minerals • Use energy efficient Strategy seeks to address and minimise such plant and machinery. 14. To adapt to impacts through Policy CC1 which requires • and mitigate operators to take into consideration climate change Implement restoration the impacts impacts and their possible mitigation for any which provides of climate proposed minerals development. appropriate habitats to help to increase change. • The development management policies, e.g. DM 1, resilience of also address and seek to minimise the issue of flora/fauna. sustainable development and climate change. 0 + • Restoration to some form of vegetated environment will offer benefits in the form of climate change mitigation, including provision of habitat for wildlife, but again these will be relatively small.

• This is a very large new site that proposes to output 0.5 million tonnes per annum. It has been estimated that this could generate 200 trips per day. No 15. To minimise access details have been provided but the only real the negative option is to access the C80 that abuts the northern impacts of site boundary. There are visibility issues with • Transport Assessment waste and providing an access on the C80 due to its vertical to be carried out, minerals and horizontal alignment but there does appear to identifying transport on _ 0 be a straight section of road where the required opportunities for the transport standards could be met. Any proposals would need reducing impacts on network, to provide full details of the proposed access. the transport network. mitigating any residual • It is expected that the site will act as a successor to impacts. the existing and past operations at Warmwell to the south although the traffic distribution is likely to be different. Traffic from the current site at Warmwell disperses to the north and south along the B3390, Page 407 of 583

Effects Sustainability Commentary Mitigation P/ Objectives R/A W and to the west and east along the West Stafford by-pass and the A352. The new site would be expected to follow a similar pattern with the exception of movements to the north and east beyond the immediate area. For these movements the likely route for the new site would be the C6 rather than the B3390. This is made more likely by the poor junction layout at Waddock Cross (B3390/C80) which has limited forward visibility. There is therefore potential for increased traffic on the C6 and through Bere Regis that should be addressed in detail within any Transport Assessment. • An alternative option may be to provide a haul route on the north side of the C80 to enable HGV traffic to enter the B3390 on the straight section of road north of Waddock Cross. There is therefore potential for this site to come forward although there are some issues with regards to the suitability of local junctions and routes to cater for the levels of HGV traffic predicted. • Even with this mitigation there are issues with this site access and significant negative impacts are expected. • Policies DM1 and DM 8 actively address this issue of minimising impacts on the transportation network.

16. To support and • encourage _ The proposed extension can only realistically be the use of accessed by means of road transport, resulting in a sustainable negative impact under this Objective during • Mitigate impacts transport development and working. 0 where identified and modes, • As far as reasonably possible negative impacts appropriate. imposing no resulting from access and transport will be unmitigated _ _ mitigated, as required by Policies DM1 and DM8 of negative the Minerals Strategy. impacts on them.

Page 408 of 583

Effects Sustainability Commentary Mitigation P/ Objectives R/A W

Impact on Sensitive Human Receptors • There are properties within 50m; others within 250m. • Provision of • However, it is considered that the site is large appropriate _ 0 enough that the properties around the edges can mitigation, following be appropriately protected and screened. assessment of likely impacts. • Development would involve mitigation (visual and noise attenuation bunding, standoffs) to limit impacts.

Impact on Existing Settlements 17. To sustain • Moreton lies across Frome valley, approximately the health 600m to south-west; Bovington Camp is and quality • Transport Assessment approximately 250 m to the south/east. of life of the to be carried, population • Site is large enough that working can be screened identifying possible _ 0 from surrounding settlements. impacts and opportunities for • Settlements along the B3390 will experience some reducing impacts on impacts from lorry traffic. However this site the transport network. proposal would not come on stream until Warmwell is finished, reducing cumulative impacts. • There may also be an impact on Bere Regis.

Impact on Airport Safety • 0 0 Site is approximately 30km from Hurn Airport and • No action required. is proposed to be restored to wetland. No impacts are expected.

Impact on Recreational Land • Restoration to open • Site comprises dedicated access land, as part of access land following Forestry Commission holdings. Site is very well working and 18. To enable used by the public for recreational purposes. improvement of safe access access where possible • This would change during working but after to and where _ _ + restoration the site could be open to public access countryside appropriate. and open again. Public will be excluded during working, • spaces. public access may be possible following restoration. Provision of areas for recreational use while • There is an issue in that users of this site might turn various parts of the to European and national designated sites for site are worked. recreational purposes, which this site is worked.

Page 409 of 583

Effects Sustainability Commentary Mitigation P/ Objectives R/A W

Impact on Public Rights of Way • Restoration and where • Statutory rights of way cross the site and will need appropriate _ _ + to be diverted during working. Restoration will improvement of need to re-establish and where appropriate statutory rights of way improve these statutory rights of way. following working.

Preliminary Hydrological Risk Assessment

Further Controlled Waters Issues/Risks Mitigation information/approval required

• The site lies between the Frome and the Piddle, and drains into the Frome. The River Basin Management Plan • Appropriate • Full hydrogeological risk South West River arrangements to be assessment Basin District made for ensuring • Flood Risk Assessment identifies both these that runoff from the rivers as being of site does not enter • Water Framework ‘poor’ environmental the Frome or Assessment quality. Potential for groundwater unless • Further assessment of contamination from any silt has first been potential impacts on water runoff from site. removed. • Watercourses quality and levels, • • • Ponds/lakes, Potential for Fuel stored on site to particularly for including wet contamination of be appropriately groundwater, is required habitats controlled waters bunded and sealed prior to development. through spillage or to prevent any • • Assessment of the Groundwater seepage of pollutants spillage from feasibility of relocating such as fuel, or silt in entering ground or ponds and associated water. surface waters. habitats and species. • Impacts on or • On-going • Land Drainage Consent to removal of surface monitoring during be obtained from Dorset water features. development and County Council if works Water flowing working of the site. may affect flow of an over/through the site • ordinary watercourse. flows into European designated wet heaths to the south and on into the Frome. This flow could be altered by

Page 410 of 583

working of the site. Detailed assessment needed.

Comments: working of this site has the potential to significantly alter the flow of water through and over this site. This could have significant impacts on the designated wet heaths/valley mires to the south. Full hydrogeological assessment will be required.

Cumulative Impacts This site proposal is a new site, although it is likely to replace Warmwell quarry and so not represent intensification. There is other mineral working, both existing and proposed, in the area. The proposal is within 5Km (by track/ road) of a site allocated in the Purbeck Local Plan Part 1 (adopted Nov 2012) for 20 Ha of employment development at Dorset Green Technology Park. (Policy ELS). Traffic arising from the new employment development will also add to general traffic levels on the B3390 and A352. In addition, traffic from the site accessing the A35 or A31 via Bere Regis would contribute to cumulative impacts in Bere Regis. Alternatively, traffic using the B3390 could contribute to cumulative effects if either of the Moreton Estate sites (AS25 and AS26) were operating simultaneously with Moreton Plantation.

Summary.

Potential Benefits Potential Impacts

• Site is a popular public recreation/access area and • Restoration to heathland would provide habitat for this will be lost or significantly reduced/affected protected species and improve linkages between during working, and altered afterwards. other heathland in the area. • Significant impacts on local landscape. • Provision of aggregates required for maintenance • and construction. Potential impacts on historic environment, if no reduction in land to be worked to protect • Restoration to heathland will benefit Scheduled monuments and their settings. Monuments and their settings and provide a link to • the historic landscape that would have previously Significant impacts on hydrology and hydrogeology. characterised the area around this site. • Significant impacts on nature conservation interests. • Possible improvement of public access, following • Noise/visual impacts on properties in the vicinity. working.

Overall Recommendation: This is a relatively large site which has strong nature conservation interest, local landscape value and historic environment importance. It provides open access and is well used. Water flows through the site to feed designated European wetlands and this could be affected by development of this site. Impacts during actual working are unknown and whether these can be fully offset is also unknown. Historic environment impacts may be mitigated by appropriate standoffs. The potential impacts on hydrology are unknown at this stage. The site would make an important contribution to the supply of aggregate in Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole. Restoration to heathland with public access should restore at least some amenity and nature conservation benefits

Page 411 of 583

Further information regarding this development has been requested. Until this is provided it is impossible to give a definitive view on this site. However, it is considered that the potential impacts and the level of uncertainty are such that this site should not be relied on as a future source of aggregate for Dorset.

The benefits of developing this site are not considered to outweigh the impacts of working here. At this time other sites are considered to be more appropriate options for supplying aggregate. It is recommended that this site should not be included in the emerging Mineral Sites Plan This site has been withdrawn by the nominee.

Page 412 of 583

Aggregates: AS11 Parley Court, West Parley No change – site is not proposed for inclusion in the Mineral Sites Plan

Site Name/Location: AS11 Parley Nominee/Agent: Raymond Brown Site Area: approximately 71 ha Court, West Parley Group Ltd Production : 150,000 tpa; Mineral Type: sand and gravel Local Authority: Christchurch Reserve : approximately 1.3 mt Borough Council

Impact Assessment Scoring

Strong Minor Minor - Strong Positive Negligible or Negative - Negative + Positive ++ 0 ? Uncertain - Impact No Effect Impact Impact Impact

Timescales for effects: P/W: Preparation and Working R/A : Restoration and Afteruse

Effects Sustainability Commentary Mitigation P/ Objectives R/A W

1. To move waste N/ N/ • This Objective is not relevant to this site management • N/A A A nomination up the waste hierarchy

European/International Designations • Some of the land on the south side of the river, including the riverside path, is intended to alleviate public access pressure on other areas of European • Assessment to designated land in Bournemouth. determine possible • Further assessment required to consider how this impacts and whether land and its use by the public could be affected by mitigation will be 2. To maintain, the proposed development and what appropriate possible, and what conserve and mitigation might be. mitigation will be _ 0 enhance needed. • Development of this site could have negative biodiversity impacts (including visual and noise) on the use of • This might include the Stour Valley Local Nature Reserve (LNR) on the advance planting that other side of the river. This forms an essential part would serve to screen of the Stour Masterplan Project and is a key the proposed Sustainable Alternative Natural Greenspace (SANG) development. for heathland mitigation purposes. It contributes to deflecting pressure away from nearby heathland Special Protection Areas (SPA) and there is a concern that gravel extraction so close to the LNR/

Page 413 of 583

Effects Sustainability Commentary Mitigation P/ Objectives R/A W SANG will discourage public use which could put additional pressure back on the heaths.

Annex 1 Bird Species 0 0 • No action required. • Not relevant to this site nomination.

National Designations 0 0 • No action required. • Not relevant to this site nomination.

Protected species • Ecological surveys • Otter has been recorded from within the proposed required, with area and an assessment will need to be made of the appropriate mitigation implications of the development for otter, although identified. the presence of this species is unlikely to be a • Restoration to include ? + serious constraint on development, and restoration appropriate habitats for proposals should be able to build in opportunities these species. for better habitat for this species. • Further investigation • Common protected reptiles may be present in the into likelihood of grant margins of the proposed area, but mitigation for of disturbance licences. such populations would be straightforward.

Local recognitions/designations, including ancient 0 0 woodland and veteran trees • No action required. • Not relevant to this site nomination.

3. To maintain, • Exposures resulting from working may be of • Operator to be asked to conserve and interest. Benefits are only expected during working, + 0 permit visits to view enhance and are likely to be obscured or covered as part of exposures as required. geodiversity. restoration.

Groundwater • Hydrological/hydrogeological 4. To maintain, assessment required to determine conserve and _ • Adjacent to River Stour and possible impacts, on ground and enhance the watercourses run through site. surface waters, with appropriate quality of Environment Agency has objected, mitigation to be implemented. ground, ? regarding significant concerns relating surface and to biodiversity and flood risk, as this • Where necessary mitigating measures sea waters site could have a direct impact on a should be installed to maintain and manage _ _ significant stretch of the River Stour groundwater levels. the relating to both flood risk and • Appropriate arrangements should be consumption biodiversity issues. put in place to ensure that the water

Page 414 of 583

Effects Sustainability Commentary Mitigation P/ Objectives R/A W of water in a • Site is not within any Source leaving the site and entering the Stour sustainable Protection Zone and overlies is of an acceptable quality. way. secondary aquifers. • Any fuel on site should be properly • Two licensed supplies within 500m. stored to avoid contamination in case of spillage. • Appropriate arrangements should be installed for surface water and silt Surface Water collection and fuel storage to prevent contamination of groundwater • Adjacent to River Stour and _ resources. watercourses run through site. Environment Agency has objected, • Land Drainage Consent to be regarding significant concerns relating obtained from Dorset County Council to biodiversity and flood risk, as this if works may affect flow of an ordinary ? site could have a direct impact on a watercourse. significant stretch of the River Stour • Any proposals would need to consider relating to both flood risk and compliance to the Water Framework biodiversity issues. Directive. • Adjacent to River Stour and _ _ • Also need consider compliance with watercourses run through site. the Moors River and Lower Stour Restoration Plan (and its floodplain), which is in development.

Flooding/Coastal Stability • 5. To reduce Flood Risk Assessment • flood risk and The majority of the site is within FRZ 2/3, but the (FRA) will be required. ? ? processing plant will be within FRZ 1. Site is improve flood • All necessary mitigation proposed for sand and gravel extraction, with management. to be implemented. extraction allowed within functional floodplain.

6. To maintain, Archaeology • Survey to assess possible conserve and • As previous archaeological work has demonstrated, presence and enhance the sites on the Stour valley gravels have archaeological significance of non- historic potential in general, particularly for prehistoric designated remains. environment material. There is also the potential for the • Adequate provision to (including ? 0 presence of earthworks and structures associated be made for archaeological with previous water management. preservation, excavation sites, historic • or recording, as buildings, Archaeological assessment and evaluation is appropriate. conservation required before an informed planning decision can areas, historic be made. When these have been undertaken • Maintain/protect parks and possible archaeological impacts will be understood. riverside landscape

Page 415 of 583

Effects Sustainability Commentary Mitigation P/ Objectives R/A W gardens and along southern edge of Historic Landscapes other locally site. distinctive • The site lies in the Stour valley, and archaeological • Strengthen screening of features and investigation of gravel sites within the valley has the site where needed their settings). shown that the rich resources of the valley were ? and appropriate. exploited throughout prehistory. Impact could be anywhere between B and D depending on working and restoration methods. • To the southern sector of the site, there are no 0 listed buildings which would be impacted by the proposed extraction. However, the river landscape along this stretch of the Stour is reminiscent of ‘Constable country’, with vistas through willows and other trees towards the meadows. The historic 0 pattern of drains and tree planting and boundaries is poorly understood but has created a visual result of quality. • Retention of the tree hedges would be necessary to protect the historic landscape in the long-term.

Historic Buildings • The cluster of buildings which comprises Parley Court is dominated by the Parley Court Farmhouse, a Grade II listed country house. Associated with • Plant to be appropriately this is the now converted barn, which has lost much located/screened to of its original character, and the adjacent thatched protect Parley Court cottage. Both are also Grade II listed. The land listed buildings. surrounding the manor house has been created as • a wedding garden area and adds to its character, Access to be kept away creating a wide open aspect. from the listed buildings. • • The proposed site abuts the northern edge of the Further assessment gardens surrounding Parley Court . Garden planting required to ensure to the south-west of the group of buildings adequate and _ + provides some screening from the northern lobe of appropriate screening is the site. If this part of the site was for extraction in place, prior to only, there would be minimal impact and the site working. would be assessed as having ‘no significant or • Strengthen screening of negligible impact’ but this could potentially move the site where needed to a higher rating ‘less significant impact’ and appropriate. depending on noise levels. • Restoration to improve • If the processing plant is to be located to the north setting of the listed of the site area, the height would create a buildings where detrimental impact (visual and audible) to the listed appropriate. buildings and their setting. • The Parley Court buildings are screened from the north-eastern lobe of the site by trees and garden planting. The proposed access directly from the Page 416 of 583

Effects Sustainability Commentary Mitigation P/ Objectives R/A W B3073 would be essential to protect the approach to the Parley Court buildings.

Landscape Capacity • Much of the site is screened by trees along the river • _ side although there are gaps which will allow views Full assessment of into the site from the opposite side of the river. landscape and visual impacts required. • Further assessment is required to consider the • 7. To maintain, extent of these impacts on surrounding land, Identified impacts to be conserve and including the adjacent housing areas to the south mitigated in most enhance the + and the Stour Valley Way, and options for appropriate manner. landscape, minimising these impacts to an acceptable level. • Restoration to seek to including • This may mean the provision of a wide buffer zone increase public townscape, _ _ along the river corridor. It is important to ensure access/informal seascape and that restoration maximises opportunities to recreation in the Stour the coast. increase informal recreation/public space in the Valley. Stour Valley and to create links to existing public rights of way.

Designated Landscapes 0 0 • No action required. • No impacts expected.

• Impacts on air quality expected to be negligible. 8. To protect • No AQMAs will be affected by the working of this • Environmental and improve site proposal. Any dust resulting from working will protection measures to air quality and be controlled through normal dust-suppression 0 0 reduce dust and ensure reduce the measures. noise is appropriately impacts of • Noise mitigation will be addressed at the planning mitigated. noise. application stage, with appropriate mitigation to be included in the development of the site.

• Soil to be properly • Majority of the land to be worked is identified as stripped and stored prior poor, although there is some very good land to the to working; protected north. Working the site will have impacts on this 9. To maintain, during working; and re- soil. conserve and spread on site after _ 0 enhance soil • The site is proposed for restoration to agriculture, working. quality. and existing soils will be protected and reused. • Restoration to include • Restoration will return the land to original ground agricultural land and to levels, and will restore the quality of the land. seek some public access as well.

Page 417 of 583

Effects Sustainability Commentary Mitigation P/ Objectives R/A W

• No specific action • The site would make an important contribution to required; site 10. To conserve aggregate supply in Bournemouth, Dorset and development to take and safeguard + 0 Poole. into consideration and mineral • mitigate where resources. However there are a number of issues to be addressed in the working/restoration of the site. appropriate relevant impacts.

• In order to achieve desired restoration levels it may be necessary to install an inert waste material • Developing an inert 11. To promote recycling facility. waste recycling facility the use of • + + 0 If this is done then this will provide a strong will promote the use of alternative positive benefit during working. It is expected that alternative materials on- materials. the recycling facility would finish when or soon site and elsewhere. after the quarry is completed and restored, giving a negligible impact during afteruse.

• Development of this site will provide a benefit in 12. To provide an terms of contributing to the provision of a supply of adequate and minerals to meet society’s needs. • Ensure principles of affordable • Ensuring a sustainable supply will depend on the sustainable development supply of + 0 development and management of the site. are incorporated into the minerals to Providing site development takes into account development of this site. meet society's relevant principles of sustainable development it is needs. expected this will contribute to complying with this objective.

• This site proposal is expected to contribute to economic development on two levels – directly through the provision of employment at the site to be developed and indirectly through the provision of aggregate minerals required for the maintenance 13. To promote of built environment and for new built • Further assessment and development. Both levels are expected to maintain required to form a view encourage + 0 employment, skilled and unskilled. However given as to what the most sustainable the expected size of the reserve this is likely to be a appropriate restoration economic limited benefit. could be. growth • Restoration to agriculture with some element of public access will, if achieved, offer some economic benefits through both the agriculture and the recreational attraction and use in the wider area (i.e. riding, walking).

Page 418 of 583

Effects Sustainability Commentary Mitigation P/ Objectives R/A W

• Developing land as a quarry is expected to have some negative impacts regarding climate change, due primarily to machinery used and transportation of mineral away from site. However, these will in _ relative terms be negligible. • • The Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Minerals Use energy efficient Strategy seeks to address and minimise such plant and machinery. impacts through Policy CC1 which requires • Ensure flood water is 14. To adapt to operators to take into consideration climate change able to flow onto the and mitigate impacts and their possible mitigation for any site. the impacts of 0 proposed minerals development. climate • Implement restoration • change. The development management policies, e.g. DM 1, which provides also address and seek to minimise the issue of appropriate habitats to sustainable development and climate change. help to increase + • The majority of the site floods during times of resilience of flora/fauna. sustained rainfall, giving the flood waters a place to run on to and slowing the speed of the water runoff. When excavated, these benefits will continue and will be increased, assisting in mitigating climate change impacts.

• 15. To minimise • This is a large new site and traffic estimations have Any proposal for this site the negative been given as 63 trips per day rising to 150 later in would need to be impacts of the life of the site. No details of intended points of accompanied by a waste and access have been provided however, there is only Transport Assessment minerals one existing option along Parley Green Lane which which will need to transport on _ 0 emerges onto the B3073 at two points. To the north provide access details the transport of the site Parley Green Lane emerges onto the and consider vehicle network, Parley Lane at a point directly opposite the routing. The TA should mitigating any entrance to Portfield School. There is an obvious be scoped with the residual conflict of movement here, especially given the Transport Development impacts. high traffic flow along Parley Lane. To the east of Management Team.

Page 419 of 583

Effects Sustainability Commentary Mitigation P/ Objectives R/A W the site Parley Green Lane emerges on Parley Lane • Transport Assessment to the south of Bournemouth Airport. will identify opportunities for • While there is no conflict with other junctions here, reducing impacts on the there are a large number of other users on this transport network. section of Parley Green Lane with the golf course, manor house and equestrian centre. The existing • Acceptable access onto junction here is a simple priority junction and has B3073, with relevant no right turn lane and has significant numbers of mitigation/improvement, accidents related to turning movements. to be identified. • Neither access option is suitable for the proposed use in its current form. Given the conflict of movements with the school at the northern access it may be that an improvement of the existing junction to the south of the Airport is a better option. Any Transport Assessment submitted along with this proposal must deal with these access issues and propose suitable junction improvements to cater for the proposed quarry traffic. • The B3073 Parley Lane is also subject to high levels of congestion at certain times of the day and there are significant other housing and business site _ _ allocations that will impact upon it. This site will impact upon the capacity and operation of Parley Lane and the Highway Authority will seek to secure contributions towards a package of schemes proposed to ease existing and expected congestion. • Any proposal will also need to look at vehicle routing, avoiding trips through residential areas of Ferndown to the west of the site where possible. There is currently no suitable access for the proposed extraction site which emerges directly onto a road which has significant congestion problems. The site has therefore been given a ‘significant adverse impact’ rating. Should a suitable access and mitigation towards improvements to Parley Lane be provided, there are good connections with the strategic network and potentially little impact on existing settlements. The site could therefore achieve a ‘less significant adverse impact’ rating. • Policies DM1 and DM 8 actively address this issue of minimising impacts on the transportation network.

Page 420 of 583

Effects Sustainability Commentary Mitigation P/ Objectives R/A W

16. To support and • encourage the _ The proposed extension can only realistically be use of accessed by means of road transport, resulting in a sustainable negative impact under this Objective during • Mitigate impacts where transport development and working. 0 identified and modes, • As far as reasonably possible negative impacts appropriate. imposing no resulting from access and transport will be unmitigated _ _ mitigated, as required by Policies DM1 and DM8 of negative the Minerals Strategy. impacts on them.

Impact on Sensitive Human Receptors • _ Commercial and residential properties adjacent and within 50m to the north – these are already screened and can be screened further. • Assessment and • Properties in Muscliffe and other areas within 100m provision of appropriate and beyond to the south. Part of site is overlooked mitigation, such as + by properties in Granby Road, Muscliffe. further tree planting, • Views through screening trees of the site from path where possible; no along river. bunding will be _ _ permitted in floodplain. • Restoration to improve landscape of site where possible; and to seek to increase public access. • Potential impacts on users of the Local Nature Reserve across the river from the site. 17. To sustain the health and • Transport Assessment to quality of life be carried out, of the identifying possible population _ impacts and Impact on Existing Settlements opportunities for • Muscliffe to the south is the closest settlement, reducing impacts on the adjacent and across the river. Mostly screened, or transport network. partly screened – although some properties • Visual impacts overlook the south-western part off the site. assessment will identify + • Parley Cross lies to north-west and East Parley to potential impacts and the north. No visual impacts are expected on these necessary mitigation. sites. • Bunding will not be _ _ • There will be some level of traffic impacts from site possible in the flood traffic. This is discussed further above. plain, and housing in Muscliffe is raised up above level of the site, making screening difficult to achieve.

Page 421 of 583

Effects Sustainability Commentary Mitigation P/ Objectives R/A W

Impact on Airport Safety • Airport to be consulted • Site is very close to airport. on all aspects of the site development and • ? 0 It will need to be developed, worked and restored restoration. in a way that will avoid any birdstrike or other • hazards and the airport will be consulted on air All necessary mitigation safety issues. to be implemented.

Impact on Recreational Land • Site is private land, used for agriculture, horse grazing and other recreational use such as • No action required for shooting. There is no public access onto the land. working. • Development for minerals will impact on these _ + • Restoration to include uses, although this will only be temporary. These some aspect of public uses can be restored after mineral working. 18. To enable safe access. access to • No formal/informal recreation on the site. countryside Potential impacts on users of the Local Nature and open Reserve across the river from the site. spaces. Impact on Public Rights of Way • Assessment of impacts, • No rights of way across site, rights of way adjacent with appropriate to site boundary at two points. May require _ + mitigation identified. screening. • Restoration to improve • Potential impacts on users of the Local Nature public access in the area. Reserve across the river from the site.

Page 422 of 583

Preliminary Hydrological Risk Assessment

Further Controlled Waters Issues/Risks Mitigation information/approval required

• The River Basin Management Plan South West River Basin District identifies the Stour as • being of ‘poor’ Appropriate arrangements to be environmental quality. • Full hydrogeological risk made for ensuring Potential for assessment contamination from that runoff from the • runoff from site. site does not enter Flood Risk Assessment the Stour or • • Water Framework Potential for groundwater unless Assessment contamination of any silt has first • Watercourses controlled waters been removed. • Further assessment of • Ponds/lakes, through spillage or potential impacts on water • Fuel stored on site including wet seepage of pollutants quality and levels, to be appropriately habitats such as fuel, or silt in particularly for bunded and sealed water. groundwater, is required • Groundwater to prevent any • prior to development. Contamination of spillage from water supplies or entering ground or • Land Drainage Consent to reduction in amount surface waters. be obtained from Dorset of water available for County Council if works • On-going licenses supplies. may affect flow of an monitoring during • ordinary watercourse. Site is adjacent to the development and Stour. Assessment is working of the site. required to demonstrate no hydrogeological connectivity with the Stour.

Cumulative Impacts Proposed site is a new site and depending on the timing of its development could represent an intensification. There is an existing quarry in close proximity along with aggregate deposits in the area and further proposals for future working. There are existing waste management facilities in the area and the potential for future development at the Airport. If the site comes into operation in parallel with the existing extraction here, and thus increases the overall impact on Parley Lane, the Highway Authority will seek to secure contributions towards a package of schemes proposed to ease existing and expected congestion.

Page 423 of 583

The proposal lies within 5Km of a site allocated for development in the Christchurch and East Dorset Consolidated Plan 15 May 2013, Policy BA2 Bournemouth Airport – Northern Business Parks – 60 Ha employment land. Traffic from this development will add to traffic levels on the B3073.

Summary.

Potential Benefits Potential Impacts

• Noise/visual impacts on properties in the vicinity, particularly properties to the south in Muscliffe. • Potential impacts on users of the Local Nature • Provision of aggregates required for maintenance Reserve across the river from the site, with resultant and construction. reduction in effectiveness of the Sustainable • If public access can be improved this would provide Alternative Natural Greenspace public benefits. • Increased traffic/new junction on B3073, possible • There is potential for this land to offset pressures on cumulative impacts with other sites in vicinity. Natura 2000 land elsewhere. • Potential impacts on Stour – hydrology, hydrogeology and biodiversity. • Potential impacts on airport.

Overall Recommendation: This site, if developed, would be a new site. It offers the benefits of contributing to the aggregate supply for Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole and its restoration may offer benefits of increased public access in the Stour valley. However its development may lead to hydrological and ecological impacts on the Stour; further assessment is required. The fact that there will be a significant buffer along the river edge minimises potential impacts. There will be time-limited local visual impacts, particularly on some of the housing in Muscliff to the south and also from users of the path running along the south side of the Stour. These are difficult/impossible to mitigate as the land on the south side of the river is raised above the level of the site and no bunding will be allowed in the floodplain. Cumulative impacts, particularly related to traffic levels, will need to be addressed if the site is working at the same time as the Hurn Court Farm site to the east.

This site has been withdrawn by the agent.

15 The Consolidated Plan is an amalgamation of the Christchurch and East Dorset Core Strategy Pre submission draft April 2012 and the Christchurch and East Dorset Schedule of Proposed Changes November 2012.

Page 424 of 583

Page 425 of 583

Aggregates: AS14 Sturminster Marshall No change – site is not proposed for inclusion in the Mineral Sites Plan

Site Name/Location: AS14 Sturminster Marshall Nominee/Agent: None Mineral Type: Sand and gravel Local Authority: East Dorset District Council

Site Area: approximately 70 ha Production: 200,000 tpa; Reserve: approximately 3 mt

Impact Assessment Scoring

Strong Minor Minor - Strong Positive Negligible or Negative - Negative + Positive ++ 0 ? Uncertain - Impact No Effect Impact Impact Impact

N.B.: For information, this Sustainability Appraisal covers the entire area shown in the map. Smaller areas have also been nominated for consideration, but have not been separately assessed.

Timescales for effects: P/W: Preparation and Working R/A : Restoration and Afteruse

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

1. To move waste • This Objective is not relevant to this site management N/A N/A • N/A nomination up the waste hierarchy

Page 426 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

European/International Designations • If site is developed • Extraction from this site could facilitate ensure that restoration 0 + + restoration to open ground including public includes land for open space for informal recreation to mitigate public against effects of human pressures on the access/recreation. heaths.

Annex 1 Bird Species 0 0 • No action required. • No impacts expected .

National Designations 0 0 • No action required. • No impacts expected .

Protected species 2. To maintain, • Ecological surveys • It is possible that there are common protected conserve and required, with reptile populations around the existing field enhance appropriate mitigation margins and along the old railway line, and biodiversity _ 0 identified. possibly also Dormouse in hedgerows and the • SNCI. Restoration to include appropriate habitats • If any of these populations would be affected, for these species. mitigation would likely be straightforward.

Local recognitions/designations, including • ancient woodland and veteran trees All necessary surveys and assessment to be • Henbury Farm Wood SNCI falls within AS14; this carried out with woodland is included within the ancient negative impacts woodland inventory and its conservation within mitigated as _ + any development would be a high priority. appropriate. • There are likely to be other features of ecological • Restoration to include interest, including veteran trees and species-rich creation/re-creation of hedgerows, within the larger area proposed for habitat, where extraction which would require investigation and appropriate. impact assessment.

3. To maintain, • Exposures resulting from working may be of • Operator to be asked conserve and interest. Benefits are only expected during + 0 to permit visits to view enhance working, and are likely to be obscured or covered exposures as required. geodiversity. as part of restoration.

Page 427 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

Groundwater • Further assessment on possible • Approximately 50% of site is within impacts on water supplies and Source Protection Zone 1. appropriate mitigation if potential Environment Agency has objected to impacts identified. the site regarding possible • 0 groundwater impacts – they also have Where necessary mitigating concerns in relation to water measures should be installed to resources and flood risk issues. maintain groundwater levels and/or monitor private water • Any proposals would need to comply supplies. with the Water Framework Directive. • Alternative arrangements should • Environment Agency notes that as the be in place in case of a reduction site is within SPZ1 they will normally in supply. object in principle to any planning application for a development that • Hydrological assessment required may physically disturb an aquifer. to determine possible impacts, on 4. To maintain, ground and surface waters, with • The site is situated on alluvial deposits conserve and appropriate mitigation to be of sands, gravels and clays, overlying enhance the implemented. 0 chalk bedrock. The alluvial deposits quality of are classified as a Secondary Aquifer • Detailed pollution prevention ground, whilst the chalk is classified as a management plan detailing best surface and Principal Aquifer. Half of the site is practices to minimise pollution sea waters located within Source Protection Zone incidents, as well as measures that and manage 1 (SPZ1) for the Corfe Mullen Public will be taken should a pollution the Water Supply (PWS) source. Given the event occur. consumption _ _ sensitivity of this site it is imperative of water in a • Appropriate arrangements should that any proposed development is sustainable be put in place to ensure that the subject to suitable risk assessment. way. water leaving the site and entering • Any development would therefore the rivers/watercourses is of an need to demonstrate hydrogeological acceptable quality. separation from the public supply. • Any fuel on site should be • This proposal potentially constitutes a properly stored to avoid very significant adverse impact , but contamination in case of spillage. this could be improved if it can be • Appropriate arrangements should demonstrated that the site is be installed for surface water and hydraulically separate from the aquifer silt collection and fuel storage to supplying the boreholes. prevent contamination of groundwater resources. Surface Water • Land Drainage Consent to be • Ponds on/near site. obtained from Dorset County _ 0 • Need to consider compliance to the Council if works may affect flow of Moors River and Lower Stour an ordinary watercourse. Restoration Plan (and its floodplain).

Page 428 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

Flooding/Coastal Stability • Flood Risk Assessment 5. To reduce • Part of original site and all of extension within (FRA) will be required. flood risk and 0 0 FRZs 2&3. Significant area within which to site • improve flood All necessary plant, in FRZ 1. management. mitigation to be • Site is prone to flooding. implemented.

Archaeology • Various archaeological finds have been recorded on and around the site, indicating a high potential for below-ground archaeological remains. There

is also potential for earthworks and structures associated with watermeadow systems and for industrial archaeological remains relating to the

former railway line that crossed the site. • Full archaeological • The presence of below-ground archaeological survey of the area remains and the other features mentioned above ? + required to assess needs to be assessed and evaluated before an possible presence and informed planning decision could be made. Only significance of non- 6. To maintain, when these have been undertaken would the designated remains conserve and archaeological impact be understood – at present and to assess enhance the it could be anywhere from Very Significant to No whether/how these historic Significant impact environment should be protected • (including Archaeological assessment and evaluation will be during working. required. When these have been undertaken archaeological • All necessary archaeological impacts, if any, will be better sites, historic mitigation to be understood. buildings, implemented. conservation • areas, historic Historic Landscapes Adequate provision to be made for parks and • The site lies in the valley of the river Stour, which preservation, gardens and is relatively broad and flat-bottomed in this area. excavation or other locally Such a location was formerly favoured for recording, as distinctive _ + watermeadow systems. features and appropriate. • Archaeological assessment, as described above, is their settings). • Further consideration required to properly understand potential impacts to be given to on such remains and to determine what restoration proposals, mitigation may be required. in terms of historic landscapes. Historic Buildings • Development not to • Henbury Hall is well screened from the proposed impact on White Mill site. The position of the treatment plant is close to Bridge and other the landscape associated with the Hall but would 0 0 buildings. be well screened by a large clump of trees in front of the Hall. The Hall does not have a recognised park or garden of historic value but does have an immediate landscape similar to planned parkland landscapes of the late 18th century and an offset

Page 429 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A approach avenue of reasonably mature trees. The setting of this building is not adversely impacted by the proposals. • The Sturminster Marshall conservation area and all the listed buildings in Sturminster Marshall are well screened from the proposed site and therefore their setting is not adversely affected by the proposals.

AS14 (a) Sturminster Marshall northern extension: • The original proposal was to extract aggregate to a point close to and fully visible from White Mill Bridge. This has been revised and proposed extraction pulled away to a point where it is not visible from the bridge, removing this impact. • The proposals for the restoration of the original site have a very artificial quality and would benefit from either professional landscape advice and or the input of a creative artist specialising in land- forming artwork.

• Landscape and visual Landscape Capacity impact assessment to • Retention and management of existing landscape identify impacts; features is important. It is considered that this adequate mitigation area has important potential as future accessible of such impacts before _ + open land associated with the Stour Valley Green and during working. Infrastructure initiative. • If mitigation is not 7. To maintain, • If site is developed, restoration can contribute to possible, a view will conserve and this end. have to be taken as to enhance the whether a time-limited landscape, impact would be including acceptable. townscape, • seascape and Appropriate the coast. restoration proposals in line with Landscape Designated Landscapes Management 0 0 • No significant impact/negligible. Guidelines referred to in Minerals Strategy. • Maintain screening woodland around edges of site.

• 8. To protect • Impacts on air quality expected to be negligible. Environmental and improve protection measures 0 0 • air quality and No AQMAs will be affected by the working of this to reduce dust and reduce the site proposal. Any dust resulting from working ensure noise is Page 430 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A impacts of will be controlled through normal dust- appropriately noise. suppression measures. mitigated. • Noise mitigation will be addressed at the planning application stage, with appropriate mitigation to be included in the development of the site.

• Soil quality ranges from poor to very good. Working the site will have impacts on this soil. • Soil to be properly • Proposed restoration is to wetland/lakes. Any soil stripped and stored 9. To maintain, removed will be protected during working and prior to working; conserve and _ 0 either re-used on site or taken elsewhere to be protected during enhance soil used. working; and re- quality. spread on site after • Soils will be protected during working and working. restoration could bring agricultural land back into production.

• No specific action required; site 10. To conserve • The site would make an important contribution to development to take and safeguard + 0 aggregate supply in Bournemouth, Dorset and into consideration mineral Poole. relevant impacts and resources. mitigate where appropriate.

• This proposal does not at present promote the 11. To promote use of alternative materials and given the the use of 0 0 sensitivities associated with the nearby borehole • No action required. alternative extraction, waste is unlikely to be used in materials. restoration.

• Development of this site would provide a benefit 12. To provide an in terms of contributing to the provision of a • Ensure principles of adequate and supply of minerals to meet society’s needs. sustainable affordable • Ensuring a sustainable supply will depend on the development are supply of + 0 development and management of the site. incorporated into the minerals to Providing site development takes into account development of this meet society's relevant principles of sustainable development it site. needs. is expected this will contribute to complying with this objective.

Page 431 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

• This site proposal is expected to contribute to economic development on two levels – directly through the provision of employment at the site to be developed and indirectly through the provision of aggregate minerals required for the 13. To promote maintenance of built environment and for new • Further assessment and built development. Both levels are expected to required to form a encourage + 0 maintain employment, skilled and unskilled. view as to what the sustainable However given the expected size of the reserve most appropriate economic this is likely to be a limited benefit. restoration could be. growth • Restoration to agriculture with some element of public access will, if achieved, offer some economic benefits through both the agriculture and the recreational attraction and use in the wider area (i.e. riding, walking).

• Developing land as a quarry is expected to have some negative impacts regarding climate change, due primarily to machinery used and transportation of mineral away from site. However, these will in relative terms be negligible. • The Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Minerals • Use energy efficient Strategy seeks to address and minimise such plant and machinery. 14. To adapt to impacts through Policy CC1 which requires • and mitigate operators to take into consideration climate Implement restoration the impacts of _ 0 change impacts and their possible mitigation for which provides climate any proposed minerals development. appropriate habitats to help to increase change. • The development management policies, e.g. DM resilience of 1, also address and seek to minimise the issue of flora/fauna. sustainable development and climate change. • Restoration to some form of vegetated environment will offer benefits in the form of climate change mitigation, including provision of habitat for wildlife, but again these will be relatively small.

15. To minimise • This is a large site on the north side of the A31T • the negative with an estimated annual output of 200,000 Any proposal for this impacts of tonnes. While no estimation of HGV trip rates has site would need to be waste and been given it could be in the region of 80 per day. accompanied by a minerals No details have been given regarding the point of Transport Assessment transport on _ _ 0 access to the site although it does have a long which will need to the transport frontage with the A31T. provide access details network, and consider vehicle • The Highways Agency have previously raised mitigating any routing. The TA should significant concerns over this proposal both in residual be scoped with the safety terms and with regards to impact on the impacts. Transport A31/A350 roundabout. Any access along this Page 432 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A section of the A31T is unlikely to be acceptable Development for safety reasons due to the alignment of the Management Team. road and traffic volumes. The Highways Agency • Transport Assessment will need to be consulted regarding any proposals to be carried out, at this site. identifying • The only other adjacent carriageway is Moor Lane opportunities for which travels northbound to Sturminster Marshall. reducing impacts on Moor Lane itself is very narrow, has few passing the transport network. places and serves some dwellings close to its • Even with all the junction with the High Street. The High Street required assessment it itself is narrow and has significant numbers of is not clear how the parked cars. The main entrance to the local first objections could be school is also just south of the junction of Moor overcome. Lane and the High Street. Vehicles would then also have to pass along Station Road, a residential street with many parked cars and a well-used local shop. This route is therefore not considered to be suitable for the large numbers of heavy vehicles and any proposal along those lines would be strongly objected to by the Highway Authority. • The only other option would be to create a haul route to the A350 north of the A31 roundabout. There is however, no indication that this is achievable and the Highways Agency may still have issues at the A31 roundabout to the south. • For the above reasons the site has been given a ‘Very Significant Adverse Impact’. • Policies DM1 and DM 8 of the Minerals Strategy actively address this issue of minimising impacts on the transportation network, but it is not clear how they could overcome these issues raised.

16. To support and • encourage the The proposed extension can only realistically be use of accessed by means of road transport, resulting in sustainable a negative impact under this Objective during • Mitigate impacts transport development and working. _ 0 where identified and modes, • As far as reasonably possible negative impacts appropriate. imposing no resulting from access and transport will be unmitigated mitigated, as required by Policies DM1 and DM8 negative of the Minerals Strategy. impacts on them.

Page 433 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

Impact on Sensitive Human Receptors • A number of residences/businesses in close • Provision of proximity to proposed development; village of appropriate Sturminster Marshall within 500m, industrial mitigation, following _ 0 estate even closer. assessment of likely impacts. • Development would likely require appropriate mitigation (such as visual and noise attenuation • Restoration to bunding, standoffs) to limit impacts. improve landscape of site where possible; Impact on Existing Settlements and to seek to increase public access. 17. To sustain the • Village of Sturminster Marshall within 500m, health and industrial estate even closer. Mitigation will be • Screening, bunding, quality of life _ 0 required – visual/noise attenuation bunds. standoffs will mitigate of the impacts to some • Development would likely require appropriate population extent. mitigation (such as visual and noise attenuation bunding, standoffs) to limit impacts.

• Airport to be Impact on Airport Safety consulted on all aspects of the site • Site is approximately 13km from airport and development and 0 0 proposed for wetland restoration. restoration. • It will be developed, worked and restored in a way • All necessary that will avoid any birdstrike or other hazards. mitigation to be implemented.

• No action required for working. Impact on Recreational Land • Restoration to include 0 + • No formal/informal recreation within the site; public access, fishing lakes and golf course adjacent to site. preferably improved levels of public access. 18. To enable safe access to Impact on Public Rights of Way countryside _ • The Wareham Forest Way, a way-marked long and open distance path, crosses the site. spaces. • Assessment of • Removing this link permanently would be a impacts, with + significant impact. Removing it temporarily would appropriate mitigation also constitute an impact, albeit time-limited. identified. _ _ • Proposed restoration includes maintaining this link as well as adding further public access across restored land, a positive benefit.

Page 434 of 583

Preliminary Hydrological Risk Assessment

Further Controlled Waters Issues/Risks Mitigation information/approval required

• The River Basin Management Plan South West River Basin District • identifies the Stour as Full hydrogeological risk being of ‘Moderate’ assessment, including risk • Appropriate environmental quality assessment on potential arrangements to be in this area. Potential impacts on borehole. made for ensuring for contamination • that runoff from the Flood Risk Assessment from runoff from site. site does not enter • Water Framework • Potential for the Stour or Assessment contamination or groundwater unless • some other impact any silt has first been Further assessment of • Watercourses on nearby borehole removed. potential impacts on water • Ponds/lakes, extraction point. quality and levels, • Fuel stored on site to including wet particularly for • Potential for be appropriately habitats groundwater, is required contamination of bunded and sealed prior to development. • Groundwater controlled waters to prevent any • through spillage or spillage from Assessment of the seepage of pollutants entering ground or feasibility of relocating such as fuel, or silt in surface waters. ponds and associated water. habitats and species. • On-going • • Contamination of monitoring during Land Drainage Consent to water supplies or development and be obtained from Dorset reduction in amount working of the site. County Council if works of water available for may affect flow of an licenses supplies. ordinary watercourse. • Impacts on or removal of surface water features.

Cumulative Impacts • Site is a new proposal in an area where there is other mineral working. • The proposal lies within 5Km of a site allocated for development in the Christchurch and East Dorset Consolidated Plan 16 May 2013, Policy CM1 Lockyer’s School, Corfe Mullen – 250 dwellings. Traffic from this development will add to traffic levels on the A31.

16 The Consolidated Plan is an amalgamation of the Christchurch and East Dorset Core Strategy Pre submission draft April 2012 and the Christchurch and East Dorset Schedule of Proposed Changes November 2012.

Page 435 of 583

Summary.

Potential Benefits Potential Impacts

• Potential impacts on biodiversity. To be assessed but should be capable of mitigation. • Unacceptable hydrological/hydrogeological impacts, on River Stour and the Corfe Mullen Public Water Supply. • Significant transport impacts relating to gaining satisfactory access to site, and from site to A31. Full • Provision of aggregates required for Transport Assessment required. maintenance and construction of the built • environment. Possible impacts on archaeology – to be fully assessed and not expected to restrict development. All necessary • Restoration could include some increased public mitigation to be implemented. access. • Possible impacts on airport to be considered and site to • Restoration could include benefits for nature be developed and restored in a way that does not have conservation, including reducing visitor impacts any impact on airport. on designated heathlands. • Site is large enough that visual impacts on surrounding properties are expected to be capable of mitigation. • Potential impacts on amenity, including residences and the village of Sturminster Marshall. • Impacts on access – the Wareham Forest Way crosses the site.

Overall Recommendation: Having considered the likely positive and negative impacts as indicated by the sustainability appraisal, it is considered that there are currently two key impacts that may not be capable of mitigation, or mitigation includes unacceptable risks. These are: i. The issue of gaining satisfactory access to the site for lorries. ii. The issue of potential risk/threat to the Corfe Mullen Public Water Supply source would require the development to demonstrate hydrogeological separation from the public supply. A detailed hydrogeological study with risk assessment would be required. Although it may be possible to demonstrate hydrogeological separation, the risk of an event causing contamination of the public water supply still exists and is considered at this time to be unacceptable. On the basis of the evidence available the nominated site appears to be subject to significant constraints not currently capable of satisfactory mitigation and cannot be included in the Draft Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Mineral Sites Plan at the present time unless exceptional circumstances (not currently present) arise.

The benefits of developing this site are not considered to outweigh the impacts of working here. It is recommended that this site should not be included in the emerging Mineral Sites Plan

Page 436 of 583

Aggregates: AS20 Came Home Farm No change – site is not proposed for inclusion in the Mineral Sites Plan

Nominee/Agent: Came Estate / Land and Mineral Site Name/Location: AS20 Came Home Farm Management Mineral Type: Sand and gravel Local Authority: West Dorset District Council

Site Area: approximately 10 ha Production: 50,000 tpa; Reserve: approximately 400,000 tonnes

Impact Assessment Scoring

Strong Minor Minor - Strong Positive Negligible or Negative - Negative + Positive ++ 0 ? Uncertain - Impact No Effect Impact Impact Impact

Timescales for effects: P/W: Preparation and Working R/A : Restoration and Afteruse

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

1. To move waste • This Objective is not relevant to this site management N/A N/A • N/A nomination up the waste hierarchy

European/International Designations 0 0 • No action required. • No likely effects identified.

Annex 1 Bird Species 0 0 • No action required. • No likely effects identified.

2. To maintain, National Designations 0 0 • No action required. conserve and • No likely effects identified. enhance biodiversity Protected species • South Winterbourne known to support • Ecological surveys significant population of Water Vole. Assessment required, with ? 0 of effects of extraction on this species will be appropriate necessary. Otter likely to use river valley as well. mitigation identified. • Mitigation for presence of these species is very likely to be achievable.

Page 437 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

Local recognitions/designations, including ancient woodland and veteran trees • Winterbournes are rare chalk streams which are groundwater fed and only flow at certain times of year as groundwater levels in the aquifer fluctuate. They support a range of specialist wildlife adapted to this unusual flow regime, including a number of rare or scarce invertebrates, otter and water vole. • Invertebrate sampling carried out confirmed the site has supported Paraleptophlebia werneri , a rare mayfly which is a Red Data Book 3 species. • All necessary surveys Simulinum latipes , a regionally notable blackfly and assessment to be species, was also recorded. This stretch of carried out with winterbourne had a high conservation value. negative impacts to be • The South Winterbourne is a priority habitat identified and ? 0 (Rivers/chalkstreams) under the European mitigated as Habitats Directive and UK Biodiversity Action appropriate. Plan. • Restoration to include • The South Winterbourne within the proposed creation/re-creation of area has been subject to significant biodiversity habitat, where enhancement works. Extraction could adversely appropriate. affect the public and private investment in biodiversity gain. • Any loss to this gain would need to be fully compensated elsewhere along the South Winterbourne. • Adjacent SNCI recognised for lichen interest on parkland trees. Assessment of peripheral trees around proposed area for lichen and bryophyte interest would be required. • Consider establishment of parkland type landscape within restoration plans.

3. To maintain, • Exposures resulting from working may be of • Operator to be asked conserve and interest. Benefits are only expected during to permit visits to + 0 enhance working, and are likely to be obscured or view exposures as geodiversity. covered as part of restoration. required.

Page 438 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

• Further assessment on possible impacts on water supplies and appropriate mitigation if potential impacts identified. • _ Where necessary mitigating measures should be installed to maintain groundwater levels. Groundwater • Hydrological assessment • Potential to impact on South required to determine Winterbourne Stream. Site is in a possible impacts, on ground ? groundwater Source Protection Zone 2. and surface waters, with Site overlies a Principal (Bedrock) Aquifer. appropriate mitigation to be 4. To maintain, • implemented. conserve and Hydrological Risk Assessment would be enhance the required. • Detailed pollution prevention quality of management plan detailing ground, best practices to minimise surface and _ _ pollution incidents, as well as sea waters measures that will be taken and manage should a pollution event the occur. consumption • Appropriate arrangements of water in a should be put in place to sustainable ensure that the water leaving way. the site and entering the Surface Water winterbourne is of an • Winterbourne running through and acceptable quality. adjacent to site, other drains on site. _ • Appropriate arrangements • Environment Agency has concerns over should be installed for the proximity of the South Winterbourne surface water and silt to the proposed works. collection and fuel storage to ? prevent contamination of • Particular concern over this section as it is groundwater resources. a losing reach and works may exacerbate this leading to increased disconnection • Land Drainage Consent to be obtained from Dorset County _ _ from the River Frome. Council if works may affect • Secondary concerns over increased flow of an ordinary sedimentation. watercourse.

• Flooding/Coastal Stability Flood Risk 5. To reduce Assessment (FRA) will • A significant proportion of the site falls within flood risk and be required. 0 0 Flood Zone 2 and 3. improve flood • All necessary • management. Site is proposed for sand and gravel extraction, mitigation to be which is permitted in the functional floodplain. implemented.

Page 439 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A • Processing plant far removed and on FRZ 1.

Archaeology • Aerial photographic evidence in the Dorset Historic Environment Record showed, at one time, a complex of earthworks of a watermeadow system on the site. • However, although the ground surface in the area of the site is somewhat uneven, there are no • Full archaeological clear traces of watermeadow earthworks. This is survey of the area probably the result of ploughing at some time, required to assess ? 0 which has largely or wholly obliterated the possible presence features recorded in the Dorset Historic and significance of Environment Record in this area. non-designated • Archaeological assessment and evaluation will be remains and to assess 6. To maintain, required to indicate potential impacts on this whether/how these conserve and system and on any other below-ground should be protected enhance the archaeological remains. during working. historic • When these have been undertaken • All necessary environment archaeological impacts, if any, will be better mitigation to be (including understood. implemented. archaeological • Adequate provision sites, historic Historic Landscapes buildings, to be made for • conservation The site lies in the bottom of the valley of the preservation, areas, historic south Winterbourne, a tributary of the river excavation or parks and Frome, which it joins nearby at West Stafford. recording, as gardens and This section of the south Winterbourne, like appropriate. much of the Frome in this vicinity, contains an other locally • Further consideration extensive series of watermeadow earthworks. distinctive to be given to These probably date from the 18th and 19th features and restoration proposals, centuries, and were a method of fertilising the their settings). ? 0 in terms of historic land and enabling an earlier growth of grass that landscapes. allowed stock to graze much earlier in the year. • Assessment and evaluation will be required and when these have been undertaken impacts on the historic landscape, if any, will be better understood. • The impact will vary depending on the quality and extent of survival of these earthworks.

Historic Buildings • Any assessment • With respect to Came Home Farm AS20 the _ 0 required to be carried minerals extraction itself is not significant but the out, with appropriate proposal to potentially route lorries through the mitigation gateway adjacent to the Grade II listed Lodge

Page 440 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A Gate to Came Park is much more significant implemented as having an effect on the setting of a group of required. listed buildings including the Grade I Came • Routing for lorries House, Grade I Parish Church of St Peter, Grade II leaving the site and Barnes Monument in Came Churchyard, Grade II wanting to turn right Old Came Rectory and the Grade II stables not to include the building. option of crossing • Came House, the church and the stables the road and turning together with the Barnes monument all sit within left past the Lodge. Came Park whose entrance is through the traditional gate and Lodge Gatehouse. The Park also includes a deserted village which is a scheduled monument. The quiet countrified access through the Lodge Gate has historical value as part of the setting of these monuments but also for its association with the Dorset dialect poet William Barnes. He was rector of Came Church, lived in Came Rectory and famously walked along the road into the Park to deliver Services every Sunday. • The impact on this countrified, semi-idyllic assembled group of related structures would be significant and adverse losing a quality of relationship that has been there for a very long time. • There would be a Significant Adverse Impact if lorries are routed out of Came Farm, through the Park and out past the Lodge . If a way of dealing with the traffic that does not involve spoiling the setting of this Lodge and thus of the related structures can be identified then the impact would be significantly reduced.

Landscape Capacity • • Open rural countryside where development Landscape and visual would have a significant adverse impact on the impact assessment to identify impacts and 7. To maintain, estate landscape and visual character as well as to assess whether conserve and _ _ ? on the amenity of road, footpath/bridleway these impacts are enhance the users. capable of appropriate landscape, • Restoration to primarily open water would be a and satisfactory including new feature to the local landscape which does mitigation, before and townscape, not have any ponds/lakes. during working. seascape and the coast. • If mitigation is not Designated Landscapes possible, a view will _ ? • Adjacent to the Dorset AONB boundary so will have to be taken as to impact on its setting. whether a time-limited

Page 441 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A • Further assessment required to assess extent of impact would be impact and options for mitigation. acceptable. • If the site is developed, appropriate _ _ restoration proposals in line with Landscape Management Guidelines referred to in Minerals Strategy will be required.

• Impacts on air quality expected to be negligible. • No AQMAs will be affected by the working of this 8. To protect • Environmental site proposal. Any dust resulting from working and improve protection measures will be controlled through normal dust- air quality and to reduce dust and 0 0 suppression measures. reduce the ensure noise is impacts of • Noise mitigation will be addressed at the appropriately noise. planning application stage, with appropriate mitigated. mitigation to be included in the development of the site.

• Agricultural soils are good to moderate and • Soil to be properly working the site will have impacts on this soil. stripped and stored 9. To maintain, Soils will be protected during working. prior to working; conserve and protected during _ 0 • Proposed restoration is primarily to open water enhance soil working; and re- as a fishing/nature conservation lake. quality. spread on site or • Soils to be protected and either re-used on site elsewhere after or used elsewhere. working.

11. To promote the use of • This proposal does not promote the use of _ 0 • No action required. alternative alternative materials. materials.

• 12. To provide an Development of this site would provide a benefit • Ensure principles of adequate and in terms of contributing to the provision of a sustainable affordable + 0 supply of minerals to meet society’s needs. development are supply of • Ensuring a sustainable supply will depend on the incorporated into the minerals to development and management of the site. Page 442 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A meet society's Providing site development takes into account development of this needs. relevant principles of sustainable development it site. is expected this will contribute to complying with this objective.

• This site proposal is expected to contribute to economic development on two levels – directly through the provision of employment at the site to be developed and indirectly through the provision of aggregate minerals required for the 13. To promote • Further assessment maintenance of built environment and for new and required regarding built development. encourage the suitability of a + 0 sustainable • Both levels are expected to maintain fishing lake/water economic employment, skilled and unskilled. However body restoration in growth given the expected size of the reserve this is this location. likely to be a limited benefit. • Restoration to a recreational use (fishing lake) will, if achieved, offer on-going economic benefits through the recreational attraction.

• Developing the site as a quarry is expected to have some negative impacts regarding climate change, due primarily to machinery used and transportation of mineral away from site. However, these will in relative terms be negligible. • The Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Minerals • Use energy efficient Strategy seeks to address and minimise such plant and machinery. 14. To adapt to impacts through Policy CC1 which requires • Implement and mitigate operators to take into consideration climate restoration which the impacts of _ 0 change impacts and their possible mitigation for provides appropriate climate any proposed minerals development. change. habitats to help to • The development management policies, e.g. DM increase resilience of 1, also address and seek to minimise the issue of flora/fauna. sustainable development and climate change. • Restoration to some form of vegetated environment will offer benefits in the form of climate change mitigation, including provision of habitat for wildlife, but again these will be relatively small.

Page 443 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

• While the site abuts the A352, there would be likely to be strong highway objections to any access here due to the horizontal and vertical alignment of the carriageway at this point. • However, if the workings were accessed from the West Stafford Bypass, there may be a solution • subject to any required improvements to that Any proposal for this access. site would need to be _ accompanied by a • The Transport Development Management Team Transport Assessment should be contacted to discuss any Transport which will need to 15. To minimise Assessment prior to submission of a planning provide access details the negative application. This document should also consider and consider vehicle impacts of Highways Agency concerns with regards to routing. The TA should waste and movements to the A35T. be scoped with the minerals • As access possibilities onto the A352 are very Transport transport on 0 restricted the site, as proposed, has been given a Development the transport rating of ‘Very Significant Adverse Impact’. Management Team. network, However, should the alternative access identified • Transport Assessment mitigating any above (or some other acceptable option) be to be carried out, residual provided then the rating would be ‘Less identifying impacts. Significant Adverse Impact’. opportunities for • This site would require a full Transport reducing impacts on Assessment were it to be submitted as a the transport network. planning application. Any TA should initially be • _ _ Alternative options to scoped with the Transport Development be investigated. Management Team. It would also need to consider the Highways Agency concerns with regards to movements to the A35T. • Policies DM1 and DM 8 actively address this issue of minimising impacts on the transportation network.

16. To support and • encourage the The proposed extension can only realistically be use of accessed by means of road transport, resulting in sustainable a negative impact under this Objective during • Mitigate impacts transport development and working. _ 0 where identified and modes, • As far as reasonably possible negative impacts appropriate. imposing no resulting from access and transport will be unmitigated mitigated, as required by Policies DM1 and DM8 negative of the Minerals Strategy. impacts on them.

Page 444 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

Impact on Sensitive Human Receptors • Provision of • Came Home Farm lies within 100m. However, the appropriate site is screened from the farm, and the screening mitigation, following can be increased. assessment of likely • Other properties within 500m. Site is already impacts. 0 0 screened, and further screening (visual and noise • Restoration to attenuation bunding) would significantly limit the improve landscape of impact of the site working. site where possible; • Development would likely require appropriate and to seek to mitigation (such as visual and noise attenuation increase public bunding, standoffs) to limit impacts. access. 17. To sustain the • health and Transport Assessment Impact on Existing Settlements quality of life to be carried out, of the _ • Dorchester approximately 800m to north west, identifying population West Stafford approximately 900m to north. No opportunities for intervisibility, the site is on the valley bottom and reducing impacts on 0 well screened. the transport network with specific reference • Potential for more of an impact on Broadmayne if ? to traffic impacts on lorries turn left out of the site to take material to Broadmayne. Masters Pit on Puddletown Road for processing.

Impact on Airport Safety • 0 0 • Site is approximately 40km from the airport, no No action required. impact expected.

Impact on Recreational Land • Further assessment • Site is agricultural land and not used for required regarding 0 ? formal/informal recreation. the impacts, visual and otherwise, of • Restoration will be to a recreational use, a including a fishing 18. To enable safe commercial fishing lake. lake in this area. access to countryside • Assessment of Impact on Public Rights of Way and open impacts required, spaces. • No rights of way cross the site, but footpath runs with appropriate along south eastern boundary and another one mitigation identified - 0 touches eastern corner of site. – including whether it is acceptable for the • Footpath to south of site overlooks the site and as time-limited impacts it ascends hill cannot realistically be screened. on the footpath of

Page 445 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A quarrying followed by creation of a fishing lake. _ _ • Restoration to improve public access in the area.

Preliminary Hydrological Risk Assessment

Further Controlled Waters Issues/Risks Mitigation information/approval required

• There is a potential • for contamination of • Appropriate Full hydrogeological risk the Winterbourne, arrangements to be assessment and therefore the made for ensuring • Flood Risk Assessment Frome, from runoff that runoff from the • from site. The River site does not enter Water Framework Basin Management the Winterbourne or Assessment Plan South West the Frome or • Further assessment of River Basin District groundwater unless potential impacts on water • Watercourses identifies the Frome any silt has first been quality and levels, as being of ‘Poor’ removed. • Ponds/lakes, particularly for environmental including wet • Fuel stored on site to groundwater, is required quality in this area. habitats be appropriately prior to development. • Potential for bunded and sealed • • Groundwater Assessment of the contamination of to prevent any feasibility of relocating controlled waters spillage from ponds and associated through spillage or entering ground or habitats and species. seepage of pollutants surface waters. • such as fuel, or silt in Land Drainage Consent to • On-going water. be obtained from Dorset monitoring during County Council if works • Impacts on or development and may affect flow of an removal of surface working of the site. ordinary watercourse. water features.

Cumulative Impacts Site is a new development in an area where there is already mineral development. Visually there will not be any cumulative impacts, but lorries will have impacts particularly where they turn left and head towards Broadmayne. The proposal is within 5Km of sites of St Georges Road, Dorchester allocated in the Pre -Submission draft West Dorset, Weymouth and Portland Local Plan (June 2012) as amended by Proposed Modifications (June 2013), (Policies DOR 7, DOR 8 and DOR 9) for residential (approx150 dwellings in total) and /or employment development. Traffic arising from the new development will also add to general traffic levels in Dorchester and on the A352. Page 446 of 583

Summary

Potential Benefits Potential Impacts

• Visual impacts, from the adjacent AONB and from the footpath going up a hill to the south of the site. Since the site is at the bottom of a valley it is lower than both these viewpoints and lower than the road that runs west and south of it. It is not clear how these impacts will be mitigated. • It is not clear how the proposed restoration will be achieved. • A number of hydrological and nature conservation related impacts have been identified, from impacts • Provision of aggregates required for maintenance on wildlife to impacts on the winterbourne flow to and construction of the built environment. hydrological impacts. Further work, including a • Restoration could include some increased and year’s worth of groundwater monitoring, will be improved public access and will include a fishing required. lake. • There are potentially serious transportation constraints, with safety issues for vehicles entering and leaving the site. Further work required to determine possible mitigation. • There are impacts on landscape, both in terms of impacts on the AONB and the capacity of the local landscape to absorb the significant changes proposed. • Potential heritage issues, including archaeology, historic landscapes and historic buildings.

Overall Recommendation: This is a relatively small site which presents a series of potential impacts for which, in some cases, no mitigation has currently been identified. On the basis of the evidence available it does not appear that there is sufficient certainty that the impacts identified in this sustainability appraisal are currently capable of satisfactory mitigation. The site remains part of the mineral resource of Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole but is not at this time included in the Draft Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Mineral Sites Plan.

Page 447 of 583

Aggregates: AS22 Trigon Hill Extension No change – site is not proposed for inclusion in the Mineral Sites Plan

Site Name/Location: AS22 Trigon Hill Extension Nominee/Agent: Imerys Mineral Type: Sand/Gravel (overlying Ball Clay) Local Authority: Purbeck District Council

Site Area: approximately 27 ha Production: up to 50,000 tpa; Reserve: approximately 260,000 tonnes

Impact Assessment Scoring

Strong Minor Minor - Strong Positive Negligible or Negative - Negative + Positive ++ 0 ? Uncertain - Impact No Effect Impact Impact Impact

Timescales for effects: P/W: Preparation and Working R/A : Restoration and Afteruse

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

1. To move waste • This Objective is not relevant to this site management N/A N/A • N/A nomination up the waste hierarchy

European/International Designations • Ecological surveys and • Proposed area lies just to the south of an area of hydrological reports European heathland. At this stage, without required, with detailed analysis of possible impacts, it is not appropriate clear whether there would be any likely mitigation. 2. To maintain, significant effect of mineral working on the conserve and • Appropriate ? 0 designated area. enhance assessment under the • biodiversity In order to be acceptable the development Habitat Regulations proposal would have to pass the tests in the will be required. Habitats Regulations. • Heathland restoration • In principle it should be possible to avoid effects and public access to on the designated sites through an appropriate be created. stand-off from the development.

Page 448 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

• Ecological surveys and hydrological reports Annex 1 Bird Species required, with • Area could support Annex 1 birds as part of the appropriate existing forestry crop rotation. Clearance of trees mitigation. would be likely to result in heathland • Appropriate ? 0 regeneration and the open habitat would rapidly assessment under the become suitable for more Annex 1 birds. Habitat Regulations • The site has the potential to be included in a will be required. revision to the heathland SPA boundary. Risk • Heathland restoration based approach essential here. and public access to be created.

National Designations • Proposed area lies just to the south of an area of • Ecological surveys Morden Bog and Hyde Heath SSSI. At this stage, required, with without detailed analysis of possible impacts, it is appropriate not clear whether there would be any likely ? 0 mitigation. significant effect of mineral working on the • designated area. Restoration to include creation of • In principle it should be possible to avoid effects invertebrate habitat. on the designated sites through an appropriate stand-off from the development.

Protected species • • There are numerous bat records from Trigon Hill Ecological surveys Plantation suggesting the plantation or trees in required, with the area may provide important roosting appropriate mitigation habitats; assessment will be required to identified. understand the implications of removal of the • Restoration to include ? 0 plantation on bats. appropriate habitats • A large badger sett is also known in the for these species. plantation and the effects of working on this • Further investigation species would also require assessment. into likelihood of • It is difficult to assess whether mitigation on bats grant of disturbance or badger would be acceptable without detailed licences. study on population sizes and locations.

Local recognitions/designations, including 0 0 ancient woodland and veteran trees • No action required. • No likely effects identified.

Page 449 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

Groundwater • Hydrological assessment required to determine possible • No impact on any Source Protection impacts, on ground and surface Zones. Site overlies a Secondary waters, with appropriate Aquifer. mitigation to be implemented. • Possible implications of adjacent ? 0 • Where necessary mitigating landfill, including leachate migration measures should be installed to to be considered/assessed. maintain groundwater levels. • Assessment required to determine 4. To maintain, • Appropriate arrangements possible impacts on hydrogeology. conserve and should be put in place to Impacts to be appropriately mitigated enhance the ensure that the water leaving quality of the site and entering the ground, rivers/watercourses is of an surface and acceptable quality. sea waters • and manage Any fuel on site should be properly stored to avoid the Surface Water consumption contamination in case of • of water in a Watercourse within the site boundary. spillage. There appears to be a pond close to sustainable • Appropriate arrangements the northern edge of the site and way. _ 0 should be installed for surface other ponds in vicinity. water and silt collection and • Assessment required to determine fuel storage to prevent possible impacts on hydrogeology. contamination of groundwater Impacts to be appropriately mitigated resources. • Land Drainage Consent to be obtained from Dorset County Council if works may affect flow of an ordinary watercourse.

• 5. To reduce Flooding/Coastal Stability Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) will flood risk and • be required. 0 0 Entire site is within Flood Risk Zone 1, improve flood no expected risk of flooding or • All necessary mitigation to be management. contributing to flooding. implemented.

Archaeology 6. To maintain, • Full archaeological survey of conserve and • The number of prehistoric barrows in the the area required to assess enhance the ? 0 area in particular indicates that the site possible presence and historic has archaeological potential. significance of non- environment designated remains and to • Archaeological assessment and (including assess whether/how these evaluation is required. Only when these

Page 450 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A archaeological have been undertaken would the should be protected during sites, historic archaeological impact be understood – at working. buildings, present it could be anywhere from Very • All necessary mitigation to conservation Significant to No Significant impact. be implemented. Adequate areas, historic provision to be made for parks and Historic Landscapes preservation, excavation or gardens and • Historically much or all of this site would recording, as appropriate. other locally have been heathland. This heathland distinctive • Further consideration to be formed part of the setting of the barrows features and given to restoration in the area. their settings). proposals, in terms of • Unsympathetic extraction and quarrying historic landscapes. ? 0 could have a negative impact on the setting of these Monuments, but there is the potential for an improvement in that setting through restoration to heathland. • Further evaluation will be required. When this has been undertaken possible impacts, if any, will be better understood.

Historic Buildings • 0 0 Belts of trees separate Trigon House, which is the • No action required. nearest listed building to the site. Therefore the site has negligible impact on the listed buildings.

• Assessment of potential visual impacts required. _ Landscape Capacity • All appropriate mitigation to be included. • Potential to impact adversely on the 7. To maintain, open access land to the west and • Restoration to consider increasing conserve and 0 north west. Due to its position on public access/informal recreation enhance the the west slopes of the hillside its and to include nature landscape, sensitivity is increased and its conservation interests. including capacity to absorb development is • Appropriate restoration proposals townscape, _ _ significantly reduced. seascape and in line with Landscape the coast. Management Guidelines referred to in Minerals Strategy.

Designated Landscapes _ 0 • No action required. • Less significant adverse impact.

• 8. To protect • Impacts on air quality expected to be negligible. Environmental and improve protection measures • air quality and No AQMAs will be affected by the working of this to reduce dust and 0 0 reduce the site proposal. Any dust resulting from working ensure noise is impacts of will be controlled through normal dust- appropriately noise. suppression measures. mitigated.

Page 451 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A • Noise mitigation will be addressed at the planning application stage, with appropriate mitigation to be included in the development of the site.

• • The site comprises primarily heathland, grassland Soil is poor quality in and woodland cover. The area is a former agricultural terms but heathland area and so would be expected to have valuable in terms of relatively poor, acidic soils. potential for 9. To maintain, heathland restoration. conserve and • Site preparation/working would require stripping _ 0 • enhance soil and storage of the soils, with some impacts on Soils to be quality. them. stored/protected during preparation • If the site is worked and restored to heathland this and working and will require reinstatement/retention of acidic soils properly reinstated with their seedbank. during restoration.

11. To promote the use of • This proposal does not at present promote the _ 0 • No action required. alternative use of alternative materials. materials.

• Development of this site would provide a benefit in terms of contributing to the provision of a 12. To provide an supply of minerals to meet society’s needs. • Ensure principles of adequate and sustainable affordable • Ensuring a sustainable supply will depend on the development are supply of + 0 development and management of the site. incorporated into the minerals to • Providing site development takes into account development of this meet society's relevant principles of sustainable development it site. needs. is expected this will contribute to complying with this objective.

Page 452 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

• This site proposal is expected to contribute to economic development on two levels – directly through the provision of employment at the site to be developed and indirectly through the provision of ball clay and aggregate minerals 13. To promote required for the maintenance of built environment and and for new built development and for • Further assessment encourage + 0 commercial/industrial uses. required to consider sustainable restoration options. economic • Both levels are expected to maintain employment, growth skilled and unskilled. However given the expected size of the reserve this is likely to be a limited benefit. • Proposed restoration is to heathland/agriculture, both of which offer economic benefits.

• Developing land as a quarry is expected to have some negative impacts regarding climate change, due primarily to machinery used and transportation of mineral away from site. However, these will in relative terms be negligible. • The Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Minerals • Use energy efficient Strategy seeks to address and minimise such plant and machinery. 14. To adapt to impacts through Policy CC1 which requires • and mitigate operators to take into consideration climate Implement restoration the impacts of _ 0 change impacts and their possible mitigation for which provides climate any proposed minerals development. appropriate habitats to help to increase change. • The development management policies, e.g. DM resilience of 1, also address and seek to minimise the issue of flora/fauna. sustainable development and climate change. • Restoration to some form of vegetated environment will offer benefits in the form of climate change mitigation, including provision of habitat for wildlife, but again these will be relatively small.

Page 453 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

• This proposal is for an extension to existing • Any proposal for this extraction at Trigon Hill. This is an established site site would need to be with a good access onto Wareham Forest Road. accompanied by a • Access from here to the strategic network is Transport Assessment 15. To minimise gained via the A35 to the north and the A351 to which will need to the negative the east. The extension site is estimated to provide access details impacts of generate 20 trips per day although it is thought and consider vehicle waste and that the site would follow the cessation of other routing. The TA should minerals extraction at Trigon rather than operating in be scoped with the transport on _ 0 parallel to it. The site has therefore been given a Transport the transport ‘Less Significant Adverse Impact’ rating. Development network, • Management Team. mitigating any Should the site intensify movements to Trigon Hill • residual any Transport Statement should consider vehicle Transport Assessment impacts. routing and any impact on the A351 to the east to be carried out, which experiences high levels of congestion. identifying opportunities for • Policies DM1 and DM 8 actively address this issue reducing impacts on of minimising impacts on the transportation the transport network. network.

16. To support and • encourage the The proposed extension can only realistically be use of accessed by means of road transport, resulting in sustainable a negative impact under this Objective during • Mitigate impacts transport development and working. _ 0 where identified and modes, • As far as reasonably possible negative impacts appropriate. imposing no resulting from access and transport will be unmitigated mitigated, as required by Policies DM1 and DM8 negative of the Minerals Strategy. impacts on them.

Impact on Sensitive Human Receptors • Provision of • Cold Harbour properties some 380 m to the east, appropriate 17. To sustain the other residential uses further to the north. mitigation, following health and assessment of likely • quality of life ? 0 Development will require appropriate mitigation impacts. of the (such as visual and noise attenuation bunding, • Restoration to population standoffs) to limit impacts. improve landscape of • Adequate scope to screen works, using mitigation site where possible; such as visual and noise attenuation bunds. and to seek to

Page 454 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A increase public Impact on Existing Settlements access. • Cold Harbour is closest settlement to the east • Transport Assessment along with other properties along the C7. to be carried out, ? 0 • Screening (visual and noise attenuation bunding) identifying would significantly limit the impact of the site opportunities for working, but there will be impacts of lorries reducing impacts on entering/leaving the site. This is an extension and the transport network should not result in intensification of any impacts. where appropriate.

Impact on Airport Safety • Site is approximately 23 km from airport and 0 0 • No action required. proposed for dry working and restoration. • No impacts expected

Impact on Recreational Land ? • Site is agricultural land and forestry, private land with no public access. No formal or informal 0 • 18. To enable safe recreational use. No action required for access to working. + • No impacts expected. Restoration to consider countryside • options for improving public access in the area. Restoration to and open improve public access spaces. Impact on Public Rights of Way in the area. 0 0 • No rights of way across the site or adjacent to it. • No impacts expected

Page 455 of 583

Preliminary Hydrological Risk Assessment

Further Issues/Risks Mitigation information/approval Controlled Waters required

• Appropriate • Full hydrogeological risk • The River Basin arrangements to be assessment will be required Management Plan made for ensuring as part of a planning South West River that runoff from the application. site does not enter Basin District • Flood Risk Assessment identifies the Piddle the Piddle or • (the closest main groundwater unless Water Framework river, some 900m any silt has first Assessment been removed. distant) as being of • Further assessment of ‘Poor’ environmental • Fuel stored on site potential impacts on water • Watercourses quality. Potential for to be appropriately quality and levels, contamination from • Ponds/lakes, bunded and sealed particularly for runoff from site. including wet habitats to prevent any groundwater, is required • spillage from prior to development. • Potential for Groundwater entering ground or contamination of • Assessment of the surface waters. controlled waters feasibility of relocating or through spillage or • On-going re-creating surface water seepage of monitoring during features and associated pollutants such as development and habitats and species. fuel, or silt in water. working of the site. • Land Drainage Consent to • Potential impacts on • Ground water be obtained from Dorset existing surface recharge if County Council if works water features. considered may affect flow of an necessary. ordinary watercourse.

Cumulative Impacts There is other mineral working in the vicinity, both existing and proposed as well as waste management. The proposed site is an extension to existing mineral working/waste disposal. As an extension site, there will be no cumulative impact but this would represent an extension of time of working. The proposal is within 5Km (by road) of a site allocated in the Purbeck Local Plan Part 1 (adopted Nov 2012) (Policy CEN) for development of 200 dwellings and community facilities, off Worgret Road, Wareham. Traffic arising from the new residential development will also add to general traffic levels in / around Wareham.

Page 456 of 583

Summary Key impacts and benefits are expected to include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following.

Potential Benefits Potential Impacts

• Site is close to European designated heathland; contains Annex 1 birds and could be designated as a Special Protection Area; there are possible impacts on national designations (SSSI nearby) and • Provision of aggregates required for maintenance protected species on/around the site. Further and construction of the built environment, with assessment, including Appropriate Assessment, will accompanying benefits to the economy. be required to better understand these impacts and to determine whether/how they can be satisfactorily • Restoration could contribute to improved mitigated. countryside access. • Ground and surface water – further assessment • Provision of employment, to the benefit of local required to determine possible impacts, but these economy. expected to be capable of mitigation. • Improved public access to be considered as a part • Heritage/archaeology – assessment required to of site restoration. This could lead to reduced determine likely impacts, but impacts expected to visitor pressure on designated heathland sites in the be mitigable. vicinity. • Significant visual impacts, when site is opened up, • Nature conservation benefits to be considered as with views through site from open access land to part of restoration. south-west. Further assessment including landscape and visual assessment will be required, with appropriate mitigation provided.

• The site will be accessed by road.

Overall Recommendation: This is a relatively small site which is primarily intended for the production of ball clay. Sand/gravel will be removed as part of the excavation of the ball clay. There are a number of issues regarding this site and further assessment will be required, including Appropriate Assessment under the Habitat Regulations. Key impacts are expected to be on ecology (nearby European and national designations, Annex 1 birds, protected species), landscape/visual impacts and surface/groundwater. Further assessment will be required to gain a better understanding of what the impacts might be and how best to mitigate. Should this site ultimately be developed, it is expected that detailed assessment of impacts and required mitigation will be covered through the required Environmental Impact Assessment. As an extension, development of the site is not expected to lead to intensification of impacts, but the time period of the impacts will be extended.

This site is no longer under consideration for sand and gravel extraction – withdrawn by nominee.

Page 457 of 583

Aggregates: AS23 Gore Heath, Sandford No change – site is not proposed for inclusion in the Mineral Sites Plan

Site Name/Location: AS23 Gore Heath Nominee/Agent: Veolia Environmental Services Mineral Type: Sand and gravel Local Authority: Purbeck District Council

Production: approximately 200,000 Site Area: approximately 145 ha Reserve: approximately 11 mt to 250,000 tpa (to be confirmed);

Impact Assessment Scoring

Strong Minor Minor - Strong Positive Negligible or Negative - Negative + Positive ++ 0 ? Uncertain - Impact No Effect Impact Impact Impact

Timescales for effects: P/W: Preparation and Working R/A : Restoration and Afteruse

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

1. To move waste • This Objective is not relevant to this site management N/A N/A • N/A nomination up the waste hierarchy

European/International Designations • Proposed area supports Annex 1 birds which may be functionally linked to Dorset Heathlands SPA. The area is well used as recreation site • contributing to the network of areas which help to Ecological surveys and reduce human recreational pressure on hydrological reports designated heathlands. required, with appropriate mitigation. • 2. To maintain, Site is adjacent to Morden Bog and Hyde Heath • Appropriate conserve and SSSI, which is a component of the Dorset Heaths _ _ 0 assessment under the enhance SAC, Dorset Heathland SPA/Ramsar. Habitat Regulations biodiversity • Working this area could lead to significant risk of will be required. adverse effects on European sites. At the moment • the area includes a small part of the Dorset Heathland restoration Heaths SAC and Dorset Heathlands Ramsar along and public access to be the eastern boundary; this area must be removed created. from the possible allocation to have any chance of being taken forward otherwise a conclusion of adverse effects on integrity of the sites is inevitable.

Page 458 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A • In order to be acceptable the development proposal would have to pass the tests in the Habitats Regulations.

• Ecological surveys and Annex 1 Bird Species hydrological reports required, with • Area supports Annex 1 birds as part of the appropriate mitigation. existing forestry crop rotation. Clearance of trees would result in heathland regeneration and the • Appropriate _ _ 0 open habitat would rapidly become suitable for assessment under the more Annex 1 birds. Habitat Regulations will be required. • The site has the potential to be included in a revision to the heathland SPA boundary. Risk • Heathland restoration based approach essential here. and public access to be created.

National Designations • In addition to the comments on European/International Designations above, the area is likely to support a rich invertebrate • Ecological surveys assemblage in existing rides contributing to required, with maintenance of species within SSSI. appropriate mitigation. _ _ 0 • At the moment the area includes a small part of • Restoration to include the Morden Bog and Hyde Heath SSSI along the creation of invertebrate eastern boundary; this area must be removed habitat. from the possible allocation to have any chance of being taken forward as there is no case for directly damaging a nationally important site to extract sand and gravel.

• Ecological surveys Protected species required, with appropriate mitigation • Existing rides support significant populations of identified. European protected species, Sand Lizard and Smooth Snake, and common protected reptiles. • Restoration to include _ _ 0 appropriate habitats • Depending on population sizes it may be difficult for these species. to mitigate fully for effects on EPS and there is a risk that disturbance licences could be refused by • Further investigation Natural England. into likelihood of grant of disturbance licences.

Page 459 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

Local recognitions/designations, including ancient woodland and veteran trees • Ecological surveys • required, with ? 0 There are possible adverse implications for the Sherford River SNCI to the north of the proposed appropriate mitigation area, although through assessment it should be identified. possible to avoid adverse effects on the SNCI.

3. To maintain, • Exposures resulting from working may be of • Operator to be asked conserve and interest. Benefits are only expected during + 0 to permit visits to view enhance working, and are likely to be obscured or covered exposures as required. geodiversity. as part of restoration.

Groundwater • Hydrological assessment required to determine • Site not within a Source Protection Zone. possible impacts, on Overlies Secondary Aquifers. ground and surface waters, • Extraction proposals would be potentially with appropriate mitigation ? / _ 0 removing a large area of unsaturated zone to be implemented. so potential impacts on water features. • Where necessary mitigating • Assessment required to determine possible measures should be impacts on hydrogeology. Impacts to be installed to maintain appropriately mitigated groundwater levels. • 4. To maintain, Appropriate arrangements conserve and should be put in place to enhance the ensure that the water quality of leaving the site and ground, entering the surface and rivers/watercourses is of an Surface Water sea waters acceptable quality. • and manage Sherford River runs 50m to north of site • Any fuel on site should be the boundary. Pond on north-eastern properly stored to avoid consumption boundary of site. Other drains and ponds contamination in case of of water in a in vicinity of site. Development needs to spillage. sustainable protect and enhance any water features in • way. ? / _ 0 site. Restoration proposals should incorporate wetland • Stream within 50m of the northern features which will boundary. contribute to the • The Sherford River and Sherford Bog Area aspirations of the are very sensitive. Any silt escape would be Biodiversity Strategy. harmful to the protected area. • Appropriate arrangements should be installed for surface water and silt collection and fuel storage to prevent contamination of groundwater resources.

Page 460 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A • Land Drainage Consent to be obtained from Dorset County Council if works may affect flow of an ordinary watercourse.

• Flood Risk Assessment 5. To reduce (FRA) will be required. flood risk and Flooding/Coastal Stability 0 0 • All necessary improve flood • Site is within FRZ 1. management. mitigation to be implemented.

Archaeology • Full archaeological • The Dorset Historic Environment Record has no survey of the area records of archaeological sites, features or finds required to assess within the site (although a milestone on the road possible presence and on the west side is recorded). significance of non- designated remains • Nevertheless, considering the size of the site the and to assess potential for below-ground archaeological whether/how these 6. To maintain, ? 0 remains and other earthworks and other above- should be protected conserve and ground features needs to be assessed and if during working. enhance the necessary evaluated before an informed historic planning decision can be made. • All necessary environment mitigation to be • Only when the relevant works have been (including implemented. archaeologica undertaken would the archaeological impact be l sites, historic understood – at present it could be anywhere • Adequate provision to buildings, from Very Significant to No Significant impact. be made for conservation preservation, areas, historic Historic Landscapes excavation or recording, as parks and • The site was presumably heathland before being appropriate. gardens and brought into its present use. So, the restoration other locally of some of it to heathland could be a positive • Further consideration _ _ + distinctive impact from an historical viewpoint. to be given to features and restoration proposals, • Further evaluation will be required. When this their settings). in terms of historic has been undertaken possible impacts, if any, will landscapes. be better understood.

Historic Buildings • 0 0 • There are no historic buildings affected by this No action required. proposal.

7. To maintain, Landscape Capacity • Landscape and visual impact _ _ ? conserve and • A very significant adverse impact on assessment to identify impacts; enhance the landscape character, visual and consider whether adequate

Page 461 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A landscape, recreational amenity and a loss of an mitigation of such impacts before including important open space facility for and during working is possible. townscape, local and visitor users within close • If mitigation is not possible, a view seascape and proximity to the urban edge. will have to be taken as to whether the coast. • Assessment required to consider a time-limited impact would be whether working of any scale could acceptable. be possible. • Appropriate restoration proposals in line with Landscape Management Guidelines referred to in Minerals Strategy. • Maintain screening woodland around edges of site.

Designated Landscapes 0 0 • No action required. • Less significant adverse impact.

• • The site comprises primarily heathland, grassland Soil is poor quality in and woodland cover. The area is a former agricultural terms but heathland area and so would be expected to have valuable in terms of relatively poor, acidic soils. potential for heathland 9. To maintain, restoration. conserve and • Site preparation/working would require stripping _ 0 • enhance soil and storage of the soils, with some impacts on Soils to be quality. them. stored/protected during preparation and • If the site is worked and restored to heathland this working and properly will require reinstatement/retention of acidic soils reinstated during with their seedbank. restoration.

• 10. To conserve No specific action • The site would make an important contribution to and safeguard required; site + 0 aggregate supply in Bournemouth, Dorset and mineral development to take Poole. resources. into consideration relevant impacts and

Page 462 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

mitigate where appropriate.

11. To promote the use of • This proposal does not at present promote the 0 0 • No action required. alternative use of alternative materials. materials.

• This site proposal is expected to contribute to economic development on two levels – directly through the provision of employment at the site to be developed and indirectly through the provision of ball clay and aggregate minerals 13. To promote required for the maintenance of built environment and and for new built development and for • Further assessment encourage commercial/industrial uses. + 0 required to consider sustainable • Both levels are expected to maintain employment, restoration options. economic skilled and unskilled. However given the expected growth size of the reserve this is likely to be a limited benefit. • Proposed restoration is to heathland/nature conservation and woodland/forestry, both of which offer economic benefits.

• Developing land as a quarry is expected to have • Use energy efficient some negative impacts regarding climate change, plant and machinery. 14. To adapt to due primarily to machinery used and • and mitigate transportation of mineral away from site. Implement restoration the impacts of _ 0 However, these will in relative terms be negligible. which provides climate appropriate habitats to • The Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Minerals change. help to increase Strategy seeks to address and minimise such resilience of impacts through Policy CC1 which requires flora/fauna. operators to take into consideration climate Page 463 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

change impacts and their possible mitigation for any proposed minerals development. • The development management policies, e.g. DM 1, also address and seek to minimise the issue of sustainable development and climate change. • Restoration to some form of vegetated environment will offer benefits in the form of climate change mitigation, including provision of habitat for wildlife, but again these will be relatively small.

• This proposal covers a large site to the east of the B3075 Morden Road. Traffic data has not been supplied but is assumed to be in the region of 50 to 75 trips per day. • Access could be achieved onto Morden Road although details indicating the necessary visibility and geometry would need to be supplied. Once on Morden Road, vehicles would either travel north to the A35 at Morden Park Corner or south • Any proposal for this to the A351 at Sandford. site would need to be accompanied by a • The existing junction at Morden Park Corner has Transport Assessment significant accident problems and any attempt to which will need to access this proposal using the junction in its 15. To minimise provide access details current form would receive the strongest the negative and consider vehicle objection from the Highway Authority on highway impacts of routing. The TA should safety grounds. There is little that can be done to waste and be scoped with the improve Morden Park Corner within the existing minerals Transport highway land. Any improvement would require transport on _ _ ? Development significant land take. the transport Management Team. network, • A previous scheme proposed to realign the • Transport Assessment mitigating any northern part of Morden Road further to the east, to be carried out, residual providing a bigger stagger between the two arms identifying impacts. of the crossroads and extended right turn lanes. It opportunities for also proposed to realign a sharp bend to the east reducing impacts on of Morden Park Corner on the A35. The cost for the transport network. this scheme, or another like it, would be significant. • Alternative options to be investigated. • To the south vehicles could access the A351. This road goes through Sandford, has severe congestion problems and a high accident rate. Any proposal that placed large numbers of HGVs on this road would therefore also be likely to be resisted by the Highway Authority. • For the above reasons this site has been given a ‘Very Significant Adverse Impact’ rating. Policies DM1 and DM 8 of the Minerals Strategy actively

Page 464 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A address this issue of minimising impacts on the transportation network, but addressing the identified issues is likely to be generally beyond the scope of these policies.

16. To support and • encourage the The proposed extension can only realistically be use of accessed by means of road transport, resulting in sustainable a negative impact under this Objective during • Mitigate impacts where transport development and working. _ 0 identified and modes, • As far as reasonably possible negative impacts appropriate. imposing no resulting from access and transport will be unmitigated mitigated, as required by Policies DM1 and DM8 negative of the Minerals Strategy. impacts on them.

Impact on Sensitive Human Receptors • Closest residence is Sherford Farm at • Provision of approximately 350 m to the north-west. Other appropriate properties in the vicinity, including Sandford to mitigation, following south and south-east, Home Farm buildings to assessment of likely the east. impacts. _ 0 • The site is large enough that it should be possible • Restoration to to screen these residences satisfactorily, using improve landscape of mitigation such as visual and noise attenuation site where possible; bunds. and to seek to • Development would likely require appropriate increase public access. 17. To sustain the mitigation (such as visual and noise attenuation health and • Transport Assessment bunding, standoffs) to limit impacts. quality of life to be carried out, of the identifying Impact on Existing Settlements population opportunities for • Sandford is within 500m – size of site would reducing impacts on _ 0 permit appropriate screening (visual and noise). the transport network Lorries turning left out of the site, or delivering where appropriate. material to Wareham/Purbeck, would have an impact on Sandford/Wareham.

Impact on Airport Safety • Site is approximately 19km from Hurn Airport. 0 0 Wet working not proposed, restoration will be at a • No action required. lower level and may include wetland areas. • No impacts expected.

18. To enable safe • Restoration to open access to _ _ +/? Impact on Recreational Land access land following countryside working and Page 465 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A and open • Site currently enjoys open access and there are a improvement of access spaces. number of tracks/paths across it. It is extensively where possible and used for informal recreation. There will be very where appropriate. significant impacts on users of the site during • Consider phased working. working and • Restoration offers the opportunity to restoration, to provide restore/improve such access. alternative options for recreational use while • The issue of displacement of existing users onto various parts of the site international designations around the site must are worked. be addressed.

• Assessment of impacts, Impact on Public Rights of Way with appropriate • Statutory rights of way along the northern and mitigation identified. 0 0 eastern edges of the site. Site is large enough that • Restoration to improve these can be appropriately screened during public access in the working. area.

Page 466 of 583

Preliminary Hydrological Risk Assessment

Further Controlled Waters Issues/Risks Mitigation information/approval required

• The River Basin Management Plan South West River Basin District identifies the • Full hydrogeological risk • Sherford River as Appropriate assessment being of ‘Moderate’ arrangements to be • Flood Risk Assessment environmental made for ensuring quality. Potential for that runoff from the • Water Framework contamination from site does not enter Assessment the Sherford River or runoff from site. • groundwater unless Further assessment of • Environment Agency any silt has first been potential impacts on water • Watercourses notes that the removed. quality and levels, • Ponds/lakes, Sherford River and particularly for • Fuel stored on site to including wet Sherford Bog Area groundwater, is required be appropriately habitats are very sensitive. prior to development. Any silt escape would bunded and sealed • • Assessment of the Groundwater be harmful to the to prevent any feasibility of relocating protected area. spillage from entering ground or ponds and associated • Potential for surface waters. habitats and species. contamination of • • Land Drainage Consent to controlled waters On-going be obtained from Dorset through spillage or monitoring during County Council if works seepage of pollutants development and may affect flow of an such as fuel, or silt in working of the site. ordinary watercourse. water. • Impacts on or removal of surface water features.

Page 467 of 583

Cumulative Impacts Proposal is a new site in an area where there is other mineral working existing/proposed. There will be cumulative impacts arising if this site is developed. The proposal is within 5Km (by road) of a site allocated in the Purbeck Local Plan Part 1 (adopted Nov 2012) (Policy CEN) for development of 200 dwellings and community facilities, off Worgret Road, Wareham. Traffic arising from the new residential development will also add to general traffic levels in Wareham and to a lesser extent the B3075 adjacent to the proposal.

Summary

Potential Benefits Potential Impacts

• Site is close to/includes European designated heathland; contains Annex 1 birds and could be designated as a Special Protection Area; there are likely impacts on national designations (SSSI) and possible threats to protected species on/around the site. Further assessment required, including Appropriate Assessment, to establish impacts and whether these can be satisfactorily addressed. • Recreational displacement will be an issue if this site is developed. • Further assessment, including Appropriate Assessment, will be required to better understand these impacts and to determine whether they can • Provision of significant amount of aggregates be satisfactorily mitigated. required for maintenance and construction of the • Ground and surface water – further assessment built environment, making an important required to determine possible impacts, but these contribution to Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole’s expected to be capable of mitigation. supply options. • Heritage/archaeology – assessment required to determine likely impacts, but any impacts expected to be mitigable. • Very significant landscape capacity and visual impacts. Further assessment including landscape and visual assessment will be required, not clear at this stage whether impacts can be mitigated. • Very significant impacts on recreational land use and users. Can be mitigated to some extent by phased working and restoration but will still be impacts. • Significant transport impact for lorries travelling to/from site, either to north or south.

Page 468 of 583

Overall Recommendation: There are a number of impacts that are likely to be associated with the working of this site, including biodiversity and European designations; impacts of recreational displacement, if this site was developed; hydrology/hydrogeology, archaeology and historic landscapes; landscape capacity; transport/access impacts; impacts on amenity, recreational use. Some are capable of mitigation but it appears that a number are unlikely to be capable of satisfactory mitigation. Further information has been requested regarding this site, but on the basis of the evidence available the nominated site appears to be subject to significant constraints not currently capable of satisfactory mitigation and cannot be included in the Draft Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Mineral Sites Plan at the present time unless exceptional circumstances (not currently present) arise. The site remains part of the mineral resource of Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole but is not at this time included in the Draft Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Mineral Sites Plan.

Page 469 of 583

Aggregates: AS24 Purple Haze South No change – site is not proposed for inclusion in the Mineral Sites Plan

Nominee/Agent: Somerley Estate (Landowner) and Site Name/Location: AS24 Purple Haze South Carter Jonas Mineral Type: Sand and gravel Local Authority: East Dorset District Council

Site Area: approximately 43 ha Production: (information awaited)… tpa; Reserve: approximately (information awaited) … mt

Impact Assessment Scoring

Strong Minor Minor - Strong Positive Negligible or Negative - Negative + Positive ++ 0 ? Uncertain - Impact No Effect Impact Impact Impact

Timescales for effects: P/W: Preparation and Working R/A : Restoration and Afteruse

Effects Sustainability Commentary Mitigation P/ Objectives R/A W

1. To move waste • This Objective is not relevant to this site management N/A N/A • N/A nomination up the waste hierarchy

European/International Designations • • Proposed area is likely to support Annex 1 birds Ecological surveys as part of the forestry crop rotation; the and hydrological populations of these birds may be functionally reports required. linked to Dorset Heathlands SPA. • Appropriate 2. To maintain, • The forestry plantation is well used as recreation assessment under the conserve and Habitat Regulations ? + site contributing to the network of areas which enhance help to reduce human recreational pressure on will be required. biodiversity designated heathlands. There are possible in- • Restoration to include combination effects of mineral working proposals heathland restoration in Hampshire within Ringwood Forest. and public • Working this area has the potential to lead to access/recreational significant risk of adverse effects on European facilities. sites.

Page 470 of 583

Effects Sustainability Commentary Mitigation P/ Objectives R/A W

• Ecological surveys Annex 1 Bird Species and hydrological reports required, with • Area supports Annex 1 birds as part of the appropriate existing forestry crop rotation. Clearance of trees mitigation. would result in heathland regeneration and the • Appropriate ? 0 open habitat would rapidly become suitable for more Annex 1 birds. assessment under the Habitat Regulations • The site has the potential to be included in a will be required. revision to the heathland SPA boundary. • Heathland restoration • Risk based approach essential here. and public access to be created.

• Ecological surveys and hydrological reports required. • Appropriate National Designations assessment under the • Habitat Regulations ? + No additional points to be raised beyond what is mentioned in European/International Decisions will be required. above. • Restoration to include heathland restoration and public access/recreational facilities.

Protected species • Ecological surveys • Existing rides may support populations of required, with European protected species, Sand Lizard and appropriate ? 0 Smooth Snake, and common protected reptiles. mitigation. Mitigation for effects on reptiles may be necessary. • Restoration to include • If so, it seems likely Natural England would be creation of able to issue a disturbance licence if required. appropriate habitat.

Local recognitions/designations, including 0 0 ancient woodland and veteran trees • No action required. • No impacts expected

3. To maintain, • Exposures resulting from working may be of • Operator to be asked conserve and interest. Benefits are only expected during to permit visits to + 0 enhance working, and are likely to be obscured or covered view exposures as geodiversity. as part of restoration. required.

Page 471 of 583

Effects Sustainability Commentary Mitigation P/ Objectives R/A W

Groundwater • Hydrological assessment required to determine possible • Site overlies a secondary aquifer. A impacts, on ground and surface stream which drains the sands (SU waters, with appropriate 12176 05789) lies within 250m of the mitigation to be implemented. site western boundary. There are drains to the East flowing into the • Where necessary mitigating ? 0 Avon SSSI/SAC. The impacts of the measures should be installed to development on these flows should be maintain groundwater levels. assessed. 4. To maintain, • Appropriate arrangements conserve and • No impact on SPZs. should be put in place to ensure enhance the that the water leaving the site • Assessment required to determine quality of and entering the possible impacts on hydrogeology. ground, rivers/watercourses is of an Impacts to be appropriately mitigated. surface and acceptable quality. sea waters • and manage Any fuel on site should be the properly stored to avoid Surface Water consumption contamination in case of of water in a • Site is approximately 120m from a spillage. sustainable drain, with other drains in the vicinity. • Appropriate arrangements way. • Site is on a ridge between the River should be installed for surface water and silt collection and fuel ? 0 Crane on the west and the Avon to the east. Approximately 750m from the storage to prevent Avon. contamination of groundwater resources. • Assessment required to determine • possible impacts on hydrogeology. Land Drainage Consent to be Impacts to be appropriately mitigated obtained from Dorset County Council if works may affect flow of an ordinary watercourse.

• Flood Risk 5. To reduce Flooding/Coastal Stability Assessment (FRA) will flood risk and • be required. 0 0 Entire site is within Flood Risk Zone 1, no improve flood expected risk of flooding or contributing to • All necessary management. flooding. mitigation to be implemented.

Archaeology 6. To maintain, • Full archaeological conserve and • A barrow that is protected as a Scheduled survey of the area enhance the Monument (SM31911 – ‘Bowl barrow on the required to assess historic _ 0 eastern part of Ashley Heath, 660m north west of possible presence and environment Ashley Lodge’) occupies a relatively central significance of non- (including location within the site. Several other barrows designated remains archaeological that are also protected as Scheduled Monuments and to assess sites, historic lie close to the site. Monuments and

Page 472 of 583

Effects Sustainability Commentary Mitigation P/ Objectives R/A W buildings, • The barrow within the site in particular is a major establish their conservation constraint, and theoretically, extraction that settings and how areas, historic destroyed this nationally-important feature would these can best be parks and be a ‘Very Significant Adverse Impact’. However, protected during gardens and the protection afforded the monument makes working. other locally this unlikely to happen. • All necessary distinctive • One way to address this issue could be the mitigation, including features and removal of some of the site from the extraction actions such as their settings). area. An archaeological assessment and if restoration of necessary an evaluation of the site that considers hedgerows, to be all the barrows mentioned above and their implemented. settings, as well as other possible archaeological • Adequate provision material on the site, should help in making a to be made for decision on this, as well as in understanding the preservation, wider archaeological impact of the extraction on excavation or this site. Early discussion with English Heritage recording, as should also be helpful in the making of this appropriate. decision. • Settings of the • If a compromise can be determined that allows Monuments to be some quarrying within a fraction of this site, the established prior to impact could perhaps drop to a ‘Less Significant working and not to Adverse Impact’. be compromised during working. Historic Landscapes • Further consideration • The site is occupied by conifer plantation and to be given to must have been heathland before. restoration proposals, • Further evaluation will be required. When this in terms of historic 0 + has been undertaken possible impacts will be landscapes. better understood. • Restoration is yet to be finalised, but could include heathland restoration/recreation, giving a positive benefit.

Historic Buildings • The nearest listed building is Ashley Lodge but if • 0 0 the woodland cover is maintained between the No action required. building and the site then there should be no adverse impact. No impacts expected.

• Assessment of potential visual Landscape Capacity 7. To maintain, impacts required. conserve and • Potential impact on the amenity of • All appropriate mitigation to enhance the footpath users and on the on the _ + be included. landscape, amenity of forest track users. Also a including potential impact on the character of the • Restoration to consider townscape, Heath Forest Mosaic. increasing public access/informal recreation and Page 473 of 583

Effects Sustainability Commentary Mitigation P/ Objectives R/A W seascape and • Potential to restore the land as to include nature conservation the coast. Sustainable Alternative Natural interests. Greenspace after extraction as it is within • Appropriate restoration the SE Dorset Green Infrastructure area. proposals in line with Further consideration needed. Landscape Management Guidelines referred to in Minerals Strategy.

Designated Landscapes 0 0 • No action required. • Negligible, no significant impacts expected.

• Soil is poor quality in • The site comprises primarily woodland cover but agricultural terms but is a former heathland area and so would be valuable in terms of expected to have relatively poor, acidic soils. potential for heathland 9. To maintain, • Site preparation/working would require restoration. conserve and _ 0 stripping and storage of the soils, with some • enhance soil Soils to be impacts on them. quality. stored/protected during • If the site is worked and restored to heathland preparation and this will require reinstatement/retention of working and properly acidic soils with their seedbank. reinstated during restoration.

• No specific action required; site 10. To conserve • The site would make an important contribution to development to take and safeguard + 0 aggregate supply in Bournemouth, Dorset and into consideration mineral Poole and beyond. relevant impacts and resources. mitigate where appropriate.

11. To promote the use of • This proposal does not at present promote the use _ 0 • No action required. alternative of alternative materials. materials.

Page 474 of 583

Effects Sustainability Commentary Mitigation P/ Objectives R/A W

• Development of this site would provide a benefit in terms of contributing to the provision of a 12. To provide an supply of minerals to meet society’s needs. • Ensure principles of adequate and sustainable affordable • Ensuring a sustainable supply will depend on the development are supply of + 0 development and management of the site. incorporated into the minerals to • Providing site development takes into account development of this meet society's relevant principles of sustainable development it is site. needs. expected this will contribute to complying with this objective.

• This site proposal is expected to contribute to economic development on two levels – directly through the provision of employment at the site to 13. To promote be developed and indirectly through the provision and of aggregate minerals required for the • Further assessment encourage maintenance of built environment and for new + 0 required to consider sustainable built development and for commercial/industrial restoration options. economic uses. growth • Both levels are expected to maintain employment, skilled and unskilled. Proposed restoration is to forestry possibly with some heathland restoration , both of which offer economic benefits.

• Developing land as a quarry is expected to have some negative impacts regarding climate change, due primarily to machinery used and transportation of mineral away from site. However, these will in relative terms be negligible. • The Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Minerals • Use energy efficient Strategy seeks to address and minimise such plant and machinery. 14. To adapt to impacts through Policy CC1 which requires • and mitigate operators to take into consideration climate Implement the impacts of _ 0 change impacts and their possible mitigation for restoration which climate any proposed minerals development. provides appropriate habitats to help to change. • The development management policies, e.g. DM 1, increase resilience of also address and seek to minimise the issue of flora/fauna. sustainable development and climate change. • Restoration to some form of vegetated environment will offer benefits in the form of climate change mitigation, including provision of habitat for wildlife, but again these will be relatively small.

Page 475 of 583

Effects Sustainability Commentary Mitigation P/ Objectives R/A W

• It is assumed that estimated HGV trips for this site could be 100 per day. Direct access onto the site would necessarily be onto the B3081. Adjacent to the site is the existing Baker’s Hanging junction, between the B3081 and Alderholt Road. This junction and the access to a walkers car park opposite have a poor accident history. This is partly due to the geometry of the road, with a restrictively acute angle to be negotiated for any _ _ vehicles that may wish to turn left into Alderholt Road from the B3081, and partly due to restricted • Any proposal for this forward visibility and speed. site would need to be • Any access onto the B3081 would need to be to accompanied by a the north of the Baker’s Hanging junction. There Transport Assessment are issues of vertical alignment and visibility on which will need to provide access details 15. To minimise this section of the B3081 and a Transport and consider vehicle the negative Assessment would need to demonstrate that a routing. The TA impacts of junction with sufficient visibility and geometry should be scoped waste and could be provided. with the Transport minerals • In addition to this a TA would need to consider the Development transport on 0 movements of HGVs leaving and arriving at the Management Team. the transport site and any interaction with mineral sites over the • network, border in Hampshire. Vehicle routing will be key Transport Assessment mitigating any and any left turning vehicles into Alderholt Road to be carried out, residual or other significant impact at Baker’s Hanging identifying impacts. junction without significant mitigation will be opportunities for strongly resisted. The option also exists for the reducing impacts on landowner to make additional land available, not the transport for quarrying, but directly onto the B3081 south of network. the Baker’s Hanging junction. • Alternative options to ? • Due to issues of direct access onto the B3081 and be investigated. safety concerns at the Baker’s Hanging junction this site has been rated as having a ‘Very Significant Adverse Impact’ . If a promoter could adequately demonstrate that there is a safe access location and safe vehicle routing then the site could be given a ‘No Significant or Negligible Adverse Impacts’ rating due to the direct access to the strategic road network. Policies DM1 and DM 8 actively address this issue of minimising impacts on the transportation network.

Page 476 of 583

Effects Sustainability Commentary Mitigation P/ Objectives R/A W

16. To support • The proposed extension can only realistically be and accessed by means of road transport, resulting in a encourage the negative impact under this Objective during use of development and working. sustainable • Mitigate impacts transport • It may be possible to use conveyor belts to _ 0 where identified and modes, transport mineral across the site. appropriate. imposing no • As far as reasonably possible negative impacts unmitigated resulting from access and transport will be negative mitigated, as required by Policies DM1 and DM8 of impacts on the Minerals Strategy. them.

Impact on Sensitive Human Receptors • Two residential properties at approximately 260m; • Provision of Ashley Heath to south/west at just over 750m. The appropriate site is large enough that it should be possible to mitigation, following screen these residences satisfactorily, using assessment of likely _ 0 mitigation such as visual and noise attenuation impacts. bunds. • Restoration to • Site is used for recreational/walking/cycling improve landscape of purposes, or is adjacent to land used for such site where possible; purposes; there will be impacts on these users of and to seek to the land . increase and improve 17. To sustain the public access. health and Impact on Existing Settlements quality of life • Transport Assessment of the • Ashley Heath to south/west at just over 750m. to be carried out, population Verwood almost 2km to north west. The site is identifying large enough that it should be possible to screen opportunities for _ 0 the workings satisfactorily, using mitigation such reducing impacts on as visual and noise attenuation bunds. the transport network where appropriate. • Transport related impacts are addressed under Objective 15 above.

Impact on Airport Safety • Site is approximately 8km from airport. Site not 0 0 • No action required. expected to be worked or restored wet. • No impacts expected

• Impact on Recreational Land Restoration to open 18. To enable safe access land following • access to Site currently enjoys open access and there are working and countryside _ _ +/? tracks/paths across it. It is well used for informal improvement of and open recreation. There will be significant impacts on access where possible spaces. users of the site, and surroundings, during and where working. appropriate.

Page 477 of 583

Effects Sustainability Commentary Mitigation P/ Objectives R/A W • Restoration offers the opportunity to • Consider phased restore/improve such access. working and restoration, to • The issue of displacement of existing users onto provide alternative international designations around the site must be options for addressed. recreational use while various parts of the site are worked.

Impact on Public Rights of Way • Restoration and • A statutory right of way (a bridleway) crosses the where appropriate site and will need to be diverted during working. improvement of _ _ + statutory rights of • Restoration will need to re-establish and where way following appropriate improve these statutory rights of way. working. Further assessment of what is needed is required.

Page 478 of 583

Preliminary Hydrological Risk Assessment

Further Controlled Waters Issues/Risks Mitigation information/approval required

• The River Basin Management Plan South West River Basin District • identifies the Avon as Full hydrogeological risk • Appropriate being of ‘poor’ assessment arrangements to be environmental • made for ensuring Flood Risk Assessment quality. In addition, that runoff from the • the River Crane is of Water Framework site does not enter ‘good’ ecological Assessment the Avon or the quality. • Crane or Further assessment of • Potential for groundwater unless potential impacts on water • Watercourses contamination from any silt has first been quality and levels, particularly for • runoff from site. removed. Ponds/lakes, groundwater, is required • • including wet Potential for Fuel stored on site to prior to development. habitats contamination of be appropriately • controlled waters bunded and sealed Assessment of the • Groundwater through spillage or to prevent any feasibility of relocating seepage of pollutants spillage from ponds and associated such as fuel, or silt in entering ground or habitats and species, as water. surface waters. may be necessary. • • Contamination of • On-going Land Drainage Consent to water supplies or monitoring during be obtained from Dorset reduction in amount development and County Council if works of water available for working of the site. may affect flow of an licenses supplies. ordinary watercourse. • Impacts on or removal of surface water features.

Cumulative Impacts Site is likely to be worked as an extension to a quarry in Hampshire. Other proposed and existing mineral development in the vicinity. The Hampshire site is likely to be developed first and in that way the Dorset side, if developed, will not constitute a cumulative impact but rather the extension of an existing site. There is no land allocated for major development in the Christchurch and East Dorset Consolidated Plan, or in the New Forest District Sites and Development Management DPD Jan 2012 (as amended by Proposed modifications Sept 2013) within 5Km of the proposal.

Page 479 of 583

Summary

Potential Benefits Potential Impacts

• Further assessment required to determine potential archaeological impacts; they are likely to be capable of mitigation, but this may take the form of a reduction in the size of the site. • There will be significant impacts on use of the site and area for recreational uses, with likely closures of parts of the site during working . However the site is big enough to maintain parts open while other parts are shut. Restoration has the potential to restore/improve opportunities for recreation and • It is likely that the site will be able to provide a open access in the area. significant amount of aggregates required for maintenance and construction of the built • Transport impacts could potentially be significant, environment, making an important contribution to but it is likely that the site is large enough that Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole’s (and other Mineral access will be provided in an area that minimises Planning Authorities) supply options. However, no impacts. Further assessment required. details on the size/quality of the mineral resource • Impacts on surface and groundwater are not yet has yet been received. known, and detailed assessment will be required. • Restoration has the potential to restore/recreate Mitigation, if required, not yet known. heathland and also improve public access/recreation • It is likely that there will be some landscape impacts facilities in the area. but it is expected that these will be capable of mitigation. • Nature conservation impacts are of key importance, given the site’s proximity to Natura 2000 sites, the bird and other species found on the site and in the vicinity and the provision of recreational opportunities provided by the site. Further assessment, including Appropriate Assessment, is required and it is not known yet what mitigation will be required.

Overall Recommendation: This is a large site, adjacent to another area that has already been included in Hampshire County Council’s adopted Minerals and Waste Plan. As a free –standing site there are a number of issues and uncertainties that justify its exclusion from the Mineral Sites Plan at this time, while awaiting provision of further information. It is also not clear when this site might be expected to be developed, which may not be in the proposed Mineral Sites Plan period. On the basis of the evidence available the nominated site appears to be subject to significant constraints and it is not clear whether these may be capable of satisfactory mitigation. The site is not considered suitable for inclusion in the Draft Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Mineral Sites Plan at the present time unless exceptional circumstances (not currently present) arise. The site remains part of the mineral resource of Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole but is not at this time included in the Draft Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Mineral Sites Plan.

Page 480 of 583

Aggregates: AS28 – Gallows’ Hill A&B No change – site is not proposed for inclusion in the Mineral Sites Plan

At this time, only the Stage 1 Assessment has been carried out on Gallows Hill ‘A’ – this is included below. No assessment has been carried out on Gallows Hill ‘B’. Very limited information has been supplied for either site, but particularly for Site ‘B’. It has not been progressed by the Mineral Planning Authority due to lack of information available It is understood that assessment work carried out on Site ‘A’ has revealed hydrogeological constraints. Until advised otherwise, the Mineral Planning Authority are treating Site ‘A’ as withdrawn

Page 481 of 583

Stage 1 Site Assessment – Gallows Hill Site ‘A’

Site Information

Adjacent to and north of Stoke Heath, East Stoke, Wareham, Dorset Site Location Grid Reference SY 851 909

District/Borough Purbeck District Council

Parish/Town Council East Stoke CP

Site Nominee/Owner Land and Mineral Management (Agent) on behalf of Holme Sand and Landownership issues? Ballast Any Mineral Operator No known landownership issues. interest

Site is promoted by mineral operator, and would form a follow-on (though not an extension) to for an existing quarry. Not previously worked. Historic records indicate the existence of three Mineral Planning History permissions in the general vicinity of the site - reference numbers 6/80/115, 6/87/656 and 300256 - difficult to establish which, if any, of these covered Is the site an extension to your site. existing site? The certificate for 6/87/656 appears to relate to the ARC concrete site to Has it been considered the north of the road, did not permit mineral extraction, and expired in for minerals 2013. development in the past? Partly worked? None of these permissions (or any others relating to the site) were included on Dorset's First List of Sites under the Environment Act 1995 and consequently any then extant minerals permissions relating to your site would, by law, have expired in the 1990's under the terms of the Environment Act.

Legal or time-related

constraints

Access to markets?

Is there geological evidence of the presence

and viability of the mineral?

Does the sequential test for flooding indicate that

the site is appropriate for the proposed use?

Extraction of sand Development proposed Potential annual output (tpa) 100,000 - 150,000 tonnes estimated

Page 482 of 583

Estimated reserve 1 million tonnes Expected life of operation Approximately 10 years

Site is approximately 8.8 ha in area. Existing land use - predominantly agriculture Existing Agricultural Land Classification - site is Grade 4 (poor quality agricultural land).

Description of Site Proposed Restoration – not known at present Development of this site would not remove the peripheral vegetation which appears to be of ecological importance. The only habitats which would be at risk would be Semi-improved Acid Grassland and Marshy Grassland, both of which would be reproduced in the site restoration.

Site is adjacent to land of national and international biodiversity Summary of Site importance. Designations/Constraints Potential for hydrogeological connectivity with protected Stoke Heath to the south.

Planning Purbeck’s Future – Purbeck Local Plan Part 1 – Adopted November 2012 Relevant Local Planning Policy Policy DH – 400m Heathland Buffer Zone & 5km Buffer Zone Policy CZ – Consultation Zone

Grants Farm approximately 250m south; Golf Club approximately 500+m Residential properties east; campsite approximately 650m to south/west. and other land uses in the vicinity of the site Aggregate recycling operation adjacent to the east; former industrial/commercial use immediately across road and to north/east.

Traffic Generation & Directly onto adjacent road, no more detail known at present Access Considerations Possibly 40-60 HGV movements per day, to/from Masters Pit to the south

Page 483 of 583

Appraisal of Site – Using Site Assessment Criteria as set out in The Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Minerals Strategy 2014 In Appendix 1 (p. 242) of the Minerals Strategy a methodology for assessing sites nominated or identified for consideration as future quarry sites is set out. Each site is assessed against 25 criteria, C1 to C25, reflecting the potential environmental, economic and social impacts/benefits of its development. Assessment is qualitative, and each criterion is given a score as a colour, representing its expected impact, with or without mitigation. These criteria and their responses are set out below, along with further comments from relevant consultees.

Topic: Biodiversity. SA Objective: To maintain, conserve and enhance biodiversity.

Criterion C1 - Impact on European/international designations. A

This proposed site is adjacent to the designated heathland SAC/SPA/Ramsar. At present the effect of working Site A on the adjacent mire which flows into the heathland sites is unknown and further hydrological studies would be needed to rule this out/inform mitigation. However, restoration to heathland/acid grassland after mineral extraction would be a significant conservation gain as part of the Puddletown Road Policy Area. Development of this area is rated ‘A’ until further assessment is carried out, and it is determined whether appropriate and adequate mitigation can be applied. Dorset County Council 27/5/16

Criterion C2 - Impact on areas used by Annex 1 bird species. A

Surveys would be needed to determine how both this area is used by Annex 1 bird species as this information is not yet known. Of particular importance to this site proposal as this is more connected to the adjacent designated heathlands. Mitigation would need to include phasing of work, enhancement/creation of suitable habitat off site or reduction of site boundary to avoid key areas. Until further assessment carried out, both sites rated ‘A’. Dorset County Council 27/5/16

Criterion C3 - Impact on national designations. C/E

This area is adjacent to SSSI heathland and surveys would be needed to determine how connected the proposed areas are to the SSSI in terms of habitat and species. Mitigation of any effects on the SSSI could include buffer strips at the edge of the site, as well as enhancement of the SSSI habitat. Restoration to heathland after mineral extraction has potential for significant conservation gain and for this reason this criterion is classified C/E. Dorset County Council 27/5/16

Criterion C4 - Impact on protected species. C

Page 484 of 583

Surveys would be needed to determine how this area is used by protected species such as European and common protected reptiles, badgers, dormice etc. These surveys would guide appropriate mitigation to ensure no adverse impact on these species. Both sites rated ‘C’, subject to further assessment. Dorset County Council 27/5/16

Criterion C5 - Impact on local recognitions/designations, including ancient A C woodland and veteran trees.

No Comment Dorset County Council 27/5/16

Possible Mitigation: An Environmental Impact Assessment will be carried out as part of any planning application, including detailed assessment of potential impacts and appropriate responses and mitigation. Appropriate mitigation of any impacts will be required as part of any planning permission granted. If adequate and appropriate mitigation cannot be achieved, the site will not be permitted. This requirement will be identified in the Development Guidelines of any allocation within the Plan. No further action considered necessary at this stage.

Topic: Geodiversity SA Objective: To maintain, conserve and enhance geodiversity.

Criterion C6 - Impact on geodiversity. D

It is not expected that specific scientific gains or geodiversity enhancements will result from quarrying this site, but the exposures may be of interest to the quaternary and tertiary research associations. Provision should be made so that it will be possible to arrange such visits on request. Dorset County Council 4/7/16

Possible Mitigation: None specifically required, but provision should be made so that it will be possible to arrange such visits on request.

Topic: Landscape SA Objective: To maintain, conserve and enhance the landscape, including townscape, seascape and the coast.

Criterion C7 – Impact on designated landscapes.

No significant impact/negligible. Dorset County Council 1.6.2016

Page 485 of 583

Criterion C8 – What is landscape capacity to accommodate proposed development. B

This area lies within the Bovington/Affpuddle Heath/Forest Mosaic Landscape Character Area (Purbeck non AONB Landscape Character Assessment). It is a flat site but is open to glimpsed views from the Puddletown Road, particularly in the winter months and more distant views from the south in the Dorset AONB. Development could contribute to the overall cumulative landscape and visual impact of development along the Puddletown Road. Development could have a significant landscape and visual impact on the sites character and visual amenity. It is essential therefore that any future extraction should be limited in extent and be based on a detailed and independent assessment of landscape character so any future operations conserve and enhance key features and views and mitigation and restoration reflects existing character. Dorset County Council 1.6.2016

Possible Mitigation : An Environmental Impact Assessment will be carried out as part of any planning application, including detailed assessment on the landscape resulting from extracting mineral from this site. It is noted that impacts will be temporary and restoration of an agreed landscape/landform will be agreed and implemented as part of any planning permission granted. This requirement will be identified in the Development Guidelines of any allocation within the Plan. No further action considered necessary at this stage.

Criterion C9 – Impact on historic landscapes. A  E

This area is likely to have been heathland since the Bronze Age. Further assessment is required, and until this is carried out and the results considered and applied, the rating of this site could be anywhere from ‘A’ (Very Significant Adverse Impact) to ‘E’ (Positive Impact). Dorset County Council 10.6.2016

Page 486 of 583

Possible Mitigation : Full assessment, including Environmental Impact Assessment, will be carried out as part of any planning application. It is noted that impacts of working will be temporary and restoration of an agreed landscape/landform will be agreed and implemented as part of any planning permission granted. The archaeological potential on the site is noted and acknowledged. It is considered that no further action needs to be taken at this stage, apart from clearly noting the likely presence of the archaeology as part of the site allocation, and requiring full assessment and appropriate mitigation at the planning application and development stage. It is considered that the Development Management policies of the Minerals Strategy, especially Policy DM 7, together with the policy stance of the National Planning Policy Framework, provide adequate protection to any archaeology that may be found during development – to the point that planning permission would be refused in the case of unacceptable and unmitigatable impacts. This requirement will be identified in the Development Guidelines of any allocation within the Plan. No further action considered necessary at this stage.

Historic Environment

Criterion C10 – Impact on historic buildings. ??

To be assessed…

Criterion C11 – Impact on archaeology. A  D

The impact on below-ground archaeology needs to be assessed and evaluated before an informed planning decision could be made. Only when these have been undertaken would the archaeological impact be understood – at present it could be anywhere from category A (‘Very Significant Adverse Impact’) to category D (‘No Significant or Negligible Adverse Impacts’). Dorset County Council 10.6.2016

Page 487 of 583

Possible Mitigation: Full assessment, including Environmental Impact Assessment, will be carried out as part of any planning application. This will include assessment of heritage impacts and appropriate mitigation. It is noted that impacts will be temporary and restoration will be agreed and implemented as part of any planning permission granted. This requirement will be identified in the Development Guidelines of any allocation within the Plan. It is considered that the Development Management policies of the Minerals Strategy, especially Policy DM 7, together with the policy stance of the National Planning Policy Framework, and the requirements of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act provide adequate protection to the heritage assets – to the point that planning permission would be refused in the case of unacceptable and unmitigatable impacts. No further action considered necessary at this stage.

Topic: Water SA Objective: To maintain, conserve and enhance the quality of ground, surface and sea waters and manage the consumption of water in a sustainable way.

Criterion C12 - Impact on hydrogeology or groundwater. A  D

The criteria classification for this site proposal should be ‘A’ as it is adjacent to a SAC/SPA/Ramsar/SSSI that is likely to be groundwater dependent. However, provided hydrogeological assessment shows no significant impact on adjacent SSSI, SAC, SPA and Ramsar, there is no objection to this site being proposed for minerals extraction. A hydrogeological risk assessment would be required at the site allocation stage. Other detailed assessments listed above would be required at the planning application stage. The Lead Local Flood Authority (Dorset County Council) must be consulted on this proposed allocation. Both sites have a boundary with Dorset Heaths SAC and Dorset Heathlands SPA/ Ramsar. There is the potential that even a relatively shallow excavation could impact on the habitats in the SAC due to interception of shallow groundwater. Any proposal will need a detailed assessment of this risk in particular. Environment Agency 17 June 2016

Criterion C13 – Impact on surface waters. A  D

Page 488 of 583

The criteria classification for this area should be ‘A’ (Very Significant Adverse Impact) as there is a drain and pond within site. Subject to further assessment, it is expected that these can be safely relocated, should the site be developed for minerals extraction. The Lead Local Flood Authority (Dorset County Council) must be consulted on this proposed allocation. The site proposal has a boundary with Dorset Heaths SAC and Dorset Heathlands SPA/ Ramsar. There is the potential that even a relatively shallow excavation could impact on the habitats in the SAC due to interception of shallow groundwater. Any proposal will need a detailed assessment of this risk in particular. Environment Agency 17 June 2016

Criterion C14 - Impact on flooding or coastal stability. A  D

The criteria classification for this site proposal should be ‘D’ (No Significant or Negligible Impact) as it is in Flood Zone 1 A hydrogeological risk assessment would be required at the site allocation stage. Other detailed assessments listed above would be required at the planning application stage. The Lead Local Flood Authority (Dorset County Council) must be consulted on this proposed allocation. The site has a boundary with Dorset Heaths SAC and Dorset Heathlands SPA/ Ramsar. There is the potential that even a relatively shallow excavation could impact on the habitats in the SAC due to interception of shallow groundwater. Any proposal will need a detailed assessment of this risk in particular. Environment Agency 17 June 2016

Possible Mitigation : Full hydrological assessment will be required as part of any planning application, with measures to protect groundwater and surface water flows to be identified and implemented. This requirement will be identified in the Development Guidelines of any allocation within the Plan. No further action considered necessary at this stage.

Topic: Soil SA Objective: To maintain, conserve and enhance soil quality

Criterion C15 - Impact on existing soils or land type (including BMV land). D

This site is Agricultural Land Classification Grade 4 - ‘poor’ agricultural land. Dorset County Council 5 July 2016

Possible Mitigation: Soils will be stripped and removed to be stored and returned as part of restoration, according to best practice. Restoration could bring the land back into agricultural production. In conjunction with this, areas of the site may be restored to a nature conservation use.

Page 489 of 583

Topic: Air Quality SA Objective: To protect and improve air quality and reduce the impacts of noise

Criterion C16 – Impact on AQMAs. D

No AQMAs to be directly affected - score of ‘D’ (Less Significant Adverse Impact) applies. Dorset County Council 5 July 2016

Possible Mitigation : Noise mitigation will be addressed at the planning application stage, with appropriate mitigation to be included in the development of the site.

Topic: Material Assets (Economic development) SA Objectives: To conserve and safeguard mineral resources. To promote the use of alternative materials To encourage sustainable economic growth To provide an adequate supply of minerals to meet society's needs.

Criterion C17 - Impact on economic development. D

The site is currently grassland and there is potential for restoration to heathland at a lower level, making a positive contribution to biodiversity. The site is currently (partly) used for agriculture. It is not known at this time whether this use will/can be resumed after quarrying. The working of this site will maintain supply of construction aggregate and maintain the provision of jobs (including skilled jobs) in the area. The working of this site is not expected to have a significant impact on local businesses/tourism, and is expected to make an overall positive contribution to the local economy. Dorset County Council 5 July 2016

Possible Mitigation: An Environmental Impact Assessment will be carried out as part of any planning application, identifying potential impacts and appropriate responses and mitigation. Appropriate mitigation will be required as part of any planning permission granted. This will be identified in the Development Guidelines within the Plan. No further action considered necessary at this stage.

Topic: Social Considerations - Human Health and Amenity, Airport Safety and Cumulative Impacts SA Objectives: To sustain the health and quality of life of the population

Criterion C18 - Impact on Sensitive Human Receptors. D/E

Page 490 of 583

It is not expected that this site will impact on any sensitive receptors. Dorset County Council 5 July 2016

Criterion C19 - Impact on existing settlements. E

Bovington Camp lies to the south-west and Bere Regis lies to the north of these areas. It is not expected that the development of this area will have any impact, visual or transport-related, on existing settlements given that existing vegetation provides screening and aggregate from these areas is proposed for processing at Masters Pit. Dorset County Council 5 July 2016

Possible Mitigation: An Environmental Impact Assessment will be carried out as part of any planning application, identifying potential impacts and appropriate responses and mitigation. Appropriate mitigation (e.g. visual and noise attenuation bunds and reducing noise at source where possible and appropriate) will be required where necessary as part of any development of the site. This will be identified in the Development Guidelines within the Plan. No further action considered necessary at this stage.

Criterion C20 - Impact on airport safety

Site is approximately 25 km from Bournemouth Airport and wet working/restoration is not proposed. No impacts expected. Dorset County Council 5 July 2016

Criterion C21 - Effects on cumulative impacts. B

The proposed area would be an extension to an existing site in an area where there is other mineral working (along the Puddletown road), indicating an ‘A’ score. However, it is expected that the site would not be worked until existing working at Masters Pit are complete. It is expected that the aggregate would be moved by lorry, thereby increasing the level of lorry traffic on the Puddletown Road but the distance involved would be relatively short. The proposal is within 5Km (by road) of a site allocated in the Purbeck Local Plan Part 1 (adopted Nov 2012) (Policy CEN) for development of 200 dwellings and community facilities, off Worgret Road, Wareham. Traffic arising from the new residential development will add to general traffic levels in Wareham and on the A352. Further development is being considered within 5km of the proposed sites, through the Partial Review of the Purbeck Local Plan. Dorset County Council 5 July 2016

Page 491 of 583

Possible Mitigation : The proposal will include mitigation for visual and noise impacts, following guidance and best practice, to limit cumulative effects. The site would be restored as soon as worked. The proposal will include mitigation for visual and noise impacts, following guidance and best practice. To minimise traffic impacts, following a Transport Assessment at the planning application stage, measures such as holding back lorry traffic during peak traffic times could be used if necessary. A traffic impact assessment report has been prepared, indicating that that roads in the area are capable of carrying the proposed quarry traffic.

Topic: Social Considerations – Carbon Emissions SA Objectives: To adapt to and mitigate the impacts of climate change

Criterion C22 - Impact on carbon emissions B

Site will rely on road transport for access. The site is currently a mixture of grassland and other agriculture. The proposed restoration would likely be either back to agriculture or to heathland, or some combination. The site will be accessed by road, with material being taken a short distance south to Masters Pit. It is not expected that there would be a permanent loss of vegetation. Dorset County Council 5 July 2016

Possible Mitigation: Guidance and best practice will be followed, to minimise carbon emissions as far as is practicable.

Topic: Social Considerations SA Objectives: To enable safe access to countryside and open spaces

Criterion C23 – Impact on recreational land D

The site is private land and has no formal or informal access right or recreational use. There could be opportunities to introduce public access following restoration. This justifies a score of a ‘D’ (No Significant or Negligible Impact), possibly mitigated to an ‘E’ (Positive Impact) if public access could be secured. Dorset County Council 5 July 2016

Criterion C24- Impact on public rights of way D

Page 492 of 583

Site A does not affect any rights of way. Development for minerals extraction to consider options for improved access through restoration. This justifies a score of a ‘D’ (No Significant or Negligible Impact), possibly mitigated to an ‘E’ (Positive Impact) if public access could be secured. Dorset County Council 5 July 2016

Criterion C25 - Are the access proposals acceptable C D

It would be reasonable to expect the existing works entrance that lies immediately to the east of this site to be used. The verge at the end of the west bell-mouth radii shows signs of over-running, probably by the rear axles of longer vehicles and doesn't have an exit taper and this should be addressed. It is expected that the issues identified can be overcome to provide a satisfactory access. Dorset County Council 5 July 2016 ------AS28a Gallows Hill South Site Assessment This would be a new site and require a new access. This must be formed onto the Puddletown Road. It is considered that this could be achievable subject to possible 3 rd party issues and adequate visibility being provided and maintained. It is understood material would be processed at an existing site to the east. The advantage of this would be left turn manoeuvres into the site and right turns from the access thus causing little or no delay to passing traffic. Dorset County Council February 2017

Possible Mitigation: If developed, a Transport Assessment would be required, identifying possible impacts and appropriate mitigation.

Page 493 of 583

Initial Site Assessment including Input from Specialist Consultees

Traffic/Access

We note that this is a new site, with processing taking place at Masters Pit which would cease extraction operations. As such, we consider it unlikely that there Highways England would be an impacts on the SRN, providing that extraction operations at Masters Pit do indeed cease.

Public Rights of Way

DCC Rights of Way Comments have been requested…

Protection of Water Resources (Hydrology/groundwater/ surface water management and flooding)

Site A No objection to Area A being proposed for minerals extraction provided hydrogeological assessment shows no significant impact on adjacent SSSI, SAC, SPA and Ramsar. A hydrogeological risk assessment would be required at the site allocation stage. Other detailed assessments listed above would be required at the planning application stage. Both Sites We have no objection to the proposed allocations at this site, provided there is no significant impact on the River Piddle and any other watercourses in the vicinity, also provided there is no significant impact on the adjacent SAC/SPA/ Ramsar and SSSI. A hydrogeological risk assessment is required at the site allocation stage. Other detailed assessments would be required at the planning application stage. The Lead Local Flood Authority (Dorset County Council) must be consulted on Environment this proposed allocation. Agency Both sites have a boundary with Dorset Heaths SAC and Dorset Heathlands SPA/ Ramsar. There is the potential that even a relatively shallow excavation could impact on the habitats in the SAC due to interception of shallow groundwater. Any proposal will need a detailed assessment of this risk in particular. Studies required and issues to consider • Hydrogeological assessment at site allocation stage • Flood Risk Assessment at planning application stage • Ecological study if water features present in site • Restoration proposals should incorporate wetland features which will contribute to the aspirations of the Biodiversity Strategy Protect and enhance water features in site Environment Agency – July 2016

Page 494 of 583

Protection of Water Resources (Hydrology/groundwater/ surface water management and flooding)

AS28a Gallows Hill South Site Assessment No grounds for objection, subject to detail: The site falls entirely within Flood Zone 1 (low risk – fluvial flooding) according to the Environment Agency’s relevant flood modelling. However it is shown to be at some theoretical risk of surface water flooding by relevant mapping, which Lead Local Flood indicates a defined flow path and ditch feature following the southern boundary, and an existing pond feature located in the south-eastern corner of the site, Authority (LLFA) - during severe rainfall events (1:100/1000yr). DCC A site specific strategy of surface water management should be requested that does not increase rates of runoff or generate off site worsening, in compliance with the NPPF. Prior Land Drainage Consent may be required from DCC as relevant LLFA, for any works offering an obstruction to flow within a channel or ditch with the status of Ordinary Watercourse.

Further work required?

Nature Conservation – Biodiversity Impacts

AS28 Gallows Hill In Natural England’s view there is significant potential for aggregate extraction within the area shown (which includes Gallows Hill B as well) and commensurate gains in biodiversity could be achieved. However, there are a number of significant biodiversity issues which at present are not well identified or explained in the site information presented. Most of these affect particular parts of the potential allocation site and in our view mean that there are some areas within the site that extraction should not take place, and others where further work is needed to establish whether or not extraction could happen without significant harm. In these circumstances, biodiversity Natural England enhancement could be achieved both through appropriate restoration and comments through appropriate management of areas within the proposed allocation site where extraction did not take place. The area shown south of the Puddletown Road – Gallows Hill A - is immediately adjacent to the part of Stokeford Heaths SSSI called Stoke Heath (also part of the Dorset Heaths SAC, the Dorset Heathlands SPA and the Dorset Heathlands Ramsar site). Stoke Heath has a high quality mire running along its length and draining from the NW to SE and then southwards. In these circumstances, there may be an adverse hydrological affect from mineral winning immediately to the north which might prevent or limit working of this area. Detailed hydrological work is obviously needed to evaluate impacts. In this case, it is impossible to predict what the outcome of this work might be.

Page 495 of 583

Historic Environment

Historic England No comment. Comments

Page 496 of 583

Purbeck Stone: PK15 Downs Quarry Extension This site is now permitted and no longer forms part of the plan process, A modification is proposed to remove the allocation. No further assessment of this site has been undertaken. November 2018)

Nominee: Lovell Purbeck Ltd Agent : Land and Mineral Site Area : approximately 0.67 ha Site Name/Location : Management Production : 2,500 tpa PK15 Downs Quarry Extension Local Authority : Purbeck District Reserve : approximately 17,000 – Council 22,000 tonnes Mineral Type : Purbeck Stone

Impact Assessment Scoring

Strong Minor Minor - Strong Positive Negligible or Negative - Negative + Positive ++ 0 ? Uncertain - Impact No Effect Impact Impact Impact

Timescales for effects: P/W: Preparation and Working R/A : Restoration and Afteruse

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

1. To move waste • This Objective is not relevant to this site management N/A N/A • N/A nomination up the waste hierarchy

European/International Designations 0 0 • No action required. • No impacts expected.

Annex 1 Bird Species 0 0 • No action required. • No impacts expected. 2. To maintain, National Designations conserve and 0 0 • No action required. enhance • No impacts expected. biodiversity Protected species • • Greater Horseshoe Bat is known to inhabit the Ecological surveys required, with 0 0 area close to the proposed site. appropriate mitigation • Whilst it is unlikely there would be any effect on to be implemented. GHB which would result from quarrying at this location, information would be needed to

Page 497 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A support the allocation to demonstrate no likely significant effect.

Local recognitions/designations, including 0 0 ancient woodland and veteran trees • No action required. • No impacts expected.

• The Purbeck limestone group has an important • association with the geology of the Jurassic Note potential for Coast World Heritage Site. Working quarries in quarries to yield Purbeck have been known to yield important fossils or other 0 fossils, including dinosaur footprints. They are material of also of on-going interest for the study of early geodiversity interest. 3. To maintain, Cretaceous stratigraphy. • Visits or other conserve and • investigation of + These interests should be acknowledged with the enhance assumption that geologists and the Jurassic working sites may be geodiversity. Coast Team hosted by DCC will respond requested. positively to any opportunities to recover fossils • Investigate potential or record and study unusual features if they are and/or benefits of + discovered. In terms of geodiversity there is a leaving quarried face presumption in favour of an appropriate level of open after quarrying activity continuing in order to sustain restoration. these on-going interests.

• Simple hydrological assessment required to determine possible impacts, on ground and surface waters, with appropriate mitigation to be 4. To maintain, Groundwater implemented. conserve and • enhance the • Site overlies Secondary Appropriate arrangements should be put quality of 0 0 aquifers. No impact on Source in place to ensure that the water leaving ground, Protection Zones. No licenced the site and entering the watercourses or surface and supplies. groundwater is of an acceptable quality. sea waters • Any fuel on site should be properly and manage stored to avoid contamination in case of the spillage. consumption • of water in a Appropriate arrangements should be sustainable installed for surface water and silt collection and fuel storage to prevent way. Surface Water contamination of groundwater 0 0 • Site is within 500m of a resources. watercourse. • The combined impacts of Purbeck Limestone Quarries should be assessed

Page 498 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A where a number of sites affect the same water resource or receiving water course.

5. To reduce Flooding/Coastal Stability flood risk and 0 0 • • No action required. improve flood Site is entirely in Flood Risk Zone 1, no risk of management. flooding.

Archaeology • An archaeological evaluation of this site has • Should any been undertaken already (Thames Valley archaeological Archaeological Services report dated August remains be 6. To maintain, 0 0 conserve and 2010 and with site code DQLM10/64). discovered, adequate provision to be made enhance the • The results were effectively negative with regard for preservation, historic to below-ground archaeology, and no above- excavation or environment ground historic features are known at the site. (including recording, as appropriate. archaeological Historic Landscapes sites, historic • Further consideration • The local landscape bears the imprint of previous buildings, to be given to quarrying dating from the Roman period conservation restoration proposals, 0 0 onwards. It could be argued that the present site areas, historic in terms of historic would be a continuation of the process, and if parks and landscapes. gardens and the site is to be restored afterwards the impact other locally would be limited in time anyway. distinctive features and Historic Buildings their settings). • This is a quarry set in a quarrying landscape and 0 0 the nearest listed buildings are too far away to • No action required. be affected. • No significant impact expected.

7. To maintain, Landscape Capacity • Assessment of potential visual conserve and impacts will be required at planning • There may be an issue with enhance the application stage. landscape, cumulative impact on residential _ 0 • including amenity. This proposal is only All appropriate mitigation to be townscape, satisfactory if other quarries in carried out, including prior seascape and immediate vicinity have been restoration of other quarries as the coast. restored prior to its development. stated.

Page 499 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A • Appropriate restoration proposals in line with Landscape Management Designated Landscapes _ 0 Guidelines referred to in Minerals • Less significant adverse impact. Strategy.

• Soil to be properly • stripped and stored 9. To maintain, Site is ‘Good to Moderate’ agricultural land. prior to working; conserve and • _ 0 Soils will be stripped and protected during protected during enhance soil preparation and working and reused on site as working; and re- quality. part of restoration. spread on site after working.

• No specific action required; site 10. To conserve • The site would make an important contribution to development to take and safeguard + + 0 the supply of Purbeck Stone for Bournemouth, into consideration mineral Dorset and Poole and all other potential markets. relevant impacts and resources. mitigate where appropriate.

11. To promote the use of • This proposal does not promote the use of _ 0 • No action required. alternative alternative materials. materials.

Page 500 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

• This site proposal is expected to contribute to economic development on two levels – directly through the provision of employment at the site to be developed and indirectly through the • Impacts on local provision of Purbeck Stone required for new businesses will be build, repairs and maintenance, decorative and identified and 13. To promote monument work and landscaping work. Both mitigation during and levels are expected to maintain employment, working will be encourage skilled and unskilled. + 0 applied where sustainable • Mineral working has the potential to negatively necessary – e.g. economic affect businesses in the locality, e.g. through holding back quarry growth contributing to traffic congestion, noise, visual traffic during peak and perception related issues. travel times, further screening.. • Restoration to agriculture will offer some economic benefits through both the agriculture itself and the recreational attraction and use in the wider area (i.e. riding, walking).

• Developing land as a quarry is expected to have some negative impacts regarding climate change, due primarily to machinery used and transportation of mineral away from site. • Use energy efficient However, these will in relative terms be negligible. plant and machinery. 14. To adapt to • The Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Minerals • and mitigate Implement restoration Strategy seeks to address and minimise such the impacts of _ 0 which provides impacts through Policy CC1 which requires climate appropriate habitats operators to take into consideration climate change. to help to increase change impacts and their possible mitigation for resilience of any proposed minerals development. flora/fauna. • The development management policies, e.g. DM 1, also address and seek to minimise the issue of sustainable development and climate change.

• Any proposal for this • Access proposed is via the existing Downs Quarry site would need to be 15. To minimise to the south of the identified site. This in turn has accompanied by a the negative a suitable access directly onto the B3069. The trip Transport Assessment impacts of generation of the proposed site is not great (4 to which will need to waste and 16 movements per day) and is likely to follow provide access details minerals reduced extraction within the existing site as and consider vehicle transport on _ 0 existing resources become exhausted. routing. The TA should the transport be scoped with the • While routes from the site to the A351 will go network, Transport through either Langton Matravers or Kingston, the mitigating any Development route is via a B class road and the number of trips residual Management Team. is relatively low. Provided that there is little impacts. increase in HGV traffic over the existing operation, • Transport Assessment there is little adverse impact and the site is will identify opportunities for Page 501 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A considered to have a ‘Less Significant Adverse reducing impacts on Impact’. the transport network. • Policies DM1 and DM 8 of the Minerals Strategy actively address this issue of minimising impacts on the transportation network.

16. To support and • encourage the The proposed extension can only realistically be use of accessed by means of road transport, resulting in sustainable a negative impact under this Objective during • Mitigate impacts transport development and working. _ 0 where identified and modes, • As far as reasonably possible negative impacts appropriate. imposing no resulting from access and transport will be unmitigated mitigated, as required by Policies DM1 and DM8 negative of the Minerals Strategy. impacts on them.

• Provision of Impact on Sensitive Human Receptors appropriate _ • Site is an extension of existing quarry in an area mitigation, following with a long history of quarrying. Closest property assessment of likely approximately 50m to the east, others within impacts. 250m to east/north/south. • Restoration to 0 • However, the context of the site is of stone improve landscape of quarrying and other properties in the area are site where possible; very close to quarries/service yards. and to seek to facilitate public access. • 17. To sustain the _ _ ? Impacts could be ‘Less Significant’, given the • Restoration of some health and context of the site. local quarrying quality of life activity, prior to of the development of this population site. Impact on Existing Settlements • Screening, bunding, • Harman’s Cross 850m to the north, Acton and standoffs will be used Langton Matravers around 1km to west/south to mitigate impacts west. Site is completely screened from latter two. where considered • Harman’s Cross might have partial views up to the necessary. _ ? 0 site, depending on screening to be implemented. • Transport impacts to • It is assumed that this site will not be developed be considered through until other locations have been completed; Transport Assessment, therefore there will not be any intensification of as considered above. existing traffic levels generated by the proposed extension. However existing traffic levels

Page 502 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A generated by the current operation will continue for a longer period of time.

Impact on Airport Safety • Site is approximately 23 km from airport, with no 0 0 • No action required. wet working or restoration. • No impacts expected.

Impact on Recreational Land • Assessment of potential impacts, 0 0 • Site is agricultural land, with no formal/informal with appropriate recreation use. 18. To enable safe mitigation identified. access to • countryside Restoration to and open Impact on Public Rights of Way include considering how it might be spaces. 0 0 • No rights of way cross the site or run adjacent to possible to improve its boundary. public access in the area.

Page 503 of 583

Preliminary Hydrological Risk Assessment

Further Controlled Waters Issues/Risks Mitigation information/approval required

Flood Risk Commentary Site is entirely within Flood Zone 1 No grounds for objection, subject to detail: The site falls entirely within Flood Zone 1 (low risk – fluvial flooding) according to the Environment Agency’s relevant flood modelling, and is not shown to be at any theoretical risk of surface water flooding, by relevant mapping. Given the prevailing geology, it is likely that surface water would be managed via infiltration. A site specific strategy for surface water management is a requirement for all development (NPPF), as no off site worsening should be offered. Both surface and ground water derived from the site is assumed to migrate north towards the Downshay Farm grouping of properties. Prior Land Drainage Consent may be required from DCC as relevant LLFA, for any works offering an obstruction to flow within a channel with the status of Ordinary Watercourse.

Cumulative Impacts Site is an extension to an existing quarry in an area where there is a high concentration and long history of mineral extraction. As an extension, it is not expected that there will be any cumulative impacts for traffic.

Page 504 of 583

There is potential for cumulative visual impacts if the proposed extension is worked while the current site is still in restoration. This would be a time limited impact, and should be addressed at the planning application stage. The proposal is within 5Km (by road) of a town (Swanage) where allocations for the development of 200 dwellings, employment and retail facilities have been made in the Purbeck Local Plan Part 1 (adopted Nov 2012) (Policy SE). (Site details not yet available). Traffic arising from the new residential development will add to general traffic levels in / around Swanage and on the A351. The combined impacts of Purbeck Limestone Quarries should be assessed where a number of sites affect the same water resource or receiving water course. To reduce cumulative impacts of quarry development, other quarries in the control of the developer should be restored, and stockpiles reduced if necessary/appropriate, before this site is developed. It is expected that these impacts are capable of mitigation.

Summary

Potential Benefits Potential Impacts

• Ensure no impacts from working this site on Greater Horseshoe Bats. • No new or intensified transport impacts expected; • Provision of Purbeck Stone. detailed Transport Assessment required at planning • Support for the Purbeck Stone industry and permission stage to consider impacts and identify employment, both locally and wherever Purbeck appropriate mitigation. Stone is exported and used, with associated • Assessment of impacts on landscape capacity and of economic benefits. visual impacts required, with relevant mitigation • Use of the stone for heritage building works/repairs, identified. and for new buildings. • Potentially significant impacts on local amenity, • Geodiversity benefits, through exposures created particularly neighbouring properties. Full and fossils found. assessment of possible impacts will be required, with relevant mitigation identified. • Possibility of improved public access • Further assessment is required to determine whether there will be any archaeology or other heritage issues, with relevant mitigation identified.

Overall Recommendation: Assessment already carried out has flagged up archaeology, landscape/visual impact and local amenity as the key issues to be addressed as part of working this site. Further assessment will be required to identify satisfactory mitigation and to identify if there are any additional impacts that will require mitigation. As the site is an extension of an existing site, it is expected that any impacts should be capable of satisfactory mitigation.

Other Building Stone: BS01 Manor Farm Quarry

Site Name: BS01 Manor Farm Quarry Nominee: Mr & Mrs Johnson (Quarry Farm) Location: West of Manor Farm, Melbury Abbas Agent: Land and Mineral Management Mineral Type: Shaftsbury Green Sandstone Local Authority: North Dorset District Council

Site Area: 4 ha Production: c. 2,000 tpa Reserve: c. 25,000 tonnes

Impact Assessment Scoring

Strong Minor Minor - Strong Positive Negligible or Negative - Negative + Positive ++ 0 ? Uncertain - Impact No Effect Impact Impact Impact

Timescales for effects: P/W: Preparation and Working R/A : Restoration and Afteruse

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

1. To move waste management • This Objective is not relevant to this site up the waste N/A N/A • N/A nomination hierarchy and promote net self sufficiency

European/International Designations 0 0 • No action required. • No impacts expected

Annex 1 Bird Species 0 0 • No action required. • No impacts expected

2. To maintain, National Designations conserve and 0 0 • No action required. • enhance No impacts expected biodiversity Protected species 0 0 • No action required. • No impacts expected

Local recognitions/designations, including 0 0 ancient woodland and veteran trees • No action required. • No impacts expected

Page 506 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

• Operator to be asked to • Large exposures in the upper greensand permit visits/access to view are uncommon inland from the coast in exposures where possible 3. To maintain, Dorset. There would be a benefit in conserve and during working. + ? allowing geologists access to recording any enhance new exposures here. • Opportunities to leave geodiversity. faces exposed when • Retaining exposures could be considered working is finished to be but only if appropriate. considered.

• Hydrological assessment required Groundwater to determine possible impacts, on • Site is on a Principal Aquifer. No ground and surface waters, with impact on any Source Protection appropriate mitigation to be Zones. One licensed abstraction implemented. ? 0 4. To maintain, site within 250m. • Appropriate arrangements should conserve and • Environment Agency advise a be put in place to ensure that the enhance the Hydrogeological Risk Assessment water leaving the site and entering quality of will be required. the watercourses or groundwater is ground, of an acceptable quality. surface and • Any fuel on site should be properly sea waters stored to avoid contamination in and manage case of spillage. the Surface Water • Appropriate arrangements should consumption • Spring and watercourse within be installed for surface water and of water in a 250m of the site boundary. Ponds silt collection and fuel storage to sustainable within 500m. way. ? 0 prevent contamination of • Assessment required to determine groundwater resources. possible impacts on hydrogeology. • Land Drainage Consent to be Impacts to be appropriately obtained from Dorset County mitigated Council if works may affect flow of an ordinary watercourse.

6. To maintain, Archaeology • Archaeological survey conserve and • The presence of two Scheduled Monuments to of the area required as enhance the the south of the proposal site (1016893 – part of planning historic ? 0 ‘Beacon and circular enclosure on Melbury Hill’ application to assess environment and 1016894 – ‘Cross dyke and linear boundary possible presence and (including on Melbury Hill and Compton Down, Melbury significance of non- archaeological Abbas’), the discovery of a Bronze Age cemetery designated remains sites, historic on a quarry site just to the east, and the and to assess

Page 507 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A buildings, prominent location all indicate the site’s high whether/how these conservation archaeological potential. should be protected areas, historic during working – no • The impact on the setting of the Scheduled parks and further work required Monuments and on below-ground gardens and at site allocation archaeological remains needs to be assessed other locally stage. and if necessary evaluated before an informed distinctive planning decision could be made. • All necessary features and mitigation to be their settings). • Only when these exercises have been implemented prior to undertaken would the archaeological impact be working. understood – at present it could be anywhere from ‘Very Significant’ to ‘No Significant’ • Adequate provision to impacts. be made for preservation, Historic Landscapes excavation or recording, as • The site is on the side of a hill that is a appropriate. prominent landmark that can be seen from much of the Blackmore Vale in particular. • Further consideration ? 0 to be given to • Impact would depend on the extent of restoration proposals, restoration and could be lessened if relatively in terms of historic small areas are quarried at a time and restored landscapes. soon after.

Historic Buildings 0 0 • No action required. • Listed buildings too far away to be affected.

Landscape Capacity • Full assessment of potential visual • Major in principle concern regarding the impacts will be significant negative cumulative landscape, visual required at planning 7. To maintain, _ _ ? & amenity impacts this will have on the Area of application stage. conserve and Outstanding Natural Beauty and in particular, enhance the from the well-used paths in the area such as • All appropriate landscape, those on Melbury Hill. mitigation to be including included. townscape, • Appropriate seascape and restoration proposals the coast. Designated Landscapes _ _ ? in line with Landscape • Very Significant adverse impact. Management Guidelines referred to in Minerals Strategy.

8. To protect • Impacts on air quality expected to be negligible. • Environmental and improve 0 0 • protection measures air quality and No AQMAs will be affected by the working of to be put in place to reduce the this site proposal. Any dust resulting from

Page 508 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A impacts of working will be controlled through normal dust- reduce dust and noise noise. suppression measures. impacts. • Any impacts due to noise resulting from mineral working would be expected to be satisfactorily minimised through normal noise mitigation measures, imposed at the planning application stage.

• • Soil appears to be good to moderate quality Soil to be properly 9. To maintain, agricultural land. stripped and stored prior conserve and to working; protected _ 0 • enhance soil Soils will be protected during working and during working; and re- quality. restoration could bring the land back into spread on site after agricultural production. working.

• 10. To conserve No specific action required • The site would make an important and safeguard • + 0 contribution to the supply of building Site development to take into mineral stone. consideration relevant impacts resources. and mitigate where appropriate.

11. To promote the use of • This proposal does not promote the use of _ 0 • No action required. alternative alternative materials. materials.

• Development of this site would provide a 12. To provide an benefit in terms of contributing to the provision • Ensure principles of adequate and of a supply of minerals to meet society’s needs. sustainable affordable Ensuring a sustainable supply will depend on development are supply of + 0 the development and management of the site. incorporated into the minerals to • Providing site development takes into account development of this meet society's relevant principles of sustainable development site. needs. it is expected this will contribute to complying with this objective.

Page 509 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

• Developing land as a quarry is expected to have some negative impacts regarding climate change, due primarily to machinery used and transportation of mineral away from site. • However, given the size of the proposed quarry Use energy efficient these will in relative terms be negligible. plant and machinery. 14. To adapt to • and mitigate • The Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Minerals Implement restoration the impacts of _ 0 Strategy seeks to address and minimise such which provides climate impacts through Policy CC1 which requires appropriate habitats to change. operators to take into consideration climate help to increase change impacts and their possible mitigation for resilience of any proposed minerals development. flora/fauna. • The development management policies, e.g. DM 1, also address and seek to minimise the issue of sustainable development and climate change.

• Any proposal for this • Previous extraction of Shaftesbury Green site would need to be Sandstone to the east of the proposed area has accompanied by a 15. To minimise established the principle of mineral extraction in Transport Assessment the negative this locality. impacts of which will need to • waste and No access location onto Quarry Lane has been provide access details minerals specified but there are points where an access and consider vehicle transport on - / ? 0 would be acceptable provided it is of suitable routing. construction and size. Details of this would need the transport • TA to be scoped with to be provided at the time of any planning network, the Transport application. mitigating any Development residual • Access to the strategic network is likely to be Management Team. impacts. gained via West Lane onto the A350 a short • The Transport distance from the proposed site. While no Assessment should estimated trip rates have been provided it is identify opportunities

Page 510 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A likely that they will be very low and sporadic, for reducing impacts hence the site has been given a C rating. on the transport network. • Policies DM1 and DM 8 of the Minerals Strategy actively address this issue of minimising impacts on the transportation network.

16. To support and • encourage the The proposed extension can only realistically be use of accessed by means of road transport, resulting in sustainable a negative impact under this Objective during • Mitigate impacts where transport development and working. _ 0 identified and modes, • As far as reasonably possible negative impacts appropriate. imposing no resulting from access and transport will be unmitigated mitigated, as required by Policies DM1 and DM8 negative of the Minerals Strategy. impacts on them.

Impact on Sensitive Human Receptors • Provision of _ • Closest properties are residences to north west, appropriate mitigation, within 50m. There are a number of other following assessment ? properties within 500m. of likely impacts. • • Site will be screened as required. Site will be Restoration to improve _ _ worked on a campaign basis, which will limit landscape of site where impacts. possible; and to seek to increase public access. 17. To sustain the • Impact on Existing Settlements Transport Assessment health and _ to be carried out, • quality of life Closest settlement is West Melbury, within 50m. identifying of the Melbury Abbas is some 600m distant. ? opportunities for population • Site will be screened as required. Site will be reducing impacts on _ _ worked on a campaign basis, which will limit the transport network impacts. where appropriate.

Impact on Airport Safety • No impacts expected • 0 0 Site is approximately 37 km from Bournemouth and no action airport and approximately 31 km from required. Yeovilton, with no wet working or restoration.

Impact on Recreational Land • Assessment of 18. To enable safe • Site is agricultural land and not used for impacts, with access to 0 +(?) informal recreation. Although no right of way appropriate mitigation countryside exists on the land, a public path crosses the site. identified.

Page 511 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A and open • Restoration could seek to formalise or improve • Realignment of spaces. this access. current ‘desire lines’ as required. • Restoration to include considering how it Impact on Public Rights of Way might be possible to improve public access • Public right of way exists adjacent to(west of) in the area. the site, and the route actually used crosses the _ western side of site. N.B. – this section over the site does not appear to be part of the statutory route. • An informal route also crosses the eastern side +(?) of the site . • During working these routes will not be available. An alternative for the statutory route to the west will be required and may need to be _ _ screened. • Restoration and possibly improvement of the path(s) when working is complete may be possible.

Page 512 of 583

Preliminary Hydrological Risk Assessment

Further information or Controlled Issues/Risks Mitigation approval that may be Waters required

• The Stour is the closest main river. The site drains into it by other water • courses, including the Water Framework • Manston Brook. Appropriate Assessment may be arrangements to be required. • The River Basin made for ensuring that • Hydrological risk Management Plan South runoff from the site assessment to consider West River Basin District does not enter the possible impacts of identifies the Stour as surface or working this site and any being of ‘Moderate’ groundwater drainage required mitigation. • Watercourses environmental quality unless any silt has first where site runoff would been removed. • Further assessment of • Ponds/lakes, join it. potential impacts on water including wet • Fuel stored on site to • quality and levels, habitats There is potential for be appropriately particularly for contamination from bunded and sealed to • Groundwater groundwater, is required runoff from site along prevent any spillage prior to development. with potential for from entering ground contamination of or surface waters. • Land Drainage Consent to controlled waters through be obtained from Dorset • On-going monitoring spillage or seepage of County Council if works during development pollutants such as fuel, or may affect flow of an and working of the silt in water. ordinary watercourse. site. • Contamination of water • Flood Risk Assessment supplies or reduction in amount of water available for licenses supplies.

Cumulative Impacts Site is an extension to existing quarry. No other mineral working in the vicinity. The proposal is within 5Km of sites allocated in Shaftesbury for residential development ( 1140 dwellings in the town in total) and employment development (7.0Ha) to the south of the A30, in the Pre -Submission draft North Dorset Local Plan Nov 2013. Traffic arising from the new development will add to general traffic levels on the A30 and A350.

Page 513 of 583

Summary

Potential Benefits Potential Impacts

• No ecological impacts expected. • Hydrological investigation required, but no significant impacts expected. • Potential for significant archaeological impacts, and further assessment will be required. However, identified impacts may be capable of mitigation but this will not be known until further assessment carried out. • Significant landscape impacts and it is not clear whether these will be capable of mitigation. Further assessment will be required and the scale and • Exposure of geological faces, during and possibly method of working to be taken into consideration. after working, expected to provide geodiversity • Site is agricultural land, which will be lost for a benefits. period of time. However, expected to be restored to • Development of site is expected to provide current use, and is a relatively small area. economic benefits, both directly at the site and in • Limited climate change impacts would be expected, the local area where the stone is expected to be but site is small in scale and intensity of working is used. low. • Development of the site will provide a source of • Developing the site will have transport related building stone, primarily for the benefit of the local impacts. However, the level of vehicle movements is area/economy. low and the site will be worked as an extension, so there will be no intensification of working or cumulative impacts. • No expected issues regarding airfield proximity – no wet working or restoration. • There will be public access impacts as the statutory footpath deviates from its line and crosses the western part of the site. Another path, non- statutory, crosses the eastern part of the site. These will need to be re-routed and the western path may need to be screened. Restoration may make it possible to improve/formalise access across the site.

Overall Recommendation: The assessment has identified potentially significant impacts from the working of this site, including landscape, historic environment and amenity issues. It is not clear at this stage whether these can be satisfactorily mitigated and further assessment will be required. Key issues/impacts are hydrology/hydrogeology, archaeology and historic landscapes, landscape and visual impacts and impacts on designated landscape, amenity (particularly on nearby residences) and rights of way/access. In addition, the site has been withdrawn by the site nominees from the Mineral Sites Plan site allocation process and therefore will not be taken forward.

The benefits of developing this site are not considered to outweigh the impacts of working here. At this time other sites are considered to be more appropriate options for supplying other building stone. It is recommended that this site should not be included in the emerging Mineral Sites Plan

Page 514 of 583

Ball Clay: BC05 Doreys – Holme Heath No change – site is not proposed for inclusion in the Mineral Sites Plan

Site Name/Location: BC05 Doreys – Holme Heath Nominee/Agent : Imerys Mineral Type: Ball Clay Local Authority: Purbeck District Council

Site Area: approximately 27 ha Production: c. 79,000 tpa; Reserve: approximately 440,000 tonnes

Impact Assessment Scoring

Strong Minor Minor - Strong Positive Negligible or Negative - Negative + Positive ++ 0 ? Uncertain - Impact No Effect Impact Impact Impact

Timescales for effects: P/W: Preparation and Working R/A : Restoration and Afteruse

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

19. To move waste management • This Objective is not relevant to this site up the waste N/A N/A • N/A nomination hierarchy and promote net self sufficiency

European/International Designations • Ecological surveys and • With European designated heathland almost hydrological reports entirely surrounding the proposed area it is required, identifying 20. To maintain, difficult without any further information to likely impacts together conserve and _ ? come to any other conclusion than mineral with possible enhance extraction would be likely to have adverse mitigation for any biodiversity effects on the designated areas. impacts. • The existing field is currently acidic grassland • Appropriate and almost certainly contributes to supporting assessment under the Annex 1 birds in the neighbouring designated

Page 515 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A areas. Further, the field drains from the south- Habitat Regulations will east downslope to the north-west corner, where be required. it feeds the mire system within the designated area; it would be almost impossible to adequately mitigate hydrological effects of extensive working in the field, and certainly impossible to recreate the complex natural _ _ topography which the field currently exhibits. • Following detailed study, it might be possible to demonstrate no adverse effect on integrity of very limited working in the easternmost part of the field, where the land slopes to the east and water drains away from the mire.

Annex 1 Bird Species • With European designated heathland almost entirely surrounding the proposed area it is difficult without any further information to come to any other conclusion than mineral _ extraction would be likely to have adverse effects on the designated areas. • Ecological surveys and hydrological reports • The existing field is currently acidic grassland required, identifying and almost certainly contributes to supporting likely impacts together Annex 1 birds in the neighbouring designated with possible areas. Further, the field drains from the south- mitigation for any ? east downslope to the north-west corner, where impacts. it feeds the mire system within the designated area; it would be almost impossible to • Appropriate adequately mitigate hydrological effects of assessment under the extensive working in the field, and certainly Habitat Regulations will impossible to recreate the complex natural be required. topography which the field currently exhibits. _ _ • Following detailed study, it might be possible to demonstrate no adverse effect on integrity of very limited working in the easternmost part of the field, where the land slopes to the east and water drains away from the mire.

Page 516 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

National Designations • With European designated heathland almost entirely surrounding the proposed area it is difficult without any further information to come to any other conclusion than mineral _ extraction would be likely to have adverse effects on the designated areas. • A rich invertebrate assemblage is likely to be • Ecological surveys and present in the field which helps to support the hydrological reports adjacent SSSI. required, identifying • The existing field is currently acidic grassland likely impacts and almost certainly contributes to supporting together with possible ? Annex 1 birds in the neighbouring designated mitigation for any areas. Further, the field drains from the south- impacts. east downslope to the north-west corner, where • Appropriate it feeds the mire system within the designated assessment under the area; it would be almost impossible to Habitat Regulations adequately mitigate hydrological effects of will be required. extensive working in the field, and certainly _ _ impossible to recreate the complex natural topography which the field currently exhibits. • Following detailed study, it might be possible to demonstrate no adverse effect on integrity of very limited working in the easternmost part of the field, where the land slopes to the east and water drains away from the mire.

• Ecological surveys and Protected species hydrological reports _ • The field is likely to support common protected required, identifying reptiles throughout and may support European likely impacts protected reptiles, Sand Lizard and Smooth together with possible ? Snake. mitigation for any impacts. • The size of the population will determine how • Appropriate _ _ easy or difficult it is to achieve adequate mitigation and a disturbance licence from NE if assessment under the required. Habitat Regulations will be required.

Local recognitions/designations, including 0 0 ancient woodland and veteran trees • No action required. • No likely impacts expected.

Page 517 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

• Exposures resulting from working may be of 21. To maintain, • Provision should be interest to the quaternary and tertiary research conserve and made so that it will be + 0 associations. Benefits are only expected during enhance possible to arrange working, and are likely to be obscured or geodiversity. visits on request. covered as part of restoration.

Groundwater • Hydrological assessment required to determine • Licensed water supply site 500m to possible impacts on ground north west. No impact on SPZs. Site and surface waters and on any overlies a secondary aquifer and is in wet heath / mires that might proximity to conservation designations exist in adjacent designated and any associated water features. sites, with appropriate • It is stated under Sustainability mitigation to be Objective 1 above that the field drains identified/implemented. from the south-east downslope to the • Where necessary mitigating north-west corner, where it feeds the measures should be installed mire system within the designated area; to maintain groundwater 22. To maintain, ? ? it would be almost impossible to levels. conserve and adequately mitigate hydrological effects enhance the of extensive working in the field, and • Appropriate arrangements quality of certainly impossible to recreate the should be put in place to ground, complex natural topography which the ensure that the water leaving surface and field currently exhibits. the site and entering the sea waters rivers/watercourses is of an • Following detailed study, it might be and manage acceptable quality. the possible to demonstrate no adverse • consumption effect on integrity of very limited Any fuel on site should be of water in a working in the easternmost part of the properly stored to avoid sustainable field, where the land slopes to the east contamination in case of way. and water drains away from the mire. spillage. • Appropriate arrangements should be installed for surface water and silt collection and Surface Water fuel storage to prevent • There are ponds within 250m of the site. contamination of groundwater resources. ? ? • Assessment required to determine • possible impacts on hydrogeology. Land Drainage Consent to be obtained from Dorset County • Impacts to be appropriately mitigated. Council if works may affect flow of an ordinary watercourse.

• 23. To reduce Flooding/Coastal Stability Flood Risk Assessment flood risk and • (FRA) will be required. 0 0 Entire site is within Flood Risk Zone 1, no improve flood expected risk of flooding or contributing to • All necessary mitigation management. flooding. to be implemented.

Page 518 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

Archaeology • The Squirrels Cottage barrows to the north- west are protected as a Scheduled • Full archaeological survey Monument. The impact on their setting of the area required to and on any below-ground archaeology on assess possible presence the site needs to be assessed and and significance of non- evaluated before an informed planning 24. To maintain, ? ? designated remains and to conserve and decision can be made. assess whether/how these enhance the • Archaeological assessment and evaluation should be protected historic is required. Only when these have been during working. environment undertaken would the archaeological • All necessary mitigation to (including impact be understood – at present it could be implemented. archaeological be anywhere from Very Significant to No • sites, historic Significant Impact. Adequate provision to be buildings, made for preservation, conservation Historic Landscapes excavation or recording, as areas, historic appropriate. • Historically the site was heathland. This parks and • forms part of the setting of the scheduled Further consideration to be gardens and Squirrels Cottage barrows. given to restoration other locally ? ? proposals, in terms of • distinctive Sympathetic restoration to heathland historic landscapes. features and would be rated as No Significant Impact – their settings). a lack of this would be Significant Adverse Impact.

Historic Buildings • 0 0 Listed buildings too far away to be affected, • No action required. therefore the site considered to have negligible impact on the listed buildings.

• Assessment of potential Landscape Capacity visual impacts required. • Visually relatively remote and inaccessible • All appropriate mitigation to despite being adjacent to open access be included. 25. To maintain, land. conserve and • Restoration to consider • There may therefore be some opportunity enhance the increasing public for extraction, based on this aspect of the landscape, access/informal recreation _ 0 assessment, particularly in the lower lying including and to include nature less visible north western section of the townscape, conservation interests. seascape and site. • Appropriate restoration the coast. • Planning of ball clay extraction would proposals in line with therefore need to consider the merits of Landscape Management these landscape issues in association with Guidelines referred to in the key ecological issues. Minerals Strategy.

Page 519 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

Designated Landscapes 0 0 • No action required. • Less significant adverse impact

• Impacts on air quality at/around the site expected to be negligible. • Environmental • No AQMAs will be directly affected by the protection measures working of this site proposal. Any dust resulting to be put in place to from working will be controlled through normal 26. To protect reduce dust and noise dust-suppression measures. and improve impacts. air quality and • Ball clay traffic travelling to/from Devon along 0 0 • Existing measures to reduce the the A35 would have some impact on the address air quality in impacts of Chideock AQMA. noise. Chideock AQMA • Any impacts due to noise resulting from mineral would minimise working would be expected to be satisfactorily impacts due to ball minimised through normal noise mitigation clay transport. measures, imposed at the planning application stage.

• • The site comprises primarily heathland, grassland Soil is poor quality in and woodland cover. The area is a former agricultural terms but heathland area and so would be expected to valuable in terms of have relatively poor, acidic soils. potential for heathland 27. To maintain, restoration. conserve and • Site preparation/working would require stripping _ 0 • enhance soil and storage of the soils, with some impacts on Soils to be quality. them. stored/protected during preparation and • If the site is worked and restored to heathland working and properly this will require reinstatement/retention of acidic reinstated during soils with their seedbank. restoration.

28. To conserve • No specific action required; site and safeguard • The site would make an important development to take into + 0 mineral contribution to the supply of ball clay. consideration relevant impacts resources. and mitigate where appropriate.

29. To promote the use of • This proposal does not at present promote the 0 0 • No action required. alternative use of alternative materials. materials.

• • Development of this site would provide a benefit Ensure principles of 30. To provide an in terms of contributing to the provision of a sustainable adequate and development are + 0 supply of minerals to meet society’s needs. affordable incorporated into the • supply of Ensuring a sustainable supply will depend on the development of this minerals to development and management of the site. site. Page 520 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A meet society's • Providing site development takes into account needs. relevant principles of sustainable development it is expected this will contribute to complying with this objective.

• This site proposal is expected to contribute to economic development on two levels – directly through the provision of employment at the site to be developed and indirectly through the provision of ball clay and aggregate minerals 31. To promote required for the maintenance of built and environment and for new built development and • Further assessment encourage + 0 for commercial/industrial uses. required to consider sustainable restoration options. economic • Both levels are expected to maintain growth employment, skilled and unskilled. However given the expected size of the reserve this is likely to be a limited benefit. • Proposed restoration is to heathland/agriculture, both of which offer economic benefits.

• Developing land as a quarry is expected to have some negative impacts regarding climate change, due primarily to machinery used and transportation of mineral away from site. However, these will in relative terms be negligible. • The Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Minerals • Use energy efficient Strategy seeks to address and minimise such plant and machinery. 32. To adapt to impacts through Policy CC1 which requires • Implement restoration and mitigate operators to take into consideration climate which provides the impacts of _ 0 change impacts and their possible mitigation for appropriate habitats to climate any proposed minerals development. change. help to increase • The development management policies, e.g. DM resilience of 1, also address and seek to minimise the issue of flora/fauna. sustainable development and climate change. • Restoration to some form of vegetated environment will offer benefits in the form of climate change mitigation, including provision of habitat for wildlife, but again these will be relatively small.

• 33. To minimise This proposed site is a small working close to the • Any proposal for this the negative current Doreys site and is accessed via an site would need to be impacts of existing, adequate, entry onto Holme Lane. accompanied by a waste and _ 0 Access to the A351 is gained a short distance to Transport Assessment minerals the east via Holme Lane and West Lane. which will need to transport on • The site details show a traffic generation of 20 to provide access details the transport 25 vehicles per day. However, if this site comes and consider vehicle Page 521 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A network, into operation it is thought that it would follow routing. The TA should mitigating any the cessation of extraction at this and other local be scoped with the residual pits. There would therefore not be an overall Transport Development impacts. increase in traffic. Management Team. • If it is in operation simultaneously with other • Transport Assessment sites, could give rise to cumulative impacts, the to be carried out, impacts of which would need to be addressed. identifying opportunities for • As the site is not expected to come forward in reducing impacts on parallel with the existing operations at this pit, the transport network. and there are relatively good links with the strategic network, there is unlikely to be any • Alternative options to noticeable increase in traffic and it has been be investigated. given a ‘Less Significant Adverse Impact’ to ‘No Significant Adverse Impact’ rating. If the site were to come forward earlier, then consideration would need to be given to the routing of vehicles between the site, any processing facility and the A351. • Policies DM1 and DM 8 actively address this issue of minimising impacts on the transportation network.

34. To support and • encourage the The proposed extension can only realistically be use of accessed by means of road transport, resulting in sustainable a negative impact under this Objective during • Mitigate impacts where transport development and working. _ 0 identified and where modes, • As far as reasonably possible negative impacts appropriate. imposing no resulting from access and transport will be unmitigated mitigated, as required by Policies DM1 and DM8 negative of the Minerals Strategy. impacts on them.

Impact on Sensitive Human Receptors • Appropriate • Closest residences within 400-800m. Site is well mitigation to be screened and not visible from residences. implemented, following 35. To sustain the • Proposed site is immediately adjacent to rifle range. assessment of health and • Lorry traffic would have impacts on some likely impacts – quality of life ? 0 settlements. This issue is mentioned under Objective visual, transport or of the 15 above. other. population • Policies DM1 and DM 8 actively address this issue of • Restoration to minimising impacts on the transportation network. improve landscape Other mitigation can be implemented as considered of site where necessary. possible; and to

Page 522 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A • Development would likely require appropriate seek to increase mitigation (such as visual and noise attenuation public access. bunding, standoffs) to limit impacts. Adequate scope • Transport to screen works, using mitigation such as visual and Assessment to be noise attenuation bunds. carried out, identifying Impact on Existing Settlements opportunities for reducing impacts • Stoborough Heath is closest settlement at on the transport approximately 800m, site is well screened and would network where not be visible. appropriate. • Lorry traffic would have impacts on some _ 0 settlements. This issue is mentioned under Objective 15 above. • Policies DM1 and DM 8 actively address this issue of minimising impacts on the transportation network. Other mitigation can be implemented as considered necessary.

Impact on Airport Safety • Site is approximately 24 km from the airport • 0 0 and not proposed for wet working or wet No action required. restoration. Not expected to have an impact on the airport.

Impact on Recreational Land • 0 0 • Site is private land with no public access. No No action required 36. To enable safe formal or informal recreational use. access to countryside • Appropriate and open Impact on Public Rights of Way mitigation, such as spaces. _ 0 • Bridleway runs adjacent to eastern edge of site. visual screen bunding, It can be screened as required. to be provided as required.

Page 523 of 583

Preliminary Hydrological Risk Assessment

Further information or Controlled Issues/Risks Mitigation approval that may be Waters required

• Full hydrogeological • The River Basin assessment to consider Management Plan South possible impacts of • Appropriate West River Basin District working this site and any arrangements to be identifies the Frome (the required mitigation. closest main river, some made for ensuring that • 850m distant) as being of runoff from the site does Flood Risk Assessment not enter the surface or ‘Poor’ environmental • Water Framework groundwater drainage quality. Potential for Assessment contamination from unless any silt has first • • Watercourses runoff from site. been removed. Further assessment of potential impacts on • • • Fuel stored on site to be Ponds/lakes, Potential for water quality and levels, appropriately bunded including wet contamination of particularly for and sealed to prevent habitats controlled waters groundwater, is required through spillage or any spillage from • Groundwater prior to development. seepage of pollutants entering ground or • such as fuel, or silt in surface waters. Assessment of the feasibility of relocating water. • On-going monitoring ponds and associated • during development and Potential impacts on habitats and species. existing surface water or working of the site. • Land Drainage Consent ground water features – • Ground water recharge if to be obtained from water flows through site considered necessary. to feed downstream Dorset County Council if designations. works may affect flow of an ordinary watercourse.

Cumulative Impacts There is other mineral working in the vicinity, both existing and proposed. The proposed site is an extension, although not directly adjacent, to an existing ball clay quarry. It is not clear at this stage when this site could commence working and whether it might operate at the same time as the current quarry. If that was to happen, this proposed site would have cumulative impacts, which would need to be addressed. The proposal is within 5Km (by road) of a site allocated in the Purbeck Local Plan Part 1 (adopted Nov 2012) (Policy CEN) for development of 200 dwellings and community facilities, off Worgret Road, Wareham. Traffic arising from the new residential development will also add to general traffic levels in / around Wareham.

Page 524 of 583

Summary

Potential Benefits Potential Impacts

• Potentially significant ecological impacts – it is expected that full Appropriate Assessment will be required, identifying impacts and required mitigation. • Significant effects expected on hydrology, especially hydrogeology, as water flows through site to feed downstream designations – full assessment and mitigation will be required. Will be related to ecological assessment. • • Contributions to the supply of ball clay, a nationally Archaeological impacts possible, but not known until important mineral. assessment – appropriate mitigation to be identified and applied. • Economic benefits at local and wider levels. • Possible limited landscape impacts, further assessment required. • Site access and mineral transport will be by road – further assessment required to establish likely impacts and identify possible mitigation. • Possibility of cumulative impacts if the site is worked simultaneously with other in the vicinity. • Impacts on adjacent bridleway, to be mitigated by screening.

Overall Recommendation: On the basis of the evidence available it does not appear that there is sufficient certainty that the impacts identified in this sustainability appraisal are currently capable of satisfactory mitigation. Further information will be required to determine likely impacts and whether these can be satisfactorily mitigated. The site remains part of the mineral resource of Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole but is not at this time included in the Draft Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Mineral Sites Plan.

Page 525 of 583

Portland Stone: PS01 Bower’s Mine, Weston, Portland No change – site is not proposed for inclusion in the Mineral Sites Plan as Planning Permission has been granted

Nominee: Albion Stone plc Site Area: approximately 2.6 ha -Site Name/Location: Local Authority: Weymouth and PS01 Bower’s Mine, Portland Borough Production: up to 6,800 tonnes per annum Council Weston, Portland Reserve: up to 45,000 tonnes Mineral Type: Portland Stone

Impact Assessment Scoring

Strong Minor Minor - Strong Positive Negligible or Negative - Negative + Positive ++ 0 ? Uncertain - Impact No Effect Impact Impact Impact

Timescales for effects: P/W: Preparation and Working R/A : Restoration and Afteruse

Effects Sustainability Commentary Mitigation P/ Objectives R/A W

1. To move waste • This Objective is not relevant to this site management N/A N/A • N/A nomination up the waste hierarchy

European/International Designations 0 0 • No action required. • No impacts expected.

Annex 1 Bird Species 0 0 • No action required. • No impacts expected. 2. To maintain, conserve and • As far as possible enhance minimise delays to biodiversity restoration of Bowers National Designations Quarry. • The only issue for the Isle of Portland SSSI ? 0 • Identify whether designation is the potential delay in restoration additional benefits for of Bowers Quarry. SSSI can be achieved through this proposed development.

Page 526 of 583

Effects Sustainability Commentary Mitigation P/ Objectives R/A W

Protected species 0 0 • No action required. • No impacts expected.

Local recognitions/designations, including 0 0 ancient woodland and veteran trees • No action required. • No impacts expected.

• Underground mining on Portland is in keeping • 3. To maintain, with the conservation of the Jurassic Coast and Visits or other conserve and investigation of 0 0 its setting. enhance working sites may be • geodiversity. Geodiversity interests are expected to be requested. limited, as compared to quarrying.

• Simple hydrological assessment Groundwater required to determine possible impacts, on ground and surface • No impacts expected, but assessment waters, with appropriate required to ensure no impacts on/from mitigation to be implemented. 4. To maintain, cemetery above. No impacts on any • conserve and ? 0 Source Protection Zone. Appropriate arrangements should be put in place to ensure enhance the • Environment Agency indicate that the water leaving the site quality of Hydrological Risk Assessment and and entering the watercourses or ground, Flood Risk Assessment will be groundwater is of an acceptable surface and required. sea waters quality. and manage • Any fuel on site should be the properly stored to avoid consumption contamination in case of of water in a spillage. sustainable • way. Surface Water Appropriate arrangements 0 0 should be installed for surface • No impacts expected water and silt collection and fuel storage to prevent contamination of groundwater resources.

5. To reduce Flooding/Coastal Stability flood risk and 0 0 • • No action required. improve flood Site is entirely in Flood Risk Zone 1, no risk management. of flooding.

6. To maintain, Archaeology • Further assessment conserve and ? 0 • The ground above is a churchyard and required to assess/ensure enhance the cemetery. Clearly disturbance of human mining of the stone under historic remains is an issue that needs to be the cemetery would have

Page 527 of 583

Effects Sustainability Commentary Mitigation P/ Objectives R/A W environment considered, even if the recent burials in no impacts on the burials (including particular are not considered ‘archaeological’ above. archaeological in most people’s opinion. • Development will be sites, historic • If disturbance of burials can be avoided, the subject to the normal buildings, impact would be D (‘No Significant or controls, established at the conservation Negligible Adverse Impacts’) but if it is not planning application areas, historic clear that this would be the case, stage, to ensure there is parks and archaeological assessment and evaluation no risk of surface impacts gardens and may be one way of providing information on or subsidence during or other locally the likely impact. after working. distinctive features and Historic Landscapes their settings). • Quarrying is a historic activity on Portland and has done much to shape its landscape. A 0 0 first impression is that underground working would not have a visible impact on this landscape, but there may be impact from associated infrastructure and possibly from subsidence.

Historic Buildings • If engineers can confirm that the depth of the mine beneath the surface is sufficient • that neither the cemetery walls, the Full assessment required 0 0 graveyard burials and tombstones nor the to ensure no stability Church of St George would have their issues. stability affected by this then the impact will be negligible as they already stand in a quarry landscape.

7. To maintain, Landscape Capacity conserve and • 0 0 No landscape and visual issues apart from • No action required, apart enhance the the potential for this to delay the restoration from, as far as possible, landscape, of the rest of the Bowers areas. minimising delays to the including restoration of Bowers townscape, Designated Landscapes Quarry. seascape and 0 0 the coast. • No significant/negligible impacts.

• Impacts on air quality expected to be 8. To protect negligible. • and improve • No AQMAs will be affected by the working of Environmental protection air quality and measures to reduce dust 0 0 this site proposal. Any dust resulting from reduce the working will be controlled through normal and ensure noise is impacts of dust-suppression measures. appropriately mitigated. noise. • Noise mitigation will be addressed at the planning application stage, with appropriate Page 528 of 583

Effects Sustainability Commentary Mitigation P/ Objectives R/A W mitigation to be included in the development of the site.

9. To maintain, conserve and 0 0 • No impacts expected • No action required. enhance soil quality.

• No specific action required. 10. To conserve • The site would make an important • and safeguard Site development to take + + 0 contribution to the supply of Portland Stone mineral into consideration to all potential markets. resources. relevant impacts and mitigate where appropriate.

11. To promote the use of • This proposal does not promote the use of _ 0 • No action required. alternative alternative materials. materials.

• Development of this site would provide a benefit in terms of contributing to the 12. To provide an provision of a supply of minerals to meet adequate and society’s needs. Ensuring a sustainable • Ensure principles of affordable supply will depend on the development and sustainable development supply of + 0 management of the site. are incorporated into the minerals to • development of this site. meet society's Providing site development takes into needs. account relevant principles of sustainable development it is expected this will contribute to complying with this objective.

• This site proposal is expected to contribute to economic development on two levels – 13. To promote directly through the provision of employment and at the site to be developed and indirectly encourage + 0 through the provision of Portland Stone • No action required. sustainable required for new build, repairs and economic maintenance and decorative/monument work. growth Both levels are expected to maintain employment, skilled and unskilled.

14. To adapt to • and mitigate Developing the proposed mine is expected to • Use energy efficient plant the impacts of _ 0 have some negative impacts regarding and machinery. climate climate change, due primarily to machinery change. used and transportation of mineral away from

Page 529 of 583

Effects Sustainability Commentary Mitigation P/ Objectives R/A W

site. However, these will in relative terms be negligible. • The Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Minerals Strategy seeks to address and minimise such impacts through Policy CC1 which requires operators to take into consideration climate change impacts and their possible mitigation for any proposed minerals development. • The development management policies, e.g. DM 1, also address and seek to minimise the issue of sustainable development and climate change.

• This proposal is for an extension to the • existing Bower’s Mine site. Traffic is not Any proposal for this site expected to increase and the existing, would need to be 15. To minimise adequate, access will be used. accompanied by a the negative Transport Assessment • The A354 is accessed a short distance from impacts of which will need to provide the site. To exit the local area this road waste and access details and passes through Fortuneswell and Weymouth minerals consider vehicle routing. to the north. Access to this site does impact transport on _ 0 The TA should be scoped upon existing settlements; however, as there the transport with the Transport is not expected to be any increase over the network, Development existing operation, the site has been given a mitigating any Management Team. C (‘Less Significant Adverse Impact’) rating. residual • The Transport Assessment • impacts. Policies DM 1 and DM 8 of the Minerals will identify opportunities Strategy actively address this issue of for reducing impacts on minimising impacts on the transportation the transport network. network.

16. To support and • encourage the The proposed extension can only realistically use of be accessed by means of road transport, sustainable resulting in a negative impact under this transport Objective during development and working. • Mitigate impacts where _ 0 modes, • As far as reasonably possible negative impacts identified and appropriate. imposing no resulting from access and transport will be unmitigated mitigated, as required by Policies DM 1 and negative DM 8 of the Minerals Strategy. impacts on them.

Page 530 of 583

Effects Sustainability Commentary Mitigation P/ Objectives R/A W

Impact on Sensitive Human Receptors • Site proposal is for mining, accessed from existing quarry. Site boundary is approximately 60m from residential properties and adjacent to listed church building. However as a mine impacts on these are expected to be minimal. • Most significant receptor is the cemetery • The Church of England under which the proposal lies. No physical have indicated that there impact is anticipated as the roof of the mine is no problem mining ? 0 will be metres below the depth of the graves. under the cemetery, • More relevant will be the perceived impact of provided there is no impact on the burials. 17. To sustain the mining under a cemetery and also the views health and of the Church as to whether there will be • Full assessment will be quality of life possible issues with consecrated ground. required to ensure no of the More research is required to determine the impacts on burials or population extent of possible impact. Rating could vary structures. Any required between A (‘Very Significant Adverse mitigation to be Impact’) and D (‘No Significant or Negligible implemented. Adverse Impacts’), depending on the outcome of further investigations.

Impact on Existing Settlements • 0 0 No impacts expected, apart from traffic impacts. These are addressed elsewhere in this report.

Impact on Airport Safety 0 0 • No action required. • No impacts expected

Impact on Recreational Land 18. To enable safe 0 0 access to • No impacts expected countryside • No action required. and open Impact on Public Rights of Way spaces. 0 0 • No impacts expected

Page 531 of 583

Preliminary Hydrological Risk Assessment

Further Controlled Waters Issues/Risks Mitigation information/approval required

• Appropriate arrangements to be made for ensuring that runoff from the site does not enter the groundwater unless any • Full hydrogeological risk • Watercourses • Potential for silt has first been assessment will be contamination removed. required as part of a • Ponds/lakes, through spillage or planning application. including wet • Fuel stored on site to be seepage of habitats appropriately bunded • Flood Risk Assessment pollutants such as and sealed to prevent • Groundwater fuel or silt in water. • Water Framework any spillage from Assessment entering ground or surface waters. • On-going monitoring during development and working of the site.

Cumulative Impacts Site proposal is an extension of a mining operation in an area with a long history of quarrying. As an extension it is not expected to lead to cumulative impacts. The proposal is within 5Km of land allocated for major employment development (8.6Ha) at Osprey Quay, Portland (Policy PORT 1) and for residential development (380 dwellings) at the Former Hardy Complex, Portland (Policy PORT2) in the Pre -Submission draft West Dorset, Weymouth and Portland Local Plan (June 2012) as amended by Proposed Modifications (June 2013). Traffic arising from the new development will add to general traffic levels on the A354.

Summary

Potential Benefits Potential Impacts on…

• Provision of Portland Stone. • Expected impact on Portland SSSI, through delaying • Support for the Portland Stone industry and restoration of Bowers Quarry. employment, both locally and wherever the stone is • Mining under the cemetery, and under the exported and used, with associated economic buildings/structures could have both physical and benefits. perceived impacts. Full assessment required to • Use of the stone for heritage building works/repairs, ensure there will be no impacts on burials or and for new buildings. structures.

Page 532 of 583

• Water/water quality could be impacted and a hydrological assessment to determine possible impacts/mitigation will be required. • Transport impacts on settlements are expected, but as an extension no intensification is expected. A Transport Assessment will be required at planning application stage, with appropriate mitigation identified.

Overall Recommendation: Assessment already carried out has flagged up local amenity (in the sense of perceived impacts of mining under graves), archaeology/historic buildings and traffic as the key issues to be addressed as part of working land within this site nomination. Further assessment will be required at planning application stage to identify satisfactory mitigation and to identify if there are any additional impacts that will require mitigation. As the site is an extension of an existing site, it is expected that any impacts should be capable of satisfactory mitigation.

This site has been permitted, following planning application.

Page 533 of 583

Portland Stone: PS02 Perryfield Quarry Extension, Portland No change – site is not proposed for inclusion in the Mineral Sites Plan

Nominee: Stone Firms Ltd Site Name/Location : Agent : Site Area : PS02 Perryfield Quarry Local Authority : Weymouth and Production Extension, Portland Portland Reserve : Mineral Type : Portland Stone

Impact Assessment Scoring

Strong Minor Minor - Strong Positive Negligible or Negative - Negative + Positive ++ 0 ? Uncertain - Impact No Effect Impact Impact Impact

Timescales for effects: P/W: Preparation and Working R/A : Restoration and Afteruse

Effects Sustainability Commentary Mitigation P/ Objectives R/A W

1. To move waste • This Objective is not relevant to this site management N/A N/A • N/A nomination up the waste hierarchy

European/International Designations 0 0 • No action required. • No impacts expected.

Annex 1 Bird Species 0 0 • No action required. • No impacts expected. 2. To maintain, conserve and National Designations enhance 0 0 • No action required. • No impacts expected. biodiversity

Protected species 0 0 • No action required. • No impacts expected.

Page 534 of 583

Effects Sustainability Commentary Mitigation P/ Objectives R/A W

Local recognitions/designations, including ancient woodland and veteran trees • Providing that the over- and inter-burden from • 0 0 quarrying can be stored away from SNCIs such No action required. as Bottomcoombe SNCI and other areas supporting calcareous grassland habitat then any effects are likely to be insignificant.

• Permit access to site 3. To maintain, where appropriate. conserve and • Existing interests and access requirements for • + 0 Retain geological face enhance scientific or educational study remain. after working if geodiversity. possible and if appropriate.

4. To maintain, conserve and Groundwater • enhance the 0 0 Criteria classification ‘‘Less Significant Adverse quality of Impact’’ as on a Secondary Aquifer. No impact ground, on Source Protection Zones. surface and • No impacts expected sea waters and no action required. and manage the Surface Water • consumption 0 0 Criteria classification ‘‘No Significant or of water in a Negligible Adverse Impacts’’ as there are no sustainable watercourses within 500m. way.

5. To reduce Flooding/Coastal Stability flood risk and 0 0 • • No action required. improve flood Entire site is within Flood Risk Zone 1. No management. impact on coastal stability.

6. To maintain, Archaeology conserve and • Unquarried areas of Portland are recognised as enhance the having high archaeological potential, and the • Further assessment of historic lawnsheds are mentioned below. possible impacts and environment • appropriate mitigation (including Archaeological assessment and evaluation will be required. archaeological ? 0 would be required before an informed planning sites, historic decision could be made. Only when these have • All necessary buildings, been undertaken would the archaeological mitigation to be conservation impact be understood – at present it could be implemented. areas, historic anywhere from at present it could be parks and anywhere from ‘Very Significant’ to ‘No gardens and Significant’ impacts.

Page 535 of 583

Effects Sustainability Commentary Mitigation P/ Objectives R/A W other locally Historic Landscapes distinctive features and • Lawnsheds are a distinctive feature of the their settings). Portland landscape. These are strip fields, probably of Medieval date, which were often in individual ownerships. _ ? _ • The site is within an area of such lawnsheds, and although they have been adversely affected by various developments, several original boundaries survive. The impact of quarrying on these would depend upon how the working and restoration methods employed.

Historic Buildings • There is no significant impact on the nearest listed building (the windmill) or its setting. The building has been stabilised in the past though having a keep out sign on it. 0 0 • No action required. • The quarrying is far enough away not to affect the foundations and the before and after settings should be very similar if not exactly the same. Assessment D (‘No Significant Impact’) therefore.

Landscape Capacity • Further open quarrying would be inappropriate in particular due to the site’s contribution to the • current intactness of the whole area as a unified Further assessment and undeveloped area of open space close to required to consider and overlooked by residential properties and whether any 7. To maintain, rights of way. mitigation is possible, and what it should be. conserve and _ _ ? • Despite some visually detracting features, • enhance the further quarrying would negatively impact on If mitigation is landscape, key characteristics and its amenity, recreational possible, all including and historic value and its value as an open appropriate mitigation townscape, undeveloped buffer and setting for adjacent to be implemented as seascape and properties and the adjacent conservation area. and when needed. the coast. It is viewed by ‘sensitive receptors’ i.e. people in residential properties and those engaged in the landscape for recreational/amenity benefits.

Designated Landscapes 0 0 • No action required. • No impacts expected.

• 8. To protect 0 0 • Impacts on air quality expected to be negligible. Environmental and improve protection measures to

Page 536 of 583

Effects Sustainability Commentary Mitigation P/ Objectives R/A W air quality and • No AQMAs will be affected by the working of this reduce dust and ensure reduce the site proposal. Any dust resulting from working noise is appropriately impacts of will be controlled through normal dust- mitigated. noise. suppression measures. • Noise mitigation will be addressed at the planning application stage, with appropriate mitigation to be included in the development of the site.

• Soil to be properly • stripped and stored 9. To maintain, Site is ‘Good to Moderate’ agricultural land. prior to working; conserve and • _ 0 Soils will be stripped and protected during protected during enhance soil preparation and working and reused on site working; and re- quality. as part of restoration. spread on site after working.

• No specific action required; site 10. To conserve • The site would make an important development to and safeguard contribution to the supply of Portland Stone take into + + 0 mineral for Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole and all consideration resources. other potential markets. relevant impacts and mitigate where appropriate.

11. To promote the use of • This proposal does not promote the use of _ 0 • No action required. alternative alternative materials. materials.

• Development of this site would provide a benefit in terms of contributing to the 12. To provide an provision of a supply of minerals to meet • Ensure principles of adequate and society’s needs. sustainable affordable • Ensuring a sustainable supply will depend development are supply of + 0 on the development and management of incorporated into minerals to the site. Providing site development takes the development of meet society's into account relevant principles of this site. needs. sustainable development it is expected this will contribute to complying with this objective.

Page 537 of 583

Effects Sustainability Commentary Mitigation P/ Objectives R/A W

• This site proposal is expected to contribute to economic development on two levels – 13. To promote directly through the provision of and employment at the site to be developed encourage and indirectly through the provision of • No further action + 0 sustainable Portland Stone required for new build, required. economic repairs and maintenance, decorative and growth monument work and landscaping work. • Both levels are expected to maintain employment, skilled and unskilled.

• Developing land as a quarry is expected to have some negative impacts regarding climate change, due primarily to machinery used and transportation of mineral away from site. • Use energy However, these will in relative terms be efficient plant and negligible. machinery. 14. To adapt to • The Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Minerals • and mitigate Implement Strategy seeks to address and minimise such the impacts of _ 0 restoration which impacts through Policy CC1 which requires climate provides operators to take into consideration climate change. appropriate change impacts and their possible mitigation habitats to help to for any proposed minerals development. increase resilience • The development management policies, e.g. of flora/fauna. DM 1, also address and seek to minimise the issue of sustainable development and climate change.

• This proposal is for an extension to the • existing Perryfield Quarry. Traffic is not Any proposal for this expected to increase over the current levels site would need to and the existing, adequate, access will be be accompanied by a Transport 15. To minimise used. Assessment which the negative • The A354 is accessed a short distance from will need to provide impacts of the site. To exit the local area this road access details and waste and passes through Fortuneswell and consider vehicle minerals Weymouth to the north. routing. The TA transport on _ 0 • should be scoped the transport Access to this site does impact upon with the Transport network, existing settlements, however, as there is Development mitigating any not expected to be any increase over the Management Team. residual existing operation, the site has been given a impacts. C (‘Less Significant Adverse Impact’) rating. • Transport • Policies DM1 and DM 8 of the Minerals Assessment will Strategy actively address this issue of identify minimising impacts on the transportation opportunities for network. reducing impacts on

Page 538 of 583

Effects Sustainability Commentary Mitigation P/ Objectives R/A W the trans port network.

• 16. To support Mitigate impacts and where identified and • encourage the The proposed extension can only realistically appropriate. be accessed by means of road transport, use of • Transport resulting in a negative impact under this sustainable Assessment to be transport Objective during development and working. _ 0 carried out, modes, • As far as reasonably possible negative identifying possible imposing no impacts resulting from access and transport impacts and unmitigated will be mitigated, as required by Policies opportunities for negative DM1 and DM8 of the Minerals Strategy. reducing impacts on impacts on the transport them. network.

Impact on Sensitive Human Receptors • Further assessment required to consider • Residential properties within 50m to the south; whether this adjacent to existing housing at Shortlands to _ _ 0 development may be the north and within 300m to the west. Further possible. assessment and information required regarding screening and stand-offs. • If it goes ahead, appropriate mitigation to be provided following Impact on Existing Settlements 17. To sustain the assessment of likely • health and Site is surrounded by settlements of Easton and impacts. Weston, being adjacent to existing properties to quality of life • Screening, bunding, _ _ 0 the north. The existence of the Important Open of the standoffs will be Gap identified in the Weymouth and Portland population used to mitigate Adopted Local Plan 2005 must be taken into impacts where consideration. considered necessary.

Impact on Airport Safety • 0 0 • Site is far removed (approximately 50km) from No action required. airport. No impacts expected.

Impact on Recreational Land • If development goes 18. To enable safe _ + • No formal recreational use; land shows signs of ahead, opportunities access to pathways indicating informal use for walking. for restoration to countryside improve landscape of and open Impact on Public Rights of Way site where possible spaces. _ _ + to be considered; • Footpaths to west, east and north of site. and to seek to Footpath to north of site is adjacent to site Page 539 of 583

Effects Sustainability Commentary Mitigation P/ Objectives R/A W boundary. Further assessment on screening facilitate public required. access. • Any impacts on rights of way to be mitigated.

Preliminary Hydrological Risk Assessment

Further Controlled Waters Issues/Risks Mitigation information/approval required

• Appropriate • Full hydrogeological risk arrangements to be assessment will be required made for ensuring as part of a planning that runoff from the application. site does not enter • Flood Risk Assessment the groundwater unless any silt has • Water Framework • Watercourses • Potential for first been removed. Assessment contamination • Ponds/lakes, • Fuel stored on site • Further assessment of through spillage or including wet to be appropriately potential impacts on water seepage of pollutants habitats bunded and sealed quality and levels, such as fuel, or silt in to prevent any particularly for • Groundwater water. spillage from groundwater, is required entering ground or prior to development. surface waters. • Land Drainage Consent to • On-going be obtained from Dorset monitoring during County Council if works development and may affect flow of an working of the site. ordinary watercourse.

Page 540 of 583

Cumulative Impacts Site nomination comprises a new proposal in an area where there is a high concentration and long history of mineral extraction. The proposal is within 5Km of land allocated for major employment development (8.6Ha) at Osprey Quay, Portland (Policy PORT 1) and for residential development (380dwellings) at the Former Hardy Complex, Portland (Policy PORT2) in the Pre -Submission draft West Dorset, Weymouth and Portland Local Plan (June 2012) as amended by Proposed Modifications (June 2013). Traffic arising from the new development will add to general traffic levels on the A354.

Summary

Potential Benefits Potential Impacts on…

• Archaeology – impacts could be significant, further • Provision of Portland Stone. assessment required to determine whether • Support for the local stone industry and mitigation is possible. employment, both locally and wherever Portland • Landscape Capacity and Historic Landscapes – Stone is exported and used, with associated significant impacts are expected, further assessment economic benefits. required to determine whether mitigation is • Use of the stone for heritage building works/repairs, possible. and for new buildings. • Amenity - significant impacts are expected, further • Geodiversity benefits, through exposures created assessment required to determine whether and fossils found. mitigation is possible. • • Possibility of improved public access. Recreation/Access - further assessment required to determine whether mitigation is possible.

Overall Recommendation: Assessment already carried out has flagged up archaeology/heritage, landscape, local amenity and access as key issues to be addressed as part of working this site nomination. Further assessment will be required to identify satisfactory mitigation and to identify if there are any additional impacts that will require mitigation. At this stage it is considered likely that the benefits of developing this site do not outweigh the impacts of working. In addition, no information has been submitted to indicate that this proposal does not conflict with Policy PD2 – Surface Quarrying of Portland Stone - of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Minerals Strategy. This policy prevents future surface quarrying on Portland unless certain criteria are met.

The benefits of developing this site are not considered to outweigh the impacts of working here. At this time other sites are considered to be more appropriate options for supplying Portland Stone. It is recommended that this site should not be included in the emerging Mineral Sites Plan

Site has been withdrawn.

Page 541 of 583

Purbeck Stone: PK11 St Aldhelms Quarry Extension, Purbeck No change – site is not proposed for inclusion in the Mineral Sites Plan as Planning Permission has been granted Planning permission for this proposed site extension was granted on 1 April 2015 and therefore this site nomination is no longer under consideration. Details of this permission are as follows:

PLANNING APPLICATION: 6/2013/0055 LOCATION: St Aldhelms Quarry, Worth Matravers, Swanage, Dorset. BH19 3LN DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED: The extension of St Aldhelm's Quarry by 0.58ha in a south-westerly direction, the continued operation of the quarry, including the importation of stone until 2046, the crushing of waste stone and the restoration of the site to calcareous species rich grassland and the retention of faces of geological interest.

No sustainability appraisal or further assessment is required.

Page 542 of 583

Purbeck Stone: PK20 Crack Lane, Langton Matravers No change – site is not proposed for inclusion in the Mineral Sites Plan

Site Name/Location: Crack Lane, north of Langton Nominee: W Haysom and Sons Matravers Local Authority: Purbeck District Council Mineral Type: Purbeck Stone (Purbeck Marble)

Site Area: approximately 0.5 ha Production: Likely to be worked in summer campaigns, 900 tonnes/campaign Reserve: up to approximately 32,000 tonnes, but only some 16,000 reasonably recoverable

Impact Assessment Scoring

Strong Minor Minor - Strong Positive Negligible or Negative - Negative + Positive ++ 0 ? Uncertain - Impact No Effect Impact Impact Impact

Timescales for effects: P/W: Preparation and Working R/A : Restoration and Afteruse

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

1. To move waste • This Objective is not relevant to this site management N/A N/A • N/A nomination up the waste hierarchy

European/International Designations 0 0 • No action required. • No impacts expected.

2. To maintain, conserve and Annex 1 Bird Species • enhance 0 0 No action required. • No impacts expected biodiversity

National Designations 0 0 • No action required. • No impacts expected

Page 543 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

• It is noted that this site would be worked Protected species intermittently and in 0 • The site has water vole (protected under limited campaigns. Schedule 9 of the Wildlife and Countryside However, no Act) and also provides foraging habitat for information has been adjacent populations of European protected provided about how 0 bats (Brown long eared, Bechsteins and this low level of Natterers). working could be achieved with • These species would all be significantly acceptable mitigation affected by the loss of this site. This impact _ _ of impacts. would have to be demonstrated to be capable of mitigation for this site proposal to progress. • Further assessment required to demonstrate that acceptable mitigation Local recognitions/designations, including is possible, and how ancient woodland and veteran trees 0 this might be • Site is adjacent to two SNCI’s and forms an achieved. important linking habitat between them. The • Also, the potential for functionality of the SNCI’s would be 0 restoration to improve significantly affected by the loss of this habitat the site for the benefit area. of these _ _ • This impact would have to be demonstrated to species/designations be capable of mitigation for this site proposal needs to be to progress. considered.

• Note potential for • This site is adjacent to an existing Local quarries to yield Geological Site (Landscape Guidelines). Any fossils or other excavation at this location has the potential to material of create fresh exposures that will compliment or geodiversity interest. 3. To maintain, enhance those that already exist at the Crack • Visits or other conserve and Lane Local Geological Site. Retaining + + investigation of enhance permanent exposures for geological working sites may be geodiversity. conservation at this site would be desirable. requested. • In addition the extraction of Purbeck Marble • for use in building is a valuable link between Investigate potential geological and human heritage and is and/or benefits of considered to benefit geological conservation. leaving quarried face open after restoration.

Page 544 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

• Simple hydrological assessment required to determine possible Groundwater impacts, on ground and surface waters, with appropriate mitigation to be • Site overlies Secondary aquifer. implemented. _ 0 No impact on Source 4. To maintain, Protection Zones. Not known • Appropriate arrangements should be conserve and if there are any licenced put in place to ensure that the water enhance the supplies. leaving the site and entering the quality of watercourses or groundwater is of an ground, acceptable quality. Any fuel on site surface and should be properly stored to avoid sea waters contamination in case of spillage. and manage • the Appropriate arrangements should be consumption installed for surface water and silt Surface Water of water in a collection and fuel storage to prevent sustainable • Watercourse forms northern contamination of groundwater way. _ _ 0 boundary of the site and there resources. is another watercourse on the • The combined impacts of Purbeck other side of Crack Lane. Limestone Quarries should be assessed where a number of sites affect the same water resource or receiving water course.

5. To reduce Flooding/Coastal Stability flood risk and 0 0 • • No action required. improve flood Site is entirely in Flood Risk Zone 1, no risk of management. flooding.

6. To maintain, • Archaeological survey Archaeology conserve and of the area required as enhance the • The site is expected to have high potential for part of planning historic both industrial archaeological evidence of application to assess environment early quarrying and perhaps other below- possible presence and (including ground archaeology. significance of non- archaeologica designated remains ? 0/+ • Archaeological assessment and evaluation l sites, historic and to assess would be required before an informed buildings, whether/how these planning decision could be made. Only when conservation should be protected these have been undertaken would the areas, historic during working – no archaeological impact be understood – at parks and further work required present it could be anywhere from ‘Very gardens and at site allocation Significant’ to ‘No Significant’ impact. other locally stage. distinctive

Page 545 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A features and • All necessary their settings). mitigation to be implemented prior to working. Historic Landscapes • Adequate provision to • The local landscape bears the imprint of be made for previous quarrying dating from the Roman preservation, 0 0 period onwards. It could be argued that the excavation or present site would be a continuation of the recording, as process, and if the site is to be restored appropriate. afterwards the impact would be limited in time • Further consideration anyway. to be given to restoration proposals, in terms of historic landscapes.

Historic Buildings • There are no historic buildings in close proximity to this site therefore there is no impact on historic buildings here except the + 0 • No action required. beneficial effect of releasing stone to repair old buildings or build new ones in sympathy with the Local environment. • This therefore qualifies as positive impact.

Landscape Capacity • Significant adverse impact. The landscape capacity to • Visual impacts accommodate the site is between low and medium. assessment The site is on a prominent corner of a busy and well required to used tourist route (the A351) and a quiet lane (Crack understand Lane) and a public footpath runs right through the more of the site. potential 7. To maintain, _ _ 0? • Although the site will be seen when passing by on impacts and conserve and these routes development will create an adverse what might be enhance the impact on the amenity of users of the AONB, on the needed to landscape, intimate character of the clay valley landscape and mitigate these. including on the existing site features such as trees, copses • townscape, Mitigation – and water courses. Further assessment will be seascape and primarily required to determine whether mitigation will be the coast. screening – may possible. be possible but it is not known Designated Landscapes at this stage • Significant adverse impact. The site is likely to what would be _ _ 0? impact adversely on the Dorset AONB. needed to make this effective. • Further assessment will be required to determine whether mitigation will be possible.

Page 546 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

• Impacts on air quality expected to be negligible. 8. To protect • Environmental • and improve 0 0 No AQMAs will be affected by the working of protection measures air quality. this site proposal. Any dust resulting from to reduce dust. working will be controlled through normal dust-suppression measures.

• The site is currently an area of pasture and • soils are either good to moderate or poor in Soil to be properly 9. To maintain, quality. stripped and stored conserve and prior to working; _ 0 • enhance soil Any soil removed will be protected during protected during quality. working and either re-used on site or taken working; and re-spread elsewhere to be used. Further assessment on site after working. may be required to determine soil quality.

• No specific action required; site 10. To conserve • The site would make an important contribution development to take and safeguard to the supply of Purbeck Stone, specifically + + 0 into consideration mineral Purbeck Marble, for Bournemouth, Dorset and relevant impacts and resources. Poole and all other potential markets. mitigate where appropriate.

11. To promote the use of • This proposal does not promote the use of _ 0 • No action required. alternative alternative materials. materials.

• Development of this site would provide a benefit in terms of contributing to the 12. To provide an provision of a supply of minerals to meet • Ensure principles of adequate and society’s needs. sustainable affordable • development are supply of + 0 Ensuring a sustainable supply will depend on incorporated into the minerals to the development and management of the site. development of this meet society's Providing site development takes into account site. needs. relevant principles of sustainable development it is expected this will contribute to complying with this objective.

• This site proposal is expected to contribute to 13. To promote economic development on two levels – directly and through the provision of employment at the site to encourage be developed and indirectly through the provision • No action + 0 sustainable of Purbeck Stone required for new build, repairs and required. economic maintenance, decorative and monument work and growth landscaping work. Both levels are expected to maintain employment, skilled and unskilled.

Page 547 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A • The relative rarity of Purbeck Marble adds benefit to this proposal and contributes to maintaining the various skills-bases associated with its preparation and use.

• Developing land as a quarry is expected to have some negative impacts regarding climate change, due primarily to machinery used and transportation of mineral away from site. However, these will in relative terms be • Use energy efficient negligible. plant and machinery. 14. To adapt to • The Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Minerals • and mitigate Implement restoration Strategy seeks to address and minimise such the impacts of _ 0 which provides impacts through Policy CC1 which requires climate appropriate habitats to operators to take into consideration climate change. help to increase change impacts and their possible mitigation resilience of for any proposed minerals development. flora/fauna. • The development management policies, e.g. DM 1, also address and seek to minimise the issue of sustainable development and climate change.

• It is expected that this site would be worked in summer campaigns, with approximately 900 tonnes per annum being produced during • those years it is worked. It is not expected that Any proposal for this the site would be worked annually. site would need to be accompanied by a • 15. To minimise This would equate to a total of about 60 trips Transport Assessment the negative over the course of the campaign. The site which will need to impacts of access is proposed to be from Crack Lane, a provide access details waste and short distance from its junction with the A351. and consider vehicle minerals An acceptable access onto Crack Lane to routing. transport on -? 0 accommodate this low number of trips would • the transport be achievable. The TA should be network, scoped with the • It is proposed that trips from the site will go to mitigating any Transport Development the Lander’s Quarry Yard located to the west of residual Management Team and B3069 Langton Matravers. A Transport impacts. is intended to identify Statement would be needed with the site to opportunities for look at potential routes between the two sites. reducing impacts on The site is considered to have a ‘Less Significant the transport network. Adverse Impact’ . • Policies DM 1 and DM 8 of the Minerals Strategy actively address this issue of

Page 548 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A minimising impacts on the transportation network.

16. To support and • encourage the The proposed site can only realistically be use of accessed by means of road transport, resulting sustainable in a negative impact under this Objective • Mitigate impacts where transport during development and working. _ 0 identified and modes, • As far as reasonably possible negative impacts appropriate. imposing no resulting from access and transport will be unmitigated mitigated, as required by Policies DM1 and negative DM8 of the Minerals Strategy. impacts on them.

Impact on Sensitive Human Receptors • Site is very well screened from receptors. 0 0 Cemetery approximately 130m to the south • No action required. but woodland in-between. • Impacts are considered to be negligible.

• Provision of appropriate Impact on Existing Settlements mitigation, should any be required, following assessment • Langton Matravers is approximately of likely impacts. 350m to the south, but site is well screened and there is no inter-visibility. • Restoration to improve 17. To sustain the landscape of site where • Quarried stone has to be transported to health and possible; and to seek to Landers Service Yard. The route has not quality of life facilitate public access. _ 0 yet been finalised, but could pass of the through Langton Matravers. • Screening, bunding, standoffs population will be used to mitigate • Rating of this site could vary between impacts where considered ‘Significant Adverse Impact’ and ‘No necessary. Significant or Negligible Adverse Impacts’, depending on the outcome of • Transport impacts to be the Transport Assessment. considered through Transport Assessment, as noted above.

Impact on Airport Safety • Site is over 20km from airport and will be 0 0 • No action required. worked and restored dry. • No impacts expected.

• 18. To enable _ _ 0 Impact on Recreational Land Assessment of safe access to potential impacts,

Page 549 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A countryside • Site is a small area of pasture-land, crossed by a with appropriate and open public footpath. mitigation identified. spaces. This must address • Apart from this footpath, the site does not impacts on the appear to be used for any other footpath. formal/informal recreational purposes. • Restoration to include Impact on Public Rights of Way considering how it might be possible to • Site is crossed by a public footpath and there improve public access are other footpaths in the vicinity. _ _ 0 in the area. • This path will be significantly impacted by this proposal and will need to be diverted appropriately during working campaigns.

Page 550 of 583

Preliminary Hydrological Risk Assessment

Further Controlled Waters Issues/Risks Mitigation information/approval required

• Appropriate • Further assessment of arrangements to be potential impacts on water made for ensuring quality and levels, • Impacts on surface that runoff from the particularly for water features - the site site does not enter groundwater, is required drains through various the streams/drains prior to development – streams/drains through or groundwater scope to • Swanage and then to unless any silt has Watercourses • Flood Risk Assessment and the sea, some 3.5 km to first been removed. • Ponds/lakes, Water Framework the east. • Fuel stored on site including wet Assessment • Potential for to be appropriately habitats • Assessment of the contamination of bunded and sealed • feasibility of relocating Groundwater drains/streams/sea to prevent any ponds and associated through spillage or spillage from habitats and species. seepage of pollutants entering ground or such as fuel, or silt in surface waters. • Land Drainage Consent to water. • On-going be obtained from Dorset monitoring during County Council if works development and may affect flow of an working of the site. ordinary watercourse.

Cumulative Impacts The proposal is within 5km (by road) of a town (Swanage) where allocations for the development of 200 dwellings, employment and retail facilities have been made in the Purbeck Local Plan Part 1 (adopted Nov 2012) (Policy SE). (Site details not yet available). Traffic arising from the new residential development will add to general traffic levels in / around Swanage and on the A351. Site is a new mineral extraction in an area where there are other areas of mineral extraction. Stone from this site will be extracted in time-limited campaigns.

Page 551 of 583

Summary

Potential Benefits Potential Impacts

• The proposed development could have impacts on protected species and local nature conservation designations. It is not known at this stage whether and how these impacts can be mitigated. • There is a stream adjacent to the site boundary and although this is not expected to prevent development of this site, potential impacts on runoff and groundwater must be very carefully assessed and monitored to ensure that there will not be any impacts on these. • Geodiversity – exposing the Purbeck Marble will have geodiversity interest/benefit. However, the exposure • The proposed development is expected to have will be temporary, only during campaigns. severe impacts on both the capacity of the local landscape to satisfactorily absorb the • A source of Purbeck Marble to be used in the development and the surrounding designated construction of new buildings and maintenance of landscape. Further assessment will be required to existing structures will be a benefit. It will also assist see if the impacts can be mitigated in any way. in providing employment and skills maintenance. • There will be impacts on users of the footpath • Possible benefits through exposure/interpretation of which crosses the site, as it will have to be historic quarries/quarrying in the locality. diverted. Further assessment is required to consider impacts and options for diversion. • The preliminary transport assessment indicates that quarry traffic will be relatively low and easily able to gain access to public roads. A more detailed assessment is required to consider impacts of transporting stone to where it will be processed/sold, and whether this will have any impacts on Langton Matravers or any other settlements.

Overall Recommendation: Although there are important benefits to be realised from developing a source of Purbeck Marble, it appears that the site will have significant landscape impacts. There will also be impacts on biodiversity, hydrology/hydrogeology, potentially archaeology and rights of way/access. In the absence of further information, particularly regarding the specific need for Purbeck Marble and more detail on how the site might be worked, how often it might be worked and how it would be restored/left between working, it is considered that the site is not at this stage appropriate for inclusion in the emerging Mineral Sites Plan. On the basis of the evidence available it does not appear that there is sufficient certainty that the impacts identified in this sustainability appraisal are currently capable of satisfactory mitigation. The site remains part of the mineral resource of Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole but is not at this time included in the Draft Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Mineral Sites Plan.

Page 552 of 583

Purbeck Stone: PK 21 Gallows’ Gore, Langton Matravers This site has been withdrawn. A modification has been proposed to remove the site from the Plan. No further assessment has been prepared.

Site Name/Location : Owner : Haysoms Site Area : approximately 4.2 ha PK 21 Gallows’ Gore, Local Authority : Purbeck District Council Production : c. 1800 tpa Langton Matravers Mineral Type : Purbeck Stone Reserve : up to 30,000 tonnes

Impact Assessment Scoring

Strong Minor Minor - Strong Positive Negligible or Negative - Negative + Positive ++ 0 ? Uncertain - Impact No Effect Impact Impact Impact

Timescales for effects: P/W: Preparation and Working R/A : Restoration and Afteruse

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

1. To move waste • This Objective is not relevant to this site management N/A N/A • N/A nomination up the waste hierarchy

• European/International Designations No 0 0 action • No significant impacts expected required.

• Annex 1 Bird Species No 0 0 action • No significant impacts expected required. 2. To maintain, • conserve and National Designations No enhance 0 0 action • No significant impacts expected biodiversity required.

• Site boundary to be Protected species amended as suggested, • The small area of rough to minimise impacts on 0 0 grassland at the south east biodiversity. corner of the site has potential to • Previously worked areas support uncommon UK priority to south east and any

Page 553 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A BAP species such as the grizzled other adjacent rough skipper and dingy skipper. grassland around the site to be left untouched • This area should be omitted from and protected from any the site boundary/working area. operations, or impacts • _ Adjacent, similar areas of rough from such operations, grassland provide habitat for on rest of site. several species of European • Site to be surveyed to Protected bats, for which the identify further possible whole area is nationally impacts and any important. appropriate mitigation to be undertaken. Local recognitions/designations, including ancient woodland and veteran trees

0 • The small area of rough grassland at the south east corner of the site has potential to support uncommon UK priority BAP species such as the grizzled 0 skipper and dingy skipper. • This area should be omitted from the site boundary/working area.

_ • Adjacent, similar areas of rough grassland provide habitat for several species of European Protected bats, for which the whole area is nationally important.

• The Purbeck limestone group has an important association with the geology of the Jurassic Coast World Heritage Site. Working • Note potential for quarries in Purbeck have been quarries to yield fossils known to yield important fossils, or other material of including dinosaur footprints. geodiversity interest. They are also of on-going 3. To maintain, • Visits or other interest for the study of early conserve and investigation of + + ? Cretaceous stratigraphy. enhance working sites may be geodiversity. • These interests should be requested. acknowledged with the • Investigate potential assumption that geologists and and/or benefits of the Jurassic Coast Team hosted leaving quarried face by DCC will respond positively to open after restoration. any opportunities to recover fossils or record and study unusual features if they are discovered. In terms of Page 554 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A geodiversity there is a presumption in favour of an appropriate level of quarrying activity continuing in order to sustain these on-going interests.

• Hydrological assessment required at planning application Groundwater stage to determine possible • Site overlies Secondary impacts, on ground and surface 0 0 aquifer. No impact on waters, with appropriate Source Protection Zones. mitigation to be implemented. • 4. To maintain, No licenced supplies. Appropriate arrangements conserve and should be put in place to ensure enhance the that the water leaving the site quality of and entering the watercourses or ground, groundwater is of an acceptable surface and quality. Any fuel on site should sea waters be properly stored to avoid and manage contamination in case of spillage. the • Appropriate arrangements consumption Surface Water should be installed for surface of water in a water and silt collection and fuel • Spring within 500 m of sustainable 0 0 storage to prevent contamination site. No impacts way. of groundwater resources. expected on this. • The combined impacts of Purbeck Limestone Quarries should be assessed where a number of sites affect the same water resource or receiving water course.

Flooding/Coastal Stability 5. To reduce • Site is entirely in Flood Risk Zone 1, no flood risk and • No action 0 0 risk of flooding. improve flood required. management. • Although the site is not at risk of flooding,

Page 555 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

Archaeology • Archaeological survey of the • The discovery of Iron Age and Roman area required period settlement remains at a site to the as part of south-west of the proposal site indicates planning the present site’s high potential for application to below-ground archaeology. There is also assess possible potential for industrial archaeological presence and evidence of early quarrying. ? 0 significance of • Archaeological assessment and non-designated evaluation would be required before an remains and to informed planning decision could be assess made. Only when these have been whether/how undertaken would the archaeological these should be impact be understood – at present it protected could be anywhere from ‘Very Significant’ during working 6. To maintain, to ‘No Significant’ impact. – no further conserve and work required enhance the at site historic allocation environment stage. (including • All necessary archaeologica mitigation to l sites, historic be buildings, implemented conservation prior to areas, historic Historic Landscapes working. parks and • gardens and The local landscape bears the imprint of • Adequate other locally previous quarrying dating from the provision to be distinctive 0 0 Roman period onwards. It could be made for features and argued that the present site would be a preservation, their settings). continuation of the process, and if the excavation or site is to be restored afterwards the recording, as impact would be limited in time anyway. appropriate. • Further consideration to be given to restoration proposals, in terms of historic landscapes.

Historic Buildings • • No action 0 0 This is a quarry set in a quarrying landscape and the nearest listed required. buildings are too far away to be affected.

Page 556 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A • No significant impact expected.

• Assessment of Landscape Capacity potential visual impacts will be • This site proposal is within the area of required at least landscape and visual sensitivity. planning _ 0 • Landscape capacity to accommodate the application 7. To maintain, development is medium. It would be stage. conserve and higher if the surrounding existing • All appropriate enhance the quarries had been completely restored or mitigation to be landscape, where prior to any new quarry opening. included. including townscape, • Appropriate seascape and restoration the coast. proposals in line with Landscape Designated Landscapes Management 0 0 • Site proposal is expected to have a less Guidelines significant adverse impact. referred to in Minerals Strategy.

• Impacts on air quality expected to be negligible. • Environmental 8. To protect • No AQMAs will be affected by the working protection and improve of this site proposal. Any dust resulting measures to air quality and from working will be controlled through 0 0 reduce dust and reduce the normal dust-suppression measures. ensure noise is impacts of • Noise mitigation will be addressed at the appropriately noise. planning application stage, with mitigated. appropriate mitigation to be included in the development of the site.

• • The site is currently an area of pasture Soil to be and soils are either good to moderate or properly stripped and 9. To maintain, poor in quality. stored prior to conserve and • _ 0 Any soil removed will be protected working; enhance soil during working and either re-used on site protected during quality. or taken elsewhere to be used. Further working; and re- assessment may be required to spread on site determine soil quality. after working.

Page 557 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

• No specific action required; site development 10. To conserve • The site would make an important to take into and safeguard contribution to the supply of Purbeck Stone + + 0 consideration mineral for Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole and any relevant resources. other markets. impacts and mitigate where appropriate.

11. To promote the use of • This proposal does not promote the use • No action _ 0 alternative of alternative materials. required. materials.

• Development of this site would provide a benefit in terms of contributing to the • provision of a supply of minerals to meet Ensure 12. To provide an society’s needs. principles of adequate and sustainable • affordable Ensuring a sustainable supply will development supply of + 0 depend on the development and are minerals to management of the site. Providing site incorporated meet society's development takes into account into the needs. relevant principles of sustainable development of development it is expected this will this site. contribute to complying with this objective.

Page 558 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

• Developing land as a quarry is expected to have some negative impacts regarding climate change, due primarily to machinery used and transportation of • Use energy mineral away from site. However, these efficient plant will in relative terms be negligible. and machinery. • 14. To adapt to The Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole • Implement and mitigate Minerals Strategy seeks to address and restoration the impacts of _ 0 minimise such impacts through Policy CC1 which provides climate which requires operators to take into appropriate change. consideration climate change impacts and habitats to help their possible mitigation for any proposed to increase minerals development. resilience of • The development management policies, flora/fauna. e.g. DM 1, also address and seek to minimise the issue of sustainable development and climate change.

• • Access southwards over adjacent land Any proposal for directly to the B3069, this would be this site would expected to have much less impact and need to be is the preferred access route. accompanied by a Transport • Haycraft’s Lane is very narrow, has Assessment which limited passing opportunity and has will need to poor forward visibility. It would not be provide access acceptable to use Haycrafts Lane to details and access Harman’s Cross, or the Kingston 15. To minimise consider vehicle Road. the negative routing. • impacts of To be acceptable in highway terms any • However, on the waste and proposal for this site would need to limit basis of these minerals trips to and from the site to the very low comments it transport on ? 0 levels that could reasonably be expected appears unlikely the transport from the existing agricultural use of the that the proposed network, land; travel very short distances and have route will be mitigating an acceptable access from the site onto suitable for use as any residual Haycraft’s Lane. a quarry access. impacts. • It is currently proposed to use Haycrafts • The TA should be Lane for a short distance (c. 50m) to scoped with the access Landers Quarry land. Working Transport would be summer campaigns, Development approximately every 2 years. Management • Policies DM1 and DM 8 of the Minerals Team and is Strategy actively address this issue of intended to minimising impacts on the identify transportation network. opportunities for reducing impacts

Page 559 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A on the transport network.

16. To support • and The proposed site can only realistically be encourage accessed by means of road transport, the use of resulting in a negative impact under this sustainable Objective during development and • Mitigate impacts transport working. _ 0 where identified modes, • As far as reasonably possible negative and appropriate. imposing no impacts resulting from access and unmitigated transport will be mitigated, as required by negative Policies DM1 and DM8 of the Minerals impacts on Strategy. them.

• Provision of appropriate mitigation, following assessment of Impact on Sensitive Human Receptors likely impacts. • Site has residential properties • Restoration to immediately adjacent to it, within 50m improve 17. To sustain the and further out. Mitigation/screening will landscape of site health and be required. where possible; quality of life _ _ 0 and to seek to of the • Although this site has been worked in the facilitate public population past, this was many years ago and further access. development would make it seem like a new site. It is in close proximity to a • Screening, number of residences. bunding, standoffs will be used to mitigate impacts where considered necessary.

Page 560 of 583

Sustainability Effects Commentary Mitigation Objectives P/W R/A

• Transport Assessment to Impact on Existing Settlements be carried out, • Closest settlements are Acton at identifying approximately 600m south east and possible Langton Matravers at around 700m impacts and south/west. Site is not visible from these opportunities settlements. for reducing impacts on the 0 0 • Harman’s Cross lies to the north, in the transport valley. The site will be potentially more network. visible from the north, which will require sensitive treatment and proper screening of • Visual impact the northern edge of the site. assessment will also be • Traffic impacts on these settlements are required, as expected to be minimal. referred to above.

Impact on Airport Safety • Site is approximately 22 km from airport, • No action 0 0 with no wet working or restoration. required. • No impacts expected.

Impact on Recreational Land • Assessment of impacts, with 0 0 • Site is agricultural land. No informal or appropriate formal recreational uses noted. mitigation 18. To enable identified. safe access to • Restoration to countryside Impact on Public Rights of Way include and open • No rights of way cross the site or run considering spaces. 0 0 adjacent to it. Closest right of way is a how it might be footpath which ends some 30m from possible to north-eastern boundary of site. improve public access in the area.

Page 561 of 583

Preliminary Hydrological Risk Assessment

Further Controlled Waters Issues/Risks Mitigation information/approval required

• Appropriate • Full hydrogeological risk arrangements to be • Potential for assessment will be required made for ensuring contamination of as part of a planning that runoff from the controlled waters application. site does not enter (groundwater) the groundwater • Flood Risk Assessment through spillage or unless any silt or seepage of pollutants • Water Framework other pollutant has • Watercourses such as fuel. Assessment first been removed. • Ponds/lakes, • Contamination of • Further assessment of • Fuel stored on site including wet water supplies or potential impacts on water to be appropriately habitats reduction in amount quality and levels, bunded and sealed of water available for particularly for • Groundwater to prevent any licenced supplies. groundwater, is required spillage from prior to development. • Potential for water entering ground or flowing off the site to surface waters. • Land Drainage Consent to flood land to the be obtained from Dorset • On-going north, downslope County Council if works monitoring during from the proposal site may affect flow of an development and ordinary watercourse. working of the site.

Viability This is the only site that is essentially a new site – although it has been worked historically. The mineral has not been tested but it is expected that mineral is present. The owner and promoter is confident that there is mineral present. As part of a planning application the site will be tested, to establish the presence of mineral.

Cumulative Impacts Site is a new mineral extraction in an area where there are other areas of mineral extraction. Site has been historically quarried. The site nomination comprises an extension to an existing quarry in an area where there is a high concentration and long history of mineral extraction. The cumulative effect of the number of quarries operating in this area should be taken into consideration, and as far as possible no new quarry areas should Page 562 of 583

be opened unless others have been restored. The proposed site is adjacent to another proposed site, Quarr Farm to the north. Both are new sites, and vehicles servicing them would have a cumulative impact on existing traffic levels. The proposal is within 5 km (by road) of a town (Swanage) where allocations for the development of 200 dwellings, employment and retail facilities have been made in the Purbeck Local Plan Part 1 (adopted Nov 2012) (Policy SE). (Site details not yet available). Traffic arising from the new residential development will add to general traffic levels in / around Swanage and on the A351.

Summary

Potential Benefits Potential Impacts

• Impacts on biodiversity, specifically due to inclusion of areas of rough grassland, an area of previously quarried land, in the south east corner of the site. Mitigation can be achieved through removing this area from the proposed site boundary and ensuring that this area is protected during working. • Impacts on local amenity, as there are residences in close proximity, as well as further afield, including • Provision of Purbeck Stone. Harman’s Cross to the north. Mitigation, such as standoffs and bunding, will be required. • Support for the Purbeck Stone industry and • employment, both locally and wherever Purbeck Access is a key issue, given how narrow Haycraft’s Stone is exported and used, with associated Lane is and the importance of its flower rich verges. economic benefits. If Haycrafts Lane is used it will have to be for a short distance only. • Use of the stone for heritage building works/repairs, • and for new buildings. The presence of the two reservoirs to the north – to be assessed at planning application stage to • Geodiversity benefits, through exposures created determine exactly what level of mitigation they and fossils found. require. • Possibility of improved public access. • Potential landscape/visual impacts, particularly regarding the capacity of the landscape to accommodate this proposed development. Assessment of possible impacts required, with appropriate mitigation identified, including restoration of quarries in vicinity as far as possible. • Assessment is required to determine whether there will be any archaeology or other heritage impacts, and what mitigation is required.

Overall Recommendation: Assessment already carried out has flagged up biodiversity, archaeology, landscape, local amenity and access as key issues to be addressed as part of working the land within this site nomination. Further assessment will be required at planning application stage to identify satisfactory mitigation and to identify if there are any additional impacts that will require mitigation. Impacts on amenity is a key issue in the case of this site in particular. Full assessment will be required, including identification and implementation of mitigation.

Page 563 of 583

Page 564 of 583

Appendix D: Considering and Selecting Site Alternatives Introduction For mineral sites, the alternatives are the full range of sites nominated for consideration, all of which have been assessed and a selection made of those considered appropriate for inclusion as site allocations in the Mineral Sites Plan. The approach to dealing with alternatives varied according to mineral type, as described in this section. However, for each mineral type, the following four questions were posed: a. How much is needed? b. Where will it come from? c. How will sites/alternatives be identified? d. How will sites/alternatives be assessed and selected?

Sand and Gravel How much is needed? The amount of sand and gravel required to be provided for through the allocation of new sites over the Plan period can be calculated, using an annual production figure and taking into account the amount of permitted reserves remaining - this gives an indication of how many site allocations will be needed in the Mineral Sites Plan. This calculation is shown in Chapter 4 of the Mineral Sites Plan. Where will it come from? The Minerals Strategy 2014 (Policy AS1) indicates that new sand and gravel extraction sites should be located within the designated aggregate resource blocks, although in certain circumstances quarries may be permitted outside these blocks. How will sites/alternatives be identified? The Minerals Strategy established a preference for the identification of for specific sites, through paragraph 5.11 and Policy SS2. The Minerals Strategy did not establish a preference for either extensions to existing sites or for new sites. All sites nominated for inclusion in the Mineral Sites Plan have been considered on their merits. Assessing potential sites and identifying those most suitable for allocation must include the issue of viability. Without a willing landowner, a site is not viable and is unlikely to be developed. The MPA has focussed on issuing call(s) for sites, as this is considered to be most likely to identify supportive landowners/developers and identify the sites that will ultimately prove viable and therefore more likely to actually be developed. i. The Calls for Sites – 2007, 2012 and 2014: In order to provide robust evidence for the appraisal of options for the delivery of a sustainable supply of aggregate resources, Dorset County Council made a call for sites in 2007, during the early stages of the preparation of the MSAD. Further calls for sites were issued in 2012 and 2014, to give any potential site nominees every opportunity to submit site nominations for consideration for possible inclusion in the emerging Draft Mineral Sites Plan. ii. Review of Existing Plans and Previously Considered Sites: In addition to the calls for sites, the Mineral Planning Authority reviewed the adopted Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Minerals and Waste Local Plan 1999 to identify sites which had not been developed, and could potentially be ‘rolled over’ to the emerging sites plan. Sites considered for inclusion in the 1999 Local Plan but not ultimately included in that Plan were also considered. Finally, Development Control officers were involved in identifying potential new sites, or site extensions, that could be considered.

Page 565 of 583

iii. Other Site Nominations: As plan preparation continued a number of new sites were identified, either in response to the calls for sites or in some cases sites were nominated not in response to specific calls for sites. All nominated sites were subjected to assessment. How will sites/alternatives be assessed? Each site nomination - alternative - has gone through a range of assessments. These include: i. Applying the 24 site assessment criteria as set out in Appendix 1 of the Minerals Strategy 2014, to produce a Site Assessment proforma sheet; • The site selection criteria have been selected to cover all aspects of sustainable development, and are derived from the sustainability objectives identified in the Sustainability Appraisal Scoping Report reference. This is to ensure that sites are appraised having regard to the full scope of sustainability issues which have shaped the Minerals Strategy. • The assessments were carried out by a range of specialists, including Dorset County Council officers (minerals policy team members, ecologists, archaeologists, historic buildings, the Jurassic Coast Team, landscape architects) and the Environment Agency for matters relating to hydrology and hydrogeology. ii. This site assessment information was then applied through the Sustainability Appraisal, which assessed the alternatives against the 18 Sustainability Objectives which were identified from the Sustainability Appraisal Scoping Report. The SA included consideration of cumulative impacts and hydrological issues. iii. Other strands of the assessment that each alternative went through include the Strategic Flood Risk Assessment and Habitat Regulations Appraisal screening. iv. There was further and more detailed assessment of specific sites, including heritage assessment and traffic impacts assessment. How will sites/alternatives be selected? As noted above, it is known approximately how many sites are required to meet expected demand over the Plan period. Having completed the assessment of all alternatives, the appropriate number of most suitable sites were selected and proposed for allocation. The sites selected together provided more than the actual amount required; a contingency figure was included, to take into account that one or more sites could be rejected following Examination of the Plan, or some sites may not yield the expected amount of mineral. The selected sites are set out in Appendix A of this Sustainability Appraisal; sites not being taken forward are shown in Appendix C.

Crushed Rock How much is needed? As with sand and gravel, it is possible to calculate how much crushed rock should be provided for over the Plan period. However, the size of the permitted reserve (on Portland) potentially available for crushing/sale is large enough that no new quarries are required during the Plan period. However, the Minerals Strategy 2014 notes that in exceptional circumstance (e.g. an unexpected reduction in supply) a new (or extended) crushed rock quarry would be possible.

Page 566 of 583

Where will it come from? A new crushed rock quarry is only possible where the mineral is found - primarily Portland or the Purbeck Plateau. How will sites/alternatives be identified? The 'calls for sites' referred to above for sand and gravel also applied to other mineral types, including crushed rock. How will sites/alternatives be assessed? All site nominations/alternatives have been assessed as described for sand and gravel above. How will sites/alternatives be selected? As noted, exceptional circumstances must be demonstrated to justify a new/extended site, given the existing landbank. In addition, sites proposed must also be acceptable according to the assessments undertaken. The selected sites are set out in Appendix A of this Sustainability Appraisal; sites not being taken forward are shown in Appendix C.

Ball Clay How much is needed? The Minerals Strategy 2014 notes that anticipated supply over the life of the Minerals Strategy 2014 will be 250,000 tonnes per annum. There are not enough existing/identified sites to provide this amount over the life of the Strategy; however, there are criteria based policies for the supply of ballclay, enabling new applications to be made if there is identified need. Where will it come from? Future ball clay sites will be located within the ball clay consultation area, as designated. There are areas within the consultation area which are less environmentally constrained, where site searches should begin. How will sites/alternatives be identified? As for other minerals, through 'Calls for Sites' as described. How will sites/alternatives be assessed? All site nominations/alternatives have been assessed as described for sand and gravel above. How will sites/alternatives be selected? It is accepted that not enough sites have been nominated to meet demand. Of the nominated sites - alternatives - any that are considered acceptable following assessment (i.e. it is considered that identified impacts can be appropriately mitigated) will be selected. The selected sites are set out in Appendix A of this Sustainability Appraisal; sites not being taken forward are shown in Appendix C.

Purbeck Stone How much is needed? The Minerals Strategy 2014 provides for 20,000 tonnes of saleable stone per year. It is not always clear how much stone a quarry will produce, before extraction starts. It is also the case that not all quarries

Page 567 of 583

produce all the various types of Purbeck Stone. Therefore the MPA has taken the approach that all nominations of potential sites will be assessed and if found acceptable will be proposed as allocations.

Where will it come from? Purbeck Stone will be source from the Purbeck Plateau. An Area of Search for Purbeck Stone is identified, within which non-allocated sites may be permitted in order to meet a shortfall in supply. In certain circumstances non-allocated sites outside the Area of Search may be permitted. How will sites/alternatives be identified? As for other minerals, through 'Calls for Sites' as described. How will sites/alternatives be assessed? All site nominations/alternatives have been assessed as described for sand and gravel above. How will sites/alternatives be selected? In order to maintain supply of the various beds of Purbeck Stone, all nominated sites/alternatives that are identified as suitable following assessment have been included as potential allocations. The selected sites are set out in Appendix A of this Sustainability Appraisal; sites not being taken forward are shown in Appendix C.

Other Building Stone How much is needed? There is no set amount identified. The Minerals Strategy 2014 states that 'small-scale building stone quarries' will be permitted, provided certain criteria are met. Where will it come from? Where the various types of stone occur. How will sites/alternatives be identified? As for other minerals, through 'Calls for Sites' as described. How will sites/alternatives be assessed? All site nominations/alternatives have been assessed as described for sand and gravel above. How will sites/alternatives be selected? In order to maintain supply, all nominated sites/alternatives that are identified as suitable following assessment have been included as potential allocations. The selected sites are set out in Appendix A of this Sustainability Appraisal; sites not being taken forward are shown in Appendix C.

These mineral types above are the only ones for which there are proposed allocations in the Mineral Sites Plan, so greater detail on treatment of alternatives is given above. Table 17 below shows all the various sites considered and assessed throughout the preparation of the Plan, indicating which sites have come out of the allocation process and why.

Page 568 of 583

Table 17: Sites Considered through the Site Identification and Assessment Process

Draft Mineral Minerals Site Draft Mineral Sites Plan 2013- Sites Considered Allocations Sites Plan 2015: Sites Under Sites included in Sites Under 2014: For Inclusion in Document 2008: Outcome Outcome Sites Assessed Outcome Consideration Draft Mineral Sites Consideration Sites Assessed Pre-Submission Sites Assessed and and Consulted 2016 Plan Update 2016 Following Hearings and Consulted Consultation Plan Consulted On On On

BC01 Carrot Bank Withdrawn BC01 Carrot Bank Withdrawn BC01 Carrot Bank Withdrawn BC01 Carrot Bank BC01 Carrot Bank BC01 Carrot Bank

BC02 Dorey’s Permitted BC02 Dorey’s Permitted BC02 Dorey’s Permitted BC02 Dorey’s BC02 Dorey’s BC02 Dorey’s

BC03 Povington Permitted BC03 Povington Permitted BC03 Povington Permitted BC03 Povington BC03 Povington BC03 Povington

Further Further Further BC04 Trigon Hill BC04 Trigon Hill BC04 Trigon Hill BC04 Trigon Hill BC04 Trigon Hill BC04 Trigon Hill consultation and consultation and consultation and extension extension extension extension extension extension assessment assessment assessment Ball Clay Ball Clay Permitted

BC05 Dorey’s - BC05 Dorey’s - BC05 Dorey’s - BC05 Dorey’s - BC05 Dorey’s - New nomination Withdrawn Withdrawn Holme Heath Holme Heath Holme Heath Holme Heath Holme Heath

BC06 BC06 BC06 New nomination Withdrawn Withdrawn BC06 Woolsbarrow BC06 Woolsbarrow Woolsbarrow Woolsbarrow Woolsbarrow

Further Further Further AS01 Binnegar - AS01 Binnegar - AS01 Binnegar consultation and AS01 Binnegar consultation and AS01 Binnegar consultation and AS01 Binnegar Permitted Permitted assessment assessment assessment

AS02 Cannon Hill Withdrawn AS02 Cannon Hill Withdrawn AS02 Cannon Hill Withdrawn AS02 Cannon Hill AS02 Cannon Hill AS02 Cannon Hill

AS03 Crossways Withdrawn AS03 Crossways Withdrawn AS03 Crossways Withdrawn AS03 Crossways AS03 Crossways AS03 Crossways

AS04 Dorey’s Permitted AS04 Dorey’s Permitted AS04 Dorey’s Permitted AS04 Dorey’s AS04 Dorey’s AS04 Dorey’s

AS05 East Parley AS05 East Parley AS05 East Parley AS05 East Parley AS05 East Parley AS05 East Parley Withdrawn Withdrawn Withdrawn Aggregates Residual Reserve Residual Reserve Residual Reserve Residual Reserve Residual Reserve Residual Reserve

Further Further Further AS06 Great AS06 Great AS06 Great AS06 Great AS06 Great AS06 Great consultation and consultation and consultation and Plantation Plantation Plantation Plantation Plantation - Plantation - assessment assessment assessment

AS07 Hodge Ditch AS07 Hodge AS07 Hodge Ditch AS07 Hodge Ditch AS07 Hodge Ditch AS07 Hodge Ditch Permitted Permitted Permitted Area 2 Ditch Area 2 Area 2 Area 2 Area 2 Area 2

Page 569 of 583

AS27 Land at AS08 Horton Heath Horton Heath - Further Further AS08 Horton Further AS08 Horton (revised areas) - AS08 Horton AS08 Horton further consultation and consultation and Heath (revised consultation and Heath (revised Not considered Heath Heath consideration assessment assessment areas) assessment areas) suitable for following inclusion Examination

Further Further Further AS09 Hurn Court AS09 Hurn Court AS09 Hurn Court AS09 Hurn Court AS09 Hurn Court AS09 Hurn Court consultation and consultation and consultation and Farm Farm Farm Farm Farm Farm assessment assessment assessment Permitted

Further Not considered Not considered AS10 Moreton AS10 Moreton AS10 Moreton AS10 Moreton AS10 Moreton AS10 Moreton consultation and suitable for suitable for Plantation Plantation Plantation Plantation Plantation Plantation assessment inclusion inclusion

Further Not considered AS11 Parley Court AS11 Parley AS11 Parley Court AS11 Parley Court AS11 Parley Court AS11 Parley Court consultation and Withdrawn suitable for Phase 3 Court Phase 3 Phase 3 Phase 3 Phase 3 Phase 3 assessment inclusion

AS12 Philliol’s Further Further Farm (under AS12 Philliol’s Farm AS12 Philliol’s AS12 Philliol’s AS12 Philliol’s Not considered AS12 Philliol’s AS12 Philliol’s consultation and consultation and consideration Farm Farm Farm necessary Farm Farm Removed following assessment assessment again in case of Examination shortfall)

Further Further Further AS13 Roeshot consultation and AS13 Roeshot consultation and AS13 Roeshot consultation and AS13 Roeshot AS13 Roeshot AS13 Roeshot assessment assessment assessment

AS14 Sturminster AS14 Sturminster AS14 Sturminster Marshall Marshall Marshall AS14 Sturminster AS14 Sturminster AS14 Sturminster (under AS14 Sturminster Withdrawn Withdrawn Withdrawn Not considered Not considered Marshall Marshall Marshall consideration Marshall suitable for suitable for again in case of inclusion inclusion shortfall)

Further Further Further AS15 Tatchell’s consultation and AS15 Tatchell’s consultation and AS15 Tatchell’s consultation and AS15 Tatchell’s AS15 Tatchell’s AS15 Tatchell’s assessment assessment assessment

AS16 Trigon Hill Permitted AS16 Trigon Hill Permitted AS16 Trigon Hill Permitted AS16 Trigon Hill AS16 Trigon Hill AS16 Trigon Hill

AS17 Uddens AS17 Uddens AS17 Uddens AS17 Uddens AS17 Uddens AS17 Uddens Withdrawn Withdrawn Withdrawn Plantation Plantation Plantation Plantation Plantation Plantation

AS18 Wimborne AS18 Wimborne AS18 Wimborne AS18 Wimborne AS18 Wimborne AS18 Wimborne Withdrawn Withdrawn Withdrawn Minster Minster Minster Minster Minster Minster

Page 570 of 583

Further Further Further AS19 Woodsford consultation and AS19 Woodsford consultation and AS19 Woodsford consultation and AS19 Woodsford AS19 Woodsford AS19 Woodsford assessment assessment assessment

Not considered Not considered AS21 Came AS21 Came Home AS21 Came Home AS21 Came Home AS21 Came Home New nomination suitable for suitable for Home Farm Farm Farm Farm Farm inclusion inclusion

Further Further AS22 Trigon Hill AS22 Trigon Hill AS22 Trigon Hill AS22 Trigon Hill AS22 Trigon Hill New nomination consultation and consultation and Extension Extension Extension Extension Extension assessment assessment Withdrawn Withdrawn

Not considered Not considered New nomination AS23 Gore Heath suitable for AS23 Gore Heath suitable for AS23 Gore Heath AS23 Gore Heath AS23 Gore Heath inclusion inclusion

Not considered Not considered AS24 Purple AS24 Purple Haze AS24 Purple Haze AS24 Purple Haze AS24 Purple Haze New nomination suitable for suitable for Haze (south) (south) (south) (south) (south) inclusion inclusion

Further AS25 Station AS25 Station New nomination consultation and AS25 Station Road AS25 Station Road Road Road assessment

Further New nomination AS26 Hurst Farm consultation and AS26 Hurst Farm AS26 Hurst Farm AS26 Hurst Farm assessment

AS28 Gallows’ Hill - AS28 Gallows’ AS28 Gallows’ Hill AS28 Gallows’ Hill - New nomination Site A only - Hill A&B A&B Site A only Withdrawn

Crushed Rock Further (category change PK16 Swanworth PK16 Swanworth PK16 Swanworth PK16 Swanworth PK16 Swanworth consultation and from Purbeck Quarry Extension Quarry Extension Extension Quarry Extension Quarry Extension assessment stone)

Further New Nomination - RA01 White's Pit consultation and RA01 White's Pit RA01 White's Pit RA01 White's Pit Recycled Aggregate assessment

PK01 Belle Vue Withdrawn PK01 Belle Vue PK01 Belle Vue PK01 Belle Vue PK01 Belle Vue PK01 Belle Vue PK01 Belle Vue PK01 Belle Vue eck eck Purb

Page 571 of 583

Further Further Further PK02 Blacklands PK02 Blacklands PK02 Blacklands PK02 Blacklands PK02 Blacklands PK02 Blacklands consultation and consultation and consultation and Quarry Extension Quarry Extension Quarry Extension Quarry Extension Quarry Extension Quarry Extension assessment assessment assessment

PK03 California PK03 California PK03 California PK03 California PK03 California PK03 California PK03 California PK03 California Withdrawn Quarry Quarry Quarry Quarry Quarry Quarry Quarry Quarry

PK04 Downs PK04 Downs PK04 Downs PK04 Downs PK04 Downs Withdrawn PK04 Downs Quarry PK04 Downs Quarry PK04 Downs Quarry Quarry Quarry Quarry Quarry Quarry

PK05 Land South PK05 Land South PK05 Land South of PK05 Land South PK05 Land South PK05 Land South PK05 Land South of PK05 Land South of of Acton Field and Withdrawn of Acton Field Acton Field and of Acton Field of Acton Field of Acton Field Acton Field and Acton Field and Priests Way and Priests Way Priests Way and Priests Way and Priests Way and Priests Way Priests Way Priests Way

PK06 Land to the PK06 Land to the PK06 Land to the PK06 Land to the PK06 Land to the PK06 Land to the PK06 Land to the PK06 Land to the North of Worth Withdrawn North of Worth North of Worth North of Worth North of Worth North of Worth North of Worth North of Worth Matravers road Matravers road Matravers road Matravers road Matravers road Matravers road Matravers road Matravers road

PK07 Land to the PK07 Land to the PK07 Land to the PK07 Land to the PK07 Land to the PK07 Land to the PK07 Land to the PK07 Land to the Withdrawn South of B3069 South of B3069 South of B3069 South of B3069 South of B3069 South of B3069 South of B3069 South of B3069

Further Further Further PK08 Quarr Farm PK08 Quarr Farm consultation and PK08 Quarr Farm consultation and PK08 Quarr Farm consultation and - Not considered PK08 Quarr Farm PK08 Quarr Farm assessment assessment assessment suitable

PK09 South Downs PK09 South PK09 South PK09 South PK09 South Downs PK09 South Downs Permitted Permitted Permitted Quarry Downs Quarry Downs Quarry Downs Quarry Quarry Quarry

Further Further Further PK10 Southard PK10 Southard PK10 Southard PK10 Southard PK10 Southard PK10 Southard consultation and consultation and consultation and Quarry Quarry Quarry Quarry Quarry Quarry assessment assessment assessment

PK11 St Aldhelm’s PK11 St PK11 St Aldhelm’s PK11 St Aldhelm’s PK11 St Aldhelm’s PK11 St Aldhelm’s Permitted Permitted Permitted Quarry Aldhelm’s Quarry Quarry Quarry Quarry Quarry

Further Further PK15 Downs PK15 Downs PK15 Downs PK15 Downs PK15 Downs New nomination consultation and consultation and Quarry Extension Quarry Extension Quarry Extension Quarry Extension Quarry Extension assessment assessment

Further PK16 Swanworth (See Crushed rock (See Crushed rock New nomination consultation and Quarry Extension - above) - above) assessment

Further Further New nomination PK17 Home Field consultation and PK17 Home Field consultation and PK17 Home Field PK17 Home Field PK17 Home Field assessment assessment

Further Further PK18 Quarry 4 PK18 Quarry 4 PK18 Quarry 4 PK18 Quarry 4 PK18 Quarry 4 New nomination consultation and consultation and Extension Extension Extension Extension Extension assessment assessment

Page 572 of 583

Further Further New nomination PK19 Broadmead consultation and PK19 Broadmead consultation and PK19 Broadmead PK19 Broadmead PK19 Broadmead assessment assessment

Further PK21 Gallows’ PK21 Gallows’ PK21 Gallows’ PK21 Gallows’ Gore New nomination consultation and Gore - Gore Gore - Withdrawn assessment Withdrawn

Withdrawn prior to Kingston Hill New nomination further (Purbeck marble) consultation

Not taken PK20 Crack Lane New nomination forward to (Purbeck marble) consultation

Further Further Further PS01 Bower’s Mine PD01 Bower’s PS01 Bower’s PS01 Bower’s PS01 Bower’s PS01 Bower’s Mine consultation and consultation and consultation and Mine Mine Mine Mine Permitted assessment assessment assessment Permitted

PS02 Perryfield PS02 Perryfield PS02 Perryfield PS02 Perryfield PS02 Perryfield New nomination Withdrawn Withdrawn Portland Stone Portland Stone Quarry Extension Quarry Extension Quarry Extension Quarry Extension Quarry Extension

Further BS01 Manor Farm BS01 Manor BS01 Manor Farm BS01 Manor Farm BS01 Manor Farm BS01 Manor Farm consultation and Withdrawn Withdrawn Quarry Farm Quarry Quarry Quarry Quarry Quarry assessment

Further Further Further BS02 Marnhull BS02 Marnhull BS02 Marnhull BS02 Marnhull BS02 Marnhull BS02 Marnhull consultation and consultation and consultation and Quarry Quarry Quarry Quarry Quarry Quarry assessment assessment assessment

Further Further BS04 Frogden BS04 Frogden BS04 Frogden BS04 Frogden BS04 Frogden New nomination consultation and consultation and Quarry Quarry Quarry Quarry Quarry assessment assessment Other Building Stone Further Further BS05 Whithill BS05 Whithill BS05 Whithill BS05 Whithill BS05 Whithill New nomination consultation and consultation and Quarry Quarry Quarry Quarry Quarry assessment assessment

NP01 Baker’s Not under NP01 Baker’s NP01 Baker’s NP01 Baker’s NP01 Baker’s NP01 Baker’s NP01 Baker’s NP01 Baker’s NP01 Baker’s Hanging consideration Hanging Hanging Hanging Hanging Hanging Hanging Hanging Hanging

NP02 Bovington Not under NP02 Bovington NP02 Bovington NP02 Bovington NP02 Bovington NP02 Bovington NP02 Bovington NP02 Bovington NP02 Bovington

Other Sites* Farm consideration Farm Farm Farm Farm Farm Farm Farm Farm

Page 573 of 583

Not under NP03 Gore Heath NP03 Gore Heath NP03 Gore Heath NP03 Gore Heath NP03 Gore Heath NP03 Gore Heath NP03 Gore Heath NP03 Gore Heath NP03 Gore Heath consideration

Not under NP04 Hurst Farm NP04 Hurst Farm NP04 Hurst Farm NP04 Hurst Farm NP04 Hurst Farm NP04 Hurst Farm NP04 Hurst Farm NP04 Hurst Farm NP04 Hurst Farm consideration (see AS26 above) (see AS26 above) (see AS26 above) (see AS26 above) (see AS26 above)

Not under NP05 Hyde Farm NP05 Hyde Farm NP05 Hyde Farm NP05 Hyde Farm NP05 Hyde Farm NP05 Hyde Farm NP05 Hyde Farm NP05 Hyde Farm NP05 Hyde Farm consideration

Page 574 of 583

Appendix E: Swanworth Quarry - Further Information Exceptional Circumstances Test 1 – Need and Economy Swanworth Contribution to Dorset Crushed Rock Supplies E 1 The crushed rock used in Dorset is provided by quarries within Dorset or by importation, primarily from Somerset, either by road or rail. The historic sales of crushed rock in Dorset are identified in the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Local Aggregates Assessment (LAA). E 2 Sales of locally won crushed rock over recent years have varied between 150,000 tonnes and 280,000 tonnes per year, the figures being largely dependent on the general level of economic activity. Sales from Swanworth amounted to approximately 50% of the crushed stone annually produced in Dorset during the same time period. E 3 The first full year that Suttle Stone Quarries operated Swanworth Quarry was 2012 when sales amounted to only 62,000 tonnes due to the effects of the economic downturn and the new entry into the crushed rock business. Sales have gradually increased as the Suttle Stone Quarries business became more mature and integrated with the recycling operation at Manning's Heath. Sales remained restricted however, due to the limitations of the quarry processing plant inherited from Tarmac. E 4 In order to address the processing limitations Suttles invested in new processing equipment in 2014 which allowed for more efficient crushing and screening of stone and a greater production of premium limestone products. E 5 Sales have risen as a consequence of the improved processing operations and the improving economy from 104,000 tonnes in 2014 to 120,000 tonnes in 2015 and have remained between 120,000 to 130,000 tonnes since then. It is not anticipated that sales will increase beyond 130,000 tonnes per year in the future. E 6 Crushed rock has been imported into Dorset by rail from Whatley Quarry in the Mendips in Somerset at varying levels up to 160,000 tonnes per year although the most recent 10 year average level of imports is only 50,000 tonnes per year as there have been no imports between 2012 and 2017. Imports have resumed. E 7 The LAA also identifies that road imports of crushed rock, primarily from Somerset, amounted to approximately 260,000 tonnes in 2014, equivalent to 49% of the 530,000 tonnes of crushed rock consumed (LAA paragraph 1.33). This level of road imports is likely to increase in the future if rail imports cease and also as the economy improves with an associated increase in demand for construction aggregates. E 8 Swanworth clearly makes an important contribution to the local crushed rock requirements and provides a spatial and sustainable source of material compared to the sites in Portland and the Mendips. E 9 The advice in the NPPF at paragraph 145 (7th bullet point) is that mineral planning authorities should ensure that large landbanks bound up in very few sites do not stifle competition and Swanworth effectively provides an alternative source to crushed rock supplies to those from Portland and the Mendips. E 10 The different types of limestone product sold from Swanworth between 2012 and 2017 is shown in Table 17 below.

Page 575 of 583

Table 17 - Swanworth Quarry Sales Split

E 11 Most products are sold within 30 miles of Swanworth. Stone is a heavy, bulky and relatively cheap product which makes the haulage element of the cost high and therefore the stone source needs to be as close as possible to the market. Longer transport distances, particularly for material such as Type 1 sub-base (the cheapest material in Table 2) are not desirable. E 12 Some materials which have specialist uses and can therefore command a higher price travel further, e.g. Gabion stone, single sized chippings for decorative use and rock armour for river/coastal defence and for rail infrastructure works. E 13 Some limestone block stone from Swanworth, from the ‘Freestone Beds’, has been transported to California Quarry to be cut as dimension stone and has been used in the local area. This stone is the same material that is extensively worked on the Isle of Portland. E 14 The quarry extension area has the potential to produce larger unfractured block which would help to supplement the availability of dimension stone from Portland. Economics E 15 The Manning's Heath recycling depot merchants a wide range of aggregates, including those sourced from Swanworth. It also acts as a major hub for the receipt and subsequent recycling of construction and demolition waste in the area. Builders and contractors are able to deliver inert waste and collect aggregate products from the site. The provision of Type 1 sub-base and decorative products from Swanworth is key to its popularity with local traders and builders who can obtain all the products they need for a construction project. E 16 The inert waste is recycled at Manning's Heath. The non-aggregate inert material remaining from the recycling operation is taken to Swanworth on returning HGVs for use in the recovery operation in site restoration. E 17 The integrated relationship between Swanworth and Manning's Heath depot is very important in the success of both enterprises and is fundamental to the high percentage of “back haulage” utilised by the business where HGVS travel fully loaded in both directions taking Swanworth stone to customers or Manning's Heath and bringing inert waste materials back to Swanworth for restoration or recycling. Approximately 70% of Swanworth HGV movements use back haulage. E 18 The annual turnover for Suttle Stone Quarries in 2016-2017 was almost £8 million with a similar turnover for Suttle Projects. Suttles strive to utilise local suppliers wherever possible. E 19 There are almost 180 individual suppliers for the Suttle Stone Quarries business based in Dorset supplying a wide range of services and products. Annual expenditure during 2017 with individual Dorset suppliers ranged between £259,000 and £55. In addition Suttle Projects have over 90 individual Dorset based suppliers with annual expenditure levels in 2017 between £625,000 and £11

Page 576 of 583

per supplier. Suttle Stone and Suttle Projects contribute significantly to the local and national economies. Employment E 20 Suttles employ a workforce that almost entirely consists of Dorset residents and are fortunate to have a loyal team with a low staff turnover. Currently Suttle Stone Quarries employs 52 and Suttle Projects employs 30. Currently all but five of the 82 Suttle employees reside in Dorset and 90% of the quarry based employees reside in Purbeck. The Suttles jobs are in general permanent, full time positions unlike some local jobs which are dependent on the seasonal nature of tourism. Exceptional Circumstances Test 2 – Alternatives Limestone E 21 There are no realistic opportunities to extend the existing quarry into immediately adjacent land. To the east the depth of overburden above the limestone is excessive, well over 15 metres deep, and the area would be particularly prominent from local viewpoints. To the south, beyond the restored quarry area, the land is open, overlooked from a number of viewpoints and lies closer to Worth Matravers village. Neither area is owned or controlled by Suttle Stone Quarries and consequently neither area has previously been promoted to Dorset as a potential extension area. E 22 It is considered that the only opportunity to continue the existing quarry and associated business is to extend extraction operations into the area allocated in the Draft Mineral Sites Plan, PK-16, for which Suttle control the mineral rights and the ability to develop. E 23 The alternatives to limestone extraction at Swanworth are limited. There is relatively little geological exposure of limestone within Dorset all of which lies within the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty or on the Isle of Portland. The only other limestone crushed rock source in Dorset is on Portland, where two companies control the supply of material. Other sources of limestone crushed rock lie in the Mendip area of Somerset. Additionally there is a railhead at Hamworthy near Poole that has periodically been used for transporting crushed rock from the Mendips. E 24 Portland crushed rock is produced either as a by-product of dimension stone production from quarry sites and underground mine operations or is produced by working the Cherty Series limestone bed which lies beneath the dimension stone beds. Stone extraction on Portland is controlled by a single extensive planning permission granted in 1951 although there are considerable landscape, ecological and amenity constraints with certain parts of the permission. E 25 Portland is not considered as a sustainable source of crushed rock due its distance from the main market of Bournemouth and Poole which is almost twice as far as Swanworth. Swanworth lies approximately 22 miles from the main Bournemouth and Poole market. Portland is located some 42 miles away from this market area and the Mendip Quarries are 60+ miles away. E 26 The supply of material from Portland rather than Swanworth would result in almost twice the amount of road miles travelled by HGVs with consequent fuel consumption and engine emissions. E 27 Swanworth also supplies 35,000 tonnes of limestone each year within the Purbeck District area, only a few miles from the quarry. Portland stone would be 20 miles further away. E 28 The Mendips have substantial consented reserves of limestone and supply the majority of crushed rock imported by road into Dorset. The Mendip quarries are almost three times the distance from the Poole/Bournemouth market in comparison to Swanworth. It is not known whether back haulage occurs. E 29 Mendips limestone is a purple/dark grey colour and not colour comparable to the stone used in Dorset. E 30 The Dorset LAA estimates that road imports in 2014 amounted to approximately 260,000 tonnes of limestone, some 49% of the total crushed rock used in Dorset (LAA paragraph 1.33 and 1.69).

Page 577 of 583

E 31 Crushed rock has previously been imported into the Hamworthy rail depot near Poole from Whatley Quarry on the Mendips. No imports were made between 2012 and 2017 and the limited operation undertaken in 2017 is to close during 2018 for economic reasons. E 32 It is likely that the demand for crushed rock will continue at the current level and may well increase due to the number of proposed housing completions and employment development (LAA paragraphs 1.70 to 1.82). E 33 The supply of crushed rock from Swanworth involves considerably less road miles, less fuel consumption and less associated engine emissions than supplies from Portland or from the Mendips. E 34 Supplying crushed stone from Swanworth to the Bournemouth and Poole market would result in approximately 100,000 fewer HGV miles every year when compared with supplies from Portland and 200,000 fewer HGV miles every year when compared to supplies from the Mendips (calculation based on 100,000 tonnes supply annually from Swanworth with 20 tonne HGV load which would equate to 5,000 HGV loads per year). E 35 These figures would double if the return HGV journey was included. Clearly Swanworth provides a sustainable source of crushed rock particularly when back haulage of material is considered. E 36 Dorset estimate that the consented reserves on Portland, termed a landbank of permitted reserves, amount to 13 million tonnes although this figure will be substantially reduced as a consequence of the Review of Mineral Planning Permissions as required under the Environment Act 1995 and other significant environmental constraints as well as the trend towards underground mining. A hypothetical landbank of 13 million tonnes is sufficient to supply locally won crushed rock for 48 years at a rate of 270,000 tonnes per year. E 37 The Planning Practice Guidance published October 2014 by the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, refers to the size of landbanks in paragraph 084 and states that: There is no maximum landbank level and each application for minerals extraction must be considered on its own merits regardless of the length of the landbank. E 38 There are many mineral planning authorities that have substantial landbanks of crushed rock aggregate that are more extensive than the Dorset landbank although a substantial landbank does not preclude the grant of new permissions for more aggregate in these areas. Planning decisions should be made following consideration of the merits of the proposals. E 39 The Planning Practice Guidance paragraph 084 goes on to state that: There are a number of reasons why an application for aggregate minerals development is brought forward in an area where there exists an adequate landbank. These could include: • Significant future increases in demand that can be forecast with reasonable certainty. • The location of the consented reserve is inappropriately located relative to the main market areas. • The nature, type and qualities of the aggregate such as its suitability for a particular use within a distinct and separate market. • Known constraints on the availability of consented reserves that might limit output over the plan period. E 40 It is considered that several of these reasons are applicable to the allocation of the Quarry extension. The demand for crushed rock will continue at the current level and may well increase due to the predicted level of residential and employment development during the next 15 years. The alternative consented reserves of limestone in Portland are located considerably further from the main market and alternative aggregate types cannot match the characteristics and specifications of Swanworth products.

Page 578 of 583

Alternative Aggregate – Sand and Gravel E 41 Sand and gravel is not a comparable alternative for many of the products from Swanworth. E 42 Sand and gravel is a conglomeration of smaller particles of other rocks which have been first eroded and then deposited as a result of water (fluvial or marine) or ice action (glaciers). Sand and gravel contains no large individual pieces and therefore cannot be used for applications where larger sizes materials are needed. By comparison limestone is a solid sedimentary rock which is formed in ‘massive’ deposits over a great depth. By comparison limestone is a solid mass and the size of the product can be controlled during the quarrying process to give sizes ranging from fine dust to say 5 tonne pieces measuring approximately 1.2 metre square. E 43 Sand and gravel contains no cohesive properties whereas limestone has cohesive properties both through clay in its bedding planes, which can be processed out during production, or utilised as a benefit depending on the final application. The natural action of lime also acts as a basic cement. E 44 Sand and gravel is largely composed of impervious silica and flint which are pH neutral whereas limestone is composed of more porous calcium carbonate which is alkali. E 45 Sand and gravel is generally yellow/brown in colour with rounded particles whereas Portland limestone is white as evidenced by the walls, tracks, paths and buildings in the area with an angular/blocky shape. Swanworth Product Range E 46 Fine limestone dust from Swanworth has applications from agricultural use (treating acid soil types) through to mortar for heritage masonry restoration work. Its alkalinity and its ability to be ground to a fine dust allow for these applications. Sand and gravel does not have these properties. E 47 Limestone in 6mm, 10mm and 20mm chippings are used primarily for decorative and specialist use. These chippings are distinctively white in comparison to sand and gravel. An example of a specialist use is the supply of 6mm chippings nationally for use in resin bonded surface coatings to architectural stairs and walkways. Swanworth limestone has a porosity which is very compatible with this process. Gravel particles are impervious. E 48 Limestone sub-base; 20mm to dust mix, Type 1 and open graded sub-base are used to build foundations for all forms of construction. It is the fine particles, produced by crushing, when mixed with larger angular particles that combine to give a material which gives a very stable, load bearing base on which roads, houses, etc, can be built. Limestone alkalinity makes it cementitious which helps the binding process during compaction. Importantly, these factors make a stable platform for the construction process as well. E 49 Recycled aggregates can be used for some construction applications but the physical properties mean that they are not universally suitable and there is often a deficit in the quantity of recycling feedstock in comparison to demand particularly for construction sub-base. E 50 Bulk fill materials are used to fill larger void spaces or the lower part of a construction profile which is then generally capped off with Type 1 sub-base. E 51 Gabion stone is sized from 100mm to 200mm and is used in the creation of Gabion baskets. These are stone filled wire mesh baskets used to form a composite structural wall that is durable and visually attractive. Gabion baskets are used for coastal and inshore marine defence, retaining walls to highways and railway embankments, and also as a modern and attractive landscaping detail. E 52 The largest particles of gravel are not compatible with the construction of gabion baskets, and without the angular nature of the particles the Gabions would lack the structural strength required. E 53 Rock armour of all sizes is used for marine and inshore flood defence. Gravel products are too small for these applications.

Page 579 of 583

E 54 Block stone can be produced at Swanworth in any size up to 8 tonnes and is used in many applications; art installations and architectural landscaping, defence against vehicle trespass and civic amenity. Gravel is not suitable for such applications. E 55 It is important to note that an amount of the Swanworth Portland block stone has been used at California Quarry for cutting into dimension stone products and it hoped to increase production levels from the extension area. Again gravel is not suitable for such applications. Exceptional Circumstances Test 3 – Environment E 56 The potential impact on the environment, landscape and recreation would be assessed as part of a planning application and Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for the development of the extension area. The extent that any impacts could be moderated would also be determined as part of the EIA process although it is considered from the work that has already been carried out that unacceptable impacts could be mitigated. E 57 In order to understand the potential level of impact and to demonstrate the necessary assessment work is fully understood, substantial preliminary work has been carried out on certain environmental aspects. Work has been undertaken on landscape, ecology, the water environment, cultural heritage and highways. Landscape E 58 Much of Dorset is designated as AONB due to the quality and variety of the landscape. All AONBs/National Parks derive their identity in the first instance from their geology. The Dorset AONB is no exception. It is, among many factors, the rolling hills, ridges, coombes, cliffs, fossils which make people want to live here and visit. It is a living landscape. People have lived, farmed, travelled, worked and quarried here for millennia. While it is the geology and natural forces that have generally created the landform, it is this human activity that has created the land cover and land use. E 59 The residents and visitors to the AONB and wider area require a supply of aggregates and essential building materials. These either have to come from within the AONB or from further afield. If the aggregates do not come from quarries within the Dorset AONB then they must travel by road from such areas as Portland or the Mendips transferring any landscape and visual impacts elsewhere but with the unsustainable addition of significant lorry movements with their own visual and other impacts on the landscape. E 60 Swanworth Quarry is a consented operational facility with its infrastructure already in place. With rare exception the plant and major activity is well-concealed. The upper slopes and faces are restored or being restored to an agreed plan. There are landscape and visual advantages in using an existing facility over introducing a new one into the AONB elsewhere. Swanworth Quarry has been providing material to the area for over 100 years and is, in itself and like other building stone quarries, part of the fabric and history of the area. The current Swanworth Quarry can be seen only from a very few limited viewpoints and, then, it is mostly the upper slopes ad faces currently being restored. E 61 The proposed extension area comprises three nearby fields. The proposed quarry and connection to the existing facility has been devised through numerous iterations and consultations to minimise landscape and visual impacts. To this end, it is only the lower parts of two fields which would be quarried with an access cut across the third field avoiding specific valued landscape elements. The proposed design utilises the strong field pattern with its walls/hedgerows/fences. E 62 The access road cutting and gabion bridge combination have been designed and located to minimise landscape and visual impacts particularly of internal lorry movements. E 63 There are very limited viewpoints from which any parts of the extension could be seen. Even these could be mitigated further at detailed design/application stage. Directions of working and sequencing have been devised to minimise impacts and to maximise the infilling and progressive restoration.

Page 580 of 583

E 64 All and any visual or landscape impacts are, in any event, temporary. The restoration of the whole proposed area to the original landform, land cover and land uses ensures this. E 65 No landscape elements or features of any consequence are permanently lost. There are limited cumulative effects. E 66 While there would be limited landscape impacts on the AONB and visual impacts to very restricted viewpoints in the AONB these would be temporary. Ecology E 67 In order to establish habitat types, their extent and provide a predictive assessment of their likely dependent fauna present ecologists Andrews Ecology were commissioned to undertake a thorough Phase 1 ecological survey. E 68 The survey work covered a larger area than the currently proposed extension and was carried out before the final extension design had been determined, however the work demonstrated the limited ecological value of the agricultural land and identified the potential for a number of species to be present primarily in the adjacent valleys that would need further survey and assessment work as part of a full EIA. The detailed Phase 1 report is available. E 69 The Phase 1 survey comprised: • A desk-study including a search for historical biological data relating to the site and a stratified radius performed by Dorset Environmental Records Centre. • Phase 1 habitat mapping on 13th August 2014 to the methodology set out in the Handbook for Phase 1 Habitat Survey: A technique for environmental audit . • An assessment of the conservation value of the habitats present against the criteria set for Priority Habitats within the UK Biodiversity Action Plan. • A predictive assessment of the potential dependent legally protected and/or UK Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) fauna using published scientific accounts. E 70 Having completed the Swanworth Quarry Extension Phase 1 survey, it was determined that in order to produce a robust assessment of the overall site detailed surveys and assessments would be required for great crested newts, reptiles, breeding birds, dormouse, badger and bats. E 71 The necessary survey work would be undertaken following agreement of the scope and extent of the works with Natural England and the Dorset ecologist. The provision of mitigation measures would be determined, as necessary, following the species survey work and assessment. Water Environment E 72 A preliminary hydrogeological and hydrological risk assessment was undertaken by BCL Hydrogeologists on the development of the extension area. The purpose of the assessment was to consider the potential impacts on the water regime and particularly on the nearby Encombe Estate water supply. The report is available and contains preliminary findings on the following: • Baseline characterisation of the local water environment. • Evaluation of effects to date. • Impact screening of the proposed extension upon that environment. • Requirements for further information and assessment. E 73 Collection and interpretation of published data, in conjunction with site specific information has facilitated the development of a preliminary conceptual model describing the nature of, and interactions between, the groundwater and surface water systems operating within the area. E 74 The conceptual model has been employed to assist a screening exercise designed to identify the likely impacts of the proposed extension upon the water environment and determine requirements

Page 581 of 583

for further information. The assessment should therefore be viewed as an initial stage of the conventional EIA process. E 75 The full report was submitted to the EA as well as to Dorset County Council in December 2016. The EA subsequently responded to the report confirming they had no objection to the proposed site extension being included in the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Mineral Sites Plan. A copy of the EA letter is available. Cultural Heritage E 76 There are several Scheduled Monuments (tumuli) in the vicinity of the extension area and as a consequence a cultural heritage consultant, Andrew Josephs Associates, has been engaged to advise on how best to minimise the potential impact of the extension area on features of cultural heritage in the area and the Scheduled Monuments in particular. E 77 The initial extension design proposals have demonstrated that there is flexibility in the operation and restoration of the quarry, and further refinement during the planning process should result in an acceptable scheme being designed. E 78 The extension area has been designed to avoid any physical disturbance of the Scheduled Monument. Shallow soil banks would be established on the boundary of the extension area to screen extraction operations. E 79 Initial consultation with Historic England has been carried out and a site meeting held in March 2015 to discuss the potential impact of the extension on the Scheduled Monuments. At the meeting it was suggested by Keith Millar (Heritage England Ancient Monuments Inspector) that extraction should not occur in the southernmost field in which the closest Scheduled Monument is located and only access should be provided. Extraction should be restricted to the fields to the north of the Scheduled Monument. This advice has been taken on board in the final extension design. E 80 In addition the proposals to restore the extension area to agriculture at original ground levels would ensure that there was no long-term impact on the Scheduled Monuments. E 81 A series of site-based investigations and analysis of heritage and landscape setting issues would be required prior to determination of a planning application. This work would be carried out at the outset of the planning application process and would be coupled with ongoing consultation with English Heritage and Dorset Archaeologists to ensure that sufficient and appropriate work is carried out to allow an informed decision to be made. Highways E 82 The Hurlstone Partnership Limited was instructed to review the general acceptability of the proposed quarry extension in terms of highway matters. The review considered the conditions imposed upon the existing planning permissions which would, as far as highway matters are concerned, continue to be applied to the proposed extension. The transport statement is available. E 83 Effectively the proposed extension would result in a continuation of the existing activities at the site for an additional period of time. There would be no increase in traffic on an hourly, daily, weekly or annual basis when compared with the current situation. E 84 A review of historic traffic data revealed that even when taking into account predicted traffic growth, the traffic flows between the quarry and the A351 corridor, along which the majority of site vehicles travel, would remain below the volumes previously accommodated on the route. It was also found that the proportion of development traffic on the A35 trunk road, to which the A351 connects, would remain insignificant in the future. E 85 The safety performance of the site access and the local road network to the A351/A35 was reviewed with reference to personal injury accident data obtained from Dorset County Council. It was found that the existing HGV activities at the site had not led to injury accidents. E 86 In reviewing the proposed extension for the purposes of the Draft Mineral Sites Plan, Dorset Highways confirmed that the existing site access is adequate and the continuation of activities as a result of the Page 582 of 583

scheme would be acceptable in terms of highway impact, awarding the site a rating of “Less Significant Adverse Impact”. E 87 It is concluded that the proposed extension to Swanworth Quarry would be acceptable in terms of highway and transport matters taking the assessment work into account and the transport policy test imposed by paragraph 32 of the National Planning Policy Framework, which advises: “Development should only be prevented or refused on transport grounds where the residual cumulative impacts of development are severe”.

Page 583 of 583