Upton House Market Street Charlbury Oxfordshire, OX7 3PJ tel +44 (0)1608 810374 fax +44 (0)1608 810093 e-mail [email protected] www.gwp.uk.com

NOTE ON THE MINERAL RESOURCES BENEATH SITES HG2-124 AND BL1-40 (PECKFIELD), GARFORTH, ; THEIR NATURE, POTENTIAL USES, AND PROSPECTS FOR EVENTUAL ECONOMIC RECOVERY For MR CHRISTOPHER MAKIN

August 2018

GWP Consultants LLP Registered No. OC326183 Registered Office: Upton House, Market Street, Charlbury, Oxfordshire, OX7 3PJ, UK

Report Title: Note on the mineral resources beneath Sites HG2-124 and BL1-40 (Peckfield), Garforth, Leeds; their nature, potential uses, and prospects for eventual economic recovery Client: Mr Christopher Makin

Job: PECK Report Number: 180807 Issue Status: Final, issued Issue Date: 22nd August 2018

Prepared by: Ruth Allington

Approved by: Alan Cobb Date: 22/08/18 Signature:

This document is based on GWP report template v1.04 and Normal template v3.09 03/01/18

This report has been prepared by GWP Consultants LLP (GWP) on the specific instructions of our Client. It is solely for our Client‘s use for the purpose for which it is intended in accordance with the agreed scope of work. Any use or reliance by any person contrary to the above, to which GWP has not given its prior written consent, is at that person‘s own risk and may be an infringement of GWP‘s copyright. Furthermore the report is issued on the understanding that GWP‘s general terms and conditions of engagement are accepted, copies of which are available on request.

CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION ...... 1 1.1 Instructions ...... 1 1.2 Scope and structure of this note ...... 1

2. INFORMATION RELIED UPON IN THE PREPARATION OF THIS NOTE ...... 2

3. GEOLOGICAL SETTING OF THE SUBJECT SITE ...... 3 3.1 Magnesian Limestone deposit ...... 3 3.1.1 Distribution and description ...... 3 3.1.2 Uses of Lower Magnesian Limestone from this locality in 1938 ...... 5 3.2 Basal Permian Sand deposit ...... 7 3.2.1 Distribution, description and mining history ...... 7 3.2.2 Uses of Basal Permian Sand in 1938 ...... 9

5. RESPONSES TO THE QUESTIONS POSED ...... 9 5.1 Magnesian Limestone deposit ...... 9 5.1.1 Was the limestone beneath the site regarded in the vernacular of the mining world, the commercial world and landowners as a ”mineral‘ in 1938? ...... 9 5.1.2 If the limestone beneath the subject site was regarded as a ”mineral‘ in 1938, did this mineral have any special characteristics, properties or uses that would distinguish it from other limestone? If so, what were they? ...... 9 5.1.3 Would it be possible and potentially viable to recover limestone from beneath the subject site in an underground mine? How would this be done? ...... 9 5.2 Basal Permian Sand deposit ...... 10 5.2.1 Was the Permian Sand beneath the site regarded in the vernacular of the mining world, the commercial world and landowners as a ”mineral‘ in 1938? ...... 10 5.2.2 If the limestone beneath the subject site was regarded as a ”mineral‘ in 1938, did this mineral have any special characteristics, properties or uses that would distinguish it from other sand? If so, what were they? ...... 11 5.2.3 What is the extent of the sand beneath the site and would it be possible and potentially viable to recover it from beneath this site in an underground mine? If so, how would this be done? ...... 11

FIGURES

Figure 1 The outcrop of the Permian Magnesian Limestone Figure 2 The distribution of the Carboniferous Limestone in the British Isles Figure 3 Diagram illustrating the potential surface impacts of collapse of Basal Permian Sand mines Figure 4 Extract from Drawing No. PECK1808-1 showing details of the Basal Permian Sand from Barclay et al 1990 and the location of GroundTech exploratory boreholes 2018 Figure 5 Sketch illustrating the geometry of room and pillar mine workings

DRAWINGS

PECK1808-1 The Site and other localities and features referred to in the report. 1/25,000

Mineral resources at Peckfield Mr Christopher Makin 180807.v04 22/08/18 i

APPENDICES

Appendix 1 Summary CV, Ruth Allington Appendix 2 Information about the tunnels excavated in Lower Magnesian Limestone at Quarry Appendix 3 Information about Portland Stone mining on the Isle of Portland, Dorset Appendix 4 Photographs and diagrams of former Basal Permian Sand mining and its impacts

Mineral resources at Peckfield Mr Christopher Makin 180807.v04 22/08/18 ii

NOTE ON THE MINERAL RESOURCES BENEATH SITES HG2-124 AND BL1- 40 (PECKFIELD), GARFORTH, LEEDS; THEIR NATURE, POTENTIAL USES, AND PROSPECTS FOR EVENTUAL ECONOMIC RECOVERY

1. INTRODUCTION I am Ruth Allington, a Chartered Geologist and Chartered Engineer with 37 years‘ experience in the evaluation of the mineral potential of green field sites in the UK and overseas and in the design of quarries and mines to recover the mineral reserves they contain economically, whilst limiting their environmental and social impacts. My experience especially relates to resources and reserves of construction materials and industrial minerals; my CV is included with this note at Appendix 1. I have been providing technical support and advice to Mr Makin and his legal and professional advisors in relation to the Peckfield site since August 2017. 1.1 Instructions This note is intended to provide technical support to Mr Makin‘s legal representatives in preparing the relevant section of the —Position Statement between: (1) BDW Homes and Taylor Wimpey (—BDW/TW“) (2) Mr Christopher Makin (3) Leeds City Council (—LCC“)“. I have been asked to address the following questions regarding the geology and minerals potential of the subject site: Magnesian Limestone deposit • Was the limestone beneath the site regarded in the vernacular of the mining world, the commercial world and landowners as a ”mineral‘ in 1938? • If the limestone beneath the subject site was regarded as a ”mineral‘ in 1938, did this mineral have any special characteristics, properties or uses that would distinguish it from other limestone? If so, what were they? • Would it be possible and potentially viable to recover limestone from beneath the subject site in an underground mine? If yes, how would this be done? Permian Sand at the base of the Magnesian Limestone deposit • Was the Permian Sand beneath the site regarded in the vernacular of the mining world, the commercial world and landowners as a ”mineral‘ in 1938? • If the Permian Sand beneath the subject site was regarded as a ”mineral‘ in 1938, did this mineral have any special characteristics, properties or uses that would distinguish it from other sand? If so, what were they? • What is the extent of the sand beneath the site and would it be possible and potentially viable to recover it from beneath this site in an underground mine? If yes, how would this be done?

1.2 Scope and structure of this note This note is presented in 4 sections following this introduction: Section 2: Information relied upon in the preparation of this note A summary of the information relied upon in the preparation of this note. This includes texts on geology and minerals dating from the 1920s and 1930s as well as more up-to-date geological information and planning context. Section 3: Geological setting of the subject site A description of the geological setting of the subject site and summary of what was known about the occurrence and properties of the limestone and sand, and what they were used for in 1938. Section 4: Responses to the questions posed

Mineral resources at Peckfield Mr Christopher Makin 180807.v04 22/08/18 Page 1 of 11

2. INFORMATION RELIED UPON IN THE PREPARATION OF THIS NOTE In addition to documents relating to this site provided to me by Mr Makin‘s legal representative, I have consulted the following published and publicly available information in the course of preparing this note: • Geological maps, memoirs and borehole records published and/or made available online by the British Geological Survey, particularly: o Edwards, W., Mitchell, G. H. and Whitehead, T. (1950). Geology of the District North and East of Leeds; Memoir of the Geological Survey of Great Britain, explanation of one-inch geological sheet 70“ HMSO o Non-confidential borehole records accessed from the BGS GeoIndex Onshore database on line: http://mapapps2.bgs.ac.uk/geoindex/home.html o Barclay, W. J., Ellison, R. A., and Northmore, K. J. (1990) A geological basis for land-use planning: Garforth- œ Pontefract. BGS Technical Report WA/90/3 Onshore Geology Series. NERC 1990. o British Geological Survey (2003) 1:50,000 geological map sheet 70 (solid and drift) o British Geological Survey (2006) Mineral Planning Factsheet: Dolomite. ODPM August 2006 • Boswell, P. G. H. (1918). A memoir on British resources of refractory sands for furnace and foundry purposes. Taylor and Francis, London. • Kendall, P. F., and Wroot, H. E. (1924). Geology of œ an illustration of the evolution of Northern . In 2 volumes. Printed for the authors, Hollinek Brothers, Vienna. • North, F. J. (1930). Limestones œ their origins, distribution and uses. Thomas Murby & Co, London • Searle, A. B. (1935). Limestone and its products œ their nature, production and uses. Ernest Benn Limited, London • Harris, P. M. (1982). Limestone and Dolomite. Mineral Dossier No. 23, Minerals Strategy and Economics Research Unit, Institute of Geological Sciences, London. HMSO. • Websites describing underground mining of Portland Stone as an alternative to the traditional quarrying methods: o Albion Stone‘s website describing their quarries and underground mine sites (https://www.albionstone.com/about-us/quarry-and-mine) o Article dated September 2017 about Portland Stone Firms‘ intentions to commence underground mining (http://minexforum.com/en/portland-stone-firms-are-about-to-go- underground) • Adopted Natural Resources and Waste Local Plan which forms part of the Leeds Local Development Framework1. • Information on the Micklefield Quarry tunnels (WW1/WW2 air raid shelter): o Best, D. (2014). Bless ”Em All œ Micklefield answered the call. Chapter about —the Dugout pp53-55. Rossendale Books (published on line by Google Books at https://books.google.co.uk/books?isbn=1291929975) o Description of Micklefield Quarry and photograph in a local history document produced by Micklefield Tenants and Residents Association http://www.aboutmicklefield.btck.co.uk/MicklefieldQuarry o Excerpt from Micklefield Parish Council minutes September 2017 (from https://www.micklefield-pc.gov.uk/uploads/minutes-07092017.pdf)

1 https://www.leeds.gov.uk/docs/Adopted%20Consolidated%20NRWLP%20Inc%20Policies%20Mins%2013- 14.pdf

Mineral resources at Peckfield Mr Christopher Makin 180807.v04 22/08/18 Page 2 of 11

o Photographs of the tunnels at Micklefield Quarry in 2017 (from https://www.oblivionstate.com/forum/topic/11509-vandicourt-quarry-micklefield-january- 2017/) Drawing No. PECK1808-1 shows the site and various other localities and features referred to in this report.

3. GEOLOGICAL SETTING OF THE SUBJECT SITE 3.1 Magnesian Limestone deposit 3.1.1 Distribution and description Beneath a thin layer of soil and weathered rock, the bedrock at this site is dolomitic limestone of Permian age known as the —Magnesian Limestone“. The limestone at the subject site is at the base of the Lower Magnesian Limestone, now called the —Cadeby Formation“. As —Lower Magnesian Limestone“ is the formation name that was in use in 1938 (and up until changes in the mid 1980s2), I have used it throughout this report. The Lower Magnesian Limestone in the Leeds district is described in the geological memoir (Edwards et al, 1950) as being 150-300 feet thick (46-92m), and comprising dolomitic limestone with —marly3 beds locally developed at the base“. The upper part of the Lower Magnesian Limestone is described as —granular and minutely-cellular cream coloured wedge-bedded dolomitic Limestone“, and the lower part as —oolitic, compact and granular well bedded dolomitic limestone with reefs at top.“ The Lower Magnesian Limestone in the railway cutting immediately to the north of the subject site (Edwards et al, 1950) is described as —…compact well bedded limestones exposed in the railway cutting between Sturton Grange and New Micklefield are at least 70ft thick, and comprise the greater part of the lower subdivision“. At New Micklefield there is a quarry face where these lower beds are also exposed, and which is designated as a geological SSSI4. The citation describes an exposure of 17m of the Cadeby Formation. This site is further of interest for the system of tunnels excavated in the limestone to form a WW1 air raid shelter (never used for that purpose at that time) and extended in WW2 to accommodate a larger population and frequently used. Information about these tunnels and some photographs from 2017 are included in Appendix 2. It is noteworthy that these tunnels (reported to be 6ft high and 6ft wide) remain open and in good condition today, 100 years after their original excavation, with no artificial support (props, roof bolting etc). Given the proximity of this quarry to the subject site and its inferred geological equivalence, it would be reasonable to expect that stable room and pillar mining excavations could be created beneath the subject site. The Magnesian Limestone outcrop5 is very limited in extent, forming a narrow band extending from Nottingham to Knaresborough and the River Tyne as shown on Figure 1.

2 D. B. Smith, G. M. Harwood, J. Pattison and T. H. Pettigrew (1986). A revised nomenclature for Upper Permian strata in eastern England. In Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 22, 9-17, 1 January 1986. 3 Marl or marlstone is a calcium carbonate or lime-rich mud or mudstone which contains variable amounts of clays and silt. The dominant carbonate mineral in most marls is calcite, but other carbonate minerals such as aragonite, dolomite, and siderite may be present. 4 National Grid Reference: SE 446325. File ref: (WY) SE 43/2. Notified 15th January 1990. 5 Outcrop is the part of a rock formation that appears at the surface of the ground (or just beneath a layer of soil).

Mineral resources at Peckfield Mr Christopher Makin 180807.v04 22/08/18 Page 3 of 11

Figure 1: The outcrop of the Permian Magnesian Limestone (Figure 82, North and Maybury, 1930) This outcrop area (where Magnesian Limestone can be accessed at the ground surface) is considerably smaller in extent than the outcrop area of the Carboniferous Limestone (see Figure 2).

Figure 2: The distribution of the Carboniferous Limestone in the British Isles (Figure 65, North and Maybury, 1930) Dolomite (also known as dolostone) is a sedimentary carbonate rock, consisting mainly of the 6 mineral dolomite (CaMg(CO3)2). Rocks, such as that at the subject site , containing only 10-50% of the mineral dolomite are referred to as —dolomitic“ (BGS, 2006). Thus, as well as being less common (and therefore less available to be excavated), Magnesian Limestone is chemically distinct from Carboniferous Limestone, which is normally principally composed of calcium carbonate

6 The Lower Magnesian Limestone from Micklefield Quarry was reported (Edwards et al, 1950) to have an MgCO3 content of just over 40% and CaCO3 content of 56.7% (page 72)

Mineral resources at Peckfield Mr Christopher Makin 180807.v04 22/08/18 Page 4 of 11

(CaCO3), with the content of magnesium oxide (MgO) being extremely low or negligible. The magnesium content is what gives rise to the properties and characteristics that make it suitable for the uses listed in Section 3.1.2 below. 3.1.2 Uses of Lower Magnesian Limestone from this locality in 1938 Stone from the Lower Magnesian Limestone is reported by Searle (1935) to be used for —building, roads, furnace-linings, lime, paper, glass, agriculture, paints, metallurgy, chemical industries“ (page 212). Harris (1982) observes that it is often worked for fill or sub-base in roads, the fines being used for agricultural purposes and that —as a source of local dolomite for refractories, glassmaking or chemicals it is of unique importance“. Further details of some of these uses are given below, focussing on evidence for the uses of Magnesian Limestone from this locality in 1938. Building stone Stone from this district was used in the building of York Minster (particularly from Huddleston Quarry, which is about 5km away from the subject site), Selby Abbey, Beverley Minster and the Roman walls of York (Kendall and Wroot, 1924). It also provided a —pale buff and cream coloured stone which contributes to the charm of the local towns and villages and of many mediaeval churches in the Vale of York“ (Edwards, 1950). Kendall and Wroot (1924) report that a fire at Selby Abbey occurred in October 1906 and, together with fires at York Minster in 1829 and 1840, —demonstrated another virtue of the Magnesian Limestone as a building material œ its power of resisting fire. Had either building been constructed of a pure carbonate of lime, much of it must have been converted into quick-lime by the ferocity of the flames and inevitably destroyed. But the Magnesian Limestone suffered comparatively little damage.“ In its Adopted Natural Resources and Waste Local Plan (NRWLP)7, Leeds City Council has identified the importance of maintaining access to Magnesian Limestone for use as building stone in restoration work by including stone for this Stone for this purpose on the list of minerals in Paragraph 3.6, and of which Paragraph 3.10 states as follows: —3.10 Where it is viable to do so, the Council will seek to ensure that the mineral resources listed in 3.6 are protected from developments that may prejudice their future extraction.“ There are two policies relating to stone production: Policy MINERALS 7: PREFERRED AREAS œ STONE AND CLAY EXTRACTION The areas listed below are the Council‘s Preferred Areas for stone and clay extraction during the plan period: • Limestone: Highmoor Quarry extension, Bramham. • Limestone: Hook Moor, Micklefield. ………….. These sites are identified on the Policies Map. The site at Hook Moor, Micklefield (approximately 2km NE of the subject site and less than 2km north of Micklefield Quarry SSSI) is shown on Drawing No. PECK1808-1 and is estimated to contain limestone that is stratigraphically equivalent to that at the subject site and Micklefield Quarry. Policy MINERALS 8: PROVISION OF STONE FOR REPAIRS AND REFURBISHMENT OF EXISTING BUILDINGS Where repair or refurbishment of buildings requires local stone of an identical or special character which cannot be supplied from an existing approved quarry, consideration will be given to proposals for extraction operations of a limited scale and duration at former quarry sites to meet this specific need. I am instructed that the effect of the 1938 conveyance is to require that the owner of the minerals beneath this site would have to extract them by underground mining. The evidence from

7 Part of the Leeds Local Development Plan

Mineral resources at Peckfield Mr Christopher Makin 180807.v04 22/08/18 Page 5 of 11

Micklefield Quarry demonstrates the suitability of these strata for the excavation of underground tunnels, which can remain open and stable for many years (see Section 3.1.1 above). There is also evidence of a past history of use of these strata as building stone. Therefore, whilst there is no former quarry at the subject site, establishment of an underground mine beneath the site would provide the opportunity to extract stone for restoration and refurbishment work with very limited surface expression, entirely consistent with the objectives of MINERALS 8 and the stated aim of the Council not to sterilise minerals where they can be extracted without unacceptable impact on the environment and people. Indeed, this move from surface quarrying to underground mining of building stone is exactly what has been happening in the past 15 years on the Isle of Portland in order to preserve important supplies of building stones, whilst reducing the environmental and nuisance impacts of their extraction (see Appendix 3 for details of Albion Stone and Stone Firms Ltd underground Portland Stone mines). Clearly, although stone mines of this type tend to be very stable, there is always the risk of roof collapse which renders this activity incompatible with built development immediately above the mine workings. Burnt lime Considerable quantities of burnt lime for building and for land dressing are reported to have been produced at Micklefield Quarry. There is also evidence that limestone excavated immediately adjacent to the subject site was suitable (and used) for this purpose in the past (Roach Lime Hills SSSI (a former limestone quarry excavation), Lime Kiln House and Lime Kiln Cottage to the south of Selby Road within 500m of the southern site boundary œ see Drawing No. PECK1808-1). Furnace linings and metallurgy North (1930) summarises the use of dolomitic limestone in metallurgical applications as follows (page 419): —practically all the metallurgical limestone used in this country is from the Carboniferous Limestone, while the magnesium bearing or dolomitic varieties of limestone area a source of material for use in lining the —converters“ and open-hearth furnaces in which iron is converted to steel“ Searle (1935) provides more detail on furnace lining and metallurgical uses for dolomite and limestone with a high magnesia content (pages 252 and 637): —Limestone is not extensively used as a refractory material in furnace-construction because of its softness when burned and of its active chemical properties. Dolomite and high magnesian limestone are used extensively as substitutes for magnesite refractories in basic open-hearth steel furnaces, basic Bessemer converters, lead refining, reverberatory furnaces, lead cupelling furnaces, crucibles for lead blast furnaces, copper converters, copper reverberatory-furnaces, and in the form of crucibles for melting metals. Dead-burnt material is various forms is commonly used, although raw dolomite may be employed for minor repairs. ……….. The term dolomite is often used in furnace construction; the substance referred to is not the raw stone but a highly calcined or —dead burned“ material which is really a magnesian lime….“ ………. —Dead burned dolomite and other magnesian limestone is used for making bricks for liming furnaces.“ Glass making Magnesian Limestone was reported to have been used as an additive in glass making œ the Leeds area being of great importance for glass making in the past, particularly mass production of bottles and glassware for the industrial conurbations of Yorkshire. Searle (1935) reports (page 253) that —Magnesian Limestone tends to make a rather tougher glass than pure calcium carbonate..“ Later in his book (page 619) Searle goes on to point out some advantages of the use of dolomitic lime: —Many glass manufacturers do not care to use dolomitic lime, but for many glasses it is excellent. Contrary to general belief, the presence of magnesia in glass is in many respects advantageous. When introduced in small amounts in place of an equal weight of lime, it does not interfere with the melting properties of the glass to any marked extent, its effect being, if anything, beneficial. It endows glass with extra toughness and strength, and this fact is of especial importance in the

Mineral resources at Peckfield Mr Christopher Makin 180807.v04 22/08/18 Page 6 of 11

manufacture of bottles which have to hold gassy liquids in which pressure is set up. The presence of magnesia also appears to promote annealing at a lower temperature and tends to prevent devitrification when the glass is molten“. 3.2 Basal Permian Sand deposit 3.2.1 Distribution, description and mining history There is a bed of sand known as the Basal Permian Sand between the Coal Measures and the Lower Magnesian Limestone (Cadeby Formation). Edwards et al (1950) reports it to be between 0 and 10ft (3m) thick and to be visible at outcrop beneath the Lower Magnesian Limestone near Garforth, Thorner and East Keswick where they have been observed to be —yellow to brown in colour, evenly graded and false-bedded, and consist almost entirely of quartz grains, many of which show unmistakable signs of wind-erosion“. At Garforth, Edwards et al report details of two exposures as follows:

• —East Garforth, 500 yds. N.N.E. of the school: old sand workings, which have been pushed a short distance underground, show 8ft of brown sand“ and • —Garforth, 300 yds. N.W. of the hospital: a large area has been worked opencast and from short adits; soft brown sandrock is seen to 5ft., but the total thickness worked is probably about 10ft.“ Kendall and Wroot (1924) provide the following description of the occurrence of Basal Permian Sand along the western boundary of the subject site itself (excursion route 84b, page 886): —Leave Micklefield and follow westward the path north of the railway; and when ² m. west of the Roman road, turn south at Stub Wood [north-west corner of the subject site]. From this spot follow round southward the face of the escarpment of the Magnesian Limestone. …… An exposure ³ m. north of the Leeds and Selby road [now Selby Road, running along the southern boundary of the site] shows extensive workings of Yellow Sands forming the basal member of the Permian. These are worked in open cutting and by drift-mining.8 The BGS publication —A geological basis for land-use planning: Garforth œ Castleford œ Pontefract“ (Barclay et al, 1990) provides a description of the occurrence of the Basal Permian Sand and delineates areas where working is known to have occurred (including at the location described above), where it is likely to have occurred, and where it may possibly have occurred (and when). The history of sand mining in the area is described by Barclay et al as follows (page 19): Sand was used for glass making in the Glass Houghton area in the early 1700‘s (unpublished MS by John Goodchild, archivist at Wakefield Library). The earliest known documentation is from 1793 when a mineral lease, which included a sand quarry, was taken at Holywell, near Glass Houghton [445 2441]. The main period of working was between the mid 1800‘s and the early 1900‘s when several small mines were in operation, the sand being used principally for iron moulding. By the time of the geological survey in the 1930‘s the sand was being dug only in the vicinity of Orchard Head [460 2361 and Ledston Sand Mine [430 2951. Underground mining ceased in the 1940‘s (Hodgkins, 1979), but quarrying continued until the 1960‘s [my emphasis]. Clearly, it is entirely possible that the sand workings that were described by Kendall and Wroot in 1924 had been significantly extended underground by 1938, possibly further east beneath the site. Barclay et al identify surface subsidence resulting from former sand mining as a significant hazard with clear implications for the deliverability of built development on the surface. This is illustrated in Figure 3 below and Appendix 4. Also included in Appendix 4 are photographs of underground Permian Sand mining and subsidence effects at the ground surface.

8 Underground tunnels driven in horizontally or at a shallow gradient from a surface exposure

Mineral resources at Peckfield Mr Christopher Makin 180807.v04 22/08/18 Page 7 of 11

Figure 3: Diagram illustrating the potential surface impacts of collapse of Basal Permian Sand mines (Figure 9 in Barclay et al, 1990) Barclay et al present an interpretation of the occurrence of Basal Permian Sand and its known, possible and probable mining history, a relevant extract of which is presented in Figure 4 below, depicting their interpretation for the subject site. It is particularly noteworthy that Barclay et al propose a zone 700m inside the outcrop which they designate as an —Area of possible sand mining defined up to 700m from the Basal Permian Sand outcrop, approximately the farthest extent of known workings at Wheldale Sand Mine.“ This zone covers more than half of the subject site It is surprising that reference to this document it does not appear to have been a key element of the —thorough due diligence“ described in the BDW/TW position paper (Paragraph 7.2).

Figure 4: Extract from Drawing No. PECK1808-1 showing details of the Basal Permian Sand from Barclay et al, 19909, and the location of GroundTech exploratory boreholes 2018

9 A Geological basis for land-use planning: Garforth-Castleford-Pontefract - Figure 31 —Basal Permian Sand œ Garforth-Kippax area“.

Mineral resources at Peckfield Mr Christopher Makin 180807.v04 22/08/18 Page 8 of 11

3.2.2 Uses of Basal Permian Sand in 1938 Edwards et al (1950) reports that —near Garforth the sands have been worked as a moulding sand for iron casting“ and Boswell (1918) also lists the Basal Permian Sand as a —naturally-bonded moulding sand. It is also known to have been used for glass making (Barclay et al, 1990).

5. RESPONSES TO THE QUESTIONS POSED Based on the foregoing, I set out below my responses to the questions posed in my instructions. 5.1 Magnesian Limestone deposit 5.1.1 Was the limestone beneath the site regarded in the vernacular of the mining world, the commercial world and landowners as a ”mineral‘ in 1938? In my opinion the Lower Magnesian Limestone (the strata beneath the subject site) was clearly regarded as a mineral in the vernacular of the mining and commercial worlds and landowners in 1938. It is interesting to note that, by the 1938 Conveyance the minerals beneath the site were reserved by the Gascoigne family. As is indicated by the following account10, Sir Thomas Gascoigne (1745- 1810) had extensive extractive industry interests, including coal mining and the quarrying of limestone (at Huddleston œ source of stone for York Minster œ and elsewhere) alongside extensive agricultural interests. —Since inheriting the baronetcy in 1763 Sir Thomas had always taken an active personal interest in the management of the estate and adopted pioneering techniques in both agriculture and the extractive industries, especially in coal mining. His estate comprised property in many of the townships stretching between Tadcaster and Leeds in the West Riding and included not only extensive farmland, but limestone quarries at Huddlestone and coal mines at Parlington, Garforth, Barnbow, Sturton, and Seacroft. Gascoigne was responsive to new developments in the extractive industries and eager to adopt these new techniques to exploit his mineral assets to the full.“ I would say therefore that it was inconceivable that the Gascoigne Family did not intend to reserve rights to extract Magnesian Limestone in its ownership, alongside other extractive industry interests (notably coal mining). 5.1.2 If the limestone beneath the subject site was regarded as a ”mineral‘ in 1938, did this mineral have any special characteristics, properties or uses that would distinguish it from other limestone? If so, what were they? There is ample local evidence of the use of Lower Magnesian Limestone excavated in the locality of the subject site as a building stone for important historic buildings (such as York and Beverley Minsters and Selby Abbey) and for the manufacture of burnt lime very close to the site. Lower Magnesian Limestone is a material that has a different chemistry to limestones that are not dolomitic (e.g. Carboniferous Limestone) and this gives it distinctive characteristics and properties that make it suitable for use in refractory linings and crucibles used in the refining of metals. It also has advantages over lime as an additive in the production of glass which has sufficient toughness and strength to contain the pressure resulting from bottling gassy liquids. 5.1.3 Would it be possible and potentially viable to recover limestone from beneath the subject site in an underground mine? How would this be done? The underground tunnels driven by local miners into the old quarry faces at New Micklefield (Micklefield Quarry SSSI) in 1915 and extended at the start of WW2 have survived without any artificial support for up to 100 years (initial WW1 excavation). These tunnels are in limestone that is geologically equivalent to that beneath the subject site and I therefore conclude that it would be entirely possible to establish an underground mine using a room and pillar configuration for the purpose of recovering building stone. It is certainly not the case that Carboniferous Limestone is inherently more suitable for underground mining than the limestone at the subject site; for the purpose of recovering building

10 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sir_Thomas_Gascoigne,_8th_Baronet

Mineral resources at Peckfield Mr Christopher Makin 180807.v04 22/08/18 Page 9 of 11

stone with ancillary production of aggregate from the waste stone there would be no need to create galleries as large as those at Middleton Mine. An underground mine at this locality would be much more similar in scale to Albion Stone‘s Portland Stone mines on the Isle of Portland and Lovell Stone‘s Hartham Bath Stone mine near Corsham, Wiltshire. Given the recent examples of new underground stone mining being carried out on the Isle of Portland, I would say that such a mine could be potentially viable. The diagram below (Figure 5) illustrates the configuration of a room and pillar mine, such as would be suitable in this location. Whilst the mine workings would be designed to be stable, including artificial support (e.g. bolting of the roof) as required, stability of the roof in perpetuity could never be guaranteed for room and pillar mining. Accordingly, if the site is allocated for built development, future access to these minerals would be prevented and they would be sterilised, contrary to the Local Plan. Similarly, if mining were to precede built development at the surface, the presence of underground mine workings in the limestone would present an impediment to delivery of the residential development unless, before development took place, the mine workings were backfilled and guaranteed to be secure. The cost of such stabilisation works would be likely to render the development uneconomic.

Figure 5: Sketch illustrating the geometry of room and pillar mine workings It is true that it would not be possible to work the entire thickness of Lower Magnesian Limestone underground, and it might be preferable to exploit the deposit in an open pit quarry to recover the full available limestone thickness if circumstances allowed that to happen. However, it is not correct (as asserted in the BDW/TW position paper) to say that such underground mining is impossible and/or impractical or that collapse and destruction of the ground surface would be an inevitable consequence of any such underground mining; the land surface would still exist and would still be available for its current agricultural use, even if not suitable for built development given the low but real risk of future mining subsidence. 5.2 Basal Permian Sand deposit 5.2.1 Was the Permian Sand beneath the site regarded in the vernacular of the mining world, the commercial world and landowners as a ”mineral‘ in 1938? There is ample evidence dating from well before the date of the conveyance that this material was mined underground in this locality (indeed, certainly along the western side of the subject site), and that underground mining continued in places until the 1940s. It is therefore certain that the Basal Permian Sand was regarded in 1938 as a mineral in the vernacular of the mining and commercial worlds and by landowners.

Mineral resources at Peckfield Mr Christopher Makin 180807.v04 22/08/18 Page 10 of 11

5.2.2 If the limestone beneath the subject site was regarded as a ”mineral‘ in 1938, did this mineral have any special characteristics, properties or uses that would distinguish it from other sand? If so, what were they? The Basal Permian Sand was used at the time of the conveyance (and before) for foundry (moulding) sand and for glass making. 5.2.3 What is the extent of the sand beneath the site and would it be possible and potentially viable to recover it from beneath this site in an underground mine? If so, how would this be done? The report of the GroundTech borehole investigation (attached to the BDW/TW position statement) concludes that there is only a very small patch of Basal Permian Sand at the site, in the north-east corner. This is entirely contrary to the significant amount of geological and historic evidence, which is that there were underground sand mines along the western boundary of this site where the Permian strata come to outcrop and that the sand is present beneath the Magnesian Limestone over the entire site. The GroundTech boreholes on the western and southern sides of the site (where the surface levels are higher), being of a fixed depth of 20m have not all penetrated the expected level of the base of the sand/top of the Coal Measures. Furthermore, these were rotary drilled holes (not cored boreholes) and so the identification of the rock types is necessarily crude and it is impossible to glean any useful information about rock mass characteristics. Thus, I would say that it would be unwise for a developer to proceed with this site without having first undertaken a site investigation using cored boreholes so as to establish with certainty the level of the interface between the Magnesian Limestone and the actual extent of Permian Sand, whether previously worked or not. The GroundTech boreholes are therefore of limited value for identifying whether the sand exists beneath the limestone and, where it does exist, where there may be old workings that could give rise to subsidence. They are, however, useful for establishing the thickness of dolomitic limestone and confirming that the lower beds of Magnesian Limestone are marly in character. BGS advice, in its report on the geological basis for land-use planning in this area (Barclay et al, 1990), is that subsidence related to Permian Sand mining should be anticipated in a zone 700m inside (east of) the outcrop; this zone covers more than 50% of the subject site. Given its limited and probably variable thickness, the likelihood that it has a mudstone roof, the most effective approach to underground exploitation of the Basal Permian Sand would be using a longwall or shortwall mining method œ i.e. a method by which the mining void collapses in a controlled manner behind the mining face, thereby causing generalised subsidence at the surface, rather than the risk of crown hole collapse resulting from failure of the mine roof in a room and pillar working. Whether this would be viable would depend on the market for high quality silica sand at the time the scheme was brought forward.

______RUTH ALLINGTON BSc, MSc, MBA, FGS, CGeol, EurGeol, FIMMM, CEng, MIQ, MAE

GWP CONSULTANTS AUGUST 2018

Mineral resources at Peckfield Mr Christopher Makin 180807.v04 22/08/18 Page 11 of 11 LEGEND

Information from Figure 31, Barclay et al (1990), A geological basis for land-use planning: Garforth-Castleford-Pontefract

80 Inferred contour (mAOD) on the base of the Basal Permian Sand 448000E 443000E 444000E 445000E 446000E 447000E 441000E 442000E

Exposed Basal Permian Sand

Area of documented sand mining 436000N from mining plans

Area of sand mining based on the evidence of undocumented workings N Preferred area for building stone Area of possible sand mining defined extraction at Hook Moor, up to about 100m from known Micklefield workings (Policy MINERALS 7, Leeds Area of possible sand mining defined Location Development Framework) up to about 700m from the Basal

Permian Sand outcrop

70 60 65 75 80 435000N Fault

Information from Groundtech Consulting Report on Borehole Investigation, dated 10th July 2018

RO1 Borehole location

Huddleston Q Inferred boundary of Permian Sand disused 434000N

60 65 70

75 80

80 The Site (area HG2-124 Reproduced from the 2018 Ordnance Survey 1:25,000 map with the permission of the Controller of Her Majesty's and BL1-40) Stationery Office,

© Crown Copyright

Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright and 433000N may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings RO12 Licence No AL100018321 RO21 RO19 RO20 RO13 RO18 RO14 RO9 RO15 RO17 Version Revision and compilation notes Date RO11 RO10 RO16 Micklefield Quarry SSSI A Final 22.08.2018 RO8 (also known as "Vandicourt Quarry") RO7 RO1 (underground tunnels in Lower Magnesian Limestone) 80 75 Client RO6 RO5 RO2 85 Mr Christopher Makin 432000N 90 80 85 Project RO4 RO3 90 Technical Support for Position Statement on Mines and Mineral Rights

The Site and other localities and features referred to in the Lime Kiln House and report Roach Lime Hills Lime Kiln Cottage (SSSI)

65 70 consultants 75 Upton House tel +44 (0)1608 810374 80 Market Street, Charlbury fax +44 (0)1608 810093 431000N Oxfordshire OX7 3PJ e-mail [email protected] United Kingdom web www.gwp.uk.com

GWP Consultants LLP. Registered No. OC326183. earth & water resources Registered Office: Upton House, Market Street, Charlbury, Oxfordshire OX7 3PJ. UK Date Drawn Checked Scale 22.08.2018 RA/DJM AEC 1:25,000 at A3 Drawing Ref Drawing No Version PECK1808 1 A APPENDIX 1

Summary CV, Ruth Allington

Appendix fronts for 180807.docx

RUTH ALLINGTON Joint senior partner, GWP Nationality : British Profession : Chartered Geologist, European Geologist (engineering geology) and Chartered Engineer (mining) Specialisation : Surface mine and quarry layout and design (including restoration and closure and operational optimisation), resource evaluation and related environmental assessment, community engagement, dispute resolution and dispute avoidance. Position in firm : Joint Senior Partner Year of birth : 1959

KEY QUALIFICATIONS  More than 36 years’ experience in engineering geology, and the whole life design and evaluation of surface mineral operations and landfills.  Senior project responsibilities have included co-ordination and management of inter-professional teams for a range of mining and quarrying related projects including: inputs to due diligence and feasibility studies; national and regional minerals inventory reporting; Expert Witness involvement in Public Inquiries, Arbitrations and High Court Actions; earthworks contract preparation; and site management.  Particular expertise and experience in projects associated with the aggregates and cement and lime industries, ensuring that quarry designs release raw materials at the appropriate rate within quality targets and are optimised in terms of costs and excavation/haulage arrangements.  Experienced in training for specialists and non-specialists in the quarrying and related industries (quarry design, resource evaluation, introductory expert witness training, dispute avoidance). Experienced also in providing non-scientific professionals (especially lawyers and accountants) and students with introductory teaching in aspects of geology and engineering.  Specialist understanding of the impacts of quarrying, mining and other earthworks on surrounding land, water and people, in the investigation of alleged effects of mineral working and in the design of remedial measures.  Suitably qualified and experienced to meet the requirements of a Competent Person as defined in major international CRIRSCO compliant reporting codes for a range of bulk and industrial minerals and building materials including aggregates, cement raw materials and building stones and opencast coal.  Specialist understanding of resource and reserve evaluation, including building of discounted cashflow models for economic evaluation of mineral and landfill operations where appropriate, as part of due diligence exercises, or for inclusion in sales particulars and bankable documents.  Specialist understanding of groundwater and surface water in underground and surface mines, quarries and landfills and very experienced in identifying environmentally sound and economically viable design and management solutions and interpreting and solving problems in these areas.  Specialist understanding of landform in the context of interpreting ground conditions, designing appropriate ground investigations and designing sympathetic quarry restoration schemes within natural landscapes.  Involvement throughout her career in dispute resolution and dispute avoidance as an expert witness, through binding expert determination of disputes, through mediation, and through preparation of preliminary technical opinions for parties contemplating bringing actions or defending actions.  A committed and qualified mediator who has successfully mediated disputes (or assisted at mediations) relating to a wide range of commercial areas including alleged professional negligence, mining and minerals related disputes, building and construction disputes, disputes relating to retail and wholesale transactions, personal injury, and contractual disputes.  Experienced in facilitating effective community/stakeholder dialogue in connection with construction and mining projects. In particular, explaining technical details of projects in ways accessible to the public and non-technical professionals involved in construction and mining projects, and communicating community concerns and suggestions to technical specialists in ways accessible to them.  Equity partner in consulting practice (GWP Consultants LLP) since 1989. Responsible for all aspects of business administration including finances, HR, and professional risk management.  Principal author of A Quarry Design Handbook (2014) – free to download at www.gwp.uk.com/qdeshbook.html

RA May18 cv summary Page 1 EDUCATION AND PROFESSIONAL STATUS BSc, Geology and Geomorphology, Class I, University of London, 1980 MSc, Engineering Geology, University of Durham, 1981 MBA (Open), Open University, 1998 Fellow of the Institute of Materials Mining and Metallurgy (FIMMM) – 1996 and Chartered Engineer (CEng) - 1987 Fellow of the Geological Society of London (FGS) – 1981. Chartered Geologist (CGeol) – 1996. European Geologist (EurGeol – 2002). Member of the Academy of Experts (MAE) – 1997 On the Academy of Experts’ Register of Qualified Mediators (QDR) - 2001 Member of the Institute of Quarrying (MIQ) - 2004 SUMMARY EXPERIENCE RECORD Blast Log Ltd April 2008 – present Director

GWP Consultants LLP (until 2004 “The Geoffrey Walton Practice”) Sept 2004 – present Joint Senior Partner 1989-August 2004 Partner 1981-1989 Engineering and Mining Geologist

OTHER EXPERIENCE Member of Council of the Geological Society of London, May 2000-May 2005 (Vice President, 2001-02, Honorary Secretary Professional Matters 2002-2005) Vice Chair of the Engineering Group, Geological Society of London, September 1996-May 1998 Chair of the Engineering Group, Geological Society of London, May 1998-May 2000 Member of Editorial Board of the Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology and Hydrogeology (Geological Society of London), 1998-2001. Visiting lecturer to the Geomaterials MSc course at Queen Mary and Westfield College, University of London (Quarry Design) 1995-1997 Visiting lecturer to the Geomaterials MSc course at The University of Greenwich (Quarry Design) 1998- 2001 Member of Steering Committee for the MSc course in Engineering Geology at Imperial College 1998-2000 Moderator for the Engineering Council Examination (D213 – Geotechnical Engineering) 2000 – 2013 Panel member for the assessment of applications to be included on a European database of women experts partly funded by the DTI and the EU 2001 – 2002 Appointed by NERC to the British Geological Survey Moderating Panel 2004 Founding member (2006 – 2015) Middlesex & Thames Valley Mediators (honorary secretary 2006 – 2007) Member of the Council of the European Federation of Geologists representing the Geological Society of London (2002 – 2013). President of the European Federation of Geologists (2009-2013) EFG representative on the Pan European Resources and Reserves Reporting Code (PERC) committee (2007 – ongoing; 2013-2017 Honorary Treasurer) School Governor (Charlbury Primary School), Vice Chair and Chair of Finance Committee (2005-2010) Chair of IUGS Task Group on Global Geoscience Professionalism, 2012 – ongoing Impact Assessor for 2014 Research Excellence Framework submissions (2014 REF) from British universities AWARDS Recipient of the Engineering Group Award 1995; presented by the Engineering Group of the Geological Society of London in recognition of a significant contribution to Engineering Geology Glossop Lecturer and Glossop Medal winner 2012; annual prestigious lecture of the Engineering Group of the Geological Society of London made by an invited ‘leader in the field’ of engineering geology.

RA May18 cv summary Page 2

PUBLICATIONS AND PUBLIC REPORTS

REPORT OF THE INDEPENDENT ENGINEERING EXPERTS – DUBLIN METRO NORTH (March 2009): Volume I: Review of the Environmental Impact Statement and Other Railway Order Documentation Volume II: Consideration of the Concerns and Comments of Residents and Other Interested Parties

This report was intended to be available to residents and others as a resource to assist them in their consideration of the Railway Order application for Metro North, and in participating in the consultation process (including, as appropriate, making written and oral submissions to An Bord Pleanála). Following a series of meetings with residents’ groups and other interested parties in August and September, a draft report for comment and discussion was issued on 8th October 2008. Meetings were held during the week commencing 20th October 2008 to present the report and allow discussion and feedback. A final draft was issued in December 2008 and further meetings were held in January 2009. This final report takes account of the comments received from residents and the RPA.

Available to download at www.metronorthexperts.com

A QUARRY DESIGN HANDBOOK (pre-publication draft 2008); This handbook, written in partnership with David Jarvis Associates, introduces the subject of quarry design and provides guidance for a wide range of stakeholder groups with involvement and interest in the subject. Available to download at http://www.gwp.uk.com/research.html. Hard copy publication planned subject to funding.

APPENDIX A, TECHNICAL ASSESSOR’S REPORT, TO THE REPORT OF EDWARD B. SIMPSON JP, Bsc(Hons), MRTPI (30 March 2007). Appeals by Canatxx Gas Storage Limited. (Planning Inspectorate reference APP/Q2371/A/05/1183799 & APP/HSC/05/07 This report was appended to the Inspector’s report and provides a technical assessment of evidence presented in relation to geological, hydrogeological and engineering aspects of a proposal to create caverns by solution mining in salt at Preesall and their use for gas storage. Assessor’s report at http://www.gwp.uk.com/research.html

ALSF SUSTAINABLE AGGREGATES: A REVIEW OF AGGREGATES LEVY SUSTAINABILITY FUND RESEARCH PROJECTS (2007). This report was one of the Sustainable Aggregates series of benchmark reports and was developed to reflect the latest information and good practice from ALSF or other recent work to make them easily accessible to those who can apply them in practice. This summary report summarises the key findings of the reports and provides a sign-post to further information in the reviews. To find out more about this report or download a copy, please visit the ALSF Sustainable Aggregates website at http://www.sustainableaggregates.com/rprts_revs/rr_summaryreport.htm.

AN OVERVIEW OF DESIGN AND MANAGEMENT APPROACHES TO REDUCING THE ENVIRONMENTAL FOOTPRINT OF THE SUPPLY CHAIN FOR LAND-WON AGGREGATES (2007). The overview report draws on the information in the twelve reports which have been produced as part of the thematic review of Aggregates Levy Sustainability Fund (ALSF) research projects for land-won minerals. It puts them into the context of the quarry life-cycle, specifically in relation to the various elements of environmental footprint and the stages in the supply chain for land-won aggregates. In particular, the report helps to emphasise some of the major findings of the ALSF research and describes some of the complex inter-relationships between environmental footprints at different stages of a quarry’s life. The overview report builds on the concept of environmental footprint and, drawing on the twelve themes, shows how the design and management of the quarry has a key role to play in determining the overall balance of negative and positive environmental effects. To find out more about this report or download a copy, please visit the ALSF Sustainable Aggregates website at http://www.sustainableaggregates.com/rprts_revs/rr_overviewreport.htm

Joint author of the following publications prepared by GWP for HMSO and/or DOE:-

RA May18 cv summary Page 3

HANDBOOK ON THE HYDROGEOLOGY AND STABILITY OF EXCAVATED SLOPES IN QUARRIES (1988); This review, published by HMSO for the Department of the Environment, includes guidelines on the investigation, assessment and inspection of proposed or existing quarry slopes.

TECHNICAL REVIEW OF THE STABILITY AND HYDROGEOLOGY OF MINERAL WORKINGS (1988); Prepared by the Practice in association with the Department of Mining Engineering, Nottingham University, this HMSO publication is of special interest to those concerned with quarry planning. The review was commissioned by the Department of the Environment to evaluate existing data on quarry slope stability and hydrogeology and to assess and identify the criteria that must be satisfied for the planning, operation and after-use of bedrock quarries and surface mines in Britain.

HANDBOOK ON THE DESIGN OF TIPS AND RELATED STRUCTURES (1992); Prepared for the Department of the Environment and published by HMSO, this handbook summarises the principles and practice of tip design, construction and management, followed by guidelines on the design and inspection of tips, lagoons and backfilled areas. A general purpose stability program is supplied on a computer disc.

Other papers and contributions

ALLINGTON, R. 2014. CRIRSO modifying factors – a brief guide for exploration and resource geologists. Pp.44-45 in European Geologist, May 2014 (Metallic mineral resources – Meeting future demand). ALLINGTON, R. 2013. Essential but overlooked – the rocks and minerals that shape society. Pp 5-6 in European Geologist November 2013 (Industrial minerals – materials in our everyday life) HENLEY, S AND ALLINGTON, R. 2013. PERC, CRIRSCO, and UNFC: minerals reporting standards and classifications. Pp 49-54 in European Geologist November 2013 (Industrial minerals – materials in our everyday life) ALLINGTON, R.E., DeFREITAS, M., and O’CONNOR, R. 2011. Dublin’s Metro North: The Role of Independent Engineering Experts. Paper presented to 2011 Underground Construction Conference, London, June 2011. ALLINGTON, R.E. and WALTON, G. 1985. Large scale geomorphological mapping at opencast coal sites in Britain. (Presentation to Opencast Executive, 18 November 1985, Aberdare - to be published). ALLINGTON, R and WALTON, G. 1992. Waste Disposal, data collection and Quarry Design in Case Histories and Methods in Mineral Resource Evaluation. Annels, A.E. (ed), Geol. Soc. Spec. Pub. No. 63, pp 61-68. WALTON G. and ALLINGTON, R. 1992. Aspects of Quarry Design with Special Reference to Large Chalk Quarries. Conference on Planning and Restoration of Quarries and Cuttings, Nottingham University. CARR, P.A. and ALLINGTON, R.E. 1993. Evaluation, scheduling and quarry planning to maximise the life of cement raw material reserves. Paper presented to the Conference on Mineral Resource Evaluation, University of Leicester. WALTON, G. and ALLINGTON, R.E. 1994. Landform replication in quarrying. Trans. Inst. Min. Metall. Vol. 103, pp A55-66. EVANS, J., EVANS, N.S.D. and ALLINGTON, R. 1995. The design and development of a long term gypsum storage facility. Proceedings of Symposium, Desulphurisation 4, Institution of Chemical Engineers, University of Sheffield, 20-21 June 1995. ATKINSON, T., ALLINGTON, R., and COBB, A. 1996. Risk management for mining projects. Mining Technology, May 1996, Volume 78 No. 897. ALLINGTON, R., AND BROWN, I. 1997. Computer applications in quarry design. Clay Technology, September 1997

RA May18 cv summary Page 4 APPENDIX 2

Information about the tunnels excavated in Lower Magnesian Limestone at Micklefield Quarry

Appendix fronts for 180807.docx

Description of Micklefield Q (also known as Vandicourt Quarry) and photograph from http://www.aboutmicklefield.btck.co.uk/MicklefieldQuarry (Micklefield Tenants and Residents Association)

Micklefield Quarry (SSSI)Location and Access Information

Grid Reference: SE 446325Magnesian limestone sequence at Micklefield QuarryThis quarry lies close to residential houses in New Micklefield, between Leeds and Selby. The village is accessible from the A63/A1 interchange and the A656 to Aberford. The quarry is located close to the train station. Limited parking is available in the village. Landscaping operations have helped it to become an attractive feature of the neighbourhood.View the site map on Nature on the Map.Geological InterestThis disused quarry at Micklefield provides exposure through part of the Permian (290-248 million years ago) Magnesian Limestone. These limestones were deposited in a relatively shallow landlocked sea extending from north east England to Poland, known as the Zechstein Sea. The estimated average temperature during the period was approximately 23°C. Due to the landlocked nature of the sea and high temperatures, gypsum and anhydrite (collectively known as evaporites) were produced as the sea water gradually evaporated and today form extensive deposits beneath the floor of the North Sea. Within the Magnesian Limestone the remains of fossil reefs (often including numerous fossil algae, bivalves, gastropods and bryozoans) which grew on the edge of the Zechstein Sea can be found. At this locality the rocks show evidence of having been deposited in a very shallow water environment in which algae grew on exposed calcareous tidal flats.

The Quarry was used as an air raid shelter in WW2

Excerpt from Micklefield Parish Council minutes September 2017 (from https://www.micklefield- pc.gov.uk/uploads/minutes-07092017.pdf)

17/120/5 – EXCAVATIONS Members noted that excavations by persons unknown from land at Vandicourt leased by the Parish Council from London Property Investments had made the tunnels in the redundant air raid shelter accessible. 17/120/6 - PARISH COUNCIL LIABILITY Members considered the need for the Parish Council to act, in order to limit its liability, or otherwise protect its interests, as lessee of the land from which the tunnels can be accessed. Members noted that the tunnels were not on Parish Council leased land and that the excavations on the Parish Council’s leased land were clearly visible.

Photographs of the tunnels at Micklefield Quarry (from https://www.oblivionstate.com/forum/topic/11509-vandicourt-quarry-micklefield-january-2017/)

APPENDIX 3

Information about Portland Stone mining on the Isle of Portland, Dorset

Appendix fronts for 180807.docx

Portland stone quarry | Portland stone mine https://www.albionstone.com/about-us/quarry-and-mine

Portland stone quarry | Portland stone mine

About Our Quarries and Mines

Albion Stone is currently extracting dimension stone at two sites; Bowers and Jordans. We are also preparing for a new mine at our Stonehills as we speak, but this reserve will probably not come into production until 2018.

Jordans

Jordans is part of Inmosthay in the centre of the Island, which also includes Fancy Beach. It has been worked since the late 1800s. We lease the southern section from The Crown Estate and purchased the northern part of the site in 2006.

The majority of the southern reserves lie under the grounds of the local cricket club and the school tennis courts. To avoid disturbing the site at surface level, we applied and received permission to extract the stone using mining rather than quarrying techniques. The reserves to the north, has been designated as a 'Site of Special Scientific Interest' (SSSI). This means the primary extraction method we use has to avoid the use of dusty, noisy, and potentially damaging blasting, in order to protect the surrounding environment.

The stones coming from this site are: Jordans Basebed , Jordans Whitbed , Jordans Roach , Grove Whitbed and Fancy Beach Whitbed .

Bowers

1 of 4 17/08/2018, 00:06 Portland stone quarry | Portland stone mine https://www.albionstone.com/about-us/quarry-and-mine

The quarry at Bowers has been operational since the late 1700's. It has been leased by us from The Crown Estate since 1979 and in 2002 it became the site of the first Portland Stone mine.

Extraction from this site is now completely underground with the original Bowers Mine in the extreme southern end of the quarry the High Wall Extraction on the eastern boundaries and a new mine entrance in the south east corner or the quarry.

The new Bowers mine which opened in 2015 will access vast reserves under the school playing fields to the south and east of the original Bowers quarry site.

High Wall Extraction is a series of small mines that extract otherwise wasted stone that sits between the final faces of the quarry and the actual boundary of the site.

The stones coming from this site are: Bowers Basebed , Bowers Whitbed and Bowers Roach .

Independent and Admiralty

Both these quarries are owned by The Crown Estate and have been leased to us since 1982.

These quarries have been worked since the mid 1800s with the final dimension stones coming out of Independent in 2006, although some stocks of block still remain.

Stonehills

2 of 4 17/08/2018, 00:06 Portland stone quarry | Portland stone mine https://www.albionstone.com/about-us/quarry-and-mine

We have secured planning permission for a vast new reserve on the western side of the Island. The stone in this part of the Island has not previously been extracted due to the depth of the overburden. To quarry this site would involve a substantial rubble removal operation with all the associated dust, noise and visual impact nuisances.

We will mine the stone from Stonehills site, thereby avoiding virtually all disturbance and nuisance to the surrounding residential properties.

Mining also dramatically reduces the carbon footprint for the production of the stone.

The final stage of phase one of the work on our Stonehills site is now complete. We started the second phase in the spring of 2016 which involves cutting the cap stone and Whitbed seam in front of the proposed portal sights. This operation took around 9 months to complete. Stonehills mine will be operational from 2018. For further information please check our newshub.

3 of 4 17/08/2018, 00:06 Portland stone quarry | Portland stone mine https://www.albionstone.com/about-us/quarry-and-mine

4 of 4 17/08/2018, 00:06 Portland Stone Firms are about to go underground | MINEX FORUM http://minexforum.com/en/portland-stone-firms-are-about-to-go-under...

1 of 7 17/08/2018, 00:09 Portland Stone Firms are about to go underground | MINEX FORUM http://minexforum.com/en/portland-stone-firms-are-about-to-go-under...

2 of 7 17/08/2018, 00:09 Portland Stone Firms are about to go underground | MINEX FORUM http://minexforum.com/en/portland-stone-firms-are-about-to-go-under...

3 of 7 17/08/2018, 00:09 Portland Stone Firms are about to go underground | MINEX FORUM http://minexforum.com/en/portland-stone-firms-are-about-to-go-under...

4 of 7 17/08/2018, 00:09 APPENDIX 4

Photographs and diagrams of former Basal Permian Sand mining and its impacts

Appendix fronts for 180807.docx

Images from Barclay et al (BGS), 1990. “A geological basis for land-use planning: Garforth- Castleford-Pontefract

The bell pits on and around the subject site access coal seams through vertical shafts that pass through the Magnesian Limestone.