P H O E N I X C O N S U L T I N G A r c h a e o l o g y L i m i t e d
CULTURAL HERITAGE CONTRIBUTION TO AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Alrewas Quarry Southern Extension Whitemoor Haye Staffordshire
on behalf of:
A Richmond BA PhD MIfA FSA
March 2014 Alrewas South, Staffordshire
Contents
Non technical summary
1 INTRODUCTION
2 ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY
Objectives Key tasks Desk Based Assessment Geophysical Survey Trial Trench Evaluation Consultation Mitigation measures Types of impact Defining setting Views
3 SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA
4 PLANNING AND LEGISLATIVE CONTEXT
Legislation National planning guidance Local planning guidance Minerals and Waste Development Framework
5 BASELINE CONDITIONS
Location and current landuse Geology and soils Archaeological and historic landscape
2 | P a g e
Alrewas South, Staffordshire
Information from the Historic Environment Record (HER) Information from the field investigations The surrounds of the application site Listed Buildings and other cultural heritage assets
6 PREDICTION/ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS
Assessment of direct impacts of construction/establishment Assessment of indirect impacts of construction/establishment Assessment of operation/decommission impacts Suggested mitigation Cumulative impacts Residual impacts
7 SUMMARY
Tables 4-8
Annex 1a Desk Based Assessment Annex 1b Geophysical Assessment Annex 1c Trial Trench Assessment Annex 1d NMA car park investigations
3 | P a g e
Alrewas South, Staffordshire
Non-technical summary
A wide range of sources were consulted for this impact assessment, including the local Historic Environment Record, published articles and books and manuscript documents. In addition the site has been comprehensively evaluated by geophysical survey and trial trenching. The results from the extensive investigations on the existing Whitemoor Haye Quarry have also been reviewed. The data gathered has provided the information required with which to appropriately assess the impact of the development proposals on the archaeological and historic landscape.
The assessment of direct impacts on archaeology and cultural heritage assets within the proposed development boundary shows that significant impacts in EIA terms comprise a high magnitude of change to the small amount of identified Prehistoric archaeological evidence in trial trench 11 (quarry phase 2), being a low sensitivity receptor, and the uninvestigated, but believed Prehistoric archaeological evidence as detailed by cropmark evidence in Field 1 (quarry phase 5), also a low sensitivity receptor. Whilst the predicted impact to both these areas is of moderate significance, it can be appropriately mitigated by the implementation of an approved scheme of archaeological works prior to development. This will preserve the archaeological interest of these parts of the site ‘by record’.
There are no other identified significant direct effects on the archaeological and heritage resource as a result of the proposed quarry extension. There will be an impact to other (later) archaeology identified within the confines of the Site and potentially to other undated and unidentified archaeological remains. However, the assessed sensitivity of these receptors (being low), together with the proposed mitigation, has identified all impacts as being of minor magnitude which does not equate to a significant impact in EIA terms.
The assessment of indirect impacts on all cultural heritage assets within the study area shows that significant impacts in EIA terms comprise a ‘medium’ magnitude of change to the Grade II Listed Roddige Farmhouse, being a Medium sensitivity receptor. Whilst the predicted impact is of moderate significance, in that the
4 | P a g e
Alrewas South, Staffordshire secondary setting of the farmhouse extends to the site, there are no clear functional or significant historic associations with this wider landscape. The wider rural landscape beyond the farmhouse’s associated gardens and former yards comprise a ‘backdrop’ rather than an integral part of the setting of the building. The creation of soil storage bunds, which will be grassed over and placed along the northern, eastern and western edges, will afford an increased protection to the secondary setting of the building whilst quarry operations take place. Quarry operations within the vicinity of Roddige Farmhouse will be temporary in nature, lasting c. 5 years prior to approved restoration taking place. Following site restoration the secondary setting of the building will be appropriately restored.
There are no other identified significant indirect effects on the archaeological and heritage resource as a result of the proposed quarry extension. The extension is not located within the primary setting of any surrounding cultural heritage asset. There will be changes to long distance and obscured views in some circumstances, but none of these changes are relevant to planned views or vistas from cultural heritage assets and those changes are not assessed as compromising the understanding or historic importance of any feature.
5 | P a g e
Alrewas South, Staffordshire
CULTURAL HERITAGE
1 Introduction
1.1 Phoenix Consulting Archaeology Ltd has been instructed by Lafarge Tarmac to prepare a Cultural Heritage assessment for their proposed Alrewas South Quarry Extension near Alrewas, Staffordshire. This document assesses the extent and importance of known archaeology and other features of cultural heritage interest in and around the proposed extension (‘the Site’). It also discusses the likelihood of further archaeological finds being made on site, the potential impacts of the proposed development on archaeology and other features of cultural heritage interest, and a range of mitigation measures to minimise those potential impacts.
1.2 Specifically, the document evaluates direct and indirect impacts on archaeological finds and sites in addition to any potential indirect impacts on other cultural heritage components in the surrounding landscape (including Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas).
1.3 Historic Battlefields, Registered Parks and Gardens and World Heritage Sites are not considered within this assessment because there are no such designations within the study area.
1.4 National and local policy guidelines on archaeology recommend that important archaeological sites should be protected and where possible preserved in situ. However, for features of lesser importance preservation by record is an acceptable alternative. If important sites are assumed to exist, a condition may be attached to any granted planning permission which requires their preservation in situ or outlines a scheme of further archaeological investigation.
6 | P a g e
Alrewas South, Staffordshire
2 Assessment Methodology Objectives
2.1 The key objectives of the impact assessment are to: ● identify key archaeological finds and sites, including Scheduled Monuments, on and within 2km of the Site; ● identify key Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas within 2km of the Site; ● identify any Registered Parks & Gardens within 2km of the Site; ● assess the impacts of constructing, operating and decommissioning the quarry upon the cultural heritage assets listed above, including consideration of their setting; ● identify measures for avoiding or mitigating potential impacts; ● detail any residual impacts that cannot be mitigated.
Key Tasks
2.2 The assessment has involved the following key tasks: ● a desk-based assessment to collect all readily available information on the archaeology and historic aspects of the landscape and to assess the probability of the survival of archaeological remains – see Annex 1a; ● assessment of the results of the geophysical survey to obtain information concerning the presence, character, date and level of preservation of any surviving archaeological remains across the site – see Annex 1b; ● targeted trial trenching to assess presence and extent of archaeology on the site, its date and level of preservation – see Annex 1c; ● assessment of the results of the archaeological investigations across the National Memorial Arboretum ‘overflow’ car park, which covers a part of the application area – see Annex 1d; ● consultation with relevant parties;
7 | P a g e
Alrewas South, Staffordshire
● site visit to assess setting of cultural heritage assets; and ● consideration of a range of measures to mitigate potential impacts of the proposed development on known and potential archaeology and other cultural heritage assets.
Desk-Based Assessment
2.3 To assess the probability of the survival of archaeological and other cultural heritage assets across the Site a desk-based assessment was undertaken (Annex 1a). This collected all available data of the study area and its surrounds (Coates & Richmond 2009). The information was considered in the context of 'background information' on the physical environment, particularly geological and geomorphological conditions and past and present land-uses of the area. The sources of information used in the desk assessment are summarised below:
Historic Environment Record
2.4 The Historic Environment Record (HER) of Staffordshire County Council was made available during the assessment. The Council HER Officers assisted with the collection of known records for the area. Computer printouts of relevant archaeological information were obtained from these sources.
2.5 The HER is not a complete listing of the actual archaeology and other cultural heritage features which may exist across, or in the vicinity of the site, nor is it seen as such by the Council Archaeological Officers, but it is a useful basis on which to begin an assessment.
Documentary and Cartographic Research
2.6 Relevant documentary and cartographic records held by the Staffordshire Council HER were consulted during this assessment, and
8 | P a g e
Alrewas South, Staffordshire
are reported upon below. In addition Local Records Offices and Local Studies Libraries were visited. The aim of the research was to provide a summary of the landscape history of the Site. Documents held by the Public Record Office (PRO) in Kew and the National Monuments Record (NMR) in Swindon were also consulted.
Aerial Photographic Data
2.7 Aerial photographs covering the application area and its surrounds which are held by the County Council (Stafford) were analysed. These included vertical and oblique shots.
Geophysical Survey
2.8 The site was investigated by a magnetometer survey, supplemented by magnetic susceptibility tests (Annex 1b). Readings were collected on 1m transects using Bartington fluxgate gradiometers, and were plotted at 25cm intervals along each transect (Bartlett 2012). These works supplemented an earlier phase of geophysics undertaken across a part of the site in 1992 (BUFAU 1992).
Trench Evaluation
2.9 The geophysical plots (both those undertaken in 1992 and 2012) provided the basis for the location of trial trenches (Annex 1c). Trenches were positioned across geophysical anomalies that suggested below-ground archaeology, geophysical anomalies that were of uncertain character, cropmark features as detailed in the HER as well as blank areas to act as a control. These works supplemented an earlier phase of trial trenching undertaken across a part of the site in 1992 (BUFAU 1992).
9 | P a g e
Alrewas South, Staffordshire
National Memorial Arboretum (NMA) overflow car park investigations
2.10 The northern-most field of the application area lies adjacent to the National Memorial Arboretum (NMA). The NMA, in association with Lafarge Aggregates Ltd, received planning permission for the construction of a temporary car park at this location. The planning permission was granted subject to completion of an approved programme of archaeological work prior to development. The works constituted an archaeological watching brief across the area of development (Annex 1d).
Consultation
2.11 In the preparation of this impact assessment, consultation has taken place with all relevant curatorial officers involved in the protection and management of archaeology and the historic landscape within the areas to be affected by the proposed development. This has included:
● Staffordshire County Council (Stephen Dean – Principal County Archaeologist); ● Litchfield District Council (Debbie Boffin – Conservation Officer); ● Staffordshire County Council (Suzy Blake – Historic Environment Records Officer); ● English Heritage (Ian George, Inspector of Ancient Monuments, West Midlands Region).
Mitigation Measures
2.12 A range of measures that might be taken to mitigate the impact of the proposed development on known and potential archaeology and other cultural heritage features in the landscape is provided following the discussion of potential impacts.
10 | P a g e
Alrewas South, Staffordshire
Types of Impact
2.13 A development can result in two types of impact upon a cultural heritage asset: direct and indirect impacts. Direct impacts arising from a quarry development are likely to only affect archaeology and heritage features within the site boundary. Indirect impacts are defined as any impacts upon the settings of built and other heritage features as a result of the presence of the proposed development. Policy guidance recognises the need to protect the ‘setting’ of historic buildings and heritage features, although the exact definition and extent of ‘setting’ is open to some interpretation.
2.14 English Heritage has recently published guidance on how to define the extent of the setting of heritage assets: The Setting of Heritage Assets: English Heritage Guidance (October 2011 – with revision notes to take account of NPPF – June 2012). They state that whilst NPPF supersedes PPS5: Planning for the Historic Environment, they still believe that the policy approach of the earlier planning guidance is unlikely to change and still contains useful advice. The methodology below draws upon this published document, guidance contained within PPS5 (2010), together with professional experience and judgement in dealing with quarry applications and other large developments.
Defining Setting
2.15 NPPF (2012 - Chapter 12 : Conserving and Enhancing the Historic Environment) refers to the setting or surroundings of designated cultural heritage assets as being of importance in the assessment of impacts, but it does not explicitly define it, albeit Policy HE10 of PPS5 (Planning for the Historic Environment) states that ‘setting is the surroundings in which an asset is experienced’. The section below sets out to define the concept of setting and how it can be assessed.
11 | P a g e
Alrewas South, Staffordshire
The issue of setting primarily refers to sites that are visible (or have visible components), as it is visible heritage assets which have settings that can be most affected by development. Issues of setting are perhaps less relevant when one is discussing buried archaeological sites that are not identifiable on the surface. As stated under NPPF (2012), the issue of setting is most relevant to designated features of national importance, such as Scheduled Monuments, Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas, although certain other aspects of the historic environment, for which there are no specific statutory controls, such as historic parks and gardens, can also be deemed to have a setting.
2.16 Paragraph 114 of the guidance to PPS5 indicates that setting is made up of a number of constituent elements which include:
● views to and from an asset; ● the experience of an asset in its setting; ● the spatial association of an asset; & ● the understanding of the historic relationship between places;
2.17 Guidance states that setting will generally be more extensive than curtilage. There is the suggestion that the setting of a heritage asset would often be associated with areas in close proximity to the asset and the spatial quality and relationship between an asset and its surroundings. It is clear, however, that some degree of interpretation is required, as not all development within the wider landscape of, say a listed building, can reasonably be assumed as falling within its setting. NPPF (2012) is concerned with the ‘significance’ of an asset and whether this significance will be altered by a development. The guidance to PPS5 states that ‘any development or change capable of affecting the significance of a heritage asset or people’s experience of it can be considered as falling within its setting’ (para 118).
12 | P a g e
Alrewas South, Staffordshire
2.18 Local Authorities need to come to an opinion as to whether a proposed development affects the setting of a heritage asset. Guidance states that ‘understanding the significance of the asset will enable the contribution made by its setting to be understood’. There is certainly room for interpretation, reinforcing the essentially undefined scope and nature of settings. English Heritage defines setting as:
‘The surroundings in which a heritage asset is experienced. Its extent is not fixed and may change as the asset and its surrounds evolve. Elements of a setting may make a positive or negative contribution to the significance of an asset, may affect the ability to appreciate that significance or may be neutral’.
The Setting of Heritage Assets: English Heritage (October 2011.4)
2.19 There is, therefore, some degree of interpretation in assessing the ‘setting’ of any given heritage asset, and accordingly there is potential for conflicting definitions as to the exact extent and composition of the ‘setting’ of it. By implication an assessment of the setting of a heritage asset may reflect a particular interpretation rather than an absolute conclusion. It is nevertheless considered possible to present a balanced and informed view on the setting of an asset through assessment. It is clear that the setting of heritage assets can vary considerably on a case-by-case basis, according to specific circumstances.
2.20 Published guidance implies that the setting of a heritage asset would normally extend in all directions (English Heritage 2011.4). Nevertheless, it is also clear that:
● The setting of most heritage assets will not be of equal importance in all directions. There is, for instance, a clear hierarchal difference between the frontage and rear elevations of formally designed
13 | P a g e
Alrewas South, Staffordshire
buildings, and planned views will be of much more importance than unintended or ‘incidental’ views.
● There are seldom physical features which will denote the exact extent of the setting of heritage assets, particularly in rural landscapes. Field or land parcel boundaries, for instance, may theoretically be useful to denote historic associations, although these often bear little or no direct relation to existing conditions or features and may have little relevance in terms of defining the physical setting of a building or cultural heritage feature. Associated boundary walls and planted boundaries, however, can sometimes clearly define the settings of features.
● The setting of some assets will be confined to their immediate surroundings, which, in some cases, can be very limited. Examples of such structures include headstones, mile stones, footbridges, steps, war memorials, boundary walls, gates and gate posts.
● What is of importance in assessing the setting of a heritage asset is its qualitative relationship with its surroundings, and in some instances also significant historic associations and relationships with surviving physical features, particularly planned vistas and interrelated buildings. The latter will normally be recognised in published literature, list and schedule descriptions.
● A building set within a rural landscape will normally have a close spatial relationship with its immediate context and surroundings (such as a farmhouse and its outbuildings; a church and its church yard). Unless there are clear functional or significant historic associations with the wider landscape, the rural landscape will comprise a ‘backdrop’ rather than an integral part of the setting of a building.
2.21 In turn it is important to differentiate between the setting of different types of heritage asset according to their characteristics and
14 | P a g e
Alrewas South, Staffordshire
constituent parts. For example, the setting of conservation areas differs from the setting of listed buildings, which in turn differ from the setting of scheduled monuments. A summary of the definitions of setting used as a basis for this assessment are set out below:
Setting of Scheduled Monuments (SM’s)
2.22 NPPF (2012) does not explicitly define what the setting of a monument is, but it is accepted that where nationally important remains and their settings, whether Scheduled or not, are affected by development there should be a presumption in favour of their physical preservation (ibid. 31). The setting of some SMs, such as those that are represented by buried remains that have no discernable understanding on the ground- surface, is generally more limited than that for listed buildings. In these circumstances the land surrounding the SM does not necessarily contribute to the understanding of the feature, although where a SM encompasses upstanding remains which might have specific relationships with the surrounding land these may have a wider setting than most.
Setting of Listed Buildings
2.23 For the purposes of this assessment the setting of a listed building has been divided into primary and secondary. The primary setting of a listed building is formed of land which materially relates or contributes to the understanding and interest of the listed building; this can also be termed the site’s ‘zone of visual influence’. For example, a country house may have formal gardens and associated outbuildings which contribute to the overall historical evolution and understanding of the site and the interest of the building itself. In this manner, the primary setting contributes to the heritage asset’s significance.
2.24 The secondary setting of a listed building can be defined as land
15 | P a g e
Alrewas South, Staffordshire
outside the primary setting of the listed building but still adjacent and with a visual relationship to it. The secondary setting should have some kind of historical connection to the listed building, such as surrounding parkland, but will often not be as clearly defined as the primary setting.
Setting of Conservation Areas
2.25 The setting of a conservation area is made up of land surrounding the boundary of the designated area and is often considered to either detract or enhance the characteristics of the area, including views into and out of it. The setting of a conservation area is not usually taken to extend very far as it is the intrinsic value of the area which is of most importance. Therefore views into or out of conservation areas can, in some circumstances, contribute to the character or appearance of an area. In many circumstances conservation areas fall within village or town centres with a distinctly inward looking character and are often screened from view by surrounding buildings and trees. PPS5 Policy HE9.5 states that ‘not all elements of a Conservation Area will necessarily contribute to its significance’.
2.26 It is the quality and interest of areas, rather than that of individual buildings, which should be the prime consideration in identifying conservation areas. It is recognised that the desirability of preserving or enhancing an area should be a material consideration in the planning authority's handling of development proposals which are outside the conservation area but would affect its setting, or views into or out of the area.
Setting of Registered Parks and Gardens
2.27 These are areas designated as being of interest due to their special historic interest and are normally associated with listed or unlisted
16 | P a g e
Alrewas South, Staffordshire
buildings and structures. Very often these areas have been specifically designed to take advantage of natural or man-made topography and landscape elements to create areas and views of interest. Some registered parks and gardens, especially those associated with a country house with planned landscapes, have deliberate vistas and sight lines to landscape markers or specific points on the horizon. It is important to remember that registered parks and gardens often have incidental views from many locations within the registered area, not all of specific importance. With the exception of specific planned vistas and sightlines the setting of registered parks and gardens is limited.
2.28 Therefore the setting of a registered park/garden can, where planned views exist, extend over a greater distance in that specific view.
Views Vistas and Sightlines
2.29 A built heritage feature, for example a listed house with associated formal gardens, may have planned vistas and views, for example avenues of trees centred on a landmark or point on the horizon which are intended to provide a pleasing aspect. English Heritage’s guidance document ‘Seeing the History in the View’ (2011) defines a Designed View as: ‘A view that is the product of a deliberate design, usually intended to create a particular effect, illustrate a particular aspect of a landscape or focus on a particular feature or features in a landscape. Such a landscape and its features do not themselves have to be designed, but they may be’.
Views Into and Out of Conservation Areas
2.30 Local planning authorities should have regard to development which may affect views into and out of conservation areas (PPS5 Policy HE10). Many conservation areas encompass the central areas of
17 | P a g e
Alrewas South, Staffordshire
villages and towns where there are views into and out of the area from surrounding streets and sometimes, the surrounding countryside. Whilst these views are often incidental, they can be identified as adding to the general character and appearance of an area.
Incidental Views
2.31 Many heritage assets set within a rural landscape may be seen from a number of locations, on footpaths, down streets and from the surrounding landscape. Views to and from such assets, where incidental and not intentionally designed, except where this forms part of the setting, are not covered in this chapter because incidental views are not integral to their special architectural or historic interest.
3 Significance Criteria
3.1 The significance of potential impacts is assessed by taking into account the sensitivity of the archaeological and/or built heritage feature and the potential magnitude of change. Magnitude of change is a function of the nature, scale and type of disturbance or damage to the heritage asset. For example, a high magnitude of change may result in the loss of, or damage to, a feature of archaeology or built heritage. Criteria for assessing the magnitude of predicted change are provided in Table 1.
3.2 The sensitivity/significance of the archaeological and/or built heritage feature will depend on factors such as the condition of the site and the perceived heritage value/importance of the site. The sensitivity of the receptor (archaeological and/or built heritage feature) is defined by its importance in terms of national, regional or local statutory or non- statutory protection. Table 2 sets out the criteria for assessing sensitivity and significance.
18 | P a g e
Alrewas South, Staffordshire
Table 1: Criteria for assessing magnitude of change on receptors
Magnitude of Change Definition High Total loss or major alteration to key elements or features of the pre-development conditions, such that its post-development character, composition or setting would be fundamentally changed. Medium Loss or alteration of one of the key elements or features of the pre-development conditions such that its post-development character or setting would be partially changed. Low Slight alteration from pre-development conditions including alteration of the setting of a built heritage feature. No Change Very slight or no change from pre-development conditions.
Table 2: Criteria for assessing sensitivity & significance of receptors
Sensitivity & Criteria Significance High SMs and their settings and Areas of Archaeological Importance. Archaeological sites of schedulable quality and importance. Listed Buildings of Grade I and II* status. Registered Parks and Gardens and their settings. Medium Undesignated sites of demonstrable regional importance. Listed Buildings of Grade II status. Local Authority designated sites such as Conservation Areas and their settings. Low Sites with specific and substantial importance to local interest groups. Sites whose importance is limited by poor preservation and poor survival of contextual associations. No Sites with no surviving archaeological or historical Importance component. Unknown Importance cannot be ascertained.
19 | P a g e
Alrewas South, Staffordshire
3.3 The sensitivity of the archaeological and/or built heritage feature, together with the magnitude of change, defines the significance of the impact (Table 3). Impacts of ‘major’ or ‘moderate’ significance are considered to equate to significant impacts in the context of the EIA Regulations. Grade I and II* Listed buildings and their setting are all of high sensitivity and so even low levels of predicted magnitude of change to these features will be significant in EIA terms.
Table 3: Criteria for assessing significance of impact (shaded boxes highlight significant impacts in EIA terms)
Sensitivity Magnitude of Change
High Medium Low No Impact
High Major Major Moderate Negligible
Medium Major Moderate Minor Negligible
Low Moderate Minor Minor Negligible
No importance Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible
20 | P a g e
Alrewas South, Staffordshire
4 Planning and Legislative Context
Legislation
4.1 Legislation provides for the protection (through being added to the scheduled list of archaeological monuments and thus preservation in- situ) of the most important and well-preserved archaeological sites and monuments (Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act, 1979). There are no SMs within the proposed development area, however eight are listed within the 2km search area, with a further two monuments lying just outside of it. Of the eight monuments within the search area, only two are within 1km of the site boundary, being SM ST 199 and ST 200). SM ST 199 relates to a Bronze Age barrow bordering the River Tame to the north of the site (0.37km). SM ST 200 relates to an extensive Iron Age and Roman rural settlement to the immediate east of the site, although this has been archaeologically excavated (in accordance with SMC) prior to development of the existing quarry. At the time of writing this site is in the final stages of investigation. It still remains on the register, although its archaeological significance has now been removed. The next nearest SM to the site lies 1km to the north, being the Deserted Medieval Village of Wychnor (SM UID 22436).
4.2 Legislation protecting buildings and areas of special architectural or historic interest is contained in the Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. Sections 16, 66 and 72 of the 1990 Act are of particular relevance. They establish that special regard must be given by the decision maker in the exercise of planning functions to the desirability of preserving a listed building or its setting and to the desirability of preserving the character, appearance and setting of a conservation area.
21 | P a g e
Alrewas South, Staffordshire
4.3 There are 74 Listed Buildings in the study area, of which nine were chosen for detailed assessment. Of these, one, Roddige Farmhouse (Grade II) borders the site boundary. Of the other assessed buildings, one is of Grade I status, six are Grade II* and one is Grade II.
4.4 The nearest Conservation Area to the site is the village of Alrewas, which lies 320m outside of the NW boundary. The Trent and Mersey Canal (1km distance) is also a designated Conservation Area, as is Fradley Junction (3km distance).
National Planning Guidance
NPPF 2012 4.5 The Government’s objectives for the historic environment are set out in NPPF (2012 – Chapter 12 Conserving and Enhancing the Historic Environment). It gives local planning authorities guidance on the appropriate ways of dealing with the historic environment, including archaeology, in the planning process. The guidance is that local authority development documents and plans should include policies for the protection, enhancement and preservation of sites of heritage interest and their settings, and that the proposals maps should define the areas and sites to which these policies and proposals within the development plan apply. The principles and policies in NPPF 2012 are a material consideration which must be taken into account in development management decisions.
4.6 NPPF 2012 also gives backing to local planning authorities, at the stage of applying for planning permission, to request additional information from prospective developers about their site before determination of any submitted planning application. The information contained in this document and its annexes forms that additional information.
22 | P a g e
Alrewas South, Staffordshire
4.7 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 (NPPF 2012, Chapter 12, 128).
4.8 Guidance requires all applicants to provide a level of information that is relative to the significance of the asset and the potential impact upon that significance.
4.9 The main thrust of the guidance is that, where development is proposed, the significance of a heritage asset and its settings should be protected if that significance is deemed to be special. Where loss of significance is justified on the merits of new development, local planning authorities should impose appropriate planning conditions requesting the heritage asset to be appropriately recorded prior to its loss. NPPF 2012 is primarily concerned with the protection of heritage assets which are designated. Some non-designated assets are of heritage significance, but not at a level that would pass the threshold for national designation. The desirability of conserving them is a material consideration, but individually less of a priority than for designated assets (ibid. 135). The requirements for recording and understanding any such assets that are to be lost apply to these assets, although the requirement imposed upon any permission will need to be proportionate to the nature and lower level of the asset’s significance.
Local Planning Guidance
4.10 The Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 outlines the means of transition to a new Planning System. As part of the change, County
23 | P a g e
Alrewas South, Staffordshire
Structure Plans and District Local Plans are no longer being produced. For the abandoned policies, sufficient guidance is now deemed to be provided under NPPF 2012, local planning guidance and the emerging Local Development Frameworks (LDF). Presently, certain policies contained within the Structure Plan have, however, been saved, and remain in place with regard to archaeological and other cultural heritage issues. These are detailed below.
Adopted Staffordshire and Stoke-on-Trent Structure Plan 1996- 2011 – saved policies
4.11 The Staffordshire and Stoke-on-Trent Structure Plan acknowledges the importance of archaeological sites and the provision of information required to inform planning decisions (Policy NC14). Developments that have a negative effect upon sites of national archaeological importance will only be allowed in exceptional circumstance (Policy NC15).
NC14 Sites of Archaeological Importance:
Proposals for development or land use change affecting sites of known or potential archaeological importance, and their settings, will be considered in the light of information held by the County or City Councils. Where necessary, developers will be required to supplement this information with the results of desk-based assessments and field evaluations before any decision on the planning application is taken. Where the planning authority decides on the basis of professional advice that archaeological remains are not sufficiently important to warrant physical preservation in situ, developers will be required to make appropriate and satisfactory provision for the excavation and recording of the remains prior to development, and for the publication of the results.
24 | P a g e
Alrewas South, Staffordshire
NC15 Sites of National Archaeological Importance:
Development which would adversely affect Scheduled Ancient Monuments or archaeological sites of national importance or, in either case, their settings, will only be allowed in the most exceptional circumstances.
4.12 There are no SMs within the proposed development area, however eight are listed within the 2km search area, with a further two monuments lying just outside of it. Of the eight monuments within the search area, only two are within 1km of the site boundary, being SM ST 199 and ST 200.
4.13 The Structure Plan also includes policies that protect Historic Parks and Gardens and Listed Buildings from the adverse effects of development (Policies NC17A and NC18, respectively). Policy NC19 protects the integrity of Conservation Areas and development within them or outside, that may affect their settings. There are 74 Listed Buildings in the study area, of which nine were chosen for detailed assessment. Of these, one, Roddige Farmhouse (Grade II) borders the site boundary. Of the other assessed buildings, one is of Grade I status, six are Grade II* and one is Grade II. The nearest Conservation Area to the site is the village of Alrewas, which lies 320m outside of the NW boundary. The Trent and Mersey Canal (1km distance) is also a designated Conservation Area, as is Fradley Junction (3km distance). There are no recorded Historic Parks and Gardens within 3km of the site. The nearest Registered site is Lichfield’s ‘Beacon Park and Minster Pool’, c. 5 km to SW.
4.14 This document fulfils the requirements for a desk-based assessment and field evaluation as detailed under Policy NC14.
25 | P a g e
Alrewas South, Staffordshire
Lichfield District Council Local Plan: Strategy (July 2012)
4.15 Lichfield District Council is required to set out its planning policies for the District in its ‘new’ Local Plan (formerly Core Strategy). This plan will comprise a number of different documents (Development Plan Documents) which will set out the overall vision and strategy for development in the District for the next 15 to 20 years, and will also provide a framework with which future Development Plan Documents will have to conform. The ‘new’ Local Plan Strategy replaces the 1998 Lichfield District Local Plan. Whilst this collection of documents sets out the District Council’s favoured approach with regard to future development, its preparation is ongoing.
Staffordshire & Stoke-on-Trent Minerals Local Plan 1994 – 2006
4.16 The Staffordshire and Stoke-on-Trent Minerals Local Plan (1994 – 2006) is being replaced by the Minerals Core Strategy as part of the Staffordshire Minerals and Waste Development Framework. Preparation of the Minerals Core Strategy is currently under review and will continue through 2013. The existing MLP Policy 16, considering the impact of mineral operations on archaeological sites, protected or not, has not been saved under Paragraph 1(3) Sch.8 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.
4.17 Minerals developments should follow guidance provided by English Heritage in their published policy statement and practice guide:
● Mineral Extraction and the Historic Environment – English Heritage 2009.
● Mineral Extraction and Archaeology: A Practice Guide – English Heritage 2009.
26 | P a g e
Alrewas South, Staffordshire
5 Baseline conditions Location and Current Landuse
5.1 The proposed extension area is located to the east of the A38, south- east of the village of Alrewas and south of the confluence of the Rivers Trent and Tame, in East Staffordshire. Fine Lane defines the southern extent with the Lichfield to Derby railway line forming much of the western boundary. The eastern boundary is defined by Barley Green Road, beyond which lies land associates with Sittles Farm and Whitemoor Haye Quarry. The northern extent is defined by Croxall Road and the A513. A number of lanes and single-track roads cross the site.
5.2 At the time of writing the proposed extension area is agricultural land. The site visit identified arable fields, with crops of wheat, rape, miscanthus and areas of set-aside. A microlight flying school is located in fields on the eastern side. To the north of Roddige Farmhouse a number of temporary animal shelters and scattered associated feeders were present. The conveyor belt to the current workings crosses the northern sector. The area is generally flat, rising in the south around Sittles Farm. It lies between the 55m and 60m AOD contours.
Geology and Soils
5.3 The site lies on a gravel terrace bordering the western bank of the River Tame. The extensive floodplain consists of extensive spreads of alluvial deposits which overlie the Pleistocene gravel sub-surface, which in-turn overlie Triassic Mercian Mudstone, sandstones and Bunter Beds. The floodplain extends away from the water course to the gently cambered elevated gravel terrace. Beyond the extent of the alluvium, soils tend to be slightly stony sandy loams and are classified as gleyic brown earths.
27 | P a g e
Alrewas South, Staffordshire
The Archaeology and Historic Landscape of the Application Area
5.4 The heritage background to the Site is detailed in the desk based assessment (Annex 1a). What follows here is a summary of the main points. Locations of records are indicated in figure 2 under Annex 1a. Information is also drawn from the recent geophysical survey of the site (Annex 1b), the trial trenching exercise (Annex 1c) and the investigations across the NMA temporary car park (Annex 1d). Some of these former surveys covered a wider area than the current application zone.
5.5 The ‘regional’ archaeological context around the Site is also provided below. It provides a comprehensive review of known archaeology and historic landscape development around the application site in order to put the area in its archaeological and historical context.
Information from the Historic Environment Record (HER)
5.6 The HER, upon which knowledge of the ‘known’ archaeology of an area is based, contains records that have been identified in the following ways: as earthworks or other standing monuments, as cropmarks on aerial photographs, as chance finds of artefacts on the ground surface and as discoveries made during ground disturbance, usually associated with gardening, ploughing or construction work. The collection of data for the HER is therefore random and un- systematic. Much buried archaeology does not reveal itself in the ways mentioned above. Therefore the HER is by its nature provisional and cannot be taken as a definitive list of surviving archaeological remains.
28 | P a g e
Alrewas South, Staffordshire
The proposed extension area (numbers in bold text refer to entries discussed in the desk assessment – Annex 1a).
5.7 The earliest evidence is represented by finds and cropmarks associated with a possible ritual or agricultural landscape dating from the Bronze Age (c. 2,000-1,000 BC). The cropmarks have largely been identified from aerial photographs taken in the 1970s. Limited geophysical survey and trial trench excavations took place across parts of the site in the early 1990’s, although findings at this time were minimal. Further characterisation of them has taken place as part of works associated with the current application (see below).
5.8 The cropmark complex in the northern part of the site [01] consists of three circular features, thought to be Bronze Age barrows, and a number of linear features. Monitoring of a soil strip in advance of the construction of a conveyor route in the late 1990’s failed to identify any archaeology, and this formerly Scheduled area was subsequently de- Scheduled (Richmond 1997a). A series of linear cropmarks, [02] [03], in the same field may be associated.
5.9 Similar cropmarks have been identified south of this field [04] and [05], which appear as rectangular enclosures. A further possible enclosure exists further to the south; to the west of Whitemoor Haye Farm [06]. It is probable that a number of the cropmarks relate to former field boundaries of post-Medieval date. Many appear to correspond with fields shown on the Tithe map of 1840.
5.10 A geophysical survey was carried out over nine areas in 1992 as part of an evaluation for an earlier application. This investigated a number of the cropmarks and their surrounds (BUFAU 1992). The gradiometer survey identified few anomalies of archaeological interest and in most cases the cropmarks were not detected. A trial trenching exercise
29 | P a g e
Alrewas South, Staffordshire
followed (ibid.; Coates 2002). Twenty-nine trenches were excavated, of which 7 lay within the boundaries of the present site. By and large, this trenching exercise failed to find features associated with the geophysical anomalies. Two shallow ditches were, however, identified where an enclosure had been suspected [06].
5.11 At the time of the desk-based assessment, all other recorded entries within the proposed extension area were finds recovered by chance or through metal detecting. They included a stone axe [11], a Roman brooch [12], a Medieval buckle [14], a Copper alloy dagger fragment [16], a sword fragment [23] and a cast alloy copper bell [24].
Information from the current field investigations
5.12 The site has recently been subject to an additional comprehensive field evaluation comprising of geophysical survey and trial trenching. These works took place across those part of the proposed extension area that were not covered by the earlier (1992) evaluation (these surveys did, however, cover a wider area than the current proposals). The results have provided an enhanced understanding of the site. Reference is also made here to the recent archaeological watching brief across the NMA temporary car park, which lies within the current application boundary.
Geophysical Survey
5.13 Parts of the site were evaluated by detailed magnetometer survey supplemented by a magnetic susceptibility scan (see Annex 1b). These works provided a more comprehensive assessment to that undertaken as part of the 1992 field evaluation.
5.14 Findings from the survey were limited mainly to linear markings of variable quality, some of which could be identified with former
30 | P a g e
Alrewas South, Staffordshire
boundaries. One clearly defined feature of possible archaeological interest was a square enclosure next to a former track or boundary in field 6. These features closely resemble cropmarks recorded nearby. Various individual magnetic anomalies which could represent silted pits were also identified, but they were sparse and widely dispersed, with no identifiable clusters which might suggest the presence of a group of archaeological features. The survey detected a number of (probably insubstantial) traces of former hedge lines, but few other findings. The evidence overall suggested that few dense concentrations of archaeological features are likely to be present.
Trial Trenching
5.15 Following both the earlier (1992) and later (2012) geophysical surveys the site was subject to targeted trial trench evaluation. All works were conducted in full accordance with the requirements and conditions of the archaeological adviser to the MPA (see Annex 1c). A total of 32 trenches were excavated (9 in 1992 and 23 in 2012), the majority being positioned in areas where the geophysical surveys suggested the presence of below ground features. Trenches were also positioned in areas where the HER had plotted cropmarks of potential archaeological origin. Other trenches were positioned in blank areas to act as a control.
5.16 The trenches excavated as part of the 1992 evaluation failed to identify the features plotted from the aerial photographic assessment. Indeed, aside from an undated ditch, very little of archaeological interest was identified. The 2012 programme of trial trenching was more successful in its aims.
5.17 This second stage of trial trenching involved the excavation of 23 trenches, excavated across eight fields (three of these fields, where 8 trenches were positioned, have since been omitted from the proposed
31 | P a g e
Alrewas South, Staffordshire
development area). Whilst features were identified in most of the trenches, the majority were either undated or clearly related to former field boundaries of post-Medieval date. One trench, however, contained stratified prehistoric archaeology (Trench 11 – quarry phase 2) and another (now outside of the development area) quite dense Medieval archaeology, suggestive of a rural farmstead (Trench 27). It was considered that many of the undated features (present in 11 trenches) could represent archaeology of any period. There was a noticeable lack of features dated to the Roman period, which was unusual considering the proximity of the Roman Ryknild Street and the bordering Roman archaeology to the east.
National Memorial Arboretum Car Park Investigations
5.18 The National Memorial Arboretum, in association with Lafarge Aggregates Ltd, received planning permission for the construction of a temporary car park within a part of the northern-most field of the application area. Prior to development, an archaeological watching brief was required across the footprint of the site (Annex 1d). Archaeological monitoring of the works identified two probable field boundary ditches, one which contained a fragment of a rotary quern, considered to be of Iron Age or Roman date. Aside from several post- Medieval furrows, no other archaeology was identified.
The wider landscape
5.19 The archaeological context around the Site is briefly discussed here, in order to put the site in its archaeological and historical context. For the full assessment see Annex 1a.
5.20 Several important excavations have been undertaken in the area, including the ongoing archaeological works at Whitemoor Haye to the immediate east of the site. These investigations make it possible to
32 | P a g e
Alrewas South, Staffordshire
provide an outline settlement sequence for the area (Miles 1969, Losco-Bradley 1984, Hughes 1991, Jones 1992, Martin 1998, Coates and Richmond 2002, Coates 2002, Losco-Bradley & Kinsley 2002, Hewson 2006). In addition to these excavations, an Aggregates Levy Sustainability Fund project called ‘Where Rivers Meet’ has been carried out across the landscape of the confluence of the Rivers Trent and Tame (Watters et al. 2003, Bain et al. 2005). Knight and Howard have also produced a volume, ‘Trent Valley Landscapes’, which summarises the archaeological background of the Trent Valley (Knight & Howard 2004). The detail of these works should be consulted in conjunction with the summary provided below.
5.21 The proposed extension lies in a landscape that contains a number of significant prehistoric monuments dating from Neolithic times. These include Neolithic ritual sites, Bronze Age burials, Iron Age farmsteads and pit alignments. Archaeology of most periods has been excavated on the bordering existing quarry site, which lies to the immediate east. This includes extensive remains of Bronze Age and Iron Age date. The earliest archaeological evidence on the quarry is, however, of Lower Palaeolithic date (c. 40,000-25,000 BC), being represented by the remains of several Woolly Rhinoceros.
5.22 The nearest Roman (AD 43-410) centre Letocetum (Wall) was occupied during the Claudian period and appears to have been a military centre with major road links to Wroxeter and Derby. Outside of the settlements, farming communities developed, which have been investigated to the west of Alrewas, at Barton Quarry, Fisherwick, Tucklesholme Farm and on the existing quarry. The high incidence of such settlement is perhaps not surprising when one considers that the present-day A38 follows the line of the Roman Ryknild Street.
5.23 Our understanding of the post-Roman Anglo-Saxon period (AD 410- 1066) is far from clear. Tamworth is known to have developed into the
33 | P a g e
Alrewas South, Staffordshire
capital of Mercia in the 7th century and Lichfield, the successor of Wall, may have developed in to the centre for the early Bishopric of Diuma. Although it is generally thought that the area did not become densely settled until the 8th century, an extensive 7th century settlement has been identified at Catholme.
5.24 Alrewas is the nearest settlement to the site. As it is mentioned in the Domesday Survey of 1086 it is assumed to have Saxon Origins. It developed, however during the Medieval period (AD 1066–1539) when it was in the ownership of the King in the Offlow Hundred. The proposed extension area is likely to have been outlying agricultural fields of the village and more likely to be used as pasture.
Historic Landscape Characterisation
5.25 The landscape of Staffordshire as we see it today is the result of both natural and man-made actions which have taken place over many years. Activities such as settlement, farming and recreation have all left behind physical traces that help to give individual parts of the County their own special character. In order to have a better understanding of the historic dimension of today’s landscape, Staffordshire County Council has undertaken an Historic Landscape Characterisation Project.
5.26 The landscape, in which the proposed extension lies, is characterised under three historic zones. The northern third of the site is recorded as ‘Post-War Amalgamated Fields’. The central third, to the north of Roddige Farmhouse are fields detailed as ‘Post 1880’s Reorganised Piecemeal Enclosure’. To the south of this are fields recorded as ‘18th/19th Century Semi-planned Enclosure’. The site borders zones detailed as ‘Post-1880’s Reorganised Fields’ (to the SW), ‘Extractive’ (the existing quarry), ‘Other Parkland’ (the National Memorial Arboretum) and ‘Post 1880’s Settlement’ (Alrewas).
34 | P a g e
Alrewas South, Staffordshire
Listed Buildings and other Cultural Heritage Features
5.27 Within the study area, the following key listed buildings and other cultural heritage features have been identified and assessed (see Annex 1a): ● 10 Scheduled Monuments (SMs) within 2.5km of the Site. These are high sensitivity receptors. ● 1 Grade I status Listed Building and 6 Grade II* status Listed Buildings within 3km of the Site. Such buildings and their settings are high sensitivity receptors. ● 2 Grade II status Listed Buildings within 1km of the Site. These buildings and their settings are medium sensitivity receptors. ● 4 Conservation Areas within 3km of the Site. These are classed as medium sensitivity receptors. ● No registered parks and gardens within 3km of the Site. The nearest Registered site is Lichfield’s Beacon Park and Minster Pool’, c. 5km to the SW. Such sites are classed as high sensitivity receptors.
Scheduled Monuments
5.28 There are no SMs within the proposed development area, however eight are listed within the 2km search area, with a further two monuments lying just outside of it. Of the eight monuments within the search area, only two are within 1km of the site boundary, being SM ST 199 and ST 200). SM ST 199 relates to a Bronze Age barrow bordering the River Tame to the north of the site (0.37km), with few surviving remains on the surface. Due to the existing structures associated with the National Memorial Arboretum, including the visitor’s centre, there are no views from the monument to the proposed development site. SM ST 200 relates to an extensive Iron Age and
35 | P a g e
Alrewas South, Staffordshire
Roman rural settlement to the immediate east of the site, although this has been archaeologically excavated (in accordance with SMC) prior to development of the existing quarry. At the time of writing this site is in the final stages of investigation. It still remains on the register, although its archaeological significance has now been removed.
5.29 The next nearest SM to the site lies 1km to the north, being the Deserted Medieval Village of Wychnor (SM UID 22436). Due to topography, distance and built development, there are few views from the scheduled monument to the proposed development site. There are perhaps occasional, long-distance obscured views from parts of the site to the very northern extent of the proposed development. However, the development would create no impact on the historic significance or understanding of the monument. A full assessment of the setting and significance of all monuments within 2.5km of the site boundary is provided under Table 4.
Listed Buildings
5.30 There are 74 Listed Buildings within the search area. One is of Grade I status (high sensitivity receptor), six are of Grade II* status (high sensitivity receptors) and the remainder are of Grade II status (medium sensitivity receptors). The majority of Grade II buildings lie within the centres of the nearby villages, and are not discussed further. However, one, Roddige Farmhouse, borders the site boundary. Descriptions of the assessed buildings and their settings are provided under Table 5.
Conservation Areas
5.31 There are four Conservation Area located within 3km of the proposed development, being the historic settlements of Alrewas and Elford, the corridor of the Trent and Mersey Canal and the canal-side settlement of Fradley Junction. Conservation Areas are designated for their
36 | P a g e
Alrewas South, Staffordshire
character and appearance which are deemed as being of local importance and interest and usually encompass listed buildings and features which form a group which the local authority deem appropriate to preserve. Conservation Areas are medium sensitivity receptors. Table 6 gives a description of the character and appearance of the assessed Conservation Areas as well as their setting.
Registered Parks & Gardens
5.32 Registered parks and gardens are designated for their historic interest as designed landscapes including layout and features of manmade and natural origin, which could be vulnerable to change, i.e. resulting from development. All registered parks and gardens are of importance at national level1, and are considered to be high sensitivity receptors. No registered parks and gardens are within 3km of the proposed development. The nearest Registered site is Lichfield’s ‘Beacon Park and Minster Pool’, c. 5 km to SW.
6 Prediction/Assessment of Impacts
Assessment of Direct Impacts of construction/establishment
6.1 Sources of impacts upon archaeology and other cultural heritage features are likely to arise from excavations and soil stripping as a result of the following:
- Establishment of quarry infrastructure; - Creation of haulage and access routes across the quarry workings;
1 Circular 01/01 Arrangements for handling heritage applications - notification and directions by the Secretary of State requires local planning authorities to consult English Heritage on planning applications for development likely to affect any grade I or II* historic park or garden. English Heritage will be notified where exceptional impact on grade II parks and gardens is likely.
37 | P a g e
Alrewas South, Staffordshire
- Soil stripping across quarry phases prior to extraction; - Creation of soil storage and landscape screening bunds;
6.2 Within the development area these construction/establishment actions can create direct impacts upon archaeology and other cultural heritage features that may be present on the site. Predicted direct impacts together with the proposed mitigation of those impacts are detailed under Table 7.
Assessment of Indirect Impacts of construction/establishment
6.3 Sources of impacts upon cultural heritage assets outside of the development boundary, i.e. indirect impacts, have the potential to arise as a result of the following:
- the development and erection of quarry infrastructure; - the creation of soil storage areas; - the establishment of the phases for subsequent quarrying.
6.4 These construction/establishment actions can create indirect impacts upon archaeology and other cultural heritage features outside of the development site. Indirect effects can occur as a result of significant adverse changes to the setting of a site. The issue of setting primarily refers to sites that are visible, as it is predominantly visible remains that have tangible settings. Issues of setting are less relevant when discussing buried archaeological sites that are not identifiable on the surface. Predicted indirect impacts together with the proposed mitigation of those impacts are detailed under Table 8.
Assessment of Operational/Decommissioning Impacts
6.5 In the case of a quarry development, direct impacts on archaeology and other cultural heritage assets within the boundaries of the development arise from disturbance relating to excavations and soil
38 | P a g e
Alrewas South, Staffordshire
stripping. Given that these operations are most likely to be experienced during the construction/establishment phase (site establishment, soil and overburden stripping) there are no anticipated additional impacts on such receptors during the operational (actual extraction following soil stripping) or decommissioning/restoration phases. Whilst there is likely to be disturbance to some degree during the decommissioning/restoration phase (i.e. removing infrastructure from the Site and creation of new landforms), it is not anticipated to extend beyond those areas disturbed during the construction period. Decommissioning/restoration impacts of a direct character are therefore identified as negligible.
6.6 Indirect effects can occur as a result of significant adverse changes to the setting of a site. It is assessed that operational and decommissioning cultural heritage impacts will have no greater significance than those identified at the construction/establishment stage. The establishment of the proposed development has been assessed to have a moderate indirect effect on the Grade II Listed Roddige Farmhouse. Therefore, the predicted impact has been assessed as being of moderate significance. It should be made clear that the identified impact will only be temporary in character, as the quarry development is a ‘temporary development’, which will be restored in the medium term. Following approved site restoration any effect to the setting of the farmhouse will be restored.
Suggested Mitigation
6.7 Mitigation measures that it may be appropriate to put in place in response to the identified impacts are detailed in Tables 7 and 8. Implementation of the mitigation measures will be able to effectively deal with the identified effects. Implementation will be secured by a written scheme of investigation (WSI) agreed with the Council Archaeological Office by way of a suitably worded planning condition.
39 | P a g e
Alrewas South, Staffordshire
Cumulative Impacts
6.8 Aside from the existing Whitemoor Haye Quarry to which this application represents an extension, there are two other quarries (operational, consented or at application stage) within the wider cumulative assessment study area. These are Barton Quarry (operated by Hanson Aggregates) and Newbold Quarry (operated by Aggregate Industries UK Ltd). There are, however, no identified cumulative impacts on archaeological or other cultural heritage assets during the construction, operational or decommissioning phases of the proposed quarry.
Residual Effects
6.9 Residual effects are those that remain after the mitigation measures detailed above are taken into account and are those that remain where the mitigation measures are not able to deal with the relevant effect. There are no anticipated residual effects for the construction or after completion phases of the development following implementation of the mitigation measures detailed.
7 Summary
7.1 A wide range of sources were consulted for this assessment, including the local Historic Environment Record, published articles and books and manuscript documents. In addition the site has been comprehensively evaluated by geophysical survey and trial trenching The data gathered has provided the information required with which to appropriately assess the impact of the development proposals of the archaeological and historic landscape.
40 | P a g e
Alrewas South, Staffordshire
7.2 The assessment of direct impacts on archaeology and cultural heritage assets within the proposed development boundary shows that significant impacts in EIA terms comprise a high magnitude of change to the small amount of identified Prehistoric archaeological evidence in trial trench 11 (quarry phase 2), being a low sensitivity receptor, and the uninvestigated, but believed Prehistoric archaeological evidence as detailed by cropmark evidence in Field 1 (quarry phase 5), also a low sensitivity receptor. Whilst the predicted impact to both these areas is of moderate significance, it can be appropriately mitigated by the implementation of an approved scheme of archaeological works prior to development. This will preserve the archaeological interest of these parts of the site ‘by record’.
7.3 There are no other identified direct significant effects on the archaeological and heritage resource as a result of the proposed quarry extension. There will be an impact to other (later) archaeology identified within the confines of the Site and potentially to other unidentified and undated archaeological remains. However, the assessed sensitivity of these receptors (being low), together with the proposed mitigation as detailed in table 7, has identified all impacts as being of minor magnitude which does not equate to a significant impact in EIA terms.
7.4 The assessment of indirect impacts on all cultural heritage assets within the study area shows that significant impacts in EIA terms comprise a ‘medium’ magnitude of change to the Grade II Listed Roddige farmhouse, being a Medium sensitivity receptor. Whilst the predicted impact is of moderate significance, in that the secondary setting of the building extends to the site, there are no clear functional or significant historic associations with this wider landscape. The wider rural landscape beyond the building’s associated outbuildings and yards comprise a ‘backdrop’ rather than an integral part of the setting of the building. The creation of soil storage bunds, which will be
41 | P a g e
Alrewas South, Staffordshire
grassed over and placed along the northern edge, will afford an increased protection to the secondary setting of the building whilst quarry operations take place. Quarry operations within the vicinity will be temporary in nature, lasting c. 5 years prior to approved restoration taking place. Following site restoration the secondary setting of Roddige Farmhouse will be appropriately restored.
7.5 There are no other identified significant indirect effects on the archaeological and heritage resource as a result of the proposed quarry extension. The extension is not located within the primary setting of any surrounding cultural heritage asset. There will be changes to long distance and obscured views in some circumstances, but none of these changes are relevant to planned views or vistas from cultural heritage assets and those changes are not assessed as compromising the understanding or historic importance of any feature.
42 | P a g e
Tables 4 - 8
Table 4: Scheduled Monuments within 2.5 km of the site boundary.
Table 5: Listed Buildings assessed within 3 km of the site boundary.
Table 6: Conservation Areas assessed within 3 km of the site boundary.
Table 7: A summary of the potential direct impacts during construction/establishment.
Table 8: A summary of the potential indirect impacts during construction/establishment.
Table 4: Scheduled Monuments within 2.5 km of the site boundary.
Table 4: Scheduled Monuments within 2.5 km of the site boundary
SM No Name Distance from site Description (D), Analysis of feature and setting (A), and boundary Significance (S)
ST 199 Site of round barrow 0.37km D: Site of a Bronze Age round barrow bordering a turn in the River near the River Tame. Tame. A buried archaeological monument with little surviving remains on the surface. Currently a patch of set-aside meadow within the confines of the National Memorial Arboretum site.
A: The monument comprises below ground remains with no discernable remains above ground. The primary setting of the monument is confined to the memorial field in which it lies, being on the west bank of the River Tame. The site’s secondary setting takes in views across open fields to the NE, across the river and to the gentle hills beyond. Due to the existing structures associated with the National Memorial Arboretum, including the visitor’s centre, there are no views from the scheduled monument to the proposed development site.
S: All Scheduled monuments are high sensitivity receptors.
UID 21536 Hlaew and settlement 1.75km D: A hlaew is a burial monument of Anglo-Saxon date, comprising remains at Croxall. a mound of earth over a primary burial or burials of individuals of high rank. As there are only 60 such monuments in England, they are all considered worthy of preservation. Associated with this site are Medieval settlement remains.
A: The monument includes the Saxon burial mound, its encircling ditch and the remains of Medieval settlement, bordering the St John the Baptist Church at Croxall. The burial mound has been built in a prominent location, on the edge of the east bank of the River Mease. It stands to a height of c. 5m. Much of the ditch has been infilled and is no longer visible. The mound has been partly overlaid by the churchyard on one edge. The mound has since been incorporated into a garden and re-used as an ornamental feature. The earthwork remains of the Medieval settlement lie within a meadow to the NE of the Saxon mound. It once covered a larger area, but much has been ploughed.
The primary setting of the monument comprises the field in which it lies together with the spur on the elevated bank of the River Mease, which represents a purposeful topographic location. The bordering Church also forms part of the site’s primary setting. The secondary setting takes in the wider rural landscape and the surrounding historical aspects of the settlement of Croxall, including Croxall Hall. Due to a heavy band of mature trees along the river’s edge, there are only obscured views to the south and west across the lower-lying floodplain and valleys of the Rivers Mease and Tame. These views would be more apparent in winter following leaf-fall. Due to distance, there are only obscured long-distance views in the direction of the proposed development. The development would create no impact on the significance of the monument.
S: All Scheduled monuments are high sensitivity receptors.
ST 174 Cropmarks SW of 2.6km D: Air photographs record cropmarks of linears and other features Elford. within meadows on the floodplain of the River Tame to the south of the village of Elford. They remain undated and uncharacterised. A suggested buried archaeological monument with little surviving remains on the surface.
A: The monument comprises below ground remains with few discernable remains above ground. The primary setting of the monument is confined to the two low-lying meadows in which it lies, being on the south bank of the River Tame. The site’s secondary setting takes in views across surrounding open fields and views to the village of Elford to the north. Due to topography and distance, there are no views from the scheduled monument to the proposed development site.
S: All Scheduled monuments are high sensitivity receptors.
ST 200 Settlement sites and 10m D: The Whitemoor Haye scheduled site is a rural settlement enclosures 500 yds NE complex which emerged during the Middle Iron Age and continued of Sittles Farm. into the Romano-British period covering a large area on the gravel terrace of the River Tame. It was initially recorded as a cropmark site, but has been extensively excavated in accordance with scheduled monument consent (SMC) over the past 15 years prior to mineral extraction. The majority of the site has now been investigated and published and has been restored back to farmland and lakes. It still remains on the scheduled list, no doubt until the final publication relating to recent excavation has been produced.
A: The site has been archaeologically investigated prior to development in accordance with SMC and shown to be a late prehistoric and Romano-British rural settlement and associated farming landscape. At the time of writing the site is in the final stages of archaeological excavation, with the majority of the site having been investigated and reported on. Most of the scheduled site is now represented by restored farmland and activity lakes. Its archaeological significance has been removed.
S: n/a
ST 250 Causewayed 1.65 km D: Air photographs record cropmarks of linear ditches, which Enclosure NE of appear to mark the line of a causewayed enclosure. These sites Fradley Junction are known to be of Neolithic date, representing ceremonial monuments. The site covers two arable fields either side of a minor c-class road to the NE of Fradley Junction.
A: The monument comprises below ground remains with no discernable remains above ground. The primary setting of the monument is confined to the two fields in which it lies, being to the south of a stretch of the Trent and Mersey Canal. The site’s secondary setting takes in views across surrounding open fields and bordering woodland. Due to topography and distance, there are no views from the scheduled monument to the proposed development site.
S: All Scheduled monuments are high sensitivity receptors.
ST 211 Cropmarks of pit 1.7 km D: Air photographs record cropmarks of pit alignments running NE alignments running NE to SW, 300m north of Wychnor Bridge. This site may be of Bronze and SW near Wychnor Age or Iron Age date, representing a ceremonial boundary marker. Bridge. Similar pit alignments have been investigated in the surrounding landscape. The site covers the eastern extent of a single arable field to the immediate west of the Trent and Mersey Canal.
A: The monument comprises below ground remains with no discernable remains above ground. The primary setting of the monument is confined to the field in which it lies, being to the west of a stretch of the Trent and Mersey Canal. The site’s secondary setting takes in views across surrounding open fields to the north and west. Due to topography, distance and built development, there are no views from the scheduled monument to the proposed development site.
S: All Scheduled monuments are high sensitivity receptors.
ST 214 Circular enclosures 2 km D: Air photographs record cropmarks of circular ditched 300m west of Wychnor enclosures, 300yds west of Wychnor Junction. This site may be of Junction. Neolithic, or more likely Bronze Age date, representing ceremonial enclosures, perhaps a burial site. Similar enclosures have been investigated in the surrounding area. The monument forms part of a ceremonial landscape at the confluence of the Rivers Trent and Tame. The site is central to a large arable field which is dissected by a farm track.
A: The monument comprises below ground remains with no remains above ground. The primary setting of the monument is predominantly the field in which it lies, being to the south of Catholme Farm. The primary setting, however, also takes in the wider prehistoric landscape represented by several other prehistoric monuments to the north of Catholme Farm. This represents additional ‘group value’ relating to the ‘Catholme Complex’. The site’s secondary setting takes in views across surrounding open fields on all sides. Due to topography, distance and built development, there are no views from the scheduled monument to the proposed development site.
S: All Scheduled monuments are high sensitivity receptors.
ST 213 Two large circular 1.9km D: Air photographs record cropmarks of two large circular enclosures SE of enclosures SE of Baggaley’s Wood. This site may be of prehistoric Baggaley’s Wood. date. Similar monuments have been recorded in the surrounding landscape. The site covers part of a single arable field to the north of the hamlet of Wychnor. The monument may form part of a ceremonial landscape at the confluence of the Rivers Trent and Tame.
A: The monument comprises below ground remains with no discernable remains above ground. The primary setting of the monument is the field in which it lies, being to the north of the hamlet of Wychnor. The site’s secondary setting takes in views across surrounding open fields on all sides. The secondary setting, may also take in the wider prehistoric landscape represented by several other prehistoric scheduled monuments to the east. Due to topography, distance and built development, there are no views from the scheduled monument to the proposed development site.
S: All Scheduled monuments are high sensitivity receptors.
ST 210 Circular enclosures 2.1km D: Air photographs record cropmarks of circular enclosures SW of 90m SW of Bonthorn Bonthorn Farm. This site may be of prehistoric date. Similar Farm. monuments have been recorded in the surrounding landscape (see above). The site covers part of a single arable field to the north of the hamlet of Wychnor. The monument may form part of a wider ceremonial landscape at the confluence of the Rivers Trent and Tame.
A: The monument comprises below ground remains with no discernable remains above ground. The primary setting of the monument is the field in which it lies, being to the north of the hamlet of Wychnor. The site’s secondary setting takes in views across surrounding open fields on all sides. The secondary setting, may also take in the wider prehistoric landscape represented by several other prehistoric scheduled monuments to the west and east. Due to topography, distance and built development, there are no views from the scheduled monument to the proposed development site.
S: All Scheduled monuments are high sensitivity receptors.
UID 22436 Wychnor deserted 1km D: The monument includes the deserted Medieval village, the Medieval village, moated site of Wychnor Hall (destroyed in 1535), and adjacent moated site, moated moated enclosure and two fishponds. It is divided into 4 separate enclosure and two constraint areas. The whole is characterised by earthwork features fishponds. of banks, ditches, hollow ways and platforms. The Trent and Mersey Canal cuts through the site.
A: The monument is a rare example which has survived well. The site remains largely unencumbered by modern development. It comprises visible earthworks and buried remains over a wide area, being to the immediate north of the River Trent. Its primary setting comprises this part of the historic settlement of Wychnor, being represented by pasture fields surrounding the C14 church. The secondary setting takes in rural farmland to various aspects, together with the riverine setting of the Trent. Due to topography, distance and built development, there are few views from the scheduled monument to the proposed development site. There are perhaps occasional, long-distance obscured views from parts of the site to the very northern extent of the proposed development. The development would create no impact on the historic significance or understanding of the monument.
S: All Scheduled monuments are high sensitivity receptors.
Table 5: Listed Buildings assessed within 3 km of the site boundary.
Table 5: Listed Buildings assessed within 3 km of the site boundary
IoE/UID Name and Parish Distance from Grade Description (D) and Analysis (A) of building and its setting. Number Site NB: descriptions taken from List Description and on-site observation.
272525 Church of All 1km I D: Parish Church off Mill End Lane, Alrewas, C13 replacing earlier church, Saints, Alrewas. additions in C14, C16 and C19. Large coursed and squared sandstone blocks, lead roofs with low pitch. West tower, 3-bay nave with transepts and south porch. Tower is of C14, 3 stages with angle buttresses dying into the second stage. West door is c. 1200.
A: The primary setting of the Church takes in the graveyard to all sides, up to the defined boundaries which are demarcated by low brick walls, mature hedges and mature trees. The secondary setting takes in this part of the historic village including parts of Mill End Lane, Church Road and the Vicarage. There may be obscured views of the site in long-distance views from the Church tower, but these would only constitute a minor backdrop, and do not represent an integral part of the setting of the building.
272546 Roddige 60m II D: Farmhouse of late C18 date, red brick (Monk Bond), plain tile roof with Farmhouse, raised verges. Brick integral end stacks. T-shaped in plan, main range Roddige Lane, aligned east-west, facing south. Rear wing extended to the west in the mid Fradley and C19. 2 storeys, with dentilled eaves. Central C19 6 panelled door with Streethay wooden doorcase and fanlight.
A: The primary setting of the farmhouse extends to the building’s associated former farm complex, gardens to the south and the mature trees forming boundaries to the east and south. The secondary setting takes in the surrounding rural fieldscape, especially to the north; the rear elevation. Dense vegetation obscure views to the south (front elevation) and east. There are views in several directions across the proposed development area.
272549 Mile Post, on NE 10m II D: Recorded as a mid to late C19 cast iron milepost of triangular section side of Tamworth with chamfered top on the NE side of Tamworth road. This milepost was not Road, Alrewas. present at the recorded location (NGR SK 18021459) at the time the site visit. Recent road workings in the area may account for this.
A: The milepost was not present at the time of the site visit.
272548 Chetwynd Bridge 0.65km II* D: Road bridge, dated 1824 by Joseph Potter, County Surveyor. Cast iron 272792 (also called Salter’s and rusticated ashlar. 3 segmental arches spanning the River Tame. Bridge), Edingale Latticework spandrels and a balustrade interspersed with panelled piers. and Alrewas. Abutments sweep round to end buttresses which also flank the central arch. Recorded under 2 parishes, with 2 LB entries. A: The primary setting of the bridge takes in its position as a crossing of the River Tame, with the riverine landscape to each side and the flanking meadows of the river’s floodplain. The secondary setting comprises the wider surrounding riverine landscape on all sides. There are long-distance, obscured views from the bridge through tree belts and across the existing quarry toward parts of the proposed development site.
82933 Catton Hall, 2.6km II* D: Large Country House, 1741, designed by William Smith for Christopher Catton. Horton, with minor C19 and C20 alterations, plus a new wing of 1907 by Sir T Jackson. Red brick on ashlar basement with gauged brick and stone dressings, plus first floor stone band. Hipped graduated slate roof with brick ridge stacks and moulded stone cornice with blocking course over. Nine bays by seven bays with double pile plan and three storeys plus basement. Main front, facing the garden, has three central bays slightly advanced with a flight of stone steps across full width. Tuscan columned doorcase with triglyphed frieze, Dentilled pediment and C19 glazed doors. All windows have flat gauged brick arches with stone keyblocks.
A: The primary setting of the house takes in its associated gardens to the south and west and the numerous surrounding outbuildings to the east. The gardens, in part, constitute a formal and planned arrangement, but are of small scale. The secondary setting comprises the surrounding mature parkland on all sides, the associated farm to the NE and the riverine setting to the immediate west. Due to distance, topography and vegetation, there are no views from the house to the proposed development area.
272781 Croxall Hall and 1.5km II* D: Large house, late C16, restored and enlarged in 1868 by Joseph Potter attached garden of Litchfield. Red brick, English Bond, with sandstone and ashlar dressings. wall, Edingale. Two storeys on coped plinth. Plain tile roofs with coped verges on shaped kneelers. Brick end stacks and ridge stacks, some with C16 octagonal shafts. Formerly a U-shaped house with hall range of two parallel blocks aligned EW facing north, and wings to the east and west enclosing 3 sides of a northern courtyard. West wing destroyed by fire in 1942. 1868 extensions to the NE. C16 garden wall with stone coping attached and extends for 150m. It incorporates a doorway with a Tudor arch. The C16 details are entirely Gothic.
A: The primary setting of the hall takes in its associated gardens to the north and south and the surrounding historic outbuildings forming the Croxall Hall complex. The gardens constitute a formal and planned arrangement, but are of small scale. The secondary setting comprises the surrounding farmscape and paddocks and the riverine setting (the River Mease) to the immediate south. The Church of St John The Baptist to the SE can also be considered to fall within the Hall’s secondary setting, providing historic ‘group value’ to this part of the hamlet of Croxall. Due to distance, topography and vegetation, there are no views from the Hall to the proposed development area.
272778 Church of St John 1.65km II* D: Parish Church of which oldest remains are c. 1200. Church largely the Baptist, rebuilt in later C13 and remodelled early C14. Minor alterations in C15, C18 Croxall, Edingale. and C19. Coursed rubble of c. 1200, otherwise dressed stone blocks, some C18 brickwork. West tower, 3-bay nave, 2-bay chancel, north-east vestry. West Tower two main stages of different dates, off-set plinth, moulded and crenellated parapet. Nave and chancel roofs are probably C18; massive tie beams on short cantilevered beams which are supported by stone corbels.
A: The primary setting of the Church takes in the graveyard to all sides, up to the defined boundaries which are demarcated by C19 iron railings and modern wood post fencing. The Church occupies a prominent position on the elevated eastern bank of the River Mease which represents a purposeful topographic location for the building. Along this side there is a belt of quite dense mature trees, preventing views across the Mease and Tame valleys beyond. The secondary setting takes in the surrounding meadows, including the Scheduled site of Hlaew and its associated settlement. The secondary setting also extends to Croxall Hall to the immediate NW and this portion of the Mease river valley. There may be obscured, long-distance views of the development site during winter months when the surrounding trees have lost their leaves. These distant views would only constitute a minor backdrop, and do not represent an integral part of the setting of the Church.
272811 Church of St 2.5km II* D: Parish Church of Medieval foundation, tower of 1598, but mostly re-built Peter, Elford. 1848-9 in Medieval style. Ashlar, with slate and lead roofs with coped verges. West tower with diagonal buttresses and semi-octagonal stair turret to south. 3-bay nave with south aisle and porch and 2-bay chancel with south and north chapels. West tower is of 4 stages marked by strings with a crenellated parapet and crocketed corner pinnacles. First stage has 3-light pointed west window with cusped intersecting tracery. The second stage has a rectangular loop to the west and north; third stage has a 2-light pointed west window with decorated style tracery.
A: The primary setting of the Church takes in the graveyard to all sides, up to the defined boundaries which are demarcated by C19 iron railings and modern wood post-fencing. The Church occupies a very enclosed setting within this part of the settlement of Elford, with numerous mature trees in and around the churchyard. The secondary setting takes in this part of the historic village including the avenue up to the Church from the east, and parts of Church Road and Old Hall Drive. Due to topography and distance, there are no views from the Church to the proposed development site.
273689 Church of St 1.3km II* D: Parish Church of Wychnor, mainly C14, with parts C12 and C17. Red Leonard, Wychnor sandstone, squared coursed and dressed, tiled roofs, verge parapets. Tower, nave, chancel and south aisle. Tower to SW, two-thirds rebuilt in brickwork, probably C17. Of three stages, the lowest stage large and part stone, part brick. Stone strings between stages and stone-dressed crenellated parapet. Nave of 2 bays, divided by 3 stage buttresses to east bay. C14 pointed door to NW bay has quatrefoil fleurons in coved intrados. Chancel of one bay, continuous with nave.
A: The primary setting of the Church takes in the graveyard to all sides, up to the defined boundaries which are demarcated by C19 iron railings and mature hedges. The Church is prominently situated on the raised south bank of the River Trent, being surrounded by earthworks associated with the Scheduled site of the deserted Medieval settlement of Wychnor. This position commands extensive views to the south and to the west across open fields. The secondary setting takes in this part of the historic hamlet of Wychnor, including other historic buildings to the north. Due to topography, distance and built development, there are no significant views from the Church to the proposed development site. There may be obscured views of the site in long-distance views from the Church tower, but these would only constitute a minor backdrop, and do not represent an integral part of the setting of the building.
Table 6: Conservation Areas assessed within 3 km of the site boundary.
Table 6: Conservation Areas assessed within 3 km of the site boundary
Name Distance from Site Description (D) and Analysis (A) of Character, Boundary Appearance and Setting
Alrewas 320m D: Alrewas was designated as a Conservation Area in recognition of the special architectural and historic interest of the area. Its boundary was designed to enclose the full extent of the historic settlement pattern of the village as set out on the Tithe map of c.1840. It includes the original plots of the village in the east and south of Main Street. North of the village the boundary runs just north of the River Trent. The rest of the boundary picks up the plot edges of the original settlement. The village dates from the late Saxon period, and its Medieval origins and development can be discerned in its topographic framework of streets and spaces. The village is quite closed in. Much of the settlement has an irregular pattern of development and a mix of architectural styles and dates. There are 46 listed structures within the Conservation Area, including All Saints Church which is the only building in the wider landscape which has Grade I status.
A: The character and appearance of the Conservation Area is derived from its historic pattern, the use of traditional materials and buildings. The character is not uniform throughout, and there are two main areas of interest. One lies to the south and east of the Trent and Mersey Canal with Main Street as its spine. The other area is Mill End, to the north and west of the canal. The Main Street Character Area has a winding alignment which ensures that only small sections of the street are seen at any one time. It has a high proportion of timber-framed buildings and a general unity of scale. The Mill End Character Area has an irregular pattern, threaded through by the canal and which is bounded to the north by the river. The principal characteristic of this area is the informal sitting of cottage properties in red brick and timber frame gathered around All Saints Church, which provides a focal point. The character here is more open, with some properties having large gardens. The gardens provide a transition between the historic village centre and the countryside to the north of the settlement. With the canal, mill stream and the river, water is clearly a dominant feature through the area.
Few buildings have an outward focus. The village is located on predominantly flat ground, which limits views out of the Conservation Area. In many directions hedges and banks of trees also restrict views out. Significant views are along streetscapes. There are no significant views toward the proposed development site, due to extensive modern development between the designated area and the proposed development site. Much of this modern development is alien to the character of the area, being inappropriate in plot size and shape, material and design.
Elford 2.3km D: The village of Elford lies along the banks of the River Tame, c. 2.3km to the SE of the proposed development site. The village is said to have derived its name from the great number of eels with which the river here formerly abounded, although it may also have been a fording point along the river. The settlement is mentioned in the Domesday Survey, and it therefore follows that it has Saxon origins. In post-Medieval times, the settlement was dominated by Elford Hall, a grand manor with gardens beside the Church. It was pulled down in the 1960’s, with only the walled garden remaining. There are 13 Listed Buildings throughout the village, the majority along Church Road and the Square. There is a range of building styles, meaning that there is no overriding architectural style.
A: The character and appearance of the Conservation Area is derived from its historic pattern and its association with the Church, the use of traditional materials and buildings set in a fairly diffuse arrangement. The setting of the majority of buildings is focussed along Church Road and the banks of the River Tame. Few buildings have an outward focus. Significant views are along streetscapes and along the river corridor. Elford is likely to have become established here as it was a suitable place to ford the river. The river, and the views across and along it, can therefore be considered part of its setting. Due to distance, topography and vegetation there are no views from the Conservation Area to the proposed development site.
Fradley Junction 2.7km D: Fradley Junction lies 2.7km W of the proposed development site. It is a part of the Trent and Mersey Canal corridor, which formed part of a section which ran from Coventry to Fradley Junction and was operational from 1789. It is situated at the point that the Coventry Canal joins the Trent and Mersey Canal. The canal-side settlement at Fradley Junction was established after the link was completed in 1790 and Fradley became a major junction on the Victorian canal network. Both the Trent & Mersey and the Coventry Canal companies built houses and cottages for their workers, while two warehouses, complete with hoists, were erected at Junction Row alongside the Swan public house. The majority of these buildings are now Listed Grade II and form an integral part of the Conservation Area. They have increased importance due to their ‘group value’.
A: The character and appearance of the conservation area is derived from its historic pattern, the use of traditional materials and buildings set in a linear arrangement. The setting of the majority of buildings is focussed along the canal with a decidedly inward focus. Few buildings have an outward focus. Significant views are along the historic canal corridor. Due to distance, topography and vegetation there are no views from the Conservation Area to the proposed development site.
Trent & Mersey Canal 1km D: Canal linking the River Mersey to the River Trent, deemed to be of special archaeological and historical importance. This section being between Fradley Junction and Alrewas. Work began on the canal in 1766, being built by engineers James Brindley and Hugh Henshall, and the section near the site was opened in 1771, although the whole route was not completed until 1777. It was the first of the major inland waterways to be constructed. Trade in goods such as coal, bar-iron, pottery, ale and pig-iron was brisk, but by the 1840’s trade began to decline with the coming of the railways. Commercial traffic continued until the 1950’s. Today it is only used by pleasure craft.
A: The Conservation Area has a distinct linear focus along the canal corridor and its setting varies between sections. Due to distance, topography and vegetation there are no views from the Conservation Area to the proposed development site.
Table 7: A summary of the potential direct impacts during construction/establishment.
Table 7: A summary of the potential direct impacts during construction/establishment
Site Predicted Direct Impact Suggested Mitigation
Prehistoric Archaeological feature identified during the trial Prior to development proceeding a written scheme for archaeology (single trenching (Tr. 11) in an area that will be archaeological investigation (WSI) will be prepared outlining the pit) identified in one removed during the development. archaeological investigation of the identified archaeology in this trench which was location. The document will be prepared in full consultation with the positioned in ‘blank’ The proposed development is anticipated to County Archaeological Office. The WSI will detail the undertaking area to act as control have a high magnitude of change on this low of appropriate works to allow for a full and proper record of the sensitivity receptor. Therefore the predicted archaeological remains to be made. These works will mitigate the impact is of moderate significance which perceived impact. does equate to a significant impact in EIA terms.
Post Medieval Many trenches identified the remnants of The former field boundaries are deemed to be of minimal archaeology (former former field boundaries, as identified on early archaeological importance and their disturbance/loss does not field boundary maps. In addition several furrows were equate to a significant impact in EIA terms. The trial trenching has ditches and furrows) identified. These were located in Trenches 6, made a record of their association with map evidence and their identified in several 10-11, 13-16, 19-20, and also Trench 15 of the general characteristics following section excavation. This record trenches, some earlier 1992 evaluation. These features will be constitutes appropriate mitigation in the event of their loss. corresponding to largely removed during the development. cropmark ditches The development is anticipated to have a medium magnitude of change (in that some of these field boundaries continue outside of the site and hence will not be totally lost) on these low sensitivity receptors. Therefore the predicted impact is of minor significance which does not equate to a significant impact in EIA terms.
Undated archaeology Eight trenches across the site contained Prior to development proceeding a written scheme for identified in various features which remain undated (Tr. 8, 12-15, archaeological investigation (WSI) will be prepared outlining the trenches (often 17, 19, 20). The majority of the identified archaeological investigation of the identified archaeology in these corresponding to archaeology was over plotted cropmarks. In locations. The document will be prepared in full consultation with cropmark plots), some cases features appear to be field the County Archaeological Office. The WSI will detail the which are perceived boundaries, but they do not correspond with undertaking of appropriate works to allow for a full and proper to date to before the historic mapping, and therefore may be earlier record of the archaeological remains to be made. These works will post-Medieval period than post-Medieval date. Some cropmarks in mitigate the perceived impact. these locations are of a type that suggests a prehistoric date.
The proposed development is anticipated to have a medium magnitude of change (in that some of the cropmark groups continue outside of the site and hence will not be totally lost) on these low sensitivity receptors. Therefore the predicted impact is of minor significance which does not equate to a significant impact in EIA terms.
Undated archaeology Field 1 contains a number of cropmarks of a Prior to development proceeding a written scheme for believed to exist in type that suggests a prehistoric date. Due to a archaeological investigation (WSI) will be prepared outlining the Field 1 which was not standing crop, these were not trenched. archaeological investigation of the suspected archaeology in this evaluated by location. The document will be prepared in full consultation with the trenching due to a The proposed development is anticipated to County Archaeological Office. The WSI will detail the undertaking standing crop have a high magnitude of change on this low of appropriate works to allow for a full and proper record of the sensitivity receptor. Therefore the predicted suspected archaeological remains to be made. These works will impact is of moderate significance which mitigate the perceived impact. does equate to a significant impact in EIA terms.
Unrecorded Unknown impact to presently unrecorded In the event that archaeological remains exist on the site that have archaeological sites archaeological remains that may exist on the not been previously identified it is proposed to put in place an site. appropriate level of archaeological cover during soil stripping and other operations that have the capacity to have an impact upon the The proposed development is anticipated to present ground surface. This will mitigate any potential impact to have a medium magnitude of change on this presently unrecorded remains. low sensitivity receptor. Therefore the predicted impact is of minor significance Any such works will first be agreed with the Council Archaeological which does not equate to a significant impact Office and be carried out in accordance with an approved WSI. in EIA terms.
Historic Landscape The historic landscape character of this part of The existing landform has been recorded as part of the present Character of the site the Tame Valley will be altered from its current assessment. Restoration to an acceptable landscape type following state. The landscape is described under development will mitigate the temporary loss of the current several different landscape headings, including landscape form. ‘18th/19th century semi-planned enclosure’, ‘post-1880’s reorganised fields’ and ‘post-War amalgamated fields’. Today it is a typical modern agricultural landscape with few historic associations.
The proposed development is anticipated to have a medium magnitude of change on this low sensitivity receptor. Therefore the predicted impact is of minor significance which does not equate to a significant impact in EIA terms.
Table 8: A summary of the potential indirect impacts during construction/establishment.
Table 8: A summary of the potential indirect impacts during construction/establishment
Site Predicted Indirect Impact Mitigation
Scheduled Monument ST 199 The interest of this site is derived from its archaeological As the predicted impact is of negligible potential in that it may contain the remains of a Bronze Age significance, no mitigation is considered Site of round barrow near the burial. A buried archaeological monument with little surviving necessary. River Tame. remains on the surface. Currently a patch of set-aside meadow within the confines of the National Memorial Arboretum site at a particular geographic location on a curve on the banks of the River Tame.
The surviving portion of the monument comprises below ground remains with no visible remains above ground. The primary setting of the monument is confined to the memorial field in which it lies. The site takes in views across open fields to the NE, across the river and to the gentle hills beyond. Due to the existing structures associated with the National Memorial Arboretum there are no views from the scheduled monument to the proposed development site.
The quarry extension will have no impact upon the setting of this high sensitivity receptor and therefore the predicted impact is of negligible significance.
Scheduled Monument 21536 The site of a Saxon burial mound and the remains of As the predicted impact is of negligible Medieval settlement, both bordering the St John the Baptist significance, no mitigation is considered Hlaew and settlement remains Church at Croxall. The burial mound has been built in a necessary. at Croxall. prominent location, on the edge of the east bank of the River Mease. The mound stands to a height of c. 5m, although much of the ditch has been infilled and is no longer visible. The mound has been partly overlaid by the churchyard on one edge and has since been incorporated into a garden and re-used as an ornamental feature. The earthwork remains of the Medieval settlement lie within a meadow to the NE of the Saxon mound.
Due to mature trees along the river’s edge, there are only obscured views to the south and west across the lower-lying floodplain and valleys of the Rivers Mease and Tame. These views would be more apparent in winter following leaf-fall. Due to distance, (c. 1.75km) there are only obscured long- distance views in the direction of the proposed development.
The quarry extension will have no impact upon the setting of this high sensitivity receptor and therefore the predicted impact is of negligible significance.
Scheduled Monument ST 174 Undated and uncharacterised cropmark site within floodplain As the predicted impact is of negligible meadows to south of village. A suggested buried significance, no mitigation is considered Cropmarks SW of Elford. archaeological monument with little surviving remains on the necessary. surface. The site’s setting takes in views across surrounding open fields and views to the village of Elford to the north. Due to topography and distance, there are no views from the scheduled monument to the proposed development site.
The quarry extension will have no impact upon the setting of this high sensitivity receptor and therefore the predicted impact is of negligible significance.
Scheduled Monument ST 200 The Whitemoor Haye scheduled site is a rural settlement As the predicted impact is of negligible complex which emerged during the Middle Iron Age and significance, no mitigation is considered Settlement sites and continued into the Romano-British period covering a large necessary. enclosures 500 yds NE of area on the gravel terrace of the River Tame. It was initially Sittles Farm. recorded as a cropmark site, but has been extensively excavated in accordance with scheduled monument consent (SMC) over the past 15 years prior to mineral extraction. The majority of the site has now been investigated and reported on.
Most of the scheduled site is now represented by restored farmland and activity lakes. Its archaeological significance has been removed. As the site has been archaeologically excavated, the quarry extension will have no impact upon the setting of this high sensitivity receptor and therefore the predicted impact is of negligible significance.
Scheduled Monument ST 250 The interest of this site is derived from its archaeological As the predicted impact is of negligible potential in that it may contain the remains of a prehistoric significance, no mitigation is considered Causewayed Enclosure NE of causewayed enclosure; a significant early Neolithic necessary. Fradley Junction. monument type.
The monument comprises below ground remains with no discernable remains above ground. The setting of the monument is confined to the two fields in which it lies, being to the south of a stretch of the Trent and Mersey Canal. Due to topography and distance, there are no views from the scheduled monument to the proposed development site.
The quarry extension will have no impact upon the setting of this high sensitivity receptor and therefore the predicted impact is of negligible significance.
Scheduled Monument ST 211 The interest of this site is derived from its archaeological As the predicted impact is of negligible potential in that the site may be of Bronze Age or Iron Age significance, no mitigation is considered Cropmarks of pit alignments date, representing a ceremonial boundary marker, and part of necessary. running NE and SW near a ‘monument complex’ recorded at the confluence of the Wychnor Bridge. Trent and Tame rivers.
The monument comprises below ground remains with no discernable remains above ground. Due to topography, distance and built development, there are no views from the scheduled monument to the proposed development site.
The quarry extension will have no impact upon the setting of this high sensitivity receptor and therefore the predicted impact is of negligible significance.
Scheduled Monument ST 214 The interest of this site is derived from its archaeological As the predicted impact is of negligible potential in that the site may be of Neolithic or Bronze Age significance, no mitigation is considered Circular enclosures 300m west date, representing possible burial enclosures, and part of a necessary. of Wychnor Junction. ‘monument complex’ recorded at the confluence of the Trent and Tame rivers.
The monument comprises below ground remains with no discernable remains above ground. Due to topography, distance and built development, there are no views from the scheduled monument to the proposed development site.
The quarry extension will have no impact upon the setting of this high sensitivity receptor and therefore the predicted impact is of negligible significance.
Scheduled Monument ST 213 The interest of this site is derived from its archaeological As the predicted impact is of negligible potential in that the site may be of Prehistoric date, significance, no mitigation is considered Two large circular enclosures representing possible burial enclosures. The site may form necessary. SE of Baggaley’s Wood. part of a Prehistoric ‘monument complex’ recorded at the confluence of the Trent and Tame rivers. The monument comprises below ground remains with no discernable remains above ground. Due to topography, distance and built development, there are no views from the scheduled monument to the proposed development site.
The quarry extension will have no impact upon the setting of this high sensitivity receptor and therefore the predicted impact is of negligible significance.
Scheduled Monument ST 210 The interest of this site is derived from its archaeological As the predicted impact is of negligible potential in that the site may be of Prehistoric date, significance, no mitigation is considered Circular enclosures 90m SW of representing possible burial enclosures. The site may form necessary. Bonthorn Farm. part of a Prehistoric ‘monument complex’ recorded at the confluence of the Trent and Tame rivers. Similar monuments have been recorded in the surrounding landscape.
The monument comprises below ground remains with no discernable remains above ground. Due to topography, distance and built development, there are no views from the scheduled monument to the proposed development site.
The quarry extension will have no impact upon the setting of this high sensitivity receptor and therefore the predicted impact is of negligible significance.
Scheduled Monument 22436 The deserted Medieval village, the moated site of Wychnor As the predicted impact is of negligible Hall, and adjacent moated enclosure and two fishponds. It is significance, no mitigation is considered Wychnor deserted Medieval divided into 4 separate constraint areas. The whole is necessary. village, moated site, moated characterised by earthwork features of banks, ditches, hollow enclosure and two fishponds. ways and platforms.
It comprises visible earthworks and buried remains over a wide area, being to the immediate north of the River Trent. Due to topography, distance and built development, there are few views from the scheduled monument to the proposed development site. There are perhaps occasional, long- distance obscured views from parts of the site to the very northern extent of the proposed development. However, the development would create no significant impact on the historic significance or understanding of the monument.
The quarry extension will have no impact upon the setting of this high sensitivity receptor and therefore the predicted impact is of negligible significance.
Listed Building The special interest of this building is derived from its As the predicted impact is of negligible survival, fabric, age, preservation and historic association. significance, no mitigation is considered Church of All Saints, Alrewas The setting of the Church does not extend to the site. There necessary. may be obscured views of the site in long-distance views Grade I from the Church tower, but these would only constitute a minor backdrop, and do not represent an integral part of the setting of the building.
The quarry extension will have no impact on the setting of this high sensitivity receptor and therefore the predicted impact is of negligible significance.
Listed Building The special interest of this building is derived from its The views from the building to the survival, fabric and age. Vegetation obscure views to the proposed quarry are partially obscured on Roddige Farmhouse, Roddige south (front elevation) and east. There are, however, views the southern and eastern elevations by Lane in several directions across the proposed development area existing trees and copses. There are, from the building’s rear elevation. however, views from the building’s rear Grade II elevation across proposed quarry workings The quarry extension will have ‘Medium’ magnitude of to the north, NE and NW. The creation of change on the setting of this Medium sensitivity receptor and soil storage bunds which will be grassed therefore the predicted impact is of Moderate significance over and placed along this edge will afford which does equate to a significant impact in the context of an increased protection to the setting of EIA regulations. the building whilst quarry operations take place. Quarry operations will be temporary in nature, lasting c. 5 years prior to restoration taking place. Following site restoration, any effect to the setting of the building will be restored.
Listed Building Recorded as a mid to late C19 cast iron milepost on the NE n/a side of Tamworth road. This milepost was not present at the Milepost, Tamworth Road recorded location (NGR SK 18021459) at the time the site visit. Recent road workings in the area may account for this. Grade II
Listed Building The special interest of the Bridge is derived from its survival, As the predicted impact is of negligible fabric and preservation. The bridge’s setting is limited to its significance, no mitigation is considered Chetwynd Bridge, Grade II* immediate surrounds being the riverine location on the River necessary. Tame.
There are long-distance, obscured views from the bridge through tree belts and across the existing quarry toward parts of the proposed development site. These views only constitute a minor backdrop, and are not an integral part of the setting of the structure.
The quarry extension will have no impact on the setting of this high sensitivity receptor and therefore the predicted impact is of negligible significance.
Listed Building The special interest of Catton Hall is derived from its survival, As the predicted impact is of negligible fabric, age and good preservation. The Hall’s setting takes in significance, no mitigation is considered Catton Hall, Catton, Grade II* its associated gardens to the south and west and the necessary. numerous surrounding outbuildings to the east. Due to distance, topography and vegetation, there are no views from the house to the proposed development area.
The quarry extension will have no impact on the setting of this high sensitivity receptor and therefore the predicted impact is of negligible significance.
Listed Building The special interest of this building is derived from its date, As the predicted impact is of negligible built-form, fabric and historic associations. The building’s significance, no mitigation is considered Croxall Hall and attached setting is limited to its associated gardens to the north and necessary. garden wall, Edingale. south and the surrounding historic outbuildings forming the Croxall Hall complex. Due to distance, topography and Grade II* vegetation, there are no views from the Hall to the proposed development area.
The quarry extension will have no impact on the setting of this high sensitivity receptor and therefore the predicted impact is of negligible significance.
Listed Building The special interest of the Church is derived from its date, Whilst no significant impacts are built-form, fabric and historic associations. The Church envisaged, it is worth stating that the Church of St John the Baptist, occupies a prominent position on the elevated eastern bank quarry operations will be temporary in Croxall of the River Mease which represents a purposeful nature. Following site restoration, any topographic location for the building. Along this side there is temporary minor effect to the secondary Grade II* a belt of quite dense mature trees, preventing views across setting of the building in winter months will the Mease and Tame valleys beyond. be mitigated by approved restoration.
There may be obscured, long-distance views of the development site during winter months when the surrounding trees have lost their leaves. These distant views (at c. 2km) would only constitute a minor backdrop, and do not represent an integral part of the setting of the Church.
The quarry extension will have no impact on the setting of this high sensitivity receptor and therefore the predicted impact is of negligible significance.
Listed Building The special interest of the Church is derived from its date, As the predicted impact is of negligible built-form, fabric and historic associations. The Church significance, no mitigation is considered Church of St Peter, Elford. occupies a very enclosed setting within this part of the necessary. settlement of Elford, with numerous mature trees in and Grade II* around the churchyard.
Due to topography and distance, there are no views from the Church to the proposed development site.
The quarry extension will have no impact on the setting of this high sensitivity receptor and therefore the predicted impact is of negligible significance.
Listed Building The special interest of the Church is derived from its date, As the predicted impact is of negligible built-form, fabric and historic associations. The Church is significance, no mitigation is considered Church of St Leonard, Wychnor prominently situated on the raised south bank of the River necessary. Trent, being surrounded by earthworks associated with the Grade II* Scheduled site of the deserted Medieval settlement of Wychnor. This position commands extensive views to the south and to the west across open fields.
Due to topography, distance and built development, there are no significant views from the Church to the proposed development site. There may be obscured views of the site in long-distance views from the Church tower, but these would only constitute a minor backdrop, and do not represent an integral part of the setting of the building.
The quarry extension will have no impact on the setting of this high sensitivity receptor and therefore the predicted impact is of negligible significance.
Conservation Area: The character and appearance of the Conservation Area is As the predicted impact is of negligible derived from its historic pattern, the use of traditional significance, no mitigation is considered Alrewas materials and buildings. The Character of the Conservation necessary. Area is not uniform throughout, and there are two main areas of interest. One lies to the south and east of the Trent and Mersey Canal with Main Street as its spine. The other area is Mill End, to the north and west of the canal. Few buildings have an outward focus. The village is located on predominantly flat ground, which limits views out of the Conservation Area.
Due to extensive modern development there are no significant views toward the proposed development site.
The quarry extension will have no impact on the setting of this medium sensitivity receptor and therefore the predicted impact is of negligible significance.
Conservation Area: The character and appearance of the Conservation Area is As the predicted impact is of negligible derived from its historic pattern and its association with the significance, no mitigation is considered Elford Church, the use of traditional materials and buildings set in a necessary. fairly diffuse arrangement. The setting of the majority of buildings is focussed along Church Road and the banks of the River Tame. Few buildings have an outward focus. Due to distance, topography and vegetation there are no views from the Conservation Area to the proposed development site.
The quarry extension will have no impact on the setting of this medium sensitivity receptor and therefore the predicted impact is of negligible significance.
Conservation Area: The character and appearance of the conservation area is As the predicted impact is of negligible derived from its historic pattern, the use of traditional significance, no mitigation is considered Fradley Junction materials and buildings set in a linear arrangement. The necessary. setting of the majority of buildings is focussed along the canal with a decidedly inward focus. Due to distance, topography and vegetation there are no views from the Conservation Area to the proposed development site.
The quarry extension will have no impact on the setting of this medium sensitivity receptor and therefore the predicted impact is of negligible significance.
Conservation Area: The character and appearance of the Conservation Area is As the predicted impact is of negligible derived from its historic group association and survival. The significance, no mitigation is considered Trent & Mersey Canal Conservation Area has a distinct linear focus along the canal necessary. corridor and its setting varies between sections.
Due to distance, topography and vegetation there are no views from the Conservation Area to the proposed development site.
The quarry extension will have no impact on the setting of this medium sensitivity receptor and therefore the predicted impact is of negligible significance.
Annex 1a Desk Based Assessment
Annex 1b Geophysical Assessment
Annex 1c Trial Trench Assessment
Annex 1d NMA car park investigations