Environmental Statement (ES) Volume 3 TECHNICAL APPENDICES September 2015

TECHNICAL APPENDIX B – Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment

Cranebrook Quarry, Watling Street, Hammerwich, Lichfi eld

PSL Ref: M13.135.R.018

CRANEBROOK QUARRY

LANDSCAPE AND VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

IN RESPECT OF PROPOSED EASTERN EXTENSION OF SAND QUARRY WITH ASSOCIATED IMPORTATION OF INERT MATERIALS FOR RESTORATION PURPOSES & THE SUSTAINABLE RECYCLING OF CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION MATERIALS. THE SITE WILL INCLUDE A LANDFORM & WATER BODY WHICH IS DESIGNED TO PROMOTE BIODIVERSITY UNDER AGRICULTURAL MANAGEMENT AND WOULD ALLOW ITS USE IN THE FUTURE (SUBJECT TO A SEPARATE PLANNING APPLICATION) AS A MARINA WITH ANCILLARY FACILITIES LINKING INTO THE REGENERATION OF THE SUMMERHILL SECTION OF THE WYRLEY & ESSINGTON CANAL

PRODUCED FOR

WCL QUARRIES LIMITED

ISSUE 1

SEPTEMBER 2015

Prepared By:

PLEYDELL SMITHYMAN LIMITED 20a The Wharfage, Ironbridge, Telford, Shropshire, TF8 7NH Tel: 01952 433211 Fax: 01952 433323 and 116 Blythswood Street, Glasgow, G2 4EG Tel: 0141 204 3491

e-mail: [email protected]

CONTENTS

Page 1.0 Introduction 4 2.0 Landscape Designations and Landscape Orientated Planning 6 Policies 3.0 Landscape Character 12 4.0 Visual Matters 18 5.0 Overall Conclusions 24

APPENDICES

Appendix A Drawings Drawing No M13.135.D.031 Restoration Scheme Drawing No M13.135.D.008 Location Plan Drawing No M13.135.D.009 Environmental and Conservation Designations Drawing No M13135.D.032 Landscape Character Drawing No M13.135.D.041 Landscape Policy Guidance Drawing No M13.135.D.033 Landscape Character Photographs Drawing No M13.135.D.034 Existing Zone of Theoretical Visual Influence Drawing No M13.135.D.035 Phase 2 Zone of Theoretical Visual Influence Drawing No M13.135.D036 Restoration Zone of Theoretical Visual Influence Drawing No M13.135.D038 Visual Representative Photographic Sheet 1 Drawing No M13.135.D039 Visual Representative Photographic Sheet 2 Drawing No M13.135.D037 Individual Representative Visual Receptor Location Points Appendix B Methodology

LANDSCAPE & VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT CRANEBROOK QUARRY WCL CRANEBROOK QUARRY LIMITED

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

This report is a Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment in respect of proposals by WCL Cranebrook Quarry Limited (WCL) for a proposed eastern extension of Cranebrook Sand Quarry with associated importation of inert materials for restoration purposes and the continued sustainable recycling of construction and demolition waste. The proposed restoration scheme will be to a wildlife enhanced agriculturally managed landscape. The restored landform will include heathland slopes, relatively flat agricultural land and a water body adjacent to the Wyrley and Essington Canal (currently dry). This water body will be designed to allow its use in the future (subject to a separate planning application and additional restoration works of the canal system as a marina basin). As such this application addresses the mineral, recycling and inert placement of restoration materials only. The proposed restoration scheme for the site is illustrated on Drawing No M13.135.D.031.

As part of the proposed development it is anticipated that a simple consolidated planning consent and associated conditions would be achieved.

This report describes existing baseline characteristics in respect of Landscape Designation, Landscape Character and Visual Matters associates within the Site and its local context and assesses the impact of the proposed development scheme on these aspects.

This assessment makes use of the methodology as set out within the Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment, 3rd Edition published jointly by the Landscape Institute and Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment, 2013. We have also made use of Staffordshire County Council’s Supplementary Landscape Policy Guidance and Landscape Character Assessment together with Guidance for England and Scotland published jointly by the Countryside Agency and Scottish Natural Heritage, 2002. See Appendix B Methodology.

This report has been prepared by Pleydell Smithyman Limited, Landscape Architectural and Environmental Designers of Ironbridge, Telford, Shropshire. The works being commissioned by WCL.

1.2 Site Location and Context

The Site known as Cranebrook Quarry is located in open countryside ~1km south of Hammerwich and ~1km east of the town of Brownhills. See Drawing No M13.135.D.008. It is located within a triangle of land between three main roads. The A5 is adjacent to the northern boundary of the site; the A461 is approximately 1 km to the east running in a north east, south west direction, and the new M6Toll road which runs just to the south and is approximately 150 metres at its closest point to the south east of the site. The line of the currently disused Wyrley Essington Canal runs along the southern boundary of the site and in-between the

S:\M13.135 Cranebrook Quarry\Reports\M13.135.R.008 LVIA\LVIA 22.09.15.Docx

September 2015 4

LANDSCAPE & VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT CRANEBROOK QUARRY WCL CRANEBROOK QUARRY LIMITED

site and the M6Toll. Other than the highways and canals in the vicinity the land use in the area is mainly agricultural, mixed arable and pastoral land.

There are no public rights of way within or adjacent to the Site. The whole site application area being ~9Ha. The nearest footpaths run off to the north of the A5. The nearest residential properties are located ~80-200m to the north east of the eastern limit of the Site and adjacent to the A5 roadway at Muckley Corner.

1.3 Development Proposals

The proposed development involves a minor eastern extension for sand extraction and the continuation of imported inert materials for restoration purposes, together with the continuation of sustainable on site recycling.

The existing quarry has approximately two years of remaining mineral reserve. The proposed mineral extension area is approximately 4ha and contains an estimated 750,000 tonnes of rock sand reserves. This would extend the current life of quarry extraction by an estimated 10 years at an average annual extraction rate of 75,000 tonnes per annum. The establishment of the restored landform will require ~640,000 m3 of imported inert material. This will be progressively placed during the development period. During the extraction and progressive restoration period, recycling of imported construction and demolition waste will continue.

The site would be worked as an extension of the existing quarry, utilising the existing access, plant site and related infrastructure. No new plant or machinery is proposed. The deposit has a depth of approximately 25m and would be worked in two benches as indicated on the Site Development Plan. The present eastern working face would be continued towards the east through the proposed extension. Appropriate standoffs to site boundaries are provided to safeguard the stability of adjoining land. The quarry would be worked ‘dry’ with no requirement for dewatering. Soils would be removed in accordance with best practice and reserved for use in the subsequent restoration of the site.

The restoration scheme has been designed as a long term sustainable agriculturally managed landscape. It also draws on the potential offered by the restoration of the adjacent Wyrley and Essington Canal. There is an active canal restoration society promoting the reopening of the canal for navigation and recreational use. The route of the canal has been protected by the provision of an aqueduct over the M6 Toll when this was constructed.

All works associated with this application have been geared to both protect and enhance the canal.

S:\M13.135 Cranebrook Quarry\Reports\M13.135.R.008 LVIA\LVIA 22.09.15.Docx

September 2015 5

LANDSCAPE & VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT CRANEBROOK QUARRY WCL CRANEBROOK QUARRY LIMITED

2.0 LANDSCAPE DESIGNATIONS AND LANDSCAPE ORIENTATED PLANNING POLICIES

2.1 Environmental Designations

The site is NOT located within any nationally designated landscape (ie a national park or an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty). The site is, however, within the West Midlands Green Belt. The extent of the area of the Green Belt is shown in Drawing No M13.135.D.009 along with other local designations.

The site is located within a non statutory designated community forest – Forest of Mercia. There are a number of such community forests across England which is a local community initiative to promote planting and understanding of woodlands and trees.

The site is also located in the outer Impact Risk Zone for a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) at Chasewater, which is located over 2km to the west of the site. The site known as Chasewater and the Southern Staffordshire Coalfield Heaths is a wet and dry lowland heath.

There are a number of listed buildings scattered through the landscape, however, none immediately adjacent to the site. The nearest is Hammerwich Place Farmhouse approximately 0.6km to the north of the site and Church of St John the Baptist in Hammerwich again to the north approximately 0.9km . Both are listed as Grade II. The Wyrley and Essington Canal Footbridge at Ogley Junction is a Grade II listed building and is located approximately 1.5 km to the East.

2.2 Landscape orientated Planning Policies

The site is within the administrative area of Staffordshire County Council and Lichfield District Council. The Local Planning Framework comprises the Lichfield District Local Plan Strategy 2008-2029, the Staffordshire and Stoke –on-Trent Minerals Local (Saved Policies) 1994-2006, and the new Minerals Local Plan for Staffordshire (2015 to 2030) Final Draft- June 2015

2.3 National Planning Policy Framework

At a national level the National Planning Policy Framework is a material consideration. The purpose of the framework is essentially to set out Core Planning Principles including “recognising the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside and supporting thriving rural communities within it”, and to guide the development of policies in local plans. Specific reference is made at chapter 11 – Conserving and enhancing the natural environment, to “Protecting and enhancing valued landscapes, geological conservation interests and soils”. Also at chapter 9 - -- Protecting Green Belt Land explains the fundamental aim is to ‘‘prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open; the essential characteristics of Green Belts are their openness and their permanence’’. Within this chapter at paragraph 80 it explains that ‘‘Once Green Belts have been defined, local planning authorities

S:\M13.135 Cranebrook Quarry\Reports\M13.135.R.008 LVIA\LVIA 22.09.15.Docx

September 2015 6

LANDSCAPE & VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT CRANEBROOK QUARRY WCL CRANEBROOK QUARRY LIMITED

should plan positively to enhance the beneficial use of the Green Belt, such as looking for opportunities for outdoor sport and recreation; to retain and enhance landscapes, visual amenity and biodiversity; or to improve damaged and derelict land’’.

Chapter 13 – facilitating the sustainable use of minerals, explains that “minerals are essential to support sustainable economic growth and out quality of life” and that local plan policies should be put into place to ensure worked land is reclaimed at the earliest opportunity, taking account of aviation safety, and that high quality restoration and aftercare of mineral sites takes place, including for agriculture (safeguarding the long term potential of best and most versatile agricultural land and conserving soil resources), geodiversity, biodiversity, native woodland, the historic environment and recreation”.

2.4 Lichfield District Local Plan Strategy 2008 -2029 (Adopted 17th February 2015)

Strategic Priority 3: Climate Change To create a District where development meets the needs of our communities whilst minimising its impact on the environment and helps the District to mitigate and adapt to the adverse effects of climate change.

Strategic Priority 12: Countryside Character To protect and enhance the quality and character of the countryside, its landscapes and villages by ensuring that development which takes place to meet identified rural development needs contributes positively to countryside character through enhancements to the local environment and preserves the openness of the Green Belt.

Core Policy 3: Delivering Sustainable Development All development will be required to contribute to the creation and maintenance of sustainable communities, mitigate and adapt to the adverse effects of climate change, make prudent use of natural resources, reduce carbon emissions, enable opportunities for renewable energy and help minimise any environmental impacts. To achieve this, all development should address the following key issues: • protect and enhance the character and distinctiveness of Lichfield District and its settlements; • protect the amenity of our residents and seek to improve their overall quality of life through the provision of appropriate infrastructure, services and facilities; • promote social cohesion and inclusion and reduce inequalities, and ensure access for all sectors of the community to employment opportunities (including safeguarding local jobs through local employment provision), adequate and affordable housing and a range of services and facilities, in both our urban and rural areas; • assist in the regeneration and evolution of towns and villages and surrounding areas in meeting the changing needs of their population over time and maintain the vitality, viability and vibrancy of local communities; • be of a scale and nature appropriate to its locality; give priority to the re-use of previously developed land in the most sustainable locations, and encouraging the reuse of buildings as a sustainable option;

S:\M13.135 Cranebrook Quarry\Reports\M13.135.R.008 LVIA\LVIA 22.09.15.Docx

September 2015 7

LANDSCAPE & VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT CRANEBROOK QUARRY WCL CRANEBROOK QUARRY LIMITED

• ensure that development on Brownfield sites affected by contamination is remediated and that any ground instability arising from mining legacy or former land uses is addressed; reduce the overall need to travel, whilst optimising choice of sustainable modes of travel, particularly walking, cycling and public transport; use our natural resources prudently and conserve, enhance and expand natural, built and heritage assets and improve our understanding of them wherever possible; • minimise and manage water, waste and pollution in a sustainable way, particularly through reduction, re-use and recycling measures in both the construction and use of buildings in line with the requirements of the Code for Sustainable Homes and BREEAM assessments, or their successors, and including incorporating adequate space provision within buildings/layouts for appropriate storage or sorting of materials for recycling; • give priority to utilising ground infiltration drainage techniques and including sustainable drainage techniques and incorporate other sustainable techniques for managing surface water run-off such as green roofs in new development and in retro-fitting where historic flooding events have been identified; • guide development away from known areas of flood risk as identified in the Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (Level 1) and Surface Water Management Plan. Where development is proposed in flood risk areas a site-specific flood risk assessment must be undertaken in line with the National Planning Policy Framework; avoid sterilisation of mineral resources; • minimise levels of pollution or contamination to air, land, soil or water, including noise and light pollution and avoid unacceptable uses within source protection zone 1 areas to safeguard water resources and ensure water quality; • ensure that all new development and conversion schemes are located and designed to maximise energy efficiency and utilise sustainable design and construction techniques appropriate to the size and type of development, using local and sustainable sources of building materials wherever possible; • maximise opportunities to protect and enhance biodiversity, geodiversity and green infrastructure and utilise opportunities to facilitate urban cooling; and • facilitate energy conservation through energy efficiency measures and the utilisation of renewable energy resources, in line with the energy hierarchy set out in the explanation below where feasible.

Core Policy 9: Tourism The District Council will support the growth of sustainable tourism in the District in line with the principles of Core Policy 3 and, as part of this, promote Lichfield City as a centre to access tourist attractions across the District.

To help support the local economy, a variety of types of additional overnight accommodation will be encouraged increasing overnight visitor capacity and enabling longer tourist stays. In line with local evidence, proposals for new hotel developments should be directed within town centres.

The existing local and national tourism attractions in the District, including those in Lichfield City Centre, the National Memorial Arboretum, Drayton Manor Theme Park, Chasewater Country Park, Cannock Chase Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB), National and Community Forests, the Central Rivers Initiative, the Trent Valley Way and the Canal Network will be supported and promoted where they do not conflict with

S:\M13.135 Cranebrook Quarry\Reports\M13.135.R.008 LVIA\LVIA 22.09.15.Docx

September 2015 8

LANDSCAPE & VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT CRANEBROOK QUARRY WCL CRANEBROOK QUARRY LIMITED

other Core Policies. New tourism initiatives will be supported where they are of particular local relevance and significance and do not conflict with other Core Policies, particularly in relation to the discovery of the Saxon Hoard, and the development and promotion of the Mercian Trail.

Core Policy 13: Our Natural Resources The District Council will seek to deliver an enhanced relationship between the countryside and settlements by creating linkages and corridors that provide for the integration of people, fauna and flora in both rural and urban locations, especially where there are opportunities to reduce health inequalities. The role of the Green Belt will be important in meeting these needs/enhancing this relationship.

Biodiversity will be made more accessible to all by creating new and managing existing rural and urban spaces to promote wellbeing where there will be no adverse impacts upon nature conservation.

The District Council will support the safeguarding of our ecological networks, including the restoration and creation of new habitats, veteran trees, tree and woodland planting and local nature reserves including through the opportunities provided within the Cannock Chase Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, the National Forest, the Forest of Mercia, the Central Rivers Initiative, the River Tame Management Strategy, the restoration of the Lichfield Canal and the nationally important lowland heathland linking the Cannock Chase SAC and Sutton Park.

All designated sites and non-designated priority habitats, together with historic landscapes and townscapes, will be protected from damage as a result of development or poor management, and enhanced where appropriate. Opportunities for the interpretation of natural resources will also be supported and encouraged.

The District Council will seek opportunities for the creation of habitats that allow for the mitigation of the effects of climate change on species, including the enhancement of opportunities for species to migrate. Where possible, links between habitats will be recreated and further habitat losses will be prevented in line with the Staffordshire Biodiversity Action Plan and National Forest Biodiversity Action Plan.

Policy NR4: Trees, Woodland & Hedgerows Lichfield District's trees, woodland and hedgerows are important visual and ecological assets in our towns, villages and countryside. In order to retain and provide local distinctiveness in the landscape, trees, veteran trees, woodland, ancient woodland, and hedgerows, are of particular significance. Trees and woodland will be protected from damage and retained, unless it can be demonstrated that removal is necessary and appropriate mitigation can be achieved. In the case of ancient woodland and veteran tree(s), development will be resisted as mitigation for these unique assets cannot be achieved. Space will be made within developments to accommodate veteran trees and ancient woodland including sufficient land around the ancient woodland to allow for expansion through natural regeneration and on-going long term management. The removal of large mature species and their replacement with smaller shorter lived species will be resisted.

S:\M13.135 Cranebrook Quarry\Reports\M13.135.R.008 LVIA\LVIA 22.09.15.Docx

September 2015 9

LANDSCAPE & VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT CRANEBROOK QUARRY WCL CRANEBROOK QUARRY LIMITED

Sufficient space within developments must be reserved for the planting and sustainable growth of large trees in order to retain the important tree canopy cover in conservation areas and the built environment, and to improve tree canopy cover in the District as a whole. Potential long term conflict between retained trees, hedgerows and built form will be designed out at the planning stage.

Policy NR5: Natural & Historic Landscapes Development will be permitted where it does not negatively impact upon the geological, archaeological and historically important landscapes in the Lichfield District. The character and significance of the natural and historic landscape will be safeguarded through decisions which protect, conserve and enhance sites of international, national, regional and local importance.

Where development or land use changes may affect national or locally important landscape assets, a full understanding of the context, characteristics, and significance should be provided and informed by the Historic Environment Character Assessment work of the County and District Councils.

2.5 Staffordshire and Stoke-on-Trent Minerals Local Plan (Saved Policies) 1994- 2006

This document details the policies and proposals for mineral working in Staffordshire and Stoke on Trent up until January 2006. The landscape related ‘Saved Policies’ from the Minerals Local Plan are detailed below:

Policy 9: Planning applications should incorporate provision for the site restoration and aftercare in accordance with the following principles: • The Phased extraction and restoration of mineral operations, wherever practicable, in order to ensure that the period over which the land is in use for mineral development before being restored is minimised; • Take account of the pre-working character of the Site, its surrounding, the landscape setting and, where possible, provide for enhancement of the general quality of the landscape and local environment; • Make provision for nature conservation, forestry, recreation or amenity after-uses where this is appropriate, and compatible with the Development Plan. Such proposals should include provision for the aftercare of land for a period of up to five years following completion of restoration or any extended time period agreed between the applicant and/or owner and the Mineral Planning Authority; • Where the development lies within areas identified for forestry expansion in the Staffordshire Indicative Forestry Strategy, including those in the National Forest, the Forest of Mercia, and Newcastle Community Woodland Zones, the desirability of establishing significant areas of woodland, while avoiding conflicts with other conservation objectives.

Policy 20 In all cases where approved development affects sites of natural or cultural conservation value, appropriate measures will be required to conserve that value as far as possible, and to provide for replacement habitats or features where damage or loss

S:\M13.135 Cranebrook Quarry\Reports\M13.135.R.008 LVIA\LVIA 22.09.15.Docx

September 2015 10

LANDSCAPE & VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT CRANEBROOK QUARRY WCL CRANEBROOK QUARRY LIMITED

is unavoidable. Where appropriate, the Mineral Planning Authority will when granting Planning permission consider the use of conditions and / or seek legal agreements to minimise damage and to secure appropriate compensatory measures.

Policy 21 Mineral development proposals should be informed by and be sympathetic to landscape character and quality. Proposals with landscape and visual implications will be assessed having regard to the extent to which they would: • Cause visual intrusion, incapable of satisfactory mitigation; • Introduce, or conversely lead to the removal of incongruous landscape elements; • Cause the disturbance or loss of, or conversely help to maintain: i) Landscape elements that contribute to local distinctiveness; ii) Historic elements which contribute significantly to landscape character and quality, such as field, settlement or road patterns; iii) Semi – natural vegetation which is characteristic of that landscape type; iv) The visual condition of landscape elements; v) Tranquillity. Planning applications for mineral development which would cause any unacceptable direct or indirect adverse impacts should demonstrate that any material planning benefits arising from the proposal outweigh the material planning objections. If the benefits would not outweigh the objections then planning permission will only be granted if the need for the mineral outweigh the material planning objections.

Policy 22 The Mineral Planning Authority will encourage agreed vegetation establishment, including the planting of trees, woodland and / or hedgerows, in advance or, and in the early stages of, mineral development, and within and around sites allocated in the MLP to provide screening and to enable the early establishment of landscaping. The use of locally native trees and shrubs will be encourages. Within the National Forest, Forest of Mercia, and Newcastle Community Woodland Zones, such early tree planting and landscaping should be on an appropriate scale and should contribute significantly to the final afteruse of the site.

2.6 The new Minerals Local Plan for Staffordshire (2015 to 2030) Final Draft – June 2015

This plan is currently out for consultation.

Notes within the text of the plan include the following general statements and are backed up by policies.

Green Belt: National policy requires the protection of Green Belt but recognises that mineral extraction need not be inappropriate in the Green Belt provided that the mineral extraction preserves the openness of the Green Belt and does not conflict with the purposes of including land in the Green Belt.

Landscape: National policy recognises the importance of protecting and enhancing valued landscapes. At a national level National Character Area Profiles produced by Natural England provide information on landscape character and contain Statements

S:\M13.135 Cranebrook Quarry\Reports\M13.135.R.008 LVIA\LVIA 22.09.15.Docx

September 2015 11

LANDSCAPE & VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT CRANEBROOK QUARRY WCL CRANEBROOK QUARRY LIMITED

of Environmental Opportunity providing guidance at a national character area scale. Staffordshire County Council has produced a county-wide landscape character assessment and guidance. These assessments and guidance should be taken into account by developers to ensure that minerals development proposals are informed by and sympathetic to landscape character and that the proposals deliver appropriate mitigation and landscape enhancement.

Strategic Objective 2 – acceptable locations for mineral sites To locate mineral sites where adverse impacts are minimised on local communities and the environment and any benefits are maximised.

Strategic Objective 4 – restoration that enhances local amenity and the environment To ensure that Staffordshire’s mineral sites are restored and managed in a way that enhances local amenity and the environment by:

• Restoring mineral sites at the earliest opportunity; • Achieving high quality restoration and aftercare; • Contributing to national and local environmental and amenity initiatives including: i) measures to manage flood risk to deliver flood risk management benefits wherever possible; ii) measures to manage water supply and demand; iii) adapting restoration and aftercare to the effects of climate change on communities, biodiversity and landscape; iv) the provision of new sport and recreation facilities; v) regularly reviewing restoration plans / strategies so that new opportunities to enhance the restoration and aftercare can be maximised.

2.7 Summary Conclusion

It is considered that there is clear guidance provided on Landscape Orientated matters by national, county and district administration authorities. Our assessed compliance of the proposed Cranebrook development is considered within paragraph 4.7 of this report.

3.0 LANDSCAPE CHARACTER

3.1 Introduction

The assessment of an area’s landscape character and its ability to accommodate change is initially based on the categorisation of a landscape’s features and elements that combine to create the distinctive character of an area. Landscape character comprises a description and assessment of the distinct and recognisable pattern of elements and features that occur consistently in a particular type of landscape and how this is perceived. The character of a landscape is a combination of geology, landform, soils, vegetation, land-use and human activities. In addition,

S:\M13.135 Cranebrook Quarry\Reports\M13.135.R.008 LVIA\LVIA 22.09.15.Docx

September 2015 12

LANDSCAPE & VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT CRANEBROOK QUARRY WCL CRANEBROOK QUARRY LIMITED

character is identified through characterisation, which classifies maps and describes areas of similar character.

In order to assess potential landscape effects resulting from the proposed development a baseline study of the landscape character of the site and its surroundings was carried out. The study involved desk based analysis and site survey to determine landscape character of the area including an examination of aesthetic and perceptual aspects of the landscape that contribute to local distinctiveness. The baseline study has taken account of and describes relevant national and local landscape character assessments, important individual landscape receptors including landscape and nature conservation designations and individual elements of the landscape fabric that are present and that contribute to local landscape character.

3.2 Description of Landscape Character

National level

Cranebrook Quarry is within National Character Area Profile 67. Cannock Chase and Cank Wood. This is a fairly extensive area of higher ground that runs north from the Birmingham and Black Country conurbation and includes the Cannock Chase Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB), and Sutton Park Nature Reserve. It is a very varied landscape with urban development to the south and extensive areas of conifer plantations and heathlands in the north interspersed with farmland. There are no major rivers but the area is crossed by a number of canals and major transport routes.

In summary the key characteristics applicable to the site in the character area include:

• A varied landscape ranging from open heathlands and plantations through towns, reclaimed mining sites to new developments and dense urban areas; • Fields generally have a regular pattern and are frequently enclosed by mature hedgerows with some hedgerow trees. Farming is generally mixed with arable cultivation in large fields; • Heathland and associated acid grassland were once more extensive although significant tracts still remain; • The canal network is a notable feature and contributes significantly to the drainage of the urban areas; • The predominant building material of the 19th and early 20th century buildings is red brick, with more modern structures in urban areas; • The extensive networks of canals and railways reflect the industrial history of the area. Major roads include the M6, M6 Toll and the A5.

S:\M13.135 Cranebrook Quarry\Reports\M13.135.R.008 LVIA\LVIA 22.09.15.Docx

September 2015 13

LANDSCAPE & VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT CRANEBROOK QUARRY WCL CRANEBROOK QUARRY LIMITED

Statements of Environmental Opportunity

There are three main statements of Environmental Opportunity

SEO 1 seeks to expand lowland heath to increase habitat connectivity, improve resilience to climate change and to improve water quality

SEO 2 seeks to manage, enhance and expand the network of green infrastructure, such as woodlands, restored mining sites, parklands and canal routes which will increase biodiversity, access and recreational use and increase understanding of the area’s rich industrial heritage, particularly geodiversity

Landscape Change

Recent changes include the increase of woodland cover which is already a key feature, and a strong character of the area. Hedges have had a mixed fortune with some improved management in areas of the Forest of Mercia, but deterioration through over cutting and neglect in others. Historic features of relevance to this site include the nearby location of the Staffordshire Hoard, the largest hoard of Anglo-Saxon gold and silver metal ware discovered to date in the United Kingdom and the extensive canal network constructed during the late 18th and early 19th centuries. Mineral development and exploitation of the thick glacial till and glacio fluvial sands and gravels over the last 200 years has been noted and that most are now restored to open heathland.

3.3 Regional / County Level

Staffordshire County Council has produced a document “Planning for Landscape Change”. This was produced as Supplementary Planning Guidance for the Staffordshire and Stoke on Trent Structure Plan, 1996 -2011, but as this plan has now been revoked it is a standalone document within the current Development Plan framework.

The site is located within an area entitled Sandstone Estatelands, which is broken down into two further subtypes, farmland and parkland. Farmland is largely the area to the west of the Character Type and is where the site is located. See Drawing No M13.135.D.032.

Sandstone Estatelands is a relatively large character area where the major land use is now pasture or arable cropping in large hedged or open fields or regular pattern. The landform is gently undulating. Due to the scarcity of hedgerow trees, there are wide expansive views through the landscape. Major road and rail routes are visually obvious.

The settlement pattern is sparse with expanded hamlets and wayside cottages. The network of small rural lanes is heavily used and large modern farmsteads are obvious in the open landscape. Urban fringe influences have encroached into the area with increased sizes of settlements, such as wire fences and increase in horse pasture. The traditional agricultural landscape is in decline as evidenced by larger fields, isolated mature trees left in larger fields and large modern farm buildings. S:\M13.135 Cranebrook Quarry\Reports\M13.135.R.008 LVIA\LVIA 22.09.15.Docx

September 2015 14

LANDSCAPE & VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT CRANEBROOK QUARRY WCL CRANEBROOK QUARRY LIMITED

The critical factors which are considered by the study to limit the landscape quality are described as:

• The loss of characteristic landscape features; • The poor condition of the features that remain; • The relatively poor survival of historic elements that contribute to landscape character, such as field patterns; • The very poor survival of characteristic semi-natural vegetation such as Heathlands.

The potential value of new woodland planting in the area is considered by the document to be very high in areas of lowest landscape quality and moderately high elsewhere and would help to restore landcover structure to those areas where the scale of the landscape has enlarged as a result of agricultural intensification and removal of the traditional hedgerow pattern. Planting has been indicated as a value to screen adjacent urban edges and intrusive urbanising elements within the landscape. See Drawing No M13.135.D033 Site Local Landscape Character Photographs.

The following table taken from the document “Planning for Landscape Change”, shows the value of habitat provision and management in this character type.

Habitat Type Objective or Target Priority

Ancient/semi- natural Restore degraded sites Medium broadleaved woodland Recreate/regenerate Medium Ancient/diverse Maintain and Manage High hedgerows Maintain trees High Hedgerows Plant species-rich hedges High Arable field margins Maintain, improve and restore Very High Canals, lakes and ponds Maintain and enhance water bodies Medium and catchments Increase the number of such features Medium Lowland acidic grassland Maintain, enhance, restore and buffer Medium Prevent Further Losses (except to Lower heathland restoration Increase the number of such sites Medium Link fragmented sites through habitat Lower creation Lowland heathland Protect existing heaths from Medium development and damaging activities Re-create or create new heathlands High Reedbeds Maintain and create Medium Rivers and Streams Maintain and improve the quality and High quantity of water Maintain the quality of all natural High existing channel features Wet Woodland Maintain, enhance and restore Lower Prevent further loss Lower S:\M13.135 Cranebrook Quarry\Reports\M13.135.R.008 LVIA\LVIA 22.09.15.Docx

September 2015 15

LANDSCAPE & VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT CRANEBROOK QUARRY WCL CRANEBROOK QUARRY LIMITED

3.4 Landscape Character Summary Conclusion

The Planning for Landscape Change document assesses that the Landscape Character type is Very Sensitive to the impacts of development and land use change. Within Staffordshire County Council’s Landscape Policy Guidance land within which the Site is located falls within the Landscape Regeneration Policy Zone. See Drawing No M13.135.D.041.

This zone forms one of 5No classes of landscape quality. These being:

Landscape Quality Landscape Policy Objections Very High Active Landscape Conservation High Landscape Maintenance Moderate Landscape Enhancement Low Landscape Restoration Very Low Innovative Landscape Regeneration. In these areas the loss of character and the decline in condition, as a result of the processes noted above, is so advanced that restoration is no longer possible – either because there is virtually nothing to restore to, or because there is no practicable means of achieving that restoration – and a programme of regeneration to a new vision is required. These are therefore the most challenging of landscapes, both in terms of the difficulties that have to be overcome and of the investment that will be required to regenerate them.

In respect of the specific development type of a “sand quarry with ancillary activities” we assess (based on the methodology produced in Appendix A) that the Landscape Character type is of High Sensitivity to change brought about by this development activity.

We assess a quarry development with appropriate mitigation and enhancement measures could be integrated into the Sandstone Estateland Farmland without any Adverse Significant Impact.

3.5 Landscape Character Elements of the Development Proposals

Elements of the proposed development that have potential to temporarily degrade the character of the landscape type during the operational period include:

i) Visual screening bunds; ii) Mobile plant and equipment; iii) Lowering of ground levels (mineral extraction); iv) Creation of areas of disturbed Land; v) Increased movement within the landscape / increased noise; vi) Water Body.

S:\M13.135 Cranebrook Quarry\Reports\M13.135.R.008 LVIA\LVIA 22.09.15.Docx

September 2015 16

LANDSCAPE & VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT CRANEBROOK QUARRY WCL CRANEBROOK QUARRY LIMITED

Landscape Character Mitigation / Enhancement Measures proposed and integrated within the temporary operational development scheme include:

i) Progressive Phased Restoration (limiting areas of disturbed land at any one time period); ii) Concentrating plant site activities in the eastern area of the site and within the quarry void; iii) Strengthening of linear vegetation structure adjacent to the northern boundary of the site within the A45 and eastern agricultural boundary; iv) Protection of the Site’s boundary within the Wyrley and Essington Canal.

Elements of the proposed development that have the potential to degrade the character of the landscape type at restoration / post restoration stage:

i) The restored landform; ii) Water body.

We have assessed the Significance of Impact on landscape character is assessed both during the Operational Stage of the proposed development and the Permanent Restoration Stage.

Landscape Character Mitigation / Enhancement Measures proposed and integrated during the restoration / post restoration stage include:

i) The creation of a sustainable long term Site landscape which integrates into its local setting; ii) Low demanding agriculturally based management of an enhanced wildlife nature; iii) Establishment of a water body within either an interim or permanent use as wildlife lake / possible agricultural irrigation lagoon or the flexibility to be developed as a marina to support and supplement regeneration works associated with the Wyrley and Essington Canal; iv) The permanent creation of heathland habitat.

The restored landform comprises both slopes and areas of relatively flat ground. Both of these elements are observed within the “Sandstone Estates / Farmlands”. The slopes will be established with heathland habitat, a locally and nationally targeted habitat type.

The slopes will also be integrated into the local setting by existing and proposed hedgerows. Flatter areas of land will assimilate into the site specific landscape and provide permanent low level agricultural use with management for wildlife enhancement. There are a limited number of water bodies within the character type. They are present, however, and include water management lakes associated with the water pumping station near Pipehill (now fishing lakes), lakes at Coppice Lane Fishery, the Crane Brook and there is the previous (now currently dry) section of the Wyrley and Essington Canal. Manmade water bodies with specific functions are present and they are capable of integration and enhancing the local landscape type. S:\M13.135 Cranebrook Quarry\Reports\M13.135.R.008 LVIA\LVIA 22.09.15.Docx

September 2015 17

LANDSCAPE & VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT CRANEBROOK QUARRY WCL CRANEBROOK QUARRY LIMITED

3.6 Assessment of the Proposed Development’s Impact on Landscape Character during the Operational Stage of the Proposals

Based upon the detailed Operational Proposals including mitigation / enhancement measures, we assess that the magnitude of the proposals impact during the temporary operational period will be “Low Adverse”. Given the “High Sensitivity” of the landscape to change in respect of the specific mineral type of development, we assess that the potential “Significance of Impact” on Landscape Character resulting from the proposal is “Moderate Adverse”.

Based upon the restoration proposals as illustrated on Drawing No M13.135.D.031 we assess that the magnitude of the development impacting at permanent restoration is “Low Beneficial”. Given the assessed “High Sensitivity” of the landscape to change in respect of the specific mineral type of development, we assess the potential “Significance of Impact” on Landscape Character resulting from the proposal is “Slight Beneficial”.

3.7 Summary Conclusion in respect of Landscape Character

We assess that the development proposals will not result in any significant Adverse Impacts at either the operational or restoration stages of the scheme. At restoration, we assess the scheme will result in a “Slight Beneficial” change to local landscape character.

The restoration proposals will help achieve the Staffordshire County Council’s Landscape Policy Objectives for Landscape Regeneration.

4.0 VISUAL MATTERS

4.1 Zone of Theoretical Visibility

Computer based studies were used to establish the site’s theoretical visual envelope. The computer models use specialised industry standard software to generate digital models of the landform to determine the site’s Zones of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV). No detailed level information was included for built structures, tree blocks, individual trees and hedges. These elements would generally obscure views where they intervene between the viewer and the viewed object. The ZTV therefore shows a worst-case scenario, with many of the predicted views, particularly distant ones, not likely to be present.

The computer study helps to objectively define the magnitude of visual effects the proposed development might have, by calculating how much an object is either visible, or to what extent the object occupies the field of view of the receptor when viewed from different locations. This method automatically takes into account effects of distance from the site (i.e. an object close to the viewer occupies a greater field of view than a feature further away) and the curvature of the earth. Where a zero value is returned, the viewpoint lies outside or on the edge of the

S:\M13.135 Cranebrook Quarry\Reports\M13.135.R.008 LVIA\LVIA 22.09.15.Docx

September 2015 18

LANDSCAPE & VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT CRANEBROOK QUARRY WCL CRANEBROOK QUARRY LIMITED

Visual Envelope, delineating the areas from which views are not thought to be possible (uncoloured).

The ZTVs are displayed overlain onto a 1:25,000 OS base that shows detail down to individual field boundaries and footpaths. The colour banding represents differences in the potential Nature (magnitude) of Effect that may be experienced by either landscape or visual receptors. This is based on the degree/amount to which the site is visible within the landscape. The nature of landscape effects are to an extent interlinked to the visibility of the proposed development within the landscape. Consequently, distance from the site and the degree of visibility of the development will generate differing magnitudes of effects from different locations. The potential nature or magnitude of effect has been assessed from both desktop studies undertaken during in the generation of the ZTVs for the proposed development, as well as by field work and experience from undertaking similar exercises previously.

The nature of landscape effects are to an extent interlinked to the visibility of the proposed development within the landscape. Consequently, distance from the Site and the degree of visibility of the development will generate differing magnitudes of effects from different locations. The potential nature or magnitude of effect has been assessed from both desktop studies undertaken during in the generation of the ZTVs for the proposed development, as well as by field work and experience from undertaking similar exercises previously.

The zone boundaries were derived by the extent of the visual envelope (maximum extent of proposed extraction) from the computer generated STV, viewing height and distance from the Site. The zoning process enabled areas of similar angles of view and / or potential levels of magnitude of effect to be grouped together for ease of undertaking the assessment process. The boundaries of these zones have been used as the basis for both the landscape and visual impact assessment process.

The existing Cranebrook Quarry and the proposed extension area are located within a ridge of land running east / west upon which the A5 is generally on the crest to the north of the quarry.

As such the site is partly observed as a skyline feature from views from the south, but as a consequence of landform and vegetation structure, quarry activities do not break the skyline view.

Although the quarry is located adjacent (to the south) of the A5 road corridor, existing and proposed mitigation screen bunding, hedgerow and tree / shrub planting block views of the site. The quarry and the proposed extension area is therefore generally well screened from potential views.

The nature and colour of the red sand quarried on site is a muted colour that assimilates into other local agricultural / natural landscape colours. The quarried extraction face / land awaiting restoration does not therefore appear unobtrusive to the eye. The quarry plant site is located either below surrounding ground levels and / or screened behind existing earth or vegetation ‘structure’. S:\M13.135 Cranebrook Quarry\Reports\M13.135.R.008 LVIA\LVIA 22.09.15.Docx

September 2015 19

LANDSCAPE & VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT CRANEBROOK QUARRY WCL CRANEBROOK QUARRY LIMITED

The main Zone of Visual Influence of the existing quarry (see Drawing No M13.135.D.034) and the proposed extension is mainly concentrated within 1km of the Site (stretching further to the south). There are limited numbers of potential residential receptors with potential views of the site.

Drawing No M13.135.D035 illustrates the Zone of Theoretical Visiblity Influence at Phase 2 of the proposed development. At this point all quarry activities will be taking place and it is considered that this is the point of maximum visual disturbance associated with quarrying activities.

The only differences between the existing ZTV and the Phase 2 ZTV is a minor geographical increase in potential higher magnitude of impact around the immediate quarry area together with a slight increased potential for higher impacts to land located ~1 to 1.5im to the south of the Site.

At restoration with land returned to either agricultural and / or wildlife enhancement uses and with just the water body as a new feature, the ZTV is literally confined to the Site boundary apart from a south eastern valley feature where topographical only views may be possible. See Drawing No M13.135.D.036.

4.2 Visual Impact Assessment

Areas of where principal views are currently gained of the existing Site operations together with those visual receptors who may receive views of the proposed development elements and features were defined by both the ZTI (topographical analysis) and field work evaluations.

For descriptive purposes key principal views have been identified to represent receptor viewpoints. These viewpoints are illustrated in Drawing No M13.135.D.037. Photographs from these representative receptor viewpoints towards the site are illustrated on Drawing Nos M13.135.D.038 and D.039.

Principal Representative Viewpoints

Viewpoint Location / Direction of View Distance from the Distance No Site (km) (Range) 1 A5 looking east south east ~30m to 750m Close 2 A5 looking south ~30m to 500m Close 3 A5 looking southwest ~30m to 350m Close 4 A5 / Lions’ Den looking Site ~30m to 350m Close 5 A5 / Cranebrook House (environs) looking ~80m to 750m Close south / west 6 Wall Butts / A461 looking west ~500m to 1300m Mid 7 Adjacent Ivy House Farm / A461 looking ~500m to 800m Mid north 8 Adjacent to Spring Hill Farm / Barracks ~1100m to 1400m Mid Lane looking north / north east 9 Barracks Lane looking north east ~800m to 1200m Mid

S:\M13.135 Cranebrook Quarry\Reports\M13.135.R.008 LVIA\LVIA 22.09.15.Docx

September 2015 20

LANDSCAPE & VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT CRANEBROOK QUARRY WCL CRANEBROOK QUARRY LIMITED

10 Warren House Farm / Barracks Lane ~500m to 1200m Mid looking east 11 Edge of Brownhills looking east ~1100m to 1800m Mid 12 Bridge across M6 Toll on Hanney Hay Road ~850m to 1600m Mid looking south east

Descriptive text is provided below for representative view point together with an overview of how receptor views will change as a result of the proposed development.

A summary of receptor sensitivity, existing and potential magnitude of change and assessment Significance of Impact is also provided.

4.3 Photographs 1, 2, 3 and 4

Existing Views

Visual receptors from this location look either south or south east towards the Site from distances of between ~30 to 750m. If the Site is approached from the west there are glimpses of the quarry’s eastern quarry face. Views are restricted by both existing landform (including bunding) and by vegetation. The view is generally of a semi urban road corridor looking over adjacent countryside. No quarry plant is visible but there are glimpses of current regeneration works associated with the Wyrley and Essington Canal. The existing hedgerow running along the site’s northern boundary screens views from receptors 3 and 4. From viewpoint 2 a limited view is possible into the Site via the Site vehicle entrance.

Receptor Types Assessed Sensitivity Users of the A5 Watling Street (heading west to east) Low Users of Public Footpath H/11 (as it runs to join the A5) Low

Predicted Changes to the View

The quarry face will continue to progress eastwards as a semi skyline feature. Proposed bunding and tree / shrub planting to the far east of the Site will allow the creation of a new vegetative skyline. Existing site peripheral northern boundary bunding / vegetation will continue to screen site operations.

The nature of effect (magnitude) of visual change resulting from the proposed development is assessed as Low. Given the Low Sensitivity of visual receptors from this location to change, we assess that the potential “Significance of Impact” on Landscape Character resulting from the proposal including mitigation measures is “Very Slight”.

4.4 Photograph 5

Visual receptors from this location look south / south west towards the proposed quarry extension’s north eastern boundary from distances of ~ 40 to 750m. Receptors look over the A5 roadway towards an existing hedgerow / hedgerow

S:\M13.135 Cranebrook Quarry\Reports\M13.135.R.008 LVIA\LVIA 22.09.15.Docx

September 2015 21

LANDSCAPE & VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT CRANEBROOK QUARRY WCL CRANEBROOK QUARRY LIMITED

tree site boundary. There is a residential receptor at this typical view point location (Crane Brook House), but the Site is screened by existing vegetation and bunding. The existing quarry cannot be seen from this representative location.

Receptor types Assessed Sensitivity Residential Receptors at Crane Brook House and residents High to the east of Muckley Corner at ~ 80 to 300m from the Site. Users of the A5 Watling Street (heading west). Low Users of a section of Public Right of Way between Hall Low Lane and the A5 at its emergence onto the A5.

Predicted Changes of View

As part of the quarry operations / mitigation measures it is proposed to strengthen the northern hedgerow boundary of the site. It is also proposed to construct a 3m high soil screening landform behind the existing hedgerow. This bund will be seeded and planted with native trees and shrubs to replicate locally observed agricultural field boundaries. Once these measures have been taken, no quarrying operations will be observed.

The nature of effect (magnitude) of visual change resulting from the proposed development is assessed as “Very Low”. Given the High Sensitivity of residential receptors from this location to change we assess that the potential Sensitivity of Impact on those receptors is “Slight”, and the Sensitivity of Impact on users of A5 / public right of way as “Minimal”.

4.5 Photograph 6

Visual receptors from this location look east towards the site either across to an existing hedgerow adjacent to the eastern boundary of the A416 Walsall Road (receptors using the Walsall Road) or over the top of the hedgerow towards 2No further hedgerows (from mupper floors of residential receptors to Wall Butts / Muckley Corner, Little Oaks Farm / properties and Oaklands).

Distance to the Site ~ 300 to 1000m.

The existing quarry cannot be seen from these receptors due to:

i) Screening vegetation; and ii) The nature of the quarry face being worked eastwards screening the face.

Receptor Types Assessed Sensitivity Residential receptors at Wall Butts located adjacent to the High eastern boundary of Walsall Road, Little Oaks Farm and Oaklands Farm. Uses of the Walsall Road. Low

S:\M13.135 Cranebrook Quarry\Reports\M13.135.R.008 LVIA\LVIA 22.09.15.Docx

September 2015 22

LANDSCAPE & VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT CRANEBROOK QUARRY WCL CRANEBROOK QUARRY LIMITED

Predicted Changes of View

As part of the quarry operations / mitigation measures it is proposed to strengthen the eastern hedgerow boundary of the Site. It is also proposed to construct a 3m high screening bund behind the existing boundary hedge. The bund will be seeded and planted with native trees and shrubs to replicated locally observed woodland blocks. Once these measures have been taken, no quarrying operations will be observed. Even if no mitigation measures were in place, due to quarry operations progressing eastwards the quarry face would not be observed from these locations.

The nature of effect (magnitude) of visual change resulting from the proposed development is assessed as “Very Low”. Given the High Sensitivity of residential receptors from this location to change, we assess that the potential Sensitivity of Impact on these receptors is “Slight”, and the Significance of Impact on users of the Walsall Road as “Negligible”.

4.6 Photographs 7, 8, 9 and 10

Visual receptors from these locations look north towards the quarry from distances of ~ 500 to 1200m. Receptors look out over intervening agricultural land towards the A5 / ridge line. The existing quarry is observed within an overall panoramic landscape view. The plant site / mobile processing / recycling operations are all screened below ground level and cannot be observed. The eastern quarry face and the unrestored northern face are clearly visible. However, due to the subtle nature of the natural red sand quarried on site the faces blend into the earth / agricultural colours within the landscape.

The view of the existing quarry face is framed by on-site and off site vegetation which help to link and integrate the quarry into its local setting.

Receptor Types Assessed Sensitivity Residential Receptors including Ivy House Farm, Spring High Hill Farm and Warrenhouse Farm Users of the Walsall Road and Barracks Lane Low

Predicted Changes of View

As part of the quarry phased working and restoration scheme it is proposed to progressively restore the northern boundary of the Site in an easterly direction. This will ensure that as the quarry is worked into the extension area visible disturbed land within the quarry face will not overly increase. Mitigation bounding, hedgerow and tree and shrub planting will further tie the quarry form down into the landscape and integrate it into its local landscape setting. The progressive restoration of the quarry’s northern batter slopes to heathland will also add vegetative texture to the muted red sand colour and further visually blend the restored Site into the landscape.

S:\M13.135 Cranebrook Quarry\Reports\M13.135.R.008 LVIA\LVIA 22.09.15.Docx

September 2015 23

LANDSCAPE & VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT CRANEBROOK QUARRY WCL CRANEBROOK QUARRY LIMITED

The quarry plant site, a recycling and mobile plant cannot be observed from these locations.

The nature of effect (magnitude) of visual change resulting from the proposed development is assessed as “Low”. Given the High Sensitivity of residential receptors from this location to change we assess that the potential Sensitivity of Impact on these receptors is “Moderate Adverse” and the Significance of Impact on users of the Walsall Road and Barracks Lane as “Negligible”.

Please note, receptors located in and around representative Photographic Point II have a similar but more restricted view of the Site from a higher elevation than those located at representative points 7, 8, 9 and 10. No view of the existing site or the proposed extension could be observed from point 12.

4.7 Summary Conclusion Visual Matters

The existing and proposed development at Cranebrook Quarry does not and will not result in any “Significant Adverse Impacts” to local visual receptors. The nature and scale of the site is small and when quarried sand faces are visible they assimilate into the local landscape in combination with the texture and colour of surrounding agricultural land.

5.0 OVERALL CONCLUSION

In conclusion, in respect of landscape character and visual matters we assess that the proposed eastern extension of Cranebrook Sand Quarry with associated importation of inert materials for restoration purposes and sustainable recycling is located in an acceptable location. The development proposals will not result in any permanent / long term harm or adverse impact and will provide an infrastructure upon which wildlife habitat under agricultural management can be sustained.

Should future regeneration works take place associated with the restoration of the Summerhill section of the Wyrley and Essington Canal the restoration infrastructure (landform, pool and heathland / structure planting) could be successfully utilised for a marina basin with ancillary activities. (This would be subject to a separate and future planning application).

S:\M13.135 Cranebrook Quarry\Reports\M13.135.R.008 LVIA\LVIA 22.09.15.Docx

September 2015 24

Cranebrook Quarry Environmental Statement Drawings Restoration Scheme - Landuses Dwg. No.M13.135.D.031

Crane Brook House

Biodiversity Rich Acid Grassland/Heathland Heathland Banks Grassland Retained Site Entrance

A5 Watling St. A5 Watling St.

Car Parking

Grassland

Restoration Pool WL 20.5m a OD

M6 Toll Biodiversity Rich Heathland Banks M6 Toll Aquaduct Re-Opened Wyrley & Essington Canal Dependant upon Stage of Regeneration Works

Proposed Access Point (Canal Link)

Canalside Pool/Lagoon Native Woodland / Tree Planting N 1:2,500 @ A3

WCL Pleydell Smithyman Limited . 20a The Wharfage, Ironbridge, Shropshire TF8 7NH . T: 01952 433211 . F: 01952 433323 . E: [email protected] Legend

..__ _.lsite Boundary

.. fl) ~ I 0 I

"-i;.. ~ I £' C rane Brook

WCL QUARRIES LTD , ..... ' J.J. " •

Reproduced from Ordnance Su~ digital map data., Crown Copyright. All rlghU [}:~dtlumber 0100031673

DRAWING STATIJS FINAL PROJECT CRANEBROOK QUARRY

CLIENT WCL Quarries Ltd

TITLE Location Plan

DATE SCALE Aug2014 1:5000@A3 DRAWN CHECKED LMB RJS DRAW NO. ~I REVISION M13.135.D.008 PleydellSmithyman I THIS DRAWING MAY NOT BE USED • WITHOUT CONSENT OF: PLEYDELL SMllHYMAN LIMITED 20A THEWHARFAGE, IRONBRIDGE SHROPSHIRE TFS 7NH T. 01952 433211 F. 01952 433323 [email protected] www.pleydellsmithyman.co.uk Legend

Site Application Boundary

Archaeological Discovery Site

Scheduled Ancient Monument (SAM)

Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)

Local Nature Reserve ( LNR)

Registered Park & Gardens

I A A I Listed Buildings

r------I Public Footpat hs

r------I Pu blic Bridleways \ \f \ ~ .·•· Byway Open to all Tra ffic I • • r------I WCL QUARRIES LTD

DRAWING STATUS FINAL PROJECT CRANEBROOK QUARRY

CLIENT WCL Quarries Ltd

TITLE Environment & Conservation Designations DATE SCALE June2015 1:5000 @A3 DRAWN CHECKED LMB RJS DRAW NO. ·IREV ISION Ml 3.1 35.0 .009 PleydellSmithyman II THIS DRAWING MAY NOT BE USED • WITHOUT CONSENT OF: PLEYDELL SMITHYMAN LIMITED 20A THE WHARFAGE, IRONBRIDGE SHROPSHIRE TFS 7NH T. 01952 433211 F. 01952 433323 E. [email protected] www.pleydellsmithyman.co.uk Legen d

Site Application Boundary ------1 I Distance Banding at lKm I I Intervals I------I

Areas of Built Character

Lands ca p e Charact er Typ es

Sandstone Estatelands

T < Mr d "') Settled Farmlands Sew ,c W:xo :• • ...... Coalfields Farmlands <.·,,,..... ' ' .. ,~_, ...... : ___' ' __ _ . .. ,,.. Sett led Plateau Farm'land Slopes .: ,, ; •., I' ' \ ,, \ . , ~ w . \ "' Sandstone Hills and Heaths ~'"' J:ll3cc ,.. \ MJo" h \ Landscap e Char acter Sub-Ty p es .,,tr...... \ . / . \ .. / . \ Sandstone Estatelands I / :' .. I .' c. I // Farmlands .' I I .' ~·I . I WCL I QUARRIES LTD I

DRAWING STATUS FINAL PROJECT CRANEBROOK QUARRY

CLIENT WCL Quarries Ltd

TITLE Landscape Character

DATE SCALE Sept2015 1 :25,000 @A3 DRAWN CHECKED LAS RJS DRAW NO. : IREV ISION Ml 3.1 35.0 .032 • PleydellSmithyman II THIS DRAWING MAY NOT BE USED WITHOUT CONSENT OF: .: .' PLEYDELL SMITHYMAN LIMITED ;> - 20A THE WHARFAGE, IRONBRIDGE Sp ' ,y F SHROPSHIRE TFS 7NH T. 01952 433211 F. 01952 433323 E. [email protected] / ~ / / www.pleydellsmithyman.co.uk \ / / ' / \ / Legen d

Site Application Boundary ------1 I Distance Banding at lKm I I Intervals I------I • Areas of Built Charact er w-;"oT~r7°9L";;-.~--- : I : I Lands ca p e Polic y Zo nes i \ Ed1 :il __...._!.__.__ 12 I ~ ·--' F rn ~l'.c•d Farrn La ndscape Regeneration , .....·\ \..C.\ \c=\O .• .. .· ' \ Ed al ------j- Hot1se- T ,,.;f I -- - _,,," : Meo Landscape Restoration

Scwa~~ ...... Work...... I . ',' Landscape Enhancement ··.~=·· ~ p, ...... : , -- ' '""\. -- ._ - ...... F'll Pipe Hill ' ' ' Landscape Maintenance : " '" ~ .... M anor "-'" : "" ' ._ -- -- ,,,. I " ' ; "~: ' Sholw • \ Br d1~ Area of Outstanding Natural ; .. ; . ?· ~c Pl;acc ; .. Beauty hlllsw.,., .. \ """' \ \ Al \ \ I I I ~ I I WCL I 8 tlS QUARRIES LTD 1

DRAWING STATUS FINAL \ PROJECT \ \ .,, CRANEBROOK QUARRY

' \ \ ~ CLIENT ' <;: ' ~ ' WCL Quarries Ltd TITLE Landscape Policy Guidance

DATE SCALE Sept2015 1:25 ,000 @A3 DRAWN CHECKED LAS RJS I DRAW NO. IREV ISION I 10 ~ M1 3.135.D.041 I 0.ury / Farm / Th / / / ~ lctt; H •ll PleydellSmithyman .... ) / farm II Wk1 / ./ ./ THIS DRAWING MAY NOT BE USED "'/ ,..t WITHOUT CONSENT OF: ./ . • Swan / : farm ,, / PLEYDELL SMITHYMAN LIMITED -.. ~.... "· ,,,,,,. ~ ">*'- ...-- ... 20A THE WHARFAGE, IRONBRIDGE Spinney.. fo<>' Form SHROPSHIRE TFS 7NH T. 01952 433211 F. 01952 433323 E. [email protected] / / / www.pleydellsmithyman.co.uk / ./ / / Legend Cranebrook Quarry Landscape Character Photographs WCL Quarries Ltd

Linear built vehicle infrastructure set within a geometric Linear built vehicle infrastructure set within urban fringe Linear water corridor canal infrastructure passing through agricultural landscape. industrial I residential landscape. both rural, rural fringe and urban environment. WCL QUARRIES LTD (A't • 4< "• ! A • (. %

DRAWING STATUS FINAL PROJECT CRANEBROOK QUARRY

CLIENT WCL Quarries Ltd

TITLE Landscape Character Photographs DATE SCALE Sept2015 NTS DRAWN CHECKED LAS RJS DRAW NO. IREVISION M 13.135.0.033 • Pleydel ISmithyman I Geometric agricultural field pattern with hedgerows I Rural views of grazing and arable land interspersed with Rural setting of AS looking north -grazing land, hedgerows, individual trees and woodland blocks to skyline views. residential and industrial development. woodland and village church. THIS DRAWING MAY NOT BE USED WITHOUT CONSENT OF: PLEYDELL SMITHYMAN LIMITED 20A THE WHARFAGE, IRON BRIDGE SHROPSHIRE TFS 7NH

T. 01952 433211 F. 01952 433323 E. [email protected] www.pleydellsmithyman.co.uk Legend

Sit e Application Bou ndary ,------, Distance Banding at lKm I I Interv als ~ ------· Zones of (Theoretical) Visual Influence (by vertlul angle o f v iew) The vertical angle IS the secllonal angle the site fo,ms when ,. viewed from a specific location. The edge of the col oured area defines the visual envl!lope within the local Study Area. \ , • Areas wher e views o f the development J ,e at.er -v " · > 3 •O I are likely t o have hlgh•r magnitude of Imp act , ,,,. ~, I J - -t"' \ 1.0-3.0° \ \ + \ Io .3-1.o· J \ \ I0 .2-0.3· 1 \ I 10 .1-0.2· 1 + I .< I 0 0 0 1 o I Areas where views of the development I • - • arellk ely to h ave low•r magnitude of Impact I This computer method helps define the measure of visual Impact the • LE , .....__ proooseCI scheme might hive by llnklno potentlal visual Impact to the vertluJ angle subtenCleCI at the viewpoint by the top uCI bottom ext remities o f the area being viewed. This gives a measure of how \.. much of a 91ven field of view Is occupied by the area w h en viewed The' from different locations.This method automatlully taku Into account Butts what effect distance has on Impact {le. an object close t o the viewer '{ occupies a f ar greater vertical angle tho1n something hundreds of • \cw I metres away). I The comput ation also takes account o f the curvature o f the earth. ,, The ZVI values were calculated on a 2Sm grid across the study area I and points o f t he s,ame value were linked t o produce •contours• of MF!r I potenllal ' visual magnitude·. The model does not take •nto account -~ ...... ~~ I man made structures or vegetation. The 'actual' Zone of Visual ...., I Influence will therefore be modified by the effects of Intervening I woodlanct.hedgerows. bulldlngs. and m inor landform fe1tures. I \ 1 \ I I \ ' \ I I WCL ' QUARRIES LTD ' ' "t;f/' .' ' .... I ' .... I ' / .... I I I DRAWING STATUS I I FINAL Whtt:ac,.. I PROJECT Far I I CRANEBROOK QUARRY I I I CLIENT I I WCL Quarries Ltd I I . I TITLE i I ( Existing ZTV ------1 1 ~1 - 1 ·fa.Mctts H•ll- lurscr cs ~ / Fum DATE SCALE ,, . Sept2015 1 :25,000 @A3 / ·: ,,"' J! _...,& DRAWN CHECKED ;' ' I~-\ ,, "' I ( l LAS RJS / ' ,,. ,,. / I DRAW NO. .1REVI SION ,,. ,,. Ml 3.135.0.034 ,.. " -< I _ _ _-;F' ­ I I -- / I ------I I PleydellSmithyman I I II I I THIS DRAWING MAY NOT BE USED I I WITHOUT CONSENT OF: I C • I h I PLEYDELL SMITHYMAN LIMITED I I 20A THE WHARFAGE, IRONBRIDGE I I ~¥ SHROPSHIRE TFS 7NH I / / T. 01952 43321 1 F. 01952 433323 / / ~ E. [email protected] / Rtproduced from Ordnanc• ~.,,J;. digital map

Site App lication Bou ndary ,------, Distance Banding at lKm I I Intervals ~ ------· Zones of (Theoretical) Visua l Influence (b y vertlul angle o f view ) The vertical angle IS the secllonal angle the site fo,ms when ,. viewed from a specific location. The edge of t he col our ed area defines the visual envl!lope within the local Study Area. \ , • I Areas where views o f the development J ,e at.er v " · > 3 •O a r e l i kely to have hlgh•r magnitude of Impact , ,,,. ~, I ~ ~ \ J 1.0-3.0° \ \ + \ Io .3-1.o· J \ \ H • rchuru ...... \ -~ ....~ l .. ~" ' I0 .2-0.3· 1 "' .... \ -·;.. " ' \ ~.. I=-: ... \._,,. / ( "' . I I ' I 10 .1-0.2· 1 / .< . , I.- + ' ' I / 1·-E p " \ I 0 0 0 1 o I Areas where views of the development .... \ I • - ' arellkely to h ave low•r magnitude of Impact I ~l•c ' \ I I Farm I I This computer method helps define the measure of visual Impact the \ • l proposed scheme might hive by llnkl no potentlal visual Impact to the I \ 1- •. I vertluJ angle subtended at the viewpoint by the top ud bottom I .. ·l extremities of the area being viewed. This gives a measure of how \ \.. much of a 91ven field o f view Is occupied by the area when viewed I \ The' ,·. _:.- from different locations.This method automatlully Ukts Into account I Butts what effect distance has on Impact {le. an object close t o the viewer I '{ occupi es a f ar greater vertical angle than something hundreds of • I IV',,. I w I metres away). I \c I I 102 'I" The comput ation also takes account of the curvature o f the earth. , I The ZVI values were calculated on a 2Sm grid across the study area MF!r I I and points of t he s,ame value were linked to produce •contours• o f I I - potenllal ' visual magnitude· . The model does not take • nto account -~ ~- I man made structures or vegetati on. The 'actual' Zone of Vi sual ...,...... I I Influence will therefore be modified by the effects of I ntervening I I woodland.hedgerows. bulldlngs. and minor landform features. I I I I 1 \ I I I I ' \ \ ~~lir::::..:;l '_..~i£..~ I \ I \ ,.- I WCL QUARRIES LTD ' 'al .' ' .... I ' .... I ' / .... I I I DRAWING STATUS I I FINAL I PROJECT I I CRANEBROOK QUARRY I I I CLIENT I I WCL Quarries Ltd I I I TITLE I ( Phase2ZTV ------1 1 ·f ~,(;' H•ll_ turscr cs ~ / Fum DATE SCALE ,, . Sept2015 1:25 ,000 @A3 / ·: ,, "' J! 6 DRAWN CHECKED ,,,, ,,,,,, / , ( · t·~ LAS RJS "' ' t ,, ,,,"' f t DRAW NO. IREV ISION ,,.. ,, "' Ml 3.135.0 .035 ,,.. -< I . I ' I 1e / I · m I I I PleydellSmithyman I I II / I THIS DRAWING MAY NOT BE USED / I WITHOUT CONSENT OF: / ( • / h / PLEYDELL SMITHYMAN LIMITED / / 20A THE WHARFAGE, IRONBRIDGE / / ~ ¥ SHROPSHIRE TFS 7NH ,. / / T. 01952 433211 F. 01952 433323 ,. "' ~ E. [email protected] ,. Rtproduced lrom Ordnanc• ~.,,J;. digital v map

Site Application Boundary

1------1 Distance Banding at lKm I I Intervals ~ ------1 Zones of (Theoretical) Visual Influence (by vertlul a ngle o f v iew) The vertical angle IS the secllonal angle the site fo,ms when viewed from a specific location. The edge of the col oured area defines the visua l envl!lope within the local Study Area. Areas where views of the development J ,e at.er 1>3.o· I are li kely to have h lgh~ r magnitude of Impact ' J ' ,, );/ 1.0-3.0° "' t.-- _1 + (_ ,,·"'"' I r--:-- Io .3- 1.o·J " ,I ____ .. I0 .2-0.3·1 10.1-0.2·1

Areas where v i ews of the development 10.0-0.1 ·1 arellkely to h ave low~ r magnitude of Impact This computer method helps define the measure of visual Impact the proposed scheme m ight hive by llnklno p o tential visual 1mp1c t to the vertluJ angle subtended at the v iewpoint by the top ud bottom extremities of the area being viewed. This gives a measure of how much of a 91ven field o f view Is occupied by the area w h e n viewed from different locations.Thi s method automatlcally taku Into account w hat effect distance has on Impact {le. an object close to the viewer occupies a f ar greater vertical angle tho1n something h u ndreds or metres awav).

The comput ation also takes account of the curvature o f the earth. The ZVI values were c alculated on a 2Sm grid a cross the s tudy area and points o f t he s,ame value were linked t o produce •contours• of potenllal ' visual magnitude*. The model does not take •nto account man made s tructures or vegetati on. The 'actual' Zone of Visual Influence will therefore b e modified by the effects of lnter"'enlng woodland.hedgerows. bulldlngs. and m inor landform fettures.

WCL QUARRIES LTD

...., ...... \~.c-::· DRAWING STATUS C r•ne brook··••·~ • ..> Farm / ...... FINAL I ..~ PROJECT / GA7,ey.... // C9t~~1e. CRANEBROOK QUARRY

··•/ ~ CLIENT WCL Quarries Ltd

TITLE Restoration ZTV

DATE SCALE Sept2015 1 :25,000 @A3 DRAWN CHECKED LAS RJS

DRAW NO. .1REVISION Ml 3.135.0.036 • PleydellSmithyman II THIS DRAWING MAY NOT BE USED WITHOUT CONSENT OF: PLEYDELL SMITHYMAN LIMITED 20A THE WHARFAGE, IRONBRIDGE SHROPSHIRE TFS 7NH T. 01952 433211 F. 01952 433323 E. [email protected] www.pleydellsmithyman.co.uk Legend Cranebrook Quarry Visual Photographic Sheet 1 WCL Quarries Ltd

PHOTOGRAPH LOCATION 1 - PHOTOGRAPH LOCATION 2- PHOTOGRAPH LOCATION 3 - View eastwards from AS View from AS towards quarry entrance View from AS I junction with Lion's Den Road. Looking westwards, quarry screened behind existing hedge I bund. WCL QUARRIES LTD (A't • 4< "• ! A • (. %

DRAWING STATUS FINAL PROJECT CRANEBROOK QUARRY

CLIENT WCL Quarries Ltd

TITLE Visual Photographic Sheet 1

DATE SCALE Sept2015 NTS DRAWN CHECKED LAS RJS DRAW NO. ; IREVISION M 13.135.0.038 • Pleydel ISmithyman I PHOTOGRAPH LOCATION 4 - PHOTOGRAPH LOCATION 5 - PHOTOGRAPH LOCATION 6 - Looking south eastwards towards the existing site, quarry View looking south westwards from curtilage of Crane Brook View looking westwards from Walsall Road towards the site, THIS DRAWING MAY NOT BE USED screened behind hedgerow I bund House. Proposed extension area screened behind existing quarry screened by multiple hedgerows WITHOUT CONSENT OF: hedgerow. PLEYDELL SMITHYMAN LIMITED 20A THE WHARFAGE, IRON BRIDGE SHROPSHIRE TFS 7NH T. 01952 433211 F. 01952 433323 E. [email protected] www.pleydellsmithyman.co.uk Legend Cranebrook Quarry Visual Photographic Sheet 2 WCL Quarries Ltd

Existing Quarry- --- · Proposed rop{>sed Extension Extension 1 Area Area I I I I

PHOTOGRAPH LOCATION 7 - PHOTOGRAPH LOCATION 8- PHOTOGRAPH LOCATION 9 - View looking northwards towards the muted coloured View looking north eastwards towards the existing quarry and View looking north eastwards to existing quarry and proposed extraction faces of existing quarry and proposed extension proposed extension area. Hedgerows interlinking the extension area landscape WCL QUARRIES LTD (A't • 4< "• ! A • (. %

DRAWING STATUS FINAL PROJECT CRANEBROOK QUARRY

CLIENT WCL Quarries Ltd

TITLE Visual Photographic Sheet 2

DATE SCALE Sept2015 NTS DRAWN CHECKED LAS RJS

DRAW NO. 11 REVISION M 13.135.0.039 • Pleydel ISmithyman I PHOTOGRAPH LOCATION 10- PHOTOGRAPH LOCATION 11 - PHOTOGRAPH LOCATION 12- View looking east north eastwards towards the existing site View looking east towards the site Quarry not visible THIS DRAWING MAY NOT BE USED and the proposed extension area WITHOUT CONSENT OF: PLEYDELL SMITHYMAN LIMITED 20A THE WHARFAGE, IRON BRIDGE SHROPSHIRE TFS 7NH T. 01952 433211 F. 01952 433323 E. [email protected] www.pleydellsmithyman.co.uk Legend

Site Ap P 1.rcat ion B oundary .------11-- 1 I Distance Ba . Intervals at O.SKm I I (fr~~ngcentre of site)

Viewand p ?'"t· Location 1 ~ -1 Direct ion o f V.'rew N umber

WCL 9.~~RRIES. LTD

CRANEBROOK QUARRY

CLIENT WCL Quarries Ltd

II THIS DRAWING "' WITHOUT CONSMEAY NOT BE USED NTOF· PLEYDELL SMITH . 20A THE WH YMAN LIMITED ARFAGE IRO SHROPSHIRE TF ' NBRIDGE 87NH T. 01952 433211 F E. psl@pleydell . . 01952 433323 smrthymanc www.pleydellsm·ithyman.co.uk . o.uk

/ / APPENDIX B - LANDSCAPE & VISUAL IMPACT

General Landscape and Visual Assessment Methodology

The methodology detailed below is in accordance with:

 Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment, 3rd Edition. Published jointly by The Landscape Institute and Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment, 2013.

 Landscape Character Assessment. Guidance for England and Scotland published jointly by The Countryside Agency and Scottish Natural Heritage, 2002.

Landscape Assessment Methodology

The assessment process is intended to provide an objective method of establishing the overall significance of effect of a proposed development on an areas landscape character and visual amenity.

The landscape and visual assessment was carried out in Six Stages as set out below:

Stage One Identification of aspects of the development likely to give rise to effects. Stage Two Identification of components/receptors most likely to be affected by the development. Stage Three Description of the interaction of the Landscape or Visual Receptor with aspects of the development. Stage Four Assessment of the Nature of the Landscape and Visual Receptor (Sensitivity) in relation to the identified aspects of the development. Stage Five Assessment of the Nature of Effects (Magnitude of Change) in relation to the identified aspects of the development. Stage Six Assessment of the Overall Significance of Effects.

Stage One

This stage was carried out to describe the proposed development and to determine aspects within it that were likely to give rise to potential landscape or visual effects. These effects will vary at different stages during the developments life cycle, and may including the following:

 Construction Stage (if applicable)

 Operational Stage

 Restoration Stage following Decommissioning (if applicable)

Stage Two

Stage two of the assessment involved an identification and description of those landscape receptors and visual receptor groups located within the study area and within the visual envelope of the proposed development, as identified by the Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV) and field study that were likely to be receptive of potential effects resulting from the proposals.

Pleydell Smithyman Ltd September 2015

S:\M13.135 Cranebrook Quarry\Reports\M13.135.R.012 LVIA Methodology\M13.135.R.012 LVIA Methodology_APPENDIX B.Doc Stage Three

Following an analysis of the proposed development consideration was given to the interaction between identified aspects of the proposals likely to give rise to effects and landscape and visual receptors identified during stage two of the process.

Stage Four

An evaluation was made of the Nature of the Receptor (Sensitivity) of the landscape and visual receptors in respect of the identified aspects of the development likely to give rise to effects. The Nature of the Receptor was considered to be dependent upon the susceptibility to change of the receptor with respect to the proposed development and on the value attached to either the landscape (landscape assessment) or view (visual assessment).

Susceptibility to change can be defined as being the ability of the landscape receptor (whether it be the overall character or quality/condition of a particular landscape type or area, or an individual element and/or feature, or a particular aesthetic and perceptual aspect) to accommodate the proposed development without undue consequences for the maintenance of the baseline situation.

The Value of a landscape or view can be defined as consisting of a number of factors that help identify how a particular landscape can be valued. This can include, but not limited to:  It’s quality or condition as a measure of the physical state of the landscape.  Scenic quality used to describe landscapes that appeal primarily to the senses (primarily visual).  Rarity or the presence of rare elements or features in the landscape or the presence of a rare Landscape Character Type.  Representativeness and whether the landscape contains a particular character and/or features or elements which are considered particularly important examples.  Planning Designations and Conservation Interests where value attached to particular landscapes are recognised through International, National or Local designations including the presence of features of wildlife, earth science or archaeological, historical or cultural interest which can add to the value of the landscape.  Recreational Value where the physical experience of the landscape is important.  Perceptual Aspects where a landscape may be valued for its perceptual qualities, such as wildness and/or tranquillity.  Physical or Literary Indicators/Associations where landscapes are associated with particular people, such as artists or writers, or events in history that contribute to perceptions of the natural beauty of the area, or the value attached to particular locations/views are recognised, for example through appearances in guidebooks or on tourist maps, or the provision of facilities for their enjoyment such as parking places, sign boards and interpretive material.

An assessment was made of both susceptibility and value based on a five point textual scale: Very Low, Low, Medium, High and Very High. This information was then combined to arrive at an overall sensitivity value for the receptor as a whole which is also expressed as a five point textual scale Very Low to Very High.

Assessment of landscape receptors susceptibility to change and value of the landscape

Criteria used to determine the susceptibility of the landscape receptor to change is given in the table below. Note: Susceptibility is also dependant on the scale, extent and degree of visibility of the particular development within the landscape and its ability to affect the maintenance of the landscapes baseline situation.

Pleydell Smithyman Ltd September 2015

S:\M13.135 Cranebrook Quarry\Reports\M13.135.R.012 LVIA Methodology\M13.135.R.012 LVIA Methodology_APPENDIX B.Doc

Appendix B Table 1: Criteria used to determine the Susceptibility of the Landscape Receptor Susceptibility Landscape Receptor to change Very open, expansive and cohesive landscapes with long views allowing views into and out of the landscape. Landscapes that are uncluttered with natural skylines without man made elements. Landscapes which retain a Very High high degree of intactness, in very good condition and high quality which are not subject to change. Landscapes often associated with rural and/or a historic character and of cultural importance. These types of landscape may be subject to or contain various historic or nature conservation designations. Open cohesive landscapes with medium to long views allowing views into and out of the landscape. Landscapes that are generally uncluttered with mainly natural skylines without man made elements. Landscapes which retain a degree of intactness, in good condition and quality and which are infrequently subject to change. Landscapes may be associated with some degree of rural and/or a historic character and of cultural importance.

Complex rural landscapes and/or suburban areas with medium to distant scale views – containing both open

and enclosed aspects generally intact and in good condition. Settlement and built form are elements of the

landscape with few man-made structures such as power lines and telecommunication masts present.

Simple rural landscapes and/or suburban areas with local to medium scale views – containing both open and

enclosed aspects somewhat intact and in medium condition. Settlement and built form common elements of

the landscape with man-made structures such as power lines and telecommunication masts present.

Dynamic, complicated landscapes in which change frequently occurs and generally in poor condition and no

strong vernacular style. Long views are limited and often truncated. Landscapes may have complex skylines

and/or dominated by man-made structures and subject to frequent change. These types of landscape are often,

although not exclusively associated with industrial and/or urban areas/fringes.

Very Low

Criteria used to determine the value of the landscape receptor to change are given in the table below.

Appendix B Table 2: Criteria used to determine the Value of the Landscape Receptor

Landscape Receptor Value Internationally valued landscapes such as World Heritage Sites, nationally valued landscapes (National Parks, Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, National Scenic Areas or other equivalent areas). Very High Locally valued landscapes, for example local authority landscape designations or landscapes assessed as being of equivalent value (Special Landscape Areas/Areas of Great Landscape Value), or strong presence other designations linked to historic, natural or cultural elements (Scheduled Ancient Monuments, Historic Parks and Gardens, Ancient Semi Natural Woodlands, Conservation Areas, Listed Buildings). Local landscapes that are not nationally or locally designated but are valued as a resource for recreation, outdoor activities and scenic value. Local landscapes that are not nationally or locally designated, or judged to be of equivalent value, but are nevertheless valued at a community level. Degraded and industrial landscapes. Landscape dominated by commercial development and communications networks Very Low

Assessment of individual visual receptor groups and their sensitivity to change

The visual receptor groups and their inherent sensitivities have been based on information contained within the Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment, 3rd Edition, as well as experience from other similar studies.

Pleydell Smithyman Ltd September 2015

S:\M13.135 Cranebrook Quarry\Reports\M13.135.R.012 LVIA Methodology\M13.135.R.012 LVIA Methodology_APPENDIX B.Doc Appendix B Table 3: Visual Receptor Groups: Susceptibility to Change - Definitions Receptors Comments Susceptibility Residential Buildings Housing/Isolated Ground Floor Containing windows on ground or upper floors designed to High dwellings/Farms Upper Floors take advantage of specific views, such as living rooms, dining Gardens rooms and/or kitchens where people may spend significant periods of waking time. Gardens likely to be used for leisure purposes. Other Buildings Schools Classrooms Windowsill heights often limit views out of classrooms Medium Grounds/Playing Fields Primarily sport orientated but may have views out towards Medium countryside Hospitals Wards Windowsill heights often limit views out of wards Medium Some wards may have windows designed to exploit particular Medium views. Grounds May be used for convalescence or therapy but also may Medium include car parking, access or ornament. Places of Worship Ground Floor Unlikely to be particularly sensitive to off-site views but may Medium and Public/Guest Upper Floors include grounds/gardens for outdoor activities and/or Houses/Hotels Gardens/Grounds enjoyment. Commercial Premises Industrial units Unlikely to be sensitive to off-site views Very Low Retail Units and Offices Unlikely to be overly sensitive to off-site views but may Low contain aspects where outward looking views are possible. Transport/Recreational Routes/Public Open Space Footpaths, Bridleways Commons and Open Rural paths/bridleways heavily influenced by residential areas Low Access Areas and/or major transport routes and/or with limited views used for general recreational access to the open countryside. Rural paths/bridleways used for general recreational purposes Medium capable of gaining views across open countryside. Rural paths/bridleways/open access land used for general High recreational purposes capable of gaining elevated views across open countryside. Rural paths/bridleways/open access land used for general Very High recreational purposes capable of gaining elevated views across open countryside and within promoted landscapes or subject to additional levels of designation such as NP’s or AONB’s. Urban Parks/Public Open Space/Golf Open Space that is primarily used for sporting activities and Low Clubs/Car Parks/Beaches subject to intermittent use. Open Space that is primarily used for sporting activities and Medium subject to continuous daily use. Public Open Space that may have views out towards the open High countryside and subject to continuous daily use. Cycleways/ National Cycle Routes Roads and/or tracks within a rural location and promoted as a High Roads/Railway national route for the enjoyment of the open countryside and to take in panoramic views Unclassified/Minor Roads/ Rural location and relatively slow traffic speeds, possibly in Medium Local Rail Network/ conjunction with greater use by cyclists or walkers may Private Drives influence sensitivity to visual impacts. Unclassified/ Minor Traffic speed and primary use likely to limit sensitivity to visual Low Roads/Main Roads/ Trunk effects. Roads/Motorways/ High Speed Rail links

Criteria used to determine the value attached to receptor views is given in the table below:

Pleydell Smithyman Ltd September 2015

S:\M13.135 Cranebrook Quarry\Reports\M13.135.R.012 LVIA Methodology\M13.135.R.012 LVIA Methodology_APPENDIX B.Doc Appendix B Table 4: Visual Receptor Groups: Value of View - Definitions

Nature of view Value Open and long range views associated with promoted landscapes, public viewpoint associated with heritage Very High assets, coastlines etc. Close range views associated with historical and or townscape settings. Views over designated landscapes and landscapes with international/national cultural associations. Open, generally unrestricted long range views over open countryside, seascapes or open parkland including High public open space, open access land and footpaths and/or with local/national cultural associations. Partially restricted and/or oblique views over open countryside, seascapes or parkland. Partially restricted or Medium oblique views of open streetscapes, avenues and boulevards and/or with local cultural associations. Restricted and/or oblique views over open countryside, seascapes or parkland. Restricted or oblique views of Low narrow streetscape, truncated views of urban built environments or longer distant views over Industrial/ commercial landscapes, communications networks etc. Very restricted views over open countryside, seascapes or parkland. Restricted views over very degraded rural Very Low landscapes and/or close range views of industrial/commercial landscapes.

The classification system used to assess the relative susceptibilities of visual receptors ranges from Very Low to Low to Medium to High to Very High. This table forms the baseline against which each visual receptor is analysed. These general levels are, however, capable of being modified locally, depending on the surrounding visual and landscape characteristics of the area and/or designations.

Appendix B Table 5: Landscape and Visual Receptors: Overall Nature of Receptor (Sensitivity)

Value of the Landscape/Visual Receptor

Very High High Medium Low Very Low

Very High Very High Very High High Medium Medium

High Very High High High Medium Medium

Medium High High Medium Medium Low

Low High Medium Medium Low Low Susceptibility of the

Landscape/Visual Receptor Very Low Medium Medium Low Low Very Low

Stage Five

Following an assessment of the sensitivity of the receptor an assessment was made of the magnitude or nature of effects. The magnitude of effects was assessed by considering the Size/Scale, (expressed in terms of Neutral or Very Small or Small or Medium or Large or Very Large) Geographical Extent (expressed in terms of Neutral or Very Small or Small or Medium or Large or Very Large), Duration (expressed as either Short or Medium or Long or Permanent) and Reversibility (expressed as either Fully or Partially or Permanent) of the proposed development. This information was then combined to arrive at an evaluation of the overall magnitude of effects on individual receptors. The effects were considered according to whether they were adverse, neutral or beneficial.

Nature of Effects (Magnitude) on Landscape Receptors

The magnitude of effects on landscape receptors was determined according to the criteria set out in Table 6.

Pleydell Smithyman Ltd September 2015

S:\M13.135 Cranebrook Quarry\Reports\M13.135.R.012 LVIA Methodology\M13.135.R.012 LVIA Methodology_APPENDIX B.Doc Appendix B Table 6: Magnitude or Nature of Change on Landscape Receptors: Definitions Summary of Effect Criteria Very High Adverse The proposed site is very damaging to the landscape in that :

 At considerable variance with the landform, scale and pattern of the landscape.  It is likely to degrade, diminish, or even destroy the integrity of a range of characteristic features and elements and their setting.  It is substantially damaging to a high quality or highly vulnerable landscape, causing it to change and be considerably diminished in quality. Likely to be in a High sensitive landscape.  It is unable to be mitigated.  It is in serious conflict with Government policy in respect to enhancing landscape character and set out in current Structure Plan Policies/LDP’s.  The cumulative operations of other proposed sites results in an unacceptable loss or detriment to character.  It is adverse to several of the key issues/priorities or strategies for the LCA . High Adverse The proposed site is damaging to the landscape in that :

 At variance with the landform, scale and pattern of the landscape.  It is likely to degrade or diminish the integrity of a range of characteristic features and elements and their setting.  It is damaging to a high quality or highly vulnerable landscape, causing it to change and be diminished in quality. Likely to be in a High sensitive landscape.  It is unable to be adequately mitigated.  It is in conflict with Government policy in respect to enhancing landscape character and set out in current Structure Plan Policies/LDP’s.  The cumulative operations of other proposed sites results in a substantial loss or detriment to character.  It is adverse to some of the key issues/priorities or strategies for the LCA . Medium Adverse The site is out of scale with the landscape, or at odds with the local pattern and landform in that:

 Probably not possible to fully mitigate for, that is mitigation will not prevent the scheme from scarring the landscape in the longer term as some features of interest will be partly destroyed or their setting reduced or removed. Likely to be in a High or Medium sensitive landscape.  In conflict with national regional and local policy to respect and enhance landscape character across a wide range of character themes and set out in current Structure Plan Policies/LDP’s.  The potential cumulative operations of other proposed sites results in a moderate loss or detriment to character.  Adverse to a few (at least 2) of the issues/priorities or strategies for the LCA. Low Adverse The site does not fit the landform and scale of the landscape in that:

 The proposal can probably not be completely mitigated for because of the nature of the proposal itself or the character of the landscape it is in. Likely to be in a Medium sensitivity landscape.  In conflict with national regional and local policy to respect and enhance landscape character across few character themes and set out in current Structure Plan Policies/LDP’s.  There is a potential of some cumulative impacts of other proposed sites.  At variance with some aspects of the LCA descriptions. Very Low Adverse The site does not quite fit the landform and scale of the landscape in that:

 The proposal can almost be completely mitigated for because of the nature of the proposal itself or the character of the landscape it is in. Likely to be in a Medium or Low sensitivity landscape.  In partial conflict with national regional and local policy to respect and enhance landscape character across few character themes and set out in current Structure Plan Policies/LDP’s.  There is a very slight potential of cumulative operations of other proposed sites.  At variance with some minor aspects of the LCA descriptions.

Pleydell Smithyman Ltd September 2015

S:\M13.135 Cranebrook Quarry\Reports\M13.135.R.012 LVIA Methodology\M13.135.R.012 LVIA Methodology_APPENDIX B.Doc Summary of Effect Criteria Minor Adverse The site, in the main, fits the landform and scale of the landscape in that:

 The proposal can almost be completely mitigated for because of the nature of the proposal itself or the character of the landscape it is in. Likely to be in a Medium or Low sensitivity landscape.  In partial conflict with national regional and local policy to respect and enhance landscape character across few character and set out in current Structure Plan Policies/LDP’s.  There is a very slight potential of cumulative operations of other proposed sites.  At variance with some minor aspects of the LCA descriptions. Neutral Effect The proposal is likely to be able to complement and fit the scale, landform and pattern of the landscape in that:

 Mitigation measures are likely to ensure that the scheme will blend in well with surrounding landscape character components.  Will probably maintain existing landscape character with specific planning conditions and in a Medium to Low sensitivity landscape.  Likely to be in a landscape in fair condition or one with a restoration objective (identified in district/borough/county assessments).  Likely to be isolated or small site with no cumulative effects from neighbouring operations. Very Low Beneficial The proposal will probably fit in the landform, pattern and historical use of the area.

 By incorporating measures for mitigation it will ensure that landscape character is marginally enhanced and improved, such as habitat creation, restoration of partly degraded landscape. Likely to be in a Medium or Low Sensitive Landscape.  Could partially incorporate national, regional and local policy to enhance landscape character (on restoration) and set out in current Structure Plan Policies/LDP’s.  Likely to be isolated or small site with no likely cumulative effect from neighbouring operations. Low Beneficial The proposal will probably fit well in the landform, pattern and historical use of the area.

 By incorporating measures for mitigation it will ensure that landscape character is enhanced and improved, such as habitat creation, restoration of a degraded landscape. Likely to be in a Medium or Low Sensitive Landscape.  Could incorporate national, regional and local policy to enhance landscape character (on restoration) and set out in current Structure Plan Policies/LDP’s.  Likely to be isolated or relatively small site with no cumulative effect from neighbouring operations. Medium Beneficial The proposal will fit well in the landform, pattern and historical use of the area.

 By incorporating measures for mitigation it will ensure that landscape character is materially enhanced and improved, such as habitat creation, restoration of a much degraded landscape. Likely to be in a Medium or High Sensitive Landscape.  Incorporates a wide range of national, regional and local policies to enhance landscape character (on restoration) and set out in current Structure Plan Policies/LDP’s.  Likely to be an isolated or small site with no cumulative effect from neighbouring operations. High Beneficial The proposal will fit well and enhance the landform, pattern and historical use of the area.

 By incorporating measures for mitigation it will ensure that landscape character is enhanced and improved, such as habitat creation, restoration of a much degraded landscape. Likely to be in a Medium or High Sensitive Landscape.  Incorporates a wide range of national, regional and local policies to enhance and promote landscape character (on restoration) and set out in current Structure Plan Policies/LDP’s.  An isolated or small site with no cumulative effect from neighbouring operations.

Pleydell Smithyman Ltd September 2015

S:\M13.135 Cranebrook Quarry\Reports\M13.135.R.012 LVIA Methodology\M13.135.R.012 LVIA Methodology_APPENDIX B.Doc Nature of Effects (Magnitude) on Visual Receptors

The magnitude of effects in relation to identified visual receptors was determined according to the criteria set out in Table 7.

Appendix B Table 7: Nature of Effects (Magnitude) on Visual Receptors: Definitions

Adverse Beneficial

VERY VERY HIGH/VERY HIGH MEDIUM/LOW NEUTRAL MEDIUM/HIGH LOW/MINOR LOW/LOW

Permanent alteration Permanent (or Permanent (or No perceived Permanent Permanent or of key elements such long term) or long term) or change in or temporary temporary that it significantly temporary temporary character or alteration of change in a key and detrimentally change in a key change of minor amenity. minor element or affects local or wider element or element, causing element, permanent character or amenity. permanent a minor or very causing a change in less Views are open, from change in less minor negative minor important close proximity and important alteration in improvemen element, detrimentally affected element, character or t in local noticeably in a pronounced or creating amenity. character or improving local very pronounced negative effects Detrimental amenity. character or manner. Forms a on character or views are Views are amenity. Views significant or very amenity. screened and/or improved are improved but significant element in Detrimental are at oblique but screened partially screened the landscape. views are angles and/or at a and/or are at and/or viewed as partially great distance. oblique part of the wider screened and/or angles. landscape. viewed as part of the wider landscape.

This classification system was used as a basis to ascertain the level or nature of effect (magnitude of change) the visual receptors were likely to experience, modified by other factors such as distance from the site, obliqueness of view, intervening landform, vegetation and man-made structures.

Stage Six

Overall Significance of Effects: Combination of Nature of Effect (Magnitude) and Nature of Receptor (Sensitivity)

Following the assessment of the Nature of Effect (Magnitude) an assessment of the Overall Significance of Effects was carried out by combining the level of the Nature of Effect with the assessed values of the Nature of Receptor (Sensitivity) present. This is presented in the form of a matrix table (see Table 8). The table was used to provide an indication of the level of the Overall Significance of Effects resulting from the development in relation to the localities landscape character or visual amenity. The effects were considered according to whether they were adverse, neutral or beneficial.

Pleydell Smithyman Ltd September 2015

S:\M13.135 Cranebrook Quarry\Reports\M13.135.R.012 LVIA Methodology\M13.135.R.012 LVIA Methodology_APPENDIX B.Doc Appendix B Table 8: Significance of Impacts: Correlation of Nature of Effect with Nature of Landscape or Visual Receptors

NATURE of the Landscape/Visual Receptor (Sensitivity)

Very High High Medium Low Very Low Very High Severe Major Substantial Notable Moderate High Major Substantial Notable Moderate Slight

Adverse Medium Substantial Notable Moderate Slight Very Slight Low Notable Moderate Slight Very Slight Minimal Very Low Moderate Slight Very Slight Minimal Negligible Minor Slight Very Slight Minimal Negligible Negligible Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral Very Low Slight Very Slight Minimal Negligible Negligible Low Moderate Slight Very Slight Minimal Minimal NATURE of Effect (Magnitude) Beneficial Medium Moderate Moderate Slight Very Slight Very Slight High Notable Notable Moderate Moderate Slight

Landscape or Visual Receptors that have been assessed as potentially receiving Moderate or less levels of Overall Significance of Effects, while receiving measurable effects from the development are deemed to be NOT Significant. Landscape or Visual Receptors that have been assessed as potentially receiving Notable or greater levels of Overall Significance of Effects from the development, are deemed to be Significant.

ZONE OF THEORETICAL VISIBILITY - METHODOLOGY

Computer based studies are used to establish the site’s potential visual envelope. These studies use Ordnance Survey digital 3D terrain Profile Data. Computer models used specialised software (LSS, McCarthy Taylor Systems Ltd) to generate digital models of the landform to determine the site's Zones of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV), based on mathematically generated vertical angles of view. No detailed level information was included for built structures, tree blocks, individual trees and hedges. These elements would generally obscure views where they intervene between the viewer and the viewed object. The ZTV therefore shows a worst-case scenario, with many of the predicted views, particularly distant ones, not likely to be present.

The computer study helps to objectively define the magnitude of visual effects the proposed development might have, by linking potential impact to the vertical angle subtended at the viewpoint by the top and bottom extremities of the object that is viewable, from which a ‘contour’ model is generated. This gives a visual measure of how much of a given vertical field of view is occupied by the object when viewed from different locations. This method automatically takes into account effects of distance from the site (i.e. an object close to the viewer occupies a greater vertical angle [field of view] than a feature further away). Where a zero value is returned, the viewpoint lies outside or on the edge of the Visual Envelope, delineating the areas from which views are not thought to be possible (uncoloured).

Pleydell Smithyman Ltd September 2015

S:\M13.135 Cranebrook Quarry\Reports\M13.135.R.012 LVIA Methodology\M13.135.R.012 LVIA Methodology_APPENDIX B.Doc Appendix B Figure 1: A Diagram to Illustrate Vertical Angles

Height of viewed object VA VA Viewer Distance of 'object' from viwer The effect of distance from the object being viewed has on vertical angle

VA

Height of viewed object Viewer Intervening Object The effect intervening landform or structures have on vertical angle

The following table shows how vertical angles of viewed objects relate to a person’s vertical field of view and the potential for an object to impact on the viewer. This table shows the mathematical relationship between a 12 metre high object, its distance from the viewer and the vertical angle it would subtend compared to the main vertical field of view of the viewer.

Appendix B Table 9: Mathematical Table to Show the Vertical Angle a 12 Metre High Object Would Visually Subtend at Various Distances Distance From Viewer of 12m Vertical Angle Subtended high object (Total Field of View = @ 90) 10.0 Km 0.07 6.8 Km 0.1 3.5 Km 0.2 2.3 Km 0.3 1.0 Km 0.7 0.7 Km 1.0 0.5 Km 1.4 0.2 Km 3.0 0.1 Km 6.8

Based on experience, photographic studies and the mathematical table, certain 'contour' values were assessed as potentially indicating differences in magnitude of effect. A classification system using six ‘contour’ values was used to relate vertical angles to levels of magnitude. These classifications were used to inform the assessment process to help distinguish possible differences in magnitudes of effect from various locations within the Study Area - those where the angle of view subtended the largest angle being likely to receive the highest magnitudes of effect. Conversely, those where the angle of view subtended the smallest angle being likely to receive the lowest magnitudes of effect.

Pleydell Smithyman Ltd September 2015

S:\M13.135 Cranebrook Quarry\Reports\M13.135.R.012 LVIA Methodology\M13.135.R.012 LVIA Methodology_APPENDIX B.Doc Environmental Statement (ES) Volume 3 TECHNICAL APPENDICES September 2015

TECHNICAL APPENDIX C – Ecological Assessment

Cranebrook Quarry, Watling Street, Hammerwich, Lichfi eld

PSL Ref: M13.135.R.018 ECO TECH ECOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY

SPECIALISTS IN: HABITAT AND SPECIES SURVEY ECOLOGICAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT MANAGEMENT PLANNING AND ADVICE

Cranebrook Quarry, nr. Muckley Corner, Staffordshire

Ecological Assessment

September 2015 v1

CONSULTANTS: ROBERT MILETO BSc MSc & TIGER MILETO BA. ASSISTANT: SKY MILETO 61 COPTHORNE ROAD SHREWSBURY SHROPSHIRE SY3 8NW. TEL. & FAX (01743) 236096 [email protected] Cranebrook Quarry, nr. Muckley Corner, Staffordshire Ecological Assessment

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Terms of Reference

This report considers the likely impacts on nature conservation of the proposals for the existing Cranebrook Quarry, near Muckley Corner, Staffordshire (NGR: SK070064). This includes the restoration of the existing quarry as well as a proposed extension, to take place over a predicted 14 year timescale.

Eco Tech Ecological Consultancy compiled this report utilising existing records and information derived from a range of habitat and species surveys.

Species and habitats are evaluated on an international, national (England), regional (Staffordshire) and site basis. Potential sources of impact on features of nature conservation importance are outlined and predicted effects of the proposed extension are described. The significance of these effects is considered and mitigation measures discussed.

1.2 Sources of Information

Information used in the production of this report was derived from the following surveys:  Phase 1 habitat survey (JNCC, 1993);  Incidental vascular plant species list;  incidental invertebrate/butterfly records and assessment for likely valuable habitat;  incidental reptile records and assessment of likely habitat suitability;  incidental bird records and assessment of likely breeding;  bat survey comprising identification of potential roost sites;  water vole and otter survey comprising an assessment of habitat suitability and signs of use;  badger survey comprising a search for signs of activity and setts within the proposed extension area and within some 30m of its boundary (where access was possible).

The scope of the surveys for the proposed extension area was discussed with the Principal Ecologist at Staffordshire County Council in 2013.

Survey was undertaken in July 2013 and July 2015.

In addition, current existing biological records for protected and notable habitats and species within 0.5km of the application boundary were obtained from the Staffordshire Ecological Record (SER).

2 Cranebrook Quarry, nr. Muckley Corner, Staffordshire Ecological Assessment

2 RESULTS

2.1 General ecological context

Map 1 shows the location of the application area and its immediate surrounds.

For the purposes of this report, the application area (approx 9ha) has been split into three sections, as follows.

Quarry operational area (approx. 5ha) This is located centrally and comprises primarily bare ground and ruderal tall herb. There are also small areas of dense scrub along with a few scattered trees and scrub, ephemeral/short perennial vegetation and the pre-fabricated site office building.

Proposed extension area (approx. 3.1ha) This is located at the east and comprises almost entirely poor semi-improved grassland.

The western area (approx. 0.9ha) This is located at the west and largely comprises an area primarily bare ground (in use as a compound for the adjacent canal restoration at the time of survey), poor-semi improved grassland and broadleaved semi-natural woodland. It is bisected by a small stream (the Crane Brook)

The surrounding landuse is primarily agricultural land (mainly improved pasture), though just to the north is the A5 trunk road and just to the west is the M6 toll road. A former canal just to the south of the application area was in the process of being re-instated during the July 2015 survey.

2.2 Habitats

Map 1 shows the location and extent of habitats within the application area. The habitats at the time of survey are described below. However, it should be noted that much of the application area is in active use and so subject to rapid and radical habitat change.

Broadleaved semi-natural woodland This occurs as a single small patch (approx. 0.07ha) on the southern edge of the western area. The canopy is co-dominated by alder and common lime with essentially no shrub later. The field layer is patchily dominated by common nettle or rough meadow-grass with scrambling cleavers also locally frequent.

Scattered broadleaved trees One semi-mature birch occurs on the northern boundary of the quarry operational area and a semi-mature crack-willow occurs on its southern boundary.

Dense scrub Three small patches occur (approx. total area is 0.1ha). The patch at the north of the quarry operational area comprises largely of gorse. The patch at the south comprises a mix of bramble and gorse and the patch at the west appears to have been planted on a bund and comprises a varied mix of species that includes young alder, ash, silver birch and elder to around 5m tall. The field layer here is rather sparse but includes patchy cleavers, herb robert, wood avens and hedge bindweed.

3 Cranebrook Quarry, nr. Muckley Corner, Staffordshire Ecological Assessment

2.2 Habitats (cont.)

Scattered scrub There are a few scattered hawthorn, bramble, gorse and young crack willow present, mainly along the course of the Crane Brook (within the western area) and along the southern boundary of the quarry operational area.

Poor semi-improved grassland Two areas occur (approx. total area is 3.6ha). At the west, the westernmost part of the western comprises this grassland type. The sward appears to be species-poor and overwhelmingly dominated by Yorkshire-fog with only locally frequent creeping thistle, cock’s-foot, ribwort plantain, hairy tare and tufted vetch. Species that are more indicative of species-rich swards appear to be absent. At the east, essentially all of the proposed extension area comprises this grassland type and it appears to have previously grazed by horses. The sward appears to be species- poor, comprising abundant perennial rye-grass, Yorkshire-fog, cock’s-foot, soft-brome, rough meadow-grass with frequent dandelion, common ragwort, cat’s-ear and sweet vernal-grass and occasional common sorrel, broad-leaved dock, spear thistle, ribwort plantain, white clover and creeping thistle. Species that are more indicative of species- rich swards appear to be absent. There are tiny patches (at the south-west – not mapped) where fine-leaved grasses (common bent and red fescue) dominate with species such as sticky mouse-ear and bird’s-foot. Here, the habitat approaches acid grassland.

Bracken A narrow strip along the southern boundary of the quarry operational area is dominated by bracken (approx. total area is 0.05ha) with sprawling cleavers and patchy common nettle.

Ruderal tall herb There are extensive stands of this habitat manly on some of the (bunded) quarry operational area boundaries and at its centre (approx. total area is 1.7ha). Typically, no one species is dominate but there are locally frequent/abundant patches of species include teasel, scentless mayweed, common ragwort, mugwort, ribbed melilot, hedge mustard, weld, common poppy, broad-leaved dock, prickly lettuce, ox-eye daisy, creeping and spear thistle. Certain areas also included locally frequent grasses, primarily Yorkshire fog but also with patchy common bent and red fescue.

Open running water The Crane Brook bisects the western area. At this point the brook is up to some 1.5m wide and was some 0.3m deep at the time of survey. Aquatic vegetation was largely limited to mainly in-channel stands of brooklime along with occasional marginal gypsywort.

Ephemeral/short perennial This habitat occurs as a strip at the east of the quarry operational area (approx. total area is 0.2ha). As is typical of this vegetation, plant cover is rather spare with scattered to locally frequent species including weld, annual meadow-grass, colt’s-foot, white clover, a small willowherb species, common whitlowgrass and sticky mouse-ear.

Bare ground Much of the quarry operational area is bare ground comprising mainly sand or concrete, though piles of other materials are also present. In places the sand forms cliffs. The easternmost part of the western area was also largely bare ground at the time of survey due to its use as a compound for the adjacent canal restoration. The approx. total area of bare ground is 3.2ha.

4 Cranebrook Quarry, nr. Muckley Corner, Staffordshire Ecological Assessment

2.2 Habitats (cont.)

Building The site office is a pre-fabricated building at the south-western end of the quarry operational area.

5 Cranebrook Quarry, nr. Muckley Corner, Staffordshire Ecological Assessment

2.2 Habitats (cont.)

Hedges (some with trees) The only internal hedge is on the boundary between the quarry operational area and the proposed extension area. Along part of this boundary is an approx 150m long intact species-poor hedge dominated by tall (to 4m) hawthorn but with several species of shrub and tree inter-planted, including pedunculate oak, field maple, ash, sycamore and wild cherry. The vegetation below is sparse (partly due to high rabbit activity) with only patchy common nettle locally frequent.

There are hedges along some of the external boundaries but as these are just outside (or form part of) the application boundary and to be retained, they are not mapped or described.

Other Several boundaries are partly fenced (not mapped).

6 Cranebrook Quarry, nr. Muckley Corner, Staffordshire Ecological Assessment

Map 1: Location and extent of habitats within the application area

7 Cranebrook Quarry, nr. Muckley Corner, Staffordshire Ecological Assessment

Photos (all from 2015)

Photo 1 – View from E boundary looking W, showing semi- Photo 2 – View from N boundary of the western area improved grassland in the foreground and woodland in the looking S, showing bare ground of compound in the distance foreground and woodland in the distance

Photo 3 – View from N boundary looking W, showing ruderal Photo 4 – View from N boundary looking SW, showing tall herb on bund ruderal tall herb on the N boundary, ruderal tall herb and dense scrub on the S boundary with bare ground in between

Photo 5 – View from N boundary looking S, showing ruderal Photo 6 – View from N boundary looking SE, showing tall herb on the N and S boundaries with bare ground in ruderal tall herb on the N and S boundaries with bare between ground in between

8 Cranebrook Quarry, nr. Muckley Corner, Staffordshire Ecological Assessment

Photos (cont.)

Photo 7 – Photo from near S boundary at E end of the Photo 8 – View across the proposed extension area, showing quarry operational area, looking N, showing poor semi-improved grassland ephemeral/short perennial habitat in foreground and ruderal tall herb in distance on bunds

9 Cranebrook Quarry, nr. Muckley Corner, Staffordshire Ecological Assessment

2.3 Species (including existing species records from SER)

Vascular plants 89 vascular plant species were recorded incidentally within the application area (see Appendix 1 for details). Two further notable species (annual knawel and corn spurrey) have been recorded in the locality (see Appendix 2 for details) and may occur within the application area (though they were not seen during the 2013 or 2015 surveys).

Invertebrate/butterflies 5 species were recorded incidentally within the application area (see Appendix 1 for details). No further species have been recorded in the locality (see Appendix 2 for details).

Amphibians There are no waterbodies on site, or visible on base maps and aerial photos within 250m of the site boundary. In addition, there are no existing records for this species group within 0.5km of the application area boundary. Therefore it is considered highly unlikely that amphibians are present with the application area.

Reptiles The open nature/structure of the vegetation present is considered to be poorly suited as reptile habitat. In addition, there are no existing records for this species group within 0.5km of the application area boundary. Hence it is considered unlikely that reptiles are present within the application area.

Birds Within or over the application area, 15 species of bird were recorded incidentally, of which 10 are considered possibly (or confirmed) breeding (see Appendix 1 for details). A further 5 bird species have been recorded in the locality (see Appendix 2 for details).

Bats There are no mature trees or other features present that are considered to have significant potential as bat roosts. The pre-fabricated site office is considered to hold negligible opportunities for a bat roost.

Four bat species have been recorded within 0.5km of the application boundary. Given the habitats present within and adjacent to the site, it is considered likely that bats make little use of the proposed extension area for foraging but may commute along the boundary hedges.

Water vole The Crane Brook was considered to be reasonably well suited to water vole use due to some reasonably dense stands of marginal vegetation and sloping banks. However, no signs of use were found. There are no existing records for this species within 0.5km of the boundary of the site. Hence it is considered unlikely that water voles are present within the application area.

Otter The Crane Brook was considered to be rather poorly suited to water vole use since it lacked a food source. No signs of use were found. There are no existing records for this species within 0.5km of the boundary of the site. Hence it is considered unlikely that otters are present within the application area, though they may pass through.

Badger No setts or other signs of badger activity were recorded within or adjacent to the application area. The nearest existing sett records for this species are some 260m from the boundary of the site. Hence it is considered unlikely that badgers are present within the application area, though they may pass through.

10 Cranebrook Quarry, nr. Muckley Corner, Staffordshire Ecological Assessment

2.3 Species (including existing species records from SER)

Other protected and notable species recorded in the locality As well as those mentioned above, a few other protected and notable species have been recorded within 0.5km of the boundary of the site (see Appendix 2 for details). However, given the nature and extent of the habitats present within the application area, it is considered highly unlikely that the site is key to the viability of populations of any of these species in the locality. The single exception to this may be annual knawel. This small vascular plant was recorded by Eco Tech in 2007 in an area that is now part of the quarry operational area, but not re-recorded in 2013 or 2015. However, being small, indistinct and visible primarily in the spring and early summer, it could easily still be present but overlooked.

2.4 Statutory and non-statutory sites of nature conservation value in the locality

The proposed extension area does not form part of any statutory or non-statutory site of nature conservation value and no such site occurs within 0.5km of its boundary.

There nearest statutory site appears to be Chasewater and the Southern Staffordshire Coalfield Heaths SSSI, which is some 1.7km west of the application boundary at the nearest point.

11 Cranebrook Quarry, nr. Muckley Corner, Staffordshire Ecological Assessment

3 EVALUATION

3.1 Method for evaluation of features

Habitat and species evaluation essentially follows the Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management (IEEM) guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment (IEEM, 2006).

The IEEM guidelines suggest that value assigned to a feature should be a matter of professional judgement based on of available guidance and information, which can include the following:  existing designations;  biodiversity value (including rare species, the habitats that support rare species, notably large or diverse species populations, habitat extent and diversity, priority habitats and ancient woodlands). (see IEEM, 2006 for more detail).

Individual species that are protected under European or National legislation are evaluated as above, but with the additional consideration of legal obligations.

3.2 Habitats

The broadleaved semi-natural woodland conforms to a habitat of principal importance for the conservation of biodiversity in England under Section 41 of the NERC Act 2006. However, given:  the small area present;  the low diversity of the plants in the field layer;  the apparent lack of associated protected/notable species; The woodland present is considered to be of value in a site context only.

The hedgerow conforms to a habitat of principal importance for the conservation of biodiversity in England under Section 41 of the NERC Act 2006. However, given:  the small length present/affected;  the low diversity of (unplanted) woody species present;  the apparent lack of associated protected/notable species;  that it does not appear to meet the criteria for classification as “important” hedges under The Hedgerow Regulations. The hedge present is considered to be of value in a site context only.

The Crane brook (open running water) conforms to the Rivers and Streams Staffordshire Biodiversity Action Plan habitat. . However, given:  the small length present/affected;  the low diversity of associated species present;  the apparent lack of associated protected/notable species; The open running water present is considered to be of value in a site context only.

Given the lack of existing designations and low biodiversity value (as described in section 2 above), the other habitats present within the application area are considered to be of negligible nature conservation value.

12 Cranebrook Quarry, nr. Muckley Corner, Staffordshire Ecological Assessment

3.3 Species

Vascular plants The diversity of vascular plants recorded is not considered to be of note.

No species recorded are notable in a national context (Cheffings & Farrell (eds), 2005 - excluding the ‘least concern’ category) or are considered particularly rare/scarce in county context (http://bsbi.org.uk/staffordshire.html , accessed June 2015). Thus, the application area is considered highly likely to be of negligible value for vascular plant species.

Invertebrates/butterflies Cinnabar moth is a species of principal importance for the conservation of biodiversity in England under Section 41 of the NERC Act 2006. However, it is also common and well distributed throughout most of England (http://butterfly-conservation.org/51-1319/cinnabar.html, accessed July 2015). Hence, the application area is considered to be of value in a site context for this species.

Amphibians Given their likely absence, the value of the application area for amphibians is considered to be negligible.

Reptiles Given their likely absence, the value of the application area for reptiles is considered to be negligible.

Birds The diversity and numbers of birds recorded within the application area (or considered likely to be present) are not considered to be of note. Hence, the application area is considered highly likely to be of negligible value for this species group as a whole.

However, linnet and yellowhammer are species of principal importance for the conservation of biodiversity in England under Section 41 of the NERC Act 2006. However, they are also widespread and well distributed throughout most of the UK with estimated populations of 430,000 and 710,000 UK breeding territories respectively (http://www.rspb.org.uk/discoverandenjoynature/discoverandlearn/birdguide/name/l/linnet/index.as px and http://www.rspb.org.uk/discoverandenjoynature/discoverandlearn/birdguide/name/y/yellowhammer/ index.aspx, accessed July 2015). Hence, the application area is considered to be of value in a site context for these species.

In addition, active nests of most wild birds are protected from damage and destruction under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended). See Appendix 3 for details.

Bats Given the lack of potential bat roosts and the likely minimal use for bat foraging and commuting, the application area is considered to be of negligible nature conservation value for this species group.

Water vole and otter Given their likely absence, the value of the application area for these species is considered to be negligible.

Badger Given the lack of any signs for this species, the application area is considered to be of negligible nature conservation value for badger.

13 Cranebrook Quarry, nr. Muckley Corner, Staffordshire Ecological Assessment

3.4 Statutory, non-statutory and protected/notable species in the locality

There are no statutory/non-statutory of nature conservation value within 0.5km of the proposed extension boundary. The SSSI, some 1.7km to the west, is part of a national series of protected sites that are generally taken to be of value in a national (England) context.

A few other protected and notable species have been recorded previously in the vicinity of the application area. However, given the habitats present and the species surveys undertaken, it is considered highly unlikely that, with the exception of annual knawel and corn spurrey (see below), these species occur within the application area or that it is of significant value for any of these species.

Annual knawel was last recorded in 2007 and may still be present. The species is of principal importance for the conservation of biodiversity in England under Section 41 of the NERC Act 2006 and considered “Endangered” in Staffordshire (see http://bsbi.org.uk/staffordshire.html , accessed June 2015). Hence it is considered to be of value in a county (Staffordshire) context. Corn spurrey was last recorded in 2004 and may still be present. The species is considered “Vulnerable” in Staffordshire (see http://bsbi.org.uk/staffordshire.html , accessed June 2015), being still known from 237 tetrads post-1994. Hence it is considered to be of value in a site context.

3.5 Evaluation summary

The woodland is considered to be of value in a site context. The hedge is considered to be of value in a site context. The open running water present is considered to be of value in a site context. Cinnabar moth is considered to be of value in a site context. Linnet is considered to be of value in a site context. Yellowhammer is considered to be of value in a site context.

Some of the habitats present are also suitable for annual knawel and corn spurrey which have been recorded in the locality and, if present, would be of value in a site context.

There are also legal obligations with regard to nesting wild birds (active nests).

14 Cranebrook Quarry, nr. Muckley Corner, Staffordshire Ecological Assessment

4 POTENTIAL IMPACTS

4.1 General

This section considers the potential and predicted impacts which might arise from the scheme (and restoration) in the absence of mitigation. These are divided firstly into direct impacts arising from the proposed development itself and then indirect impacts arising from other possible associated effects.

4.2 Method of impact assessment and prediction

The method essentially follows a simplified form of the guidance set out in the Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management (IEEM) guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment (IEEM, 2006).

For each feature of greater than negligible value, any significant impact is assessed in the absence of mitigation. The IEEM Guidelines (2006) define an ecologically significant impact as ‘an impact (negative or positive) on the integrity of a defined site or ecosystem and/or the conservation status of habitats or species within a given geographical area’. Typically, this can involve;  Characterisation of unmitigated impact on the feature (often including extent (area), duration and reversibility, as well as the size and/or severity of the impact in quantitative terms);  Significance without mitigation and confidence level (often including if the impact is positive or negative, the likelihood that any impacts will occur as predicted).

The following predicted impacts are based on proposals submitted as part of application and consider both direct impacts on habitats and species within the proposed extension area and potential effects off-site on habitats and species in the vicinity of the proposed development.

4.3 Potential Direct Impacts on Habitats

Woodland The proposed scheme has intentionally retained the woodland. Hence, no impact is predicted (with a near definite level of confidence).

Hedgerows The proposed scheme would lead to the loss of some 140m of hedgerow to the proposed extension.

Hence, in the absence of mitigation/compensation, this is considered to comprise a definite but minor significant negative impact in a site context (since all other boundary hedges have been intentionally retained).

Compensation for this predicted impact is incorporated into the restoration strategy (see section 5 below).

Open running water The proposed scheme has intentionally retained the open running water. Hence, this is considered to comprise a definite minor significant positive impact in a site context.

In addition, it’s retention in the proposals, along with a vegetated buffer of some 25m is in keeping with the Water Framework Directive.

15 Cranebrook Quarry, nr. Muckley Corner, Staffordshire Ecological Assessment

4.4 Potential Direct Impacts on Species

Cinnabar moth was recorded in the quarry operational area where the larval food plant (common ragwort) is frequent. This plant is considered likely to persist in the locality throughout the proposed scheme and on final restoration and thus no adverse impact is considered likely with a reasonably high degree of certainty.

Linnet was recorded in the quarry operational area where there are nesting (mostly dense scrub) and feeding (seed and insects) opportunities. These features considered likely to persist in the locality throughout the proposed scheme and on final restoration and thus no adverse impact is considered likely with a reasonably high degree of certainty.

Yellowhammer was recorded in the quarry operational area where there are nesting (mostly dense non-woody vegetation) and feeding (seed and insects) opportunities. These features considered likely to persist in the locality throughout the proposed scheme and on final restoration and thus no adverse impact is considered likely with a reasonably high degree of certainty.

The open habitats present that are suitable for annual knawel and corn spurrey area considered likely to persist in the locality throughout the proposed scheme and on final restoration and thus no adverse impact on these two species (if present) is considered likely with a reasonably high degree of certainty.

4.5 Potential Indirect Impacts

Statutory, non-statutory and other sites of nature conservation value in the locality No such sites occur within 0.5km of the application area boundary. The nearest such site appears to be Chasewater and the Southern Staffordshire Coalfield Heaths SSSI, which is some 1.7km west of the application boundary at the nearest point. Since the proposed scheme is understood not to involve any de-watering or other potential effects on the groundwater, no significant indirect impacts are predicted on the SSSI with a very high level of confidence.

4.6 Potential Cumulative Impacts As well as the impacts detailed above, the canal restoration already commenced may affect the context within which the impacts of the proposed quarry development are couched. In terms of habitats, the canal restoration appears broadly to be leading to a replacement of dense scrub and ruderal tall herb by open standing water and marginal vegetation. The latter two, being rarer in the landscape are generally regarded as being of higher nature conservation value than the former, which are generally considered to be of low or negligible value. Hence no significant cumulative impacts pertaining to habitats are anticipated.

In terms of species, it is not known if any notable species were/are present within the canal restoration corridor, but, given the habitats present there and the lack of existing records (see appendix 2), it is considered unlikely that any would be reliant on the existing habitats present within proposed quarry application area. Hence no significant cumulative impacts pertaining to species are anticipated.

16 Cranebrook Quarry, nr. Muckley Corner, Staffordshire Ecological Assessment

5 PROPOSED MITIGATION, COMPENSATION AND ENHANCEMENT

This section outlines measures to mitigate or compensate for any significant impacts identified in section 4 above. Enhancement measures (via habitat creation and features for selected species) are also proposed.

See also the restoration drawings associated with this application, one of which is included in appendix 4 for ease of reference.

5.1 Habitats The woodland and open running water will be retained in-situ and separated from any built development by a buffer of at least 25m of undeveloped land.

The retained boundary hedges will be allowed to grow thicker and taller. In addition, during restoration a new hedge (longer than that to be lost) will be established through planting of site- native species (such as pedunculate oak, silver birch, rowan, holly, hawthorn, blackthorn and hazel) of local provenance (where available) and with appropriate aftercare.

The restoration concept includes the creation of around 2.7ha of lowland heath and acid grassland (heathland). This is fully in keeping with the Staffordshire Biodiversity Action Plan target to create an additional 218 ha of lowland heathland by 2026. There is now ample evidence that this can be successfully achieved if best practice is used (eg: see http://www.preesheathcommonreserve.co.uk/images/pdf/Prees%20Heath%20paper%20in%20Asp ects%20of%20Applied%20Biology.pdf, accessed July 2015). The success of the heathland creation will be maximised through the use of low fertility sandy soils, seeded with brash/cuttings from local heathland sites (such as Cannock Chase). In addition, ‘soft’, sandy, south facing, low cliffs (unplanted) will be incorporated into the heathland habitat, providing habitat for ephemeral plant species and burrowing bees and wasps (see also 5.2). See also Drawing M13.135.D.031 - Concept Restoration Scheme within the Phased Working and Restoration Scheme document.

5.2 Species The mitigation, compensation and enhancement measures proposed under habitats above are also considered highly likely to result in a net positive impact on a number of species groups. In addition, the following measures are also proposed:

Annual knawel, corn spurrey and burrowing bees and wasps The heathland creation will incorporate ‘soft’, sandy, south facing, low cliffs (unseeded/unplanted), providing habitat for ephemeral plant species and burrowing bees and wasps.

Linnet The heathland creation will incorporate the planting of small patches of gorse thicket, suitable as nesting sites for this species.

Sand martin and other bird species The removal of the hedge and any existing faces that may support sand martin burrows should be restricted to the period between September and February inclusive, in order to minimise any disturbance to breeding birds and to comply with existing legislation.

Sand martin is not considered to be a particularly notable species. However, since the proposed scheme would result in the total loss of suitable nest sites (sand faces), alternative nest sites for sand martin will be provided via tow nesting ‘barrels ’ (see below) or equivalents. Additional nest sites for other bird species will be provided via a selection of appropriate nest boxes. 5 open- fronted nest boxes (suitable for robin and dunnock) and 5 swallow cups are suggested.

17 Cranebrook Quarry, nr. Muckley Corner, Staffordshire Ecological Assessment

Details for a sand martin barrel

18 Cranebrook Quarry, nr. Muckley Corner, Staffordshire Ecological Assessment

6 RESIDUAL IMPACTS

Feature Impact in the Proposed mitigation and/or Residual impact, significance absence of enhancement and confidence level mitigation etc. (including significance and confidence level) Broadleaved None (near definite Retention of the woodland None (near definite level of semi-natural level of confidence) present within the application confidence) woodland area Hedges A definite but minor Retained boundary hedges will A definite minor significant significant negative be allowed to grow thicker and positive impact is predicted impact in a site taller. During restoration a new context hedge (longer than that to be lost) will be planted Open running None (near definite Retention of the woodland None (near definite level of water (the level of confidence) present within the application confidence) Crane brook) area Heathland and None The creation of approx. 2.7ha A moderate positive impact is sandy cliffs of these habitats considered highly probable Sand martin A definite but The provision of sand martin None, with a high degree of insignificant negative barrels (or equivalent) certainty impact in a site context

The table below shows that all significant negative impacts will be fully mitigated (with a high level of confidence in this conclusion).

19 Cranebrook Quarry, nr. Muckley Corner, Staffordshire Ecological Assessment

7 REFERENCES & BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bat Conservation Trust, (2012). Bat Surveys – Good Practice Guidelines 2nd ed.

Cheffings & Farrell (eds), (2005). Species Status No. 7, The Vascular Plant Red Data List for Great Britain. Available at http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/pdf/pub05_speciesstatusvpredlist3_web.pdf in June 2013.

DTI (2000): Guidance on the methodology for multi-modal studies. Originally available at: www.dft.gov.uk/itwp/mms/index.htm but no longer at this URL.

Gent A H, Gibson S D (eds), 2003: Herpetofauna Workers Manual. JNCC.

IEEM, 2006: Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment. Available at http://www.ieem.net/ecia/index.html in October 2010.

JNCC, 1993: Handbook for Phase 1 Habitat Survey – a technique for Environmental Audit. JNCC.

Nature Conservancy Council, 1989: Guidelines for Selection of Biological SSSI's. NCC.

Preston CD, Pearman DA and Dines TD, 2002: New Atlas of the British and Irish Flora. Oxford University Press.

20 Cranebrook Quarry, nr. Muckley Corner, Staffordshire Ecological Assessment

APPENDIX 1 SPECIES LISTS

A. VASCULAR PLANTS Nomenclature follows Stace, 1991

English Name Latin Name Abundance a small willowherb sp. Epilobium sp, VLF an evening primrose Oenothera sp. R alder Alnus glutinosa VLA annual meadow-grass Poa annua R/VLF ash Fraxinus excelsior R bird's-foot Ornithopus perpusillus VR blackthorn Prunus spinosa R bracken Pteridium aquilinum VLD bramble Rubus sect. Glandulosus R/VLA broad-leaved dock Rumex obtusifolius O brooklime Veronica beccabunga VLF cat's-ear Hypochaeris radicata LF cleavers Galium aparine LA cock's-foot Dactylis glomerata LA colt’s-foot Tussilago farfara VLF common bent Agrostis capillaris O common fumitory Fumaria officinalis R common lime Tilia x europaea VLA common mouse-ear Cerastium fontanum O common nettle Urtica dioica VLF common poppy Papaver rhoeas R common ragwort Senecio jacobaea F common sorrel Rumex acetosa O common vetch Vicia sativa R common whitlowgrass Erophila verna VLF cow parsley Anthriscus sylvestris VLF crack-willow Salix fragilis VR creeping bent Agrostis stolonifera R creeping buttercup Ranunculus repens R/VLF creeping thistle Cirsium arvense O crested dog's-tail Cynosurus cristatus R daisy Bellis perennis R dandelion Taraxacum sect. Ruderalia. F dog rose Rosa canina R dove's-foot crane's-bill Geranium molle R elder Sambucus nigra VR false oat-grass Arrhenatherum elatius R fat hen Chenopodium album R fennel Foeniculum vulgare R field maple Acer campestre R field wood-rush Luzula campestris O germander speedwell Veronica chamaedrys R gypsywort Lycopus europaeus VLF gorse Ulex europaeus VLD great willowherb Epilobium hirsutum R greater plantain Plantago major R groundsel Senecio vulgaris VR hairy tare Vicia hirsuta O

21 Cranebrook Quarry, nr. Muckley Corner, Staffordshire Ecological Assessment

APPENDIX 1 SPECIES LISTS A. VASCULAR PLANTS (cont.)

English Name Latin Name Abundance hawthorn Crataegus monogyna VLA hazel Corylus avellana R hedge bindweed Calystegia sepium O hedge mustard Sisymbrium officinale O/LF herb robert Geranium robertianum R hogweed Heracleum sphondylium R horse-chestnut Aesculus hippocastanum VR ivy Hedera helix R ivy-leaved speedwell Veronica hederifolia R meadow buttercup Ranunculus acris R mugwort Artemisia vulgaris VLA musk thistle Carduus nutans R ox-eye daisy Leucanthemum vulgare VLF pedunculate oak Quercus robur R perennial rye-grass Lolium perenne LA prickly lettuce Lactuca serriola VLA red clover Trifolium pratense O red fescue Festuca rubra O redshank Persicaria maculosa R ribbed melilot Melilotus officinalis VLF ribwort plantain Plantago lanceolata O rough meadow-grass Poa trivialis LA scentless mayweed Tripleurospermum inodorum VLA Scots pine Pinus sylvestris VR silver birch Betula pendula R soft-brome Bromus hordeaceus LA spear thistle Cirsium vulgare O squirreltail fescue Vulpia bromoides R sticky mouse-ear Cerastium glomeratum R sweet chestnut Castanea sativa R sweet vernal grass Anthoxanthum odoratum F sycamore Acer pseudoplatanus R teasel Dipsacus fullonum VLA tufted vetch Vicia cracca R weld Reseda luteola VLF white clover Trifolium repens O wild cherry Prunus avium R wild pansy Viola tricolor R wood avens Geum urbanum R yarrow Achillea millefolium R Yorkshire-fog Holcus lanatus LA

KEY TO ABUNDANCE: D = Dominant A = Abundant F = Frequent O = Occasional R = Rare L = Locally V = Very

22 Cranebrook Quarry, nr. Muckley Corner, Staffordshire Ecological Assessment

APPENDIX 1 SPECIES LISTS

B. BUTTERFLIES AND OTHER INVERTEBRATES Large skipper Meadow brown Ringlet Small skipper

Cinnabar moth

C. BIRDS

Species Likely status within the proposed extension area Blackbird Possibly breeding Blue Tit Present Carrion Crow Present Chaffinch Possibly breeding Goldfinch Possibly breeding Linnet Possibly breeding Mistle Thrush Present Pied wagtail Possibly breeding Rook Present Sand Martin Confirmed breeding Swallow Present Whitethroat Possibly breeding Wood Pigeon Possibly breeding Wren Possibly breeding Yellowhammer Possibly breeding

Definitions: Present - Observed on or over the area but suitable breeding habitat not considered present Possibly breeding – Observed on the area and suitable breeding habitat considered present Confirmed breeding – Observed showing breeding activity

D. MAMMALS Fox Rabbit

23 Cranebrook Quarry, nr. Muckley Corner, Staffordshire Ecological Assessment

APPENDIX 2 Summary of existing information provided by the SER

Scientific Name Common Name Informal Group Most Recent Rec. Alauda arvensis Sky Lark bird 2007 Emberiza citrinella Yellowhammer bird 2007 Falco tinnunculus Common Kestrel bird 2013 Hirundo rustica Barn Swallow bird 2009 Passer domesticus House Sparrow bird 2007 Riparia riparia Sand Martin bird 2013 Sturnus vulgaris Common Starling bird 2007 Turdus philomelos Song Thrush bird 2007 Scleranthus annuus Annual Knawel flowering plant 2007 Spergula arvensis Corn Spurrey flowering plant 2004 Erinaceus europaeus West European Hedgehog mammal 2008 Meles meles Eurasian Badger mammal 2011 Myotis mystacinus Whiskered Bat mammal - bat 2014 Nyctalus noctula Noctule Bat mammal - bat 2008 Nyctalus/Eptesicus agg. a bat mammal - bat 2009 Pipistrellus Pipistrelle Bat species mammal - bat 2009 Pipistrellus pipistrellus Common Pipistrelle mammal - bat 2010 Pipistrellus pipistrellus s.l. Pipistrelle mammal - bat 2009 Pipistrellus pygmaeus Soprano Pipistrelle mammal - bat 2009

24 Cranebrook Quarry, nr. Muckley Corner, Staffordshire Ecological Assessment

APPENDIX 2 Summary of existing information provided by the SER (cont.)

25 Cranebrook Quarry, nr. Muckley Corner, Staffordshire Ecological Assessment

APPENDIX 3 Extracts from guidance documents pertaining to protected species

Wild Birds Adapted from RSPB website: http://www.rspb.org.uk/ourwork/policy/wildbirdslaw/birdsandlaw/wca/index.aspx (accessed July 2015)

Basic protection All birds, their nests and eggs are protected by law and it is thus an offence, with certain exceptions (see Exceptions), to:  intentionally kill, injure or take any wild bird  intentionally take, damage or destroy the nest of any wild bird whilst it is in use or being built  intentionally take or destroy the egg of any wild bird  have in one's possession or control any wild bird, dead or alive, or any part of a wild bird, which has been taken in contravention of the Act or the Protection of Birds Act 1954  have in one's possession or control any egg or part of an egg which has been taken in contravention of the Act or the Protection of Birds Act 1954  use traps or similar items to kill, injure or take wild birds  have in one's possession or control any bird of a species occurring on Schedule 4 of the Act unless registered, and in most cases ringed, in accordance with the Secretary of State's regulations (see Schedules)  intentionally or recklessly disturb any wild bird listed on Schedule 1 while it is nest building, or at a nest containing eggs or young, or disturb the dependent young of such a bird.

Exceptions There are some exceptions to the offences created by the Wildlife and Countryside Act, the most notable of which are:  an authorised person (eg a landowner or occupier) may kill or take, in certain situations and by certain methods, so called 'pest species' and destroy or take the nest or eggs of such a bird. This is permissible under the terms of General Licences issues by government departments (see Licences).  it is not illegal to destroy a nest, egg or bird if it can be shown that the act was the incidental result of a lawful operation which could not reasonably have been avoided.  a person may kill or injure a wild bird, other than one included on Schedule 1, if they can show, subject to a number of specific conditions, that their action was necessary to preserve public health or air safety, prevent spread of disease, or prevent serious damage to livestock, crops, vegetables, fruit, growing timber, or fisheries (contact Defra for more information).  a person may take or kill (or injure in attempting to kill) a bird listed on Schedule 2, Part I, outside the close season (see Schedules).  a person may take a wild bird if the bird has been injured other than by their own hand and their sole purpose is to tend it and then release it when no longer disabled. These provisions enable people to care for sick, injured or orphaned birds. Additionally, a wild bird may be killed if it is so seriously disabled as to be beyond recovery. Sick and injured birds listed on Schedule 4 should be registered with Defra.

26