Formal Amendment to Planning Application Ref.CM3/0507/30, Slinter Top Quarry
Non Technical Summary of Environmental Statement
Formal Amendment to Planning Application Ref.CM3/0507/30 for
(A) Variation of Condition No.1 – Planning Permission CM3/901/76 for
Continuation of Use for Mineral Extraction and Restoration by
Landfill and
(B) Variation of Condition No.2 – Planning Permission CM3/1203/163 for
Retention of Temporary Access Road
Dated 26th April 2007
Slinter Top Quarry, Cromford, Matlock, Derbyshire
Non Technical Summary of the Environmental Statement
Contents
Page
i
1.
Introduction
2.
2.1
2.2
2.3
Development Proposals
The Application Site
Quarry Operations, Reserves and Void Space
Development, Restoration and Aftercare Proposals
3.
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.7
3.8
3.9
Environmental Issues
Landscape & Visual Amenity
Ecology
Noise
Dust
Blasting
Water
Stability
Transport
Other Environmental Issues
4.
Alternatives to the Proposed Development
Plans and Drawings
Drawing No.SMC/FA/01
Drawing No.SMC/FA/02
Drawing No.SMC/FA/03
Drawing No.SMC/FA/04
Drawing No.GA.DRB.334-3
Drawing No. PSS-100-001-14.2
Drawing No.PSS.DRB.150-2a
S/4065/ES NTS Contents Final
Location
Application Site
Site Environs
Site Topography
Excavation Areas & Cross Sections
Survey and Excavation Design
Conceptual Final Restoration
iii
iii
iv
vi
vii
vii
viii
ix
x
xi
xii
xiii
xiv
xiv
xvii
Formal Amendment to Planning Application Ref.CM3/0507/30, Slinter Top Quarry
Non Technical Summary of Environmental Statement
Environmental Statement in Support of Formal Amendment to Planning
Application Ref.CM3/0507/30 for
(A) Variation of Condition No.1 – Planning Permission CM3/901/76 for
Continuation of Use for Mineral Extraction and Restoration by
Landfill and
(B) Variation of Condition No.2 – Planning Permission CM3/1203/163 for
Retention of Temporary Access Road
Dated 26th April 2007
Slinter Top Quarry, Cromford, Matlock, Derbyshire
Non Technical Summary of the Environmental Statement
1. Introduction
Slinter Top Quarry is located near Cromford, Matlock, Derbyshire. Limestone and
associated vein minerals are worked at the Quarry, which is operated by the Slinter
Mining Company Ltd (the Applicant).
The Environmental Statement is being submitted to Derbyshire County Council (the
MPA) in support of a formal amendment (the Formal Amendment) to undetermined
Planning Application Ref.CM3/0507/30, dated 26th April 2007. The Environmental
Statement contains details of the Formal Amendment.
The main planning permission covering Slinter Top Quarry is Planning Permission
CM3/901/76, dated 15th December 2005. This Permission time limited the mineral
extraction operations to 30th April 2007 and infilling and restoration to 30th April
2010. Just prior to 30th April 2007, the Applicant submitted Planning Application
Ref.CM3/0507/30 to extend these time limits to 30th April 2013 for mineral extraction
operations and 30th April 2020 for infilling and restoration.
The MPA processed the Application, but the consequent planning permission was
never issued. The current planning situation at Slinter Top Quarry is that mineral
extraction and infilling operations are currently being carried out on the basis that
Permission CM3/901/76 is being ‘held over’ until the Application is finally determined.
During 2011 it became apparent that the time limits proposed in the undetermined
Application were considerably short of the time limits actually required and it was,
therefore, decided that a new planning application would be submitted to extend the
S/4065/ES NTS October 2012
Page
i
Formal Amendment to Planning Application Ref.CM3/0507/30, Slinter Top Quarry
Non Technical Summary of Environmental Statement
timescales set out in Planning Permission CM3/901/76. Accordingly a Screening and
Scoping Request was submitted to the MPA on 20th July 2011 and the MPA issued a
Scoping Opinion on 18th November 2011.
Following discussions with the MPA, it was decided that a better way forward would
be for the Applicant to formally amend the undetermined Application to reflect the
development outlined in the Screening and Scoping Request and to submit the
Environmental Statement (the ES) outlined in the Scoping Opinion as supplementary
information in support of the Formal Amendment.
The Formal Amendment to the undetermined Application is that the time limit on
mineral extraction operations be extended from 30th April 2013 to 31st December 2021
and the time limit for infilling and restoration be extended from 30th April 2020 to 31st
December 2032. The Formal Amendment also withdraws the request to retain the
temporary access road, as this is no longer required. The revised timescales are
referred to in this Non-Technical Summary as the ‘proposed development’.
The ES has been prepared by Sloane Mead, a specialist firm of minerals planning
consultants, it comprises two volumes:
ƒ Volume I is the full Environmental Statement, which includes a detailed report on
each of the key environmental issues considered during the Environmental Impact
Assessment (EIA). This Non-Technical summary is included at the start of the ES.
ƒ Volume II is the Non-Technical Summary of the Environmental Statement, which
is being made available as a separate document.
It should be noted that the ES is being submitted in support of the Formal
Amendment to the undetermined Application. It comprises the findings of the EIA
and details of the Formal Amendment. The scope of the EIA is set out in the Scoping
Opinion issued by the MPA on 18th November 2011.
The Scoping Opinion advised that the EIA should include: a Landscape & Visual
Impact Assessment; an Ecological Impact Assessment; a Noise Assessment; an Air
Quality Assessment; a Blast Vibration Assessment; a Hydrological & Hydrogeological
Assessment; and a Transport Assessment. Additionally, in the light of recent stability
issues, the Applicant felt that a Geological & Geotechnical Assessment would also be
appropriate. These Key Environmental Issues have been assessed by independent
specialist consultants and their individual reports are contained in Sections 6 to 13 of
the ES and are summarised in this Non-Technical Summary.
S/4065/ES NTS October 2012
Page
ii
Formal Amendment to Planning Application Ref.CM3/0507/30, Slinter Top Quarry
Non Technical Summary of Environmental Statement
The Scoping Opinion also required an assessment of the impact on Cultural Heritage
(Archaeology) and Rights of Way & Recreation. It also required the issues of Socio
Economic Impact and Cumulative Impact to be considered. These other issues have
been dealt with and their findings are contained in Section 14 of the ES and are
summarised in this Non-Technical Summary. The issue of Alternatives to the
proposed development is dealt with in Section 5 of the ES and is also summarised in
this Non-Technical Summary.
The baseline for these various Assessments was taken to be the situation should the
undetermined Application not be permitted. If this occurs then the time limits set out
in Permission CM3/901/76 become operational. As both these time limits have now
passed then Condition No.51 in the Permission would take effect. This Condition
states that an alternative reclamation scheme should to be drawn up, submitted and
implemented in the event of the expiry of the Permission before completion of mineral
extraction and infilling. The baseline situation is, therefore, that if the Application is
refused then a part worked, part filled restored Quarry will result.
2. Development Proposals
2.1. The Application Site
Slinter Top Quarry is located approximately 0.5km west of Cromford, 1km north east
of the village of Middleton by Wirksworth, 1.2km south of the village of Bonsall and
1.5km south west of Matlock Bath. It is situated in Derbyshire Dales District in the
County of Derbyshire. Its location can be seen on Drawing No.SMC/FA/01. The
Application Site covers the entire Quarry and is shown outlined by a solid red line on
Drawing No.SMC/FA/02. Land controlled by the Applicant is shown outlined by a
solid blue line on Drawing No.SMC/FA/02.
Tarmac’s Dene Quarry lies only 0.2km south of Slinter Top Quarry and heavy goods
vehicles (HGVs) entering or leaving the Quarry use Dene Quarry’s internal haul road
and share the same access onto the B5036 Cromford to Wirksworth Road. The HGV
access route is shown by a purple line on Drawing No.SMC/FA/02. Light traffic
entering or leaving Slinter Top Quarry uses a track along the northern boundary of
Dene Quarry, which links into the shared access and is shown by a yellow line on
Drawing No.SMC/FA/02.
Drawing No.SMC/FA/02 also shows the Application Site in relation to the
surrounding topography and built development. The nearest dwelling houses to the
Application Site boundary are as follows:
S/4065/ES NTS October 2012
Page
iii
Formal Amendment to Planning Application Ref.CM3/0507/30, Slinter Top Quarry
Non Technical Summary of Environmental Statement
• Houses on Rose End Avenue, Hawthorn Drive and St Marks Close in
Cromford, situated approximately 450m east of the Site boundary.
• Three isolated farm houses off Duke Street in Middleton by Wirksworth,
situated approximately 500m to 600m south west of the Site boundary.
• Houses at the southern end of Clatterway
approximately 400m north of the Site boundary.
in
Bonsall,
situated
• Houses at the southern end of Church Street in Bonsall, situated in excess of
800m north of the Site boundary.
• Old Mill Cottage, situated on the A5012 and lying approximately 375m
north west of the Site boundary.
Drawing No.SMC/FA/03 shows Slinter Top Quarry in relation to the surrounding
area. It also shows: Rose End Meadows Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI); Via
Gellia Woodlands SSSI; Derwent Valley Mills World Heritage Site Buffer Zone; Peak
District Dales SAC; and definitive Footpaths along with their respective footpath
number.
Drawing No.SMC/FA/04 is based on a recent topographical survey of the Quarry. The
adjoining ground levels around the Quarry are approximately 230m AOD on the
south-western side and 208m AOD on the north-eastern side. The Quarry excavation
extends down to around 167m AOD. Infill material attains a height of approximately
225m AOD near to the entrance on the southern limit of the Site. However, the
extent of infilling is currently limited to the south-eastern part of the Quarry.
The Application Site is situated within an area of sloping land and covers 5.97ha.
Virtually the entire Site as been disturbed and the quarry workings have reached
their maximum lateral extent. All future extraction will extend downwards and no
additional surface area will be required.
2.2.
Quarry Operations, Reserves and Void Space
In-situ rock is loosened by a combination of blasting and digging with a hydraulic
excavator. Blasting takes place no more than once a day on an ad-hoc basis,
depending on demand. The blasted rock is loaded into dump trucks by loading shovel
and transported to the mobile processing plant, which comprises a primary and
secondary crusher and screens. As and when pockets of mineral ore are encountered
S/4065/ES NTS October 2012
Page
iv
Formal Amendment to Planning Application Ref.CM3/0507/30, Slinter Top Quarry
Non Technical Summary of Environmental Statement
they are either loaded directly onto HGVs or pre-screened to remove lump limestone
prior to loading and dispatch.
The void created by quarrying is being gradually infilled with inert, non-hazardous
excavation materials including concrete waste, moulding sands and insoluble vitrified
waste. Infill materials are discharged by HGVs in front of the tip face and are then
spread and compacted in layers not exceeding 2.5m by dozer of rubber-tyred shovel.
The infilling takes place in compliance with the approved Excavations and Tips Rules
(Regulation 31, Quarries Regulations 1999) and in full compliance with the terms of
the Waste Management Licence (BW30521Z). To ensure that the tipped materials are
suitably contained the void is lined with clay.
In the event that the content of infill materials received does not comply with the
authorised types to be disposed of, then such materials are separated for removal
from the Site for disposal at an authorised location. If suitable waste material is
available, the Applicant is permitted to recycle up to 5% of the permitted volume of
imported materials for use as construction hardcore.
Current permitted working hours at Slinter Top Quarry are:
•
•
Monday – Friday:
Saturdays:
07:30 – 18:00
07:30 – 15:00
No operations are permitted on Sundays or Bank Holidays.
The loading of HGVs and their movements to and from the Quarry are also restricted,
under Condition No.9, to the following time periods:
•
•
Monday – Friday:
Saturdays:
06:00 – 19:00
06:00 – 15:00
No vehicle operations are permitted on Sundays or Bank Holidays.
There are no maximum annual or monthly limits on stone production or materials
exported from the Site. Nevertheless, the Applicant operates a backloading system
(i.e. HGVs depart the Site full of stone product and return to the Site full of landfill
material) wherever possible. Such backloading practice limits the number of vehicle
movements to and from the Site each day and helps to reduce overall vehicle mileage.
There are some 677,320 tonnes of mineral remaining at the Quarry (as of 1st January
2012), which should have a life of approximately 7.2 years (based on the average
annual output for the past four years). There are also some 1,455,000 tonnes of
S/4065/ES NTS October 2012
Page
v
Formal Amendment to Planning Application Ref.CM3/0507/30, Slinter Top Quarry
Non Technical Summary of Environmental Statement
potential void space remaining at the Quarry (as of 1st January 2012), which could
take approximately 17 years to infill (assuming an average input of 50,000 tonnes per
annum for 9 years rising to an average input of 120,000 tonnes per annum for a
further 8 years).
It is due to the remaining mineral reserves and landfill void that the Formal
Amendment is being made. The Formal Amendment requests a new time limit for
mineral extraction operations until 31/12/2021 and a new time limit for infilling &
restoration until 31/12/2032. These additional timescales will allow the remaining
mineral to be extracted and the resultant void space to be infilled and the Site
restored back to original ground levels.
2.3.
Development, Restoration and Aftercare Proposals
The proposed development is to continue with the current mineral extraction and
infilling operations in accordance with the timescales in the Formal Amendment. If
planning permission is not granted then Quarry operations would have to cease and
an alternative reclamation scheme would need to be drawn up, submitted and
implemented.
Drawing No.GA.DRB.334-3 is the currently approved working scheme. However, due
to difficult geological and geotechnical issues it has been necessary to revise the
extraction design at the western end of the Quarry. The new design is shown on
Drawing No.PSS-100-001-14.2. This new design caters for 15m high faces with 5m
wide intermediate benches. This Drawing also shows a comparison between the
previous and proposed excavation design for this part of the Quarry.
Other than the revised excavation design in the western part of the Quarry, it is not
proposed to materially change any other aspect of the current mineral extraction and
infilling operations. Neither is it proposed to change the approved Drawing
No.PSS.DRB.150-2a entitled ‘Conceptual Final Restoration’. This Drawing shows the
Site being restored to original ground levels, the tree planting to be carried out and
the reinstatement of the original pattern of dry stone walls.
It is the Applicant’s intention to submit further details of restoration and aftercare in
advance of the completion of infilling. These details will be designed so as to enhance
the important landscape and ecological features of the area. Once restoration has
been completed, the restored area will be subject to five years of aftercare.
S/4065/ES NTS October 2012
Page
vi
Formal Amendment to Planning Application Ref.CM3/0507/30, Slinter Top Quarry
Non Technical Summary of Environmental Statement
3. Environmental Issues
3.1. Landscape and Visual Amenity
Independent landscape and environmental consultants, Bright & Associates, carried
out a full Landscape and Impact Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) of the proposed
development. It includes a baseline study of the current situation at the Quarry and
its surroundings; a study of the Landscape Setting; a study of the Landscape
Character and Designations; and a Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment.
The Assessment found that:
In terms of Landscape Character
ƒ In the ‘East Midlands Regional Landscape Character Assessment’ the Site is
located within Group 6 (Limestone Farmlands). The Site is situated within
sub-group Group 6c Limestone Dales.
ƒ
The ‘Landscape Character of Derbyshire’ adopts National Character Area
boundaries and further sub-divides these into Landscape Character Types. The
Site is located on the edge of the Limestone Slopes Landscape Character Type.
ƒ
In the section on Built Environment, within the ‘Landscape Character of
Derbyshire’ the following is noted ‘…Quarrying in general is a prominent
feature. Once small in scale, some areas are now dominated by large modern
quarries with their associated plant’.
In terms of Landscape Designations
ƒ The Peak District National Park is located c.350m north-west of the Site and
occupies the north-western part of the study area.
ƒ
Areas within the Griffe Grange Valley (along both sides of the Peak District
National Park boundary) are identified for conservation and landscape
protection including SSSIs (Sites of Special Scientific Interest) and SACs
(Special Areas of Conservation).
ƒ
The Derwent Valley Mills World Heritage Site (WHS) comprises a range of
industrial sites and settlements dating from the 18th to early 20th centuries in
the lower Derwent Valley. Representing examples of the Industrial Revolution
it includes areas around Cromford and Matlock Bath. The WHS itself covers
1,229ha with a buffer zone of 4,365 ha.
S/4065/ES NTS October 2012
Page
vii
Formal Amendment to Planning Application Ref.CM3/0507/30, Slinter Top Quarry
Non Technical Summary of Environmental Statement
ƒ
In relation to the Site, the WHS boundary is within c.150m to the north-east as
the boundary includes an area segmented between the A5012 and Slinter
Wood. The eastern part of the Site is within the WHS buffer zone (which
extends west of Cromford).
ƒ
There are a number of conservation areas near to the Site, as well as
Registered Parks and Gardens.
In terms of Visual Impact Assessment
ƒ Only limited areas from where the Site could potentially be seen (principal
visual envelope) were identified. Accordingly, the potential impacts are limited
to relatively small areas and are generally situated on the southern valley
slope, north of the Site from Masson Hill.
ƒ
The highest predicted impact is from Viewpoint 4, located on the upper part of
Masson Hill, from where visible infilling could lead to a Moderate or ModerateMajor level of visual significance. This effect will be limited to the higher areas
of the Hill where a more direct view is gained. From lower elevations, where
some residential properties may gain a view towards the Site, a Moderate or
even Minor-Moderate impact significance is predicted.
ƒ
Cumulative visual effects may occur from some elevated areas although this is
not predicted to have a significant level of effect and will not increase the visual
impacts identified.
The impacts identified in the LVIA (both landscape and visual) are considered to be
acceptable and preferential, when compared to the baseline situation. The proposed
development will result in the continued use of the site access road and site entrance
together with a change in landform due to infilling taking place; however the
restoration proposals will have a longer term beneficial effect, returning the Site
ultimately to grassland (and a small section of woodland). This is in keeping with the
immediate environment and landscape character. There is no lasting or significant
adverse landscape effect predicted as a result of the proposed development.
3.2. Ecology
Independent consultants, BSG Ecology, carried out a comprehensive Ecological
Impact Assessment (EcIA) of the development proposals. The EcIA includes a
Baseline Ecological Report (comprising a desk study and an extended phase 1 habitat
survey); consideration of the environmental impacts; the mitigation measures
S/4065/ES NTS October 2012
Page viii
Formal Amendment to Planning Application Ref.CM3/0507/30, Slinter Top Quarry
Non Technical Summary of Environmental Statement
required to prevent, reduce or offset any significant adverse effects; and the likely
residual effects after these measures have been employed.
The Baseline Report identified and listed statutory and non-statutory sites of nature
conservation interest, lying in close proximity to the Site, and described the habitats
identified during the extended phase 1 habitat survey. The Report also considered
the habitats in relation to various protected species.
The EcIA examined the likely significant ecological effects of the proposed
development. The impact assessment was carried out with reference to the guidance
produced by the Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management (IEEM, 2006),
which is recognised nationally as current best practice. The approach adopted
followed the EcIA process from baseline data gathering through to the assessment of
residual impacts. The collated baseline information was evaluated to identify which
receptors (i.e. sites, habitats and species) were of importance for nature conservation,
placing that importance on a geographical scale that ranges from site to international
level. The policy/legal implications of each impact were also discussed.
The potential impacts on the key receptors were then outlined and an assessment
made of their ecological significance. In the final stages, the potential for measures to
mitigate significant adverse impacts was investigated and, where this was not
possible, the need for compensatory measures was identified. The likely postmitigation/compensation residual impacts were discussed and any residual effects
identified.
The EcIA concluded that, without mitigation, compensation or enhancement, the
proposed development would be likely to result in an adverse impact on: the Peak
District Dales SAC/Via Gellia SSSI; Rose End Meadows SSSI; scrub and ruderal
vegetation; badger; nesting birds; and slow worm. However, with the proposed
mitigation, compensation and enhancement measures in place, there will be a neutral
impact. In the long-term the restoration of the Site to species-rich grassland
complementing the surrounding habitats will provide a positive benefit.
3.3. Noise
Independent consultants, Vibrock, carried out a Noise Impact Assessment of the
development proposals. The assessment comprised a visual survey of the Quarry and
the measurement of the existing ambient noise levels at two potentially noise
sensitive locations around the Site boundary. The two noise monitoring locations
were: 13 St Marks Close, Cromford and 56 Church St, Bonsall.
S/4065/ES NTS October 2012
Page
ix
Formal Amendment to Planning Application Ref.CM3/0507/30, Slinter Top Quarry
Non Technical Summary of Environmental Statement
The assessment found that:
ƒ
The working of any mineral deposit has the potential to create a certain degree of
environmental disturbance to locations in its immediate vicinity. This may be in
the form of noise and it is therefore essential that any such potential is recognised
and tightly controlled by safe and up to date site working practices and by strict
site management.
ƒ
The quarry plant used to work the Site has the potential to increase existing noise
levels at nearby properties. Accordingly, the existing noise climate has been
assessed at neighbouring properties and predictions of maximum likely future
noise levels, due to site operations, have been undertaken to some of the closest
properties according to the principles of the relevant British Standards.
ƒ
All the predicted noise levels refer to worst case scenarios, when operations are
undertaken at their closest distances to sensitive properties and, therefore, have
the greatest influence on the noise climate at these locations. These worst case
noise predictions may only last for a few weeks throughout the envisaged working
life of the Site.
ƒ
The daytime noise levels have been assessed against the latest guidance given by
HM Government for inhabited property adjacent to or near surface mineral
extraction sites in the National Planning Policy Framework.
From this
assessment, it is apparent that the predicted worst case noise levels:
(a)
Without exception, do not exceed the 70 dB LAeq,1h criterion, considered
a normally justifiable upper limit for temporary operations from
mineral extraction operations.
(b)
Without exception do not exceed the background noise level by more
than 10 dB(A), a criterion stated in the Technical Guidance to the
National Planning Policy Framework.
3.4. Dust
Independent consultants, Vibrock, carried out an Air Quality Assessment of the
development proposals. The assessment examined wind speed & direction and
rainfall data for the Site. Existing air quality was assessed and monitored and
considered against the background of current air quality standards and the current
planning permission. A PM10 assessment was carried out and consideration of the
cumulative impact of dust from Slinter Top and Dene Quarry was undertaken.
S/4065/ES NTS October 2012
Page
x
Formal Amendment to Planning Application Ref.CM3/0507/30, Slinter Top Quarry
Non Technical Summary of Environmental Statement
The assessment found that:
ƒ
The mobile plant required to work the Site has the potential to generate dust in
the immediate vicinity of their area of operation. The likelihood of problems
caused by dust will be largely influenced by the effectiveness of on-site
environmental control.
ƒ
The current dust climate was measured at the closest residential properties to the
Site (13 St Marks Close, Cromford and 56 Church St, Bonsall) and these are seen
to be typical of a rural area.
ƒ
Climatic conditions local to the Site have been assessed and analysed to give an
indication of how often the Site could be susceptible to fugitive dust events. Such
occasions are relatively few.
ƒ
Potential dust sources were identified and best practice dust control measures
have been recommended in order to minimise any such disturbance at nearby
sensitive locations.
ƒ
A full PM10 assessment in line with the latest recommendations was undertaken
and this clearly showed that the Air Quality Objectives are not expected to be
exceeded.
ƒ
Given the intended dust control measures, it is concluded that the Quarry can
continue to operate with minimal impact on nearby residential properties.
3.5. Blasting
Independent consultants, Vibrock, carried out a Blast Vibration Assessment of the
development proposals. The assessment included consideration of: vibration criteria;
prediction and control of vibration levels; and blast induced vibration measurements.
The locations chosen for the measurements were: Via Gellia Mill, Bonsall; 20 Via
Gellia Road, Bonsall; 13 St. Marks Close, Cromford; 56 Church Street, Bonsall; and
Bat Roost 183 (closest). The assessment also included a consideration of the
cumulative impact of blast vibration from Slinter Top and Dene Quarry.
When blasting takes place two forms of vibration occur, namely groundborne and
airborne vibration. Groundborne vibration is quoted in terms of peak particle velocity
(PPV) and is measured in millimetres per second (mm/sec). Airborne pressure waves
are also generated when a blast is set off, known as air overpressure.
S/4065/ES NTS October 2012
Page
xi
Formal Amendment to Planning Application Ref.CM3/0507/30, Slinter Top Quarry
Non Technical Summary of Environmental Statement
Human beings are very sensitive to vibration and when a blast is felt it may be at
levels as low as 0.5mm/sec. Most concerns centre on the possible damage to the fabric
of properties, however research indicates that vibration levels in excess of 50mm/sec
are necessary to induce structural damage to residential type structures. Cosmetic
damage may occur above 15 mm/sec in the worst case.
The assessment found that:
ƒ
A criterion for restricting vibration levels from production blasting has been
recommended in order to address the need to minimise annoyance to nearby
residents. Accordingly, the criterion of 6 mms-1 for 95% of events is recommended
as a satisfactory magnitude for vibration from blasting at the Quarry.
ƒ
All blasts at the Quarry will be designed in order to comply with the vibration
criterion of 6 mms-1 peak particle velocity at a 95% confidence level as measured in
any of the three planes of measurement.
ƒ
All vibration will be of a low order of magnitude and would be entirely safe with
respect to the possibility of the most cosmetic of plaster cracks. All vibration will
also be well below those levels recommended for blast induced vibration as being
satisfactory within the British Standard Guide BS 6472-2: 2008.
ƒ
All vibration will conform to MPG 9 and MPG 14 where illustrative figures of 6 to
10 mms-1 at 95% confidence are given. With such low ground vibration levels,
accompanying air overpressure would also be of a very low and hence safe level,
although possibly perceptible on occasions at the closest of properties.
ƒ
If the recommended mitigation measures are followed, there is no reason why
blasting operations at the Quarry will give rise to adverse comment due to induced
vibration at any of the dwellings or structures in the vicinity.
3.6. Water
Independent consultants, James Associates, carried out a Hydrological &
Hydrogeological Assessment of the development proposals.
The assessment
considered the location and topography of the Site and the surface drainage and
hydrogeology of the Site. Potential impacts during the proposed development and
post restoration were also considered, as was the possible refusal of the Application.
The assessment found that:
S/4065/ES NTS October 2012
Page
xii
Formal Amendment to Planning Application Ref.CM3/0507/30, Slinter Top Quarry
Non Technical Summary of Environmental Statement
ƒ
There was no evidence of any derogation of water supply at groundwater
abstraction points or to any surface water features. The assessment concluded
that the Quarry has already had over 50% of its footprint extracted down to the
permitted limit and worked through any clay wayboards contained within the
geological sequence. Therefore, any disruption to perched water tables associated
with such structures has already occurred and further working to depth in the rest
of the Site will have no impact.
ƒ
There was no evidence of any pollution of groundwater due to suspended solids or
chemistry of discharge. There were no reports of any water quality problems
potentially associated with the operations and the Site complies with current
standards with respect to fuel containment. The imported waste materials are
contained within an approved containment structure, which is constructed in
compliance with the requirements of the extant Waste Management Licence.
Water which enters the Site, via direct precipitation or any minor inflows
associated with the clay wayboard horizons, passes directly into the quarry floor
thereby limiting the potential for contamination by suspended solids.
ƒ
The potential for the creation of any negative impacts upon the water environment
associated with the continuation of operations in line with currently adopted
practices is considered to be insignificant.
3.7. Stability
Independent consultants, James Associates, carried out a Geological & Geotechnical
Assessment of the development proposals. The assessment considered the geological
and geotechnical issues experienced at the Quarry. Specific geotechnical problems
with the South Eastern Sidewall and the West Sidewall were also considered as was
the possible refusal of the Application.
A solution was proposed to deal with the excavated faces. It is proposed to adopt a 15
metre high face with a 5 metre wide intermediate bench excavation profile within the
Quarry. However, it should be noted that where conditions dictate, the face height
may be reduced (or possibly in the vicinity of clay wayboards, marginally increased)
and/or bench width increased.
Drawing No.PSS-100-001-14.2 entitled Survey and Excavation Design has been
designed to take account of recent geotechnical issues at the Quarry. It illustrates the
proposed excavation design described above and is being submitted to replace
Drawing No.GA.DRB.334-3 (the currently approved Quarry design) in respect of the
western part of the Quarry.
S/4065/ES NTS October 2012
Page xiii
Formal Amendment to Planning Application Ref.CM3/0507/30, Slinter Top Quarry
Non Technical Summary of Environmental Statement
3.8. Transport
Independent consultants, Axis, carried out a comprehensive Transport Assessment of
the development proposals. The assessment considered: the Site location and existing
conditions; the historical operation of the Quarry; a description of the development
proposals; and a review of the impact of anticipated future Site traffic.
The Assessment found that:
ƒ
The existing main vehicular access to the Quarry is taken directly from a
dedicated quarry access junction with the B5036 Cromford Hill, between the
settlements of Cromford to the North and Wirksworth to the South. The Site
access junction lies within a section of steep gradient route (1:8) and represents a
high standard industrial access connection, which is shared with the adjacent
Dene Quarry (operated by Tarmac). A review of visibility criteria and historical
safety records at this location suggests that the existing vehicle access junction
represents a suitable layout to support continued quarry/landfill operations.
ƒ
A review of accident history over the local study network identified no evidence of
accident or road safety issues relating to operation of the Quarry access and only
limited HGV accident history on the immediate sections of the A6, A5012 &
B5036. There is therefore no reason to anticipate that the development proposals
would result in a material detrimental effect on local highway safety conditions.
ƒ
Existing traffic impact mitigation measures would be maintained at the Site to
support the proposed extension of life. These measures include sheeting of loaded
HGVs, vehicle wheel washing and on-site road cleansing.
The main conclusion of the Assessment was that the proposed development would
typically only result in traffic related environmental impact of a negligible/slight
nature and would not require any additional mitigation measures over and above the
retention of those measures already in place.
3.9. Other Environmental Issues
Cumulative Impact
Where appropriate, the specialist assessment reports considered the cumulative
effects of the proposed development in respect of the particular environmental issue
being dealt with. None of the individual cumulative impacts identified in the reports
were found to be significant or more than negligible or slight. It is, therefore,
S/4065/ES NTS October 2012
Page xiv
Formal Amendment to Planning Application Ref.CM3/0507/30, Slinter Top Quarry
Non Technical Summary of Environmental Statement
considered that the combined effects of the individual cumulative impacts are
insignificant and no worse than that currently experienced.
There have been a series of time limited planning permissions issued in respect of the
development of Slinter Top Quarry. These time limits have not been of sufficient
duration to allow for the completion of the development and they have created a
degree of uncertainty, both within the local community and for the Applicant and its
employees and contractors. Should planning permission be granted in response to
this Formal Amendment then there should be sufficient time for both the mineral
extraction and infilling and restoration to be completed. This would provide certainty
for both the local community and the Applicant and allow the Applicant to make
capital investments based on the life of the development.
Cultural Heritage
English Heritage has requested that the ES should demonstrate that there would be
no adverse impact on:
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Buried archaeological remains within the footprint of the development.
Subterranean historic mining remains within the footprint of the proposed
development.
Impact on the setting of heritage assets or character of the historic
landscape that lies beyond the footprint of the Quarry.
Regarding these issues it is concluded that:
ƒ
As all the land within the Quarry footprint has been disturbed there will be no
adverse impact on buried archaeological remains within the footprint of the
development.
ƒ
It is possible that subterranean historic mining remains exist at depth within
the unworked part of the Quarry footprint. Should any such remains be
exposed, it is proposed that a detailed written and photographic record of the
remains is made and that this record be made available to English Heritage.
ƒ
The impact on the character of the historic landscape that lies beyond the
footprint of the Quarry will remain as currently experienced for almost the
entire duration of the proposed development, with expected beneficial effects
following restoration.
S/4065/ES NTS October 2012
Page
xv
Formal Amendment to Planning Application Ref.CM3/0507/30, Slinter Top Quarry
Non Technical Summary of Environmental Statement
ƒ
Currently nearby heritage sites co-exist with the Quarry. Once restored the
Site will contribute to the landscape value which is underpinned by the
heritage sites.
Rights of Way & Recreation
A number of Public Footpaths run close to the Site. The Cromford FP70 (previously
known as Cromford FP13) Public Footpath is the nearest to the Quarry.
The original route of this Footpath crossed the middle of the Quarry, but was formally
diverted in 1989 to the route shown on Drawing No.SMC/FA/03. It rejoins its original
route approximately 30m from the northern Site boundary and 70m south of the Site
boundary. The diversion was for a 20 year period, which has now expired.
Accordingly, the Applicant has made a further application to divert the Footpath, but
this is held in abeyance pending the outcome of the Planning Application. The
diversionary route is around the eastern half of the Quarry and is generally situated
around 60m from the Site boundary. The exception to this is the stretch of Footpath
closest to the northern Site boundary, where the diversionary route is generally
around 30m from the Site boundary.
With the exception of Cromford FP70, the potential impact of users of Public
Footpaths is generally slight and limited to occasional medium to long distance
glimpses of the Quarry, occasional effects of blasting and possible noise depending
upon wind direction. These impacts are ongoing and are considered to be acceptable.
Cromford FP70 is the exception because it is diverted around the eastern half of the
Site and users are likely to be aware of the proximity of the Quarry. The impacts on
users of Cromford FP70 are considered to be:
• Occasional views of the Quarry perimeter and Quarry vehicles. These views
have been catagorised in the Landscape & Visual Assessment report as being
of ‘medium’ visual sensitivity.
• Occasional effects of blasting at the Quarry. In the interest of public safety,
warning notices have been erected at either end of the diverted part of FP70.
• Occasional effects of noise, depending upon wind direction.
All these effects are current and ongoing and, as the Quarry workings deepen, these
effects will generally reduce during the period of the development. It is, therefore,
considered that the impact on users of Cromford FP70 is acceptable.
S/4065/ES NTS October 2012
Page xvi
Formal Amendment to Planning Application Ref.CM3/0507/30, Slinter Top Quarry
Non Technical Summary of Environmental Statement
Socio-Economic Effects
The Applicant was established in 1946 and is a private, family owned, independent
business, which specialises in the extraction, processing and treatment of minerals.
Its main extractive operation is Slinter Top Quarry, from which limestone, fluorspar
and barytes are worked. The Applicant has an annual turnover of around £3 million.
The Applicant directly employs 27 people, all of whom live within a 12 mile radius of
the Quarry. Four hauliers are also employed on a regular daily basis, but if required
a further five or six are spot hired on a daily basis. The Applicant uses a range of
local sub contractors and suppliers, many of whom are based in the locality. The
goods and services supplied include: maintenance and repairs, tools and equipment,
fuels and lubricants, electricity and water, professional and legal, stationary and
publications etc.
The positive ongoing socio-economic benefits of quarrying at Slinter Top Quarry are
significant, particularly in respect of the creation and continuation of employment and
the generation of income to the local, regional and national economies. If permission
is not granted for the Application, and the Quarry has to close, then the negative
socio-economic effects would be substantial and include:
•
•
•
•
•
•
The loss of twenty seven jobs
The loss of indirect employment, such as the four hauliers
The cessation of the use of local sub contractors and suppliers
The loss of costs, wages and salaries totaling some £2.4 million annually
The loss of approximately £250,000 in Aggregates Levy annually
The loss of some £35,000 per annum in Business Rates
In conclusion, it is considered the significant socio-economic benefits of the
continuation of quarrying at Slinter Top Quarry, far outweigh any potential identified
environmental impact caused by the development and identified in the ES.
4. Alternatives to the Development Proposals
The Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations require an environmental
statement to include an outline of the main alternatives studied by the Applicant and
the main reasons for choosing the development. This can mean alternative sites,
alternatives for the development within the site (such as alternative layouts and
designs) or alternative materials.
S/4065/ES NTS October 2012
Page xvii
Formal Amendment to Planning Application Ref.CM3/0507/30, Slinter Top Quarry
Non Technical Summary of Environmental Statement
The development is the continuation of mineral extraction operations until 31st
December 2021 and the continuation of infilling and restoration until 31st December
2032. It is not possible for this development to apply to any alternative mineral site.
The bulk of the mineral reserves at Slinter Top Quarry already form part of the
landbank of permitted aggregate reserves in Derbyshire. The study of alternative
sites is not, therefore, considered relevant to the development that is the subject of
this EIA.
The alternatives for the development within the site are limited in that the Quarry
has already reached its maximum ‘footprint’ and all further mineral extraction and
infilling will take place within the existing quarry void. However, due to geological
and geotechnical issues, an alternative excavation design is being proposed for the
western part of the Quarry. There are no other material changes proposed to the
operation of the Site.
Alternative ways of dealing with undetermined Application Ref.CM3/0507/30 have
been considered in conjunction with the MPA. These included: submitting a new
planning application to extend the timescales in Permission CM3/901/76 and
requesting the MPA to determine undetermined Application Ref.CM3/0507/30.
However both the MPA and the Applicant decided that the best way to proceed was by
way of the Formal Amendment supported by an ES.
Alternative timescales for completing the development have also been considered, in
particular expediting the mineral extraction and infilling, but market conditions for
the sale of limestone aggregate are difficult and any significant increase in limestone
extraction from the Quarry is unlikely in the short to medium term. The speed of the
infill operations are, to a large extent, determined by the void space created by the
extraction of the limestone. Once all the mineral reserves have been extracted then it
is anticipated that the rate of infill will increase.
Should the Application not be permitted, then the time limits set out in Permission
CM3/901/76 become operational and, as both these time limits have now passed,
Condition No.51 would take effect. This condition states that an alternative
reclamation scheme should be submitted and implemented in the event of the expiry
of the Permission before completion of mineral extraction and infilling. The situation
is, therefore, that if the Application is refused then a part worked, part filled restored
Quarry will be the result. This alternative was considered in the specialist reports
dealing with Landscape & Visual Impact, Ecological Impact, Hydrological &
Hydrogeological Impact and Geological & Geotechnical Impact. All these assessment
reports independently concluded that the environmental impact of the completion of
S/4065/ES NTS October 2012
Page xviii
Formal Amendment to Planning Application Ref.CM3/0507/30, Slinter Top Quarry
Non Technical Summary of Environmental Statement
the development was a superior alternative to the environmental impact of the
leaving a part worked, part filled restored Quarry.
There are alternative supplies of limestone within the market area the Quarry but
working these instead of the reserves at the Quarry could result in the taking of
additional areas of virgin land, whereas the reserves at Slinter Top can be worked
with the minimum of environmental impact. Furthermore, the Quarry contains rare
and valuable reserves of fluorspar and barytes, which are classified as minerals of
national importance.
_________________________________
S/4065/ES NTS October 2012
Page xix