A1(T) Elkesley Junction Improvements - Highways Agency
A1(T) Elkesley Junction Improvements - Highways Agency A1(T) Elkesley Junction Improvements - Highways Agency
MediumLowNegligibleUnknownAssets that can contribute significantly to acknowledged national researchobjectivesDesignated or undesignated assets that contribute to regional researchobjectivesDesignated and undesignated assets of local importanceAssets compromised by poor preservation and/or poor survival ofassociations within the context of other assetsAssets of limited value, but with potential to contribute to local researchobjectivesAssets with very little or no surviving archaeological interestThe importance of the resource has not been ascertainedMagnitude of ImpactImpact magnitude is based on the vulnerability of the study area, its current state ofsurvival/condition and the nature of the impact upon it. The survival and extent of thearchaeological deposits is often uncertain and consequently, the magnitude ofchange is difficult to predict with any certainty.Table 4.2: Factors for Assessing the Magnitude of ImpactMagnitude of ImpactMajorModerateMinorNegligibleNo ChangeExampleChange to most or all key archaeological materials, such that the resource ittotally alteredComprehensive changes to settingChanges to many key archaeological materials, such that the resource isclearly modifiedConsiderable changes to setting that affect the character of the assetChanges to key archaeological materials, such that the asset is slightlyalteredSlight change to settingVery minor changes to archaeological materials, or settingNo changeAssessing Magnitude of ImpactsAn impact is defined as a change resulting from the scheme that affects the culturalheritage resource. Impacts, both positive and negative, which may occur during thelife cycle of road scheme projects, are detailed below.Significance of EffectThe significance of effects for the archaeological resource is derived by combiningthe value of the resource with the magnitude of the impact for each cultural heritageasset. The following table illustrates how information on the value of the asset andthe magnitude of the impact are combined to arrive at an assessment of thesignificance of effect. The matrix is not intended to ‘mechanise’ judgement of thesignificance but act as a check to ensure that judgements regarding value,magnitude of impact and significance of effect are reasonable and balanced.28
Table 4.3: Significance of Effects MatrixMagnitude of ImpactValue/SensitivityNoChangeNegligible Minor Moderate MajorVery High Neutral Slight Moderate/ Large Large or VeryLargeVery LargeHigh Neutral Slight Moderate/ Slight Moderate/Large Large/Very LargeMedium Neutral Neutral/Slight Slight Moderate Moderate/ LargeLow Neutral Neutral/Slight Neutral/ Slight Slight Slight/ ModerateNegligible Neutral Neutral/Slight Neutral/ Slight Neutral/ Slight Slight4.4 Baseline ConditionsThe study area for the proposed scheme encompasses a 1 km area around a centralgrid point within the scheme. The landscape surrounding Elkesley is one ofpredominantly agricultural land. There are a number of low hills surrounding thevillage, which rise to a maximum height of 55 m OD. Four rivers (the Poulter, the Idle,the Maun and the Meden) converge close to the route of the A1(T) resulting inshallow river valleys in the area. The geology of the area is fine-medium roundedsand overlying mudstone and limestone. The topography and geology of the area arein line with preferred areas of settlement in prehistoric and historic times.Within the study area there are a total of 38 cultural heritage assets, which consist ofarchaeological sites, artefacts and historic buildings. A full list of these assets can befound in the attached annex. There are no scheduled monuments, registered parksand gardens or registered battlefields within the study area. There are seven listedbuildings and seven buildings considered to be of local historical and architecturalimportance within the study area. None of these heritage assets will be directlyimpacted by the proposed scheme.According to the Historic Landscape Characterisation undertaken by NottinghamshireCounty Council, the study area lies within a landscape characterised by regulargeometric fields, irregular fields, modern fields, modified modern fields and semiirregularfields. These enclosure types all date from the 19th century at the latest andare therefore capable of incorporating further change.The most relevant archaeological features that may affect the Preferred Version area collection of linear crop marks which appear to the west and northwest of thescheme (Site 1a). These have been recorded and transcribed from aerialphotographs by the Royal Commission on the Historical Monuments of England(RCHME). From the transcribed plans parts of these features appear to intersect withthe proposed layout of the junction improvements where the improvements runparallel to the current A1(T). It is also likely that these features extend further to theeast than is recorded by the RCHME. These crop marks suggest that an extensiveRomano-British settlement was located here in the prehistoric period. Althoughpedological and geological conditions, together with land use and agriculturalpractices can affect the identification of crop marks, given their quantity, morphologyand distribution they can be reliably classified as archaeological in nature.29
- Page 1: A1(T) Elkesley JunctionImprovements
- Page 4 and 5: Document ControlProject Title:Docum
- Page 6: km 2Kilometres squaredLAQMLocal Air
- Page 9 and 10: L 10 hourly dB(A)L AeqL A1(T)0,18hL
- Page 11 and 12: Wildlife CorridorsZone of Visual In
- Page 13 and 14: 5.4 Assessment of Environmental Imp
- Page 15 and 16: Introduction and Background1.1 Intr
- Page 17 and 18: 1.5 Scope of AssessmentThe followin
- Page 19 and 20: 2 Development of the Preferred Opti
- Page 21 and 22: In 2007 a simpler scheme was develo
- Page 23 and 24: It is anticipated that these amendm
- Page 25 and 26: 3 Air Quality3.1 Findings at Stage
- Page 27: Policy 6/12Permission will not be g
- Page 31 and 32: Assessment of Environmental Effects
- Page 33 and 34: 5 Disruption Due to Construction5.1
- Page 35 and 36: 5.6 Residual EffectsDisruption duri
- Page 37 and 38: 7 Landscape Effects7.1 Assessment M
- Page 39 and 40: Table 7.1: Landscape Character Sens
- Page 41 and 42: Inclusion of an area within the vis
- Page 43 and 44: MagnitudeHighMediumLowNo ChangeDefi
- Page 45 and 46: • rolling landforms with numerous
- Page 47 and 48: associated with Jockey Lane forms a
- Page 49 and 50: • Properties along the High Stree
- Page 51 and 52: 7.5 Implication of New Lighting Pro
- Page 53 and 54: Area F: Enclosed Arable Farmland (G
- Page 55 and 56: Table 7.7: Summary of Impacts on Vi
- Page 57 and 58: Discussion of Impacts:Visual effect
- Page 59 and 60: • To optimise protection for resi
- Page 61 and 62: Detailed Mitigation ProposalsThe fo
- Page 63 and 64: 8 Land Use8.1 Findings at Stage 2 A
- Page 65 and 66: The frequency response of the human
- Page 67 and 68: oad traffic. It does not provide pr
- Page 69 and 70: The results of the Scoping Assessme
- Page 71 and 72: operations. If the total noise leve
- Page 73 and 74: Table 9.4 - Significance criteria o
- Page 75 and 76: noise levels are below 58 dB LA1(T)
- Page 77 and 78: climate for a typical day on the ex
MediumLowNegligibleUnknownAssets that can contribute significantly to acknowledged national researchobjectivesDesignated or undesignated assets that contribute to regional researchobjectivesDesignated and undesignated assets of local importanceAssets compromised by poor preservation and/or poor survival ofassociations within the context of other assetsAssets of limited value, but with potential to contribute to local researchobjectivesAssets with very little or no surviving archaeological interestThe importance of the resource has not been ascertainedMagnitude of ImpactImpact magnitude is based on the vulnerability of the study area, its current state ofsurvival/condition and the nature of the impact upon it. The survival and extent of thearchaeological deposits is often uncertain and consequently, the magnitude ofchange is difficult to predict with any certainty.Table 4.2: Factors for Assessing the Magnitude of ImpactMagnitude of ImpactMajorModerateMinorNegligibleNo ChangeExampleChange to most or all key archaeological materials, such that the resource ittotally alteredComprehensive changes to settingChanges to many key archaeological materials, such that the resource isclearly modifiedConsiderable changes to setting that affect the character of the assetChanges to key archaeological materials, such that the asset is slightlyalteredSlight change to settingVery minor changes to archaeological materials, or settingNo changeAssessing Magnitude of ImpactsAn impact is defined as a change resulting from the scheme that affects the culturalheritage resource. Impacts, both positive and negative, which may occur during thelife cycle of road scheme projects, are detailed below.Significance of EffectThe significance of effects for the archaeological resource is derived by combiningthe value of the resource with the magnitude of the impact for each cultural heritageasset. The following table illustrates how information on the value of the asset andthe magnitude of the impact are combined to arrive at an assessment of thesignificance of effect. The matrix is not intended to ‘mechanise’ judgement of thesignificance but act as a check to ensure that judgements regarding value,magnitude of impact and significance of effect are reasonable and balanced.28
Change language