SITE MONITORING REPORT FOR AFTERCARE SITES
Fees for Monitoring of Mining and Landfill Sites in England
Please find detailed below the report for the site monitoring undertaken on 12
March 2015. If you should have any queries or require any photographs taken on
site please do not hesitate to contact me.
File Ref: 24 421 17
Visit no: 1 of 1
Monitoring Officer: Glenn Shaw
Time on site:
Time off site:
Tel No: 03330136873
14:30
15:05
Site Co-ordinator: Glenn Shaw
Tel No: 03330136873
Site Name: Southminster Quarry, Goldsands Road, Southminster
Operator: G & B Finch
Site Representative: None Present
Permission Number:
ESS/34/10/MAL - Extraction of sand, restoration, and importation of material
Previous Permission Numbers:
ESS/55/98/MAL/R determined 23 March 1998, ESS/09/08/MAL determined 31
March 2009.
ROMP Date: March 2024
Outstanding Submission of details:
Permission
Condition
Scope of Condition and Action to be taken
No.
No.
Constraints:
Weather:
Noise:
Approach Roads:
Ground:
Access:
Wheel Cleaning:
Hose:
Machinery:
In correct position:
Stockpiles:
Bunds:
Dry / Windy / Rain / Snow
Acceptable / Not acceptable / N/A
Dry / Dusty / Wet / Muddy / Flooded
Dry / Dusty / Wet / Damp / Muddy / Flooded
Obstructed / Not Obstructed / Mud on Road / Ice /
Slippery
Washer / Spinner / Sweeper / N/A
In use / Not in Use / N/A
Working / Not working / N/A
Yes / No / N/A
Height = N/A
Profiled / Grassed / Weeds / N/A*
Actions from last site visit:
The Operator is reminded of the proposed timeframes for extraction and
restoration, 2014 and 2015 respectively. The Operator’s attention is particularly
drawn to the observations made above with regard to site refinement and the
concerns raised with regard to the western bank.
It is noted that condition 19 (aftercare scheme) of ESS/34/10/MAL has not
formally been submitted and discharged. ECC, as the MPA, will consider the
relevance of this in relation to the information provided as part of the variation of
1
condition application currently pending determination. Should it however be
deemed that sufficient information has not been provided such a submission will
be expected as soon as possible.
Inspection Results Summary:
The site walked well and the sides of the waterbodies were stable.
The area to be established as grazing pasture was cultivated and drilled with a
mixed grass ley and then followed up with a herbicide and fertiliser regime to
assist established. The site monitoring visit however showed that the grass ley
has failed to establish and invasive and broadleaf weeds have become
established and have not been controlled by the herbicidal management plan. It
was also noted that this area was also very stony.
It is recommended that that is area be cultivated, re-drilled with a grass ley and
stone picked as per Condition 16 of ESS/54/113/MAL.
The Reptile Refugia located on the western and southern areas of the site are
approximately within the heights as proposed by Dr Tony Walentowicz, however
also according to the same report, these Refugia are to be have been lightly
covered with earth to allow some vegetation establishment. It was noted there
was no earth covering on these Refugia. It is recommended that is carried out to
comply with Condition 1 of ESS/54/113/MAL.
In New Area I, The report “Proposed Management for Mitigation and Restoration”
states that a patcthwork planted with an insect friendly seed mix to create a
random mosaic as per Condition16. It was noted that during the visit that this
patchwork had seemed not to have established and would need to be reestablished to comply with Condition16.
The seasonal shallow wet depressions seem to be working well.
The invasive and poisonous plant Hemlock has established itself on sides of the
water body located to the north of the low raised area. This needs to be
eradicated as a matter of urgency.
At the junction of the 2 main water bodies where there are red and blue
containers, a large quantity of wood chip has been imported. This needs to be
removed.
It was noted that there is to be a hedge and small parcel of woodland adjacent to
the site entrance. This would seem not to have been completed.
In the various reports submitted with planning application ESS/54/13/MAL it
states that the site would be allowed to regenerate naturally in certain areas.
How this monitoring visit showed that the site has become infested with invasive
weeds and the areas to be established for gazing and insect enhancement have
2
failed to establish per Condition16.
This is a good restoration scheme which would enhance the area; however the
implementation and establishment would seem to have failed.
In light of the above the site shall remain in year 1 of Aftercare and the number of
site monitoring visit shall be increased to 2 visits a year until the issues raised in
this monitoring report are rectified.
Permission
No.
Compliance with Conditions
Condition Scope of Condition and Action
No.
to be taken
Action to be
taken by
Operator or
MPA/WPA
Officer
Actions To Be Taken Before Next Site Visit:
Re-establish new grassed area for grazing and the insect friendly seed mix to
create a random mosaic.
Stone picking.
Control all invasive weed species.
Remove woodchip
Plant woodland and hedges.
Note: The actions noted in this report are required in order to ensure
adequate progress is made and to avoid potential enforcement action
against a breach of planning control.
3