5001-ua005241-ue1r-01 Ser Volume 1.pdf
This document was uploaded by user and they confirmed that they have the permission to share it. If you are author or own the copyright of this book, please report to us by using this DMCA report form. Report DMCA
Overview
Download & View 5001-ua005241-ue1r-01 Ser Volume 1.pdf as PDF for free.
More details
- Words: 126,883
- Pages: 384
NW Bicester Masterplan Volume 1: Strategic Environmental Report
Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited 2212959 Manning House 22 Carlisle Place London SW1P 1JA United Kingdom Tel: +44 (0)20 3014 9000 www.hyderconsulting.com
P3 Eco (Bicester) Ltd and A2Dominion Group Bicester Eco Development Masterplan Environmental Statement Volume 1: Main Text Author
Checker
Various compiled by Lourdes Cooper
Andrew Saunders
Approver
Andrew Saunders
Report No
5001-UA005241-UE31R-01
Date
March 2014
This report has been prepared for P3 Eco (Bicester) Ltd and A2Dominion Group in accordance with the terms and conditions of appointment for Masterplan Environmental Statement dated May 2010. Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited (2212959) cannot accept any responsibility for any use of or reliance on the contents of this report by any third party.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Environmental StatementStrategic Environmental Report - Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
CONTENTS
Volume 1: Main Text 1
2
3
4
5
6
Introduction .................................................................. 1 1.1
The Masterplan ............................................................... 1
1.2
Background and Context .................................................. 1
1.3
Purpose of the Strategic Environmental Report .................... 2
1.4
Structure of the Strategic Environmental Report .................. 3
The Masterplan Description ............................................. 4 2.1
Policy Background ........................................................... 4
2.2
Masterplan Objectives ...................................................... 4
2.3
Description of the Masterplan ............................................ 5
Alternatives .................................................................. 10 3.1
Introduction .................................................................. 10
3.2
Weston Otmoor NW Bicester Development Site ................. 10
3.3
Determining the Masterplan Site Boundary ....................... 10
3.4
Development of Site Layout ............................................ 11
Assessment Methods ..................................................... 12 4.1
Introduction .................................................................. 12
4.2
Scoping of Environmental Topics ..................................... 12
4.3
Consultation ................................................................. 12
4.4
Strategic Assessment General Methodology ...................... 13
4.5
Cumulative Effects ......................................................... 15
Landscape and Visual Impact .......................................... 16 5.1
Introduction .................................................................. 16
5.2
Regulatory and Policy Framework .................................... 16
5.3
Methodology ................................................................. 17
5.4
Description of Existing Baseline Conditions ....................... 21
5.5
Design and Mitigation ..................................................... 26
5.6
Assessment of Effects .................................................... 26
5.7
Cumulative Effects ......................................................... 28
5.8
Summary ..................................................................... 28
Ecology ........................................................................ 29 6.1
Introduction .................................................................. 29
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page i
6.2
Regulatory and Policy Framework .................................... 29
6.3
Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plans .............................. 35
6.4
Methodology ................................................................. 36
6.5
Description of Existing Baseline Conditions ....................... 40
6.6
Design and Mitigation ..................................................... 64
6.7
Assessment of Impacts .................................................. 80
6.8
Cumulative Effects ......................................................... 96
6.9
Monitoring and Management ........................................... 96
6.10 Summary ..................................................................... 96
7
8
9
10
Flood Risk and Hydrology ............................................. 100 7.1
Introduction ................................................................ 100
7.2
Regulatory and Policy Framework .................................. 100
7.3
Methodology ............................................................... 102
7.4
Description of Existing Baseline Conditions ..................... 106
7.5
Design and Mitigation ................................................... 112
7.6
Assessment of Effects .................................................. 114
7.7
Cumulative Effects ....................................................... 116
7.8
Summary ................................................................... 116
Air Quality .................................................................. 118 8.1
Introduction ................................................................ 118
8.2
Regulatory Framework ................................................. 118
8.3
Methodology ............................................................... 120
8.4
Baseline Conditions ...................................................... 126
8.5
Design and Mitigation ................................................... 131
8.6
Assessment of Effects .................................................. 132
8.7
Cumulative Effects ....................................................... 133
8.8
Summary ................................................................... 133
Noise and Vibration ..................................................... 134 9.1
Introduction ................................................................ 134
9.2
Regulatory Framework ................................................. 134
9.3
Methodology ............................................................... 140
9.4
Baseline Conditions ...................................................... 148
9.5
Design and Mitigation ................................................... 151
9.6
Assessment of Effects .................................................. 154
9.7
Cumulative Effects ....................................................... 159
9.8
Summary ................................................................... 159
Cultural Heritage ......................................................... 161 10.1 Introduction ................................................................ 161 10.2 Regulatory Framework ................................................. 162 10.3 Methodology ............................................................... 167 10.4 Baseline Conditions ...................................................... 172 10.5 Design and Mitigation ................................................... 186 10.6 Assessment of Effects .................................................. 189 10.7 Cumulative Effects ....................................................... 191 10.8 Summary ................................................................... 192
11
Contaminated Land ..................................................... 193 11.1 Introduction ................................................................ 193
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page ii
11.2 Regulatory and Policy Context ....................................... 193 11.3 Methodology ............................................................... 197 11.4 Description of Existing Baseline Conditions ..................... 200 11.5 Design and Mitigation ................................................... 204 11.6 Assessment of Effects .................................................. 204 11.7 Cumulative Effects ....................................................... 207 11.8 Summary ................................................................... 207
12
Agriculture and Land Use ............................................. 209 12.1 Introduction ................................................................ 209 12.2 Regulatory Framework ................................................. 209 12.3 Methodology ............................................................... 212 12.4 Baseline Conditions ...................................................... 214 12.5 Design and Mitigation ................................................... 215 12.6 Assessment of Effects .................................................. 217 12.7 Cumulative effects ....................................................... 218 12.8 Summary ................................................................... 218
13
Human Health ............................................................ 220 13.1 Introduction ................................................................ 220 13.2 Regulatory Framework ................................................. 220 13.3 Methodology ............................................................... 223 13.4 Baseline Conditions ...................................................... 227 13.5 Design and Mitigation ................................................... 239 13.6 Assessment of Effects .................................................. 243 13.7 Cumulative Effects ....................................................... 253 13.8 Summary ................................................................... 254
14
Socio-Economics and Community .................................. 256 14.1 Introduction ................................................................ 256 14.2 Regulatory and Policy Framework .................................. 256 14.3 Methodology ............................................................... 259 14.4 Description of Existing Baseline Conditions ..................... 263 14.5 Design and Mitigation ................................................... 278 14.6 Assessment of Effects .................................................. 279 14.7 Cumulative Effects ....................................................... 289 14.8 Summary and Conclusion ............................................. 290
15
Waste ........................................................................ 291 15.1 Introduction ................................................................ 291 15.2 Regulatory Framework ................................................. 294 15.3 Methodology ............................................................... 302 15.4 Baseline Conditions ...................................................... 307 15.5 Design and Mitigation ................................................... 310 15.6 Assessment of Effects .................................................. 316 15.7 Cumulative Effects ....................................................... 318 15.8 Summary ................................................................... 319
16
Transport ................................................................... 320 16.1 Introduction ................................................................ 320 16.2 Regulatory Framework ................................................. 320 16.3 Methodology ............................................................... 328
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page iii
16.4 Description of Baseline Conditions ................................. 334 16.5 Design and Mitigation ................................................... 342 16.6 Assessment of Effects .................................................. 343 16.7 Summary ................................................................... 343
17
Interrelationships and Cumulative Effects ....................... 344 17.1 Introduction ................................................................ 344 17.2 Technical Assumptions and Method ................................ 344 17.3 Baseline Conditions ...................................................... 346 17.4 Mitigation and Enhancement Measures ........................... 347 17.5 Assessment of Cumulative Effects .................................. 347 17.6 Summary ................................................................... 354
Abbreviations ..................................................................... 355 Glossary ............................................................................ 358 References ......................................................................... 365
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page iv
Volume 2: Drawings Drawing 1-1
Site Location
Drawing 2-1
Land Uses
Drawing 2-2
Green Infrastructure Masterplan
Drawing 2-3
SuDs Concept Plan
Drawing 6-1
Phase 1 Habitat Survey
Drawing 6-2
Badger Setts, Bat Roosts and Key Activity Corridors
Drawing 6-3
Ponds, Grassland, Woodland and Hedges Location
Drawing 7-1
Flood Risk
Drawing 8-1
Air Quality Monitoring Stations
Drawing 9-1
Noise Monitoring Locations
Drawing 9-2
Noise day time
Drawing 9-3
Noise night time
Drawing 12-1
Agricultural Land Classification Grades
Drawing 13-1
Location of Health Facilities
Drawing 13-2
Health Facilities
Drawing 14-1
Education Map
Drawing 14-2
Sports and Recreation Facilities and PROWs
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page ii
Volume 3: Appendices Appendix 6A-6I
Ecological Desk Based Assessment
Appendix 7A
Flood Risk Assessment
Appendix 9A
Noise Baseline Assessment
Appendix 11A
Desk Study Report
Appendix 11B
Preliminary Intrusive Ground Investigation
Appendix 11C
Ground Water Supply: Feasibility Study
Appendix 15A
Site Waste Management Plan
Appendix 16A
Bicester Accident Area
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page iii
1
Introduction
1.1
The Masterplan The A2Dominion Group is proposing to develop a North West Bicester development (NW Bicester) on land to the north west of Bicester in Cherwell District, as shown on Drawing 1-1 in Volume 2 of this Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report (SER). NW Bicester is intended to provide a new form of sustainable community within Cherwell District, and to extend the benefits of this community to the existing town of Bicester. The first part of the NW Bicester development was an Exemplar Site development located in the north west part which is currently under construction. This SER presents the findings of the high level environmental assessment for the proposed NW Bicester development. This SER describes the development, the baseline environment and the significant and non-significant environmental effects after mitigation.
1.2
Background and Context In July 2009, the Department for Communities and Local Government published ‘Planning Policy Statement (PPS): eco-towns’ (Ref 1-1) as a supplement to PPS1 Delivering Sustainable Development (Ref 1-2). The PPS1 supplement includes requirements on sustainability, waste reduction, zero carbon buildings and sustainable public transport. Within the PPS1 supplement, Eco-towns are defined as sustainable developments of at least 5,000 homes. In July 2009, four ‘first wave’ locations were identified with the potential to have an Eco-town; one of which was NW Bicester (Ref 1-3). The Eco-towns PPS outlines the Government’s objectives for planning that are set out in PPS1: 1. “To promote sustainable development by: ensuring that eco-towns achieve sustainability standards significantly above equivalent levels of development in existing towns and cities by setting out a range of challenging and stretching minimum standards for their development, in particular by: – providing a good quantity of green space of the highest quality in close proximity to the natural environment – offering opportunities for space within and around the dwellings – promoting healthy and sustainable environments through ‘Active Design’ principles and healthy living choices
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 1
– enabling opportunities for infrastructure that make best use of technologies in energy generation and conservation in ways that are not always practical or economic in other developments – delivering a locally appropriate mix of housing type and tenure to meet the needs of all income groups and household size, and – taking advantage of significant economies of scale and increases in land value to deliver new technology and infrastructure such as for transport, energy and community facilities. 2. To reduce the carbon footprint of development by: ensuring that households and individuals in eco-towns are able to reduce their carbon footprint to a low level and achieve a more sustainable way of living.” The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (Ref 1-4) published on 27 March 2012 replaced all the previous Planning Policy Statements. The NPPF no longer refers explicitly to eco-towns, however, the eco-towns supplement to PPS1 is still in existence. The NW Bicester development lies within the jurisdiction of Cherwell District Council (CDC), and the masterplan for the site is being progressed by A2 Dominion. A planning application (Ref: 10/01780/HYBRID) was submitted in December 2010 for the first part of the NW Bicester development, the Exemplar Site with an Addendum submitted in April 2011. The Exemplar Site is the first phase of the development of the Masterplan Site. This SER has been prepared in relation to this Masterplan Site development.
1.3
Purpose of the Strategic Environmental Report This SER will provide a high level assessment of the Masterplan site which will then feed in the more detailed Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA) to support future planning applications. The Masterplan site covers 379.88 hectares (ha). It is expected that EIAs will be required for future planning applications that collectively cover the Masterplan area. The main aims of the SER are:
To provide a description of the Masterplan proposal.
To provide high-level information regarding the likely main environmental effects of the proposals having taken into account the measures proposed to avoid, reduce and if possible remedy any predicted significant adverse effects on the environment or to enhance the beneficial effects of the proposals.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 2
1.4
To consider the likely cumulative effects of the development of the Masterplan Site and the schemes likely to be developed in the vicinity of the Site.
Structure of the Strategic Environmental Report The SER is structured as follows:
Volume 1 (this volume) explains the purpose of the SER (Chapter 1), describes the proposed development (Chapter 2), summarises alternatives considered (Chapter 3) and the overall approach to the high level impact assessment (Chapter 4). It presents the mitigation measures and draws together the significant environmental effects after mitigation for each environmental topic in Chapter 5 to 16. Cumulative effects are presented in Chapter 17 and also within some topic areas.
Volume 2 contains the SER drawings referred to in Volume 1 SER main text
Volume 3 contains the SER appendices referred to in Volume 1 SER main text
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 3
2
The Masterplan Description
2.1
Policy Background The land at NW Bicester is identified in the Supplement to PPS1 entitled ‘Eco-towns’ (July 2009) (Ref 2-1) as one of four locations for a potential Eco-towns. A2 Dominion Group is promoting the overall site for a mix use residential led development. Within the Cherwell Local Plan Submission (2014) (Ref 2-2) CDC has identified the area for development. The Local Plan Policy Bicester 1 – North West Bicester Eco-Town seeks to:
Provide a development of 5,000 homes.
Provide approximately 5,000 jobs (about 1,800 to be delivered by 2031)
Create a development that will be a zero carbon development as defined in the PPS and the Eco Bicester One Shared Vision (Ref 2-3).
Deliver a high quality local environment taking into account climate change adaptation.
Create homes that achieve Level 5 of the Code for Sustainable Homes.
Provide access to one employment opportunity for each new dwelling within easy reach by walking, cycling and / or public transport.
At least 50% of trips originating from the development should be made by means other than the car.
Provide 40% of the total gross site area as green space of which half will be public open space. These open spaces would be publicly accessible and consist of a network of well managed, high quality green/open spaces which are linked to the countryside.
The Masterplan for NW Bicester is intended to set out the framework for the future development of the area and will be used to help guide forthcoming planning applications.
2.2
Masterplan Objectives The Vision for NW Bicester development is “to achieve more sustainable ways of living through low carbon lifestyles”. The proposals will be developed around community hubs to provide facilities to meet the day to day needs of residents and opportunities for employment. The development will promote walking, cycling and use of public transport over the use of the private car. This vision will
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 4
be underpinned through a number of fundamental principles established for the Masterplan by the masterplan team in response to the CDC planning framework and Eco Bicester. The principles include:
2.3
Seeing a minimum of 5,000 homes built.
Ensuring a mix of affordable housing is included in line with CDC’s requirements.
Ensuring 40% of the overall area comprises open spaces and green landscape infrastructure.
Creating one job per home within a sustainable travel distance.
Ensuring homes are built to Code for Sustainable Homes Level 5 and BREEAM excellent standards.
Delivering zero carbon energy across all buildings
Allow for future climate change adaptation by incorporating forward thinking technologies and design within homes.
Providing real time energy and travel monitoring in every home.
Ensuring high levels of energy efficiency in the fabric of the buildings and their design.
Providing primary schools located within 800m of all homes.
Enabling and encouraging local food production.
Attaining a net gain in local biodiversity.
Striving towards water neutrality.
Creating a management program to ensure zero waste goes into landfill during construction
Making a commitment towards a Local Management Organisation.
Description of the Masterplan Development Context The town of Bicester lies approximately 24km to the north-east of Oxford, and 28km to the southeast of Banbury. The M40 runs approximately 2km to the southwest, with Junction 9 providing access to the town via the A41. Bicester is served by two railway stations; namely Bicester North and Bicester Town. Chiltern Railways operate services from Bicester North between Birmingham Snow Hill and London Marylebone. Branch line services to Oxford (via Islip) operate from Bicester Town. This lies to the south of the town and uses the old Varsity Line track between Oxford and Cambridge.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 5
The Site lies approximately 1.5km from the Bicester town centre. The site, shown on Drawing 2-1, currently comprises Grade 3a and Grade 3b agricultural land and contains a number of farmhouses and other buildings. The railway line runs in a north west to south east direction through the middle of the site. The villages of Bucknell and Caversfield are located to the north and east of the site respectively. Drawing 2-1 illustrates the site boundary for the Masterplan development. This site lies wholly within the area identified by CDC for the NW Bicester Eco development. The Masterplan Site boundary runs alongside the B4030, A4095 and B4100, and lies within the parish of Caversfield.
The Masterplan Site The Masterplan Site development proposals include the Exemplar Site, which provides for 393 homes. The Masterplan Site will include provision for the following:
Approximately 6000 residential units (5607 excluding Exemplar Site).
Community and Business Centres
Potential Water Treatment and Energy Centres.
Four primary schools.
A secondary school and sport pitches.
An extra care home.
Provision for 4,600 jobs on site including 2,000 jobs at the proposed business park in the south west corner of the Site
Means of access.
Car parking.
Landscape.
Amenity space.
Service infrastructure.
2.3.1 Masterplan Details Development Area The net residential developable area in the Masterplan comprises 159.1 ha. The net non-residential developable area (to be developed for commercial, social, community uses, green infrastructure and supporting infrastructure) in the Masterplan comprises 220.78 ha. The proposed Masterplan land uses are shown on Drawing 2-1.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 6
Green Infrastructure Forty percent of the total area of land at North West Bicester is to be allocated to green space of which half should be public spaces. A network of well-managed high quality green/open spaces which are linked to the wider countryside would be provided. Green spaces would be multifunctional: accessible for play and recreation, walking or cycling and supporting wildlife, urban cooling and flood management. The Green Infrastructure Masterplan is shown on Drawing 2-2. Land Uses Table 2-1 summarises the proposed land use across the Masterplan Development. Table 2-1
Proposed Land Uses of Masterplan Development
Use
Area (ha)
Housing – Mixed Use with Flats (excluding exemplar)
158.54
Secondary School (excluding green infrastructure)
10.5
Primary School (including green infrastructure)
7.6
Care Home/Hotel/Other
1.04
Commercial/Business (excludes green infrastructure)
9.965
Social/Community
1.81
Retail/Leisure
0.7
Energy Production
0.3
Green Infrastructure
156.97
Existing Farms Mixed Use
0,73
Existing Rail Corridor
6.25
Existing Bucknell Road
2.24
Existing Lords Lane
0.59
Existing Howes Lane
1.3
General Layout and Framework The development of the site shall accord with the general principles and layout set out on Drawing 2-1. The Masterplan has been designed with landscape as the key driver to the layout of the site. Care has been taken to preserve and enhance hedges and water courses within the development and for the natural landscape to be accessible for residents to enjoy. NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 7
Site Access The construction phase of the development will extend over approximately a 20 year period. It is anticipated that over the construction period, all construction traffic will use the A41/Vendee Drive from the M40 Junction 9 and the A4421 around the eastern side of Bicester. The Access and Travel Strategy for NW Bicester aims to minimise traffic impacts by promoting high quality walking and cycling linkages within the Masterplan and connection to the town and wider area. The internal site layout will be designed to facilitate the safe and convenient movement of vehicular, cycle and pedestrian traffic with priority given to non-car routes. In relation to vehicular traffic, the road system will be designed to control vehicle speeds for the benefit of road safety while the pedestrian and cycle routes will aim to provide a safe and permeable network for these travel modes. Street lighting will be provided within public areas and will incorporate, where appropriate, full cut-off luminaires together with use of timed and low energy systems. Parking Car parking will be provided up to the maximum provision set out in CDC's Local Plan. Based on these standards an average of 1 space is permitted for a 1 bedroomed dwelling while the maximum standard for 2 and 3 bedroomed dwellings is 2 spaces (although most will be 1 parking space). For 4 and 5 bed dwellings the maximum is 2 spaces. Surface Water Drainage Surface water drainage will be managed using a Sustainable Drainage System (SuDS). This will involve a combination of gravel-filled channels, underground storage facilities, above ground attenuation basins (some of which will support water for most of the year) and other wetland features. Those attenuation basins that will not hold water permanently will be specifically designed to do this to create habitats of value to wildlife. The proposed SuDs Concept Plan is shown in Drawing 2-3. Services There are no existing public utilities crossing the site however there are telecoms (BT), 11kv and LV Electricity supplies (SSE) and water mains (Thames Water) on the periphery of the site adjacent to Lords Lane (A4095) and Banbury Road (B4100) with existing gas mains and foul sewers to the west and south. The proposed utilities serving the proposed housing and other uses would be located in the spine footways and road ways. Reinforcement and interconnection with the existing utility infrastructure would be NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 8
required, however due to the size and reduced demand of the development this would be relatively small scale. The electricity system would incorporate supply connections from an on-site Energy Centre that would also supply the proposed district heating system. Although the Exemplar is phased ahead of the main NW Bicester development, the utility provision in this initial phase would be set out to allow connectivity with the future renewable energy strategy for the NW Bicester development. Phasing of Development The site shall be developed in phases for over a twenty year period, starting in 2019. Figure 2-1 presents the conceptual phasing and build out. The proposed phasing will consist of three phases: early development, mid development and later development. The early development work would cover areas nearest Howes Lane, Middleton Stoney Road and Banbury Road. This would be followed by the development of the area in the middle of the site. Then the rest of the site, mostly in the northern part would be developed. Figure 2-1 Conceptual Phasing and Build Out
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 9
3
Alternatives
3.1
Introduction This chapter summarises the main alternatives considered during the development of the proposals. This considers the evolution of the proposal from the time when a NW Bicester development was first shortlisted within Cherwell District, to the specific layout within the Masterplan Site boundary. This demonstrates the consideration of environmental impacts has been considered as an integral part of the design process.
3.2
Weston Otmoor NW Bicester Development Site Following publication of PPS1 – eco-towns, LPAs across the UK submitted applications for eco-towns to be considered within their local areas. Twelve locations were shortlisted, one of which was located within Cherwell District. The original location was near the village of Weston-on-the-Green; this proposal was known as Weston Otmoor. It comprised 15,000 dwellings, 15,000 jobs and a range of retail space, leisure facilities, primary and secondary schools, healthcare provision and community facilities. CDC objected to the Government’s proposal at Weston Otmoor, raising the suggestion of an alternative eco-town at NW Bicester. This concept was based upon Local Development Framework (LDF) work undertaken by CDC. The Eco-towns Location Decision Statement (Ref 3-1) stated ‘the [Weston Otmoor] site was considered not to demonstrate the potential to meet the sustainability and deliverability requirements for successful development as an eco-town at this time’. Some of the key sustainability issues of the site included being partially on the Oxford Green Belt, being located on high grade and versatile agricultural land (Grade 2), on a site incorporating Ancient Woodland, Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) and a Nature Reserve, being in an area of ‘serious’ water stress, and being close to a congested road junction on the M40 and A34 which could encourage commuting and exacerbate congestion.
3.3
Determining the Masterplan Site Boundary During the development of the Masterplan Site proposals, A2Dominion Group considered a number of alternative boundaries for the site. The environmental consultants advising the design team were consulted at all stages to comment on proposed land parcel selection, however the selected site boundary largely reflected the
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 10
result of negotiations with landowners and the shape of the land parcels available.
3.4
Development of Site Layout Previous Masterplan The masterplan produced for the 2010 consultation suggested a concept of four villages separated by green spaces. This concept required the green infrastructure to be subdivided to provide at least three areas separating villages. The resultant fragmentation of green areas did not relate well to the existing hedgerows and streams and the green space between housing areas were not of sufficient size to create a distinctive visual and environmental quality or to be suitable for green infrastructure uses. The residential catchment for four villages of 1000-1500 homes would have been below the optimum size of 2000-3000 needed to create viable convenience retail and a cohesive local centre with amenities.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 11
4
Assessment Methods
4.1
Introduction This SER presents the assessment of the environmental effects likely to result from the construction and operation of the Masterplan. This chapter sets out the methods used to assess the various environmental topics.
4.2
Scoping of Environmental Topics A scoping report was prepared in 2011 by Hyder Consulting, which has informed this SER. This identified that the Masterplan could potentially have significant environmental effects on the following topic areas:
Landscape and Visual Impact
Ecology
Flood Risk and Hydrology
Air Quality
Noise
Built Heritage and Archaeology
Contaminated Land
Agriculture and Land Use
Human Health
Socio-Economics and Community
Waste
Traffic and Transport
The Scoping Report provided an outline approach for the identification of potentially adverse and beneficial effects
4.3
Consultation From the outset, A2Dominion has had an open approach to information about the development and has made a substantial number of public and private presentations and ensured information is made available via www.nwbicester.co.uk.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 12
As well as through numerous ad hoc meetings and conversations, there has been structured contact through both the project workstream structure and formal periods of consultation. From 2008 to 2014, A2Dominion has consulted with the public and stakeholders through workshops, public engagements and roadshows, providing the local community with details of the 2008 masterplan and integrated the communities’ feedback into the current masterplan. The detailed work to produce the wider Masterplan and specific proposals for the Exemplar scheme began with an Open Planning Week which established local ambitions, context and concerns. Other events include: Bike Day 2013, 2011 exemplar model and consultation and masterplan stakeholder workshops in 2013. There is a significant level of active support for the proposed Masterplan from key groups, including elected representatives on Town, District and County councils and in consultation responses from the local parish – Caversfield. There has also been consistent support from Bicester Vision (the public-private partnership) and the Bicester Chamber of Commerce. Various other groups, including the Bicester Local History Society, the residents’ associations and individual business and community associations have shown consistent interest. A good level of awareness of the proposals for NW Bicester has been established and a significant amount of interest shown in information presented publicly. Primary concerns have centred on whether the development will reach the high expectations of sustainability and the impact of the additional population on traffic and other infrastructure.
4.4
Strategic Assessment General Methodology This SER is a strategic, high level assessment, which focuses on the potential impacts of the Masterplan, focusing on the cumulative impacts. The assessment covers the following elements: The Baseline: Baseline environmental conditions, including those that are predicted to exist immediately prior to construction and operation of the development as well as those currently existing, will be identified through a number of means. They can be determined through the use of existing data or through undertaking additional surveys, studies and modelling. Each environmental discipline has identified key resources and receptors that have been taken into account during the assessment process. Assessment Scenarios: For all topics, assessments have been made of the impacts with (Do-Something) and without (Do-Minimum) the proposed development. The Do-Minimum scenario represents a
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 13
baseline against which the environmental effects of the development can be measured. This takes account of the likely future baseline conditions, allowing for environmental trends and planned future development that has not yet been implemented. Spatial Scope: The area over which impacts could occur could be wider than the area of land directly taken by the proposals. It is inappropriate to define a single study area for the assessment, since the spatial scope varies depending on the topic under consideration. The study areas allow for the assessment of indirect as well as direct effects, including off-site works such as spoil disposal and routes for construction traffic. Temporal Scope: In considering the environmental effects of the development, it is necessary to identify impacts that may occur during construction or operation. Construction extends from the commencement of site works to the date immediately prior to opening of the development. Operation extends from immediately after opening of the development for the remainder of its life. In addition, it is recognised that some environmental design measures would take time to become established and effective. The assessment therefore considers impacts in Year 1 (Opening Year) and in Year 15 (Design Year), where appropriate. It is also recognised that some effects would be of a permanent nature whereas others would be temporary. Assessing Impacts: Impacts associated with the construction and operational stages of the proposed development will be identified. These will be considered in terms of their nature, the physical extent of their influence and the magnitude of their effects. In considering the nature and significance of the impacts, the effects will be assessed on the basis of whether they will be:
Direct or indirect
Temporary, short, medium or long term
Reversible or irreversible
Beneficial or adverse
Cumulative
Qualitative and quantitative techniques have been used to assess these impacts, as appropriate. However, as a high level assessment, most of the impacts have been assessed qualitatively. The SER identifies those elements of the development that have been introduced to mitigate potential adverse effects and assesses the significance of the impacts that remain after mitigation measures have been put in place (the “residual impacts”).
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 14
Determining Significance: The assessment will include determining the significance of potential impacts. In general, the significance of an impact reflects the importance or value of the affected resource or receptor, its sensitivity to change, and the magnitude of the predicted impact. The criteria for determining significance will vary from topic to topic but the general principle will be that higher magnitude impacts on important resources will be regarded as significant. Lower magnitude impacts on less important resources will not generally be regarded as significant.
4.5
Cumulative Effects Cumulative effects result from the incremental impacts of the development when added to other past, present and reasonably foreseeable future actions. The impacts from a single development may not be significant on their own but when combined with other impacts and other developments, these effects could become significant. Cumulative effects will be considered by describing and assessing the following:
Interaction of impacts from the development with those from other plans or activities, including the various phases of the redevelopment of this site.
Interaction of different impacts of the development, which affect the same resource or receptor.
Cumulative impacts are considered in each topic chapter as necessary, and summarised in Chapter 17, Cumulative Effects.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 15
5
Landscape and Visual Impact
5.1
Introduction This chapter considers the landscape and visual implications of the proposed development. Landscape is defined in the European Landscape Convention (Ref 5-1), as ‘...an area, as perceived by people, whose character is the result of the action and interaction of natural and/or human factors’.
5.2
Regulatory and Policy Framework This impact assessment has been undertaken in accordance with current international and national legislation, and national, regional and local plans and policies relating to landscape and visual amenity in the context of the proposed masterplan. A summary of the relevant legislation and policies, and the requirements of these policies together with the Masterplan Response have been provided in 5-1 below: Table5-1
Policy/Legislation
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester Development Masterplan Response
National Planning Policy Framework (Ref 5-2)
Landscape to be taken into account in the planning process through protection and enhancement of landscapes.
Development will respect and enhance local landscape character, securing appropriate mitigation where damage to local landscape character cannot be avoided. This will be achieved, in large part, through green infrastructure proposals and through design in response to the local vernacular
Cherwell District Council Submission: Policy ESD13 - Local Landscape Protection and Enhancement (Ref 5-3)
Opportunities will be sought to secure the enhancement of the character and appearance of the landscape, particularly in urban fringe locations, through the restoration, management or enhancement of existing landscapes, features or habitats and where appropriate the creation of new ones, including the planting of woodlands, trees and hedgerows. Development will be expected to respect and enhance local landscape
Development will respect and enhance local landscape character, securing appropriate mitigation where damage to local landscape character cannot be avoided. This will be achieved, in large part, through green infrastructure proposals and through design in response to the local vernacular
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 16
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester Development Masterplan Response
character, securing appropriate mitigation where damage to local landscape character cannot be avoided. Proposals will not be permitted if they would:
Cause undue visual intrusion into the open countryside;
Cause undue harm to important natural landscape features and topography;
Be inconsistent with local character;
Harm the setting of settlements, buildings, structures or other landmark features; or
Harm the historic value of the landscape.
Development proposals should have regard to the information and advice contained in the Council's Countryside Design Summary Supplementary Planning Guidance, and the Oxfordshire Wildlife and Landscape Study (OWLS) and be accompanied by a landscape assessment where appropriate.
5.3
Methodology
5.3.1 Introduction The assessment process has been carried out based on guidance entitled ‘Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment: Third Edition’, produced by the Landscape Institute and Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment, in 2011 (Ref 5-4).
5.3.2 Study Area The study area will cover the whole of the Masterplan Site and would consider the character areas as shown in Figure 5-1. At the strategic level, available landscape and character capacity studies together with project-level landscape character assessment (which take into NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 17
account perceptual/broad-scale visual considerations), for land to the north west of Bicester, form the basis for assessment.
5.3.3 Establishment of Baseline Conditions Relevant information has been obtained from Natural England, Oxfordshire County Council, CDC and Ordnance Survey, with field survey work during Summer/early Autumn 2010. Key information sources are as follows:
Cherwell District Council (2014); ‘Local Plan Submission’ (Ref 53).
Countryside Agency (1999); ‘Countryside Character’ (Ref 5-5)
Cherwell District Council (1995); ‘Cherwell District Landscape Assessment’ (Ref 5-6)
Oxfordshire County Council (2004); ‘Oxfordshire Wildlife and Landscape Study’ ( Ref 5-7)
WYG Planning & Environment (2013): ‘Bicester Landscape Sensitivity Capacity Assessment (Ref 5-8)
The following criteria have been used to assess sensitivity: Table 5-2
Assigning Sensitivity
Sensitivity
Description
Very High
Value: Typically of very high importance and rarity, international scale, and very limited potential for substitution (e.g. World Heritage Site). *Susceptibility to change: Landscape very unlikely to tolerate the change proposed, even with mitigation.
High
Value: Typically of high importance and rarity, national scale, and limited potential for substitution (e.g. National Park or Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty). *Susceptibility to change: Landscape very unlikely to tolerate the change proposed, even with mitigation.
Medium
Value: Typically of high or medium importance and rarity, regional scale, and limited potential for substitution (e.g. Registered Historic Park and Garden, Conservation Area). *Susceptibility to change: Landscape has the potential to tolerate the change proposed, with appropriate mitigation.
Low
Value: Typically of low or medium importance and rarity, local scale, such as undesignated landscape. *Susceptibility to change: Landscape likely to tolerate the change proposed, with appropriate mitigation.
Negligible
Value: Typically of very low importance and rarity, local scale, such as degraded landscape identified for enhancement in policies. *Susceptibility to change: Landscape likely to readily absorb the
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 18
Sensitivity
Description change proposed.
*The judgement concerning susceptibility to change is made by considering the nature/characteristics of the development and receiving landscape, following evaluation of value and prior to the assessment of effects.
5.3.4 Assessment of Effects The criteria and threshold matrices used to assess the magnitude of impact and significance of landscape and visual effects are set out below: Table 5-3
Assigning Magnitude of Landscape Impact
Magnitude Description of Impact Major Adverse
Loss of landscape character and/or quality and integrity of landscape designation; severe damage to key landscape characteristics, features and elements.
Major Beneficial
Large scale or major improvement of landscape quality; extensive restoration or enhancement; major improvement of landscape attribute quality.
Moderate Adverse
Loss of landscape character, but not adversely affecting the integrity of landscape designation; partial loss of/damage to key landscape characteristics, features or elements.
Moderate Beneficial
Benefit to, or addition of, key landscape characteristics, features or elements; improvement of landscape attribute quality.
Minor Adverse
Some measurable change in landscape attributes, quality or vulnerability; minor loss of, or alteration to, one (maybe more) key landscape characteristics, features or elements.
Minor Beneficial
Minor benefit to, or addition of, one (maybe more) key landscape characteristics, features or elements; some beneficial impact on landscape attribute or a reduced risk of negative impact occurring.
Negligible Adverse
Very minor loss or detrimental alteration to one or more landscape characteristics, features or elements.
Negligible Beneficial
Very minor benefit to or positive addition of one or more landscape characteristics, features or elements.
No Change
No loss or alteration of landscape characteristics, features or elements; no observable adverse or beneficial impact.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 19
Table 5-4 Determining the Significance of Effect
Sensitivity
Magnitude of Impact No Change
Negligible
Minor
Moderate
Major
Negligible
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral or Slight
Neutral or Slight
Slight
Low
Neutral
Neutral or Slight
Neutral or Slight
Slight
Slight or Moderate
Medium
Neutral
Neutral or Slight
Slight
Moderate
Moderate or Large
High
Neutral
Slight
Slight or Moderate
Moderate or Large
Large or Very Large
Very High
Neutral
Slight
Moderate or Large
Large or Very Large
Very Large
Note: Significance is derived as a product of Magnitude and Sensitivity, as set out above. Where more than one significance outcome is possible, professional judgement is used to determine that which is most appropriate, on a case by case basis.
Table 5-5
Definitions for Significance of Effect
Significance of Effect
Description
Very Large
Only adverse effects are normally assigned this level of significance. They represent key factors in the decision-making process. These effects are generally, but not exclusively, associated with sites or features of international, national or regional importance that are likely to suffer most damaging impact and loss of resource integrity. However, a major change in site or feature of local importance may also enter this category.
Large
These beneficial or adverse effects are considered to be very important considerations and are likely to be material in the decision-making process.
Moderate
Those beneficial or adverse effects may be important, but are not likely to be key decision making factors. The cumulative effects of such factors may influence the decision-making if they lead to an increase in the overall adverse effect on a particular resource or receptor.
Slight
These beneficial or adverse effects may be raised as local factors. They are unlikely to be critical in the decision making process, but are important in enhancing the subsequent design of the Project.
Neutral
No effects or those that are beneath levels of perception, within the normal bounds of variation or within the margin of forecasting error.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 20
5.4
Description of Existing Baseline Conditions
5.4.1 Landscape The site and immediate surroundings are not covered by any landscape designations. Natural England has produced a landscape character assessment of England entitled ‘Countryside Character’, 1999 (Ref 5-9). Land to the north west of Bicester is defined by the transition between National Character Areas 107 and 108, the ‘Cotswolds’ and ‘Upper Thames Clay Vales’, respectively. More locally, the area forms part of the ‘Oxfordshire Estate Farmlands’ Character Area identified in Cherwell District Landscape Assessment (1995) (Ref 5-6). This is broadly described as having a rolling landform, with underlying limestone geology, characterised by a distinctive pattern of woodlands and mixed farmland - much of which is associated with 18th Century parkland. Most recently, the Oxfordshire Wildlife and Landscape Study (2004) (Ref 5-7), places the site within ‘Wooded Estatelands’ Landscape Character Type, with the following key characteristics:
‘Rolling topography with localised steep slopes.
Large blocks of ancient woodland and mixed plantations of variable sizes.
Large parklands and mansion houses.
A regularly shaped field pattern dominated by arable fields.
Small villages with strong vernacular character.’
Within this Character Type, the land near Bicester is classified as ‘Middleton Stoney’ Landscape Character Area, described as follows: ‘The area is dominated by large arable fields and localised improved grassland. There are smaller grass fields around villages, particularly Bletchington and Kirtlington. Woodland is a strong landscape element, and large woodland blocks are associated with the parklands and estates. It is mainly ancient semi-natural woodland, with species such as ash, oak, hazel, and field maple, as well as mixed plantations. Throughout the landscape, there are belts of young mixed and coniferous plantations next to roadside hedges and they often function as field boundaries. Hedgerow trees such as ash, sycamore and occasionally oak are found in some roadside hedges, but they are sparser to the north where there is more intensive arable cropping. In parts there are dense corridors of willow and ash, belts of semi-natural woodland and poplar plantations bordering watercourses. Hedgerows vary from tall, thick species-rich hedges with shrubs such as wayfaring tree, dogwood, hazel, field maple, spindle and wild privet through to low, gappy internal field hedges. Parklands are a prominent feature throughout and they include NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 21
Middleton, Bignell and Tusmore Parks in the north and Kirtlington and Bletchington Parks in the south.’ The landscape strategy for the Wooded Estatelands, within which the Middleton Stoney area lies, is to safeguard and enhance the characteristic landscape of parklands, estates, woodlands, hedgerows and unspoilt villages.
Local Landscape Character In addition to the landscape character assessments outlined above, WYG Planning & Environment was commissioned by Cherwell District Council to produce ‘Bicester Landscape Sensitivity and Capacity Assessment’ (Ref 5-8) which forms part of the evidence base for the Cherwell Local Plan Submission. The landscape of the masterplan site is described as follows: ‘The site comprises a relatively flat landform ranging between 80m and 95m AOD. The area is dissected by the Bicester to Banbury railway line passing through the centre of it in a south east to north west orientation; Bicester Road/Bucknell Road runs parallel to the railway line and creates a wedge of land in the middle of the site which is isolated from the surrounding area by the railway line and road. There are a number of streams and drainage ditches passing through the northern area providing field drainage, some of these converge in the northern area of the site and pass through the adjacent housing area to the south east and feed into Bure Park Nature Reserve. This drainage network provides a slightly more varied topography to the north of the railway line than to the south. There is one Public Footpath passing through the area in a south east to north west orientation, again almost parallel with the railway line. This route enables views over the surrounding arable. lands to the south of the footpath although views north are truncated by the elevated alignment of the railway line. Views are available south as far as Himley Farm in the southern area of the site before the land falls slightly towards Bignell Park. The site is crossed by a number of low voltage transmission lines although these are primarily within the southern half of the site. Whilst these are detracting within the views, they are not dominantly visible due to the deciduous plantations which screen them in places.’ Broad-scale visual considerations are described as follows: ‘Visibility of the site comprises sensitive and non sensitive receptors. The residential area to the south east has glimpsed views into the area through the existing structure planting along the residential area boundary and roadside verge of the A4095 although these views are not prominent. The majority of viewers are users of the roads located on the site boundaries. These viewers receive intermittent sequential views through hedgerow vegetation and field gates over the arable NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 22
land. The railway line enables elevated views from the route as it passes through the centre of the site with most of the site area visible.’ The sensitivity and capacity assessment identifies the masterplan site has having medium-high capacity for residential, employment and recreation development, which is defined as the capacity to accommodate development as long as recognition is given to protect the landscape character and the visual resource of the site. Specifically, the assessment suggests maintaining the visual separation with outlying satellite settlements such as Bucknell. In terms of general landscape maintenance/management, the assessment suggests enhancement of the railway line as a wildlife corridor; development of improved structure planting along site boundaries; improvements to the water courses, including introduction of native species planting; and improved access through the area creating a series of footpaths from the adjacent housing estates. As part of the landscape impact assessment process for the NW Bicester development project, a landscape character assessment has been prepared for land to the north west of Bicester based on the principles set out in ‘Landscape Character Assessment Guidance for England and Scotland’, produced by the Countryside Agency and Scottish Natural Heritage, in 2002 (Ref 5-9). In line with this guidance, landscape character areas have been identified and key landscape characteristics defined for each. The sensitivity of each landscape character area to the masterplan has also been identified, based on the criteria set out in the methodology, above. Local landscape character areas that have been identified, each with a distinctive sense of place, in the form of key characteristics, as illustrated and described below. This provides the local landscape character context for the Masterplan Site:
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 23
Figure 6-1 Local Landscape Character Areas
Caversfield Valleys and Ridges
Distinctive valley and ridge landform.
Valleys defined by tree lined watercourses, woodland blocks and relatively steep fields predominantly laid to pasture.
Mixed farmland on ridges, with fields bounded by established hedgerows and woodland blocks.
Settlement comprising the historic, stone built village of Caversfield, including Home Farm and the Anglo-Saxon St Lawrence’s Church (Listed Buildings), with the church tower forming a visible element in the local landscape.
Generally strong sense of enclosure due to characteristic landform, vegetation and settlement edges.
Based on the criteria set out in Section 5.3 above, landscape value is considered to be low. The setting of St Lawrence’s Church and Home Farm are key considerations for any future development within this character area. This setting is currently defined in large part by undeveloped agricultural land with associated rural qualities, in turn allowing views from these areas to the church tower, such that built development without adequate open buffers would be incongruous. Development edges made up of soft landscape proposals and sensitively designed built form have the potential to conserve and NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 24
enhance the current setting of historic features and would respond well to the existing tree and woodland cover, described above. The strong landscape structure and general sense of enclosure across the landscape are such that with careful consideration for retention and enhancement of local features (described above) development could be accommodated without resulting in disruption to the local landscape pattern. Overall, taking into account the existing landscape and scope for mitigation, this landscape is considered to have a low sensitivity. Bucknell Ridge
Ridgeline defined by subtly raised landform, with land falling away to local watercourses and Bicester urban edge.
Large, rectilinear fields, predominantly in arable use.
Established hedgerows with hedgerow trees.
Settlement limited to scattered farmsteads of clustered farm buildings.
Open, expansive views framed by established hedgerow vegetation.
Based on the criteria set out in Section 5.3 above, landscape value is considered to be low. Development in this raised area has the potential to form an obtrusive element within the landscape. However, if new built form responds to the local pattern of clustered settlement, buffered by tree planting and separated by open land, development could occur without undue urbanising effects in the wider landscape. Overall, taking into account the existing landscape and scope for mitigation, this landscape is considered to have a low sensitivity. Bucknell Valley Corridor
Shallow valley depression, falling between local ridgelines.
Landscape pattern heavily influenced by linear communications and drainage features, with generally narrow, elongated fields separated by communications and drainage corridors.
Farmland comprising mixture of fields in arable and pastoral use, bounded by established hedgerows and copses.
Settlement defined by a mixture of scattered farmsteads and, nearer the urban edge, modern offices /depots.
Strong sense of enclosure due to vegetation cover, railway embankment and settlement edges.
This enclosed landscape offers limited views across the area and, with careful consideration for existing vegetation; development could be accommodated without resulting in significant disruption to the local NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 25
landscape characteristics. There is considerable scope to enhance communications/drainage corridors through landscape proposals that improve amenity value, particularly where there is currently/could be public access. Overall, taking into account the existing landscape and scope for mitigation, this landscape is considered to have a low sensitivity. Himley Farmland Slopes
Gently sloping farmland, predominantly in arable use, interspersed with woodland shelter belts.
Medium to large-scale fields bounded by established hedgerows with hedgerow trees.
Settlement limited to isolated farmsteads, including the historic Himley Farm buildings (the barns are Listed Buildings), connected by hedgerow lined tracks.
A number of overhead power lines, which form urbanising elements, traverse the area.
Based on the criteria set out in Section 5.3 above, landscape value is considered to be low. This gently sloping, enclosed landscape, offers limited views across the area, and with careful consideration for local features (described above), development could be accommodated without resulting in disruption to the local landscape pattern. Whilst Listed Buildings present a constraint, their setting could be respected through careful layout of proposals, retention of landscape features and structural planting, where appropriate. Overall, taking into account the existing landscape and scope for mitigation, this landscape is considered to have a low sensitivity.
5.5
Design and Mitigation The masterplan responds to landscape character, as expressed through landscape character assessments (set out above). This would be achieved in large part through built form in response to the locality and creating a network of multi-functional green space/infrastructure (including enhancement of public access, watercourses/drainage features and biodiversity). This would include provision of appropriate open land/landscape buffers at key locations, namely land around Caversfield and Bucknell and bordering the existing urban edge of Bicester along Howes Lane.
5.6
Assessment of Effects The proposed development would not lie within a valued landscape, as expressed through designation. However, as described above, the site is subject to planning policy in respect of landscape character and local landscape characteristics should therefore be taken into
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 26
account. The proposed development site falls at the transition between National Character Areas 107 and 108, the ‘Cotswolds’ and ‘Upper Thames Clay Vales’, and within the ‘Wooded Estatelands’ of the Oxfordshire Wildlife and Landscape Study. The landscape characteristics exhibited more locally relate to those of the character areas defined as part of this strategic assessment. The implications of the masterplan for each of these landscape character areas are set out below: Caversfield Valleys and Ridges Whilst farmland would be replaced with new settlement, landscape structure/enclosure would be retained/enhanced through greeninfrastructure proposals. In addition, vistas across the landscape to the tower of St Lawrence’s Church would be retained and the masterplan proposals would give increased public access to such vistas. As a result there would not be significant disruption to the local landscape. Bucknell Ridge Whilst farmland would be replaced with new settlement, a separation with Bucknell would remain in place, landscape structure/enclosure would be retained/enhanced, new built form would respond to the local pattern of clustered settlement, and views (particularly those from areas with public access, such as public rights of way near Bucknell) would be buffered by tree planting. As a result development would occur without undue landscape effects. Bucknell Valley Corridor The enclosed landscape offers limited views across the area such that development would be readily assimilated within the landscape, and communications/drainage corridors/watercourses would be enhanced through green infrastructure proposals. As a result development would occur without significant disruption to the local landscape characteristics. Himley Farmland Slopes The setting of historic buildings would be respected through careful layout of proposals and planted buffers. Where proposed employment uses, off Howes Lane, have the greatest potential to result in discordance with semi-rural landscape characteristics, appropriate buffers of open land/green-infrastructure would be in place to avoid or minimise such impacts. As a result development would occur without undue landscape effects. The analysis above illustrates that the proposals are consistent with the landscape strategy of the Oxfordshire Wildlife and Landscape NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 27
Study7, which identifies the need to safeguard and enhance characteristic woodlands, hedgerows and unspoilt villages, and Bicester Landscape Sensitivity and Capacity Assessment8, which suggests maintaining the visual separation with outlying satellite settlements such as Bucknell, enhancement of the railway corridor, development of improved structure planting along site boundaries, enhancement of water courses, and improved access through the area. Overall the magnitude of impact is considered to be minor adverse. The overall significance of landscape effects, taking account of the low sensitivity and adverse magnitude of impact, is considered to be neutral.
5.7
Cumulative Effects Other committed developments in the vicinity of Bicester are separated from the existing urban area or other infrastructure such that there would not be cumulative impact on the local landscape or visual amenity north west of Bicester.
5.8
Summary This chapter considers the implications of the masterplan for the local landscape. The masterplan site is not afforded protection through landscape designation and local landscape character is defined by a rolling topography, mixed farmland enclosed by woodlands and hedgerows, and villages exhibiting strong vernacular character, near the existing north western urban edge of Bicester. The masterplan responds to these characteristics and as a result it is considered that the masterplan would not result in significant landscape effects.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 28
6
Ecology
6.1
Introduction This chapter assesses the likely significant effects of the proposed development of the Masterplan in terms of Ecology and Nature Conservation. This chapter is supported by the reports presented in Appendix 6A to 6I. Appendices 6A to 6I presents the full baseline information relating to Ecology and Nature Conservation. The baseline against which the likely significant effects are to be assessed is the current environmental conditions at and surrounding, the study area, which comprises and area of land to the north west of Bicester, Oxfordshire. The Site boundary is illustrated on Drawings 61 to 6-3. The study area has been widened further to include particular species or species groups of conservation concern (see Appendix 6A for further details). This SER addresses the construction phase and the completed development, or operational phase. The impact assessment elements of this SER have been undertaken in accordance with the guidance set out in the Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management’s (IEEM) Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment (2006) (‘the IEEM Guidelines’) (Ref 6-1), in order to provide Cherwell District Council with “clear and concise information about the likely significant ecological effects associated with the project” (IEEM, 2006). It is noted that since publication of these guidelines IEEM has become Chartered and they are now known as the Chartered Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management. However, since the guidelines pre-date the change they are referred to as IEEM guidelines throughout this Chapter. The surveys that underpin the ecological impact assessment were undertaken during the period 2010 to 2013; see Appendix 6A for more details.
6.2
Regulatory and Policy Framework This impact assessment has been undertaken in accordance with current international and national legislation, and national, regional and local plans and policies relating to nature conservation in the context of the proposed Masterplan development. A summary of the relevant legislation and policies, the requirements of these policies and the proposed Masterplan development response has been provided in Table 6-1 below.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 29
Table 6-1
Ecology Regulatory and Policy Framework
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester Masterplan Response
Habitats Directive (92/43/EEC) as transposed into UK legislation by ‘The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010’
The Regulations provide for the designation of both Special Protection Areas (SPAs) (first established under the Birds Directive, 1979) and Special Areas for Conservation (SACs) as part of the Natura 2000 network of protected areas across Europe.
There are no Natura 2000 sites within 10km of the proposed Masterplan development, thus development on this site is unlikely to have any effects on sites of European importance. The ponds that support a breeding population of great crested newt are retained within the Masterplan Layout with buffer zones that are connected to green space. The Masterplan layout also retains the confirmed and possible bat roosts and the commuting routes and foraging corridors that link the confirmed and potential roost sites both on and off site. Otters are also EPS, but their presence on site has not been confirmed.
The Directive promotes the maintenance of biodiversity in Europe. The Regulations 2010 constitute the UK government’s implementation of the Directive in England and Wales.
The Wildlife and Countryside Act (1981), as amended This Act is the principle mechanism for the legislative protection of wildlife in Great Britain.
The Regulations also provide protection for European Protected Species (EPS) from the deliberate capture, killing or disturbance. It is also an absolute offence to destroy or damage the resting site or breeding site of an EPS.
The Act provides for the designation of Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), which are selected as the best national examples of habitat types, sites with notable species and sites of geological importance. Schedules 1-4 of the Act provide for the protection of wild birds. Schedule 5 of the Act details protection of other animal species. Full protection is given under Section 9 of the Act to certain animals listed on Schedule 5, including all species of bats and great crested newt. Partial protection under Section 9 is given to certain other species, including all common species of reptile. Badgers are listed on Schedule 6 of the Act which
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
There are no SSSIs within the Masterplan site. There are five SSSIs within 5km of the Masterplan site, and a further nine within 10km. Air quality impacts on all SSSIs within 10km of the proposed development arising from traffic and emissions from the Energy Centre(s) would be assessed as part of future impact assessments once data are available. Species protected by the Act recorded within the Masterplan site are great crested newt, common lizard, grass snake, bats, barn owl, and badgers. No protected plant or invertebrate species have been recorded within the Masterplan site. As identified above (with Page 30
Policy/Legislation
National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act 1949 Local Nature Reserves (LNRs) are designated by Local Authorities under Section 21 of this act as amended by Schedule 11 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006. Countryside Rights of Way Act (2000)
Requirements
NW Bicester Masterplan Response
outlaws certain methods of taking or killing animals, where necessary. Schedule 8 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act details protection for plants and fungi.
respect to the Habitats Directive) the Masterplan incorporates measures to safeguard the great crested newt and bat populations. The badger setts would be retained and protected, and mitigation measures that would be implemented during construction would ensure no reptiles would be killed or injured. Measures would be implemented during construction to ensure that nesting birds and in particular barn owls are not disturbed.
LNRs are places with a wildlife or geological interest of local value that are capable of being managed with the conservation of nature and/or the maintenance of public access as priority concerns.
The northern boundary of Bure Park LNR is 25m from the Masterplan site. The implementation of standard measures to protect water quality during construction and as part of the sustainable drainage system (SuDS) would also ensure that no adverse effects on the River Bure would arise as a result of the proposals.
This Act (2000) gives greater protection to SSSIs and strengthens wildlife enforcement legislation by the introduction of the offence of ‘reckless disturbance’. The Act also requires Government Departments to have regard to biodiversity and conservation; Section 74 of the Act required lists of habitats and species of Principal Importance to be produced, for which conservation steps should be taken or promoted. The requirement to prepare such lists of habitats and species was extended by the Natural
See response to Wildlife and Countryside Act (above) and the NERC Act (below).
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 31
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester Masterplan Response
Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006 (see below). Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act (2006)
The NERC Act places a duty upon public bodies to consider enhancement of biodiversity within all of their actions. Sections 40 and 41 of this Act superseded Section 74 of the CROW Act. Section 41 lists flora, fauna and habitats considered by the Secretary of State to be of Principal Importance for conserving biodiversity. In addition, this Act provides for those species that were previously identified within the UK Biodiversity Action Plan (UKBAP) and the relevant Local Biodiversity Action Plans (LBAPs) to be considered as biodiversity conservation priorities. The UKBAP has been superseded by the England BAP (for BAPs see Section 2.3 below).
The protection and enhancement of UKBAP and LBAP habitats and species have been considered as part of this assessment. Section 41 and UKBAP habitats and species of Principal Importance recorded within the Masterplan Site include: hedgerows; common lizard, great crested newts, brown hare, hedgehog, 13 bird species (see Table 6-2) and a number of bat species including noctule, soprano pipistrelle, and brown longeared bat.
Protection of Badgers Act (1992)
Badgers are extensively protected by the Protection of Badgers Act (1992) which consolidates the legislation specific to badgers. The Act makes it an offence to wilfully take, kill, injure or ill-treat a badger; to obstruct, destroy, or damage in any part, a badger’s sett; or to disturb badgers within a sett.
All of the badger setts recorded within the Masterplan Site would be retained and protected within areas of green space.
The European Water Framework Directive (WFD) (2000)
The European Water Framework Directive came into force in December 2000 and became part of UK law in December 2003.
The implementation of standard measures to protect water quality within the Masterplan site would ensure that no adverse effects on the River Bure would arise as a result of the proposals. SuDS would also ensure that water quality is protected once the site was
The purpose of the Directive is to establish a framework for the protection of inland surface waters, transitional waters, coastal waters and NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 32
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester Masterplan Response
groundwater.
operational. In addition the watercourses within the site would be maintained within a 60 metre-wide buffer of semi-natural vegetation that would enable the water to follow a natural path. These measures would ensure that the Masterplan does not conflict with the requirements of the WFD.
To meet the objectives of the WFD, Member States have established River Basin Districts and developed Plans and Programmes of Measures that detail the actions that need to be taken within each District. The overall aim is for the ‘water bodies’ and ‘protected areas’ within each River Basin District to achieve 'good ecological status' by 2015. The Hedgerows Regulations (1997)
The Hedgerows Regulations (1997) provide protection for ‘important’ hedgerows for which replanting is no substitute. The ‘importance’ of a hedgerow depends upon a number of archaeological, wildlife and landscape criteria.
There are 14 hedgerows within the proposed development, of which 11 are considered to be ‘important’ using the wildlife and landscape criteria. The design includes for the retention of the majority of the hedgerows including those that are ‘important’ within wide bands of seminatural vegetation.
Planning Policy Statement: Eco-towns. A Supplement to Planning Policy 1
Key features of PPS1 that seek to safeguard biodiversity include:
43% of the Masterplan Site has been allocated to green space.
ET14 Green Infrastructure sets that forty percent of the eco-town’s total area should be allocated to green space, of which at least half should be open to the public. Ecotown applications will also need to demonstrate a range of types of green space. These should be multi-functional, including the supporting of wildlife.
Off-site compensation would be provided to offset the impacts on farmland birds. Significant areas of green space would be created within the Masterplan site. Overall, this would deliver a net gain to biodiversity.
This policy sets out the minimum standards for Eco-town development to ensure that they are exemplars of good practice and provide sustainable, low carbon living. It states that the design of eco-towns should take full account of the impact on local eco-systems, mitigating negative impacts as far as possible and maximising opportunities to enhance their local environments
ET16 Biodiversity stipulates that the eco-town will need to demonstrate a net gain in local biodiversity and planning permission may not be granted for eco-town proposals which have a significant adverse effect on
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
No impact is envisaged on Internationally designated sites within 10km of the Masterplan site (as outlined above with respect to European designated sites). Air quality impacts on Nationally designated sites within 10km of the Masterplan site arising from traffic and emissions from the Energy Centre(s) would Page 33
Policy/Legislation
National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) The NPPF sets out how the planning system should protect and enhance nature conservation interests. Its intention is to consolidate previous planning guidance (including Planning Policy Statement 9 (PPS9), the previous guidance on the protection of biodiversity through the planning system) into a single document. Cherwell Local Plan 2014 Local plan policies that are of relevance to this site are contained within this Local Plan.
Requirements
NW Bicester Masterplan Response
internationally designated nature conservation sites or Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI). The ecotown development should include a strategy for conserving and enhancing local biodiversity, and this is to accompany the planning application.
be assessed as part of future impact assessments once data are available (as outlined above with respect to SSSIs).
A key function of the NPPF is to promote sustainable development whilst ensuring that planning decisions should protect, and try to improve, wildlife and the habitats they live in. The framework sets out nationally important issues whilst leaving other planning matters to be decided upon by local authorities and communities through the presumption of sustainable development.
The Masterplan retains and protects the most valuable features of the site; the hedgerows, River Bure and its tributaries, the mature woodlands, ponds, badger setts and bat roosts. There are also opportunities to enhance the value of the newly created areas of green space for biodiversity. Overall, the Masterplan together with the Biodiversity Offsetting will deliver a net gain in biodiversity.
In the Local Plan the Masterplan Site is known as Bicester 1, relevant sections of the policy that relates to this site are:
The Masterplan retains and protects the most valuable features of the site (see response to NPPF above).
Preservation and enhancement of habitats and species on site, particularly protected species and habitats and creation and management of new habitats to achieve an overall net gain in biodiversity, including the creation of a local nature reserve. Sensitive management of recreational access to open space provision to secure recreation and health benefits alongside
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
The proposals include the creation of significant areas of green space, including: a Nature Reserve supporting wetland habitats, trees, shrubs and grassland; a woodland fitness trail; a Country Park; SuDS features, and an wetland waste water treatment facility. Off-site compensation would be provided for farmland birds. The four key principals of retention, creation, enhancement and offsetting will ensure that a net gain in biodiversity is achieved.
Page 34
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester Masterplan Response
biodiversity gains.
A Landscape and Habitats Management Plan to be provided to manage habitats on site and to ensure this is integral to wider landscape management.
6.3
A Landscape and Habitats Management Plan would be produced as part of the detailed design.
Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plans
6.3.1 England’s Biodiversity Strategy The document entitled ‘Biodiversity 2020: A Strategy for England’s Wildlife and Ecosystem Services’ sets out England’s Biodiversity Strategy. Its aim is to halt the loss of biodiversity, support healthy well-functioning ecosystems and establish coherent ecological networks. It takes a large landscape scale approach to conservation on both the land and at sea. It identifies the need to establish Local Nature Partnerships to deliver the Strategy through community involvement. It supports the establishment of Nature Improvement Areas, measures to increase the number of SSSIs in favourable conservation status and the creation of a network of Marine Protection Areas. It also identifies that improvement and protection of the natural environment are part of the planning system and identifies that biodiversity offsetting will be piloted to deliver planning policy more effectively. It promotes flood and erosion management to conserve the natural environment and improve biodiversity. Whilst the Masterplan site is not within a Nature Improvement Area there will be opportunities as part of the development proposal to enhance the biodiversity value of the retained habitats within the Masterplan site and to create new habitats. Biodiversity offsetting will also be used to compensate for the impact on farmland birds.
6.3.2 Local Biodiversity Action Plans Local BAPs relevant to the proposed development are the Oxfordshire BAP and Cherwell BAP.
Oxfordshire BAP The Oxfordshire BAP (Ref 6-2) identifies Conservation Target Areas (CTAs) for the maintenance, restoration and creation of BAP habitats within the county. Those habitats relevant to the Masterplan include woodland, hedgerows and rivers. Biodiversity targets have been created for these habitats within the CTAs. The Masterplan Site is not within or in close proximity to any of the identified CTAs. There are NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 35
four CTAs located within 5km of the proposed development. The nearest CTA is the Tusmore and Shelswell Parks with Stoke Lyne Woodlands CTA located approximately 1km to the north west. This CTA is designated for its parkland, lowland mixed deciduous woodland (including ancient woodland), and associated habitats including large parkland lakes, ponds and wet woodland. The River Ray CTA, located approximately 2.5km to the south-east of the site, largely comprises lowland meadow and wet grassland habitats. Kirtlington and Bletchingdon Park and Woods CTA, is located approximately 3.9km south west of the site at its closest point. The area comprises parkland, lowland mixed deciduous woodland, fen, swamp and wet woodland and limestone grassland. Otmoor CTA is located 4.2km to the south of the Masterplan site and comprises floodplain grazing marsh, reedbed, hedgerows, ponds and woodlands.
Cherwell BAP The Cherwell Corporate BAP 2013-2014 (Ref 6-3) sets out how the District Council will fulfil its duties under the NERC Act and meet other biodiversity legislation. It identifies that biodiversity is an important consideration in the planning process and that this will be set out in the Local Plan. It also identifies that the CTA’s are important areas of high ecological value and supports the development of the Local Nature Partnership.
6.4
Methodology
6.4.1 Introduction The methodology used to carry out the impact assessment is based upon the IEEM Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment. In accordance with the IEEM Guidelines, an assessment has been carried out which collates all of the existing baseline information through a desk-based study and field surveys, and predicts all of the significant effects of the Masterplan development on ‘Key Ecological Receptors’, with mitigation. Where significant adverse effects are predicted, the assessment presents measures to mitigate these effects such that the residual impacts of the Masterplan would not be significant. In addition, measures have been developed to address the legislative and policy requirements associated with those protected species and valuable habitats for which significant effects are not expected, but which nevertheless warrant mitigation. Measures to enhance biodiversity in the area affected by the proposals and those which help to deliver Action Plan and local policy targets are also recommended. The Masterplan also provides opportunities for habitat creation and enhancement, incorporating ecological features of benefit to species already present with the Site, and habitats and species which have currently not been recorded but for which an NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 36
overall benefit can be provided. This together with Biodiversity Offsetting will ensure that a net gain in local biodiversity is provided by the Masterplan, and is key to its design. This approach is considered to represent best practice.
6.4.2 Consultations Consultations were undertaken with statutory and non-statutory nature conservation organisations, including: Natural England; the Environment Agency; Oxfordshire County Council; Cherwell District Council; the NW Bicester Eco-Town BioRegional Development Coordinator; Bicester Town Council; Thames Valley Police; and Berkshire, Buckinghamshire and Oxfordshire Wildlife Trust. Consultation meetings were held in 2013 on the 14th May, 8th July, 24th September and 12th November. A Site visit was undertaken on the 2nd December with representatives of these organisations to discuss the results of the ecological surveys, implications for the emerging Masterplan, and opportunities for habitat creation and enhancements. Measures that were discussed that have been incorporated into the Masterplan are identified below. Consultees agreed with the scope of the ecological surveys and desk study assessment that has been undertaken to inform the impact assessment. It was agreed that the habitats and features of greatest value to biodiversity within the Masterplan site should be retained with appropriate buffer zones as part of the proposals. Surveys have revealed that these habitats and features include: the hedgerows; watercourses; woodlands; ponds; badger setts; confirmed bat roosts and bat commuting routes/foraging corridors. Care has been taken to ensure that the hedgerows and watercourses continue to provide wildlife corridors that are linked to larger areas of green space. The principal of creating green spaces that are ‘inter-woven’ into the development was agreed. The need to provide dark corridors for nocturnal species was also identified to enable these species to cross the site safely. It was accepted at an early stage that the Masterplan site was of value to farmland birds and that these species could not be accommodated within the Masterplan design. Therefore, in order to achieve a net gain in biodiversity it would be necessary to enhance the value of land that is off-site for farmland birds. The Masterplan has sought to create a network of green spaces linked by green corridors that would support a range of native species in order to achieve a net gain in biodiversity. Consultees requested that areas be created for biodiversity. In response to this request, the Masterplan provides a Country Park and Nature Reserve; it also has space for a wetland waste water treatment facility, green burial sites, a woodland fitness trail and SuDS features that would provide benefits to biodiversity. NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 37
6.4.3 Study Area The baseline survey information has been established by combining the results of field surveys that were undertaken by Arup and Hyder. The Arup surveys were undertaken before the Masterplan site boundary was finalised and therefore the survey area that was adopted by Arup was larger than the final Masterplan site. It comprised the Masterplan site and the fields immediately adjacent (to the west and north west, extending up to 650 m). For great crested newts the survey area was increased further to include waterbodies that were within 500m of the extended Masterplan site boundary. Access was not available to all ponds within 500m of the site boundary; as such the suitability of ponds where access was not available was assessed using a combination of inspections from adjacent land and aerial photographs. For bats, the survey area was extended to include a known bat roost site at St Laurence Church, Caversfield. This church is north of the B4100 which is the minor road adjacent to the northern boundary of the Masterplan site. The desk study extended up to approximately 5km from the centre of the Masterplan site in order to identify records of protected species, species of conservation concern and non-statutory designated sites of nature conservation importance. A distance of up to 10km was searched for European and nationally designated sites. These survey/study areas make up the Zone of Influence (ZoI) for the Masterplan site. The ZoI describes the area over which the activities associated with the Masterplan could influence ecological resources in the wider area.
6.4.4 Establishment of Baseline Conditions The baseline conditions have been established through a desk-based assessment which obtained existing records relating to habitats and species of nature conservation concern both within the Masterplan Site and within the 5km search area defined on the basis of the ZoI for the development. Records were obtained from Thames Valley Environmental Records Centre (TVERC), Oxford Ornithological Society, Banbury Ornithological Society, and the Oxfordshire branch of the Barn Owl Conservation Network. The Oxfordshire Bat Group was also consulted with regard to likely bat species present in the local area. The invertebrate specialist consulted the County Butterfly and Moth recorders in order to obtain species records for the NW Bicester Eco-development and the wider area. In addition, the MAGIC website (Ref 6-4) was reviewed for designated sites within the ZoI. Detailed results of the desk-based assessment are included in Appendix 6A. Field surveys were also undertaken within the Masterplan Site and the surrounding habitats, including a Phase 1 Habitat and protected NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 38
species walkover survey undertaken in Spring 2010 to identify any habitats likely to be of conservation value, and to investigate the presence (or likely presence) of protected species of plants and/or animals. A survey to update the Phase 1 Habitat information was undertaken by Hyder Consulting staff in October 2013. The 2010 survey revealed the need for more detailed surveys to inform the assessment and the design of the Masterplan. Consequently, further surveys were undertaken for terrestrial and aquatic invertebrates, white-clawed crayfish, great crested newt, breeding birds, wintering birds, badgers (including a bait-marking study), bats (including emergence surveys of potential roost sites and bat activity surveys), dormice, water voles and otters. A botanical survey was also undertaken of the hedgerows, areas of grassland, and the mature woodlands. The additional field surveys were completed between May and October 2010, with further surveys undertaken in April and May 2011 to investigate the presence of great crested newt and in October 2012 to ascertain the quality of the water on site. Detailed methodologies and results for the various surveys can be found in Appendices 6B to 6I.
6.4.5 Assessment of Effects Valuation of Ecological Receptors In accordance with the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2011 (referred to as the ‘EIA Regulations 2011’), and the guidance set out in the IEEM Guidelines, it is considered inappropriate to attempt to investigate in detail all potential ecological issues in relation to the Masterplan Site. It is therefore necessary, under the Regulations, to focus on those activities that could potentially generate significant ecological effects on ‘Key Ecological Receptors’. In accordance with the British Standard BS42020:2013 Biodiversity- Code of Practice for Planning and Biodiversity this assessment has followed the IEEM guidelines. In order to determine the likelihood of a significant ecological effect, it is first necessary to identify whether a receptor is sufficiently valuable for a significant effect upon it to be material in decisionmaking. To achieve this, where possible, animal species and their populations have been valued on the basis of a combination of their rarity, status and distribution, using contextual information where it exists. Habitats and plant communities are evaluated against existing selection criteria, wherever possible (such as those developed to aid the designation of SSSIs or non-statutory designated sites). Only those receptors that it was considered could experience significant effects (i.e. impacts that could adversely affect the integrity of the habitat or the favourable conservation status of a species’ local population), and which were identified as being of sufficient value to NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 39
be material to decision-making (i.e. of ‘District/Borough’ level importance or above), have been classified as being ‘Key Ecological Receptors’ and have been considered in the impact assessment. The habitats and features within the ZoI are known as the ‘ecological receptors’. The nature conservation importance/value of each of the ‘ecological receptors’ considers the protected species and species of conservation concern that they may support, to avoid pseudoreplication. For example, the importance for species associated with the hedgerows (breeding birds, reptiles and hedgehogs) has been taken into account as part of categorising the overall importance/value of that habitat. The following geographic frame of reference has been used to determine the value of ecological receptors: International; National; County/Regional; District/Borough; and Parish/ Neighbourhood. Those sites, habitats and/or species classified at ‘District/Borough’ level and above are considered to be sufficiently valuable for a significant effect upon them to be material in decision making. Where habitats and species within the Masterplan Site do not constitute ‘Key Ecological Receptors’ based upon their nature conservation value, and have not formed part of the detailed assessment, they may still warrant consideration during the design and mitigation of the Masterplan on the basis of their legal protection, their implications for environmental (and related) policies and plans, or other issues such as animal welfare issues. Therefore, consideration has separately been given to these ‘Other ecological receptors requiring mitigation’. The results of the ecological valuation process are presented in Section 6.5 Description of Existing Baseline Conditions(below); this summarises the results of the desk study and field surveys, and identifies which of the resources are ‘Key Ecological Receptors’, which are ‘Other ecological receptors’ requiring mitigation, and those which have been scoped out of the assessment altogether. It is important to note that the selection of ‘Key Ecological Receptors’ has therefore been informed by an assessment not only of nature conservation value but also of the likely impacts upon them, the methodology for which is described below.
6.5
Description of Existing Baseline Conditions As described previously, a suite of surveys were undertaken within the Masterplan Site by Arup and Hyder, the results of which are presented in Appendices 6A to 6I and summarised below.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 40
6.5.1 Site description The Masterplan site comprised arable fields and fields supporting improved grassland. There were over 100 hedgerows within the Masterplan site, the majority of these were of high or very high ecological value and considered to be ‘important’ under the Wildlife and Landscape Criteria of the Hedgerows Regulations (1997). Several of the hedgerows supported mature trees. The mainline railway that links Bicester to Banbury divides the Masterplan site into two approximately equal areas. This railway line is on an embankment covered by trees and scrub. With the exception of the derelict buildings at Gowell Farm in the southern half of the Masterplan site, most of the farmsteads were occupied, with gardens that contained regularly mown (amenity) grassland, most also contained mature orchard trees. A number of semi-natural habitats were identified within the Masterplan site, these comprised: broadleaved woodland; speciesrich hedgerows; running water; and standing water. Bat and barn owl boxes had been installed on a number of trees, the majority of which were located on trees within the ownership of Home Farm. Several bat roosts were confirmed within trees and buildings (see Drawing 23). In 2010, a pair of barn owls was confirmed to be breeding within a nest box at the northern end of the site. In 2012 this nest box was relocated to a tree on the edge of woodland in the north of the Masterplan site. The hedgerows provide suitable foraging and commuting habitat for bats, and nesting habitat for birds, including species of conservation concern. The field margins were found to support common species of reptile, including small numbers of grass snakes and common lizards. These margins were found to be of limited value to invertebrates; however, two Nationally Scarce species, the Shaded Pug Moth and the Roesel’s Bush-cricket, were recorded within the field margins at the northern end of the site. Several large badger setts were recorded within the Masterplan site. Two of the ponds near Himley Farm were found to support great crested newts. The field surveys found no evidence of use of the hedgerows within or in close proximity to the Masterplan site by dormice. In summer 2010, the River Bure and tributaries which cross the proposed development did not hold water, and there was no evidence of use by protected species such as otters, water voles, or white-clawed crayfish. Water was recorded in these features subsequently and it appears that they are seasonally wet, more commonly holding water in the autumn/winter and into the spring, but largely dry in the summer months. The precise pattern of water flow is dependent on rainfall. More detail regarding particular receptors is provided below.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 41
6.5.2 Habitats The results of the air quality assessment that will be produced for the EIA will be used to determine whether the Energy Centre(s) and traffic associated with the development would have any effect on air quality on the statutory and non-statutory designated sites identified below. It is likely that mitigation would be provided to ensure that the Energy Centre(s) would not generate significant impacts on this receptor. The results of traffic modelling would also be required to assess whether there is the potential for impacts on these sites, and to assess the impact that the travel plan would have. In the absence of any information relating to impacts on air quality, these receptors have not been carried forward in the impact assessment for these reasons provided.
Ardley Cutting and Quarry SSSI At its closest point to the development, Ardley Cutting and Quarry SSSI are located approximately 370m from the boundary of the Masterplan Site. It is designated for its calcareous grasslands, woodland and wetland habitats which support a diverse invertebrate fauna including uncommon moth and butterfly species in Oxfordshire. The quarry ponds also contain significant populations of great crested newts. However, there is no public access to the railway land and the absence of hydrological links from the Masterplan Site to the features that support the newts. Other than air quality impacts that would be assessed during the EIA, it is not considered that the development proposal would have any effect on this SSSI and this site of National value has not been considered any further in this SER.
Ardley Trackways SSSI Ardley Trackways SSSI is located approximately 1.6km from the Masterplan Site boundary at its closest point, and is designated for its geological interest. There are no Public Rights of Way linking this SSSI to the Masterplan Site. It is considered unlikely that the proposals would have direct or indirect effects on this site of National importance. In the absence of any information relating to impacts on air quality, this SSSI has not been considered any further in this SER.
Stratton Audley Quarries SSSI and Local Wildlife Site (LWS) Stratton Audley Quarries SSSI, located approximately 1.9km from the Masterplan Site boundary, is designated for its geological interest. It has also been designated a Local Wildlife Site (LWS). Natural England assessments of this site have declared it destroyed through infilling with waste material and water. Given the absence of hydrological links, the absence of Public Rights of Way linking it to the Masterplan Site, and its nature as a geological SSSI, it is considered unlikely that NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 42
the proposals would have direct or indirect effects on this site of National importance. However, this would be dependent on the results of the air quality assessment (as outlined above). In the absence of any information relating to impacts on air quality, this SSSI has not been considered any further in this SER.
Weston Fen SSSI Weston Fen SSSI, located 4.6km south west of the Masterplan site boundary, consists of a small, species-rich, calcareous fen bordering a fast-flowing stream, together with adjacent willow carr, Hazel woodland, limestone grassland and marshy grassland habitats. The site is of particular interest for the flowering plant communities associated with the wetland habitats, and for its invertebrate fauna, which includes several rare beetles. The site is hydrologically linked to the Masterplan site and therefore there is the potential for adverse effects on water quality within this SSSI. However, it would be possible to avoid adverse impacts on water quality during both construction and operational phases of the development. Standard techniques to protect water quality within the watercourses would be implemented during the construction phase and the Masterplan incorporates SuDS; thus it is not envisaged that the Masterplan would have adverse effects on this SSSI. In the absence of any information relating to impacts on air quality, this SSSI has not been considered any further in this SER.
Wendlebury Mead and Mansmoor Closes SSSI Wendlebury Meads and Mansmoor Closes SSSI is located approximately 4.7km from the Masterplan boundary. This SSSI comprises a series of traditionally-managed unimproved neutral meadows and supports over 160 plant species. The site also supports a number of bird species including breeding snipe and curlew, and the meadows support large numbers of common butterflies, including meadow brown, hedge brown, small copper, common blue, green veined white and marbled white. The site is hydrologically linked to the Masterplan Site and therefore there is the potential for adverse effects on water quality within this SSSI. However, it will be possible to avoid adverse effects on water quality during both construction and operational phases of the development. Standard techniques to protect water quality within the watercourses will be implemented during the construction phase and SuDS form part of the Masterplan; thus it is not envisaged that the Masterplan would have adverse effects on this SSSI. There is also the potential for adverse effects associated with traffic but, this would be dependent on the results of the air quality assessment (as outlined above). In the absence of any information relating to impacts on air quality, this SSSI has not been considered any further in this SER.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 43
Other SSSIs within 10km of the Masterplan Site There are a further nine SSSIs within 10km of the proposed development: Arncott Bridge Meadows SSSI, located 6.5km to the south-east; Kirtlington Quarry SSSI, located 6.8km to the south west; Otmoor SSSI, located 8km to the south; Bestmoor SSSI, located 8.3km to the north west; Whitecross Green and Oriel Woods SSSI, located 8.6km to the south; Long Herdon Meadow SSSI, located 8.7km to the east; Murcott Meadows SSSI, located 9km to the south, Shipton-on-Cherwell and Whitehill Farm Quarries SSSI, located 9.5km to the south west; and Tingewick Meadows SSSI, located 9.5 km north-east. Of these sites, Otmoor SSSI is likely to be hydrologically linked to the Masterplan site; however, the implementation of standard measures to protect water quality and run-off rates within the Masterplan site would ensure that no adverse effects on this SSSI would arise as a result of the proposals. A sustainable drainage system (SuDS) would also ensure that water quality is protected once the site was operational. The results of the air quality assessment will be used to determine whether the Energy Centre(s) and traffic associated with the development would have any effect on air quality in proximity to these receptors. In the absence of any information relating to impacts on air quality, these SSSIs have not been considered any further in this SER.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 44
Bure Park LNR The River Bure and two of its tributaries flow through the Masterplan site before they enter Bure Park Local Nature Reserve (LNR). The LNR is located 25m south of the Masterplan site; it includes the River Bure, several ponds, mature hedgerows and trees, scrub, and meadow habitat. As the LNR is hydrologically linked to the Masterplan site there is the potential for adverse effects on water quality and quantity. However, it would be possible to avoid adverse effects on water quality through the implementation of standard techniques to protect water quality during the construction phase, and the creation of SuDS features to protect water quality during operation. Thus it is not envisaged that the development proposals would have adverse effects on this LNR. The residents associated with the Masterplan are likely to pass through the park on a regular basis and therefore there would be an increase in visitor numbers to the park, however, the park is already well used by the public and thus the habitats and species that it supports are already tolerant of high levels of disturbance. It is therefore considered unlikely that the increase in visitor pressure would have a discernable impact on habitats or species. The LNR will not be considered further in this SER.
Tusmore and Shelswell Parks with Stoke Lyne Woodlands CTA Tusmore and Shelswell Parks with Stoke Lyne Woodlands CTA is situated at a distance of approximately 1km from the Masterplan Site at its closest point. The CTA comprises the large parklands at Tusmore and Shelswell, together with large areas of mixed deciduous broadleaved woodland, including ancient woodland sites near to Stoke Lyne, and large parkland lakes. The CTA includes several Local Wildlife Sites (LWS): Twelve Acre Copse, Stoke Little Woods, Stoke Woods, and Stoke Bushes. Twelve Acre Copse LWS is a small area of ancient woodland set among arable fields. Stoke Little Wood LWS is an area of ancient woodland which supports a species-rich ground flora, with one ride and several wet areas. Stoke Woods LWS is an area of ancient woodland adjacent to Junction 10 of the M40 motorway, it supports a species-rich ground flora, and the eastern track and internal rides support a good butterfly population. Stoke Bushes LWS is an area of Oak-Ash woodland, with a field layer of Dog’s Mercury. It supports a diverse ground flora and there are a number of historical records of rare plant species for the site. Given the proximity of Masterplan site to the CTA and the LWSs within it, it is considered that the new residents may visit this area via existing Public Rights of Way; others may use the car park at Stoke Wood. It is envisaged that those residents that choose to walk to the CTA would keep to the existing footpath network and not have a significant effect on flora and fauna since the existing paths follow the woodland edge. The Masterplan provides for significant areas of NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 45
open space with opportunities for formal and informal recreation. It is therefore anticipated that the new residents would use the open space within the Masterplan site on a regular basis rather than choose to take the car to Stoke Wood. The Tusmore and Shelswell Parks with Stoke Lyne Woodlands CTA and associated LWS will therefore not be considered further within this SER.
Ray CTA The Ray CTA is located 2.5km to the south-east of the Masterplan site boundary, with Bicester town between the CTA and the site. The CTA comprises lowland meadow and wet grassland with species-rich and well-structured hedgerows. It includes several LWSs: Gavray Drive Meadows, Meadows NW of Blackthorn Hill, Cutter’s Brook Meadows, and Field by Beacon Hill Ditch. Although the watercourses within the Masterplan site are tributaries of the River Ray, they converge with this watercourse at a point which is downstream of the Ray CTA. It is therefore considered that the Masterplan would have no direct or indirect hydrological effects on the Ray CTA, a site of County importance. Whilst it is possible that the new residents may visit the farmland that comprises this CTA via the existing road and footpath network, the CTA does not support habitats or a landscape that is likely to attract large numbers of visitors. In addition, there are large parts of the CTA that are not accessible from public rights of way. The Masterplan includes large areas of open space for formal and informal recreation. For these reasons it is considered that the new residents are unlikely to visit the area on a regular basis. The Ray CTA will not be considered further within this SER.
Kirtlington and Bletchingdon Park and Woods CTA Kirtlington and Bletchingdon Park and Woods CTA is located approximately 3.9km south west of the Masterplan site at its closest point. The area comprises parkland, lowland mixed deciduous woodland, fen, swamp and wet woodland, and limestone grassland. Kirtlington Park Lake (north) LWS and Kirtkington Park proposed LWS are located within this CTA. Based on the distance of this CTA from the Masterplan site, and that it is separated from the site by the M40 motorway, it is not envisaged that the Masterplan would have adverse effects on this CTA.
Otmoor CTA Otmoor CTA is located 4.2km to the south of the Masterplan site and comprises floodplain grazing marsh, reedbed, hedgerows, ponds and woodlands. The area is likely to be hydrologically linked to the Masterplan site; as such there is the potential for adverse effects on water quality within this CTA. However, it will be possible to avoid adverse effects on water quality during both construction and operational phases of the development. Standard techniques to NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 46
protect water quality within the watercourses will be implemented during the construction phase and SuDS form part of the Masterplan; thus it is not envisaged that the Masterplan would have adverse effects on this CTA.
Other LWSs outside CTAs In addition to the LWSs located within the CTAs listed above, there are a further ten sites within 5km of the Masterplan site, as well as three proposed LWSs:
Trow Pool LWS: 1km from the Masterplan site, on the other side of the M40 motorway. Two shallow ponds formed by damming a small stream, the larger of which is used for fishing.
Bicester Airfield (and proposed LWS extension): an area of species-rich grassland located 1.4km to the east of the Masterplan site.
Stratton Audley Quarry LWS: 1.7km east of the Masterplan site. This site comprises a diverse mosaic of habitats which have developed on the former limestone quarry.
Bicester Wetland Reserve: This site is located 2.1km south of the Masterplan site. It is mostly maintained as wet grassland by outflow from the sewage works and includes a small area of reedbed, open water, wet ditches, banks with tall herb and a dry grassland field to the east. The margins around the open water have swamp vegetation and areas of wet grassland.
Graven Hill LWS: An area of mixes deciduous woodland, 3.1km south of the Masterplan site.
Upper Heyford Airfield (and proposed LWS extension): 3.4km north west of the Masterplan site. This large area of grassland ranges in diversity and includes some species-rich calcareous areas. The site supports a number of butterfly species and several bird species (including skylark, curlew, grey partridge and corn bunting) are thought to breed on the site.
Meadow east of Fringford LWS: 4.3km north-east of Masterplan site, an area of wet meadow in a small valley near Fringford with a rich variety of grassland wildflowers.
Warmough Copse: 4.6km south of the Masterplan site, a small fragment of ancient coppice woodland.
Hopyard Spinney LWS: This area of old broadleaved woodland, open wetland habitat and scrub is 4.7km north-east of Masterplan.
Pool Spinney LWS: an area of wet willow dominated woodland, 5km north-east of the Masterplan site.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 47
Skimmingdish Lane Fields - Proposed LWS: 2.3 km to the southeast of the Masterplan Site.
Jarvis Lane - Proposed LWS: 2.1 km to the east of the Masterplan site.
Ardley Fields Quarry - Proposed LWS: 3.2km to the north-east of the Masterplan site on the other side of the M40 motorway.
Given the close proximity of the Masterplan site to Bicester Airfield LWS and Stratton Audley Quarry LWS it is considered that the new residents may visit these areas via existing Public Rights of Way. However, it is envisaged that there would not be a significant effect on the flora and fauna of these sites, since the existing paths are limited to a small section of the northern area of Straton Audley Quarry LWS. As noted previously, the Masterplan provides for significant areas of open space with opportunities for formal and informal recreation. It is therefore anticipated that the majority of new residents would use the open space within the Masterplan site on a regular basis, rather than locations further afield. These LWS are not hydrologically linked to the Masterplan site. The LWSs will therefore not be considered further within this SER.
Hedgerows The majority of the hedgerows within the Masterplan site were species-rich, supporting five or more woody species. Many of the hedgerows were associated with dry ditches that were shaded by the hedgerow shrubs. The hedgerow ground floras were species-poor with few if any hedgerow species. Several of the hedgerows supported mature and semi-mature trees with Ash, Pedunculate Oak, Horse-chestnut and willow the most commonly recorded species. Many had been replanted with a diverse mix of native shrub species. More detail regarding the composition of the hedgerows that were subject to survey is presented in Appendix 6D; Drawing 2-2 shows the location of these hedgerows. The hedgerows provide habitat links across the Masterplan site. They were of value to foraging and commuting bats, common species of reptile, and breeding birds and likely to be of value to hedgehogs; these species are discussed in more detail below. Hedgerows are a Habitat of Principal Importance under the Section 41 of the NERC Act (2006); they are also an Oxfordshire LBAP habitat. Due to their nature conservation value and the species they support, the hedgerows within the Masterplan site are considered to be part of a hedgerow network of ‘District/Borough’ Importance.
The River Bure and tributary The River Bure and two tributaries of this watercourse cross the Masterplan site. The upper reaches of the tributaries are NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 48
winterbournes and were dry for large parts of the year. Where water was present, common wetland plants were recorded. The aquatic invertebrate surveys revealed that water quality within the River Bure was ’moderate’. The riparian habitats associated with the River Bure and its tributaries were found to be of value to commuting and foraging bats, foraging common reptile species such as grass snake, and also amphibians. However, given the ephemeral nature of these watercourses, they were considered to be of limited value to otter, water vole and aquatic invertebrates including white-clawed crayfish. Species associated with the watercourses are discussed in more detail below. Rivers are a Habitat of Principal Importance under Section 41 of the NERC Act (2006). They are also an Oxfordshire LBAP habitat. Given the scarcity of water within the Masterplan site, it is considered that overall these watercourses are of ‘District/Borough’ Importance.
Broadleaved plantation There was one block of semi-mature broad-leaved plantation woodland (close to Hawkwell Farm) and several belts of more recently planted broad-leaved plantation woodland (close to Himley Farm, Aldershot Farm and Home Farm). The block of more mature plantation woodland supported a restricted flora it, nevertheless, it supported mature trees and as such was considered to be of some intrinsic nature conservation value, and as such has been assessed as being of ‘District/Borough’ Importance. The narrow belts of recently planted woodland are considered to be of ‘Parish/Neighbourhood’ Importance.
Broadleaved semi-natural woodland Within the Masterplan site, there were two blocks of semi-natural broad-leaved woodland, west of Home Farm (see Drawings 2-1 and 2-2). Most of the canopy trees in these areas had been felled and replaced by recently planted Scots Pine and Norway Maple. The canopy comprised a small number of retained Ash trees, but the shrub layer of Hawthorn, Elm and Elder formed the main canopy of these woodlands. The ground flora largely comprised Dog’s Mercury and Common Nettle (for further details of other common plant species recorded in these woodlands see the quadrat data presented in Appendix 6B). These woodlands most closely resembled the NVC woodland plant community W8d Ash-Field Maple (Acer campestre) – Dog’s Mercury woodland Ivy (Hedera helix) sub-community. However, they had clearly been subject to disturbance associated with tree felling, replanting and historical use as a site in which to rear game birds. NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 49
The areas of semi-natural woodland did not support particularly diverse or valuable ground floras, and would not be classified as Habitats of Principal Importance under Section 41 of the NERC Act (2006); nor would they be priority habitats targeted for action in the LBAP. However, woodlands are a scarce resource in this part of the Cherwell District. Therefore these areas of broadleaved semi-natural woodland were considered to be of ‘District/Borough’ Importance.
Arable land and grasslands Within the Masterplan Site the arable fields are intensively managed. Arable field margins are a Habitat of Principal Importance under Section 41 of the NERC Act (2006), and a LBAP habitat; however, within the Masterplan site the arable field margins and arable fields did not support any notable or protected plant species, or any communities of high botanical value. The grassland habitats were classified as ‘improved’ and intensively grazed. They supported a limited diversity of common grass species of low nature conservation value, with very few forbs (non-grass species). The grasslands within the Masterplan site would not be classified as Habitats of Principal Importance under Section 41 of the NERC Act (2006); nor would they be priority habitats targeted for action in the LBAP. Both habitats are common and widespread in the locality and not considered to be of particular conservation value. Overall these habitats are considered to be of limited intrinsic nature conservation importance; nevertheless they are of value to farmland birds see section 2.5.3 below.
Ponds There were four ponds within the Masterplan site; the largest was next to Crowmarsh Farm, with two small ponds associated with Himley Farm, and one recorded to the north west of Hawkwell Farm. The pond at Crowmarsh Farm had a deep layer of silt at the bottom and supported a diverse wetland flora. The pond to the north west of Hawkwell Farm was small and supported few wetland plant species. The northern pond at Himley Farm was small (approximately 10m by 5m) and located within an arable field (Pond 14 on Drawing 2-2). In September 2011 the bottom of the pond was damp and vegetated, but held no water. This pond held water in spring 2011 and October 2013. The southern pond at Himley Farm was also small (approximately 20m by 4m), with an island in the middle (Pond 15 on Drawing 2-2). This pond was surrounded by an earth bank which was almost vertical along the southern edge. Common species of wetland plants were recorded at both ponds. Both the ponds near NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 50
Himley Farm were found to support great crested newts; this species is discussed further in section 2.5.3 below. Ponds are a Habitat of Principal Importance under Section 41 of the NERC Act (2006) and small field ponds are considered to be a scarce resource in the locality. Overall these habitats are considered to be of ‘District/Borough’ Importance.
6.5.3 Species Aquatic Invertebrates The River Bure and its tributaries were considered suitable for whiteclawed crayfish, at least at certain times of the year. However, North American signal crayfish have been recorded within the catchment, and a dead signal crayfish was found close to the pond at Crowmarsh Farm. Furthermore, the targeted surveys did not reveal the presence of white-clawed crayfish within the Masterplan site, or the wider survey area. Given the negative survey result, and the fact that signal crayfish and native crayfish rarely co-exist, it is considered extremely unlikely that white-clawed crayfish are present within the Masterplan site. The upper reaches of these watercourses are winterbournes and during the 2010 field surveys the channels within the Masterplan site were largely dry by June. Due to the ephemeral nature of these watercourses, surveys for aquatic invertebrate surveys were undertaken in October 2010 once flow of water had returned. The 2010 aquatic invertebrate surveys revealed that the pond at Crowmarsh Farm and the tributary of the River Bure which runs under the railway embankment supported a small number of common and widespread aquatic invertebrate species. The spring/ stream that fed the pond at Crowmarsh Farm supported only two species. The 2012 aquatic in vertebrate surveys revealed that the River Bure supported a limited diversity of common aquatic invertebrates and overall the river was assessed to be of ‘moderate’ water quality. The desk study revealed a single historical (1988) record of a Nationally Scarce (Notable B – Nb) (Ref 6-6) scavenger water beetle within a pond in Bucknell, approximately 300m away; if present on the Masterplan site it would be associated with the ponds. Although no uncommon or notable aquatic invertebrates were recorded, the presence of aquatic invertebrates in the watercourses and ponds does contribute to the valuation of these features as habitats of ‘District/Borough’ Importance.
Terrestrial invertebrates The desk study revealed a range of rare and uncommon moth and butterfly species from the area surrounding the Masterplan site. This included recent records of two Species of Principal Importance listed NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 51
under the NERC Act (2006); brown hairstreak from Bure Park, and records of white-letter hairstreak from the Whitelands Farm area to the south of the Masterplan site, and from habitats along the B4030 Middleton Stoney Road adjacent to the southern portion of the Masterplan site. The habitats within the Masterplan site that were of potential value to terrestrial invertebrates, and which were targeted for survey were the hedgerows and the more overgrown areas across the site (See Appendices 6A and 6F for more details). No legally protected invertebrates were recorded during the surveys. Nine moth species listed as Species of Principal Importance under Section 41 of the NERC Act (2006) were recorded during the invertebrate surveys: beaded chestnut, green brindled crescent, centre-barred sallow, small phoenix, ghost moth, dot moth, cinnabar moth and sallow. Eight of these species were recorded in the vicinity of Gowell Farm and five were recorded on the tree and shrub-lined lane leading to Lord’s Farm. A Red Data Book micro-moth species Ref 6-6was also recorded in a tree close to Gowell Farm. Five Nationally Scarce (Notable B - Nb) (Ref 6-5) invertebrates were also recorded during the invertebrate surveys. These were the shaded pug moth, recorded on the edge of an arable field in the northeastern corner of the Masterplan site, Roesel’s bush-cricket, also recorded in the north-east of the site and on the lane leading to Lord’s Farm, a bark beetle on the lane leading to Lord’s Farm, a micro-moth in the vicinity of Gowell Farm; and the blue and red leaf beetle, also recorded in the vicinity of Gowell Farm. It should be noted that Roesel’s bush-cricket has undergone a substantial increase in its range over recent years due to climate change, and is generally now generally considered to be a Nationally Local species rather than Nationally Notable. In addition, 21 Nationally Local invertebrates were recorded during the surveys, mainly within the habitats around Gowell Farm and the hedgerows. A complete account of the terrestrial invertebrates that were recorded during the targeted surveys is presented in Appendix 6F. Brown hairstreak butterfly eggs were identified during the targeted surveys and suitable habitat for this species (Blackthorn shrubs for egg-laying within the hedgerows, and mature trees for display and mating) was present across the Masterplan site. Elm, a foodplant of the white-letter hairstreak butterfly, was recorded in many of the hedgerows in the southern part of the Masterplan site. Given that these butterflies have been recorded in hedgerows close to the southern boundary of the Masterplan site, it would appear likely that this species would be present within the hedgerows on the Masterplan site.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 52
The Masterplan site as a whole comprises habitats with limited structural and botanical diversity that consequently support a limited diversity of terrestrial invertebrates. The parts of the site that were of greatest value to invertebrates were the hedgerows, the ‘weedy’ habitats associated with Gowell Farm, and the more mature trees and shrubs associated with the access track leading to Lord’s Farm. Overall, the value of the site as a whole for terrestrial invertebrates is considered to be of ‘Parish/Neighbourhood’ Importance. However, the presence of the hairstreak butterflies in the hedgerows does contribute to the valuation of these features as a habitat of ‘District/Borough’ Importance.
Fish Although targeted surveys for fish were not undertaken a shoal of roach were noted within the southern pond associated with Himley Farm (Pond 15 on Drawing 6-2). Three-spined stickleback were also recorded in the pond at Crowmarsh Farm (Pond 6 on Drawing 6-2). Fish species recorded incidentally during the aquatic invertebrate surveys of the River Bure included three-spined stickleback, tenspined stickleback, and bullhead; a species associated with good water quality. Overall the value of the site is considered to be of limited value to fish, but their presence in the watercourses does contribute to the valuation of these features as habitats of ‘District/Borough’ Importance.
Great crested newts A number of ponds within and close to the Masterplan site were identified as being potentially suitable for great crested newts. Targeted surveys identified a medium population of great crested newt within the two ponds associated with Himley Farm, within the Masterplan site boundary (Ponds 14 and 15 on Drawing 6-2). A population of great crested newt was also found to be present within four ponds at Bucknell, outside the Masterplan site boundary; Ponds 2, 5, 7 and 9 on Drawing 2-2. Ponds 2, 5 and 9 are over 500 metres from the Masterplan boundary and it is considered unlikely, given the distance, that the great crested newts associated with these ponds would regularly forage within the Masterplan site. Pond 7 is 240m from the western boundary of the Masterplan site. Great crested newts typically forage within 250m of their breeding pond; therefore there is the potential that newts associated with this pond may forage within suitable habitat on the edge of the Masterplan site. The arable fields on the edge of the Masterplan site represented sub-optimal habitat for foraging newts, and as such it is extremely unlikely that these fields would be of value to these newts, but they may forage along the bases of hedgerows. Great crested newts were absent from the other five ponds that were subject to survey. Smooth newts and/or common frog were recorded within 11 ponds (Ponds 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 13, 14 and 15 on Drawing 6-2). NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 53
Great crested newts are a Species of Principal Importance under Section 41 of the NERC Act (2006); individual great crested newts, their breeding sites and resting sites receive full protection under UK and European legislation. Two ponds within the Masterplan site support a medium population of great crested newts, and as such are considered to be of value to this species. The ‘District/Borough’ value that has been assigned to the ponds as a whole includes the value of these features for great crested newts and other amphibians.
Reptiles The targeted surveys for reptiles revealed the presence of small numbers of common lizards within suitable habitats across the site, including within the north-east area of the Masterplan site, the railway embankment, the pond at Crowmarsh Farm, Gowell Farm, a strip of ruderal vegetation parallel with Howes Lane, and on a field margin south of Aldershot Farm. Their presence was also confirmed from direct observation during the walkover surveys of the farmland around Himley Farm. It is considered likely that small numbers of common lizard would be present in other areas of suitable habitat (the unmanaged field margins and stream corridors) across the Masterplan site. There are historical records for grass snake at Himley Farm, and a grass snake was recorded on the northern boundary of the woodland to the west of Home Farm. It is considered likely that grass snakes would be present in other areas of suitable habitat, in particular, within the areas of grassland adjacent to the ponds and watercourses. With the exception of the south-facing railway embankment, the habitats within the Masterplan site were considered largely sub-optimal for use by slow-worm, and the desk study did not reveal any records for this species. All three common species of reptile are identified as Species of Principal Importance under Section 41 of the NERC Act (2006). They are also protected under UK legislation. The Masterplan site is considered likely to support a small population of reptiles within the field margins, riparian habitat along the River Bure and its tributary, and railway embankment. The value that has been assigned to the hedgerows and the watercourses takes into account their value to reptiles, the railway embankment would be largely unaffected by the Masterplan proposals, the remainder of the site is considered to be of ‘Parish/Neighbourhood’ Importance for reptiles.
Breeding birds Table 6-2 below provides a list of the bird species of conservation concern (listed as either Red or Amber RSPB Birds of Conservation Concern (BOCC)) (Ref 6-7) associated with the trees, farm buildings, NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 54
fields, and hedgerows within the Masterplan site that were recorded as breeding or probable breeding, during the 2010 and 2011 surveys. Table 6-2 Species recorded as breeding or probable breeding within the Masterplan site
Species
Conservation Status
Barn owl
Protected under Part 1, Schedule 1 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, Amber list BOCC
Yellow Wagtail
Red list BOCC, Species of Principal Importance NERC Act (2006)
Skylark
Red list BOCC, Species of Principal Importance NERC Act (2006)
Yellowhammer
Red list BOCC, Species of Principal Importance NERC Act (2006)
Linnet
Red list BOCC, Species of Principal Importance NERC Act (2006)
Starling
Red list BOCC, Species of Principal Importance NERC Act (2006)
Reed bunting
Amber list BOCC, Species of Principal Importance NERC Act (2006)
Stock dove
Amber list BOCC
Kestrel
Amber list BOCC
Common whitethroat
Amber list BOCC
Cuckoo
Red list BOCC, Species of Principal Importance NERC Act (2006)
Spotted flycatcher
Red list BOCC, Species of Principal Importance NERC Act (2006)
Marsh tit
Red list BOCC, Species of Principal Importance NERC Act (2006)
Songthrush
Red list BOCC, Species of Principal Importance NERC Act (2006)
Lapwing
Red list BOCC, Species of Principal Importance NERC Act (2006)
House sparrow
Red list BOCC, Species of Principal Importance NERC Act (2006)
Bullfinch
Amber list BOCC, Species of Principal Importance NERC Act (2006)
Dunnock
Amber list BOCC, Species of Principal Importance NERC Act (2006)
Swallow
Amber list BOCC
Green woodpecker
Amber list BOCC
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 55
Willow warbler
Amber list BOCC
Mistle thrush
Amber list BOCC
The field surveys recorded nine farmland specialist bird species breeding within the Masterplan site, one of which (yellow wagtail) is also listed within the ‘arable six’ species of concern. The ‘arable six’ species are those that the Higher Level Stewardship (HLS) specifically targets. Yellow wagtail were recorded nesting on the edge of the Masterplan site close to Crowmarsh Farm; another farmland specialist and ‘arable six ‘ species, grey partridge, was recorded overwintering, but not nesting on the site (discussed further below). The site also supported approximately 28 pairs of skylark and 64 pairs of yellowhammer. With the exception of linnet (where 28 pairs were recorded), the remaining farmland bird species (starling, stock dove, reed bunting, kestrel and common whitethroat) were recorded in low numbers. Barn owl, a species specially protected under Schedule 1 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act, has been recorded nesting within the Masterplan site. They were nesting in a specifically designed barn owl nest box located on a tree to the west of Home Farm. The barn owl nest box was relocated in 2012 to the area of broadleaved seminatural woodland in the north-east of the Masterplan site. Another two boxes were installed close by at this time, to provide alternative nest sites. In addition, the desk study also revealed records for two BOCC Red list (Ref 6-7) and Section 41 NERC Act species within the Masterplan site in previous years. These were corn bunting and grey partridge. Neither of these species was recorded during the 2010 and 2011 breeding bird surveys. For more details regarding the birds recorded on site see Appendix 6A; a full list of the birds recorded during the 2010 and 2011 surveys is presented in Appendix 6H.
Wintering Birds Eleven BOCC Red list (Ref 6-7) species were recorded overwintering within the Masterplan site: skylark, linnet, yellowhammer, herring gull, marsh tit, house sparrow, grey partridge, starling, redwing, song thrush and lapwing. Skylark, linnet, yellowhammer, herring gull, marsh tit, house sparrow, grey partridge, starling, song thrush and lapwing are also Species of Principal Importance under Section 41 of the NERC Act (2006), as are reed bunting and dunnock, which as identified below were also recorded during the wintering bird surveys. The wintering bird surveys revealed moderate numbers of yellowhammer (flocks of up to 150), skylark (flocks of up to 24), NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 56
redwing (flocks up to 50) and fieldfare (flocks of up to 150). Low to moderate numbers of other bird species of conservation concern that were recorded during the surveys included mallard, linnet, reed bunting, kestrel, herring gull, red kite, marsh tit, house sparrow, grey partridge, green woodpecker, dunnock, bullfinch, starling and song thrush (up to three birds). Grey partridge, a farmland specialist and ‘arable six ‘species, was also recorded overwintering on the site. The distribution of wintering birds reflected the field and hedgerow management, with stubble fields and the less heavily trimmed hedgerows supporting higher numbers. No barn owls were recorded within the Masterplan site during the surveys. For more details regarding the birds recorded on site see Appendix 6A with a list of the birds recorded during the 2011 wintering bird surveys, together with their conservation status is presented in Appendix 6I. As identified above, red kite (a species specially protected under Schedule 1 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act, whilst breeding) were observed flying over the site during the wintering bird surveys; but they were not recorded nesting on the Masterplan site during the breeding bird surveys. It is considered unlikely that red kite would nest within the small woodlands that are present within the Masterplan site since they require large trees for nesting, which are absent from the Masterplan site. Similarly, although both fieldfare and redwing were recorded on site during the wintering bird surveys and both species are listed on Schedule 1 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act and therefore specially protected whilst nesting, neither species would breed within the Masterplan site since they do not breed in southern Britain.
Breeding and over-wintering birds The hedgerows were found to be of value to nesting and foraging birds and the value of these features for both farmland and nonfarmland specialist species has been taken into account when assigning the value of ‘District/Borough’ Importance to the hedgerows. However, given that the Masterplan site as a whole has been found to support a diverse range of bird species, including nine specialist farmland species, species of conservation concern and Species of Principal Importance, the breeding and wintering bird assemblage on the Masterplan site as a whole is considered to be of ‘District/Borough’ Importance.
Bats The desk study revealed records for common pipistrelle, brown longeared and Natterer’s bat within 5km of the Masterplan site. There are also known common pipistrelle and brown long-eared bat roosts 1.5km south of the Masterplan site. The known roosts for Leisler’s bat and serotine are greater than 10km from the Masterplan site. NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 57
The presence of roosting bats was confirmed in two trees within the north-east of the Masterplan site; a small common pipistrelle bat roost within an artificial bat roosting box on a mature tree along the River Bure, and small numbers of common pipistrelle bats within a mature Ash tree on the edge of the woodland to the west of Home Farm. Levels of bat activity recorded close to two mature trees on the watercourse south of Hawkwell Farm may indicate that these trees could support a common pipistrelle roost. Similarly, the levels of bat activity close to Crowmarsh Farm indicate that bats may roost in the trees or buildings close to this property. Surveys revealed a small common pipistrelle bat roost within a modern farmhouse at Home Farm, and another within a barn at Himley Farm. Activity around the buildings associated with Lord’s Farm shortly after dusk indicated that the buildings may support a small common pipistrelle bat roost, although its location was not confirmed. The level of bat activity associated with Crowmarsh Farm may also indicate that these buildings supported a pipistrelle and/or Myotis bat roost, but once again the surveys were inconclusive. Although access to Lovelynch House was not provided, the activity surveys did not reveal large numbers of bats appearing close to this property shortly after dusk. It is therefore unlikely that this property (house to the south of Himley Farm) supports a large or significant roost. In addition, three additional bat roosts were confirmed outside of the Masterplan site boundary. These comprised individual common pipistrelle bats within two adjacent mature oak trees; and a roost of brown long-eared bats and another unconfirmed species within St Laurence Church, Caversfield. The locations of the confirmed bat roosts are shown on Drawing 6-3. The majority of the bat activity was associated with the stream corridors and largely comprised foraging and commuting common pipistrelle bats, but regular activity of soprano pipistrelle, brown longeared, serotine, noctule, Leisler’s and Myotis species were also recorded. A single Nathusius’ pipistrelle was recorded close to the pond at Crowmarsh Farm. A number of hedgerows were also revealed to be key features for foraging and commuting bats. The activity surveys that were undertaken in the land around Himley Farm revealed that small numbers of common and soprano pipistrelle bats were foraging along the hedgerows; other bats species recorded included noctule and Myotis. The value of the hedgerows and stream corridors as features of ‘District/Borough’ value has taken into account the value of these NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 58
features for foraging and commuting bats. The bat roosts themselves are also considered to be of ‘District/Borough’ value to bats.
Dormice No evidence of dormice was found during the targeted surveys undertaken within the Masterplan Site. No records of this species were obtained from TVERC and the links between the proposed development and suitable habitat for dormice offsite were limited. It is therefore considered unlikely that dormice would be present on site and therefore they have not been considered further within this SER.
Water voles There are records dating from 2010 for water voles on the River Bure downstream of the Masterplan site. However, the only suitable habitat for water voles within the Masterplan site was the upstream extent of the tributary of the River Bure near Crowmarsh Farm. No signs of water vole activity were recorded in this location during the surveys. Within the Masterplan site, the River Bure was considered at best, sub-optimal for use by water voles. Given the isolated nature, and the limited extent of suitable habitat it is considered unlikely that the tributaries of the River Bure support water voles and no signs of water vole activity were recorded during the targeted surveys. Water voles are therefore considered to be absent from the Masterplan site and have not been considered further within this SER.
Otters Desk study records of otter were provided close to the fishery at Trow Pool, located 1km west of the Masterplan site boundary, but not hydrologically linked. Within the Masterplan site, the tributaries appeared to hold very little water for most of the year and the River Bure appeared to support few fish and other prey items suitable for otters. It is therefore considered that these features would be of limited value to foraging otters. The river and its tributaries provided suitable resting sites for otters, and although it is considered likely that otters would use these features whilst travelling across their home range, no signs of otter activity were recorded during the survey. Otters are fully protected under UK and European legislation; they are also a Species of Principal Importance under the NERC Act (2006). Overall, based on the survey data and conditions on the site, the Masterplan site is considered to be of ‘Parish/Neighbourhood’ Importance for otters.
Badgers North of the railway line a ‘main’ badger sett was located on a tributary of the River Bure west of Home Farm. A further large sett (a NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 59
subsidiary sett) was located in the area of broadleaved semi-natural woodland 200m to the north west, with a further two small ‘outlying’ setts in between these two setts. South of the railway line two large setts that could represent small ‘main’ setts were identified; one to the south of Crowmarsh Farm along a field margin, the other further south on a field boundary to the west of, and outside, the Masterplan site boundary. Although protected, badgers are not a species of conservation concern and they are reasonably common within the wider area. Consequently, the Masterplan site is considered to be of ‘Parish/ Neighbourhood’ Importance for badgers.
Other mammals of conservation concern Brown hare Brown hares have been recorded within the proposed NW Bicester eco-development area but not within the Masterplan Site. Brown hares are a UKBAP Priority Species. It is possible that brown hares would forage and rear within the arable fields of the Masterplan Site; however, given the intensity of the grazing in the pasture fields it is considered unlikely they would rear young in those fields. Given the size of the proposed development and the availability of suitable habitat within the locality it is considered that the arable fields within the Masterplan Site would be of particular value to brown hare. Overall the proposed development is considered to be of no more than ‘Parish/Neighbourhood’ Importance for brown hare. Hedgehog Although targeted surveys for hedgehog have not been undertaken it is likely that they would be present within the proposed Masterplan development, but it is considered unlikely that the proposed development would be of particular value to hedgehogs. Hedgehogs are a UKBAP Priority Species. Overall the site is considered to be of no more than ‘Parish/Neighbourhood’ Importance for hedgehogs. Polecats Polecats are known to be present in the surrounding area and it is possible that they could be present within the Masterplan site; however the habitats present are sub-optimal for this species, which is more typically associated with woodland areas. Overall the site is considered to be of no more than ‘Parish/Neighbourhood’ Importance for polecats. Harvest mice Harvest mice could be present within the hedgerows associated with the Masterplan site; however, given that the intensity of the NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 60
management of the arable fields and grasslands the Masterplan site is considered to be sub-optimal for this species. Overall the site is considered to be of no more than ‘Parish/Neighbourhood’ Importance for harvest mice.
6.5.4 Selection of Key Ecological Receptors Table 6-3 summarises all ecological receptors that have been considered, and highlights those which have been selected as ’Key Ecological Receptors’ for further investigation in this assessment. The locations of these habitats and features and other known ecological constraints are illustrated on Drawings 6-1 to 6-3. Table 6-3
Ecological Receptor
Summary of Ecological Receptors
Associated species/habit ats
Nature Conservatio n Value
Potentially significant effect
Invertebrates (in particular hairstreak butterflies), foraging and hibernating great crested newts, foraging and hibernating reptiles, breeding and foraging birds, foraging bats, foraging and hibernating hedgehogs.
District/Borou gh
Fragmentation of hedgerows by access roads. Context of hedgerows altered since no longer adjacent to farmland.
River Bure and tributary
Aquatic invertebrates, reptiles, foraging and commuting bats, and otters
District/Borou gh
Ponds
Great crested newts, aquatic invertebrates
District/Borou gh
Potential for pollution or habitat degradation.
Barn owls
Trees, arable fields, grasslands
District/Borou gh
Potential for disturbance to nesting barn owls, which in turn could potentially affect breeding success.
Key Ecological Receptors Hedgerows (including breeding birds, reptiles, and hedgehogs)
Potential temporary loss of habitat for reptiles, great crested newts, and hedgehogs during construction. Potential for disturbance and mortality of nesting birds during hedgerow removal if undertaken during the breeding bird season Potential mortality of reptiles and hedgehogs if present during hedgerow removal.
Potential for pollution/degradation of watercourses. Fragmentation of stream corridors by access roads.
Loss of small areas of suitable foraging habitat. Breeding and overwinterin
Farmland, woodland and
District/Borou gh
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
The majority of the land that supports farmland specialist bird species would be
Page 61
Ecological Receptor
Associated species/habit ats
g birds
hedgerows
Nature Conservatio n Value
Potentially significant effect
lost. Domestic pets associated with new residents may also lead to an increase in predation of ground-nesting birds using the adjacent farmland.
Bat roosts
Mature trees, farm buildings
District/Borou gh
Potential for disturbance of bats though night-time lighting. Loss / fragmentation of foraging and commuting habitat.
Other ecological receptors requiring mitigation Reptiles
Stream corridor, hedgerows, grasslands
Parish/ Neighbourhoo d
Potential for mortality during construction included within hedgerow and River Bure receptors above. The remainder of the site not sufficiently valuable for significant impacts on reptiles to arise.
Badgers
Hedgerows, arable fields, grasslands.
Parish/ Neighbourhoo d
Potential disturbance of badger setts during construction.
Brown hares
Arable fields
Parish/ Neighbourhoo d
Habitat loss, but receptor not sufficiently valuable for significant effects to arise.
Hedgehogs
Hedgerows, tall grassland
Parish/ Neighbourhoo d
Potential for mortality during construction considered within hedgerow receptor above.
Loss/fragmentation of foraging habitat.
Ecological receptors not considered further Recent broadleaved plantation
Bats, invertebrates
Parish/
Invertebrate s
Arable field margins, hedgerows, mature trees
Parish/
Ardley Cutting and Quarry SSSI
Calcareous grassland, woodland, wetlands
National
No direct effects or no indirect effects predicted. Further assessment required to assess impacts on air quality.
Ardley Trackways SSSI
Geological interest
National
No direct effects or no indirect effects predicted. Further assessment required to assess impacts on air quality.
Stratton Audley Quarries
Geological interest
National
No direct effects or no indirect effects predicted. Further assessment required to assess impacts on air quality.
Neighbourhoo d
Neighbourhoo d
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Removal of an area of plantation in the north-east of the Masterplan site. Fragmentation of the retained woodland belts by access roads. Loss of habitat used by invertebrates during construction. Impacts on brown hairstreak and white-letter hairstreak considered under hedgerows.
Page 62
Ecological Receptor
Associated species/habit ats
Nature Conservatio n Value
Potentially significant effect
Weston Fen SSSI
Calcareous fen bordering a fastflowing stream, with willow carr, hazel woodland, limestone and marshy grassland habitats.
National
No direct effects or no indirect effects predicted. Further assessment required to assess impacts on air quality.
Wendlebury Meads and Mansmoor Closes SSSI
Unimproved neutral meadows, bird and butterfly assemblage
National
No direct effects. The implementation of standard mitigation techniques during construction to protect water quality within the River Bure will ensure no adverse effects on this SSSI. SuDS will ensure water quality is protected once the site is developed. Further assessment required to assess impacts on air quality.
Nine further SSSIs within 10km of proposed developmen t
Various
National
No direct or indirect effects predicted. Further assessment required to assess impacts on air quality.
Tusmore and Shelswell Parks with Stoke Lyne Woodlands CTA
Parkland, mixed broadleaved deciduous woodland
County/Region al
No significant direct effects or no indirect effects predicted.
Ray CTA
Lowland meadows, riparian habitat, hedgerows.
County/Region al
No direct effects or no indirect effects predicted.
Bure Park LNR
River, riparian, woodland, grassland, water voles
District/Borou gh
The implementation of standard mitigation techniques during construction to protect water quality within the Bure will ensure no adverse effects on the LNR, SuDS will ensure water quality is protected once the site is developed. Habitats sufficiently robust to cope with additional visitor pressure.
Arable land and grasslands
Invertebrates, reptiles, farmland birds, barn owls
Parish
Habitat loss, impacts on birds and barn owls considered under those ecological receptors.
SSSI
/Neighbourhoo d
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 63
Ecological Receptor
Associated species/habit ats
Nature Conservatio n Value
Potentially significant effect
Great crested newts
Riparian corridor, hedgerows
Negligible
No direct effects and no indirect effects predicted.
Dormice
Hedgerows
Negligible
No effects predicted as considered to be absent from the Site.
Water voles
River Bure and tributary
Negligible
No effects predicted as considered to be absent from the Site.
Otters
River Bure and tributary
Parish/
The site is not considered to be sufficiently valuable for otters for significant effects on their population to arise.
Hedgerows, River Bure and tributaries
Parish/
Arable fields, grasslands
Parish/ Neighbourhoo d
Polecats
Harvest Mice
6.6
Neighbourhoo d
Neighbourhoo d
The site is not considered to be sufficiently valuable for polecats for significant effects on their population to arise. The site is not considered to be sufficiently valuable for harvest mice for significant effects on their population to arise.
Design and Mitigation Around 42% of the Masterplan site comprises green space, which exceeds Policy ET14 in the guidance document PPS: Eco-towns (a supplement to PPS1). The green space will include the most valuable habitats: the riparian habitat along the River Bure and its tributaries, hedgerows, badger setts, ponds, and the confirmed bat roosts. It will also include the mature woodlands and the majority of the more recent broad-leaved plantations. As well as retaining the most valuable features, ecological corridors would be maintained and enhanced on site to provide important links to the green space beyond the site boundary. In particular to maintain links to Bure Park LNR (to the east), to Bignell Park (to the south), to Caversfield (to the north) and Bucknell (to the west). The links to the north, south and east are all severed by the existing road network, but the Masterplan has sought to create significant corridors of semi-natural vegetation through and around the site to facilitate the movement of species. Mitigation and enhancement measures that have been incorporated into design with respect to Key Ecological Receptors are identified below. Habitat enhancement and creation measures that form part of the design to ensure a ‘net gain in biodiversity’ in keeping with Policy ET14 and the Local Plan policy that relates to this site are also identified.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 64
42% of the proposed Masterplan development comprises green space, of which over 37% is public open space. This exceeds Policy ET14 in the guidance document PPS: Eco-towns (a supplement to PPS1). The green space will include the most valuable habitats: the riparian habitat along the River Bure and its tributaries, the hedgerows, the ‘main’ badger sett, and the confirmed bat roost. As well as retaining the most valuable features, ecological corridors will be maintained and enhanced on site to provide important ecological links from the River Bure and its tributary to Bure Park LNR to the south, and to habitats adjacent to Home Farm and Caversfield House in the north. Links are also provided from the tributary of the River Bure to riparian and woodland habitats to the west of the proposed development. Mitigation and enhancement measures that have been incorporated into design with respect to Key Ecological Receptors are identified below. Habitat enhancement and creation measures that form part of the design to ensure a ‘net gain in biodiversity’ in keeping with Policy ET14 are also identified.
Protection of hedgerows The Masterplan layout retains the majority of the hedgerows and has sought to minimise the number of times hedgerows are breached. Where sections of hedgerows require removal to permit access, the width of the removed section would be kept to a minimum. These features would be retained within buffer zones of semi-natural vegetation that extend a minimum of 10 metres either side. Although there would be pedestrian and cycle routes within these buffers no other built development or other land uses would take place in these buffers. Many of the hedgerows would be located alongside green space that would ensure that the value of these features for wildlife is maintained. As part of the detailed design the development layout would also seek to ensure that where development is located close to a hedgerow the development would face the hedgerow so that it is clearly part of an area of public open space and managed as such not part a private space. The 10 metre buffer would be extended to 20 metres where hedgerows are located within the dark corridor maintained for foraging and commuting bats. The retention of hedgerows and the maintenance of buffer habitats would maintain nesting opportunities and foraging resources for birds, and provide continued habitat and wildlife corridors for species such as invertebrates (including hairstreak butterflies), reptiles, hedgehogs and bats. The buffer and adjacent green spaces would also help to protect these species from disturbance arising from increased human presence, site traffic, noise and lighting during both the construction and the operational phase of the development. To avoid impacts on breeding birds, the works close to hedgerows would preferably be undertaken outside of the bird breeding season NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 65
(i.e. between the months of September and February, inclusive). Where this is not possible and hedgerow removal is required, to minimise the risk of killing and/or injuring birds, or damaging or destroying nests (all of which would be unlawful should they occur), specialist ecological supervision would be provided to confirm the absence of nesting birds prior to the removal, and ensure the protection of any confirmed nesting sites. Should the presence of nesting birds be established, works would cease in the locality until the young have fledged. In advance of construction, bird nesting boxes would be installed on some retained trees and in hedgerows, in suitable locations away from the construction. This would ensure alternative nesting opportunities are provided to mitigate for any temporary loss. New planting to create new links between hedgerows and to fill gaps in the existing hedgerows would ensure that in the long-term there is no net loss in the length of hedgerows within the Masterplan site. Prior to any removal of hedgerows, pre-construction checks for any species of conservation concern, such as reptiles and hedgehogs, would be undertaken. Any features of value to hibernating reptiles would not be disturbed during the reptile hibernation period (November through to March) similarly should nesting hedgehog(s) be found at this time, this, and surrounding vegetation, would be left until vacated. The development associated with the Masterplan would be phased and take place over a number of decades. It would be possible, therefore, to ensure that new planting takes place in advance of hedgerow removal. This would ensure that the planting has time to mature. In the early phases of the development where this would not be possible hedgerow translocation would be considered. Haul routes, storage compounds and staff facilities would be located away from retained hedgerows to minimise disturbance to the species they support. In addition, any night-time lighting would be kept away from retained hedgerows and limited only to those areas where absolutely necessary. In advance of site clearance and during construction retained hedgerows would be fenced with their buffers to ensure that they are not subject to accidental damage. This protective fencing would also ensure that the roots of the hedgerow trees and shrubs are not undermined during any excavation works. As part of the detailed landscape design buffers of diverse grassland areas would be created alongside the hedgerows so that they are suitable for invertebrates, including Roesel’s Bush-cricket; and proposed planting would incorporate plants favoured by the Shaded Pug moth, such as Field Scabious; thus retaining habitat for these species within the Masterplan site. The implementation of a NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 66
Landscape and Habitats Management Plan would ensure that the hedgerows maintain their value to hairstreak butterflies.
River Bure and tributary The Masterplan proposals retain all ephemeral watercourses; set within a 60 metre-wide buffer zone of semi-natural habitat. Construction site drainage would be carefully designed and controlled, with silt traps established at the outset of the works, such works would take place in accordance with the provisions of a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP). The construction site and operational drainage solutions would incorporate measures to ensure that all surface water runoff is treated and returned to the watercourses at greenfield runoff rates. All works would incorporate relevant legislation for the protection of surface and groundwater and implement codes of good practice, and best practice guidelines for works within or near water. Relevant guidance including Pollution Prevention Guidelines (PPGs) prepared by the Environment Agency and literature produced by CIRIA would form the basis for pollution control measures. Surface water drainage within the Masterplan site during operation would be managed using SuDS. This would involve a combination of gravel-filled channels, swales, open ditches, underground storage facilities and above ground attenuation basins (some of which would support water for most of the year). As part of the detailed design SuDS features within areas of green space would be specifically designed to create habitats of value to wildlife. This would include planting schemes that support native species to provide habitats for wildlife (invertebrates, amphibians and reptiles). Water quality samples would be collected and analysed from the River Bure and its tributaries in advance of construction to provide a baseline for water quality monitoring during and post-construction. On each watercourse samples would be collected from three locations: 1) upstream of construction works; 2) in proximity to the proposed location of construction works; and 3) downstream of construction works. Water quality samples would then be taken at regular intervals during construction and on completion to ensure that remedial actions can be taken if required to maintain water quality. Road and pedestrian/cycle bridges would be designed to minimise impacts on the watercourses and associated protected species, maintaining a dark corridor beneath the structures. Care would be taken to avoid damage to the banks and/or any sensitive features in close proximity, such as badger setts and mature trees. As discussed above, current best practice guidance would be followed to ensure water quality is protected during construction close to watercourses. If night-time construction lighting is required it would be kept away NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 67
from the watercourses. During the operational phase the bridges would be lit for safety reasons. However, to prevent illumination of the dark corridors the lighting would be shielded, the lighting column heights would be reduced, and road surface materials would comprise a low-reflective surface. The 60 metre-wide buffer zone that the watercourses would be retained within together with any leisure routes would not be lit this would ensure that the stream channels and their associated tree and shrub vegetation would not be illuminated. Care would also be taken with the detailed bridge designs to ensure that they provide safe crossings within/below the bridge for large mammals such as badgers and otters during peak water flows. This would include the use of culverts and/or mammal ledges or an open span structure that maintains access to the banks above typical flood levels. A pre-construction survey would be undertaken to ascertain the presence of badger setts, and/or any potential otter holts/resting sites and water vole burrows which would constrain the construction of the bridges over the watercourses.
Broadleaved semi-natural woodland and mature broadleaved plantation The blocks of broadleaved semi-natural woodland west of Home Farm and the more mature woodland associated with Hawkwell Farm would be retained within buffer zones of semi-natural habitats linked to larger areas of green space associated with the river Bure and its tributaries. This would protect the woodlands from encroachment from surrounding land uses. As part of the Masterplan design the footpaths and cycleways avoid these woodlands to protect them from excessive trampling and disturbance. In addition, there would be no night-time lighting in close proximity to avoid disturbance of nocturnal species. It may be considered appropriate, as part of the detailed design, to create a wildlife walk through these woodlands. This path would be appropriately surfaced with planting and signage used to discourage excessive trampling throughout. Bat boxes and bird boxes would be installed on suitable trees and additional planting undertaken to compensate for any disturbance and enhance the nature conservation value of these woodlands for these fauna. The boxes would be installed in advance of site clearance to compensate for the effects that this disturbance may have on nesting birds. The implementation of a Landscape and Habitats Management Plan would ensure that the woodlands maintain their value to nesting birds.
Ponds The ponds would be retained within an appropriate buffer linked to green space. Water quality within the ponds would be protected NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 68
through the implementation of standard mitigation techniques during construction (through the CEMP), and through the creation of SuDS during operation. Care would be taken in the detailed design to ensure that the retained ponds, and in particular the pond at Crowmarsh Farm and the ponds that support the great crested newts, only receive surface water run-off that is balanced and treated to ensure that water quality in these features is protected. Habitat links between the two ponds found to support great crested newts would be maintained to allow for the movement of newts between the ponds and to allow for continued access with the surrounding terrestrial habitats. The detailed design of the roads that are close to the ponds would ensure that the roads have culverts that enable newts and other amphibians to continue to be able to travel safely between the ponds and suitable foraging habitats. Site clearance within 500 metres of the great crested newt ponds would need to be overseen by an ecologist. Measures would need to be put in place during site clearance to ensure that no great crested newts are harmed. The removal of vegetation that represents a place of shelter or a breeding site for great crested newts would need to take place in accordance with Method Statements and under licence. New habitats of value to great crested newts to include ponds, tussocky grassland and scrub would need to be provided in proximity to the existing breeding ponds to maintain the favourable conservation status of the newt population, such measures would be required as part of a licence application. The success of any mitigation measures would also need to be monitored. The pond at Crowmarsh Farm would be retained within the Nature Reserve and the pond at Hawkwell Farm would be retained within a hedgerow buffer close to the Country Park. As part of the detailed design of these areas of open space it would be possible to create habitats of value to the wildlife (invertebrates, amphibians, bids and bats) associated with the ponds. This would enhance the value of these ponds which are currently surrounded by intensively managed arable land or closely grazed pasture.
Barn Owls The area of broadleaved semi-natural woodland to the west of Home Farm where three barn owl boxes are located would be retained with a 10 metre-wide buffer of semi-natural habitat. Development would take place within 250 metres of these boxes and therefore there is the potential that barn owls using these boxes would be disturbed. Before site clearance works take place in the vicinity of these boxes they would be moved to suitable locations on the edge of the Masterplan site where there is no potential for disturbance. Locations would be selected to ensure that the barn owls have access to suitable foraging habitat (ideally tussocky grassland but more likely NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 69
arable land). Any damaged boxes would be replaced before relocation. These boxes would also provide suitable nesting habitat for the kestrels that were recorded nesting within a barn owl box on the site. Existing nest boxes would only be moved once it has been confirmed, by an experienced, licensed ecologist, that they were not in use.
Breeding and overwintering birds The development would lead to the loss of arable land and grassland fields that supported bird species that are of conservation concern and Species of Principal Importance, this includes farmland specialist species. Domestic pets associated with new residents may also lead to an increase in predation affecting ground-nesting birds using the adjacent farmland. Habitats of value to nesting and foraging birds such as the hedgerows and woodlands would be retained within suitable buffers of semi-natural habitat, this together with the creation of large areas of open space on the edge of the Masterplan site that includes a Nature Reserve, a Country Park and a woodland fitness trail would reduce the scale of this impact on certain species. Nevertheless, there would be a residual effect on birds as habitats that are used by farmland specialists would not remain on the site. It is therefore proposed to compensate for this loss of habitat offsite. Funds would be provided to enhance local habitats for farmland birds through appropriate, proven management regimes to increase the carrying capacity of local habitats. It is considered that such enhancement measures would compensate for the loss of habitat for farmland birds. Measures that have been developed as part of HLS provide safe nesting sites, summer food and winter food for farmland birds. Those measures that could be adopted within local habitats include: the creation of in-field nesting habitat such as skylark plots and beetle banks; the provision of over-wintering seed food as a crop; the provision of bought seed to provide supplementary feeding in winter; the creation of insect-rich foraging habitat such as unharvested fertiliser-free conservation headland and uncropped, uncultivated margins for rare plants on arable land. This offsite compensation would also provide habitat suitable for other farmland specialist species such as brown hare and harvest mice. The requirement to deliver and monitor this off-site compensation would be delivered through a Section 106 or similar legal agreement. There would be a loss of nesting sites associated with the loss of hedgerows, and disturbance to birds within the hedgerows and woodlands. As indicated above with respect to hedgerows and woodland new nest boxes would be provided in advance of site clearance to compensate for habitat loss and/or disturbance. In addition, the provision of nest boxes within the areas of open space and within the areas of built development would lead to the creation NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 70
of new nest sites for certain species, this would include BOCC and Species of Principal Importance. The number of boxes would follow the guidance provided by the Bat Conservation Trust for zero carbon homes (Ref 6-8).
Bat roosts The two trees that supported roosting bats would be retained within areas that would not be lit. In addition, it is not proposed to alter the lighting around the existing farmsteads that either support roosting bats (Home Farm and Himley Farm) or have the potential to support roosting bats (Hawkwell Farm, Crowmarsh Farm and Lord’s Farm). A dark corridor suitable for foraging and commuting bats also forms part of the design. This corridor comprises the River Bure and its tributaries. This dark corridor would continue south following the line of existing hedgerows to provide a link from Crowmarsh Farm across the site to Bignell Park. The stream corridors would be retained within a 60 metre-wide band of semi-natural vegetation and the hedgerows would be retained within a 40 metre-wide band of vegetation. Not only would this ensure that a dark corridor would be maintained when the site is operational but it would also ensure that if the construction site is lit when bats are active the dark corridors would be maintained. As noted previously, during the operation phase, the road and pedestrian/ cycle bridges would need to be lit for safety reasons. However, sensitive lighting design and a low-reflective road surface would prevent light spilling onto the watercourse corridor below; thus ensuring the retention of a continuous dark corridor avoiding impacts on light-sensitive bat species such as brown long-eared bats. The road bridges will be designed to ensure that they do not represent a barrier to the movement of bats. The Masterplan site contained very few natural roost sites and only a few bat boxes had been installed. As part of detailed design the Masterplan proposals would include artificial roosting sites (bat bricks and bat boxes) would be incorporated into the development areas and installed on trees in the areas of open space. This would enhance the value of the Masterplan site for roosting bats. The number of boxes would be informed by the guidance published by the Bat Conservation Trust for Zero Carbon Buildings (Ref 6-8). As well as retaining the most valuable features for bats, a green network of ecological corridors would be created across the site and new habitats of value to foraging bats would be created across the site. This would include new woodland planting on the western edge of the site, the creation of a Nature Reserve that would include wetland habitats and habitats of value to the invertebrates that bats feed on and the creation of a Country Park that would also provide habitat suitable for foraging bats. NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 71
Habitat enhancement and creation measures (detailed below) that would improve the value of Masterplan site for invertebrates would also be of benefit to the bats that feed on them. Such measures include the creation of long grassland habitats, SuDS features supporting wetland vegetation, areas of diverse grassland and allotments.
CEMP A CEMP or similar document would be in place in advance of site clearance to ensure that measures are put in place to protect the environment. This would ensure that: 1. Appropriate measures are put in place to protect water quality in the watercourses and ponds on site. This would also protect downstream habitats. 2. Appropriate measures are put in place to control dust and other emissions that could affect air quality. 3. Protective fencing is put in place to protect the retained habitats and their associated buffer zones. 4. Site compounds, storage facilities and staff facilities are suitably bunded and located in places that would not have an adverse effect on the environment. 5. Protective fencing is installed to protect ecologically sensitive habitats (the watercourses ponds, mature trees, woodlands and hedgerows). 6. Protective fencing is installed to protect ecologically sensitive features such as badger setts and confirmed bat roosts. 7. Pre-construction surveys are carried out by an ecologist to confirm the nature and extent of any ecological constraints in advance of site clearance. So that appropriate mitigation measures including licences are in place in advance of site clearance. 8. An ecological clerk of works is in place to oversee site clearance, in particular any works that have the potential to disturb nesting birds, great crested newts, reptiles and/or hedgehog.
Other ecological receptors requiring mitigation Invertebrates Invertebrate boxes and other structures suitable for use by species such as ladybirds, lacewings and solitary bees, would be provided within suitable habitat to create shelter for these species within the Masterplan site. NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 72
Reptiles Hedgerow removal should ideally be undertaken during the autumn/winter to avoid disturbance to nesting birds. However, at this time reptiles would be entering into, or be within, their hibernating period (typically between the beginning October and early-April) and disturbing reptiles at this time can cause mortality. It is considered unlikely that hibernating reptiles would be present within the footprint of the small sections of hedgerows/vegetation to be removed; however, a check for features suitable for hibernating reptiles would be carried out by a suitably experienced ecologist as part of the preconstruction survey, prior to their removal. Any features considered likely to support hibernating reptiles would be identified and their removal left until the following April, in suitable warm weather conditions, to avoid killing or injuring reptiles. Should hedgerow/vegetation removal be carried out during the reptiles’ active period, a check for the presence of reptiles would be undertaken by an experienced ecologist. If suitable habitat for reptiles was present, habitat manipulation techniques would be employed to displace any reptiles into nearby retained areas of suitable habitat. If no such habitat occurred nearby, a small-scale translocation operation would be undertaken in advance of site clearance. This would involve moving any reptiles captured to a suitable area of retained habitat. In either case, reptiles would not be moved outside the area in which the small populations have already been found to exist. Therefore there would be no issues associated with introducing individuals to a different population, or creating new populations with small numbers of animals. Following the displacement and/or translocation of reptiles, destructive searches would be undertaken as appropriate to further avoid the incidental mortality of individuals. The need for reptileresistant fencing would be reviewed throughout the construction phase. Given the small areas of suitable habitat for reptiles that would be removed, this is considered unlikely to be a requirement at the early phases of development. The need for fencing during the later phases would depend on whether the site remains in agricultural production in advance of development. Reptiles would be expected to persist within the Masterplan site once the site is developed, as the hedgerows and riparian habitat would be maintained within suitable buffer zones of semi-natural vegetation. Badgers All of the badger setts located within the Masterplan site would be retained within areas of green space. All setts would be protected during construction through the use of temporary protective fencing to prevent damage from construction machinery or staff. Any works close to the badger setts would also be carried out under close NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 73
ecological supervision to minimise disturbance to badgers as far as possible. Badgers are afforded protection under the Protection of Badgers Act 1992. As a consequence, works close to active setts which would disturb badgers would be licensable, and there are seasonal restrictions associated with such works. Consequently works that could disturb badgers should not be undertaken during the badger breeding season, which is taken to be from the 1st December to the 30th June. The badger setts would be protected from accidental damage and destruction by being clearly marked out for the duration of works carried out in the vicinity of the setts. The installation of the bridge over the tributary to the River Bure would be undertaken in a sensitive manner to avoid potential damage to the nearby ‘main’ badger sett and to avoid disturbing any badgers present. The area around the ‘main’ sett would also be planted with scrubby vegetation, incorporating a high proportion of fruit-bearing trees and shrubs, to screen the sett from any works and discourage interference or disturbance of the sett. Hedgehogs Hedgehogs would be expected to persist within the Masterplan site once the site is developed, as the hedgerows and riparian habitat would be maintained within suitable buffer zones of semi-natural vegetation. Hedgehogs are also likely to benefit from the increased diversity of habitats within the areas of open space and gardens following construction compared to the habitats present on site prior to development. Measure to protect these species during hedgerow removal are discussed above. Brown hare To minimise impacts on brown hare, topsoil stripping of arable fields would be timed to avoid the brown hare breeding season, or when dependent young could be present. Pre-construction checks for this species would be undertaken by an experienced ecologist.
Habitat Enhancements The green infrastructure included within the Masterplan would lead to the creation of new habitats of benefit to biodiversity. The large areas of green space that have been incorporated into the Masterplan that would provide habitats of benefit to biodiversity are listed below: 1.
A Country Park;
2.
A Nature Reserve;
3.
Dry sustainable drainage features in the northern half of the site;
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 74
4.
A wetland waste water treatment facility; and
5.
A woodland fitness trail.
Country Park This would be created on the western edge of the site north of the railway line, and it would be designed to provide a space for informal recreation but also support habitats of value to biodiversity (trees, a variety of grassland types and scrub). Careful design of the Country Park layout would ensure that there would be areas for quiet contemplation that would provide conditions suitable for fauna that are more sensitive to disturbance. The Country Park would be linked to the stream corridor to the north by open space that is likely to contain allotments and tree planting. Other areas of green space most likely a waste water wetland treatment facility and a green burial ground would also link the Country Park to the stream corridor and the tree and shrub covered railway embankment. This area of green space would be linked to the developed area via the retained hedgerow network. It is therefore anticipated that the fauna associated with the retained hedgerows would colonise the new habitats in the Country Park. The majority of the Country Park would not be lit. Native planting would be used to create habitats of benefit to biodiversity and in particular the species that are already present on the site, to include invertebrates such as hairstreak butterflies, birds associated with woodland and scrub, reptiles, bats and badgers.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 75
Nature Reserve This would be created on the southern side of the railway corridor separated from the main site by the stream corridor. Its purpose would be to provide a site for wildlife that is also suitable for informal recreation. The reserve is likely to support wetland habitats, trees, shrubs and grassland. Access would be managed through the use of a defined footpath network with strategic planting to create a space for quiet contemplation. The native planting would be designed to replicate semi-natural habitats that can be managed by cutting, pruning and occasional vegetation removal. It is not envisaged that the Nature Reserve would be grazed by livestock. However, this will be kept under review as plans for the site develop. The aim of the reserve would be to create semi-natural habitats that support the flora and fauna that are on site and to encourage additional species associated with the newly created habitat to colonise. There is the potential for the existing farm buildings that would be within this Nature Reserve area to be adapted to provide a place of shelter for nesting birds including species of conservation concern such as barn owl, swift, swallow and house sparrow and also to provide suitable sites for roosting bats. Alternatively new structures could be created for this purpose. Dry Sustainable Drainage Features Two large drainage features would be created in the northern half of the site at the intersection of the river crossing and between the River Bure and Lord’s Lane. These features would provide flood storage capacity and be dry for most of the year. These areas will be designed to support native grassland herbs and shrubs. They will be designed and managed to provide habitats of value to biodiversity including the species associated with the hedgerows and stream corridors to which they would be linked. There would be numerous above ground SuDS features across the site most likely they would include swales, dry attenuation ponds, ephemeral ponds and wet ponds. Not only would these create wetland habitat that, with appropriate design, would support native flora and fauna; they would be located within the green infrastructure and within the green space with the developed areas and contribute to the value of these areas as wildlife corridors. The aim would be to create habitats of value to invertebrates, amphibians and reptiles, such as grass snakes. Waste Water Treatment Facility The detail for this facility has yet to be determined. However, it is known that waste water treatment would be required and it is anticipated that it would be dealt with on site. It is envisaged that an integrated wetland would be created to enable water to be discharged NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 76
to the existing stream network. Such a wetland facility would provide a range of wetland features and, although the primary function will be to treat waste water, it would also provide habitats that benefit biodiversity, particularly in association with the tertiary treatment before final discharge. This facility could support wet or damp woodland/scrub, swamp/reed bed habitats, damp/marshy grassland as well as dry habitats associated with the infrastructure buildings and access routes. Most of this area would not be publically accessible and therefore any habitats created would not be subject to regular human disturbance. It would be located alongside the railway corridor and provide additional habitat for the fauna associated with this feature. In the event that a wetland waste water treatment facility is not constructed then the area would support green space and incorporate habitats of value to biodiversity within its design. All planting in this area would comprise native species. Although it may be necessary to install security lighting around particular buildings it would not be necessary to illuminate the entirety of this area. Woodland Fitness Trail A woodland fitness trail would be created on the western edge of the site south of the railway line. The woodland would link into the existing site contours and comprise native tree and shrub species. The planting and design would create a habitat that would be of value to biodiversity and in particular invertebrates, birds, bats and badgers (the trail is located between two large badger setts). A pedestrian/cycle leisure route would pass through this area. Neither the fitness trail nor the leisure route would be lit at times of year when bats are active. This area would be linked to the retained hedgerow network and the dark bat corridor, the fauna associated with these retained features would be expected to colonise the new woodland as it develops. To the north the woodland fitness trail would be linked to the pond at Crowmarsh Farm and in turn linked to the new Nature Reserve by the stream corridor. To the south the woodland fitness trail would be connected to green space that is the potential location for the burial ground or allotments. As indicated previously the fitness trail would be linked to the bat corridor which would be connected to the stream corridor and a network of retained hedgerows. Other Measures Habitats of value to biodiversity would be created in other areas of green space across the site, either to maintain and enhance the biodiversity value of a retained habitat, as an incidental result of another site activity, or to enhance the value of the Masterplan site for biodiversity. Examples of this are provided below. NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 77
The hedgerow buffers would support long grass habitat to maintain and enhance the value of these features for invertebrates. Some buffers would be sown with a native plant mix that would be flower-rich so that it would be visually appealing to the local residents.
A mosaic of habitats of value to great crested newts would be created in the green space linking the two ponds that support the great crested newts. This would include new ponds, tussocky grassland and scrub. This would be required to facilitate the movement of newts between the ponds and maintain the favourable conservation status of the newt population.
The buffers to the semi-natural woodland would support scrub and tall grass habitat to provide a soft edge to these areas. Additional scrub planting would be used to screen the badger setts on the edge of the woodland.
A mosaic of grassland, tall herb, scrub, and woodland habitats would be created in the stream corridors and adjacent areas of green space to create habitats of value to the fauna recorded on the site.
New woodland would be created on the western edge on the northern half of the site to provide a screen between the Masterplan site and the village of Bucknell. This would also lead to the creation of habitat of value to biodiversity.
An incidental result of another site activity Although the primary function of a community farm (or similar facility), allotments, other food growing areas and the burial grounds would not be to provide habitat of value to biodiversity, these areas would nevertheless support a range of fauna. They would provide habitat that would be suitable to support invertebrates, reptiles, birds, bats, hedgehog and badger. If suitable ponds were created in these areas they would also provide habitat for breeding amphibians. The sports pitches that support amenity grass would provide suitable foraging habitat for hedgehog, badger and birds such as starlings. The areas of green space within the developed areas would also provide habitat for wildlife in particular invertebrates and birds. Similarly, there would be opportunities within the above ground SuDS to create habitat and features of value to biodiversity, both through the use of native planting and through design, particularly if features contain open water which was a scarce habitat on the site prior to development. Measures to enhance the biodiversity value of the built environment NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 78
The detailed design of the built development does not form part of the Masterplan. However, there would be opportunities within the site to encourage wildlife into the built area. These could include the use of artificial nest and roost boxes, and/or the incorporation of suitable features into the built design; the use of green/brown/blue roofs; street trees; green walls; and other planting that may not comprise native species but has a structure that provides shelter for fauna; linked gardens and community gardens that provide significant areas of green space; and the incorporation of native planting within areas of open space and SuDS features.
Habitat Management Management of the hedgerows would be relaxed to provide increased value for invertebrates and nesting birds. The buffer adjacent to the hedgerows would also be less intensively managed to encourage long grassland areas, which would support invertebrates and reptiles. The management including the replacement of nest/roost boxes would be controlled through a Landscape and Habitats Management Plan (see Section 6.9 below).
Climate Change The Masterplan includes within its design, elements which would increase the resilience of biodiversity to climate change and ensure it can adapt in the long term. Such elements include: measures to conserve existing biodiversity, such as the maintenance of existing key ecological habitats within the green infrastructure and the conservation of a variety of habitats, to ensure local species and habitats are maintained. It also includes large areas of green space where there is potential to increase habitat diversity and the availability of ecological niches within the Masterplan Site by creating new habitat types using native species. Retained habitats and newly created habitats would also form linear corridors allowing for the migration of species across the Site and into the wider countryside, to counteract isolation and potential loss of species. The Masterplan would also ensure that the River Bure and its tributary are retained, protected, and are given sufficient space to adapt, allowing for the natural processes of erosion and deposition. Retained riparian habitats together with planting within the buffers associated with these watercourses would also assist in soil retention and damage which may potentially arise from any future flood events. The provision of SuDS would also ensure that the water resources within the Masterplan site are controlled and maintained for the future. For example, the SuDS would hold back water following heavy rain, therefore allowing the watercourses to cope more effectively with extremes of weather than traditional piped drainage systems. NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 79
The system also has the potential to improve the quality of the riparian habitats. The retention and improvement of the riparian corridor, the hedgerows, the woodland and the ponds, together with the creation of interconnected green corridors within the built development would also help to reduce the heating effect created by built development. Planting that comprises native species would ensure that it thrives in the anticipated future climatic conditions. Non-native species may be selected in the built areas to cope with the stressed environment created when much of the surrounding area comprises hard surfaces. The provision of long grassland buffer areas and other semi-natural habitats in the hedgerow, woodland and stream buffers would also help to reduce any future droughting effects.
6.7
Assessment of Impacts
6.7.1 Impacts on Key Ecological Receptors Hedgerows (including breeding birds, reptiles and hedgehogs) Construction Impacts Habitat Loss Hedgerows are a Habitat of Principal Importance under Section 41 of the NERC Act (2006) and are also considered to be of intrinsic nature conservation value for the species they support, such as invertebrates, breeding/foraging birds, reptiles and hedgehogs. The hedgerows also form important boundary features and wildlife corridors across the site. Any loss and/or fragmentation would therefore have the potential to impact the associated species. Cumulatively, approximately 500 metres of hedgerow would be removed as a consequence of road access routes and gaps created for cycle and pedestrian routes. However, the Masterplan seeks to minimise the number of times that individual hedgerows are breached; and this hedgerow loss would be compensated for with new planting to ensure no net loss to biodiversity. The new planting would take the form of hedgerows and tree belts in green space, which would be managed to benefit biodiversity. None of the hedgerows have been found to support valuable ground flora plant species and therefore there would be no loss in plant species diversity associated with the loss of hedgerows. Consideration would be given to hedgerow translocation in the early phases of the development since new planting would not have time to mature before hedgerow sections are lost. However, it would be possible to provide new NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 80
planting in advance of hedgerow loss in the later phases of the development. Removal of hedgerow sections would result in the temporary loss of nesting and foraging habitat for birds, prior to the establishment of new areas of planting; however, the provision of additional nest boxes during the construction phase would mitigate for this temporary loss. To further avoid impacts on breeding birds, the removal of any hedgerows would preferably be undertaken outside of the bird breeding season, or under the supervision of a specialist ecologist where this is not possible. It is not envisaged that the hedgerow removal would have any impact on the confirmed bat roosts in trees, as these features would be retained and are not in close proximity to any of the removed sections of hedgerows. Habitat Degradation - Fragmentation Whilst the Masterplan has sought to reduce the fragmentation of the hedgerow network as far as possible, it would be an inevitable consequence of the development proposal that some hedgerows would be breached by access roads and the pedestrian/ cycle routes. The impact of these crossings would be reduced by minimising the width of crossings and the Masterplan has ensured that the crossings are at right angles wherever possible so that this would be feasible. To compensate for the effects of fragmentation, a network of interconnected green spaces would be created across the Masterplan site. This includes green corridors associated with: the railway line; the boundaries to the site; the streams; and the woodlands. Overall, it is considered that fauna (invertebrates, reptiles, birds, bats, hedgehogs and badgers) would continue to be able to cross the site using the retained hedgerows and the green corridors. The removal of sections of hedgerows during the construction phase may result in the disruption of foraging and commuting bats. Impacts on bats are discussed in more detail under the ‘Bat roosts’ receptor below. Road speeds throughout most of the Masterplan site would be reduced since it largely comprises residential development with areas of employment and local amenities. This would reduce the impact of road mortality. Corridors have been provided that would provide badgers with safe access to foraging habitat and culverts would be provided to provide great crested newts with safe crossing points. Habitat Degradation - Disturbance In addition to direct impacts associated with the removal of sections of hedgerows, there would be periods when they may be subject to disturbance from nearby construction works within the site. While all hedgerows and their associated buffers would be protected by NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 81
fencing, there may be some disturbance during the breeding bird season which may deter the use of the some areas of hedgerow by nesting birds, potentially resulting in a temporarily reduced breeding success of the species recorded on site. The provision of nest boxes in advance of site clearance would mitigate for this impact since large parts of the site would remain undisturbed by this large scale phased development. Residual impacts Assuming the implementation of effective mitigation described in Section 6.6, it is considered that the residual impact related to construction on this receptor would be Not Significant. Operational impacts Habitat Degradation - Disturbance Following construction, the context of the hedgerows would have changed as they would no longer be adjacent to arable or grazed farmland, which may change the nesting locations of bird species. However, the hedgerows within the Masterplan site would be retained within buffer zones of semi-natural vegetation that extend a minimum of 10 metres from either side of each feature. This buffer would be extended to a total of 40 metres where hedgerows are located within dark corridors to be maintained for foraging bats. The buffers would ensure that the retained hedgerows are protected from encroachment from adjacent land uses. The hedgerows are a feature of the Masterplan and have been incorporated into leisure routes, formal cycle/pedestrian routes and areas of green space. This secures their future retention and management. There would be no built development or other above ground land uses within the hedgerow buffers. Where hedgerows would be located alongside developed land the development would face the hedgerows, care would be taken in the detailed design to reduce the risk, as far as possible, that local residents would encroach onto these features. For example, care would be taken in the detailed design to ensure that the hedgerows do not form garden boundaries. Retaining hedgerows within wide buffers of semi-natural vegetation would reduce the effects of disturbance to wildlife. It is anticipated that birds nesting in the hedgerows would become habituated to the noise and visual disturbance associated with the development once built. It is predicted that there would be predation associated with domestic cats; however research published by RSPB (The predation of wild birds in the UK: a review of its conservation impact and management. RSPB Research Report no 23) (Ref 6-9) has shown that NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 82
this would be compensated by a boost in numbers associated with artificial nest sites and feeding associated with the new residents. Whilst artificial lighting can disrupt the behaviour of some nocturnal species, conversely it has also been found to be beneficial to species that require light to forage or, as in the case of pipistrelle bats, where the lighting attracts the prey items that the species feed on. It is envisaged that the fauna that would occupy the hedgerows once the site is developed would not be adversely affected where the site is illuminated by artificial light. Care would be taken in the detailed design to ensure that the hedgerows along the dark bat corridor would not be illuminated by artificial light. Habitat Degradation - Poor Management The hedgerows would be incorporated into the green space that would be managed to ensure that they maintain their value to biodiversity. Although the hedgerows would no longer support farmland birds, as a result of their change in setting, they would provide suitable nesting and foraging habitat for birds associated with built development and the urban fringe. These would include species such as house sparrow that are listed as a Species of Principal Importance under the NERC Act (2006). The hedgerows would be managed in accordance with a Landscape and Habitats Management Plan to ensure that they provide habitat suitable for the fauna that were recorded on site prior to development, in particular nesting birds (non-farmland specialists), mammals and invertebrates, including the hair-streak butterflies and other notable invertebrates. Residual impacts It is anticipated that the residual impact on the hedgerow network associated with the operational impacts would be Not Significant. In time, the habitat creation within the green infrastructure and the built development that would form part of the detailed design combined with appropriate management of these features in accordance with a Landscape and Habitats Management Plan, would be beneficial to some species.
River Bure and tributary The River Bure and its tributaries comprise a narrow stream channel that seasonally hold water. For most of their length the banks were tree and shrub lined. Few wetland plants and a restricted range of aquatic invertebrates were recorded in these features. These watercourses pass through fields supporting arable crops and improved grassland, with a small block of woodland present along a stretch of one channel. These watercourses and their adjacent habitats were found to support foraging and commuting bats, a confirmed bat roost within a tree along the River Bure, and a ‘main’ NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 83
badger sett. There was no evidence of use of these watercourses by white-clawed crayfish, water voles or otters, and only low numbers of widespread and common aquatic invertebrates were recorded during the surveys. Construction Impacts Habitat Loss The River Bure and its tributaries would all be retained; set within a 60 metre-wide buffer zone of semi-natural habitat. The creation of the new road crossings would lead to the loss of short sections of bankside habitat; the Masterplan seeks to minimise this impact by creating only three new road crossings, one cycle/pedestrian crossing and to make use of the existing bridge on Bucknell Road. The detailed design of the bridges would ensure that the fauna that currently travel along the stream corridor would continue to use this feature (principally, provision would need to be made to allow large mammals such as badgers and otters to pass under the bridge during times of peak water flows). Habitat Degradation - Disturbance Works close to the ‘main’ badger sett would be undertaken under close ecological supervision to ensure that disturbance to badgers is minimised as far as possible, and temporary protective fencing would be provided to prevent damage to the sett from site machinery or staff during construction activities. The need for works to proceed under licence to Natural England would also be reviewed, and methods of working devised to ensure that activities likely to cause disturbance were avoided if at all possible. A number of potential bat tree roosts are located along the banks of the River Bure, including one confirmed common pipistrelle bat roost. In addition, the bat activity transect surveys identified that the stream corridor was a valuable foraging area for bats. These trees would be retained within the River Bure corridor; however, their value for bats could potentially be reduced due to noise associated with construction. However, it is considered unlikely that this disturbance would have a significant impact on the local bat population since the streams and their associated trees would be retained within a substantial buffer of semi-natural vegetation and this buffer would be protected from site traffic by fencing. Habitat Degradation - Fragmentation As identified above with respect to habitat loss, the number of new stream crossings has been limited to three new road crossings with a further crossing for pedestrians and cycles. Careful design of the bridges would ensure that the fauna associated with these watercourses could continue to use the stream as a wildlife corridor. NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 84
This would include measures to ensure that a dark corridor would be maintained for bats, for example though careful design of lighting and the design of the structures to ensure that otters and badgers can travel along the bank at periods of peak water flow. Habitat Degradation - Pollution There is the potential for habitat degradation to occur as a result of polluted surface water runoff entering the watercourses during construction. The implementation of standard pollution control measures during construction would ensure the protection of water quality. Residual impacts Assuming the implementation of effective mitigation described in Section 6.6, the residual impact on the River Bure, its tributaries, or the associated species during construction would be Not Significant. Operational impacts Habitat Degradation - Pollution There is the potential for habitat degradation to occur as a result of polluted surface water runoff entering the watercourses when the site has been developed. The creation of SuDS would ensure that water quality within the watercourses is protected. Habitat Degradation - Trampling and other disturbance These watercourses are currently unlit, providing a dark foraging area and commuting route for nocturnal species such as bats and badgers. Lighting these previously dark corridors may render them less suitable for nocturnal foraging species, particularly light sensitive species such as brown long-eared bats, which are known to roost within St Laurence Church to the north of the Masterplan site. The riparian habitat along these watercourses provides a suitable dark link between the church roost and suitable habitat to the west of the Masterplan site; therefore, lighting could prevent bats from reaching foraging areas, thereby having a detrimental impact on the local population. Impacts on bats would be minimised through sensitive lighting design at the bridge crossings and not illuminating the streams and their associated buffers. This would maintain the existing dark corridor. In addition, sensitive lighting of the road bridge across the River Bure tributary would minimise adverse effects on the badgers within the ‘main’ badger sett close to this watercourse. Retaining the watercourses within a wide corridor of semi-natural green space and the careful design of the newly created semi-natural habitats within this corridor would reduce the impact of disturbance associated with NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 85
the new residents. Careful design of the newly created habitats within this buffer, and of the leisure cycle/pedestrian route would ensure that the effects on the retained bankside habitat would be minimal. It is considered unlikely that increased public access would result in significant impacts on the River Bure and its tributaries, or the protected species they support. Habitat Degradation - Poor Management The watercourses and their associated bankside habitats would be managed to benefit nature conservation in the longer-term, to ensure that these habitats retain their value for biodiversity. It is not proposed to create play areas, allotments or other similar amenity facilities within the stream corridor buffer areas across most of the Masterplan site. A play area will be created within the river corridor in the northern part of the site. Residual impacts Assuming the implementation of effective mitigation described in section 6.6, it is considered that during operation the residual impact on the River Bure, its tributary and associated species would be Not Significant. The creation of diverse semi-natural habitats within the riparian corridor as part of the detailed design for the Masterplan would ensure that in time there would be a beneficial effect on some species associated with this ‘Key Ecological Receptor’.
Broadleaved semi-natural woodland & mature broadleaved plantation Construction impacts Habitat Degradation - Noise and Visual Disturbance There would be periods when the woodland may be subject to disturbance from nearby construction works within the site. To minimise these impacts, these blocks of woodland would be retained within an appropriate buffer zone that extends a minimum of 10 metres from the woodland edge. The buffer zone would support seminatural habitats, and would be incorporated into larger expanses of green space that would also support areas of planted trees. While the woodland would be protected by fencing during construction, there may be some disturbance during the breeding bird season which may deter its use by nesting birds, potentially resulting in a temporarily reduced breeding success of the species recorded on site. The provision of nest boxes elsewhere on the site would mitigate for this disturbance. The woodlands would not be lit during construction and therefore it is not anticipated that this phase of the development would have any impact on bats that may roost or forage within the woodlands or on their periphery. NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 86
Residual impacts Assuming the implementation of effective mitigation described in Section 2.6, and due to the temporary nature of these impacts, it is considered that the residual impact related to construction on these woodlands would be Not Significant. Operational impacts Habitat Degradation - Trampling There is the potential for activities associated with the new residents to cause habitat degradation associated with trampling. To minimise such impacts, the footpath and cycle networks avoid the areas of semi-natural woodland. The creation of wildlife walk in the woodlands, the use of strategic tree and shrub planting and the use of signage would help to protect these habitats. Habitat management would ensure that the value of the woodland for wildlife would be maintained in the longer-term. Habitat Degradation - Noise and Visual Disturbance Noise and visual disturbance once the site was operational could affect birds nesting within the woodland; however, it is envisaged that the birds would have become habituated to the change in setting during the construction phase. The provision of a buffer zone and incorporation of the woodlands into larger areas of open space would be expected to reduce the scale of the impact on birds occupying these habitats and ensure that any impacts on roosting bats is avoided. The woodlands would not be lit when the site is operational. Residual impacts Assuming the implementation of effective mitigation described in Section 6.6, it is considered that the residual impact related to operation on these woodlands would be Not Significant.
Ponds All ponds within the Masterplan site, including the two which were found to support great crested newts would be retained within areas of open space and/or green corridors; with suitable buffers. Construction impacts Habitat Loss/Fragmentation To minimise the impacts of habitat loss and fragmentation the ponds would be retained within appropriate buffer zones. A link between the two ponds known to support great crested newts would be NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 87
maintained to allow movement of animals between the ponds. Culverts would be provided beneath the roads that are close to these ponds to enable the great crested newts and other amphibians to travel safely between these ponds during construction. The ponds would also be linked to green corridors to maintain access to suitable terrestrial habitats, with culverts provided where appropriate to maintain access. All works likely to affect great crested newts would need to be overseen by an ecologist and, where appropriate, in accordance with the provisions of a licence. Amphibian-proof fencing would also be used, where appropriate, to avoid harm to great crested newts during site clearance and construction. Habitat Degradation - Pollution There is the potential for habitat degradation to occur as a result of polluted surface water runoff entering the ponds during construction. The implementation of standard pollution prevention and control measures during construction would protect water quality during that phase of the development. Residual impacts Assuming the implementation of effective mitigation described in Section 6.6, it is considered that the construction phase residual impacts on ponds would be Not Significant. Operational impacts Habitat Loss/Fragmentation Care would be taken in the detailed design of access roads and the green space around the retained ponds that support great crested newts to ensure that great crested newts can travel between the ponds with culverts provided where appropriate. This would also ensure that access to open space suitable for foraging newts is maintained. Habitat Degradation - Pollution There is the potential for habitat degradation to occur as a result of polluted surface water run off entering the ponds when the site has been developed. The detailed design of the SuDS would protect the ponds when the site is occupied. Although the retained and newly created ponds may receive surface water run off care would be taken to ensure that they receive water that has been screened first so that pollutants and sediments have been removed to protect water quality in these features. Habitat Degradation – Poor Management NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 88
Habitat management linked to monitoring would be required to maintain the value of these habitats for the wildlife. The great crested newt population would be safeguarded since the ponds that support them would be retained within green space with green links and other measures put in place to maintain the favourable conservation status of this population. Residual impacts Assuming the implementation of effective mitigation described in Section 6.6, it is considered that the residual impact related to operation on ponds would be Not Significant.
Barn owls Barn owls were recorded nesting in a barn owl nest box west of Home Farm in 2010. This box together with two new boxes was moved to the edge of the woodland west of Home Farm in 2012. Construction Impacts Disturbance Should construction works be undertaken during the barn owl breeding season (March to August) it is possible that increased human presence in the area, site traffic, noise and lighting could disturb nesting barn owls. Works that take place within 250 metres of the nest boxes have the potential to cause disturbance, and potentially affect breeding success. The boxes would be moved in advance of site clearance to suitable trees in locations that would not be disturbed that also have access to suitable foraging habitat. Habitat loss The Masterplan site as a whole supported very little habitat that was of particular value to foraging barn owls; however, the development would result in the loss of grassland leys and cattle-grazed grassland fields, the rough grassy margins and borders of which may be part of the confirmed breeding pair of barn owls’ home range. A significant proportion of suitable foraging habitat would remain outwith the Masterplan site, including areas immediately to the north and west. Therefore, it is not considered that the Masterplan would remove valuable barn owl foraging resources.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 89
Residual impacts The potential exists for the construction of the proposed development to disturb nesting barn owls, however assuming the implementation of effective mitigation described in Section 6.6, the residual impact on barn owls associated with the construction phase would be Not Significant. Operational impacts Disturbance The increased public use of areas within the vicinity of the nest boxes, and noise and light impacts from the proposed development would be likely to disturb nesting barn owls. Disturbance from increased public use of the retained grasslands within the area is also likely to have a significant impact on barn owls, which may forage during the day at certain times of year, and are sensitive to disturbance at these times. As such, the barn owl nest boxes within the Masterplan site would be moved to suitable trees in locations that would not be susceptible to disturbance, with access to suitable foraging habitat. Residual impacts Assuming the implementation of effective mitigation described in Section 6.6, and that the nest boxes are moved to areas that would not be subject to disturbance the residual impact on barn owls would be Not Significant.
Breeding and overwintering birds Construction impacts Habitat loss The arable land and the majority of the improved grassland that was found to be of value to farmland specialist bird species would be lost within the Masterplan site. There is the potential that new habitats of value to some of these species would be provided within the Nature Reserve and Country Park; notwithstanding this, there would be a residual impact on farmland birds. As identified in Section 2.6 above, it is therefore proposed to provide habitats suitable for these species off site to compensate for this adverse impact. Given that the development within the Masterplan site would be phased over several decades it is envisaged that it would be possible to provide compensation in a similar timeframe to the impacts that are generated. There are tried and tested techniques for creating and enhancing habitats for the benefit of farmland birds, therefore it is envisaged that such measures could be instigated with a high degree of confidence of achieving success NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 90
The mature woodland and hedgerows that were also found to be of value to nesting and foraging birds would be retained with appropriate buffers linked to areas of open space as part of the green infrastructure strategy. These buffers would be protected with fencing during construction. Birds would become habituated to disturbance and it is therefore anticipated that many of the bird species associated with these habitats in particular those associated with the urban fringe and woodland habitats would continue to use these habitats within the Masterplan site during construction. As indicated above construction would be phased over a number of decades and as such large parts of the Masterplan site would be left undisturbed. The provision of nest boxes would provide nesting sites for the hedgerow and woodland birds that are displaced during construction. Residual impacts
Assuming the implementation of effective mitigation described in Section 6.6, it is considered that the residual impact on breeding and overwintering birds associated with the construction phase would be Not Significant. Operational impacts Increased predation of adjacent bird populations
Domestic pets associated with new residents may also lead to an increase in predation of ground-nesting birds using the adjacent farmland. As detailed in Section 2.6, it is anticipated that the proposals for offsite habitat creation and enhancements would help to bolster local farmland bird populations and compensate for any increases in predation as a result of the Masterplan. It is anticipated that the creation of significant areas of green space that would include a Nature Reserve, Country Park, a waste water treatment facility and woodland fitness trail together with new woodland and hedgerow planting would lead to the creation of habitats that are beneficial to some bird species. This, together with the provision of artificial nest sites and supplementary feeding from local residents, would lead to an increase in the number of urban fringe species that could include species of conservation concern and Species of Principal Importance like the house sparrow and starling. Disturbance to bird populations
It is anticipated that birds resident within the Masterplan site comprising both the built areas and the areas of open space would become habituated to the noise and visual disturbance associated with the development once the site is occupied. Within the Masterplan there would be areas that would be areas that are less regularly disturbed this would include areas within the Nature Reserve, the Country Park, green burial sites, the waste water NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 91
treatment facility and areas of woodland planting on the western edge of the site. As identified above the Masterplan would lead to the creation of new habitats of value to nesting and foraging birds and the establishment of a large number of artificial nesting sites. In addition, although residents would have access to the retained blocks of woodland the pedestrian and cycle paths avoid these habitats to reduce disturbance to woodland birds. Residual impacts Assuming the implementation of effective mitigation described in Section 6.6, and due to the temporary nature of these impacts, it is considered that the impact on breeding and over-wintering bird species associated with the operational phase would be Not Significant.
Bat roosts The proposed development design has ensured the retention of all confirmed bat roost trees. The key areas of the site for foraging and commuting bats were the woodland, along the River Bure and its tributaries and the associated hedgerow corridor in the southern half of the site, which would all be retained. The road and pedestrian/cycle bridges that cross the water courses would be appropriately designed and so that a dark corridor is maintained and to ensure that they do not represent a barrier to the movement of bats. Construction Impacts Disturbance Protective fencing associated with the protection of the watercourses and their associated buffers would ensure that the confirmed bat roosts in trees would be retained and protected from noise and visual disturbance during construction and site. The buildings associated with the confirmed and potential roost sites in the farmsteads would be retained together with the land immediately adjacent to them, this would ensure that the roosts would not be affected by noise and visual disturbance associated with site clearance.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 92
Habitats loss and/or degradation The removal of vegetation to install bridges over the River Bure and its tributaries would be kept to a minimum. Given that this watercourse links to areas containing larger gaps in vegetation (such as the B4100 separating the Masterplan site from the brown longeared roost at St Laurence Church), and that the majority of bats passes recorded using the Masterplan site were of common pipistrelle bats, it is unlikely that the creation of these gaps would deter the use of the Bure and its tributaries by foraging and commuting bats. The removal of hedgerows to create gaps for access roads would not have an impact on the confirmed bat roosts in trees, as these features are not in close proximity to any of the removed sections of hedgerows. The hedgerows provide valuable foraging and commuting habitat for bats; however, as noted above, it is considered unlikely that the creation of a small number of gaps (one or two) would deter the species present from using these features. The arable fields and grassland habitats which would be lost under the footprint of the proposed development were not considered to be of particular value to the bat species recorded within the activity and emergence surveys, and dark vegetated links would be retained across the site to link to suitable foraging habitat outside the Masterplan site boundary. This would be particularly important for more vulnerable species such as brown long-eared bats, which emerge after dark and prefer to fly in dark, cluttered environments. However, few brown long-eared bats were recorded during the surveys, and as discussed above, to reach these locations within the site they have to cross already existing gaps such as the B4100 and the less vegetated corridors to the west. It is therefore not considered likely that the loss of low value arable land and improved grassland would have a significant impact on the local bat population. Residual impacts Assuming the implementation of effective mitigation described in Section 6.6, it is considered that the residual impact on bats roost related to construction would be Not Significant. Operational impacts Disturbance The confirmed bat tree roosts would be retained in dark corridors within the Masterplan site and the bridges would be designed to ensure bats can continue to forage along the River Bure and its tributaries. However, as discussed under the River Bure and tributaries receptor above, there could be direct impacts on bats commuting or foraging along these corridors if the associated lighting for these new bridges is not installed in a sensitive manner. Should NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 93
lighting spill over from the bridges onto the riparian corridor, it may render them less suitable for light sensitive bat species such as brown long-eared bats. Commuting and foraging brown long-eared bats follow dark corridors; therefore, lighting these corridors could prevent them from reaching foraging areas, thereby having a detrimental impact on the local population. It is unlikely that lighting on the bridges or within Masterplan site itself would adversely affect other bat species recorded within the area such as pipistrelle, noctule and Leisler’s bats, as these species have been recorded foraging under certain artificial light sources, and are fast flying species that are not deterred from flying through lit areas. The design principles set on the Exemplar site would be followed on the Masterplan site to ensure that dark corridors are maintained. The confirmed and potential bat roosts in the farmsteads would be retained with their associated gardens. The hedgerows and stream corridors that link these buildings to the wider countryside would be retained. Although it is not proposed to alter the lighting in the vicinity of the farmsteads the roosts were occupied by pipistrelle bats that are not adversely affected by normal street lighting. It is not anticipated that development around the farmsteads would cause disturbance to these bat roosts. Residual impacts Assuming the implementation of effective mitigation described in Section 6.6, the residual impact on bat roosts would be Not Significant. The creation of significant areas of open space, that has the potential to support a diverse range of semi-natural habitats, would enhance the value of the Masterplan site for invertebrates and thus the bats that feed on them. The provision of artificial roost sites within the open space and in the built areas would also lead to the creation of more sites potentially suitable for use by roosting bats in the longer-term. Overall, the Masterplan could have a beneficial effect on some species of bats as the new habitats mature.
6.7.2 Impacts on Other Ecological Receptors Reptiles Small numbers of common lizard and a grass snake were recorded within the Masterplan site. These species would most frequently occur in the hedgerows and buffers associated with the River Bure and its tributaries; therefore, there is the potential risk of killing and/or injuring reptiles during the construction phase of the development, where potentially suitable habitat for these species is removed to create the access roads. All reptiles are protected from killing or injuring under the Wildlife and Countryside Act, 1981 (as amended); therefore measures outlined in Section 6.6 would be taken to avoid their incidental mortality during the removal of vegetation. NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 94
Badgers The Masterplan has been designed to allow the retention of all of the badger setts in situ and provides vegetated buffers surrounding the setts to minimise the impacts of construction activities in close proximity. There would be some loss of foraging habitat for badgers within the Masterplan site; however, the habitat within close proximity to the setts would be retained together with well-connected grassland and woodland habitat along the watercourses and hedgerows which would ensure links to other areas of suitable habitat within this badger social group’s territory. It is therefore not anticipated that this would significantly affect the badger population. Planting fruit trees within the areas of open space next to setts would also enhance the value of these areas for badgers on a seasonal basis. Underpasses for badgers and badger-resistant fencing are not considered necessary along the new access roads within the Masterplan due to the relatively low predicted speed of the traffic in proximity to the known setts. With regard to the badgers in the northern half of the site they are more likely to continue to forage along the river corridors travelling under the bridges to access suitable foraging habitat rather than crossing the roads themselves. The badger setts on the southern half of the site are close to the western boundary and it is anticipated that these badgers would forage within the newly created areas of green space associated in the Masterplan and not come into conflict with the access roads.
Brown Hares Given the low value of the Masterplan site for brown hare it is unlikely that they would be utilising the area; however, site clearance works could result in the mortality of dependent young brown hares (should they be present), if carried out during the brown hare breeding season. Therefore, topsoil stripping works would, as far as possible, aim to avoid unnecessary impacts on brown hares; either by taking place at appropriate times of year, or following a check by an experienced ecologist to confirm the absence of brown hares and dependent young. Brown hares are unlikely to utilise the site following operation due to disturbance from increased public use of area. Brown hares are also likely to be particularly sensitive to disturbance from exercising of dogs. Retained areas of suitable habitat would be present outside of the Masterplan site boundary. Brown hare would also be expected to benefit from the offsite compensation that would be provided for farmland birds.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 95
6.8
Cumulative Effects Other developments of relevance to this assessment are detailed in Table 17-1. The closest of these are two housing developments: a proposal for 200 dwellings at Caversfield, along Fringford Road approximately 300m from the Masterplan site; and the other, for 197 dwellings at RAF Bicester, Caversfield, which is currently under construction. The impact assessment concluded that, assuming the effective implementation of the mitigation measures outlined above, there would be no residual impacts on habitats and species present within the Masterplan site. It is not envisaged that the developments listed in Table 18-2 would lead to any direct impacts on the habitats and species associated within the Masterplan site. There is potential for traffic associated with the new developments to contribute to impacts associated with air quality. This would be fully reviewed as part of future impact assessments, once traffic data are available.
6.9
Monitoring and Management A programme of monitoring of the ‘Key Ecological Receptors’ would be developed covering the period during construction, and postcompletion of relevant phases of the development. As a minimum, monitoring is likely to be necessary to confirm: the continued use of retained badger setts; continued use of the confirmed bat roost and continued use of the watercourses by foraging bats; continued use of the ponds by great crested newts; use of the hedgerows and shrub areas by nesting birds; and biological water quality of the River Bure and tributary, both pre-, during and post-construction. The retained and newly created habitats would be managed in accordance with a Landscape and Habitats Management Plan (in keeping with local planning policy) to ensure the value to wildlife of the habitat and features is realised. Monitoring would form part of this plan to ensure that management is modified if required to ensure that its aims are achieved.
6.10 Summary The Ecology chapter of the SER has been informed by desk studies, the results of detailed and targeted ecological field surveys and consultations with the Eco-development’s Biodiversity team, comprising representatives from the statutory nature conservation organisations, the local authorities and the local wildlife trust. The results of this work has influenced the Masterplan to reduce impacts NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 96
on wildlife and habitats as far as possible, and to produce a design that incorporates habitat enhancement and creation measures that would result in a proposal that leads to a net gain in biodiversity, as required by statutory planning policies. Care has been taken to ensure that the habitats that have been retained and created as part of the proposed development are resilient to the anticipated effects of climate change. The field surveys revealed that the Masterplan site comprised arable fields and improved grassland. There were two small areas of broadleaved semi-natural woodland in the north-east of the site, used by foraging bats and the location of three barn owl nest boxes. There was one small area of mature broadleaved plantation. There were also areas of recently established plantation, comprising broadleaved trees within tall unmanaged grassland. There are three watercourses within the proposed development, the River Bure, and two tributaries. These watercourses are seasonally dry holding water in the winter months and during periods of high rainfall at other times of the year. One ‘main’ badger sett, one subsidiary sett, two outlier setts and two potential main setts were recorded within the Masterplan site, and several bat roosts were confirmed within trees and buildings within the Masterplan site. Two further bat roosts were identified in nearby buildings that are outside the proposed development area. Species-rich hedgerows form the field boundaries; these features together with the River Bure were found to be used by foraging bats. The River Bure and the linked hedgerows to the south were also found to be used by commuting bats. Common pipistrelle, soprano pipistrelle, Leisler’s, noctule, and an undetermined myotis bat were recorded on the proposed development site; however, the majority of passes recorded within the study area were of common pipistrelle bats. Several uncommon invertebrate species were recorded within the proposed development area, but the majority of the area supported few invertebrates. Small numbers of common lizards and grass snake were recorded on the field boundaries and it is likely that hedgehogs may also use these features. The Masterplan site was found to support ten bird species typically associated with the farmland habitats. Small numbers of birds were recorded nesting in the hedgerows, but the fields were found to be of limited value to nesting birds. Barn owls are known to have nested on the site recently and in the surrounding area. The nest boxes within the Masterplan site would be relocated to suitable habitat outside the development to ensure that barn owls are not disturbed by the proposals. The ponds within the Masterplan site would be retained one within the nature reserve one close to the Country Park and two that support great crested newts will be retained within buffers of semiNW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 97
natural vegetation. Culverts and corridors of vegetation would be provided to ensure that great crested newts can continue to travel between the two ponds and their terrestrial habitat. The proposed development would have no direct impacts on designated sites of nature conservation importance. The results of the air quality assessment will be used to determine whether the Energy Centre(s) and traffic associated with the development would have any effect on air quality in proximity to SSSIs within 10km of the Masterplan site. It is likely that mitigation would be provided to ensure that the Energy Centre(s) would not generate significant impacts on these receptors. The results of traffic modelling would also be required to assess whether there is the potential for impacts on these sites, and to assess the impact that the travel plan would have. The proposed development layout has ensured that the hedgerows are retained as far as possible. Where it is necessary to breach these features to provide access, or to create visibility splays, the affected areas would be moved and replanted nearby within the proposed development or replacement planting provided. This would ensure that the hedgerow network is retained and that there is no loss. Nest boxes would also be provided to maintain suitable nest sites in areas that would not be disturbed during construction. All hedgerows would be retained with an appropriate buffer zone of tall grassland habitat. Care has been taken to ensure that each watercourse is crossed once to provide access so that these natural wildlife corridors are retained. Sensitive lighting would be used on the bridges to ensure that dark corridors are retained to avoid disturbance to nocturnal species such as bats and badgers. Careful lighting design would also be used close to the hedgerows in order to maintain their value to wildlife. New habitats of value to wildlife would be created within a Nature Reserve, a County Park, sustainable drainage features, a woodland fitness trail and a waste water treatment facility. Large numbers of trees and shrubs would also be planted within the areas of open space including the residential areas. Whilst their primary function is to provide an attractive environment for people, this planting would also provide habitats for wildlife and help to offset impacts of climate change. Similarly, although the primary function of the allotments and other food growing areas is for the benefit of the residents, they would also contain habitats and features of value to wildlife. Bird nest boxes and boxes for roosting bats would also be provided as part of the proposed development. These features would be located on and within buildings and trees in unlit areas that have ready access to suitable foraging areas for these species and where they can also be accessed for maintenance. NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 98
A Landscape and Habitats Management Plan would be produced to ensure that the retained and newly created habitats are managed for wildlife in the long-term. This plan would be monitored to ensure that remedial action would be taken if required. Monitoring would also take place to ensure that water quality within the River Bure and its tributary is protected during construction. The proposed development would ensure that features of value to wildlife are retained (the hedgerows, woodland, ponds and watercourses) and that new habitats of value to wildlife would be created. It would not be possible to compensate for the loss of habitats used by farmland birds and habitats off site would be enhanced to benefit these species. The measures provided for in the Masterplan and the habitat enhancements offsite would ensure that there is a net gain in biodiversity as required by statutory planning policies. The proposed development will ensure that features of value to wildlife are retained (the hedgerows and watercourses) and that new habitats of value to wildlife will be created. The latter will ensure that there is a net gain in biodiversity as required by statutory planning policies.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 99
7
Flood Risk and Hydrology
7.1
Introduction This chapter considers the potential beneficial and adverse impacts on the water environment associated with the construction and operation of the North West Bicester Masterplan development. This chapter also describes:
The current baseline conditions of the water environment and considers the future baseline, immediately prior to the proposed development.
Measures that have been embedded into the Masterplan vision, and recommended additional mitigation measures to prevent, reduce or offset any potentially significant adverse effects to the water environment.
The likely residual effects after these measures have been implemented.
To assist the understanding of the principles of this subject and their particular application within the context of the proposed development, it is recommended that the reader refers to the associated Hyder Consulting Ltd. Flood Risk Assessment (Ref 7-1), Surface Water Drainage Strategy (Ref 7-2) and Water Cycle Study (Ref 7-3).
7.2
Regulatory and Policy Framework This impact assessment has been undertaken in accordance with current international and national legislation, and national and local plans and policies relating to flood risk and hydrology in the context of the proposed Masterplan development. A summary of the relevant legislation and policies, the requirements of these policies has been provided in Table 7.1 below. Table 7-1
Flood Risk and Hydrology Regulatory and Policy Framework
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester Masterplan Site Response
National Planning Policy Framework and Technical Guidance
Sets out Government policy on development and flood risk and provides explanation of the roles of all stakeholders in managing flood risk, with the goal of achieving sustainable development, from local planning bodies to developers and the Environment Agency.
A Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) has been completed in accordance with NPPF, in addition to the comprehensive Surface Water Drainage Strategy, which focuses on the sustainable management of surface water flood risk.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 100
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester Masterplan Site Response
The Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EEC)
The Directive provides a framework for the protection of surface (fresh) water, estuaries, coastal water and groundwater. The objectives of the Directive are to enhance the status, and prevent further deterioration, of aquatic ecosystems, promote the sustainable use of water, reduce pollution of water (especially by `priority' and 'priority hazardous' substances) and ensure progressive reduction of groundwater pollution. Among the main features of the Directive are that all inland and coastal waters within defined river basin districts must reach at least good status by 2015.
The proposed development will aim to attain the highest achievable water quality standards. This will be achieved with the incorporation of Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) into the design to improve the quality of the runoff from the Masterplan Site.
The Flood and Water Management Act 2010
The Flood and Water Management Act encourages the use of sustainable drainage in new developments and redevelopments. National Standards for the design, construction, operation and maintenance of SuDS are currently being drafted.
Through the preparation of the FRA and the Drainage Strategy, the proposed development has incorporated SuDS into the design. It has been concluded that the proposed development will not be exposed to an unacceptable degree of flood risk or increase flood risk to third parties.
Cherwell Local Plan Submission (2014) Policy ESD8 – Water Resources
This policy is aimed at maintaining water quality, ensuring adequate water resources and promoting sustainability of water use. It states that development that would adversely affect the water quality of surface or underground water bodies, including rivers, canals, lakes and reservoirs as a result of directly attributable factors will not be permitted.
The proposed development will aim to attain the highest achievable water quality standards, through embedded design and implementation of additional mitigation measures.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 101
7.3
Methodology
7.3.1 Study Area The study area consists of the proposed Masterplan Site, along with the catchment area of the two tributaries to the River Bure, to which the Masterplan Site drains, downstream to the mainline railway crossing in Bicester. The study area has been extended beyond the boundary of the Masterplan Site to include an area of the Bure catchment downstream, to ensure that the assessment of potential impacts on downstream water quality and flood risk to downstream third party lands is included. Baseline data has been gathered for the defined study area. However, where information is not available from within the study area, the best available information from outside the study area have been utilised where appropriate. In consultation with Natural England a hydrological link between the proposed Masterplan Site and Wendlebury Meads and Mansmoor Closes SSSI was highlighted. The study area was therefore extended to include this site.
7.3.2 Establishment of Baseline Conditions Flood risk from a wide range of sources has been assessed and is reported in the Masterplan FRA (Appendix 7-1, Volume 3). To inform this FRA a hydraulic model was developed representing the River Bure and three of its key tributaries which flow through the Site. The hydraulic model was developed in ISIS (Ref7-4), an industry standard hydraulic modelling package, which routes flow hydrographs that were estimated using UK Best Practice Flood Estimation Handbook (FEH) (Ref 7-5) techniques. A conceptual surface water drainage strategy has also been developed based on the principle of attenuating any additional post development runoff to equivalent greenfield rates to ensure that there is no increase in flood risk as a result of the development. The drainage strategy incorporates a suite of sustainable drainage techniques, with the aim of managing rainwater runoff close to its source, reducing flood risk and improving water quality. An assessment of the potential for water quality impacts has been undertaken using published information for local watercourses. In order to establish baseline conditions at the proposed Masterplan Site, the following data has been utilised:
Topographic survey (Drawing 7013)
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 102
Hydrological data for the River Bure derived from the FEH CDROM v3 (Ref 7-6)
Hydrological data from the Environment Agency’s River Bure model.
Information on ground conditions from the NW Bicester development- Phase 1 Desk Study, (Hyder Consulting, July 2010)
Water quality data from the Environment Agency collected for the Town Brook, downstream of the Masterplan Site development within Bicester (Ref 7-8).
Environment Agency online data sets accessed via http://maps.environment-agency.gov.uk/wiyby.
Information on private water supplies, provided in response to a request to Cherwell District Council Environmental Health team (September 2013).
Abstraction license data, water quality data and WFD monitoring data, provide in response to a request to the Environment Agency (July 2013).
7.3.3 Assessment of Effects The criteria used to assess potential impacts on the water environment are outlined below. These have been used to define the significance of the impacts associated with the proposed Masterplan development on the Bure and other features of the water environment within the study area. The method comprises the following stages and is based on guidance set out in the Design for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Volume 11: Environmental Assessment (Ref 7-9):
Assessment of baseline environmental importance (value)
Assessment of impact magnitude
Assessment of significance of effects
Key water resources/receptors within the study area have been assigned a value / importance based upon the criteria contained within Table 7-2. Table 7-2
Criteria for estimating the receptor value / importance of water features
Value / Typical Importan Descriptor ce s
Typical Example
Very High Attribute has Surface a high quality Waters: and rarity on NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
EC Designated Salmonid / Cyprinid fishery River Quality Objective (RQO) River Ecosystem Class RE1.
Page 103
Value / Typical Importan Descriptor ce s
Typical Example
a regional or national scale.
Watercourse achieving WFD Class ‘High’. Site protected under EU or UK wildlife legislation (SAC, SPA, SSSI, Ramsar site) Supports a public potable water supply to a large community Groundwater: Principal aquifer providing a regionally important resource or supporting a site protected under wildlife legislation Source Protection Zone (SPZ) I Flood Risk:
High
Attribute has Surface a high quality Waters: and rarity on a local scale.
Designated washland or a large and active floodplain where there is high potential for flooding of a large number (> 100) of residential properties and infrastructure Watercourse achieving WFD Class ‘Good’ Major Cyprinid Fishery Species protected under EU or UK wildlife legislation
Groundwater: Secondary A aquifer providing locally important resourced or supporting river ecosystem SPZII Flood Risk:
Medium
Flood plain or defence protecting between 1 and 100 residential properties or industrial premises from flooding.
Attribute has Surface Watercourse achieving WFD Class ‘Moderate’ a medium Waters: quality and Groundwater: Secondary B aquifer providing water for rarity on a agricultural or industrial use with limited local scale. connection to surface water SPZII Flood Risk:
Low
Attribute has Surface a low quality Waters: and rarity on Groundwater: a local scale. Flood Risk:
Flood plain or defence protecting 10 or fewer industrial properties from flooding Watercourse that is not a fishery, achieving WFD Class ‘Poor’ Non-productive strata Flood plain with limited constraints and low probability of flooding of residential and industrial properties.
The magnitude of changes on the baseline condition is then assigned considering the scale/extent of change and the nature and duration of the impacts. Definitions of magnitude are provided in Table 7-3.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 104
Table 7-3
Criteria used to determine the magnitude of impacts on water features
Magnitude of Potential Impact
Criteria
Major
Adverse
Results in loss of attribute and/or quality and integrity of the attribute
Beneficial
Results in major improvement of attribute quality.
Adverse
Results in effect on integrity of attribute, or loss of part of attribute.
Beneficial
Results in moderate improvement of attribute quality.
Adverse
Results in some measurable change in attribute’s quality or vulnerability.
Beneficial
Results in some beneficial effect on attribute or a reduced risk of negative effect occurring.
Moderate
Minor
Negligible
Results in effect on attribute, but of insufficient magnitude to affect the use or integrity.
The overall significance of the identified impacts is then assessed using a matrix which correlates the importance of the receptor/attribute against the magnitude of the impact. The matrix is reproduced in Table 7-4. Table7-4
Criteria for estimating the significance of effects on water features
IMPORTANT OF ATTRIBUTE
MAGNITUDE OF IMPACT Negligible
Minor
Moderate
Major
Very High
Neutral
Moderate/Large
Large/Very Large
Very Large
High
Neutral
Slight/Moderate
Moderate/Large
Large/Very Large
Medium
Neutral
Slight
Moderate
Large
Low
Neutral
Neutral
Slight
Slight/Moderate
Where a choice of two significance criteria is given in Table 7-4, professional judgement has been used to decide on the overall significance of impacts.
7.3.4 Consultation The Environment Agency has been consulted via telephone and email to gather the baseline data that has informed this SER and the associated Flood Risk Assessment. Oxfordshire County Council has been consulted to inform the Surface Water Drainage Strategy and relevant views expressed by Natural England have also been considered. NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 105
7.4
Description of Existing Baseline Conditions
7.4.1 Current Conditions Existing baseline conditions are described below. A summary is presented in Table 7-5, with further details provided in Sections 7.4.3 to 7.4.7. Consideration of how existing baseline conditions might change during the interim period from present day to immediately prior to commencement of the construction phase of the development is presented in Section 7.4.8.
7.4.2 Water Environment Features Table 7-5 Summary of key receptors, their attributes and assigned importance (value) Feature
River Bure, associated tributaries and ponds
Attribute
Quality
Importan ce
Recreation
Downstream of the proposed Masterplan Site High there is a green river corridor and park land on the banks of the Bure. This can be considered as being rare on the local (Bicester) scale
Dilution and removal of waste products
There are permitted discharges to the Bure and its tributaries, however, these are for low volumes of effluent, which do not require significant dilution, until the Bicester sewage treatment works discharge, located downstream of Bicester
Biodiversity
The River Bure and tributaries do not Medium support flowing water in the summer months and are therefore considered to be of limited value to aquatic invertebrates (including white-clawed crayfish), water voles and otters. However, these features provide a wildlife corridor of value to foraging and commuting bats.
Conveyance/st orage of flow
There are four watercourses, which are typically subject to ephemeral flow regimes, within the study area and a number of ponds and drainage ditches.
High
Floodplain
Conveyance of flow
Within the study area the narrow flood plain associated with the Bure provides attenuation and reduces the magnitude of the flooding within Bicester.
High
Groundwat er
Water supply/quality
The proposed Masterplan Site is underlain by a High Principal bedrock aquifer and localised superficial deposits are classified as a Secondary Aquifer. There are no groundwater source protection zones (SPZ) in the study
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Medium
Page 106
Feature
Attribute
Quality
Importan ce
area.
Springs
Water supply/quality
There are several springs within the proposed Masterplan Site, which are likely to support baseflow to the tributaries of the Bure that flow through the site and feed the existing ponds within the Site.
Medium
7.4.3 Surface Water Within the proposed Masterplan Site there are several water features, namely: the Bure and its associated tributaries, field drains, ponds and springs. The Bure (a main river) flows in a southerly direction from Caversfield House to a culvert beneath the A4095. Downstream of the culvert it flows in an open channel between Lucerine Avenue and Purslane Drive. A tributary flows in an easterly direction from Bucknell which converges with the Bure downstream of Home Farm, and the Langford Brook (an ordinary watercourse) flows in an easterly direction from Crowmarsh Farm which converges with the Bure at the A4095 culvert. There is a field drain south of Gowell Farm flowing in a southerly direction to a culvert under the A4095 and the downstream urban area. There are several ponds within the proposed Masterplan Site, most notably at Crowmarsh Farm and south of Himley Farm and a spring is shown to present east of Himley Farm. In addition to these most prominent water features, a number of ditches, such as the ditch adjacent to Howes Lane, and other smaller features drain individual fields and feed in to the network. Surface water runoff across the proposed Masterplan Site flows largely at greenfield rates to the Bure and its tributaries, according to the local topography, with the potential for localised ponding to occur in low lying areas.
7.4.4 Flood Risk Flood risk is considered in more detail in the Flood Risk Assessment report that has been prepared for the Masterplan Site (Appendix 7-1, Volume 3). The proposed Masterplan Site drains to the River Bure and its tributaries, which flow through the site before their confluence into a single channel the A4095 Lord’s Lane. The River Bure then flows into Bicester in a south-easterly direction, where it is split into the urbanised Back Brook and Town Brook through the town. The River Bure is a tributary of the Ray, Cherwell and ultimately the Thames. NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 107
Flood risk to the proposed Masterplan Site from the River Bure displayed on the online EA flood maps (Ref 7-10) are based upon a coarse DTM and JFLOW modelling and are not considered suitable to delineate the flood plain in sufficient detail to inform a FRA in support of a planning application. Therefore a hydraulic model has been constructed to confirm the floodplain extents across the Masterplan Site. An unsteady state ISIS model of the River Bure and associated tributaries and floodplains was constructed and is described more fully in the FRA. The model contains four watercourses and an outflow to the lake located downstream at Caversfield House, a summarised in Table 7-6. Table 7-6 Watercourses represented in the model
Watercours Name in model e Tributary 3 (T3) down to confluence with Tributary 2 (T2) down to River Bure confluence with Tributary 1 (T1) to downstream extent of model
Length of reach Upstream Downstream (metres) extent (NGR) extent (NGR)
1952
2588 Tributary 1 Tributary 1 (T1)
(to confluence with T2) 1510
Tributary 2 Tributary 2 (T2) Tributary 3 (Hawkswell Tributary 3 (T3) ) Lake outflow
(to confluence with T3) 93 260
Tributary 4 (T4)
(to culverted confluence with T3)
458174, 225414
457695, 223804
455409, 224548
457606, 224230
456707, 225662
457979, 224508
456973,22441 0
457050, 224381
458207, 225342
458100, 225070
Drawing 7-1 of Volume 2 shows the modelled flood extent across the proposed Masterplan Site for the 100-year and 1,000-year events (i.e. Flood Zones 3 and 2 respectively). This shows that flooding occurs predominantly on the flatter land around the confluence between the River Bure and the northernmost of the tributaries. Away from the confluence, flooding is confined to the relatively narrow valley of the watercourse. Drawing 7-1 of Volume 2 also shows that the flooding only impacts on green space within the proposed Masterplan development, and no NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 108
buildings or roads are affected by flood water. Where the bridges are required, these will be designed to cause no constriction to flow, and therefore will not increase flood risk to the proposed development. Built development within the Masterplan Site would therefore be placed entirely within Flood Zone 1, as is required for an ecodevelopment. The model predicts that floodwater is generally confined to the valleys in which the watercourses flow, with ponding occurring at confluences and upstream of constricting structures. The model does not predict any overland flow occurring. The model results have confirmed that the proposed development is predominantly located within the Low Flood Risk Zone (Zone 1), with small areas of Medium and High risk restricted to areas immediately adjacent to the watercourse corridors. All proposed development has been located within the areas of Low risk, and therefore the development is considered to be at low risk of flooding from fluvial sources.
7.4.5 Water Quality The Water Framework Directive (WFD) sets standards for water quality in rivers, estuaries, coastal waters and aquifers. River Basin Management Plans aim to protect and improve the water environment by identifying the main issues within a catchment, and outlining the means of achieving the targets set by the Directive.
Surface Water Quality Data has been collected from the Thames River Basin Management Plan (Ref 7-11) to define the existing water quality of the River Bure within the study area where, under the WFD, the Bure is referred to as the Town Brook. Available water quality data is presented in Table 7-7 below: Table7-7 WFD Data
Parameter
Value
Waterbody ID
GB106039030150
Waterbody Name
Town Brook at Bicester
Management Catchment
Cherwell
River Basin District
Thames
Typology Description
Low, Small, Calcareous
Hydromorphological Status
Heavily Modified
Current Ecological Quality
Moderate Potential
Current Chemical Quality
Does Not Require Assessment
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 109
2015 Predicted Ecological Quality
Moderate Potential
Status Objective (Overall):
Good by 2027
2015 Predicted Chemical Quality
Does Not Require Assessment
Overall Risk
At Risk
Protected Area
Yes
The Town Brook is classified as Heavily Modified Waterbody, as a result of urbanisation, with a target to achieve Good Ecological Potential. The waterbody is considered to currently achieve Moderate Ecological Potential, limited by the supporting element Phosphate, with a target to achieve Good Ecological Potential by 2027. The chemical status of this waterbody does not require assessment under the WFD, which means that priority substances and other specific pollutants are not discharged into this waterbody in significant quantities. The WFD requires no deterioration in the current status of the water body. It also includes an objective to ‘aim to improve’ any water body that is not presently a Good Status or Potential and defines how this should be achieved through the establishment of environmental objectives and ecological targets for surface waters.
Groundwater Quality The WFD groundwater underlying the study area is named the Bicester-Otmoor Combrash. Its current chemical quality is classified as Poor, failing its WFD status objective of Good, but with no apparent upward chemical trend. The quantitative quality of this groundwater body, which considers factors such as the impacts of abstraction and the water balance, is classified as Good and the target has been set to achieve Good overall status by 2027.
7.4.6 Water Supply A Detailed Water Cycle Study has been prepared for the Masterplan site, to ensure that the impacts of the development on water resources and the potable supply infrastructure are understood and mitigated. The statutory water undertaker for the area, Thames Water Utilities Ltd (TWUL), has submitted a 25 year resource development and demand management strategy for approval by its regulators, which will be accompanied by its own Strategic Environmental Assessment. This (currently draft) plan illustrates the demand management options TWUL intend to utilise in and around the Bicester area to avoid a supply demand deficit, and sustainably manage water resources. The Detailed WCS confirms that the potable water use NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 110
from the proposed development is well within the assumptions made by TWUL, and is hence deemed compliant with CDC Policy ESD 8. The Detailed WCS sets out water efficiency measures (such as the installation of water-efficient appliances) to reduce the potable water demand from the proposed development in line with the Code for Sustainable Homes Levels 3/4 (105 litres/head/day). In addition, the Detailed WCS has tested a range of property and neighbourhood level water reuse options (including rainwater harvesting and greywater recycling) to provide a non-potable supply to the proposed development, and hence limit the potable water demand to less than 80 litres/head/day. This level of demand is in line with the Code for Sustainable Homes Levels 5/6 and CDC Policy Bicester 1, and therefore assists with moving the development towards the aspiration of water neutrality. As part of the Detailed WCS, these options are being discussed with potential suppliers to ascertain their technical feasibility, economic viability and sustainability. It is considered that economically viable arrangements are available in the market to offer a separately piped non-potable supply to the developments, sourced from combinations of either locally collected rainwater, greywater, or reclaimed wastewater. These measures will ensure that the impact of the proposed Masterplan development on water resources is minimised.
7.4.7 Foul Water The Detailed WCS also considers the impact of wastewater discharges on the existing drainage infrastructure, and the receiving water environment. Early indications are that it is likely that there is insufficient capacity within TWUL’s existing infrastructure to service a large development, requiring the provision of additional off-site sewerage infrastructure to transmit flows to the existing TWUL Wastewater Treatment Works (WwTW) in Bicester. However, this infrastructure could be provided via a well understood requisitioning process under the provisions of the Water Industry Act. The commercial viability of such an option is being explored with TWUL. In addition, ongoing consultation with the Environment Agency and TWUL is underway to appraise the feasibility of treating and discharging the new foul water from the NWB Masterplan site at Bicester WwTW, taking account of other proposed development in the town, existing hydraulic and process capacity, planned capacity upgrades, and the water quality constraints imposed via the Urban Wastewater Treatment Directive and WFD.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 111
Innovative local treatment options are also being appraised in consultation with suppliers to identify if the treated effluent can be viably utilised as a local non-potable water resource, to assist in achieving CDC Policy Bicester 1, and moving the development towards the aspiration of water neutrality. To inform this approach, indicative environmental permit water quality standards are being determined in partnership with the Environment Agency, to ensure that any local effluent discharge would be compliant with the WFD, and explore if a phased permitting approach would allow environmental and financial risks to be minimised. Consultation with a range of suppliers suggests that the advanced treatment required is technically feasible, and that the integration of tertiary treatment processes with wetland treatment of surface water run-off offers opportunities to further enhance sustainability and amenity benefits.
7.4.8 Future Baseline Conditions Legislative drivers, such as the WFD are likely to yield improvements in future surface and groundwater quality. The potential impact of climate change on increased rainfall and river flows has the potential to increase the risk of flooding over time. The Flood Zone classification of the site however is likely to remain unchanged, with the majority of the site remaining in the low risk flood zone (from rivers and the sea), due to the site topography.
7.5
Design and Mitigation One of the stated aims of the Masterplan development is to reveal, enhance and integrate existing watercourses within the landscape of the Site. To achieve this, a number of measures are embedded into the Masterplan design. An outline of the measures that will be implemented during both the construction and operational phases is given below.
7.5.1 Construction During the construction phase, a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) will be prepared and implemented based upon Environment Agency (Ref 7-12) and CIRIA 2001 (Ref 7-13) guidance. This will set out method statements and protocols for activities such as excavation, storage of fuels, chemicals and oils, pollution control, and emergency contingency to ensure that best practice is employed and the water environment is safeguarded. Examples of these best practice methods include:
Soil stripping managed to ensure the minimum area of exposed soil at any one time
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 112
Provision made for water treatment to remove sediment before discharge to a surface water feature
Careful planning of materials storage and use to prevent accidental release of oils and other harmful contaminants
Regular monitoring to ensure pollution control measures are successful in managing water quality impacts
Design and installation of watercourse crossings to minimise flood risk effects
Waste management to avoid littering/ release of items which could cause blockages of bridges and culverts downstream
Management of groundwater, including dewatering
Control of potential contaminants which could harm groundwater
7.5.2 Operation The development will avoid the floodplain and there will be no change in the flood storage capacity of existing watercourse channels. The potential impacts arising from construction of built environment on an essentially greenfield site, will be managed using SuDS techniques, and are described in the Drainage Strategy Report (Ref 7-2). The widespread use of Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) and rainwater harvesting will provide sustainable storm water management ensuring that flood risk is reduced for areas downstream. The SuDS systems will comprise of chains of linked SuDS components which complement one another, such as; rain gardens, swales, permeable paving with storage, ponds and ditches. Attenuation measures would be located both amongst the built up areas at source, and within the public open spaces adjacent to the development areas. Building layouts and road geometry will also be minded to the natural topography to allow surface flow to be routed away from sensitive receptors. A variety of storage structures will be used, to provide attenuation storage, including ponds, basins and cellular storage. The use of SUDS promote good water quality standards and will also allow the creation of new wildlife spaces incorporating wetlands, ponds and a variety of vegetation, creating valuable open amenity areas whilst enhancing the local water environment. A variety of methods are proposed to be employed for different sources of runoff to remove hydrocarbons, metals, sediments and other impairments on water quality. Pre-treatment would be utilised to supplement filtration, bioremediation, detention and vegetative uptake processes.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 113
7.6
Assessment of Effects
7.6.1 Construction Recreation There are no water-based recreational facilities in the Masterplan Site development area itself and public access to the River Bure is currently limited. During the construction phase of the proposed development there will be no direct impacts on existing riverside recreational activities or users. Pollution control measures during construction will minimise the potential for indirect effects on downstream users of the River Bure Park. The magnitude of the impact on recreation is therefore judged to be Negligible, with an overall significance that is classified as Neutral.
Dilution and Water Quality Implementation of the CEMP will provide a means by which impacts on the water quality of the surface water features and groundwater will be minimised. Any residual impact will be limited and local and it is considered that no detriment to water quality would be discernable at the Wendlebury Meads and Mansmoor Closes SSSI, located seven kilometres downstream. There are also other SSSIs within 10km of the Masterplan Site and of these, Otmoor SSSI is likely to be hydrologically linked to the Masterplan Site; however, the implementation of standard measures to protect water quality and run-off rates within the Masterplan Site would ensure that no adverse effects on this SSSI would arise. Given the small size of the receiving watercourses on site (hence the limited potential for dilution of contaminants), the potential magnitude of residual impacts upon these receptors is considered to be Minor, with an overall significance that is classified as Slight Adverse
Flood Risk The CEMP will set out measures to minimise the potential flood risk impacts of the proposed Masterplan development, both on-site and to downstream areas. Following implementation of mitigation measures, the magnitude of the impact will be Minor and the overall significance of effect on the conveyance and flood risk features of the water environment is likely to be Slight Adverse.
Groundwater There is a Secondary A bedrock aquifer underlying the proposed Masterplan Site but there are no SPZ in the study area. The proposed development is unlikely to pose a high risk to groundwater quality, or flow dynamics as there is an intervening soil and unsaturated zone which could dilute releases of contaminants arising during the construction phase and measures detailed in the CEMP will be NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 114
implemented to safeguard groundwater. The superficial aquifer will be at greater risk of contamination, but is very limited in extent and restricted to areas adjacent to the watercourse channels where construction works will be very limited. The magnitude of the residual impacts on groundwater resources during the construction phase are therefore likely to be Negligible, with and overall significance that is classified as Neutral.
7.6.2 Operation Recreation Currently, there is no direct access for the public to the River Bure and its tributaries through the site. During the operational phase of the development the Bure will become a key landscape feature and there will be public stream side access for activities such as cycling, walking and jogging. In addition, existing features such as ponds, will be enhanced to provide increase value for biodiversity and to provide a resource for education and recreation. This will result in an impact with a magnitude that is judged as Major Beneficial and an overall significance that is classified as Large Beneficial.
Dilution and Water Quality SUDS will be installed to manage impacts arising from surface water drainage once the development is operational. The SUDS systems will provide treatment to surface runoff and enhance infiltration and provide an increase in low flow contributions to the on-site watercourses. Both of these impacts will be beneficial. However, the magnitude of any impact on dilution and water quality is judged to be Minor and localised with a resultant Slight Beneficial significance of effect.
Flood Risk Although the development itself is located in areas of relatively low flood risk, there are some limited areas of flood risk downstream in Bicester so any increase in peak flows in the River Bure could have an impact on flood risk downstream. The drainage strategy utilising SUDS measures will ensure that surface water runoff from the proposed Masterplan Site is maintained at or below greenfield rates. The hydraulic modelling undertaken to inform the Flood Risk Assessment has delineated the floodplain and has shown that no development is to occur within the predicted localised areas of floodplain. There will therefore there is no loss of floodplain up to and including the 1 in 1,000 year event. NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 115
As a result of the Masterplan design, the development will result in a Negligible magnitude of impact on flood risk, which will therefore have a Neutral significance of effect.
Groundwater Following installation of the SUDS drainage strategy, the magnitude of impacts on groundwater resources arising from the development is likely to be Negligible. The significance of effects on the underlying groundwater resources is therefore likely to be Neutral.
7.7
Cumulative Effects Development of the Masterplan Site, together with other sites in the Bicester wastewater treatment works catchment area, has the potential to result in a cumulative excessive demand on the treatment capacity of the works and/or the ability of the receiving watercourses to dilute resulting discharges of effluent. Further work is underway to assess the treatment requirement. Alternative on site measures to treat effluent from the NW Bicester development are also being considered and these may become available to the proposed Masterplan development in the future. If these become available there will be no cumulative impacts arising from the proposed Masterplan development on the Bicester wastewater treatment works, otherwise the infrastructure modelling currently underway will assess the need for an infrastructure upgrade. Similarly, the cumulative effects of all potential development may be significant in terms of water supply. However there is an aspiration to attain water neutrality, i.e. reducing overall demand to allow new development within the existing supply, and Thames Water has a long term water supply strategy to ensure demand can be met without harm to the environment. As indicated in Sections 7.6.1 and 7.6.2, the development of the Site will not have any other permanent adverse effects on the water environment. There will, therefore, be no cumulative effects arising from this development and others planned in the area.
7.8
Summary This high level assessment has concluded that development of the Masterplan Site could be undertaken without increasing construction or operational phase flood risk (from fluvial and surface water sources) to the development Site itself or downstream areas. This would be achieved through locating all new build development in Flood Zone 1 and maintaining surface water runoff at rates that equal or better existing greenfield rates, through the implementation of SUDS measures. The current Surface Water Drainage Strategy seeks
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 116
to provide attenuation at source, infiltration and treatment of surface water runoff through the SUDS management train and would result in a likely improvement in runoff quality compared to the existing scenario, when agricultural activities influence runoff quality. There is currently no access to water-based recreation along the Bure as it flows through the Masterplan Site, but this will be transformed by the development proposals, which sets the watercourse as a key landscape feature and asset, providing numerous riverside recreational opportunities. The likely effects of the proposed development are summarised in Table 7-8 below. Table7-8
Summary of Significance of Effects
Receptor/Water Feature Recreation
Importance
High
Significance of Effect with Mitigation
Neutral (Construction) Large Beneficial (Operation)
Dilution and Water Quality
Medium
Conveyance and Flood Risk
High
Groundwater
High
Slight Adverse (Construction) Slight Beneficial (Operational) Slight Adverse (Construction) Neutral (Operation)
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Neutral (Construction and Operation)
Page 117
8
Air Quality
8.1
Introduction This Chapter assesses the development’s potential to impact on air quality during both the construction and operational phase. Dust and emissions from the construction phase and operational emissions from traffic movements and on-site energy production associated with the development all have the potential to impact on local air quality.
8.2
Regulatory Framework
8.2.1 UK Air Quality Legislation Part IV of the Environment Act (1995) requires UK government to produce a national Air Quality Strategy (AQS) which contains standards, objectives and measures for improving ambient air quality. The most recent AQS (Ref 8-1) was published by DEFRA in July 2007. The AQS sets out Air Quality Objectives, which are maximum ambient pollutant concentrations that are not to be exceeded either without exception or with a permitted number of exceedences over a specified timescale. The ambient air quality standards and objectives are given statutory backing in England through the Air Quality (England) Regulations 2000, the Air Quality (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2002. The AQS Objectives were published in these regulations for seven pollutants. Table 8-1 below shows the AQS Objectives for nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and particulate matter (PM10), the pollutants considered within this assessment. Table 8-1
Air Quality Limit Values
Pollutant
Air Quality Limit Value Concentration (µg/m3)
Averaging Period
Nitrogen dioxide (NO2)
200
1-hour average; not to be exceeded more than 18 times a year
40
Annual average
Particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of less than 10µm (PM10)
50
24-hour average; not to be exceeded more than 35 times a year
40
Annual average
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 118
It is a requirement of the Environment Act (1995) that Local Authorities (LAs) review current and future air quality within their area of jurisdiction under the system of Local Air Quality Management (LAQM). Any areas of relevant exposure where the AQLVs are not, or unlikely to be, achieved should be identified. Where it is anticipated that an AQLV will not be met, it is a requirement that an Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) be declared. Where an AQMA is declared, the LA is obliged to produce an Action Plan in pursuit of the achievement of the AQS Objectives.
8.2.2 National Planning Policy The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) published in 2012 sets out the Government’s planning policies for England and how these are expected to be applied (Ref 9-2). The NPPF revokes forty four planning documents including: Planning Policy Statement 23: Planning and Pollution Control. The Conserving and enhancing the natural environment section (Section 11) of the NPPF considers air quality and pollution. In the NPPF pollution is described as: ‘Anything that affects the quality of land, air, water or soils, which might lead to an adverse impact on human health, the natural environment or general amenity. Pollution can arise from a range of emissions, including smoke, fumes, gases, dust, steam, odour, noise and light.’ The following paragraphs (paragraphs: 109 bullet point 4, 110, 120 and 124) from NPPF Section 11 consider air quality and pollution: ‘The planning system should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by: preventing both new and existing development from contributing to or being put at unacceptable risk from, or being adversely affected by unacceptable levels of soil, air, water or noise pollution or land instability; and’ ‘In preparing plans to meet development needs, the aim should be to minimise pollution and other adverse effects on the local and natural environment. Plans should allocate land with the least environmental or amenity value, where consistent with other policies in this Framework.’ ‘To prevent unacceptable risks from pollution and land instability, planning policies and decisions should ensure that new development is appropriate for its location. The effects (including cumulative effects) of pollution on health, the natural environment or general amenity, and the potential sensitivity of the area or proposed development to adverse effects from pollution, should be taken into account. ...’ NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 119
‘Planning policies should sustain compliance with and contribute towards EU limit values or national objectives for pollutants, taking into account the presence of Air Quality Management Areas and the cumulative impacts on air quality from individual sites in local areas. Planning decisions should ensure that any new development in Air Quality Management Areas is consistent with the local air quality action plan.’ The NPPF is also accompanied by Technical Guidance to the National Planning Policy Framework. This document does not include any specific guidance for the assessment of air quality impacts from road schemes.
8.2.3 Local Planning Policy The proposed new Cherwell Local Plan (2006-2031) was submitted to the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government for formal Examination on 31st January 2014. In the meanwhile saved policies of the Adopted Cherwell Local Plan 1996 are used when making planning decisions. Policy ENV1 of the Adopted Cherwell Local Plan 1996 states that ‘Development which is likely to cause materially detrimental levels of noise, vibration, smell, smoke, fumes or other type of environmental pollution will not normally be permitted’ and that the Council will ‘seek to ensure that the amenities of the environment, and in particular the amenities of residential properties, are not unduly affected by development proposals which may cause environmental pollution, including that caused by traffic generation (Ref 8-3).
8.3
Methodology
8.3.1 Introduction Construction impacts will primarily be related to dust emissions that can result in health effects and enhanced dust soiling which can, without adequate mitigation, temporarily affect amenity use and, potentially, commercial operations. It is recognised that dust from construction activity can also cause statutory nuisance under the Environmental Protection Act 1990. Exhaust emissions from on-site plant and from vehicles accessing the works may also affect local air quality; this will be in a similar way to that described for operational traffic effects. Construction dust and emissions are assessed following the Institute of Air Quality Management (IAQM) document ‘Guidance on the Assessment of the Impacts of Construction on Air Quality and the Determination of their Significance’ (Ref 8-4).
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 120
Operational impacts may be negative and/or positive and will arise from changes in exposure to traffic pollutants in response to new patterns of traffic flows on local road networks. This will give rise to local changes in concentrations of NO2 and PM10. Operational air quality impacts have been assessed in accordance with Environmental Protection UK guidance ‘Development Control: Planning for Air Quality’ (2010) (Ref 8-5) and Local Air Quality Management Technique Guidance (LAQM.TG (09)) (Ref 8-6). It is proposed to include an energy centre with a biomass boiler and two gas fired Combined Heat and Power (CHP) plants within the development. These will result in atmospheric emissions of combustion gases, including NO2 and PM10. Although the exact energy centre specification had not been finalised at the time of assessment, the preliminary energy strategy was reviewed in order to provide an indication of likely emissions. Potential impacts have been screened using the methodology outlined in LAQM.TG(09) and the Environmental Protection UK document ‘Biomass and Air Quality Guidance for Local Authorities’ (Ref 8-7).
8.3.2 Study Area Construction Dust The Institute of Air Quality Management ‘Guidance on the assessment of dust from demolition and construction’ (Ref 8-4) (2014) states that a construction dust assessment will normally be required where there is:
a ‘human receptor’ within 350 m of the boundary of the site; or 50 m of the route(s) used by construction vehicles on the public highway, up to 500 m from the site entrance(s).
an ‘ecological receptor’ within 50 m of the boundary of the site; or 50 m of the route(s) used by construction vehicles on the public highway, up to 500 m from the site entrance(s).
Should sensitive receptors not be present within the relevant distances then negligible impacts would be expected and further assessment is not necessary.
Road Vehicle Exhaust Emissions The study area assessed dependent on the change development. The proposed on existing receptors located
within the air quality assessment is in traffic flows as a result of the development has the potential to impact on roads affected by the development.
The criteria presented in the Environmental Protection UK guidance ‘Development Control: Planning for Air Quality’ (2010), has been used to determine which roads need to be included in the air quality NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 121
assessment. As traffic associated with the proposed development is likely to affect air quality, the following criteria have been used to define roads considered in the air quality assessment:
Roads with a traffic change in Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) flow of 10% or more as a result of the development (5% change if the roads affected reside within an AQMA).
Roads with a change in Heavy Duty Vehicle AADT flow of 200 or more as a result of the development.
The criteria above were applied to roads with a traffic flow of 10,000 AADT or more. In addition to existing receptors pollutant concentrations at locations of proposed receptors will need to be modelled to determine whether any mitigation measures need to be included in the scheme design in future EIAs.
8.3.3 Establishment of Baseline Conditions Baseline air quality conditions in Bicester have been defined from a number of sources. These include:
Review of CDC LAQM reports.
Review of the UK National Air Quality Archive (www.airquality.co.uk).
Review of the Department for Food, Environment and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) LAQM website (www.defra.gov.uk/environment/quality/air/airquality/local/inde x.htm).
In order to establish baseline conditions in the vicinity of the proposed development, a six month NO2 diffusion tube survey has been commissioned in agreement with the Environmental Protection Officer (EPO) at Cherwell District Council. The monitoring locations are shown in Drawing 8-1. This is being undertaken to establish background concentrations in the area and to identify a current baseline along roads where the proposed development will be, along roads in the vicinity of the proposed development and ultimately in order to verify the modelling. The results of this monitoring are presented in Table 8-5 of the baseline section. Background concentrations from the DEFRA air quality website have been obtained for this submission, see Table 8-4.
8.3.4 Assessment of Effects Construction Dust Emissions Construction works can affect local air quality through the generation and subsequent deposition of construction dust. Dust deposition on NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 122
windows, properties, and cars can result in complaints through surface soiling. The amount of dust generated from construction activities depends on:
the type of materials handled;
the length and scale of operation;
the type of activities performed on-site;
the weather conditions; and
the effectiveness of dust suppression measures.
Furthermore, the perception determined by factors such as:
of
dust
from
surface
soiling
is
the colour contrast between the dust and the surface on which it settles;
the nature of the illumination of the surface;
the presence of a nearby clean 'reference' surface against which comparisons can be made;
the personal experience and expectation of the observer; and
adverse publicity influencing the expectation of the observer.
The above factors mean that it is not possible to reliably predict the number of dust complaints that will occur during the construction phase of a Project. It is however possible to estimate the distance from dust generating activities over which dust complaints may occur. Studies of dust impacts from quarrying, waste disposal and construction operations indicate rapid fall-off in downwind dust concentrations with increasing distance from the source due to particle dispersion and deposition. In order to identify suitable mitigation measures for the control of construction dust emissions, risk assessment will be undertaken in accordance with the Institute of Air Quality Management (IAQM) document ‘Guidance on the Assessment of the Impacts of Construction on Air Quality and the Determination of their Significance’ (Ref 8-4).
Construction Vehicle Emissions The construction phase may also affect air quality as a result of vehicular emissions from construction worker and haulage vehicles. In terms of haulage vehicles, the construction phase is not expected to lead to an increase of 200 HGVs per day on the local road network and therefore construction traffic effects are not likely to be significant, as defined in the EPUK guidance (Ref 8-5), which stipulates that an assessment of construction vehicles is only required for: NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 123
“large, long term construction sites that would generate large HGV flows (greater than 200 movements per day) over a period of a year or more”. The construction vehicle numbers will be verified once further information regarding the development becomes available.
Road Vehicle Exhaust and Energy Centre Emissions Methodology For future EIAs, the impacts of road vehicle emissions on the exposure to NO2 and PM10 of existing and future receptors will be modelled using the dispersion model ADMS (Roads). The model uses detailed information regarding traffic flows on the local road network together with meteorological data to predict pollutant concentrations at specific locations selected by the user. The impacts of the proposed energy centre emissions on the exposure to NO2 and PM10 of existing and future receptors will be modelled using the using the United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) dispersion model, AERMOD. AERMOD is a development from the ISC3 dispersion model and incorporates improved dispersion algorithms and pre-processors to integrate the impact of meteorology and topography within the modelling output. AERMOD is routinely used throughout the world for the prediction of pollutant dispersion and results are accepted within the UK by the Environment Agency and DEFRA. The model utilises hourly meteorological data , it estimates the concentration for each source and receptor combination for each hour of input meteorology, and calculates user-selected long-term and short-term averages, for comparison with the relevant AQS Objectives.
Significance Criteria The significance criteria for predicted road vehicle exhaust and energy centre emissions are outlined in the Environmental Protection UK ‘Development Control: Planning for Air Quality (2010 update)’. The method for defining the magnitude of impact is outlined in Table 8-2. Table 8-2
Definition of Impact Magnitude
Magnitude of Change
Change in Annual Average NO2 or PM10 Concentration (µg/m3)
Change in Number of Days with PM10 Concentrations Greater than 50µg/m3
Large
Greater than 4.0
More than 4
Medium
2.0 – 4.0
2–4
Small
0.4 – 2.0
1–2
Imperceptible
Less than 0.4
Less than 1
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 124
The guidance also provides descriptors for potential impacts based on predicted concentrations and magnitude of change. These are outlined in Table 8-3. Table 8-3
Impact descriptors
Prediction with Development
Predicted Magnitude of Change Small
Medium
Large
Above AQLV
Slight
Moderate
Substantial
Slight
Moderate
Moderate
Negligible
Slight
Slight
Negligible
Negligible
Slight
Annual average greater than 40µg/m3
More than 35-days greater than 50µg/m3
Just below AQLV
Annual average 36 40µg/m3
32 to 35-days greater than 50µg/m3
Below AQLV
Annual average 30 36µg/m3
26 to 32-days greater than 50µg/m3
Well below AQLV
Annual average below 30µg/m3
Less than 26-days greater than 50µg/m3
Finally, the document provides guidance on determining the overall air quality significance of a proposed development. The following factors are identified for consideration by the assessor:
Number of properties affected by slight, moderate or major air quality impacts and a judgement on the overall balance.
Where new exposure is introduced into an existing area of poor air quality, then the number of people exposed to levels above the objective or limit value will be relevant.
The magnitude of changes and the descriptions of the impacts at the receptors.
Whether or not an exceedence of an objective or limit value is predicted to arise in the study area where none existed before or an exceedence area is substantially increased.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 125
Whether or not the study area exceeds an objective or limit value and this exceedence is removed or the exceedence area is reduced.
The extent to which an objective or limit value is exceeded e.g. an annual average NO2 concentration of 41µg/m3 should attract less significance than an annual average of 51µg/m3.
It should be noted that the determination of significance relies on professional judgement and reasoning should be provided as far as practicable.
8.4
Baseline Conditions A review of the CDC Air Quality Updating and Screening Assessment and Progress Report has been undertaken. CDC have declared one AQMA for exceedences of annual mean nitrogen dioxide concentrations at Hennef Way. CDC has also identified that an additional three other areas where an AQMA should be declared for exceedences of annual mean nitrogen dioxide concentrations following Detailed Assessments (Horsefair/North Bar, Banbury; Kings End/Queens Avenue, Bicester; and Bicester Road, Kidlington) in the district. The proposed AQMA at Kings End/Queens Avenue, Bicester is the closest AQMA to the proposed site at a distance of 1.5 km southeast of the development. All other pollutants apart from nitrogen dioxide have been found to be below the AQS Objectives. CDC has one continuous automatic monitor but this is located in Banbury, a significant distance from Bicester. CDC operates a network of 38 diffusion tubes in the district, including nine in the Bicester area, of which the 2006 to 2012 annual average results are presented in Table 8-4 and exceedances are highlighted in bold. Table 8-4 Annual Average bias-adjusted NO2 diffusion tube results in Bicester as managed by CDC
Location
Site type *
2006 (µg/m3 )
2007 (µg/m 3 )
2008 (µg/m3 )
2009 (µg/m3 )
2010 (µg/m3 )
2011 (µg/m3)
2012 (µg/
Villiers Rd
UB
-
-
-
-
26.8
19
20.5
Kings End West
K
-
-
-
-
36.5
30.1
31.1
Kings End S
R
-
-
-
-
51.3
49.5
49
Kings End N
R
-
-
-
-
46.2
43.9
46
Field St
K
-
-
-
-
46.2
42.9
41.6
North St
K
-
-
-
-
44.1
46.1
45.6
Queens
K
-
-
43.6
44.1
46
42.9
45
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 126
Site type *
2006 (µg/m3 )
2007 (µg/m 3 )
2008 (µg/m3 )
2009 (µg/m3 )
2010 (µg/m3 )
2011 (µg/m3)
2012 (µg/
Market Square
K
34.6
34.9
35.4
31.7
37.2
35.7
45.6
Tamarisk Gardens
UB
22.2
21.6
22.3
19.7
22.3
22.3
17.6
Location Avenue (Triplicate)
* UB = urban background, K = kerbside, R = roadside, RB = rural background ** All results provisional
The monitoring data suggests that exceedences of the annual average NO2 objective have occurred at six of the nine sites where monitoring was undertaken in 2012. Tamarisk Gardens monitoring location is closest to the proposed development, on the edge of Bicester with the diffusion tube located approximately 30 metres back from the A4095. This indicates that at background locations away from roads, the concentrations are significantly below the annual average objective for NO2. Site specific monitoring for NO2 was undertaken in 2010 and began in August 2010. The results are presented in Table 8-5 and monitoring locations illustrated in Drawing 8-1. Table 8-5 Six month nitrogen dioxide diffusion tube survey data
Mean NO2 concentration (µg/m3) Period Mean
Location
Site type *
Aug 2010
Sept 2010
Oct 2010
Nov 2010
Dec 2010
Jan 2011
B1
K
15.7
-
27.6
29.0
-
-
24.1
B2
R
16.1
21.8
26.6
30.7
30.8
35.1
26.9
B3
R
-
20.5
24.8
30.8
27.9
30.3
26.9
B4
R
18.5
24.0
29.1
35.3
38.1
31.1
29.4
B5
UB
19.9
23.7
30.6
29.7
39.2
36.2
29.9
B6
R
22.5
29.2
30.5
36.4
32.5
35.8
31.2
B7
RB
18.1
19.7
23.4
29.8
32.6
29.1
25.5
B8
RB
-
16.9
23.9
23.1
39.5
26.1
25.9
B9
RB
27.0
30.6
35.3
-
-
36.4
32.3
B10
R
36.1
37.0
48.9
37.9
49.7
58.9
44.8
B11
R
23.4
32.8
35.9
38.3
41.6
38.4
35.1
B12
UB
-
-
-
-
36.6
51.4
44.0
B13
R
23.6
27.2
36.3
40.4
35.5
37.0
33.3
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 127
Mean NO2 concentration (µg/m3) Period Mean
Location
Site type *
Aug 2010
Sept 2010
Oct 2010
Nov 2010
Dec 2010
Jan 2011
B14
R
21.3
29.3
33.9
35.2
39.0
39.6
33.1
B15
R
17.8
22.7
27.8
35.3
38.2
33.5
29.2
* UB = urban background, K = kerbside, R = roadside, RB = rural background
Due to the inherent bias associated with passive NO2 diffusion tubes it is necessary to utilise an adjustment factor obtained from the collocation with an automatic analyser which can be applied to the diffusion tube results. A factor of 0.91 was obtained from the National Diffusion Tube Bias Adjustment spreadsheet (version 3/11) available from DEFRA for the analytical laboratory used for the study, Staffordshire Scientific Services, and used for the bias adjustment of the raw monitoring data. In addition to bias adjustment, the NO2 concentrations presented in Table 8-7 are in essence a period mean. However, period means are not directly comparable with annual mean Air Quality Strategy (AQS) Objectives and therefore all monitoring results have been adjusted based upon the methodology contained within Local Air Quality Management Guidance LAQM.TG(09). The approach is based on the principle that patterns in pollutant concentrations are usually consistent across broad regions and therefore considers the relationship between period means and annual means at monitoring stations in the same region as the site of interest. Error! Reference source not found.Error! Reference source not found.Table 8-6 presents ‘urban background’ monitoring locations within the vicinity of the site and the relationship between period and annual mean NO2 concentrations. Urban background monitoring sites are characterised as urban locations distanced from sources and broadly representative of city-wide background concentrations. Data from these sites is considered by Local Air Quality Management Guidance LAQM.TG(09) to be suitable for the adjustment of shortterm diffusion tube monitoring survey results to annual mean concentrations. Table 8-6
Period to Annual Mean NO2 Concentration Factors
Monitoring Site
NO2 Concentration (µg/m3) 2010 Annual Mean
Period Mean
Ratio Annual: Period
Oxford St Ebbes
22.3
23.8
0.94
Reading New Town
25.0
30.5
0.82
Northampton
20.6
24.0
0.86
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 128
Monitoring Site
Leamington Spa
NO2 Concentration (µg/m3) 2010 Annual Mean
Period Mean
Ratio Annual: Period
28.4
30.0
0.95
Mean Value
0.89
Applying the calculated factor of 0.89 to the bias adjusted monitoring results provides an estimation of the 2010 annual mean NO 2 concentration, as shown in Table 8-7. Table 8-7
Adjusted Period to Annual Mean NOx, Concentrations
Location*
NO2 Concentration (µg/m3) Period Mean
Bias Adjusted Period Mean
2010 Annual Mean
B1
24.1
21.9
19.5
B2
26.9
24.4
21.8
B3
26.9
24.4
21.8
B4
29.4
26.7
23.8
B5
29.9
27.2
24.2
B6
31.2
28.3
25.2
B7
25.5
23.2
20.6
B8
25.9
23.6
21.0
B9
32.3
29.4
26.2
B10
44.8
40.7
36.3
B11
35.1
31.9
28.4
B12
44.0
40.0
35.6
B13
33.3
30.3
27.0
B14
33.1
30.1
26.8
B15
29.2
26.6
23.7
* See Drawing 8-1
As indicated in Table 8-9, the annual mean NO2 concentration at all diffusion tube monitoring locations was below the relevant AQS Objective of 40µg/m3. In addition to the monitoring data, background concentration from the DEFRA air quality website have been obtained corresponding to the location of the development itself. The highest and lowest background NO2 and PM10 concentrations over the proposed development are presented in Table 8-8. NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 129
Table 8-8 Highest and lowest background NO2 and PM10 concentrations over the proposed development
R e c e p t o r s
British National Grid Reference
Concentration (µg/m3)
Minimum background NO2
458500, 225500
10.43
Maximum background NO2
458500, 222500
14.04
Minimum background PM10
458500, 224500
15.31
Maximum background PM10
455500, 224500
16.96
The locations of the nearest sensitive receptors are shown in Table 89. These receptors could be impacted on by the proposed development and the impacts of the development on these receptors may be included as part of the detailed application assessment. Table 8-9
Nearby Sensitive Receptors
Receptor
Receptor type
Bure Park Primary School
Primary School
Kings Meadow County Primary School
Primary School
12 Derwent Road
Residential
Busy Bees Nursery
Nursery
14 Saffron Close
Residential
Lodge on B4100
Residential
72 Isis Avenue
Residential
British National Grid X Coordinate
British National Grid Y Coordinate
Distance from Development (metres)
457951
223802
518
456998
223422
178
456784
223358
50
458080
223807
577
457724
224207
55
457904
225371
39
456499
222903
46
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 130
8.5
Receptor
Receptor type
Bicester Community Hospital
Hospital
British National Grid X Coordinate
British National Grid Y Coordinate
Distance from Development (metres)
457982
222327
1611
Design and Mitigation
8.5.1 Construction The construction activities have the potential to impact on existing and proposed receptors. At this stage details of the construction activities are not available. Depending on the risk of dust impacts which would be assessed in the Construction Dust Impact Assessment, appropriate mitigation measures will be selected from the Institute of Air Quality Management (IAQM) document 'Guidance on the Assessment of the Impacts of Construction on Air Quality and the Determination of their Significance' (Ref 8-4). These might include using water as a dust suppressant where applicable and effective vehicle cleaning and specific fixed wheel washing on leaving site. A Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) detailing the proposed construction methods and mitigation measures will also be submitted to CDC prior to the commencement of construction. Monitoring of depositional and suspended dust will be undertaken during construction in order that trigger levels may be set where mitigation must be increased to protect the health and amenity of local residents. These monitoring requirements should be agreed in advance with the EPO at CDC.
8.5.2 Operation At this stage the operational impacts are unknown as the traffic data is not available to determine the development impacts. The impacts of the development will be determined during the detailed application stage. It is anticipated that measures will be incorporated into the development to reduce its impacts on air quality. This would include a Travel Plan which include measures designed to promote sustainable travel. The measures which are likely to be included are outlined below:
Land use containment
Working from home
Branding and Marketing/ Travel Awareness Promotions
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 131
Personalised Travel Planning
Individual Travel Plan – Primary School
Individual Travel Plans – Other Non Residential Uses
Parking Strategy
Car Club
Car sharing
Bus Service
Bus Infrastructure
Rail Linkages
New Occupant Travel Incentives
Walking Routes
Cycling Routes and storage
Cycle Purchase/ Hire and Facilities for Cyclists
In addition, the implementation of electric car charging points, assisted purchase of electric vehicles and the use of Hybrid buses will also reduce the emissions of pollutants from the type of vehicles used as part of the site.
8.6
Assessment of Effects
8.6.1 Construction The construction impact will be assessed during the detailed planning application. It is however worth noting that the potential dust impacts are considered to be, local, occasional, and temporary in nature. The impacts that are likely to occur throughout the construction phase are likely to be short-term as impacts will only occur during the construction phase. The impacts will be localised as impacts are not predicted to occur beyond 350m from the site boundary, occasional as impacts would only occur when specific activities and meteorological conditions combine to cause the predicted level of impact at sensitive locations, and temporary as there is unlikely to be any lasting impacts after construction is complete. It should be noted that the potential for impacts would depend significantly on the distance between the dust generating activity and receptor location. With the standard mitigation measures in place the developments impacts during construction will be reduced.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 132
8.6.2 Operation Road Vehicle Exhaust Emissions Operational phase traffic emissions will be assessed during the detailed application. It is therefore not possible at this stage to predict the magnitude of any impacts on local air quality. A detailed dispersion model ADMS (Roads) will be used to assess the operation impacts of the development.
Energy Centre Emissions An energy centre is proposed as part of the development. The impact of the energy centre will be assessed during the detailed application. The emission rates for both NOx and PM10 will be required in addition to the characteristics of the stack. A detailed dispersion model will be used to assess the energy centre impacts.
Waste Water Treatment Works A waste water treatment works (WwTW) will be built as part of the proposed development. This has the potential to impact on both existing and proposed receptors in relation to odour. The impact of the WwTW will therefore be assessed using a detailed dispersion modelling as part of the detailed application.
8.7
Cumulative Effects Cumulative effects could result from the effects of the development in combination with the effects from other developments. Potential cumulative effects on air quality during both the construction and operation phases will be assessed as part of the detailed planning application stage. This will include consideration of cumulative traffic data, which is currently not available.
8.8
Summary At this stage there is limited information on the potential impact of the proposed development in the context of air quality assessment. The impacts of the development will need to be assessed during the detailed application once the traffic data, emissions data and data relating to the WwTW is available. Given the size of the development it does have the potential to impact on local air quality as a result of increases in traffic using the local road network.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 133
9
Noise and Vibration
9.1
Introduction The purpose of the noise and vibration assessment is to identify potential noise and vibration impacts associated with the proposed Bicester Masterplan development and assess the suitability of the site for residential and other use. Operational noise impacts included an assessment of road traffic noise associated with the development and noise from operational plant to be installed on site. Further assessment of noise from operational plant would however be required once detail of the plant to be installed on site is known. A baseline noise and vibration survey has been carried out to establish existing conditions on site. The vibration baseline considered possible vibration impacts from the Chiltern main railway line on the Masterplan Site. The baseline noise assessment serves as a basis for assessing effects of construction noise and operational noise from the proposed development at receptors within the local area.
9.2
Regulatory Framework The noise and vibration assessment has been carried out in accordance with national legislation, policy and guidance as set out in Table 9-1 below. Table 9-1
Noise and Vibration Regulatory and Policy Framework
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester Masterplan Site Response
Noise Policy Statement for England (NPSE)
The Noise Policy Statement for England (published on 15 March 2010) sets out the long term vision of Government noise policy, which is to promote good health and a good quality of life through the management of noise within the context of Government policy on sustainable development.
Noise and vibration assessment protocol has been agreed with the Environmental Health Officer (EHO) and the assessment has followed recognised guidance to ensure that good health and quality of life have been promoted.
National Planning Policy (NPPF) formally published on 27 March 2012
The NPPF sets out core planning principles which "should underpin both planmaking and decision-taking. NPPF recognises that Noise pollution impacts negatively on people’s quality of life.
NPPF provides an overarching policy framework that has been embraced in assessing noise impacts.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 134
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester Masterplan Site Response
The Framework makes clear that planners must seek to avoid noise pollution as a result of new developments, and to protect tranquil areas prized for their peace and quiet. The NPPF does not provide prescriptive advice on how to achieve its principal objective, this being: “to avoid noise from giving rise to significant adverse impacts on health...” Footnote 27 of the NPPF mentions the Noise Policy Statement for England (NPSE)5. The NPSE does discuss health effects but does not provide any guidance in terms of noise limits or guideline values which would allow the assessment of impacts. Planning Policy Guidance Note 24 (PPG24)
PPG24 has been replaced by the NPPF. The NPPF does not however provide any guidance in terms of noise limits or guideline values which would allow the assessment of impacts. In the absence of noise limits in NPPF and NPSE, PPG24 remains the guidance to refer to when assessing noise impacts associated with new developments
Noise and vibration assessment protocol has been agreed with the EHO and PPG 24 assessment will inform site layout and location of residential components of the development.
PPG 24 gives guidance to local authorities in England on the use of their planning powers to minimise the adverse impact of noise and builds on the advice previously contained in DOE Circular 10/73. BS5228:1 2009 Code of practice for noise and vibration control
BS 5228 gives recommendations for basic methods of noise control
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
A Construction Environmental Management Plan would be developed and agreed with the
Page 135
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester Masterplan Site Response
on construction and open sites. Noise
relating to construction and open sites where work activities/operations generate significant noise levels, including industryspecific guidance.
EHO to ensure that construction noise is controlled using bestpractice methodologies.
BS 6472-1:2008: Guide to Evaluation of Human Exposure to Vibration in Buildings
BS 6472 provides guidance on predicting human response to vibration in buildings. Frequency weighting curves for human beings exposed to wholebody vibration are included, together with advice on measurement methods to be employed.
Noise and vibration assessment protocol has been agreed with EHO in accordance with this guide. Potential vibration impacts would inform site layout.
BS8223: 1999: Sound insulation and noise reduction for buildings –. Code of practice
BS8223 gives recommendations for the control of noise in and around buildings, and suggests appropriate criteria and limits for different situations. These criteria and limits are primarily
The suitable design range for good acoustic performance set out in BS 8233 would inform site layout and building design.
intended to guide the design of new or refurbished buildings undergoing a change of use Calculation of Road Traffic Noise 1988 (CRTN - ISBN 0 11 550847 3)
CRTN describes the procedures for calculating noise from road traffic. These procedures are necessary to enable entitlement under the Noise Insulation Regulations to be determined but they also provide guidance appropriate to the calculation of traffic noise for more general applications e.g. environmental appraisal of road schemes, highway design and land use planning.
Noise and vibration assessment protocol has been agreed with EHO in accordance with this guide. DMRB requires that the CRTN calculation methodology be used.
The Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB), volume 11, section 3, part 7
Advice Note provides guidance on the appropriate level of assessment to be used when assessing the noise and vibration impacts arising from all road
Noise and vibration assessment protocol has been agreed with EHO in accordance with this guide. Principles in DMRB have been used to assess road traffic noise impacts associated with the
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 136
Policy/Legislation
Cherwell Local Plan 1996
Requirements
NW Bicester Masterplan Site Response
projects, including new construction, improvements and maintenance.
development.
ENV3
Noise and vibration assessment protocol has been agreed with the EHO and PPG 24 assessment will inform site layout and location of residential components of the development.
Development sensitive to noise generated by road traffic will be i)
Refused where external noise levels exceed LAeq 16hr = 72 dB and LAeq 8hr = 66dB between 0700 and 2300 and 2300 to 0700 hours respectively
ii) Generally resisted where external noise levels between 0700 – 23 00 falls in the ranges LAeq 16hr = 63 to 72 dB and LAeq 8hr = 57 to 66dB respectively iii) Expected to achieve a specified internal acoustic environment when the external noise levels between 0700 to 2300 and 2300 to 0700 fall into the ranges LAeq 16hr = 55 to 63 dB and LAeq 8hr 45 to 57 dB respectively. ENV4 Development sensitive to noise generated by rail traffic will be i)
Refused where external noise levels exceed LAeq 16hr = 74 dB between 0700 - 2300 and LAeq 8hr = 66dB between 2300 to 0700 hours.
ii) Generally resisted where external noise levels between 0700 – 23 00 NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 137
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester Masterplan Site Response
falls in the ranges LAeq 16hr = 66 to 74 dB and LAeq 8hr = 59 to 66dB respectively iii) Expected to achieve a specified internal acoustic environment when the external noise levels between 0700 to 2300 and 2300 to 0700 fall into the ranges LAeq 16hr = 55 to 66 dB and LAeq 8hr 45 to 59 dB respectively. ENV5 Notwithstanding Policies ENV3 and ENV 4 Development sensitive to vibration will be resisted in locations where vibration levels are likely to affect material comfort of end users. 10.7 Government advice contained in PPG24 'Planning and Noise' states that noise sensitive developments should be separated from major sources of noise wherever practicable. The above policies seek to ensure that noise-sensitive developments such as new dwellings are not located in positions where they will be subject to severe noise pollution. Other classes of noise-sensitive development would include nursing homes, hostels, hospitals, hotels, residential colleges and schools. 10.8 Where there is a clear NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 138
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester Masterplan Site Response
need for noise sensitive development in a location satisfying the criteria described in clause (ii) of the above policies, development will be expected to achieve a constant specified internal acoustic environment, i.e.: the design is likely to have to incorporate acoustic mechanical ventilation. 10.9 Where individual noise events regularly exceed 82dB LAmax during the night-time period (23:00 - 07:00hrs) the criteria described in (ii) in the above policies shall apply. 10.10 The specific guidance contained in policies ENV3 and ENV4 must not be taken to mean that where noise levels are below those specified in clause (iii) of these policies, noise will not be a consideration. In these circumstances noise levels may be a material planning consideration depending on local circumstances and conditions and particularly where levels are approaching those specified in (iii) above. Control of Pollution Act 1974
The Control of Pollution Act 1974 Section 61 sets out procedures for those undertaking works to obtain ‘Prior Consent’ for construction works within
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Section 61 consent applications may be made to the local council to obtain prior consent for construction works and to agree noise limits for construction works. Page 139
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester Masterplan Site Response
agreed noise limits. The Noise Insulation Regulations 1975 (as amended 1988)
9.3
Regulation 5 provides relevant authorities with discretionary powers to provide noise insulation at dwellings to reduce the impact of construction noise.
Any requirements for Noise Insulation will be addressed once the detailed construction programme has been finalised.
Methodology
9.3.1 Introduction The noise and vibration assessment considers the suitability of the site for residential development in line with Policy Planning Guidance 24 (PPG 24) (Ref 9-1). The noise assessment also considers both construction and operational noise impacts associated with the proposed Masterplan Site development. The construction impacts were assessed in accordance with the provisions in BS 5228: 2009 +A1: 2014 (Ref 9-2). A baseline noise survey serves as a basis for the assessment of the suitability of the proposed Masterplan Site for development and for assessing construction and operational noise impacts. The operational impacts will arise from increased road traffic and from fixed plant and similar installations to be constructed on site. Operational traffic will be assessed during future EIAs using the provisions in the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Volume 11, Part 7, Section 3 Noise and Vibration (Ref 9-3). Noise from operational plant will be considered in accordance with the provisions in BS 4142: 1997 ‘Method for rating of industrial noise affecting mixed residential and industrial areas’ (BS4142) (Ref 9-4). The assessment of operational plant will be carried out once more detailed design information on plat to be installed on site is made available. The vibration assessment has considered the potential for vibration impacts from rail movements on human receptors in accordance with BS 6472 -1: 2008 ‘Guide to evaluation of human exposure to vibration in buildings: Vibration sources other than blasting’. (Ref 94).
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 140
9.3.2 Study Area In order to establish if the proposed Masterplan Development site would be suitable for residential use the extent of the study area covers all of the land within the boundary of the site. This is to ensure that noise levels across the site would comply with Planning Policy Guidance Note 24: Noise (PPG 24) (Ref 9-1). Baseline monitoring locations were agreed with Rob Lowther, the EHO for Cherwell District Council. It was agreed that noise measurements will be taken to reflect noise levels on a typical weekday. The LAeq,T; LA90; LA10; LAmin and LAmax were measured at all locations. Noise related terminology has been set out in the Appendices in Volume 3. To assess the operational impact due to road traffic noise, the study area has been extended to cover the local road network. The effects of increased traffic flows on roads within this study area have formed the basis for the assessment of noise impact upon existing receptors. An affected route is one where there is the possibility of a change of 1dB(A) or more between the ‘Do-Minimum’ or ‘Do-Something’ scenarios in the short-term or 3dB(A) or more in the long-term. This will be established once traffic data for the proposed development has been made available. To assess the impact from commercial activities (e.g. air conditioning plant) in accordance with BS 4142 (Ref 9-4) there would not be a study area as such but rather an assessment of the closest sensitive receptors to the noise sources in question.
9.3.3 Establishment of Baseline Conditions A full noise survey was undertaken at locations representative of the Masterplan Site. It was agreed that noise measurements would be taken to reflect noise levels on a typical weekday. In addition to the noise surveys, vibration measurements were taken at two locations along the railway line that passes through the site. The EHO for Cherwell District Council expressed concern that rail movements had the potential to generate noise and vibration levels that had the potential to impact on the Site. The measurement locations for the whole site are indicated in Drawing 9-1. An assessment of the site indicated that the dominant noise source across the site would be from road traffic noise. Noise monitoring was carried out at selected locations over a 24 hour period. The unattended (24 hour) monitoring locations were selected at the locations indicated on Drawing 9-1, denoted by the prefix LTN (Long Term Noise). NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 141
In addition, short term attended noise measurements (prefix STN) were taken along Bucknell Road and along the M40 motorway. The potential for noise impacts from the M40 were raised as a concern by Rob Lowther of Cherwell District Council. For the attended measurements daytime measurements were taken over a period of 3 hours and at night for 1 hour.
PPG 24 The assessment of whether the proposed site would be suitable for residual use was undertaken in accordance with Planning Policy Guidance Note 24 (PPG 24) (Ref 9-1). PPG 24 guides local authorities in England on the use of their planning powers to minimise the adverse impact of noise. It outlines the considerations to be taken into account in determining planning applications both for noise-sensitive developments and for those activities which generate noise. A recommended range of noise levels for different noise exposure categories (NECs) covering day and night-time periods in relation to road noise are provided in PPG 24. The NECs for road traffic sources are detailed in Table 9-2. Table 9-2 noise
Noise levels corresponding to the NEC for new dwellings relating to
Noise Exposure Category
Noise Source
Period
A
B
C
D
Day
<55
55-63
63-72
>72
Night*
<45
45-57
57-66
>66
Day
<55
55-66
66-74
>74
Rail Traffic
Night*
<45
45-59
59-66
>66
Mixed Sources
Day
<55
55-63
63-72
>72
[inc.industry]
Night*
<45
45-57
57-66
>66
Road Traffic
* when several events in any hour exceed 82 dBA Lmax "slow", the NEC should be "C" (unless it is already "D").
When considering an application in terms of noise, PPG 24 advises that local planning authorities should consider the advice presented in Table 9-3. Table 9-3
Significance of noise exposure category
NEC
Advice
A
Noise need not be considered as a determining factor in granting planning permission, although the noise level at the high end of the category should not be
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 142
NEC
Advice regarded as a desirable level.
B
Noise should be taken into account when determining planning applications and, where appropriate, conditions imposed to ensure an adequate level of protection against noise.
C
Planning permission should not normally be granted. Where it is considered that permission should be given, for example because there are no alternative quieter sites available, conditions should be imposed to ensure a commensurate level of protection against noise.
D
Planning permission should normally be refused.
To establish which relevant NEC the proposed site would fall into, noise monitoring was carried out as described above. The measured noise levels were corrected for distance from source to provide the sound pressure level at source. This data was inserted into IMMI, software for modelling and mapping noise from roads, railways, industrial, construction and other open sites, to produce noise contours for the site for both daytime and night-time that indicate the relevant NEC for various parts of the site.
Vibration Trains using the Chiltern main railway line have the potential to generate noise and vibration in the context of the Masterplan development Site. The vibration measurement locations are indicated as VIB 1 and VIB 2 on Drawing 9-1. The Network Rail Sectional Appendix for this rail route indicated that rail speed limits were uniform across the site. There is a major difference between the sensitivity of occupants of buildings when feeling vibration and the onset of levels vibration which are likely to cause damage to the building structure. Levels of vibration at which adverse comment is likely are below levels of vibration at which damage to the building is likely. Comments regarding building vibrations in residential situations are likely to arise from occupants when vibration levels are only slightly in excess of thresholds of perception. Vibration magnitudes that would normally result in adverse comment can sometimes be tolerated for temporary disturbances on infrequent, brief events such as a construction project. BS 6472 -1: 2008 (Ref 9-5) provides guidance on predicting the human response to vibration in buildings over the range 0.5 Hz to 80 Hz. The way in which people perceive building vibration depends on various factors, including the vibration frequency and direction. Perception thresholds for continuous whole body vibration vary widely NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 143
among individuals. BS 6472 states that the effect of building vibration on people is assessed by finding the appropriate vibration dose, and is best evaluated with the vibration dose value (VDV). BS 6472 sets out the threshold of vibration for humans together with the levels that are considered acceptable for the time of day and night and for the type of activity or building use. The values in Table 9-4 represent best judgement currently available and may be used for both vertical and horizontal vibration. BS 6472 sets out the criteria as ranges as members of the public are likely to exhibit differing susceptibility to vibration. Table 9-4 VDV ranges which may result in various probabilities of adverse comments within residential buildings (BS 6472)
Low probability of adverse comment m/s-
Adverse comment possible m/s-
Adverse comment probable m/s-
Residential buildings 16hour day
0.2 – 0.4
0.4 – 0.8
0.8 – 1.6
Residential buildings 8 hour night
0.1 – 0.2
0.2 – 0.4
0.4 – 0.8
Place and time
1.75
1.75
1.75
9.3.4 Assessment of Effects Traffic Noise Impacts Once traffic data for the proposed development has been made available, traffic noise impacts will be predicted using the technical memorandum issued by the Department of Transport and Welsh Office Calculation of Road Traffic Noise (CRTN) (Ref 9-6). CRTN was produced in 1975 and updated in 1988 and is still the standard method for calculating noise from a road in the UK. In the UK the standard index used for traffic noise is the LA10,18-hour level, which is quoted in decibels dB(A). DMRB HD213/11 provides classification for the magnitude of changes in road traffic noise. A change in road traffic noise of 1dB(A) in the short term (Do-Minimum to Do- Something in the baseline year) is the smallest that is considered perceptible. In the long term (Do-Minimum in the baseline year to Do-Something in the future assessment year) a 3dB(A) change is considered to be perceptible. The magnitudes of impact in the short and long term are therefore considered to be different. For road traffic noise the classification of magnitude of change is reproduced from HD213/11 for the short and long term respectively. The magnitude of noise impact from the project was be classified into levels of impact taken from DMRB as presented in Table 9-4 in order to assist with the interpretation of the project. NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 144
Table 9-4
Magnitude of Noise Change and associated impact
Magnitude of Change in the Short Term Noise Change LA10, 18 Hour
Magnitude of Impact
0
No Change
0.9
Negligible
1 - 2.9
Minor
3 - 4.9
Moderate
5+
Major
Magnitude of Change in the Long Term Noise Change LA10, 18 Hour
Magnitude of Impact
0
No Change
0.9
Negligible
1 - 2.9
Minor
3 - 4.9
Moderate
5+
Major
A noise model will be created using acoustic modelling software known as “IMMI” which calculated the noise level in terms of dB LA10 18 hour at each sensitive receptor at a default height of 1.5m. In accordance with DMRB simple assessment, a comparison between the following scenarios will be undertaken:
Do-minimum condition in the opening year against do-something condition in the opening assessment year.
Do-minimum condition in the opening year against do-something condition in the future assessment year.
Interim advice note 126/095 which was published by the Highways Agency in 2009 recommends that environmental receptor values are not used for road traffic noise assessments and that only magnitude is reported as currently the methodology has not been developed to assign a significance according to both the value of a resource and the magnitude of impact. Night-time Noise The prediction of Lnight, outside will be carried out in accordance with guidance provide in the TRL report ‘Converting the UK traffic noise index LA10,18-hr to EU noise indices for noise mapping’ (2002) (Ref 97). This report provides three methods for the prediction of Lnight, depending on the traffic data that is available.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 145
Method 1 is the preferred approach, and can be used where traffic data for each separate hour over the 24-hour period is available for each road link. Values of LA10,1-hour are calculated using CRTN, which can then be converted to LAeq,1hour values, and subsequently Lden values, using the relationships provided in the report. Method 2 can be used where detailed hourly traffic data is not available but traffic data is known for the relevant Lden time periods. The value of LA10,18-hour is calculated using CRTN, and converted to Lden time periods using the relationships provided. Method 3 is used where detailed hourly traffic data is not available. An ‘end-correction’ is applied to the CRTN calculated levels of LA10,18hour to convert to Lday, Levening and Lnight as required. For this Development method 3 has been used, based on the available traffic data. The relationship that is used to convert the calculated LA10,18-hour at each receptor to Lnight is presented in Equation 1. Equation 1:
LNight = 0.87 x LA10,18 Hour + 4.24
Operational Plant Noise impacts from operational plan to be installed on site will be assessed in accordance with British Standard BS 4142:1997. This is the standard used to determine the impacts of industrial noise upon residential units. The guidance provided within BS 4142 provides a method whereby the likelihood of complaints due to noise from industrial sources can be assessed. The standard advises that the existing background noise levels outside noise sensitive premises are compared with the rating noise levels from any nearby industrial activities. The rating noise level should include corrections for any acoustic character to the noise that makes it more readily discernible to a listener (e.g. whines, crashes, bangs etc). The background noise level (LA90) is the noise level that is exceeded for 90% of the monitoring period at the assessment location. For BS 4142 it is usual to measure the background noise level at the nearest noise sensitive receptor to the industrial noise source. The specific noise level is the LAeq produced by the noise source under investigation, measured as close as possible to the source, over a given reference time interval.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 146
The rating noise level is the specific noise level plus any adjustments for the acoustic characteristics of the noise as specified in clause 8.2 of BS4142. An adjustment of +5dB is applied when the specific noise has a discrete distinguishable tone or distinct impulsive characteristic. The greater the difference between rating level and background noise level, the greater the likelihood of complaints.
A difference of around +10 dB or more indicates that complaints are likely.
A difference of around + 5 dB is of marginal significance.
If the rating level is more than 10 dB below the measured background noise level then this is a positive indication that complaints are unlikely.
Construction Noise Construction noise impacts have been assessed in accordance with BS 5228: 2009 + A1:2004 (Code of practice for noise and vibration control on open and construction sites). BS 5228-1 gives recommendations for basic methods of noise control relating to construction and open sites. It applies to work activities and operations that generate significant noise levels. It also includes industry-specific guidance. BS 5228-2 deals with vibration control on construction and open sites. BS5228 also provides guidance concerning methods of predicting and measuring noise and assessing its impact on those exposed to it. The assessment of construction noise requires a detailed phasing of activities associated with preparation of the site and construction, including the duration of each phase. A detailed inventory of plant and equipment to be used during site preparation and construction would need to be provided, including plant and equipment used for temporary and permanent haul roads. Construction traffic movements would also need to be provided as well as an indication of likely routes for construction traffic movements. In the absence of the above information, assumptions were made regarding the type of plant that would typically be used for construction of this nature. Based on these assumptions noise impacts with distance from source were predicted in accordance with BS 5228. There are no legislative criteria for limiting noise levels from construction sites. Traditionally it was stipulated that noise levels between 07.00 and 19.00, outside the nearest window of the occupied room closest to the site boundary should not exceed 70 dB(A) in rural, suburban and urban areas away from main road traffic NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 147
and industrial noise; and 75 dB(A) in urban areas near main roads in heavy industrial areas. BS 5228: 2009 +A1: 2014, Annex E, sets out criteria for significance based upon noise change. The ABC method describes a threshold of significant effect at dwellings when the total noise level, rounded to the nearest decibel, exceeds a listed category value. If the total noise level (construction plus ambient pre-construction) exceeds the appropriate category value, then a significant effect is deemed to occur. The 2 – 5 dB(A) change method regards construction noise as significant if the total noise (pre-construction ambient plus construction noise) exceeds the pre-construction ambient noise by 5 dB or more, subject to lower cut-off values of 65 dB, 55 dB and 45 dB LAeq, Period, from construction noise alone, for the daytime, evening and night-time periods, respectively; and a duration of one month or more, unless works of a shorter duration are likely to result in significant impact. Criteria for assessing construction noise impacts have also been set out in the ‘Guidelines for Noise Impact Assessment’ (IEMA/IOA 2002) (Ref 9-8). Table 9-5
Criteria for the rating of noise impacts during construction
Significance Criteria
Noise Level dB LAeq
Substantial
Daytime noise levels at houses in excess of 75 dB LAeq (12 hour) or cause statutory nuisance to occur
Moderate
Daytime noise levels at houses in the range between 65 to 75 dB LAeq (12 hour)
Slight
Daytime noise levels at houses in the range between 55 to 65 dB LAeq (12 hour)
The criteria to be used for determining the significance of construction noise impacts will be agreed in consultation with the local EHO for Cherwell District Council once the construction strategy is determined by the contractor.
9.4
Baseline Conditions The assessment of whether the proposed Site would be suitable for residual use was undertaken in accordance with Planning Policy Guidance Note 24 (PPG 24).
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 148
PPG 24 guides local authorities in England on the use of their planning powers to minimise the adverse impact of noise. It outlines the considerations to be taken into account in determining planning applications both for noise-sensitive developments and for those activities which generate noise. An aerial overview of the site indicates that road traffic noise from the A4095 and B4100 would be the dominant noise source across the Masterplan Site. There are no dominant sources of industrial noise in close proximity to the site. The noise survey was carried out between 13th and 15th October 2010 at monitoring locations shown on Drawing 9-1. The noise measurements are summarised in Table 9-6. During monitoring, conditions were cloudy, with light winds at times. At no stage were wind speeds observed to have any influence on the noise measurements. All instruments were calibrated prior to measurement and again at the end of the survey period and zero drift was observed. Table 9-6
Date
Noise Survey Measurements
Location Period
LAmax
LAeq,T
LA90
LA10
Day 0700-2300
96.9
68.3
52.4
72.6
Night (23000700
86.6
61.6
39.0
64.9
Day 0700-2300
76.8
56.6
49.6
59.8
Night (23000700
67.8
51.6
44.7
54.7
Day 0700-2300
76.9
50.2
42.1
50.2
Night (23000700
76.8
46.6
38.3
45.8
Day 0700-2300
93.7
54.7
45.4
49.8
Night (23000700
90.7
60.9
40.4
46.2
Day 0700-2300
93.8
65.0
50.4
69.3
Night (23000700
80.4
56.2
36.6
59.4
Day 0700-2300
94.6
65.4
53.6
69.0
Night (23000700
83.8
57.7
47.9
59.4
Day
90.1
84.2
81.5
86.0
Night
86.6
73.6
55.8
78.1
24 Hour Measurements 13/10 to 14/10
13/10 to 14/10
13/10 to 14/10
13/10 to 14/10
13/10 to 14/10
13/10 to 14/10
LTN 1
LTN 2
LTN 3
LTN 4
LTN 5
LTN 6
Short Term Measurements 13/10/10 14/10/10
STN 1
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 149
Date
Location Period
LAmax
LAeq,T
LA90
LA10
14/10/10
STN 2
Day
78.1
58.8
43.5
63.2
Night
83.0
51.5
36.6
42.6
15/10/10
The noise measurements in Table 9-6 reflect noise levels close to sources such as roads. To accurately represent the noise exposure category (NEC) as set out in PPG 24, the measurements have been corrected for distance to source and IMMI has been used to produce noise contours across the Site. As an initial indication, the noise contours generated for the site have been compared against the criteria in BS 8233. BS 8233 describes a sound reduction of 10 to 15 dB for an open window. Assuming a worst case, with open windows in bedrooms during summer months, a sound reduction (Rw) of 10dB is likely. At night, noise levels on the majority of the site would be below 45dB. Taking the 10dB reduction into consideration, an indoor noise level of less than 35 dB is likely. According to the criteria in BS 8233, a design range LAeq,T of 35 dB would be regarded as Reasonable and 30 dB as Good. The fact that the site falls predominantly within NEC A and that the majority of the site is within the design range of Reasonable to Good in BS 8233 indicates that noise will not be considered as a determining factor in granting planning permission. High noise levels were recorded at short term noise monitoring location STN 1, along the M40 motorway. The noise contours generated in IMMI however indicate that motorway noise will not impact on the site due to distance from the motorway. Future noise levels will however be dependent on future traffic volumes taking into consideration any additional traffic associated with the proposed development and natural traffic growth.
Vibration The baseline vibration data collected at VIB 1 and VIB 2 on Drawing 9-1 is summarised in Table 9-7. Location VIB 1 was located approximately 10m from track side and is located on the same level of as the rail track. Location VIB-2 is located at the base of an embankment along an elevated section of the track. Table 9-7
Baseline Vibration Survey Data
Location
Period
X_VDV
Y_VDV
Z_VDV
VIB 1
Day (Average)
0.003108
0.00269
0.003312
Day (Max)
0.31267
0.28747
0.270625
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 150
VIB 2
Night (Average)
0.000164
0.000162
0.000214
Night (Max)
0.01327
0.01276
0.04189
Day (Average)
0.00115
0.001068
0.000678
Day (Max)
0.005555
0.00538
0.01592
Night (Average)
0.001132
0.00106
0.000543
Night (Max)
0.00353
0.0019
0.0109
The vibration data in Table 9-7 has been collected in 1 minute intervals to consider the vibration impacts from passing trains. He data has been presented as an average for both daytime and nighttime periods as well as the maximum or highest vibration level measured over 1 minute for both daytime and night-time. The recorded vibration data indicates that the 16-hour vibration levels are well below the 0.2 – 0.4 m.s-1.75 for daytime and the 0.1 to 0.2 m.s-1.75 for night-time that would indicate a low probability for adverse comment as set out in BS6472. Maximum 1-minute levels at VIB-1 are in the range of 0.2 -0.4m.s1.75 that indicates a low probability of adverse comment. It must however be remembered that the criteria are set for a 16 hour daytime and 8 hour night-time rather than for individual events. The 1-minute maximum vibration level at VIB-2 for daytime and night-time is below the criteria in BS6472 for a low probability of adverse comment.
9.5
Design and Mitigation
9.5.1 Construction Details regarding the construction methodologies are not currently available; therefore assumptions were made regarding typical plant that would be used for construction of this nature. Initial predictions indicate that the noise impact will be substantial adverse without mitigation at the receptors within 50 to 100m from source and moderate adverse for receptors beyond 300m. The following generic noise mitigation measures need to be implemented as appropriate for all works:
Construction activities would be confined to times of the day when they are least likely to be disturbing.
Careful selection of plant, construction methods and programming. Only plant conforming with relevant national or international standards, directives and recommendations on noise and vibration emissions would be used.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 151
Construction plant would be located, as far as is reasonably practicable, away from adjacent occupied buildings or as close as possible to noise barriers or site hoardings where these are located between the plant and the buildings.
Static and semi-static plant/equipment (e.g. compressors and generators) would be fitted with suitable enclosures where practicable.
Personnel would be instructed on best practice to reduce noise and vibration as part of their induction training and as required prior to specific work activities.
When plant is not being used, it would be shut down and not left to idle.
Vehicles would not wait or queue on the public highway or on the worksite with engines running.
Methods of work and vehicular routes would be selected with regard to minimising noise and vibration impact.
Where practicable, all audible warning systems and alarms would be designed to minimise noise. Broadband reverse alarms would be fitted to all vehicles.
With the phasing of construction, it is possible that certain areas of the development may be occupied while construction is still underway in adjacent areas. Where possible, the occupancy of completed phases of construction would be planned in such a way that there is a buffer between occupied areas and areas where construction is being carried out.
A noise monitoring programme would also be recommended to ensure that mitigation measures achieve the required results.
Vibration impacts would be minimised by selecting the most appropriate construction method and plant to be used. Should activities like piling be required, using vibro-piling instead of hammer piling would reduce vibration impacts.
A Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) would be developed to ensure that construction noise impacts are managed and that appropriate mitigation measures are implemented.
9.5.2 Operation Details regarding plant to be installed at the Energy Centre are not known but it is likely that plant such as fans, extractors, chiller units and air conditioning units will be installed at the commercial premises. At detailed design stage, further studies would be undertaken to agree noise limits for plant to be installed on site with the local EHO, and ensure that the design meets these limits. The key
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 152
issue would be to achieve a level below the night-time background (LA90) noise level. There are a number of generic methods that can be used to reduce plant noise on site, which would be utilised as appropriate to ensure that noise limits are met:
Screening can be an effective method in reducing noise from plant mounted on buildings. Reflective products like concrete have been the traditional material for noise barrier walls and HVAC screens and enclosures. Absorptive materials present a much more effective abatement option. Reflective products like concrete or brick simply bounce sound waves in different directions, while absorptive materials can significantly reducing overall noise.
Controlling the noise generated by an outdoor air conditioning unit can involve enclosing the unit within a frame and affixing outdoor sound blankets designed to prevent airborne noise from bleeding through. The frame may be constructed using a number of materials, including wood, steel or iron, as long as the structure is capable of supporting the heavyweight sound blankets that will be affixed to it.
Since air conditioning units cannot be completely enclosed, sound reduction treatments will not result in a complete deadening of the noise. However, such partial enclosure treatments are extremely effective at preventing transmission of a majority of the noise produced by an air conditioning unit. Results will vary depending upon the extent of the enclosure, but such treatments can affect an average 10-12 dB reduction in noise transmission.
Fan noise can be controlled through use of traditional techniques such as silencers and enclosures.
Select the appropriate low-noise equipment. In addition to the rational design of the air conditioning system, the use of advanced low-noise equipment, design of air ducts and the flow rate of chilled water are also key to reducing air-conditioning system noise.
Air conditioning units and ventilation systems can generate unacceptable noise within buildings if installed incorrectly. Air conditioning units can be fitted with damping spring to prevent structure borne noise. Soft connections and joints should be used for fan duct connection and water pipes.
Air conditioning ducts should be located next to building spaces that are less sensitive such as staircases and storage areas. Duct work is like an open channel to transmit sound. Addition of a baffle box and/or plenum that is lined with absorbing material to
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 153
both the trunk and return of the HVAC unit would serve to reduce noise levels
9.6
Assessment of Effects
9.6.1 Construction As discussed previously, assumptions have been made regarding the plant and equipment to be used during each phase of construction. The assessment has also assumed a free-field for propagation of noise across hard ground, thereby presenting a worst-case. The noise levels at the selected receptor locations have been predicted using the sound pressure levels for the plant as described in BS 5228: 2009 Part 1. The sound pressure levels in BS 5228 have been presented as a LAeq at 10m (Table 9-8). A high percentage ontime has been assumed so as to present a possible worst case. Table 9-8 List of construction plant and associated sound pressure level (LAeq) in dB at 10m.
Plant
BS5228 Table Reference
Percentage On Time
Lp at 10m (LAeq dB)
Road Planer
Table C.5 No.7
70
82
Tracked Excavator
Table C.5 No. 18
70
80
Dozer
Table C.5 No. 12
60
77
Dumpers
Table C4 No. 9
60
77
Vibratory Roller (22t)
Table C5 No. 28
60
77
Asphalt Paver
Table C5 N0. 33
60
75
Diesel Generator
Table C4 No. 84
100
74
Delivery Lorry
Table C.2 No.35
70
80
Tracked Mobile Crane
Table C4 No.52
60
75
Telescopic Handler
Table C4 No.54
75
79
Wheeled Loader
Table C2 No. 26
75
79
Tower Crane
Table C4 No.49
60
77
Concrete Saw
Table C4 N0. 71
10
85
Compressor
Table C5 No.5
80
75
Excavator
Table C5 No.34
75
82
Roller Compactor
Table C.5 No.29
60
76
Water Pump
Table C.2 No.45
75
65
Concrete Pump & Concrete mixer truck discharging
Table C.4 No. 28 80
79
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 154
Plant
BS5228 Table Reference
Percentage On Time
Lp at 10m (LAeq dB)
Poker Vibrator
Table C.4 No. 33
80
78
Percussion Drill
Table C4 N0. 69
40
85
Circular Saw
Table C4 No.72
40
79
Angle Grinder
Table C4 No.93
40
80
Welder
Table C3 No.31
40
73
The construction noise impacts have been calculated using the following formula as described in BS5228:
Where: Kh
=
the correction for propagation across hard ground
R
=
the distance to the receptor location
r
=
the distance of 10 m at which the SPL has been measured
A possible worst case has been presented by considering propagation across hard ground and by not considering screening afforded by topographical features, buildings or other structures. The predictions also assume that all the plant will run simultaneously, which is most unlikely. Once a detailed construction programme is available, the possible overlap of construction activities can be considered. Construction will commence with mobilisation to site, involving delivery of plant and equipment and the preparation of site compounds. The noise impacts associated with this activity are shown in Table 9-9. Table 9-9
Predicted noise levels (LAeq,1h) during mobilisation to site
Plant
Total Number SPL @ 10m
Delivery Lorry
4
Tracked Mobile Crane
1
Telescopic Handler
1
Wheeled Loader
1
Total SPL @ 20m
Total SPL @ 50m
Total SPL @ 100m
Total SPL @ 200m
Total SPL @ 500m
84.5
78.5
70.5
64.5
58.5
44.5
72.8
66.8
58.8
52.8
46.8
32.8
77.8
71.7
63.8
57.8
51.7
37.8
77.8
71.7
63.8
57.8
51.7
37.8
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 155
Plant
Total Number SPL @ 10m
Total SPL @ 20m
Total SPL @ 50m
Total SPL @ 100m
Total SPL @ 200m
Total SPL @ 500m
Dozer
1
78.8
72.7
64.8
58.8
52.7
38.8
Dumpers
2
77.8
71.8
63.8
57.8
51.8
37.8
Diesel Generator
1
74.0
60.0
60.0
54.0
48.0
26.0
87.6
73.6
73.6
67.6
61.6
39.7
Total
Site clearance would typically involve the use of earth moving equipment and dumpers. The associated noise impacts with distance from source are shown in Table 9-10. Table 9-10 Predicted noise levels (LAeq,1h) during site clearance
Plant
Quantity
Total SPL @ 10m
Total SPL @20m
Total SPL @ 50m
Total SPL @ 100m
Total SPL @ 200m
Total SPL @ 500m
78.5
72.4
64.5
58.5
52.4
38.5
77.5
71.4
63.5
57.5
51.4
37.5
Dumpers
2
Tracked Excavator
1
Lorry
1
78.5
72.4
64.5
58.5
52.4
38.5
Tower Crane
1
74.8
68.8
60.8
54.8
48.8
34.8
Dozer
1
74.8
68.8
60.8
54.8
48.8
34.8
Compressor
2
77.0
71.0
63.1
57.0
51.0
37.0
Diesel Generator
1
74.0
68.0
60.0
54.0
48.0
34.0
85.2
79.2
71.2
65.2
59.2
45.2
Total
A number of underground services will be installed on site, requiring excavation and trenching. The associated noise impacts with distance from source are indicated in Table 9-11. Table 9-11 Predicted noise levels (LAeq,1h) during installation of underground services
Plant
Quantity
Excavator
2
Telescopic Handler
1
Dozer
1
Total Total Total SPL @ SPL SPL @ 10m @20m 50m
Total SPL @ 100m
Total SPL @ 200m
Total SPL @ 500m
83.8
77.7
69.8
63.8
57.7
43.8
77.8
71.7
63.8
57.8
51.7
37.8
78.8
72.7
64.8
58.8
52.7
38.8
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 156
Plant
Quantity
Total Total Total SPL @ SPL SPL @ 10m @20m 50m
Total SPL @ 100m
Total SPL @ 200m
Total SPL @ 500m
Dumpers
2
77.8
71.8
63.8
57.8
51.8
37.8
Delivery Lorry
2
81.5
75.4
67.5
61.5
55.4
41.5
Roller Compactor
1
73.8
67.8
59.8
53.8
47.8
33.8
Water Pump
2
66.8
60.7
52.8
46.8
40.7
26.8
Compressor
2
77.0
71.0
63.1
57.0
51.0
37.0
Generator
1
74.0
68.0
60.0
54.0
48.0
34.0
88.0
81.9
74.0
68.0
61.9
48.0
Total
Plant that would typically be used during construction of roads on the development site and the associated noise level with distance from source is shown in Table 9-12. Table 9-12 Predicted noise levels (LAeq,1h) during road construction
Plant
Total Number SPL @ 10m
Road Planer
1
Tracked Excavator
1
Dozer (Spreading fill)
1
Dumpers
2
Vibratory Roller (22t)
1
Asphalt Paver
1
Diesel Generator
1
Total
Total SPL @ 20m
Total SPL @ 50m
Total SPL @ 100m
Total SPL @ 200m
Total SPL @ 500m
80.5
74.4
66.5
60.5
54.4
40.5
78.5
64.5
64.5
58.5
52.4
30.5
74.8
60.8
60.8
54.8
48.8
26.8
77.8
63.8
63.8
57.8
51.8
29.8
74.8
60.8
60.8
54.8
48.8
26.8
72.8
58.8
58.8
52.8
46.8
24.8
74.0
60.0
60.0
54.0
48.0
26.0
85.4
71.4
71.4
65.4
59.4
37.4
Noise impacts associated with the construction of buildings and other structures on site are shown in Table 9-13.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 157
Table 9-13 Predicted noise levels (LAeq,1h) during construction of buildings
Plant
Total Quantity SPL @ 10m
Total SPL @20m
Total SPL @ 50m
Total SPL @ 100m
Total Total SPL @ SPL @ 200m 500m
77.5
71.4
63.5
57.5
51.4
37.5
72.0
66.0
58.0
52.0
46.0
32.0
74.8
68.8
60.8
54.8
48.8
34.8
77.8
71.7
63.8
57.8
51.7
37.8
78.0
72.0
64.1
58.0
52.0
38.0
Tracked Excavator
1
Diesel Generator
1
Dumpers
1
Telescopic Handler
1
Concrete Pump & Concrete mixer truck discharging
1
Poker Vibrator
2
80.0
74.0
66.1
60.0
54.0
40.0
Tower Crane
2
77.8
71.8
63.8
57.8
51.8
37.8
Compressor
2
77.0
71.0
63.1
57.0
51.0
37.0
86.4
80.4
72.4
66.4
60.4
46.4
Total
Construction activities produce significantly high noise levels, particularly close to source. Construction noise tends to fluctuate and is usually of fairly short duration. The construction noise impacts will depend on the proximity of construction activities to nearby receptor locations. Also, some of the activities presented above could take place at the same time. The construction noise impacts predicted above indicate that the highest impacts occur within 100m of the works, and these may be substantial adverse. The predicted noise levels are based on a possible worst case scenario. Propagation across hard ground has been assumed and no screening from topographical features or other structures has been assumed. At distances of above 200m the construction noise impacts can be expected to be moderate. The construction noise impacts can however be largely mitigated through measures as set out in Section 9.5.1 such as limiting work hours or using acoustic screening. Considering that construction noise impacts are temporary in nature, with mitigation measures in place no residual impacts are expected. There is a potential for vibration to be generated during construction. This will depend on the construction method and the type of plant to be used. In the absence of a detailed construction programme predicting vibration impacts will be very difficult. Vibration impacts NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 158
will also depend on proximity to receptor locations and on local conditions such as ground conditions. Vibration impacts can be mitigated by selecting plant and equipment that will generate low levels of vibration. It will only be possible to predict vibration impacts once details of the plant to be used and the construction methods to be used have been finalised.
9.6.2 Operation Operational traffic associated with the proposed Masterplan Site will be assessed in accordance with DMRB, using traffic data for the Opening Year (and the Design Year) once traffic data has been provided. This will be undertaken for future EIAs.
9.7
Cumulative Effects This section considers the potential for cumulative noise effects from other consented developments in the area. The consented developments are detailed in Table 17.1 in Chapter 17 (Cumulative Effects Chapter). Cumulative impacts are most likely from increases in road traffic associated with other developments. There is potential for minor adverse cumulative effects associated with construction noise from other developments within 1km of the Development Site. There are other committed developments in the immediate vicinity of the Masterplan Site, but it is unlikely that cumulative construction noise impacts would be of concern given that other developments are located more than 1km from the Bicester Development Site.
9.8
Summary The noise and vibration assessment was carried out to identify and assess the suitability of the ambient noise and vibration levels across the proposed development for residential use and also assess the impact upon road traffic noise levels and the effects of construction noise at existing receptors within the local area. The noise and vibration assessment considers the suitability of the site for residential development in line with Policy Planning Guidance 24 (PPG 24). The noise assessment also considers both construction and operational noise impacts associated with the proposed development.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 159
A baseline noise survey serves as a basis for the assessment of the suitability of the site for development and for assessing construction and operational noise impacts. The noise baseline noise measurements indicate that the majority of the site falls within NEC A, which means that noise need not be considered as a determining factor in granting planning permission. The construction impacts were assessed in accordance with the provisions in BS 5228: 2009. Assumptions have been made regarding the construction plant that would typically be used for developments of this nature. The construction noise impacts will depend on proximity of the construction works to receptors, the nature or intensity of the construction, the type of plant being used and the time of day. Construction noise impacts are generally temporary, will be transient in nature and can be mitigated against. Operational road traffic noise impacts and operational plant noise impacts will be assessed once the required traffic data and operational plant design detail has been made available.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 160
10
Cultural Heritage
10.1 Introduction The objective of this chapter is to identify and assess the likely significant effects of the proposed NW Bicester Development on the archaeological, built heritage and historic landscape resource, collectively referred to as the Historic Environment. Cultural heritage assets are defined by the National Planning Policy as ““All aspects of the environment resulting from the interaction between people and places through time, including all surviving physical remains of past human activity, whether visible, buried or submerged and landscaped and planted or managed flora”. The PPS5 practice guide that provides guidance on the assessment of The Historic Environment within the planning framework classifies heritage assets as “A building, monument, site, place, area or landscape positively identified as having a degree of significance meriting consideration in planning decisions. Heritage Assets are the valued components of the historic environment they include Designated Heritage Assets and assets identified by the Local Planning Authority during the process of decision-making or through the plan-making process (including local listing).” World Heritage Sites, Scheduled Monuments, and Listed Buildings are all designated assets. The cultural heritage resource considered in this assessment comprises the totality of archaeological remains, historic buildings and historic landscapes. This chapter firstly describes the regulatory framework that the assessment will be produced within, it then details the methodologies used to assess the potential significant effects of the development during the construction and operation phases. Details of consultations undertaken are also provided. Baseline conditions are then explained. Design, mitigation and enhancement measures are then described, followed by an assessment of significant residual effects. A summary of the assessment is then provided, together with relevant conclusions. A list of references, appendices, abbreviations and a glossary completes the chapter. There is potential for considerable overlap with other chapters within this Environmental Statement and reference to the appropriate chapter is made where required. In this respect, information on landscape and visual impacts is provided in Chapter 6.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 161
10.2 Regulatory Framework This assessment has been undertaken in accordance with current legislation, national, regional and local plans and policies. Outlined below are those elements of current legislation, policy and guidance relevant to archaeology in the context of the proposed Masterplan Site development. A summary of the relevant legislation and policies, the requirements of these policies and NW Bicester Masterplan Site response is provided in Table 10-1 below. Table10-1 Summary of Relevant Legislation and Policies
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester Masterplan Response
Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979
The Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979 gives statutory protection to any structure building or work which is considered to be of particular historic or archaeological interest and regulates any activities which may affect such areas. Under the Act any work that is carried out on a Scheduled Ancient Monument must first obtain Scheduled Monument consent.
The nearest Scheduled Ancient Monuments to the site are at RAF Bicester and are not anticipated to experience significant impacts. Scheduled Monument Consent will not be required for any element of the Eco-town development
Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act
The Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 applies special protection to buildings and areas of special architectural or historic interest.
Consideration will be given for the potential for the Development to impact the listed buildings within the study area including their settings
Section 66 (1) of the act states that “In considering whether to grant planning permission for development which affects a listed building or its setting, the local planning authority or, as the case may be, the Secretary of State shall have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses”. The National Planning Policy Framework
The NPPF sets out the Government’s planning policies for England and how these are expected to be applied. The NPPF provides a framework within which local and neighbourhood plans can be produced. Planning law requires that applications for
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
The Cultural Heritage assessment will be produced in accordance with the requirements of the NPPF. In order to comply with policy 128 a programme of archaeological investigations is underway, these include Page 162
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester Masterplan Response
planning permission must be determined in accordance with the development plan. The NPPF must be taken into account in the preparation of local and neighbourhood plans, and is a material consideration on planning decisions.
Desk-based Assessment, Aerial Photograph Analysis, Geophysical Survey and Archaeological Evaluation. The results of all of these phases of investigation will be incorporated into the Environmental Impact Assessment.
Section 12 of the NPPF Conserving and enhancing the historic environment contains the government’s policies relating to the historic environment. Paragraph 126 states that local planning authorities should set out in their Local Plan a positive strategy for the conservation and enjoyment of the historic environment. In doing so they should recognise that heritage assets are an irreplaceable resource and conserve them in a manner appropriate to their significance. Paragraph 128 states that in determining applications, local planning authorities should require an applicant to describe the significance of any heritage assets affected, including any contribution made by their setting. The level of detail should be proportionate to the asset’s importance and no more than is sufficient to understand the potential impact of the proposal on their significance. As a minimum the relevant historic environment record should have been consulted and the heritage assets assessed using appropriate expertise where necessary. Where a site on which development is proposed includes or has the potential to include heritage assets with archaeological interest, local planning authorities should require developers to submit an appropriate Desk-Based Assessment and, where NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 163
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester Masterplan Response
necessary, a field evaluation. Planning Policy Statement: Eco-towns
The PPS sets out a range of Ecotown targets. ET15 deals with landscape and historic environment. It states: “Planning applications for ecotowns should demonstrate that they have adequately considered the implications for the local landscape and historic environment. This evidence, in particular that gained from landscape character assessments and historic landscape characterisation should be used to ensure that development complements and enhances the existing landscape character. Furthermore, evidence contained in relevant Historic Environment Records, should be used to assess the extent, significance and condition of known heritage assets (and the potential for the discovery of unknown heritage assets) and the contribution that they may make to the eco-town and surrounding area. Eco-town proposals should set out measures to conserve and, where appropriate, enhance heritage both assets and their settings through the proposed development.”
Cherwell Local Plan
The Cherwell Local Plan 2006 – 2031 was submitted in January 2014 The relevant policy in the Local Plan for this assessment is policy ESD16: The Character of the Built and Historic Environment. This policy states: “Successful design is founded upon an understanding and respect for an area’s unique built, natural and cultural context. New development will be expected to complement and enhance the character of its context through sensitive siting, layout and high
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
The ES chapter will have a section which considers the effect of the development on the historic environment and will make recommendations to lessen that impact. Aside from a small Pilot study in 1993 there is no Historic Landscape Characterisation for Oxfordshire therefore the assessment will concentrate on other sources such as the Oxfordshire HER and cartographic sources.
The assessment will consider all heritage assets and their settings which are located within the Study Area and consider all appropriate protection, enhancement and conservation measures. There are no Scheduled Ancient Monuments or nationally important remains within the study area. Desk-based Assessment and field evaluation will be carried out as part of the EIA
Page 164
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester Masterplan Response
quality design. All new development will be required to meet high design standards. Where development is in the vicinity of any of the district’s distinctive natural or historic assets, delivering high quality design that complements the asset will be essential. New development proposals should:
Be designed to deliver high quality safe, attractive, durable and healthy places to live and work in.
Development of all scales should be designed to improve the quality and appearance of an area and the way it functions
Deliver buildings, places and spaces that can adapt to changing social, technological, economic and environmental conditions
Support the efficient use of land and infrastructure, through appropriate land uses, mix and density / development intensity
Contribute positively to an area’s character and identity by creating or reinforcing local distinctiveness and respecting local topography and landscape features, including skylines, valley floors, significant trees, historic boundaries, landmarks, features or views, in particular within designated landscapes, within the Cherwell Valley and within conservation areas and their setting
Conserve, sustain and enhance designated and non designated ‘heritage assets’ (as defined in the NPPF) including buildings, features, archaeology, conservation
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 165
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester Masterplan Response
areas and their settings, and ensure new development is sensitively sited and integrated in accordance with advice in the NPPF. Proposals for development that affect non-designated heritage assets will be considered taking account of the scale of any harm or loss and the significance of the heritage asset as set out in the NPPF.
Regeneration proposals that make sensitive use of heritage assets, particularly where these bring redundant or under used buildings or areas, especially any on English Heritage’s At Risk Register, into appropriate use will be encouraged
Include information on heritage assets sufficient to assess the potential impact of the proposal on their significance. Where archaeological potential is identified this should include an appropriate desk based assessment and, where necessary, a field evaluation.
Respect the traditional pattern of routes, spaces, blocks, plots, enclosures and the form, scale and massing of buildings. Development should be designed to integrate with existing streets and public spaces, and buildings configured to create clearly defined active public frontages”
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 166
10.3 Methodology 10.3.1 Introduction This assessment has reviewed the archaeological, built heritage and historic landscape resource within the proposed Development and the surrounding study area through the collation of existing written, cartographic and electronic information in order to identify the likely character, extent, quality and significance of the known or potential heritage resource. The study was undertaken in accordance with the ‘Code of Conduct’ (Ref 10-1) and ‘Standards and Guidance for Archaeological Deskbased Assessments’ of the Institute for Archaeologists (IfA 2008a; IfA 2008b) (Ref 10-2 and Ref 10-3). The field evaluation was undertaken in accordance with the IfA’s Standards and Guidance for Field Evaluation (IfA 2008) (Ref 10-4).
10.3.2 Study Area The study area was defined by a 500m radius from the site boundary as set out in the scoping report for the Masterplan area. Since the scoping report the Masterplan area has been extended to include the field immediately to the noth of Home Farm known as Altitude Land. This area is located within the original study area. For the Historic Landscape assessment a wider study area influenced by the zone of visual influence was used where appropriate.
10.3.3 Establishment of Baseline Conditions The baseline conditions described below have been established through a search of the Oxfordshire Historic Environment Record (HER) and the National Monuments Record (NMR) for archaeological assets within the study area. Records of Listed Buildings within the study area were also obtained from the NMR. A selection of historic maps was also obtained from the Oxfordshire record office and Landmark Information Group. These included the 1853 Caversfield Tithe map and Ordnance Survey editions. Online sources were also consulted. The research was carried out in July 2010 and an updated search of the Oxfordshire HER was carried out in February 2014. Two site walkover surveys have been carried out. The Exemplar Site was visited on the 23rd July 2010 and the Masterplan Area (excluding Altitude land) was visited on the 2nd of September 2010. In addition, weekly site visits were made during the archaeological evaluations which took place between the 6th and the 24th of September 2010 for the Exemplar Site and the 12th of August and the 25th of October 2013 for the Masterplan Area. NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 167
An analysis of aerial photographs has been undertaken in order to identify areas of archaeological potential. Both the Exemplar Site and the Masterplan Area were also subject to Geophysical Survey and Archaeological Evaluation. The baseline conditions will be based on a combination of the data gathering exercise, cartographic analysis, aerial photograph analysis and the field evaluation. The area known as Altitude Land has not been supject to aerial photograph analysis, geophysical survey or archaeological evaluation as it was not part of the Masterplan area when these surveys were carried out.
10.3.4 Consultation The Planning Archaeologist for Oxfordshire Richard Oram and the Conservation Officer at Cherwell District Council Claire Sutton were consulted during the preparation of this document. The Planning Archaeologist for Oxfordshire was also consulted during the archaeological field evaluation carried out at the site and made a number of monitoring visits.
10.3.5 Assessment of Effects In the absence of any set guidelines the methodology used to assess the significance of the assets is based on the criteria set out in DMRB Volume 11, Section 3, Part 2 (Highways Agency et al, 2007) (Ref 105). In assessing the impacts of the proposals upon cultural heritage assets, it is necessary to consider the value of the resources, as well as the magnitude of impact. Professional judgement and a degree of flexibility are often required. In carrying out the assessment of effects in accordance with the criteria set out in DMRB the following tables will be used.
Estimation of Value Assessments of value considered how far the asset(s) contributes to an understanding of the past, through their individual or group qualities, either directly or potentially. These are professional judgements, but they were guided by legislation, national policies, acknowledged standards, designations, criteria and priorities. Table 10-2 presents the scale of values that was assigned to archaeological remains. Table10-2 Scale of values that were assigned to Archaeological Remains
Value Very High
High
Example
World Heritage Sites (including nominated sites)
Assets of acknowledged international importance
Assets that can contribute significantly to acknowledged international research objectives
Scheduled Monuments (including proposed sites)
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 168
Value
Example
Undesignated assets of Schedulable quality and importance
Assets that can contribute significantly to acknowledged national research objectives
Medium
Designated or undesignated assets that contribute to regional research objectives
Low
Designated and undesignated assets of local importance
Assets compromised by poor preservation and/or poor survival of contextual associations
Assets of limited value, but with potential to contribute to local research objectives
Negligible
Assets with very little or no surviving archaeological interest
Unknown
The importance of the resource has not been ascertained
Table 10-3 Scale of values that were assigned to historic buildings.
Value
Example
Very High
Structures inscribed as of universal importance as World Heritage Sites
Other buildings of recognised international importance
Scheduled Monuments with standing remains
Grade I and Grade II* Listed Buildings
Other Listed Buildings that can be shown to have exceptional qualities in their fabric or historical associations not adequately reflected in the listing grade
Conservation Areas containing very important buildings
Undesignated structures of clear national importance
Grade II Listed Buildings
Historic (unlisted) buildings that can be shown to have exceptional qualities in their fabric or historical associations
Conservation Areas containing buildings that contribute significantly to its historic character
Historic townscape or built up areas with important historic integrity in their buildings, or built settings (e.g. including street furniture and other structures)
‘Locally Listed’ buildings
Historic (unlisted) buildings of modest quality in their fabric or historical association
Historic townscape or built up areas of limited historic integrity in their buildings or built settings (e.g. including street furniture and other structures)
Negligible
Buildings of no architectural or historical note; buildings of intrusive character
Unknown
Buildings with some hidden (i.e. inaccessible) potential for historic significance
High
Medium
Low
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 169
Table10-4 Scale of values that were assigned to historic landscapes.
Value
Example
Very High
World Heritage Sites inscribed for their historic landscape qualities
Historic landscapes of international value, whether designated or not
Extremely well preserved historic landscapes with exceptional coherence, time-depth, or other critical factor(s)
Designated historic landscapes of outstanding interest
Registered battlefields
Registered parks and gardens
Undesignated landscapes of outstanding interest
Undesignated landscapes of high quality and importance, and of demonstrable national value
Well preserved historic landscapes, exhibiting considerable coherence, time-depth or other critical factor(s)
Designated special historic landscapes
Undesignated historic landscapes that would justify special historic landscape designation, landscapes of regional value
Averagely well-preserved historic landscapes with reasonable coherence, time-depth or other critical factor(s)
Robust undesignated historic landscapes
Historic landscapes with importance to local interest groups
Historic landscapes whose value is limited by poor preservation and/or poor survival of contextual associations
Landscapes with little or no significant historical interest
High
Medium
Low
Negligible
Magnitude of Impact The determination of magnitude of impact was based on the vulnerability of the study area, its current state of survival/condition and the nature of the impact upon it. The survival and extent of archaeological deposits is often uncertain and consequently, the magnitude of change can be difficult to predict with any certainty. Table10-5 Magnitude of impact criteria related to archaeological remains
Magnitude of Impact
Example
Major
Change to most or all key archaeological materials, such that the resource is totally altered Comprehensive changes to setting
Moderate
Changes to many key archaeological materials, such that the resource is clearly modified Considerable changes to setting that affect the character of the asset
Minor
Changes to key archaeological materials, such that the asset is slightly altered
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 170
Magnitude of Impact
Example Slight change to setting
Negligible
Very minor changes to archaeological materials, or setting
No Change
No change
Table10-6 Magnitude of impact criteria related to historic buildings
Magnitude of Impact
Example
Major
Change to key historic building elements, such that the resource is totally altered Comprehensive changes to the setting
Moderate
Change to many key historic building elements, such that the resource is significantly modified Changes to the setting of an historic building, such that it is significantly modified
Minor
Change to key historic building elements, such that the asset is slightly different Change to setting of an historic building, such that it is noticeably changed
Negligible
Slight changes to historic building elements or setting that hardly affect it
No Change
No change to fabric or setting
Table10-7 Magnitude of impact criteria related to historic landscapes
Magnitude of Impact
Example
Major
Change to most or all key historic landscape elements, parcels or components; extreme visual effects; gross change of noise or change to sound quality; fundamental changes to use or access; resulting in total change to historic landscape character unit.
Moderate
Changes to many key historic landscape elements, parcels or components, visual change to many key aspects of the historic landscape, noticeable differences in noise or sound quality, considerable changes to use or access; resulting in moderate changes to historic landscape character.
Minor
Changes to few key historic landscape elements, parcels or components, slight visual changes to few key aspects of historic landscape, limited changes to noise levels or sound quality; slight changes to use or access: resulting in limited changes to historic landscape character.
Negligible
Very minor changes to key historic landscape elements, parcels or components, virtually unchanged visual effects, very slight changes in noise levels or sound quality; very slight changes to use or access; resulting in a very small change to historic landscape character.
No Change
No change to elements, parcels or components; no visual or audible
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 171
Magnitude of Impact
Example changes; no changes arising from in amenity or community factors.
Significance of Effects Table 10-8 illustrates how information on the value of the asset and the magnitude of impact was combined to arrive at an assessment of the significance of effect. The matrix is not intended to ‘mechanise’ judgement of the significance of effect but to act as a check to ensure that judgements regarding value, magnitude of impact and significance of effect are reasonable and balanced. Where a combination of significance descriptors allowed for a choice of significance of effects, professional judgement was applied on case by case basis in order to determine which is the most appropriate significance of effects. Table10-8 Criteria for Determining the Significance of Effect on Archaeology, Built Heritage and Historic Landscape
Value
Magnitude of Impact No Change
Negligible
Minor
Moderate
Major
Very High
Neutral
Slight
Moderate/Large
Large or Very Large
Very Large
High
Neutral
Slight
Moderate/Slight
Moderate/Large
Large/Very Large
Medium
Neutral
Neutral/Sligh t
Slight
Moderate
Moderate/Large
Low
Neutral
Neutral/Sligh t
Neutral/Slight
Slight
Slight/Moderate
Negligible
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral/Slight
Neutral/Slight
Slight
10.4 Baseline Conditions 10.4.1 Archaeology Desk Based Assessment An archaeological and historical Desk-based assessment has been produced as part of the Cultural Heritage assessment. These were carried out in 2010 and a synthesis of the baseline presented in these reports is presented below. In addition an updated search of the Oxfordshire HER which was carried out in February 2014. All additional data added to the HER between 2010 and 2014 has been included in this assessment. In addition to the Desk-based Assessments further archaeological investigation were carried out. These comprised an aerial photograph analysis, geophysical survey NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 172
and archaeological field evaluation. The findings of these investigations are presented below. An archaeological and historical Desk-based Assessment has been produced as part of this assessment The Desk-based Assessments concluded that the site is located within an area that has remained undeveloped since at least the late 19th century and possibly before. The site has known potential for remains dating to the prehistoric period with records of a prehistoric ring ditch located approximately 350m to the north of Himley Farm (3), a possible curvilinear enclosure to the north west of Hawkwell farm (2) and other evidence of prehistoric activity within the study area suggesting a general potential for remains dating to this period to be present. The study area also have some potential for remains dating to the Roman period as demonstrated by the presence of Roman remains recorded to the south of the site (5). As it is likely that these remains are related to the settlement of Alchester to the south it is possible that the Roman activity in the area did not spread as far north as the application site. The Desk-based Assessments concluded that as the site has been agricultural land since at least the post-medieval period or possibly before there is the possibility that the development could impact on remains associates with this activity.
Updated Historic Environment data, February 2014 A geophysical survey was carried out at Whitelands Farm to the south of the development site. This survey identified traces of features that suggested early occupation of the site. Potential ditches were recorded within or close to a cropmark complex thought to represent a field system associated with an early farmstead. Clear traces of a former windmill were also detected, and immediately to the east, a number of less distinct anomalies which could reflect earlier mills, or possibly much earlier remains, such as barrows. Traces of a penannular enclosure were also observed, as well as ridge and furrow. An archaeological evaluation carried out of land south of Middleton Stoney Road found little of archaeological interest. A geophysical survey carried out at South Lodge Stables, Caversfield recorded a small number of positive linear anomalies. A geophysical survey and archaeological evaluation was carried out on land at Howes Lane, within the Masterplan Area. The geophysical survey identified a group of boundary and enclosure ditches of probable Iron Age or Romano-British date, and other features of less certain archaeological significance. The evaluation confirmed the NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 173
results of the geophysical survey, with the identification of a small group of Iron Age features, including a probable ring ditch and Romano-British ditches, probably representing enclosure systems. Pottery from the Romano-British features dated to the 1st to 4th centuries, indicating that activity here may have extended throughout the Roman period. The progress of the evaluation was severely hampered by wet ground conditions and flooded trenches.
Aerial Photograph Analysis Interpretation of aerial photograph data was undertaken in order to further define the potential for the proposed development to impact upon potential cultural heritage assets. The object of the aerial photograph interpretation was to provide information on the location and nature of any archaeological features or areas of archaeological potential visible on existing aerial photographs within the proposed development or the surrounding study area. The work was carried out by Air Photo Services. Evidence for fragmentary ditches and possible ditched enclosures was observed in the aerial photograph analysis. These features are located in the central and one of the northern fields of the Exemplar site (the eastern part of the Masterplan Site). These features are heavily masked by natural geological features and show as marks in crops on vertical aerial photographs. Immediately to the south of the Exemplar site development, outside of the site boundary, is a buried ditched sub rectangular enclosure. These features are all eroded and buried and are visible only via marks in crops where the plants grow more vigorously over the buried ditches in times of drought (Cox, 2010) (Ref 10-6). The aerial photograph analysis of the masterplan area recorded evidence of a complex and extensive area of buried ditches, pits, probable tracks and enclosures. These features show as distinctive marks in crops at Hawkswell Farm. This is the most intensive area of archaeological activity recorded by the AP analysis and may be indicating possible settlement activity. Just to the south of this area is a curvilinear feature of uncertain origin or function. It is possible that this feature could be related to agricultural activity in the area. A short distance to the south of this possible feature some slight ridges on the floodplain of a small watercourse are visible which may be either water meadows or Medieval cultivation or drainage. To the north of Hawkwell Farm, close to the Exemplar Site, is a buried ditched sub rectangular enclosure. There is also a subrectangular area of deeper soil which may be a place where local quarrying has been undertaken for stone extraction, then filled in when worked out. Close to the northern boundary of the application site and between the railway line and Bucknall Road the AP analysis recorded evidence of medieval and post-medieval fields and field boundaries. There is NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 174
also an oddly shaped cut feature which is now in filled located a short distance to the east of Bucknall Road. Most small quarries in this area are sub-rectangular or square, but this feature has a number of projections. Given the proximity of a local World War 2 airbase, this may possibly have been a bombing decoy which is now in filled, but it is not visible on photographs taken immediately after the War in 1946. Its origin is therefore uncertain. To the south of the railway line a series of ditches and enclosures centre upon Aldershot Farm and are visible as crop marks. Their type or origin is uncertain but they are likely to pre-date the modern farm buildings. They are underlain by complex geological features, and are visible on vertical aerial photographs which were taken in July 1975 when the weather was very dry. The fields to the north of Himley Farm contain buried ditches and pits which are visible on vertical aerial photographs as marks in crops, in addition to the underlying geological features in the area. This area also contains a buried ring ditch, indicative of a possible eroded Bronze Age funerary site. A circular feature, with some adjacent straight cut features was also visible at this site as a cropmark and its former function is unknown. The south eastern corner of the application site contains some very well defined crop marked buried features which may either be natural or archaeological. They cannot be well defined as either, therefore have been mapped as possible features which may require further investigation as appropriate. The area also contains some eroded traces of Medieval fields. This area also contains evidence for a complex of very clearly defined ditches, possible double ditched boundary, track way and enclosures (Cox 2010) (Ref 10-6).
Geophysical Survey A geophysical survey was carried out on the Masterplan Area between December 2011 and February 2012. The survey was successful in identifying archaeological features within much of the area. The geophysical survey confirmed and expanded upon the presence of features identified by the aerial photograph analysis. Particular concentrations of features were located in the north of the Masterplan Area. These included sub-rectangular and sub-circular ditched enclosures, curvilinear ditches and pits, likely to be of late prehistoric or Roman date. Other foci of archaeological features were detected in the north and west of the area. Of particular interest was a possible, long curving droveway or crowding alley in the west of the site.
Archaeological Evaluation Following on from the aerial photograph analysis a programme of archaeological field evaluation was carried out at the proposed NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 175
Exemplar Site development in September 2010 and the Masterplan Area in 2013. Exemplar Site A total of 70 trenches measuring 50m x 2m were excavated across the Exemplar Site, representing a 4% sample of the total area. The aim of the evaluation was to establish the presence/absence, extent, character, quality and date of any archaeological remains present. Six of the seventy trenches contained features worthy of further investigation. These were trenches 1 and 30, located in the two northern most fields of the Proposed Exemplar Site development and trenches 47, 52, 53 and 54 located in the two southern-most fields. Each of the trenches contained one feature which required investigation. Five of the features were linear in nature and the other was most likely a natural hollow. All of the linear features appeared to be of no archaeological significance and could have been the result of natural activity such as water runoff or geological formation. However the location of two of the features in a relatively flat area of the site means that it cannot be ruled out that it is possible that they may be the result of human activity, rather than natural processes (Dean 2010). The evaluation also demonstrated that the features identified during the aerial photograph analysis were not archaeological in nature. The only artefacts recovered from the investigations were two fragments of animal bone from the linear feature in trench 52. These fragments were recovered from the top of the fill of the feature and are likely to be intrusive resulting from ploughing activity (Dean 2010). The results of the evaluation suggested that there was very little potential for archaeological activity within the proposed Exemplar Site development. No evidence was recovered to link the features found during the evaluation to any other known archaeological activity within the study area such as the field systems and enclosures to the south west or the Deserted Medieval Village to the north east which were recorded in the Desk-based assessment. This suggests that activity within the proposed Exemplar Site development was limited to agrarian practices and did not result in partitioning the land. The nature of the geology in the area also indicates that there would have been no need for any drainage construction either. Masterplan Area A total of 529 trenches were excavated across the Masterplan Area representing a 2% sample. Of these trenches, 130 had features of archaeological origin, including 26 that had only furrows or modern features. NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 176
Evidence was found for activity from several periods. The earliest was represented by a single feature containing pottery sherds of middle Neolithic date (c. 3400-2500 BC). The presence of isolated features or small clusters features widely dispersed in the landscape is typical of this period. A number of archaeological features were recorded in a small valley on the eastern side of the site. While these were undated, the presence of burnt stones and charcoal forming low mounds sealed beneath a deposit of colluvium (hill-wash deposits) is significant. Such 'burnt mounds' are widely known (although unusual in Oxfordshire) and generally date to the Bronze Age (c. 2400-700 BC) and may be the remains of prehistoric saunas or, alternatively, specialised cooking sites. A number of pits and a sinuous ditch in the same valley may represent further activity of the same date. There were five widely-separated locations which produced substantial quantities of early-middle Iron Age pottery (c. 700100BC), as well as a number of other features which produced single sherds or features in which the pottery was found in association with later material. Such a dispersed pattern of activity is somewhat unusual for this period but may suggest that the site lies in the hinterland of a more substantial settlement located elsewhere. There were two main areas and one subsidiary area of Roman activity (AD 43-410) revealed by the evaluation. The two main areas of activity are typical of Roman rural settlements in Oxfordshire in terms of the types, features and range of artefacts present. They are potentially noteworthy in terms of their chronological range, spanning the whole Roman period. Such continuity, with some evidence of expansion in the late Roman period, can be considered to be unusual. The third, smaller area of activity contained material of largely early Roman date and may have been a small outlying farmstead. Human remains were found in all three areas. Geophysical anomalies suggesting the presence of ridge and furrow agriculture were fairly widespread across the site and furrows were also present in a number of trenches. This suggests that much of the site was under arable cultivation during the medieval period and later. No evidence of medieval or later settlement was recorded on the site, aside from the extant farmhouses themselves. There were a large number of undated features present across the site. Most of these were ditches and it is likely that these were boundary and drainage ditches associated with agricultural activity. It is most likely that they are of medieval or later date (Hughes 2013).
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 177
10.4.2 Built Heritage The following section sets out the built heritage baseline conditions for the study area. It identifies designated and undesignated buildings and structures within the study area and provides an assessment of them.
Listed Buildings There are five Listed Buildings within the study area. One is Grade II* listed and the others are Grade II listed. St Lawrence’s Church (Grade II* listed) (BH1) St Lawrence’s Church is located in the grounds of Caversfield House and has a Norman nave with later aisles, an Early English chancel with a north chapel and a gabled west tower. The earliest part of St Lawrence’s Church is the Anglo-Saxon tower which is built of courses rag-stone with dressed quoins. In the north and south faces of the tower are round-headed double-splayed windows of late Saxon date. The upper portion of the tower is modern. The rest of the church dates to the 10th, 11th, late 12th and 13th centuries and was restored and partially rebuilt in 1874 by Henry Woodyer. The church is located within well-defined grounds surrounded by mature planting. The tower of the church is visible from certain key vantage points in the surrounding area. The setting of St Lawrence’s Church is defined by its immediate environs and is characterised by its relationship with Caversfield House. The only point where the tower is visible is along the sightline stretching from the church to the south west corner of the site. This asset is considered to be of high value. Home Farmhouse (Grade II listed) (BH4) Home Farmhouse is located in a rural setting, but close to the urban development of Bicester. It is adjacent to the B4100. The farmhouse dates to the early/mid 17th century and was extended in the 18th or 19th century. The farmhouse is two storeys constructed of coursed squared limestone with ashlar dressings. It has an old plain-tiled roof with rebuilt brick gable stacks. This asset is considered to be of medium value. The farmhouse is surrounded by a number of nonlisted buildings which make up the farm complex and are now used for a variety of functions including office space and light industry. These assets are considered to be of low value. The setting of the farmhouse is defined by its function as a working farmhouse within a mainly rural location, however the setting of the farmhouse is significantly characterised by its proximity to the urban development of Bicester. The Farmhouse is partially screened from the proposed development by the high hedges which form the field boundaries on the south eastern boundary of the site. NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 178
Churchyard Cross (Grade II listed) (BH2) A churchyard cross is located in the churchyard of St Peter’s Church in Bucknall. The cross dates to the 13th or 14th century, however only the base remains from the original. The cross was restored in 1929 and now the medieval socket stands on a recent plinth of two steps and is set with a new shaft and lantern. A plaque in the porch of the church notes that the cross now covers the grave of a former lord and lady of the manor of Bucknall who were buried in the churchyard in 1929. The setting of the cross is defined by the churchyard which it sits within. The churchyard is located behind the church and is surrounded by walls and mature trees and as a result feels very secluded and inward looking. This asset is considered to be of Medium value. Two Barns at Himley farm (Grade II listed) (BH3) Two barns dating to the mid 18th century are located approximately 700m to the north east of Himley Farmhouse. The barns are constructed of coursed limestone with wooden lintels and corrugatedasbestos roofs. The barns have recently been converted into living accommodation. The barns are set within a gravelled yard with open access to and views over open farmland. The setting of these assets is defined by their located within an area of open farmland. This asset is considered to be of Medium value. Bucknell Manor House (Grade II listed) (BH5) The present manor house at Bucknall is constructed from stone and dates to approximately 1700. The house stands on the site of the medieval manor house which was at one point surrounded by a moat. Some traces of the moat remain visible. The manor house is basically H shaped in plane but has been subject to many additions and alterations since its original construction. The house is now an old people’s home.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 179
The manor house is located close to the church and is set within its own mature grounds. Beyond the ground to the south is open fields and to the north is the village of Bucknall. However the house itself is quite secluded due to a large amount of mature planting within its ground. The setting of the manor house is initially defined by its grounds but is also informed by its location within Bucknall and its proximity to the church. This asset is considered to be of Medium value.
Non-listed buildings There is one other non listed building of historical interest within the study area. It is recorded on the NMR. Caversfield House (BH6) Caversfield House was built in 1842 by CR Cockerall on the site of a former manor house. The House is located adjacent to the B4100 within a secluded area of mature planting and separated from the road by a wall. There is a large fish pond to the south of the house which separates it from the area to the south. The setting of the house is defined by its immediate environs and its relationship with St Lawrence’s Church. There are no apparent views between the house and the proposed development. This asset is considered to be of low value. No other structures are recorded either on the HER or NMR within the study area. However all of the farms within the application site, Lords Farm, Aldershot Farm, Hawkwell Farm, Gowell Farm, Home Farm and Himley farm are recorded on the 1885 OS map and therefore date to at least the late 19th century. The buildings at these farms are generally of the vernacular style. The setting of all these farm complexes is informed by the landscape of open farmland within which they are located.
10.4.3 Historic Landscape There has been no Historic Landscape Characterisation produced for Oxfordshire therefore this assessment of the historic landscape within the study area is based on an analysis of cartographic sources and available documentary sources. Exemplar Site The 1853 tithe map shows the proposed Exemplar Site development as open fields under either arable or grassland with a small coppice in the south west corner. The field boundaries are the same as the modern boundaries. There are some fieldnames recorded on the tithe award which indicate former activity within the site. For example the field to the north east of the area of woodland is named The Limekiln NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 180
Ground which may indicate there once was a limekiln in the vicinity. The small narrow field to the east of the woodland is named Stone Pit Pieces which could suggest quarrying activity in the area. The 1881 1:2,500 scale Ordnance Survey (OS) map shows there has been no change from the tithe map. The 1885 1:10,560 scale OS map shows the proposed Exemplar Site development as open fields set in a rural landscape and displays no real changes from the tithe map. Home farm is marked as is St Lawrence’s Church and Caversfield House, both of which are surrounded by woodland. The B4100 which forms the eastern boundary of the proposed Exemplar Site development is marked. The 1899 1:2,500 scale OS maps shows evidence of water management along the stream next to Home Farm with a sluice marked close to the farm buildings. The 1900 1:10,560 scale OS map shows little change. The site is still open fields although the area of woodland is now shown as being much less dense. The U shaped area of water to the south of Caversfield House is marked on this map as a fish pond. An old quarry is also marked just to the south of the fish pond. The 1022 1:2,500 scales OS map and the 1923 1:10,560 scale OS map shows the site remained relatively unchanged; however a filter bed is now marked to the north of Home Farm, just outside the site boundary. Further afield the expansion of Bicester is now visible with housing plots marked along the roads to the south of the site. There is no change on the 1938-1952 1:10,560 scale OS map, the 1955 1:10,000 scale OS map or the 1968 – 1976 1;2,500 scale OS map. By the time of the 1970 1:10,000 scale OS map the development of Bicester has spread up along Srimmingdish Lane to the Old Vicarage south of Home Farm. The 1999 1;10,000 scale OS map shows the proposed Exemplar Site development in its modern state and also demonstrates how Bicester has by this time expanded almost up to Caversfield House. There is no change up to the 2010 1:10,000 scale OS map. The cartographic sequence for the proposed Exemplar Site development indicated that it is an enclosed landscape of arable and pasture land with some small scale industry in the form of quarrying. There is also evidence for earlier landscape features in the area with the A421 following the route of the Roman Akeman Street The nearest settlement to the proposed Exemplar Site development is Caversfield to the east which is likely to have originated as a nucleated settlement as indicated by the presence of the Anglo-Saxon church and the Deserted Medieval Village to the east. After the NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 181
abandonment of the village to the east of the site Caversfield developed into a more dispersed settlement with comprising a church and manor house serving number of scattered farmsteads with the church possibly also serving the northern areas of Bicester as it expanded. The change in the nature of the settlement of Caversfield reflects what was happening across the Cherwell District around the same time with economic and social change leading to widespread desertion and contraction of late medieval villages. The south of the Cherwell district was particularly affected in this way with a third of villages disappearing and a further third exhibiting sign of shrinkage (Cherwell District Landscape Assessment, 1995) (Ref 10-7). The Cherwell District Landscape Assessment (1995) places the landscape around the Proposed Exemplar Site development within the Oxfordshire Estate Farmlands character area. This area runs from Bletchingdon in the south, around the north of Bicester and up to the county boundary with Northamptonshire and is characterised by a rolling landform and a pattern of woodland and mixed farmland. Much of the landscape is this character area is associated with estates linked to the extensive areas of remaining 18th century parkland and this is one of the special features of the character area. However there is no real evidence for parkland in the landscape around the Exemplar site where the local landscape has a much more agricultural quality. The Landscape Assessment characterises the local landscape around the Exemplar site as a rolling arable landscape with strong field patterns, copses and trees. The patchwork of arable and pasture is given definition by well maintained hedges. The Landscape Assessment draws out some of the key landscape elements of the area surrounding the Exemplar site but does not designate it as an area of high landscape value. As with other parts of Cherwell the area to the north of Bicester has been considerably affected by military development. Military airfields such as RAF Bicester are dominant features in the landscape when they occur. Other key features in the landscape of the Cherwell district are the small settlements. Many of these date to the Early Medieval and Medieval periods and a significant number of these settlement experienced abandonment or shrinkage as a result of social and economic change in the post-medieval period. Of the two closest villages to the Proposed Exemplar Site development, Caversfield has a church which dates to the Anglo Saxon Period and Bucknall is likely to have medieval or earlier origins. Both the villages experienced shrinkage in the post- medieval period with little remaining of Caversfield except for the church and the manor house. The predominant architecture in both Caversfield and Bucknall is of the vernacular style which is typical for the district.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 182
The Oxfordshire Wildlife and Landscape Study has characterised the landscape around the Proposed Exemplar Site development as Wooded Estate. The study states that this landscape type is characterised by arable farming and small villages with a strong vernacular character. The key characteristics of this landscape type are a rolling topography, large blocks of ancient woodland and mixed plantations, large parkland and mansion houses, regular field pattern dominated by arable fields and small villages with strong vernacular character (http://www.owls.oxfordshire.gov.uk/wps/wcm/connect/occ/OWLS ). The landscape which the proposed Exemplar Site development is situated in contains many of these characteristics including the arable fields and the small villages such as Bucknall to the north and Caversfield to the east. Overall the historic landscape which the proposed Exemplar Site development is located within can be described as fairly typical for the area. It is of a predominantly rural nature characterised by late 18th and early 19th century arable fields. The settlements close to the Exemplar site are also typical of the area. Overall the value of the historic landscape has been assessed as low. Masterplan Area The following presents an analysis of the cartographic sequence from the 1753 map of the manor of Bicester Market End and Kings End to the 2010 Ordnance Survey (OS) map. Part of the Masterplan Area falls into the area covered by Williams 1753 map of Bicester Market End and Kings End. This map shows that by this time the land within this area had been enclosed. The map also shows the enclosed fields divided into furlongs and single field was often farmed by many different people. In 1780 an enclosure award was created for the manor of Bucknall, unfortunately the accompanying map no longer survives. However the presence of the enclosure award demonstrated that the land within the application site which falls within the manor of Bucknall was likely to have been open fields until the late 18th century. The 1853 Caversfield Tithe map covers the north eastern third of the site. The map shows that at this time the B4100 which forms the eastern boundary of the site was part of a turnpike road. The map also shows that the field pattern at that time was very similar to the present day one. Generally the fields were under either pasture or arable cultivation. The 1885 1:10,560 scale Ordnance Survey (OS) map shows the field boundaries within the site have already achieved their present day layout by this time. Home Farm is shown, as is Lords Farm, Himley NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 183
Farm, Aldershot Farm, Gowell Farm and Hawkwells Farm. There is also a barn labelled Parkers Barn located one field to the south east of Himley Farm. The road which bisects the site is present and the road network to the east of the site has achieved its present day layout. Outside of the application site St Lawrence’s Church and Caversfield House are also marked. To the north the village of Bucknall as a small nucleated settlement centred around the Manor house and the church with a small cluster of buildings located to the each of the main area of settlement and separated by two small fields. The village had achieved its present day road pattern by this time. To the south east of the Masterplan Area Bicester is considerably smaller than in the present day. The Bicester Union Workhouse lies in open countryside approximately halfway between the site and the town along Bucknall Road. Slad farm, which became the site of a satellite landing ground during World War II is also marked a short distance to the south east of the application site. To the south of the site is a large house labelled Bignell House which is surrounded by fairly extensive grounds. The 1900 1:10,560 scale OS map shows the field pattern within the site remains unchanged. There is also no change to Bicester, Caversfield House or the village of Bucknall. To the south of the application site the ground of Bignall House have expanded to abut the southern boundary of the site and are now labelled Bignall Park. A significant number of tree have been planted within the park including a wide bank of trees, labelled as Bignall Belt, along the northern boundary of the park, which is adjacent to the southern boundary of the site. The only change to the north eastern section of the site shown on the 1923 1:10,560 scale map is that there is now a filter bed marked in the field immediately to the west of Home Farm. Across the rest of the site the field boundaries remains unchanged. The most important change on this map is that the railway line which bisects the site is marked for the first time. A number of quarries are marked on the map around the railway line in the southern section of the site and to the south of the site boundary. A pumping station, a tower and a lime kiln are also marked at the point where the railway line crosses the site boundary, where the Avonbury Business park is now located. Further afield, another notable change is that the urban development of Bicester has now begun to spread northwards along Hemmingford Lane towards the site. This is the beginning of what will become the modern village of Caversfield. The map shows no change to Bucknall. The 1938-1952 1:10,560 scale OS maps shows there have been no change to the site except for a small building which has been constructed adjacent to the B4030 approximately halfway along the southern boundary of the site. It is likely that this building is the one which is labelled as Lovelynch House on modern maps. By the time of NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 184
the 1952 map this building has been enclosed within its own plot. There also has been little change to Bucknall and no change to Caversfield House. Bignall House and Bignall Park to the south of the sire are shown as unchanged. However the development that was shown along Hemmingford Lane on the 1923 map is no longer marked. Outside of the application site the Bicester Union Workhouse has expanding considerably by the time of the 1938 map. This expansion is likely to be associated with its use at this time as a home for poor boys. The 1952 map show the workhouse is now called market End House. This map also shows the gradual expansion northwards of Bicester. The only change to the north east corner of the site on the 1955 1:10,000 scale OS map is that the filter beds close to Home Farm are no longer marked. The pumping station adjacent to the southern boundary of the site is also no longer marked. The map also shows little change to Bucknall. The 1960 1:10,000 scale OS map shows no change to the field pattern in the south west corner of the site. No change is shown on the 1966 1:10,000 scale OS map. The 1970 1:10,000 scale OS maps shows little change to the application site except that the building adjacent to the B4030 is labelled Himley Farm. Another small building has also been constructed towards the southern end of the track which links the original farm buildings at Himley farm with the B4030. The map also shows that the expansion of Caversfield has increased along Hemmingford Lane. The map also shows the considerable expansion of Bicester which happened at this time. The town has now achieved something close to its modern day shape to the north of the town centre although the area around Slad Farm remains undeveloped. The south east corner of the application site remains unchanged. The 1982-1988 1:10,000 scale OS map shows that a small building has been constructed adjacent to Bucknall Road within the site boundary. The plot that the new Himley Far building sits within has increased in size to its present day extent. Parkers Barn is no longer marked. The field pattern within the site remains unchanged. A small depot is marked adjacent to the southern boundary of the site, in the area now occupied by the Avonbury business park. Outside of the site boundary there has been further development to the north east around Brashfield House. To the north Bucknall remains relatively unchanged. By the time of the 1988 map Bicester has expanded even further with the north western limit of the town now abutting the south western boundary of the site. The 1996 1:10,000 scale OS map shows little change to the application site, except that the depot in the location of the Avonbury NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 185
Business park has expanded slightly and is labelled as a Police HQ. The map also shows that Bicester has almost reached its full extent by this time and the A4095 has been constructed. The area around Slad Farm remains undeveloped however. By the time of the 1999 1:10,000 scale OS map little has changed within the application site. Two small strips of plantation have been planted between Gowell Farm and Himley Farm and one of the fields in Himley Farm is now labelled as a piggery. The new building at Himley Farm is now labelled Lovelynch House and the small building adjacent to the access track for Himley Farm is now labelled Himley Farmhouse. Outside of the site boundary Bucknall has achieved its modern day layout, as has the modern day village of Caversfield, with the two separate areas of development along Hemmingford Land and around Brashfield House being joined together. The north east corner of the site remains unchanged. The 2006 1:10,000 scale OS map shows little change to the application site other than the piggeries at Himley Farm have moved one field to the west. Outside of the application site there has been further development at the Avonbury Business Park. The map also shows that the area around Slad farm has been developed by this time and Bicester is shown as having its modern day extent. The 2010 1:10,000 scale OS map shows that there has been a small amount of development at Lords Farm but shows no other changes to the site. There is no change to Bucknall on the 2006 map, nor the 2010 map. Overall the value of the historic landscape has been assessed as low.
10.5 Design and Mitigation 10.5.1 Construction Archaeology The investigations carried out as part of this assessment have demonstrated that there is little potential for archaeological remains to exist within the Exemplar site and therefore it was not necessary to recommend any changes to the design to reflect archaeological considerations. Consultation carried out with Richard Oram, Planning Archaeologist for Oxfordshire County Council after the conclusion of the field evaluation confirmed that, based on the results of the field evaluation no further archaeological investigations will be required at the Exemplar site; therefore no mitigation is required during the construction phase. The rest of the Masterplan Area however, has been demonstrated to contain archaeological remains of some significance and whilst the assessment and consultation process is currently ongoing it is highly NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 186
likely that the mitigation strategy will need to include archaeological excavation of the areas where the evaluation has recorded activity. The exact location and extent of the areas of excavation will be agreed through consultation with the Planning Archaeologist and will be carried out in accordance with a Written Scheme of Investigation which shall be agreed with the Local Planning Authority prior to commencing work. It is also recommended that archaeological investigations of a similar nature to those that have been carried out across the Exemplar Site and Masterplan area are extended into Altitude Land in order to determine the archaeological potential of this area.
Built Heritage This assessment has demonstrated that there are no Listed Buildings, or non-listed buildings within the boundaries of the Exemplar site itself. There will be a small visual impact upon the setting of the built heritage assets around the Exemplar site once the construction activity begins and the site is no longer arable farmland. However as this will be a temporary impact and the built heritage assets are at least partially shielded from the site by walls and hedgerows, it is not considered that there are any practical mitigation measures that can be implemented at this stage. On the basis of the built heritage assessment it is recommended that the proposed development of the Masterplan Area ensures it does not have any direct physical impacts on the designated and undesignated built heritage assets within the site. In addition, wherever possible, efforts should be made to preserve the setting of these assets. Specifically the efforts made during the design of the Exemplar site to preserve the line of sight from the north east corner of the wooded area in the north west corner of the site to St Lawrence’s Church should be continued, especially in the design for Altitude Land. This would significantly lessen the impact of the development of this area on this asset. It is also recommended that some open space is maintained between the Listed barns at Himley farm and the development and the development is screened from the asset through careful planning and maintaining the existing hedgerows. It is also recommended that the farm buildings within the site be retained as far as possible in their current layout and efforts be made during the masterplanning process to ensure that the proposed development does not detract too much from the understanding of the original function of these buildings. On a more general note sympathetic design of key structures within the development to compliment the historic structures in the area will allow the development to blend well with the existing historic structures allowing a greater sense of place connecting the new development with important buildings in the area. NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 187
It is also recommended that sympathetic design and preservation of green space in the areas closest to the listed buildings at Home Farm is included in the design for Altitude Land in order to avoid impacts to the setting of these assets. The character of any green space should reflect the current character of the fields in this area which are under pasture.
Historic Landscape During the construction of the development any construction activity in the vicinity of hedgerows to be retained would be managed to avoid causing damage to or removing the existing hedgerows as they contribute to the historic character of the field boundaries which are a key element of the Historic landscape in this area. Where practicable exclusion zones should be set up around the hedgerows to avoid accidental damage. Where removal of hedgerows is unavoidable then these would be translocated to as close to the original line as possible in order to preserve the line of the historic boundary.
10.5.2 Operation Archaeology As the investigations carried out as part of this investigation have shown that there is little potential for archaeological remains to survive within the Exemplar site, no mitigation measures are recommended during the operation phase.
Built Heritage As part of the design stage of this project a number of measures have been put in place in order to minimise any adverse impacts of the development on the built heritage assets in the vicinity of the Exemplar sites. The Grade II* listed St Lawrence’s Church currently commands views looking south west across the Exemplar site towards a small wooded area. By designing a gap in the centre development along the sightline from the church to the wood this view has been preserved within the development. The other built heritage assets within the study area, the listed and non-listed buildings at Home Farm and the non-listed Caversfield House are all separated from the Exemplar site. In the case of Caversfield House the B4100 runs between the Exemplar site development and the house and on the Exemplar site side it is bounded by high hedgerows which are to be retained as part of the development and on the opposite side of the road there is a high wall forming a boundary between the house and the area to west of the Masterplan site. The boundary of Exemplar site development stops a field’s length away from Home Farm so the setting of the built heritage assets at NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 188
the farm are preserved by a buffer of open fields between them and the development. The retention of hedgerows along the boundary of the Exemplar site is another design measure that will help to reduce any adverse impacts upon these built heritage assets.
Historic Landscape The design of the layout of the proposed development has sought to preserve the lines of the existing historic field boundaries where possible and the layout of the development is contained within the areas defined within these boundaries. In many places across the proposed development, the existing hedgerows are also preserved in whole or in part. In addition two of the existing farm tracks leading from Home Farm have be preserved in the design ensuring the continuation of historic routeways. This design has ensured that the historic landscape of the area remains visible despite the change in the character of the area from farmland to a residential and mixed use development. During the operation phase efforts would be made to maintain the hedgerows and preserve the lines of the historic boundaries when redevelopment proposals are considered.
10.6 Assessment of Effects A full impact assessment assessing the effects of the development of all Cultural Heritage assets identified as part of the baseline will be carried out as part of the Environmental Impact Assessment. The following presents a brief overview of what impacts are anticipated to occur to heritage assets following mitigation.
10.6.1 Construction Archaeology All impacts on the archaeological remains within the site will occur during the construction period. These impacts will be direct physical impacts and will occur as a result of the partial or total truncation of archaeological remains. These impacts are considered to be in the range of moderate to major. However the archaeological fieldwork that will be carried out as mitigation in advance of the development will add considerably to the knowledge of archaeological activity in this area.
Built Heritage All built heritage assets will experience impacts to their setting as a result of construction activity. However the majority of impacts will be experienced during the operation phase so they will be discussed in that section below. NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 189
Historic Landscape The proposed development is located within a historic landscape which is of low value. However the construction of the development will result in considerable changes to the use of the area and there will be visual changes within the landscape and changes in noise levels due to construction activity. This will result in impacts to the Historic Environment which are considered to be in the range of slight to minor taking into account the low value of the historic landscape resource.
10.6.2 Operation Archaeology No further impacts to archaeology is anticipated during the operation phase.
Built Heritage This assessment has concluded that the built heritage resource within the study area contains assets of high medium and low value. Any impacts which will occur will be on the setting of the assets. The buildings within the proposed Site development are to be constructed in various styles and with a variety of finishes including stone, brick, timber and render. The closest buildings within the proposed Exemplar Site development to St Lawrence’s Church and Caversfield House are to be constructed in styles which is likely to blend in well with the local buildings and they are to be finished with either brick or stone. The use of stone will help to connect the new development to the existing historic buildings and will allow for the creation of a coherent sense of place due to the similarity in building material and colour between the historic buildings and the new development. This effect is lessened slightly be the use of building design elsewhere in the proposed Exemplar Site development which is very different to the local style and the red brick finish of some of the buildings thus weakening the connection between the historic buildings and the new development. However these buildings are unlikely to be visible from either Caversfield House or St Lawrence’s Church. The development of Altitude Land will bring the development closer to the listed building at Home Farm. This will erode the setting of this asset further. However the green space within this area is closest to the farm buildings and thus helps to reduce the impact on their setting. The current setting of the listed and non-listed agricultural buildings within the site are informed by their location within a rural farmed NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 190
landscape. Overall some of this setting will be lost which will impact the setting of these assets. This assessment has concluded that the built heritage resource within the study area contains one asset of high value, two assets of medium value, and two assets of low value. There are no built heritage assets within the Proposed Exemplar Site development itself and therefore there will be no direct physical impacts on any built heritage assets from the operation phase of the development. Any impacts which will occur will be on the setting of the assets within the study area. Bucknell Manor House and the Churchyard Cross are not anticipated to experience any impacts to their setting.
Historic Landscape The proposed development is located within a historic landscape which is of low value. The key element of the historic landscape in this area has been identified as the historic boundaries as they inform the area’s historic use as farmland. The design and mitigation measures outlined in this assessment will ensure that either the field boundaries themselves or the line of them will be protected and retained during the construction of the proposed Exemplar Site development. Where possible it is recommended that this occurs in the Masterplan area as well. The development will result in considerable changes to the use of the area and there will be visual changes within the landscape and changes in the use of the landscape from agricultural to residential and amenity. This will result in impacts to the Historic Environment which are considered to be minor to moderate taking into account the low value of the historic landscape resource.
10.7 Cumulative Effects Archaeology The environmental assessment produced for the Exemplar site concluded that there is no potential for archaeological remains to occur within the proposed Exemplar development and the significance of effects of the development on the archaeological resource in the study area has been assessed as neutral. There is no potential for archaeological remains to occur within the Exemplar site, therefore there are no cumulative effects associated with either the NW Bicester development or other developments with regard to the archaeological resource. All committed development in the vicinity of Bicester is separated from the Masterplan Area and therefore would not have any cumulative impacts on the archaeological resource within the site. NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 191
Built Heritage The combination of the Exemplar site with the NW Bicester Development could result in a minor adverse cumulative effect on the setting of listed buildings and non-listed buildings within the vicinity of the development. The design of the proposed developments would be in sympathy with the adjacent built heritage assets to minimise these adverse effects.
Historic Landscape The masterplan for the NW Bicester Development should retain key landscape features such as the line of field boundaries. There would be no cumulative effects on historic landscape associated with other developments, due to their distance from the site.
10.8 Summary This assessment report has demonstrated that from the work carried out to date it is known that the Exemplar site has little potential to impact archaeological remains and no archaeological mitigation is proposed in this area. For the wider Masterplan Area, it is clear that there are concentrations of archaeological activity across the site and mitigation in the form of archaeological excavation is proposed. The archaeological remains across the Masterplan Area will be impacted by the proposed development and therefore it is important that they are fully identified and recorded. The built heritage resource within the study area includes a small number of Listed Buildings and a group of historic but undesignated farm buildings. All buildings within the site will experience impact to their setting as a result of the development. This assessment has concluded that the proposed development is located within a historic landscape which is of low value. The construction of the development will result in considerable changes to the use of the area and there will be visual changes within the landscape and changes in noise levels due to construction activity. Therefore there will be impacts experienced by the Historic Landscape resource.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 192
11
Contaminated Land
11.1 Introduction This chapter relates to the proposed development on the entire Masterplan Site (including the area known as the Exemplar site) of the NW Bicester Eco development and considers the potential associated risks to human health and controlled waters that development of the Site may represent. This chapter also describes:
The current baseline conditions at the Masterplan Site
Any potential impacts and the mitigation measures required to prevent, reduce or offset any potentially significant adverse effects
The likely residual effects after these measures have been implemented
To assist the understanding of the principles of this subject and their particular application within the context of the proposed development, it is recommended that the reader refers to the associated Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited Reports (Ref 11-1, 11-2 and 11-3), which have provided information for this chapter and copies of which are included in Appendix 11A, 11B and 11C.
11.2 Regulatory and Policy Context This assessment has been undertaken in accordance with current legislation, national, regional and local plans and policies. Outlined below are those elements of current legislation, policy and guidance relevant to contaminated land in the context of the proposed Masterplan Site development. A summary of the relevant legislation and policies, the requirements of these policies and NW Bicester Masterplan Site response is provided in Table 11-1 below. Table 11-1
Summary of Relevant Legislation and Policies
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester Masterplan Response
Environmental Protection Act
Government policy in relation to land contamination is outlined in DEFRA Circular 01/2006 ‘Contaminated Land’. The policy aims to both prevent new contamination and to address the inherited legacy of contaminated land. The primary legislation that covers historic land contamination is Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990, which was inserted by section 57 of
Local authorities are the main regulator and are required to publish a strategy for inspecting their areas. The Environment Agency is responsible for dealing with defined ‘special sites’ and monitoring and reporting on progress made. Both local authorities and the Environment Agency record
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 193
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester Masterplan Response
the Environment Act 1995. Part 2A provides a definition of contaminated land, focussing on risks in the context of the current use and circumstances of the land. It places specific duties on local authorities to inspect their areas to identify land falling within this definition and, where they do, to require its remediation in line with the ‘suitable for use’ approach.
certain prescribed information about their regulatory actions on a public register and local authorities maintain databases about potentially contaminated sites within their area.
Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 defines contaminated land as ‘Any land which appears to be in such a condition, by reason of substances in, on or under the land that: Significant Harm is being caused or there is a Significant Possibility of such harm being caused; or Pollution of Controlled Water is being, or is likely to be, caused’. The identification of contaminated land on the basis that there is a significant possibility of significant harm (SPOSH) being caused is set out in DEFRA Circular 01/2006. The identification of contaminated land, as defined in Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990, comprises a risk-based approach. For harm to the non-aquatic environment or pollution of controlled waters to occur, there must be a ‘pollutant linkage’. This linkage is based on the following being present:
Source contamination (hazard);
Pathway for the contaminant to move from source to receptor;
Receptor (target), which is affected by the contaminant. This includes humans, ecosystems, controlled waters, physical systems and built structures,
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
of
Page 194
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester Masterplan Response
which could be affected by the hazard. Waste Management Regulations
The Waste Management (England and Wales) Regulations 2006 states that excavated material generated by the development of land maybe subject to waste regulatory controls to ensure that waste does not harm human health or the environment. Waste disposal, deposit, recovery & recycling in England, Wales and Scotland is regulated primarily through Part 2 of the Environmental Protection Act and the Waste Management Licensing Regulations 1994. Under the legislation all controlled waste must be deposited, disposed of, recycled or recovered at a suitably licensed site, or a site that is registered as exempt from waste management licensing. In addition, controlled waste must be transported to a licensed (or exempt) site by an authorised waste carrier. It is an offence to deposit waste on land that does not have a waste management licence (or exemption) in force.
National Planning Policy Framework 2012
The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) was introduced in March 2012 to simplify planning and was written to help achieve sustainable development. Whilst containing only limited guidance on land affected by contamination the document does states that:
Licensing of waste disposal and treatment facilities, waste carriers and brokers and the monitoring of waste management activities is the responsibility of the Environment Agency in England and Wales.
Consideration will be given for the potential risks from pollution within the study area.
“To prevent unacceptable risks from pollution and land instability, planning policies and decisions should ensure that new development is appropriate for its location. The effects (including cumulative effects) of pollution on health, the natural environment or general amenity, and the potential sensitivity of the area or proposed development to adverse effects from pollution, should be taken into account. Where a site is affected by contamination or land stability issues, responsibility for securing a safe development rests NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 195
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester Masterplan Response
with the developer and/or landowner. ” Water Resources Act
The Water Resources Act 1991 provides regulation of contamination potentially impacting controlled waters and is enforced by the Environment Agency. This provides regulation separate from that within the planning framework.
Controlled Waters Risk Assessment (CWRA) has been undertaken and the potential impacts on water are included.
Control of Substances Hazardous to Health
The Control of Substances Hazardous to Health (COSHH) Regulations, 2002, and subsequent amendments and the Construction and Design Management (CDM) Regulations, 2007, require the developer to ensure that risks to the public and site workers, in relation to the likely presence of contaminated land, are minimised.
Human Health Risk Assessment has been undertaken as part of this SER.
Additional guidance is provided by DEFRA in their series of Contaminated Land Reports (CLR 1CLR 11). Cherwell Local Plan
The proposed new Cherwell Local Plan (2006-2031) was submitted to the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government for formal examination in January 2014. Upon adoption the plan will set out broadly how the district will grow and change in the period up to 2031. The Local Plan must set out the long term spatial vision for the District and contain policies to help deliver that vision. Within Section C of the new Local Plan (Policies for Cherwell’s Places), there is discussion about the development in and around the towns of Bicester and Banbury which will ensure that the housing growth the district needs is focused on the locations that are most sustainable and most capable of absorbing this new growth. Policy Bicester 1 provides details of the North West Bicester Eco-Town.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
In support of the submitted Local Plan, a series of evidence documents have been prepared under the headings of Economics, Environment & Energy, Heritage, Housing, Infrastructure, Leisure and Plan Wide. A Bicester Environmental Baseline Report (2013) is included within the Environment & Energy Evidence and where relevant, the information has been included within this chapter.
Page 196
11.3 Methodology 11.3.1 Study Area The study area for the contaminated land assessment is defined by the Masterplan Site boundary, as shown on Drawing 3-1. The assessment addresses the potential risks to human health and controlled waters that the development of the site may represent.
11.3.2 Establishment of Baseline Conditions The baseline conditions for the Masterplan Site have been determined based on the Phase 1 Desk Study Report (Appendix 11A) and from laboratory testing results obtained from a follow-up preliminary intrusive ground investigation undertaken on site in August 2010 (Appendix 11B). Details have also been taken from the Groundwater Supply: Feasibility Study (Appendix 11C).
11.3.3 Assessment of Effects The potential effects on the identified receptors from contaminants at baseline conditions at the Masterplan Site have been assessed under the headings ‘Human Health Risk Assessment’, ‘Ground Gas Risk Assessment’ and ‘Controlled Waters Risk Assessment’.
Human Health Risk Assessment The Statutory Guidance on Part IIA of the Environmental Protection Act 1990, as set out in DEFRA Circular 01/2006, and Contaminated Land Report 11 (CLR 11) form the basis on which this contaminated land assessment has been undertaken. Current legislation and guidance on the assessment of potentially contaminated sites acknowledges the need for a tiered risk based approach comprising:
Tier 1 Assessment: Comparison of site contaminant levels against generic standards and compliance criteria including an assessment of risk using a source-pathway-receptor model.
Tier 2 Assessment: Derivation of site-specific risk assessment criteria and calculation of site-specific clean-up goals.
The assessment has therefore been undertaken in a phased approach, focussing initially on the Tier 1 Assessment. The Tier 1 assessment includes the following stages, which were completed where applicable:
Zoning of data/site averaging areas;
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 197
Maximum Concentration Assessment - comparison of maximum detected concentrations against relevant Generic Assessment Criteria (GAC);
Mean and Maximum Value Statistical Analysis – consideration of statistical outliers and 95% Upper Confidence Levels (UCLs) against relevant GAC;
Risk Evaluation/Assessment of Significant Results; and
Identification of the need for Tier 2 Assessment and derivation of Site Specific Assessment Criteria (SSAC).
The current philosophy in the assessment and remediation of contaminated land in the UK is to adopt an ‘end use’ approach whereby the significance of contamination at a site is evaluated according to either the existing use or to a proposed development. For the Tier 1 Assessment, Environment Agency published generic Soil Guideline Values (SGVs) derived using the Agency’s CLEA model (Ref 11-6), was used. Where these are not available, GAC published by LQM/CIEH (Ref 11-7) were utilised. The assessment criteria relevant to the standard sensitive receptor setting within the CLEA model has been used i.e. a female receptor aged 1 to 6 years, a residential building (small terraced house) and a sandy loam soil with a pH7 and SOM 1%. Given the proposed site end use, the stringent “residential with plant uptake” land use scenario has been adopted.
Zoning of Data/Site Averaging Areas The development is expected to comprise predominantly residential properties, therefore the site has been considered to comprise one zone and averaging area for the purposes of this assessment.
Tier 1 Assessment In order to focus on the contaminants of potential concern (COPC), the laboratory testing results have been compared with the respective SGVs/GAC. The results and respective screening criteria are presented in the associated interpretative report, a copy of which is included within Appendix 11B. Any contaminants that exceed the SGVs/GAC are considered to be COPC. Those that do not exceed the respective SGVs/GAC are not considered to be COPC and do not require further assessment in relation to the proposed development of the site.
Ground Gas Risk Assessment It should be noted that, in accordance with current best practice and guidance, the number and frequency of ground gas monitoring NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 198
rounds is dependent on the sensitivity of the development and the generation potential of any ground gas source. In this case, the ground gas monitoring programme has been devised in order to establish a preliminary indication of the ground gas regime at the site. Monitoring of the ground gas regime was undertaken on between August and November 2010. The results of monitoring have been assessed guidance document: CIRIA C665 “Assessing Hazardous Ground Gases to Buildings” (Ref11-8) “Code of Practice for the Characterization and Ground Gas in Affected Developments” (Ref 11-9).
using the current Risks Posed by and BS8485:2007 Remediation from
Controlled Waters Risk Assessment The Controlled Waters Risk Assessment (CWRA) has been undertaken in accordance with the guidance suggested in the Model Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination (Contaminated Land Report 11, CLR 11) and comprised a staged approach (referred to as ‘Levels’). A Level 2 Assessment has been undertaken for the purposes of this CWRA. For information, all Levels (1 to 4) are summarised in Table 11-2 below. Table 11-2 Quantitative Risk Assessment Levels
Level Soil
Groundwater
1
Pore water contamination compared Not applicable directly to receptor target concentration
2
Attenuation in unsaturated zone and dilution at the water table
Groundwater below source - groundwater data is compared directly to target concentrations
3
Attenuation in the aquifer
Attenuation and down gradient receptor or compliance point – groundwater concentration at the receptor/compliance point is predicted using numerical modelling
4
Dilution in the receptor
Dilution in the receptor - dilution in a receiving watercourse or pumping abstraction borehole (only with approval of EA)
The basis for the screening criteria is to ensure that the selected screening values are protective of the identified receptor. For groundwater the general approach is to use an environmental standard as experience shows that remediation of contaminated groundwater to background quality is not achievable. The standard should be relevant to the current and future receptors and the standards compliance criteria should be considered. NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 199
Standards that are applicable to this study are:
UK Environmental Quality Standards (EQS) for the protection of aquatic life (in both freshwater and saline environments);
UK Water Supply (Water Quality) Regulations, 2000 and 1989.
The groundwater beneath the site is considered to be the receptor in the first instance and therefore the UK Drinking Water Standards (UKDWS) have been selected as the appropriate screening criteria for the Level 2 Assessment. The results and respective screening criteria are presented in the associated interpretative report (Appendix 11B).
Assessment Criteria In the assessment criteria used to define the significance of the effects, both adverse and beneficial, are:
Large Adverse/Beneficial – where the development would cause a large change to the existing environment
Moderate Adverse/Beneficial – where the development would cause a noticeable change to the existing environment
Minor Adverse/ Beneficial – where the development would cause a small change to the existing environment
Neutral – where no impact will occur on the environment
11.4 Description of Existing Baseline Conditions The Phase 1 Desk Study Report was undertaken for the Masterplan Site to determine likely soil, groundwater and contamination conditions. A summary of the findings from the Desk Study Report and ground investigation, as relevant to the Masterplan site, is as follows. Since the earliest available historical map of 1881 to the present day, the site has been dominated by agricultural activity and the railway line run through the centre of the Site. ‘B’ roads border the Site to the east and south – south west. The A4095 road and Bicester town border the Site to the south-east. Streams run through the Site and flow towards the South East to south south-east and join the River Ray seven km away, south of Bicester. Geologically, the Site is underlain by a thin cover of superficial deposits. At rock head, this is represented by the Combrash Formation, which primarily comprises bioclastic limestone. This is underlain by the Forest Marble Formation, which comprises grey calcareous mudstone with lenticular beds of bioclastic limestone.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 200
The geological sequence is generally confirmed by the ground investigations undertaken and the strata encountered are summarised as follows:
0-0.2m thickness of Topsoil;
0.2-0.6m (up to 0.8m deep in places) of Subsoil, comprising an orange/brown gravelly/sandy Clay or sandy clayey Gravel;
0.6m to 1.9m (up to 2.9m deep in places) of yellow sandy Gravel and in places yellow/grey Clay, grading to completely weathered Limestone (Cornbrash Formation);
From 1.9 to 7m depth, alternating Limestone and Clay bands of the Cornbrash Formation are represented.
The bedrock is designated as Secondary A aquifer. These are aquifers which are permeable layers capable of supporting water supplies at a local rather than strategic scale, and in some cases forming an important source of base flows to rivers. These are generally aquifers formerly classified as minor aquifers. The site is not located within a SPZ and there are no major potable water supplies (such as public water supply wells) within 5km of the Site centre. There are three groundwater abstractions recorded within the site boundary. All are registered to boreholes at Lord’s Farm for general farming and domestic purposes. Two abstractions are shown on the map at Hawkwell Farm in the centre of the Site, but these are not recorded in the EA database (from Envirocheck). Three historical wells have been located within the Masterplan boundary, but there are currently no private water supplies on the Site. From the site investigation groundwater was encountered between 0.6 to 2.6 m in trial pits TP7, TP8, TP9 TP10, TP13 and TP18 respectively (location plan in Hyder, February 2011) . The remaining trial pits were dry. Trial pits TP7 to TP10 and TP13 were carried out after a period of heavy rain. Groundwater monitoring, following completion of the ground investigation at the Masterplan site suggested that excavations for shallow foundations may encounter some groundwater flow in some areas, particularly after heavy rain. The groundwater strikes within the trial pits generally coincide with the top of the limestone (Cornbrash Limestone). A historic landfill is recorded as present on the Site at Gowell Farm. This is currently part of Avonbury Business Park. Records suggest that this location may have been previously quarried for limestone. Local Authority records contained within the Envirocheck Report state the deposited waste as being “ash, glass, brick, pottery”, which was likely used as fill for the old quarry on Site. We understand that a ground investigation is going to be done on this area to determine the NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 201
nature of the fill and any impact this may have on the surrounding proposed development. Plans showing the features detailed above are included within the Phase 1 desk study report (Appendix 11A) and Hydrogeological Report (Appendix 11C).
Human Health Risk Assessment Across the whole masterplan site, soil samples were analysed for a suite of metal and organic contaminants. From the assessment only one soil sample from TP13 at 0.6m depth had a concentration slightly above the respective SGVs/GAC for Arsenic. The concentration recorded was 36.2mg/kg which is marginally above the SGV of 32mg/kg for a residential with plant uptake scenario. On review of the log for TP13, this slightly elevated result was encountered within natural soils (very clayey sandy GRAVEL) and therefore it is possible that the Arsenic is from natural sources. Due to the depth that it has been encountered, residents are unlikely to come into day to day contract with this material, as long as site levels remain the same. All other samples analysed contained contaminants which were below the SGVs/GAC for a residential with plant uptake scenario. The risks posed to human health (i.e. site end users) are considered to be low. As only one sample of the 23 samples tested returned contaminant values greater that the respective SGVs/GAC, the soil that has been tested is deemed suitable for use in gardens (including growing edible plants) without the need for treatment or other remedial action. It should however be noted that samples have been taken from depths ranging from 0.2m to 1.2m below ground level. There has therefore been limited testing of shallow soils and very limited testing (if any) of topsoil across the site. It should be noted that the investigation undertaken to date, only covers provides limited spatial coverage due to access constraints at the time of the works. During site construction works, site workers should remain vigilant to the possible risk of encountering localised areas of contaminated soils. Should potentially contaminated soil be encountered, further testing will be required to assess the risks to the health and safety of site workers, site end users and other sensitive receptors. All persons engaged in site construction works should be made aware of the findings of the intrusive investigation and the hazards associated with handling potentially contaminated materials. It is recommended that all works are conducted in accordance with the Health and Safety Executive publication entitled “Protection of Workers and the General Public during the Development of Contaminated Land” (Ref 11-10). Gas Risk Assessment NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 202
In line with current guidance, Gas Screening Values (GSV) for methane and carbon dioxide have been calculated and the maximum values are shown in Table 11-3. The corresponding Characteristic Gas Situation (CGS) is also presented in this table. It is understood that the proposed development is to comprise mainly residential houses and therefore the CGS for ‘Situation A’, defined in the guidance as ‘all development types except those in Situation B’ has been considered (Situation B is defined as ‘low rise housing with a ventilated underfloor void’). Table 11-3 Maximum Gas Concentrations and G SVs
Borehole No.
Max. CH4 (v/v %)
Max. CO2 (v/v %)
Max. Flow Rate (l/h)
BH1
<0.10
2.5
0.2
0.0002
0.005
1
BH3
<0.10
1.0
<0.1
0.0001
-
1
BH5
<0.10
3.7
0.3
0.0003
0.011
1
BH10
<0.10
0.9
0.1
0.0001
0.001
1
BH11
<0.10
1.1
0.4
0.0004
0.004
1
Max. CH4 Characteristic Max. CO2 GSV Gas Situation GSV (l/h) (l/h) A
The results of the gas monitoring indicate a low risk in relation of ground gases (methane and carbon dioxide) for the proposed development. The above gas risk assessment does not account for Radon. A detailed BR 211 Radon Report was obtained from the British Geological Survey (BGS) as part of the Desk Study and states that the estimated probability of a property being above the Action Level for radon is 3-5% and therefore basic radon protection measures are required in the construction of new properties for the site. Details on the technical specifications for basic radon protection measures are given in document BRE Report BR211: Radon – Guidance on Protective Measures for New Buildings (Ref 11-11).
Controlled Water Risk Assessment Four water samples taken from the boreholes across the Masterplan site were analysed predominantly for metal contaminants. All the results were below the water quality screening values. As noted none of the contaminants tested returned values greater that the respective UKDWS, therefore the waters that has been tested indicate that no remedial action with regards to ground water is required. NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 203
11.5 Design and Mitigation 11.5.1 Construction A Construction Environmental Management Plan, CEMP will be prepared and implemented by the contractor during the construction phase of the Masterplan Site. Mitigation measures will be implemented during the construction phase to minimise potential effects. Measures will include the following:
Dust mitigation measures such as damping down, covering of stockpiles, use of wheel washes and covering of lorries during transportation. will be implemented as part of a general good site management plan to ensure that the potential effects associated with airborne dust are minimised.
Water mitigation measures - as previously stated, very low contaminant concentrations in the soil and groundwater have been measure in the explored areas of the site, therefore it is considered unlikely that the construction works will introduce new contamination from the shallow soil to the underlying Secondary ‘A’ Aquifer (Cornbrash Formation) and the two on-site streams.
Waste mitigation to minimise the impacts associated with waste arising from the site is discussed within Chapter 15.
Spillage mitigation measures will include the storage of chemicals and contaminative material in accordance with the Environment Agency guidance; regular servicing and inspection of vehicles used on-site; restriction of refuelling of vehicles to bunded areas underlain by hard standing, or other impermeable materials and the restriction of vehicle movements within close proximity of the surface watercourses.
11.5.2 Operation No mitigation measures are proposed for the operational phase of the Masterplan Site.
11.6 Assessment of Effects 11.6.1 Construction Effects likely to arise on-site through construction activities are outlined below. All construction works have the potential to generate the following potential effects relevant to this assessment:
Creation of areas of contamination e.g. through spillage
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 204
Waste generation
Dust generation
Risk to contamination of workers
Mobilisation of contamination and migration into controlled waters
As the contamination testing has not identified any COPC, it is not considered that construction work will lead to exposure of construction workers and members of the public to any existing contamination present within soils, nor is it expected that the work will mobilise existing contaminants into ground or controlled water (surface water and groundwater). However, the scale of the site is such that complete coverage of all land area during the ground investigation was uneconomical and impractical, and as such, there is always a possibility that contaminants may be present in previously unexplored areas. These possibilities are discussed below in the context of existing site conditions i.e. pre-remediation:
Dust Whilst likely not contaminated, dust and silt can result from ground disturbance during construction, which can lead to accidental ingestion, dermal contact or inhalation of particles by site workers and possibly the general public. In some cases, generation of dust and silt may also lead to deposition on nearby surface waters. As no significant contamination sources have been identified, the impact is assessed to be neutral to minor adverse.
Water Construction activities can result in the mobilisation of contaminants within the soil and the creation of a pathway for contaminants to migrate to underlying groundwater. Pathways can also be created for the transport of contaminants to surface water via airborne dust and through overland flow from poorly managed stockpiles. The impact is assessed to be neutral if mitigation measures are implemented.
Work in Previously Unexplored Areas In the event that construction activities are undertaken in areas where previously unknown contamination is encountered, a management strategy (“Watching Brief”) would be devised to ensure that any risks associated with its mobilisation are minimised. If required, suitable arrangements for stockpiling will be implemented to minimise the potential for the leaching of contaminated runoff of sediment through loading and exposure to rainwater. Mitigation measures will include stockpiling in bunded areas underlain by impermeable material away from watercourses. Stockpiles will be covered to prevent leaching of the material. NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 205
If excavation works are undertaken in areas where locally contamination water is identified, water may enter the excavations and lead to contaminants migrating vertically and horizontally. Abstraction of potentially contaminated water from excavations will need to be controlled to prevent cross contamination of soils and potential impact upon the Secondary ‘A’ Aquifer. Mitigation could include the abstraction and disposal of water to a foul sewer or to surface water following appropriate treatment (and with the appropriate consent in place). If contamination is encountered via visual or olfactory evidence, during the construction works, a suitably qualified Geoenvironmental Engineer should be contacted to ensure that samples are taken and analysed to determine the risks associated with the contaminants present and therefore the mitigation measures required. The impact is assessed as neutral to minor adverse.
Waste The geology identified at the site indicates that shallow spread foundations may be suitable for all anticipated low-load structures; therefore, the generation of spoil is expected to be minimal. It is anticipated that any spoil generated may be reused on site for landscaping or other purposes, therefore it is expected that only minimal volumes of material may require disposal off-site e.g. if contaminated. The impact is assessed as neutral to minor adverse depending on the final destination of the material i.e. reuse or disposal. Accidental Spillage of Construction Related Material During any construction work, there always some potential for accidental spillage/leakage from construction plant and materials stored on site, particularly fuel and lubricating hydrocarbons. The impact is assessed as neutral to minor adverse as long as mitigation measures detailed above are implemented. Overall, it is considered that the effect during construction will be neutral to minor adverse.
11.6.2 Operation For the proposed primarily housing end use, it is expected that receptors will come into regular contact with the soil, therefore potential for accidental ingestion, dermal contact or inhalation of dust particles exists. However, as no contaminant sources have been identified from the historical or current use of the site (confirmed by laboratory testing of the soil and groundwater) the impact is assessed as neutral. If contaminated material were discovered in previously NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 206
unexplored areas of the site, remedial measures would be implemented as appropriate for the end use of that area of development. There is a small landfill site located on the southern boundary of the site and is currently occupied by the Avonbury Business Park. The composition of the landfill site is unknown, however it is understood that a ground investigation is to be undertaken in this area to establish the nature of the landfill material. If contamination is present within this landfill area, there is the possibility of migration of leachate on to the surrounding land; however the majority of the site is upgradient from this feature. The limited gas monitoring has not recorded any significant quantities of ground gases, however it is noted that none of the boreholes are close to the landfill site. The impact is assessed as minor adverse to neutral. It is anticipated that a small proportion of the site may contain retail/leisure facilities. During operation, there may be limited potential for accidental spillage of potentially contaminating materials from delivery locations and plant operational locations. Due to the expected hard standing in these areas with appropriate drainage infrastructure and the adoption of standard materials handling and storage procedures, the impact is assessed as neutral. Overall, it is considered that the effect during operation would be neutral. The potential for impacts on ecology, hydrology and air quality are discussed separately in Chapters 6, 7 and 8 respectively.
11.7 Cumulative Effects There are no cumulative effects associated with the development of the Masterplan site with NW Bicester Eco-development or with other developments.
11.8 Summary The contaminated land assessment has been undertaken following the current guidelines set out to address the potential risks to human health and controlled water that the development of the Masterplan Site may present. The baseline conditions for the Masterplan Site and vicinity have been determined based on the Desk Study Report and from laboratory testing results obtained from the subsequent intrusive ground investigation undertaken on site in 2010. In those areas of the site covered by the intrusive ground investigation, no contaminated soil or groundwater was discovered when compared to appropriate screening values. The investigations NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 207
only covered a relatively small proportion of the site and therefore it is possible that some localised contamination may be encountered during the construction of the development. Based on the knowledge to date, the degree of contamination is not expected to be significant, and it is considered that the previously described mitigation measures would significantly reduce or completely mitigate any potential impacts. No residual effects are identified. Construction impacts are considered to be neutral to minor adverse and will be mitigated thorough the use of appropriate PPE and good site management practices. Operational impacts are considered to be neutral and therefore require no mitigation measures. Overall, the contamination risks associated with the masterplan site are considered to be very low, though the risks from naturally occurring radon gas require basic radon protection measures to be incorporated in the construction of new dwellings and extensions.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 208
12
Agriculture and Land Use
12.1 Introduction This assessment reviews the information currently available in relation to agriculture and soils (including the infrastructure utilised for agricultural purposes and the structure of the businesses engaged in farming and related activities) in relation to the proposals. The methodology used to identify the key receptors is described, followed by details of these receptors. Both the construction phase and operational phase impacts of the proposals are identified with detailed measures to mitigate these impacts, such that the residual effects of the proposals would not be significant, are presented. The baseline against which the likely significant effects have been assessed are the environmental conditions at, and surrounding, the site in March 2014.
12.2 Regulatory Framework Apart from the EIA Regulations, there are no legislative requirements governing the assessment of agricultural matters, and the framework of any assessment is derived from a combination of EU and national agricultural and land use policies and measures. The key elements of these can be summarised as:
The conservation of the best and most versatile (BMV) resources of agricultural land
Retention of a competitive and sustainable agricultural industry
The diversification of individual farm businesses into supplementary non-agricultural activities
The more positive engagement of individual farm businesses with the delivery of environmental benefits
A summary of the policy and legislation relevant to this assessment is set out in the following table: Table12-1 Land Use and Agriculture Regulatory and Policy Framework
Policy/ Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester Masterplan Response
The Strategy for England ; Safeguarding Our Soils (Ref 12-1)
The Strategy for England sets out the Government’s aims in relation to protecting agricultural soils and in relation to protecting the soil resource during construction and development. This includes a requirement that planning decisions take
An assessment has been made of the agricultural land grade and the potential impacts on this resource.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Recommendations have
Page 209
Policy/ Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester Masterplan Response
sufficient account of soil quality, particularly where significant areas of the BMV agricultural land are involved.
been provided detailing appropriate soil handling methodologies in line with the DEFRA Code of Practice.
The presence of best and most versatile agricultural land is stated to be a material consideration in planning decisions, but has to be taken into account alongside other sustainability considerations including: biodiversity, the quality and character of the landscape, accessibility to infrastructure, workforce and markets and maintaining viable communities. Within the Strategy there is an aim of encouraging better management of soils during the construction process. As part of this, a Code of Practice for the sustainable re-use of soils on construction sites, also published by DEFRA (Ref 12-2) to protect soil resources disturbed on construction sites. Whilst the Code is not legislatively binding, the wider benefits of following the guidance (in terms of sustainability, cost savings and waste controls) are clearly set out. National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF; Ref 123)
The NPPF sets out the Government’s planning policies for England and how these are expected to be applied. The NPPF provides a framework within which local and neighbourhood plans can be produced. Planning law requires that applications for planning permission must be determined in accordance with the development plan. The NPPF must be taken into account in the preparation of local and neighbourhood plans, and is a material consideration on planning decisions.
An assessment has been made of the agricultural land grade and the potential impacts on this resource.
Section 11 of the NPPF deals with conserving and enhancing the natural environment. This includes a requirement that the ‘local planning authorities should take into account the economic and other benefits of the best and most versatile agricultural land. Where significant development of agricultural land is demonstrated to be necessary, local planning authorities should seek to use areas of poorer quality land in preference to that of a higher quality.’ The local planning authority should also ‘put NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 210
Policy/ Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester Masterplan Response
in place policies to ensure …(safeguarding the long term potential of best and most versatile agricultural land and conserving soil resources) …’ The NPPF also has, as one of its core planning principles, the promotion of “mixed use developments, and encourage multiple benefits from the use of land in urban and rural areas, recognising that some open land can perform many functions (such as for wildlife, recreation, flood risk mitigation, carbon storage, or food production)”. The sustainable re-use of soil materials will support this objective.
Cherwell Local Plan (Ref 12-4)
Biodiversity and the Natural Environment) requires that the re-use of soils will be sought. In relation to the North West Eco-Town it is stated that “an assessment of whether the site contains best and most versatile agricultural land, including a detailed survey where necessary” will be required and that “a soil management plan may be required to be submitted with planning applications”.
An assessment has been made of the agricultural land grade and the potential impacts on this resource. The soil information available will form part of any soil management plan required to be submitted with planning applications.
12.2.1 Consultations As very limited detailed published Agricultural Land Classification (ALC) information was available for the site, which separates Grade 3 land into Grades 3a and 3b, Natural England was consulted on the requirements for further surveys. Their response stated that: “An agricultural land classification and soil survey of the land should be undertaken at a detailed level, e.g. 1 auger boring per hectare, supported by pits dug in each main soil type to confirm the soil physical characteristics of the full depth of soil resource, to determine the impact of the development on ‘best and most versatile’ agricultural land and on soil resources.” In addition, the landowners were interviewed (as detailed below) to gather information on the existing farm business.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 211
12.3 Methodology 12.3.1 Introduction The principal agricultural and related resources are the quality of the agricultural land and items of fixed farm and farm-related capital, as well as other items of capital associated with diversified activities on farms. Soil and ALC surveys have been undertaken in accordance with published guidelines (MAFF 1988) (Ref 12-5). As noted above, there are no legislative requirements governing the assessment of agricultural matters, and the framework of any assessment is derived from a combination of EU and national agricultural and land use policies and measures, combined with expert judgement.
12.3.2 Study Area The Study Area for the proposed development includes the land within the red line boundary, as well as adjacent land under the same ownership, such that a full assessment of the potential impact on farm viability could be undertaken.
12.3.3 Establishment of Baseline Conditions The baseline conditions comprise an assessment of the quality of the agricultural land, items of fixed farm and farm-related capital, as well as the agricultural practices used on the land. A range of information has been reviewed in order to assess the character of the site in terms of land use and soils. This has included:
Published soil maps (Ref 12-6)
Published ALC maps and more detailed survey information held by Natural England
LandIS Soils Site Report (Ref 12-7)
In addition, the landowners were interviewed in April 2011 where contact details were available and permission had been granted. As detailed above, as very limited published ALC information was available for the site separating Grade 3 land into Grades 3a and 3b, Natural England was consulted on the requirements for further surveys. Following their response, an ALC survey was undertaken, in accordance with MAFF (1988), in September 2010 and April/May 2011 (note that whilst the majority of the site has been covered by these surveys but some areas remain to be surveyed).
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 212
12.3.4 Assessment of Effects An assessment has been carried out of the likely effects of the proposals, both during the construction phase and in the longer-term. Where required, effects have been quantified and assessed in the wider context to evaluate the degree to which they may be considered significant. Effects have been based on the assumption that agricultural circumstances prevailing in March 2014 would continue to prevail. Current best practice and professional judgement are used to define significance criteria in relation to both agricultural land and to farming businesses. Significance criteria in relation to agricultural land and farm viability are shown below in Table 12-2 below. Table12-2 Significance Criteria for Assessing the Effect of the proposals on the National Agricultural Resource
Magnitude of Impact
Land resources
Large Adverse
The loss of more than 20ha of Best and Most Versatile (BMV) agricultural land. In some areas where BMV land is rare and of particular importance, lesser amounts might be classed as a large adverse impact.
Moderate Adverse
The loss of between 5ha and 20ha of BMV land, depending on the quantum and quality and its relative availability in a locality.
Slight Adverse
The loss of small areas (under 5ha) of BMV land. The loss of lower quality land where it is identified as having special agricultural significance in the locality.
Neutral
Where there is no net loss of agricultural land.
The criteria for assessing the impact on the farm businesses have been assessed in accordance with Table 12-3 below. Table12-3 Significance Criteria for Assessing the Effect of the Scheme on Farm Viability
Magnitude of Impact
Farm Businesses
Large adverse
Renders an existing full-time farm business (including any diversification enterprises) unviable.
Moderate adverse
A significant effect on the workability of a full time farm business (including any diversification enterprises) but where the continued viability is not prejudiced.
Slight adverse
Limited effects on workability and the economic performance of a farm unit (including any diversification enterprises) or the loss or a significant effect on the viability of a part-time farm business.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 213
Neutral
Where there would be no negative impact on the farm business (including any diversification enterprises).
12.4 Baseline Conditions Soils A Soils Site Report has been obtained for a 4km x 4km study area centred on the site (NGR SP56366 24621) (Ref 12-7). The soils are mapped as belonging to the Aberford Series across the whole site. These are described as shallow, locally brashy well drained calcareous fine loamy soils over limestone. These soils are relatively freely draining, but are identified as having a high leaching potential and thus little ability to retain non-adsorbed pesticides, which may therefore leach out of the soils and into surface or groundwater. It is not considered that the soils present any significant constraints with the exception of the high leaching potential and thus the need to ensure the protection of any groundwater resources. The land is shown as all falling within Grade 3 (under the Agricultural Land Classification scheme) from available published sources. Limited information is available showing the distinction between Grade 3a and 3b. Figure 12-1 shows an area of land around Gowell Farm as being Grade 3b. No other specific mapping is available for the rest of the site. Figure 12-1 Existing available detailed ALC mapping (the green shading shows areas of Grade 3b land). From www.natureonthemap.naturalengland.org.uk
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 214
The ALC survey undertaken as part of this assessment has shown the land that has been surveyed predominantly falls within Grade 3b, with some small areas of Grade 4 land and small areas (approximately 23ha, 8% of the agricultural land) classed as Grade 3a. The remaining area of the site will be surveyed, following the methodology outlined above, prior to submission of the full Environmental Statement. The major limitation on the Grade attributed to this land is soil depth, which is <30cm in total depth in all locations mapped as Grade 3b on Drawing 13-1. In the areas shown as Grade 3a on Drawing 13-1 the soil is up to 1m in depth. These areas include the small floodplain of the stream which runs through the eastern corner of the site, and thus these soils are likely to have been built up from alluvium. It is considered likely that the majority of the remainder of the site which has not yet been subject to a specific survey will also predominantly be Grade 3b, with the grade again limited by the shallow depth of the soil. As such, it is likely that the site will include approximately 33 ha of Grade 3a land.
Land Use The land within the red line boundary falls under eleven different ownerships. Land use across the site is a mix of arable and grazing (predominantly cattle but also including horse pasture). The grazing land is mainly associated with the central and eastern parts of the site, with arable dominating the western part of the site. Livestock include beef cattle, a dairy herd and suckler cows. The arable crops include wheat, oilseed rape, bean and barley. Fixed assets are mainly associated with the livestock businesses, including a parlour, stables and an important borehole which supplies one farm. Machinery is also owned by the businesses, including tractors, combines, loaders etc. The businesses report some level of disturbance, vandalism and incidents of arson, likely to be a result of this land forming the urban fringe.
12.5 Design and Mitigation 12.5.1 Construction Soils The sustainable re-use of the soil resource affected by the proposals would be undertaken in line with the Construction Code of Practice for the Sustainable Use of Soil on Construction Sites (Ref 12-2). This would be achieved by the development of a Soil Resources Plan (SRP) identifying the soils present, proposed storage locations and handling NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 215
methods and locations for re-use where possible. Measures which would be implemented include (but are not limited to):
Completion of a Soil Resources Survey and incorporate results into a SRP
Link SRP to the Site Waste Management Plan (SWMP)
Ensure soils are stripped and handled in the driest condition possible
Confine vehicle movements to defined haul routes until all the soil resource has been stripped
Protect stockpiles from erosion and tracking over
Ensure physical condition of the entire replaced soil profile is sufficient for the vegetation requirements
Approximately 40% (approximately 167 ha) will be set aside as open space (to include SuDS, hedgerows, a village green, allotments, community garden and the green link). The design will promote the retention of the Grade 3a land within these open spaces. Implementation of appropriate soil handling and use measures would ensure that the soils used across the site in these areas would be of the required characteristics and in the required condition to support a variety of specified activities. For example, surplus nutrient-poor soils (topsoils or subsoils) will be re-used in areas of habitat creation whilst surplus nutrient-rich soils will be prioritised for areas designated for food production or in areas of landscape planting. A limitation of these soils, identified above, is that they have little ability to retain non-adsorbed pesticides, and thus may also have a limited ability to retain other pollutants. This is, in part, due to the shallow nature of these soils and thus this will be taken into account in the creation of soil profiles within the SuDS to ensure they can provide the required functions.
Land Use The phasing of the development will take into account how each business operates, ensuring that the phasing does not, for example, lead to the severance of parts of an enterprise from the rest of the holding or lead to the undeveloped part of the enterprise becoming unviable for the period until it is brought into the development. A considerate construction approach would be used to minimise potential impacts on the agricultural enterprise. The potential impacts on the farm business, in particular the risks of disturbance to livestock and the risks of livestock getting out into adjacent areas, will be clearly highlighted to all construction staff during Toolbox Talks provided by the Environmental Coordinator or their recognised deputy. If there are likely to be periods of significant construction
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 216
activity close to the boundary with the undeveloped fields, the option to use temporary screening will be reviewed. All fencing around the proposed development will be sufficient to resist damage by livestock, and will be regularly checked and maintained in a suitable condition. Any damage to boundary fencing will be repaired immediately. During construction of the link between the two main areas of the proposed development the water pipe feeding the drinking troughs on the field margins to the north west will be protected from damage. Should it be damaged the pipe will be repaired immediately to ensure no disruption to drinking water supplies for livestock. The protection of the water supply from the borehole close to Lord’s Farm is dealt with in Chapter 11 Contaminated Land.
12.5.2 Operation There is provision, within the proposed development, for local food production from allotments, and additional potential for local food production from private or commercial gardens (with 40% of the development which will be set aside as open space). The use of areas of Grade 3a land for this purpose, and the appropriate construction techniques outlined above in relation to soil handling during the construction phase will ensure that the soils in those areas set aside for food production will be in a suitable condition to support this activity. It is also proposed that there will be advice provided locally to individuals or firms on soil management in order to maximise both productivity and sustainability.
12.6 Assessment of Effects 12.6.1 Construction The proposals for this site would result in the loss of approximately 33ha of BMV land from primary agricultural productivity. Whilst some of this land will be used for allotments in within the design, at a worst case it is considered that these proposals would have a Large Adverse impact on agricultural land, given the area of BMV land affected. During construction, there would be impacts on the agricultural enterprise. Land would be lost to the business as each field was brought into the proposed development, reducing the area available for grazing and fodder production. The measures outlined above will minimise disruption to on-going activities and minimise disturbance to remaining livestock. These should limit the likelihood of any of the enterprises becoming unviable. It is assumed that the phasing, and notice periods provided, will allow the enterprises to adapt or move NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 217
such that the economic performance of the business remains unaffected, and as such it is considered that there would be no more than a short-term Slight Adverse impact on farm viability as they adapt through the changes required. This will be confirmed through further discussions with the landowners once more information on the phasing of the development is available.
12.6.2 Operation There would be no additional impacts on the soil resource during the operational phase. It is considered that, once construction is complete the farm enterprises will have relocated totally and thus there will be no further impacts on these businesses. However, during operation there is the potential for impacts associated with disturbance and vandalism to occur outside the red line boundary (as in effect the development brings urban development closer to these areas). This is considered to be a minor issue currently, and thus it is assumed that at this level during the operational phase this would result in a Slight Adverse impact on the enterprises now adjacent or in closer proximity to the development.
12.7 Cumulative effects A number of other developments are proposed in the vicinity of Bicester which have the potential to impact on agricultural land. Some of these are at a significant scale, such as the South West Bicester development which reports a total loss of approximately 60 ha of agricultural land. However, the majority of this land has been assessed as being Grade 3b, with only a small amount of Grade 3a land (area not provided but likely to be <10% of the total area). The Bicester Business Park development states that the land to be lost is Grade 4. Provisional ALC mapping shows that the land surrounding Bicester is classed as Grade 3 or 4. Where more detailed mapping is available areas of Grade 3a land are limited in extent. As such, it is considered that the potential for cumulative impacts on best and most versatile land is limited, and unlikely to be more than Moderate Adverse.
12.8 Summary The soils across the site are fairly uniform, with approximately 8% being classed as Grade 3a (i.e. BMV land). The main limitation on land productivity relates to soil depth, and only where deeper alluvial soils are present can the land be classed as ‘Best and Most Versatile’ (BMV). Given the minimal area (approx. 33ha) of BMV land affected, it is considered that the proposals would have no more than a NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 218
Moderate Adverse impact on agricultural land. The proposal to include areas for local food production, and provide advisory support for residents in relation to soil management, will further mitigate the loss of this land. During construction, appropriate soil handling methodologies will be used, in line with current guidance, to ensure the sustainable re-use of soils and maximise the value of the soil resource within the proposed design. This will ensure the use of soils with the optimum characteristics are allocated for the given end use, such as food production, habitat creation of SuDS. Assuming that the phasing of construction and the notice periods provided will allow the enterprises to adapt or move such that the economic performance of the business remains unaffected, it is considered that there would be no more than a short-term Slight Adverse impact on farm viability as they adapt through the changes required. In addition, a considerate construction approach would be used to minimise potential impacts on the agricultural enterprises, which will focus on limiting disturbance to livestock and ensuring no restrictions to access and the ability of farmers to move livestock across the remaining areas of the landholding. As the land around Bicester is likely to predominantly be Grade 3b or lower (i.e. not BMV) the potential for cumulative impacts is limited.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 219
13
Human Health
13.1 Introduction This chapter provides an assessment of the likely significant effects of the proposed Masterplan development on human health. The World Health Organisation states that ‘health is a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity’ (Ref 13-1). This definition highlights that health status is affected by a wide-range of factors and this is reflected in the range of issues considered within this assessment. The cross-cutting nature of the human health assessment requires the use of results in other chapters of this Strategic Environmental Report (SER) including: Air Quality; Noise and Vibration; Landscape and Visual; Traffic and Transport; Contaminated Land; and Socio-Economic and Community Effects.
13.2 Regulatory Framework Table 13-1 presents the key regulatory and policy framework relevant to the assessment of human health effects. The regulatory and policy framework review provided in the Air Quality; Noise and Vibration; Landscape and Visual; Traffic and Transport; Contaminated Land; and Socio-Economic and Community Effects assessments are also relevant to consideration of human health effects. Table 13-1
Human Health Regulatory and Policy Framework
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
Bicester Masterplan development Response
UK Government Sustainable Development Strategy
The strategy identifies the five main priorities for delivering sustainable development: living within environmental limits; ensuring a strong healthy and just society; achieving a sustainable economy; promoting good governance; and using sound science responsibly. All of these factors are inherent to securing good levels of health and well-being for the UK population.
The design of the proposed Masterplan development includes provision for open space, accessibility, walking and cycling, thereby seeking to provide the infrastructure necessary to support the community and the pursuit of healthy lifestyles.
Planning Policy Statement: Eco-towns – A Supplement to Planning Policy Statement (PPS) 1.
The PPS identifies that the built and natural environment is an important component of health and well-being. Good urban design can help to support the pursuit of healthier and more active lifestyles and contribute
The design of the proposed Masterplan development has considered the need to provide the infrastructure and environment to enable residents to pursue healthy lifestyles. This has been
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 220
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
Bicester Masterplan development Response
to reducing health inequalities.
considered through the provision of green infrastructure, community facilities and the appropriate mix of housing.
The planning policies highlight that quality design is important as it contributes to the creation of sustainable communities. New housing developments should have layouts that meet the needs of residents, are visually attractive and make the most sustainable and efficient use of the land. The need for an appropriate mix of housing is also highlighted, as well as the provision of appropriate services and infrastructure.
Quality of design and housing mix are fundamental components of the proposed Masterplan development.
NPPF Planning Policy 4 Promoting sustainable transport
The planning policy states that the transport system needs to be balanced in favour of sustainable transport modes, giving people a real choice about how they travel. The siting of facilities needed on a day to day basis (shops, health centres, schools etc.) to ensure easy access by modes other than the private car is also highlighted. Encouragement should be given to solutions which support reductions in greenhouse gas emissions and reduce congestion.
The ability of future residents to utilise more active modes of travel is considered in the assessment, as well as the accessibility to facilities needed on a day to day basis. Accessibility has been considered in the design of the proposed Masterplan development.
NPPF Planning policy 8 Promoting Health Communities
The needs of local communities must be understood to ensure that sufficient high quality open space, sports and recreational facilities that meet local needs are provided.
As part of the design of the proposed Masterplan development the capacity of existing sport and recreation facilities has been considered and the provision of open space and green infrastructure is a fundamental component of the design. The development will retain 40% green space including community allotments to encourage outdoor lifestyles and nurture wildlife and biodiversity.
National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (Ref 13-2): Planning Policy 6. Delivering a wide choice of high quality homes Planning Policy 7. Requiring Good Design
When local authorities are deciding where to provide new recreational and community facilities consideration should be given to the accessibility to such developments by walking and cycling. The potential effects of such development on NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 221
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
Bicester Masterplan development Response
vibrancy and vitality and the wider effects of such development, for example on the existing built and natural environment and local residents must be considered.
Natural landscaping will be used to create safe play areas. Public transport and active travel options have been designed into the proposal. With specially designed cycle and pedestrian routes, a bus service within 400m of every home with live timetable updates in each house, charging points for electric vehicles and an electric car club, residents will be encouraged to adopt more sustainable modes of travel.
Eco-Bicester – One Shared Vision, December, 2010 (Ref 13-3)
The Vision highlights that NW Bicester will be designed to support healthy and sustainable environments and provide opportunities for residents to make healthy choices easily.
Providing opportunities to pursue healthy lifestyles has been an integral component of the proposed Masterplan development design.
Cherwell Local Plan (2006 – 2031) (Ref 13-4)
Policy BSC8: Securing Health and Well-Being. The policy tackles health inequalities through the provision of health facilities in sustainable locations, the provision of open space and by encouraging walking and cycling.
Providing opportunities to pursue healthy lifestyles has been an integral component of the proposed Masterplan development design.
Cherwell Local Plan (1996) Saved Policies (Ref 13-5)
Policy R12 – Provision of Open Space in association with New Residential Development requires that at least 2.43 hectares of public open space per 1,000 people should be provided within all new housing developments.
Provision of open space and green infrastructure has been an integral part of the proposed Masterplan development design.
Non-Statutory Cherwell Local Plan 2011
Chapter six of the Local Plan includes a number of policies that are relevant to the human health assessment. Policies TR8 and TR9 relate specifically to walking and cycling.
The ability of future residents to utilise more active modes of travel is considered in the assessment, as well as the accessibility to facilities needed on a day to day basis. This has also been an integral component of the design of the proposed Masterplan development.
Chapter seven addresses
Provision of open space and
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 222
Policy/Legislation
Cherwell Core Strategy – Draft (2010) (Ref 13-7)
Requirements
Bicester Masterplan development Response
recreation and community facilities. This section of the plan highlights the need for improvements to facilities and accessibility to them. The poor distribution of open space throughout Bicester town is identified.
green infrastructure has been an integral part of the proposed Masterplan development design. Accessibility to recreation facilities has also been an integral component of the assessment.
Strategic Objective 9 - To seek a balance between economic growth, the development of new homes and the provision of sufficient, good quality services, facilities and infrastructure including green infrastructure, to meet health, education, transport, open space, sport, recreation and other community needs.
The proposed Masterplan development is being designed in line with the Core Strategy requirements and has, therefore, considered potential for residents to be able to pursue healthy lifestyles and the requirement for new health facilities.
Policy NWB1 – Strategic Allocation 1: NW Bicester development outlines what the proposals will be expected to achieve.
13.3 Methodology 13.3.1 Introduction Health Impact Assessment (HIA) is a tool that can be used to assess the health impact of policies, plans and projects. A stand-alone HIA is not being undertaken for the proposed Masterplan development; rather the assessment of effects on human health is being integrated into the SER to ensure that the interrelationships between health and other environmental topics are holistically considered rather than being assessed in isolation. The methods proposed within the Merseyside Guidelines for HIA have been used to guide the assessment of effects on human health although they have been adapted to reflect the integration of human health considerations into the SER. The assessment uses a broad definition of health which recognises that health is affected by more than simply the presence or absence of disease and is influenced by a range of health determinants as illustrated in Figure 13-1.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 223
Figure 13-1 Main Determinants of Health (Source: European Policy Health Impact Assessment -A Guide, 2004) (Ref 13-8)
The assessment of effects on human health considers how the health determinants will be affected by the proposed Masterplan development which could result in a change in health outcomes. The following health determinants were considered in the assessment:
Employment and Economy
Safety and Security
Air Quality
Noise and Vibration
Physical Environment (focussing on built form and urban design)
Transport and Access
Waste Management and Contamination
Community and Social Infrastructure
Community Spirit and Engagement
Access and provision of healthcare and facilities and services
The cross-cutting nature of the human health assessment requires the use of results presented in other chapters of this SER to determine the potential effects of the proposed Masterplan NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 224
development on health outcomes. The results presented in other assessments are cross-referenced where appropriate.
13.3.2 Study Area The study area for human health covered Cherwell District as well as considering the wards in which the NW Bicester development are to be located and those within the immediate vicinity (Caversfield, Ambrosden and Chesterton, Launton, Fringford, Bicester West, Bicester North, Bicester East, Bicester South and Bicester Town). Drawing 13-1 shows the indicative boundary of these wards and the boundary of the proposed Masterplan development. This study area was selected to enable an understanding to be obtained of the existing health characteristics of the communities surrounding the site, as well as service and facilities provision. Reference was also made to the health status trends reported for Oxfordshire to provide appropriate contextual information and comparative statistics for the assessment. The assessment of human health effects has also utilised the results of other chapters in this SER. Some of these topics have used slightly different study areas to that defined above and this has been acknowledged in the assessment. Therefore, the study area has varied depending upon the health determinants being considered as part of the assessment.
13.3.3 Establishment of Baseline Conditions The baseline conditions have been established through desk –based research. Key data sources have included Neighbourhood Statistics, the Association of Public Health Observatories and the Clinical and Health Outcomes Knowledge Base. Reference has also been made to the Annual Public Health Report 2013 published by the Director of Public Health for Oxfordshire (Ref 13-9) and the Joint Strategic Needs Assessment 2013 (Ref 13-10). Reference has been made to Ordnance Survey mapping where relevant. Trends have been identified where historical data is available. No specific sites surveys have been undertaken for the assessment of human health effects. An Audit of Social Infrastructure Provision was conducted in October 2010 (Ref 13-11) and reference has been made in this SER Chapter. The report covered social infrastructure in the area surrounding the eco-town site to the north west of Bicester.
13.3.4 Assessment of Effects There is no widely accepted significance criteria used in the assessment of health effects and, therefore, the assessment NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 225
determines whether the aspects of the proposed Masterplan development are likely to result in positive or negative effects on health outcomes and the likelihood of such effects being realised. This is an approach typically adopted for HIAs. The level of detail presented in this assessment reflects the level of detail available about the proposed Masterplan development and its potential future population. The assessment identifies the effects likely to occur during the construction and the operational phases of the development. The health impacts are grouped by health determinant and the assessment identifies whether the health impact is positive or negative i.e. a health gain or a potential health loss, the likely geographical scale of the impact i.e. whether the impacts are likely to be local to the proposed Masterplan development or could potentially affect wider communities and the likelihood of the health impact occurring based upon the evidence available (both information about the proposed Masterplan development design and evidence in health literature about potential health cause and effect relationships). Tables 13-2 present the notation and definitions that used in the assessment. Table 13-1 Notation Used in the Matrix
Notation
Definition
Direction of Impact Positive Impact (+)
Aspect of the scheme is likely to result in a positive influence upon health determinants potentially resulting in long-term gains for health status or the scheme creates conditions that enable the pursuit of healthy lifestyles.
Neutral (0)
No potential change to health status likely.
Negative Impact (-)
This aspect of the scheme is likely to result in adverse effects on health determinants through health losses or creating conditions that do not enable the pursuit of healthy lifestyles.
Likelihood of Impact Occurring (for positive and negative impacts) Speculative
Considered unlikely to occur – limited supporting evidence available.
Possible
Likely to occur on the basis of evidence from a range of sources.
Probable
Very likely to happen with strong evidence from a range of sources.
The assessment was desk-based and primarily qualitative, although where modelling has been undertaken for other environmental topics, for example the noise and vibration assessment, the results have been used in the assessment. NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 226
13.3.5 Consultation Consultation has occurred with the Primary Care Trust to obtain details of existing health facilities in Bicester and their capacity to accommodate future growth. Consultation has also been undertaken with Oxfordshire County Council regarding the location of Public Rights of Way (PRoW), the availability of data about the use of PRoW and to obtain ward level health statistics used to inform the preparation of the Joint Strategic Needs Assessment. External consultation utilising focus groups and workshops specific to human health issues did not form a specific part of the methodology. However, stakeholder events have been undertaken as part of the proposed Masterplan development design process and the information from these events has been used to inform the assessment where appropriate.
13.4 Baseline Conditions 13.4.1 Existing Baseline The purpose of the baseline data gathering is to understand the existing health status of the population living in the vicinity of the proposed Masterplan development and Cherwell Borough as a whole. The coverage of the issues considered as part of the baseline is wider than just the existing health status of the population. Overall health and well-being, as demonstrated in Figure 13-1 is influenced by a range of factors and this is reiterated in the Director of Public Health for Oxfordshire Annual Report VI (Ref 13-9). The baseline description provides details about:
The health status of the population including life expectancy, mortality rates for leading causes of death and incidence of lifestyle related conditions such as obesity and type II diabetes.
Existing levels of deprivation across Cherwell district which can affect overall health status and life chances.
The location and provision of existing health care facilities servicing the population of Bicester and the capacity of these services to accommodate future growth, as well as their accessibility by walking, cycling and public transport.
The baseline data collated in other SER chapters is also of relevance to the assessment of effects on human health. When reading this chapter of the SER, consideration should also be given to the baseline data presented in the following chapters: Landscape and Visual Amenity (Chapter 5), Air Quality (Chapter 8), Noise and Vibration (Chapter 9), Contaminated Land (Chapter 11), Socio-Economic and NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 227
Community Effects (Chapter 14) and Traffic and Transport (Chapter 16) as they are of relevance to effects on human health.
13.4.2 Health Status The Cherwell Health Profile published in September 2013 (Ref 13-12) identifies that health in the district is generally better than the England average for a number of health indicators.
Life Expectancy at Birth Life expectancy at birth is an estimate of the number of years a new born baby would be expected to live, if they were to experience, throughout their lifetime, an area’s age specific mortality rates. Figures 13-2 and 13-3 present the trends for life expectancy at birth for males and females for districts across Oxfordshire compared to the England average. Both graphs indicate a positive upward trend for life expectancy that is above the England average. Between 2008 and 2010, female life expectancy at birth within Cherwell District was slightly higher than that in South East and Oxford, and lower than in South Oxfordshire, Vale of White Horse and West Oxfordshire. Male life expectancy in Cherwell District was the same as male life expectancy in Oxford, but lower than the other districts within Oxfordshire. Figure 13-2 Life Expectancy at Birth for Females (Source: Joint Strategic Needs Assessment 2013)
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 228
Figure 13-3 Life Expectancy at Birth for Males (Source: Joint Strategic Needs Assessment 2013)
Table 13-3 supplements both Figures 13-2 and 13-3 with the latest life expectancy at birth statistics for the period January 2007 to December 2009 and January 2008 to December 2010 which again indicates positive results for Cherwell. Table 13-3 Life Expectancy at Birth 2007 - 2010 (Source: Neighbourhood Statistics) (Ref 13-6)
Area
Life Expectancy At Birth (Females)
Life Expectancy at Birth (Males)
2007 - 2009
2008 - 2010
2007 - 2009
2008 - 2010
Cherwell District
83.7
83.6
78.8
78.9
South East
83.3
83.5
79.4
79.7
England
82.3
82.6
78.3
78.6
Whilst the results indicate that life expectancy is good across Cherwell District as a whole, there are disparities within the district. The Cherwell District Health Profile (2013) states that life expectancy is 10.7 years lower for men and 5.0 years lower for women in the most deprived areas of Cherwell than in the least deprived areas (Cherwell Health Profile).
General Health Status Table 13-4 presents data about the percentage of the population in each ward reporting their health status as good. The data was obtained during the last census (2011); it provides further context for the assessment. It is evident that self-reported health status is above the England average in all wards with the exception of Bicester Town. In addition, the population was asked whether they had a long-term NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 229
limiting illness, health problem or disability which restricted their daily activities or the work they are able to do. Table 13-4 demonstrates that health status is again better than the England and South East average for all wards, although there are disparities between the wards. Table 13-4 Standard of Reported Health (Source: Neighbourhood Statistics) (Ref 13-13)
Ward
Percentage of population that considered themselves to be in good health and very good health (2011)
Percentage of Population with a Long-Term Health Problems or Disability1 (2011)
Caversfield
86.4
12.6
Ambrosden and Chesterton
91
8.7
Bicester East
86
13.29
Bicester North
90.7
8.2
Bicester West
84.3
14.5
Bicester South
92.5
6.2
Bicester Town
79.3
19.3
Launton
85
15.9
Fringford
87.8
12
Cherwell Average
85
14.1
South East Average
83.6
15.7
England Average
81.4
17.6
Incapacity benefit is paid to people who have been medically certified as physically or mentally unable to work. Table 13-5 presents data regarding benefits claimants in Cherwell District compared to averages for the South East and England. The data demonstrates that total claimants within Cherwell District are below the South East and England averages and this trend is reflected in the more detailed breakdown by statistical group.
1
Includes the subcategories ‘day-to day activities limited a lot’ and ‘day-to-day activities limited a little’.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 230
Table 13-5 Key Benefits Claimants (Working Age Group) (Ref Office for National Statistics – Neighbourhood Statistics 2010) (Ref 13-13)
Cherwell (%) South East (%)
England (%)
9
11
15
Job Seekers
2
2
4
Employment and Support Allowance and Incapacity Benefits
5
7
4
Lone Parents
1
1
2
Carers
1
1
1
Others on income related benefits
0
0
1
Disabled
1
1
1
Bereaved
0
0
0
Total Claimants By Statistical Group
Mortality Figure 13-6 demonstrates that since 2001 there has been a steady decrease in the age-standardised rate of all age, all cause mortality for both males and females within Cherwell District, with the rate also being lower than the rate for England. The age standardised mortality rate for an area is the number of deaths, expressed per 100,000, that would occur in that area if it had the same age structure as the standard population and the local agespecific rates of the area applied. The rate is usually expressed per 100,000. Data sourced from Oxfordshire County Council demonstrates that there is a wide range in the age-standardised mortality rates for all ages for the wards within the study area.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 231
Figure 13-6 Mortality Rates for Males and Females (Health Profile for Cherwell, 2013) (Ref 13-12)
The mortality rates from coronary heart disease and stroke for each area are presented in Table 13-7. The mortality rate from heart disease in Cherwell is lower than regional and national levels; however, the rate is higher when compared to South Oxford and West Oxfordshire. The mortality rate from stroke is the second lowest of all Oxfordshire districts and lower than national rates. Table 13-7 Mortality Rates from Coronary Disease and Stroke (Source: Joint Strategic Needs Assessment 2013 (Ref 13-10)
Area
Mortality rate from coronary heart disease (2010)
Mortality rate from stroke (2010)
Oxfordshire
55.5
32.5
Oxford
67.3
30.0
South Oxford
46.4
36.3
Vale of White Horse
58.4
31.9
West Oxfordshire
54.1
34
Cherwell
55.6
31.0
South East
63.1
37.6
England
74.2
40.9
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 232
The prevalence of cancer in Cherwell is the second lowest of all Oxfordshire’s districts as demonstrated in Figure 13-5 below. Figure 13-5 Prevalence of All Cancers (Source: Joint Strategic Needs Assessment, 2009).
Mortality rate from cancer in Cherwell (106.6) is slightly lower when compared to England average (108.1) but not significantly different (Health Profile Cherwell 2013).
Mental Health Mental health rates are usually expressed per 1,000. Data sourced from Oxfordshire County Council demonstrates that there is a wide range of mental health indicators including number of people with neurotic disorders, panic disorders, anxiety and depression, etc. Data from 2006 show that the number of people with mental health disorders in Cherwell District is lower than national and regional figures.
Physical Activity and Lifestyle Habits The Chief Medical Officer’s report (Ref 13-14) states that physical activity is essential for good health and contributes to overall wellbeing. Physical activity has significant benefits in reducing coronary heart disease and in reducing other health impacts including diabetes, cancer and osteoporosis and, therefore, new developments should be well located in relation to public transport connections and provide opportunities for healthy lifestyles to be pursued where possible. If a more active population helps to reduce the number of people with poor health status this will also positively impact the local economy, helping to reduce the number of individuals claiming incapacity benefits. The following sections provide some details about NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 233
mortality from diseases that are associated with lifestyle habits and levels of physical activity. Physical Activity
Table 13-8 presents data showing levels of physical activity within Cherwell District (the percentage of the adult population participating in at least 30 minutes of sport and active recreation of at least moderate intensity at one session per week). The data demonstrates that activity levels in Cherwell are below the England average for the year 2012/2013 and are lower than in some other parts of Oxfordshire. Ward specific data is not available for this indicator. Table 13-8 Physical Activity Levels (Source: Active People Survey 7 June 2013)
Area
2010/11 (Percentage)
2011/12 (Percentage)
2012/13 (Percentage)
Cherwell
36.7
37.3
33.7
South Oxfordshire
36.0
46.8
38.4
Vale of White Horse
41.2
36.9
36.4
West Oxfordshire
37.3
41.5
37.2
Oxfordshire
36.9
40.2
36.5
South East
35.7
37.4
36.2
England
34.8
36.0
35.2
The 2010 Director of Public Health Annual Report for Oxfordshire (Ref 13-16), reports that almost three quarters of Oxfordshire’s population does not participate in enough physical activity. Since 2006, there has been a reported increase in activity levels although a lot more work needs to be done to improve activity levels further. People Diagnosed with Diabetes
The number of people diagnosed with Type 2 diabetes is increasing and the main contributory factor is increasing rates of obesity. Since 1996 the number of people diagnosed with diabetes in the UK has increased from 1.4 million to 2.6 million. The number of people in the UK who have been diagnosed with diabetes has reached three million for the first time, equivalent to 4.6 per cent of the UK’s population, according to new analysis carried out by Diabetes UK and Tesco (Ref 13-15). The figure represents an increase of 132,000 people diagnosed with diabetes over the last year. A further 850,000 people are thought to have undiagnosed Type 2 diabetes. By 2025 it is estimated that 4 million people will be living with diabetes in the UK (Ref 13-15). Modifying lifestyle behaviours and increasing levels of physical activity will therefore be very important NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 234
to prevent this as it is recognised that the risk of developing Type 2 diabetes can be reduced by making lifestyle changes. The Department of Health Strategy ‘Be Active: Be Healthy’ states that physically active people have a 33-50% lower risk of developing Type 2 diabetes compared with inactive people (Ref 13-17). Between 2011 and 2012, 5.1% of people in Cherwell on GP registers were recorded as being diagnosed with diabetes, which is below the England average of 5.8% but has increased over time from 3.1% in 2005/2006 (Ref 13-12). Obesity In 2010/12, 7.2% of children of school ages 4-5 within Cherwell District were considered to be obese, which is above the Oxfordshire County Council average of 7.0% and below the England average of 9.5% (Ref ONS, Oxfordshire City Council). This has decreased since 2008/2009, when the figure was 7.9%. Between 2011 and 2012, 24.0% of adults in Cherwell District were classed as obese, in comparison to 24.2% of England’s population. This has gradually fallen since 2006 and 2008, when the figure was 26.2% (Health Profile Cherwell 2013). The 2013 Director of Public Health Annual Report for Oxfordshire (Ref 13-9) states that with regards to obesity in adults the region is generally healthier than the national average. However, the fact remains that around 1 in 4 adults in this County (and rising) are obese. By 2020 obesity could lead to an additional 6,900 cases of diabetes in Oxfordshire alone. Increasing levels of activity and promoting opportunities for the pursuit of healthier lifestyles could help to reduce this issue in the long-term.
Deprivation The Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) 2010 is a measure of multiple deprivation experienced by individuals living in a particular area. The IMD 2010 combines seven dimensions covering income, employment, health and disability, education, skills and training, barriers to housing and services, living environment and crime and weights them to create a combined IMD score. Figure 13-6 taken from the Cherwell District Health Profile 2013 (Ref 13-12) presents the proportion of residents within England, the region and Cherwell District living in neighbourhoods belonging to each of the five national deprivation quintiles. The quintiles were derived by ranking all the Lower Super Output Areas (LSOA) in England in order of their deprivation scores and dividing them into five equal groupings. The graph demonstrates that around 5% of the population of Cherwell District lives in an LSOA in the 20% most deprived in England. Almost 40% of the population live in an LSOA in the least deprived quintile. NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 235
Figure 13-6 IMD Results for Cherwell (Source: Department of communities and Local Government Indices of Deprivation, 2010) (Ref 13-12)
The IMD includes the Health Deprivation and Disability Domain. A review of the results for each LSOA within the wards in the study area demonstrates that there are no significant health deprivation issues within these wards i.e. none of the LSOAs lie within the top 20% most deprived nationally. Figure 13-7 presents the IMD Data for the Health Deprivation and Disability Domain within LSOAs in Bicester.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 236
Figure 13-7 IMD Results for Bicester and surrounding LSOAs (Source: http://opendatacommunities.org/deprivation/map)
Cherwell District ranks 26,319 for the IMD Health Deprivation and Disability Domain (32,482 indicates the least deprived and 1 the most deprived).
13.4.3 Accidents Chapter 16 (Traffic and Transport) presents details of Personal Injury Accidents for the key roads in the vicinity of the Masterplan Site.
13.4.4 Location of Key Health Facilities The location of existing health facilities including doctor’s surgeries, hospitals and dentists in the vicinity of the proposed Masterplan development are shown on Drawing 13-2. The closest GP Practice to the site is the North Bicester surgery. The GP surgeries in Bicester are currently accepting new NHS patients and the average list size for the five GP surgeries in Bicester is 1,230 patients per GP which is in line with the average list size for the Oxfordshire Primary Care Trust (1,284 patients per GP). The dental practises, opticians and NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 237
pharmacies are primarily located in the town centre as shown on Drawing 13-2. The Bicester Community Hospital has only 12 beds and provides intermediate care and GP admissions. It also provides an out of hours service in a minor injuries unit. The Department for Transport Core Accessibility Indicators provide a number of measures of accessibility by public transport, walking and (where appropriate) cycling to different services types including GPs and hospitals. The purpose of the indicators is to assist Local Authorities develop their evidence base for their accessibility strategies. The data for Cherwell District for 2011 demonstrates that access to GPs is good for people living in Cherwell with individuals able to access more than one GP/health care centre within 15 minutes by either public transport, walking or cycling. Accessibility data by modes of transport is provided in Table 13-8. Table 13-8 Accessibility to Health Facilities (Source: Department of Transport, 2012) (Ref 13-13)
Indicator
Results
Travel time to nearest GP by public transport/walk
12 minutes
Travel time to nearest GP by cycle
7 minutes
Travel time to nearest GP by car
5 minutes
Number of GPs within 15 minutes by public transport/walk
2
Number of GPs with 15 minutes by cycle
4
Number of GPs within 15 minutes by car
5
The closest ambulance station to the proposed Masterplan development lies approximately 12km to the north in Brackley. Both a fire station and police station are situated in Bicester.
13.4.5 Accessibility to Recreation and Amenity Facilities Chapter 14 (Socio Economics and Community) of this SER presents details of the PRoW surrounding the proposed Masterplan Site with key routes shown on Drawing 14-2. Information regarding the levels of use of the PRoWs surrounding the proposed Masterplan NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 238
development is not currently held by Oxfordshire County Council and no specific surveys have been commissioned for this assessment. At present there are no cycle routes crossing the Masterplan Site. Traffic-free cycle routes located southeast of the Masterplan Site along Banbury Road and A4095 (Sustrans maps). On-road cycle routes on Shakespeare Road are connecting the Masterplan Site southwards (Ref 13-31). Walking as a low impact form of exercise can reduce the risk of strokes, osteoporosis, high blood pressure, bowel cancer, Alzheimer's disease, arthritis, anxiety and stress. In addition regular walking can improve a person’s mental health and well-being by increasing confidence, stamina, energy, weight control and life expectancy (Walking the Way to Health Initiative, 2004). Oxfordshire County Council has produced a Rights of Way Improvement Plan (RoWIP) which sets out their ambitions for the improvement of PRoW within the county in order to meet the Government's aim of better provision for walkers, cyclists, equestrians and people with mobility problems. There is scope for good connections to the PRoW to be provided to enable future residents of the proposed Masterplan development to pursue healthy lifestyles. The ‘Health Walks’ initiative is a national initiative that encourages individuals to improve their fitness by using their local countryside for walking. This initiative is run in Cherwell District and walks are regularly held in Bicester. The location of sports and recreation venues is shown on Drawing 142. Further discussion is also included in Chapter 14 (Socio Economics and Community) about the sports and recreation provision, play areas, community centres and open spaces in the vicinity of the proposed Masterplan development. The quality and availability of pedestrian and cycle facilities in the vicinity of the proposed Masterplan development and issues of severance are discussed in Chapter 16 (Traffic and Transport). As identified in the Cherwell Green Spaces Strategy (Ref 14-20), there is a need for more and better green spaces to be provided within both the urban and rural areas of Cherwell to accommodate the growing population.
13.5 Design and Mitigation A number of mitigation measures have been incorporated into the design process to reduce the potential adverse health effects and to maximise potential health gains offered by the proposed Masterplan
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 239
development. Mitigation measures relevant to the construction and operational phases are provided in the following sections.
13.5.1 Construction Construction best practice should be employed to minimise potential adverse health effects and maximise potential health benefits for the nearby community as well as those individuals undertaking the construction works. Measures that must be implemented comprise:
Traffic movements should be carefully phased to minimise any possible delays and disruption to regular road users, public access, community facilities, residences and businesses, particularly those used by vulnerable groups such as children.
Construction site compounds and areas for material/plant storage should be positioned away from sensitive views, wherever possible.
Careful management of retained vegetation at the site periphery, to provide visual screening.
All construction works should be undertaken in accordance with the health and safety legislation prevailing at the time of construction to ensure that all works are executed safely and to minimise risk of accidents.
The mitigation measures recommended in Chapter 8 (Air Quality) to control dust and air quality during construction.
Monitoring of depositional and suspended dust during construction in order that trigger levels may be set where mitigation must be increased to protect the health and amenity of local residents. These monitoring requirements should be agreed in advance with the Environmental Health Officer (EHO) at Cherwell District Council.
The mitigation measures recommended in Chapter 9 (Noise) to control construction noise and vibration. The use of a Section 61 consent should ensure that noise levels at the site are effectively controlled.
The mitigation measures recommended in Chapter 16 (Traffic and Transport).
Ensure regular dialogue and information provision to nearby residents who could potentially be affected by the construction works.
Encourage the contractors appointed for the construction works to register with the Considerate Constructors scheme.
In addition to the above, during the preparation of the Masterplan, work has already been undertaken to engage with local companies to secure maximum benefits for local residents and employees. NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 240
13.5.2 Operation The Masterplan Site has been designed in line with key project objectives, principally, in relation to human health, to provide green infrastructure, to ensure the appropriate provision of social and community facilities, to provide access to employment opportunities and to provide the necessary design and infrastructure to promote the use of walking, cycling and public transport use rather than the private car. The following mitigation measures have been included within the design as a result of the iterative design process and recommendations from the design and assessment teams:
Secured by design principles have been used to minimise the risk of crime occurring and the local constabulary has had the opportunity to comment on the design proposals.
The requirements of all sectors of the society have been considered to ensure the correct balance of services and amenities to serve the proposed Masterplan development. The detailed design and operation of the Energy Centre must be discussed with the EHO at CDC to agree appropriate noise limits and an Environmental Permit will be obtained from the Environment Agency. The Environment Agency will be required to review the health effects of the proposals as part of the permitting process.
The provision of community facilities that will promote community interaction, empowerment and community development. Provision has also been informed by a Community Facilities Audit.
Providing appropriate infrastructure to enable home-working (appropriate broadband speeds).
The proposed Masterplan development has been designed to facilitate easy movement by foot and cycle, thereby supporting the use of active modes of travel and the pursuit of healthy lifestyles. The objective is to provide a principal network of segregated footways and cycleways, some of these alongside roads or shared with vehicles. Traffic speeds within the development will be controlled accordingly in order to provide a safe environment for pedestrians and cyclists. The new road crossing under the railway creates the opportunity for a direct pedestrian crossing and bus only link between Bucknell Road and NW Bicester. The new urban boulevard which will be created in place of existing Howes Lane with a new alignment approximately 100 metres to the west, (with a new underpass crossing under the existing railway linking to Lords Lane) will provide a strong pedestrian priority and shared public space. Further details about the operational design of the scheme from
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 241
this perspective are provided in Chapter 16 (Traffic and Transport).
The provision of secure cycle parking and storage facilities will be incorporated into the residential areas, local centre and employment areas. Cycle parking and storage is to be provided in accordance with Cherwell District Council cycle parking standards.
The ‘centre’ of the proposed Masterplan development providing the community facilities has been located to ensure that it is highly accessible by foot and cycle to all areas of the site. For example, access to the primary school by foot has been a key consideration.
The development of a comprehensive green infrastructure strategy for the site that includes areas of public and private green space. The green infrastructure is 40% of the total site. The green infrastructure provides opportunity for interaction between children and young people and with their environment.
A new bus service is to be provided through the site and will enable all residents and occupiers of the site to be within 400m of a bus stop.
Allotments are included within the site to enable local food production, as well as local orchards.
Other mitigation measures that should be implemented to reduce potential adverse human health effects and to maximise potential health gains are:
Ensure ownership and responsibility for maintenance of external spaces and buildings are clearly defined. High levels of maintenance of, for example, areas of greenspace will encourage more active use which should help to reduce incidence of crime and associated perceptions of fear of crime.
Ensure provision of effective signage throughout the proposed Masterplan development to encourage walking and cycling to key facilities.
In the long-term, the ‘Health Walks’ initiative should be extended to include the proposed Masterplan development to further encourage the pursuit of healthy lifestyles amongst the new residents.
Develop opportunities to include public art within the proposed Masterplan development to provide a means of engaging with the community and to create a ‘sense of place’ and ‘ownership’.
As a result of the policy of connecting the site to the rest of Bicester by other means other than by road, a walking survey has been carried out in Bicester to identify the weaknesses in the current footpaths and cycle ways but also to establish the
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 242
distances and realistic times to travel the distances to the various destinations in the town. This information will be used to deliver wider off-site improvements.
13.6 Assessment of Effects The assessment of effects of the proposed Masterplan development on human health is presented in the sections below. The effects have been separated into construction and operational phase effects and have been grouped by health determinants.
13.6.1 Construction Phase Effects Employment and Economy During the construction phase, employment opportunities will be created and there will be potential indirect economic benefits for local businesses, for example, local accommodation providers, as a result of spending by the construction workforce (refer to Chapter 14, Socio-Economics and Community for further details). There are also opportunities for upskilling of the existing workforce as a result of the design specification for the Masterplan development. There is strong evidence documenting the health benefits of being in employment and the associated health benefits (mental and physical) (Ref 13-21). For this reason, health effects are assessed as positive. The likelihood of this impact occurring is considered possible as the health effects will depend upon a number of factors including: the types of jobs created, the status of those who will take the construction phase employment opportunities i.e. will they be those who are currently unemployed?, the income offered by the employment opportunities, the types of jobs that will be created and the types of contracts that employees will have - these are all factors that can ultimately influence the likely health benefits realised. To secure maximum health benefits as a result of the construction works, it is recommended that opportunities are sought to establish employment routes that enable those currently unemployed to benefit from the construction works and for local apprenticeships and training scheme providers to be engaged in the works to provide maximum upskilling benefits.
Safety and Security Construction works have the potential to adversely affect health and well-being, both to those working on the construction site, but also members of the public who may come into contact with the works. The mitigation measures clearly identify that all works will be undertaken in accordance with the health and safety legislation prevailing when the scheme is constructed and that the works will be securely cordoned off to prevent public access. Whilst adherence to NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 243
these legislative requirements will create a working environment that is conducive to safe working, the effects on health status are assessed as neutral. There is scope for further benefits to be delivered although this will depend upon the contractors appointed and the specific health and safety training they deliver to their employees, the hours that employees are required to work and any associated benefits that may be provided by the contractors that could benefit health.
Air Quality There is a large body of evidence which documents the health impacts of various pollutants and it is apparent that health effects of air pollution are greatest for ‘at risk’ groups including the elderly, people with chronic chest and heart disease and young children. Dust and particulate matter generated by construction sites has the potential to cause adverse health effects. Whilst dust cannot generally be ingested as the particle size is too large, it can cause eye, throat and nose irritation. PM10 is of more concern from a health perspective as it can enter the lungs causing respiratory difficulties and cardiovascular concerns in the long-term (Ref 13-22). The receptors most likely to be affected are listed in Table 8-9 of Chapter 8 Air Quality. They are most likely to be affected by dust particles of greater than 30 μm. There is also the potential for particles of size 10–30 μm to travel up to 500m and particles of less than 10 μm to travel 1,000m or more. Owing to the temporary nature of the effects and the proposed mitigation measures, including regular dust monitoring during the construction works and the establishment of trigger levels to ensure effective mitigation is implemented, the health effects are assessed as neutral as there should be no significant change to health status. Dust generation will also be intermittent during the construction works. The review of the existing health status of the population in Section 13.4 identified that the health of the population in Bicester is generally good and so they may be considered less vulnerable to adverse air quality effects than a population where there is a higher prevalence of existing respiratory and cardiovascular conditions.
Noise and Vibration It is well documented that noise can adversely affect health and wellbeing. Figure 14-8 depicts the adverse health effects that can be generated by elevated noise levels.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 244
Figure 14-8 Health Effects of Noise (Source: Babisch, W, 2002 cited in Good Practice Guide on Noise Exposure and Potential Health Effects, 2010) (Ref 13-23)
The key sensitive receptors that could be affected by elevated construction noise levels are:
Greenacres, Caversfield and the Lodge along the B4100
Residential properties adjacent to Lord’s Lane along A4095
Residential properties adjacent to Howes Lane along A4095
The construction noise assessment presented in Chapter 9 (Noise) states that with the implementation of mitigation there will be no significant noise impacts. Whilst, there may be some intermittent disturbance caused by certain, very noisy construction activities, they will not result in prolonged adverse effects and so it is assessed that there will be a neutral effect on human health as there will be no significant health improvement delivered and no significant health loss or deterioration caused. Through the use of a Section 61 consent during the construction period, it will be possible to ensure that noise levels are controlled in line with the recommendations outlined in Chapter 9 of this SER. Proactive engagement with the potentially affected receptors in advance of the construction works commencing will also be important to help manage any potential anxiety issues, as will the use and management of a complaints procedure during the construction works to ensure that any issues are promptly resolved.
Physical Environment and Urban Design During the construction works there will be changes to the built and natural environment within and adjacent to the site. Modifications to the physical environment have the potential to affect human health as a result of localised disturbance which may cause anxiety or as a result of emissions, such as dust emissions or increased levels of noise and vibration (the latter issues have been discussed above). NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 245
There may be temporary deterioration in amenity value for users of nearby paths and bridleways particularly those to the north and west of the proposed Masterplan development as shown on Drawing 14-2, such effects are not considered likely to have a significant effect on health status. Similarly, the changes to the amenity value of the environment as a result of the construction works are not considered to result in significant changes to health status and are also assessed as neutral.
Healthy Lifestyles Based upon the analysis provided in the ‘Physical Environment’ section above, the assessment for the construction phase is neutral as the ability of nearby residents and the wider community to pursue healthy lifestyles will not be affected by the construction works.
Transport and Access Traffic and transport is a significant source of stress but there is a lack of epidemiological research on the health impacts. However, there is evidence that transport related stress can cause sleep disturbance and increase blood pressure amongst drivers (Ref 13-24). At this stage of the assessment there is no estimate of construction traffic for the Masterplan Site. However, effects on traffic and transport during the construction phase will be assessed as part of the next EIA stage. For this reason, it is assessed that effects on human health will be unknown.
Waste Management and Contamination Chapter 11 (Contaminated Land) confirms that there are no contaminants present above the relevant human health and controlled waters assessment criteria. Therefore, there will be no significant health risks to site operatives during the works and effects are assessed as neutral. During construction works it is possible for pathways to be created allowing any potential contaminants to migrate to underlying groundwater which may then be used as a drinking water source. However, owing to the absence of contaminants such human health effects are assessed as neutral. Chapter 11 (Contaminated Land) identifies that naturally occurring radon is present and, therefore, basic radon protection measures will be required for the construction of new dwellings. The inclusion of this mitigation in the design means that health effects are assessed as neutral as there will be no residual risk to health status.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 246
Community and Social Infrastructure (including Community Spirit and Engagement) During the construction phase, there will be no adverse effects on community and social infrastructure. Effects are assessed as neutral from a human health perspective. The extent of an individual’s participation in their community and the added control that this may offer to their lives and health status is documented in literature (Ref 13-25). It will be important during the construction phase to communicate openly with the communities that may be affected such that they understand the works that are being undertaken and any potential disruption that it may cause to adequately manage any concerns and to reduce the risk of anxiety which can have adverse effects on mental health status.
Access to and Provision of Health Facilities and Services During the construction phase, there will be no adverse effects on the provision of health facilities and services as all existing facilities will continue to be operational and accessible. Effects are assessed as neutral.
13.6.2 Operational Phase Effects Employment and Economy Chapter 14 (Socio Economics and Community) identifies a positive significant impact on employment as the proposed Masterplan development will generate a number of jobs and could potentially attract a significant amount of new investment within the immediate area . These job opportunities could offer potential indirect positive health impacts. The likelihood of health benefits being realised is considered possible as the effects will depend upon who benefits from the employment opportunities and the types of jobs, pay and contracts offered (as identified in the discussion of potential construction effects). The Marmot Review (Ref 13-25) identifies that health inequalities arise because of inequalities in society. A key factor is being able to access good employment opportunities and, therefore, improving access to good jobs and reducing long-term unemployment across the social gradient will help to reduce health inequalities. Whilst health status is generally good across Cherwell District, there are inequalities between parts of the district and this is reflected in the differences in life expectancy. There are opportunities for such issues to be addressed by providing access to the employment opportunities for those who are currently unemployed. This can be secured by promoting long-term apprenticeships and initiatives and maximising the upskilling opportunities presented by the proposed Masterplan NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 247
development and in the future by the development of the rest of the NW Bicester development.
Safety and Security The proposed Masterplan development has been designed to minimise the risk of crime through the use of Secured by Design principles and this is assessed as having a potential positive health impact as the design will enable future residents and users of the site to pursue lifestyles that are not adversely affected by crime and fear of crime. The likelihood of this impact being realised is assessed as probable as there is a strong body of evidence that demonstrates the associations between urban design and incidence and fear of crime and the associated effects on health status and lifestyles. It has been identified that fear of crime may act as a barrier to physical (e.g. walking and cycling) and social activities (visiting places) that benefit health (Ref 13-26). The positioning of key walking and cycling routes through the site has been designed to ensure they benefit from natural surveillance. In the long-term, the effective maintenance of the proposed Masterplan development and its soft and hard infrastructure will also help to ensure that such positive impacts continue to be realised.
Air Quality The House of Commons Environmental Audit Committee Report (Ref 13-27) critically reviews current performance across Government in relation to the achievement of air quality targets. Transport in particular comes under heavy scrutiny with a significant shift in transport policy needed to ensure that air quality targets can be achieved. The onus is put upon local authorities to do more to tackle poor air quality and the need for Government to provide guidance about how to further develop local air quality strategies. With improved air quality there will be improved benefits to the economy and human health. The development of the proposed Masterplan development will result in changes to traffic flows and access which have the potential to affect air quality and, therefore human health. As mentioned previously in Chapter 8 Air Quality, operational phase traffic emissions will be assessed during the detailed application. It is therefore not possible at this stage to predict the magnitude of any impacts on local air quality and consequently on human health. However, it should be noted that the design has been focussed upon reducing travel by private car and encouraging the use of more sustainable modes of transport and use of active travel modes (walking and cycling). Chapter 8 (Air Quality) identifies that the proposed energy centre has the potential to cause air quality impacts as a result of combustion NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 248
emissions of NO2 and PM10 from the biomass boiler and gas Combined Heat and Power (CHP) plants. These will be emitted to atmosphere via dedicated stacks located on the roof of the energy centre. The impact of the energy centre will be assessed during the detailed application. The emission rates for both NOx and PM10 will be required in addition to the characteristics of the stack. A detailed dispersion model will be used to assess the energy centre impacts. Therefore, the emissions and health effects will be subject to further scrutiny during the detailed design process.
Noise and Vibration The suitability of the site to accommodate residential development in line with the requirements of Planning Policy Guidance Note 24 (PPG24) has been assessed in Chapter 9 (Noise). The noise contours produced for the site (using a combination of baseline monitoring and modelling) indicate that the site falls within Noise Exposure Category (NEC) A which states that ‘noise need not be considered as a determining factor in granting planning permission, although the noise level at the high end of the category should not be regarded as a desirable level’. On this basis the use of the site for residential development is deemed acceptable from a human health perspective and effects on the health of future residents is assessed as neutral. Studies suggest that the physiological and psychological impacts from transport related noise include speech interference, annoyance and sleep disturbance. Within the literature there is some debate about causal links between noise levels and particular health outcomes although it is acknowledged that transport is a major source of ambient noise levels and so could have health impacts but the quantification of such effects is problematic. Chapter 9 (Noise) assesses the noise effects of construction traffic but impacts can be mitigated through measures set out in Section 9.5.1. Health effects as a result of traffic noise caused by the proposed Masterplan development are assessed as neutral. Operational traffic noise associated with the Masterplan Site will be assessed once data has been provided. It is anticipated that this will be undertaken during future EIAs. The Energy Centre has the potential to generate noise nuisance and subsequent adverse health effects during its operation. Details about the plant to be installed and the potential noise effects are not known at this stage. Further studies will be undertaken to agree noise limits for plant to be installed on site with the local EHO and to ensure that the design meets these limits. The key issue will be to achieve a level below the night-time background (LA90) noise level However, providing the mitigation measures identified in Chapter 10 (Noise) are implemented then health effects are considered to be neutral. NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 249
Physical Environment and Urban Design Central to the design of the proposed Masterplan development has been the concept of minimising travel by private car, and encouraging walking and cycling. The mitigation measures outlined in Section 13.5 identify how these concepts have been incorporated into the design. All of the measures should help to promote the pursuit of active lifestyles which should offer long-term health benefits and, therefore, effects are assessed as positive. The health effects of greater levels of physical activity include reductions in the risk of coronary heart disease, reductions in obesity, diabetes, hypertension, cancer, osteoporosis, depression and anxiety21. The evidence documenting the health benefits of active lifestyles and exercise is very strong and the concepts used in the proposed Masterplan development design are intended to make this possible and a way of life for new residents. The baseline data review identified that there is a need to increase activity levels to tackle issues like obesity incidence. Therefore, the likelihood of health effects being realised is probable. The comprehensive green infrastructure strategy developed for the site is wide-ranging and has been designed to ensure that the requirements of PPS1 are achieved. The network of high quality, green spaces will provide opportunities for communities to interact, for residents to participate in physical activity and allow residents to engage with their wider environment, for example, through the development of the central riparian corridor that incorporates circular walks and through the inclusion of allotments. The provision within the Masterplan development for local food production from allotments is also assessed as offering potential health gains both physically and mentally. The provision of allotments offers the opportunity for local residents to grow vegetables which are essential to a healthy diet and also provide opportunities for social interaction which will offer mental well-being benefits. Health effects are assessed as positive as this is providing a proactive opportunity for healthier lifestyles to be adopted and the health benefits of a healthy diet are well documented. The likelihood of the effects being realised is possible. These aspects again contribute to positive health effects as opportunities are provided to allow the pursuit of healthier lifestyles. Whilst the health benefits of green space are frequently cited, there are relatively few epidemiological studies on the relationship between nature and health and the mechanisms that underpin this relationship. A recent study in the Netherlands (Ref 13-29)sought to investigate this link further and again concluded that green space has an important effect on health. Based upon this evidence and the comprehensive green infrastructure strategy, the likelihood of such effects being realised is considered probable. The importance of NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 250
ensuring sufficient green space provision has been further underlined by the shortfalls in parts of Cherwell District. The housing to be provided across the site will meet Code for Sustainable Homes Level 5 and will meet Lifetime Homes standards. The Lifetime Homes Standard enables the housing produced to meet the requirements of a wide range of households, for example those with children or those requiring wheelchair access. Therefore, the housing provided on the site should be appropriate for a variety of owners (this is considered important in view of the ageing population and the potential need in the future for accommodation to meet the needs of an older population).
Healthy Lifestyles Issues relating to the ability to pursue healthy lifestyles through physical activity and diet have been addressed in the ‘Physical Environment and Urban Design’ and ‘Transport and Access’ sections of the assessment.
Transport and Access The majority of Bicester is located within a radius of approximately 3.2km (or 2 miles) from the centre of the proposed Masterplan development; a distance considered as being a reasonable journey by foot given the relatively flat topography of the town. Whilst there are currently limited opportunities for local journeys to be undertaken on foot to/from the, the design of the site has been modified to ensure that connections within Bicester town are developed making the scheme accessible. The design of the site from a transport and access perspective has the potential to offer potential health gains if the design encourages greater levels of walking and cycling and, therefore, effects are assessed as positive. A range of off-site improvements to walking and cycling routes have the potential to further complement the measures that have been integrated into the design of the proposed Masterplan development, although it is not known when they will be implemented and, therefore, there is a greater level of uncertainty about whether such benefits will be delivered. The internal layout of the proposed Masterplan development is such that traffic speeds and flows will be low which ensures that issues of fear and intimidation will be minimised. Effects on accidents (both number and severity) are uncertain at this stage as a Road Safety Audit has not been completed. The provision of a bus service through the Masterplan development that connects with the facilities in Bicester town centre is also seen as a strength as it ensures that facilities are accessible for those parts of the community who may not be as able to walk and cycle such as the NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 251
elderly or those with physical disabilities. Further consideration of accessibility to different types of land use and facilities is provided in the Transport Assessment which concludes that the Masterplan development is well located for a range of educational, employment, retail and leisure facilities within achievable walking and cycling distances. There are also facilities in Bicester town centre and other leisure opportunities that are easily accessible by cycling and public transport.
Waste Management and Contamination Chapter 11 (Contaminated Land) concludes that whilst end users of the site (residents) will come into regular contact with soil therefore there is the potential for accidental ingestion, dermal contact of inhalation of dust particles. However, as there are no contaminant sources confirmed on the site, the potential health effects associated with this risk are assessed as neutral.
Community and Social Infrastructure (including Community Spirit and Engagement) Community participation, inclusion and the establishment of strong community networks can help to protect against ill health and positively contribute to levels of overall well-being. The Department of Health (Ref 13-28) highlights the need to develop connected communities that promote social networks and engagement to provide long-term mental well-being benefits. The development includes provision of a number of community facilities to support the local community that will live at the proposed Masterplan development. These facilities include: village shops, a primary school, a nursery, a community centre, and an eco pub and office space. These will provide opportunities for community interaction and engagement and provide an opportunity for healthier lifestyles to be pursued. Effects are, therefore, assessed as positive and the likelihood of the effect being realised is possible as effects will depend upon the extent to which the community facilities are used. A community governance strategy has also been developed for the proposed Masterplan development. This is considered a strength from a human health perspective as it sets the framework for community ownership, engagement and responsibility that will further benefit community spirit and cohesion and could indirectly benefit mental well-being in the long-term. This is likely to benefit the local community living at the site but could also assist those living in the vicinity of the Masterplan development as there is a clear commitment in the governance strategy to integration of existing properties with the new development. The potential health effects are assessed as positive, although the likelihood of the effect being realised is speculative. Further consideration should be given to the use of public art within key areas of open space to create a sense of NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 252
well-being and ownership within the development. This could offer positive health gains if a sense of well-being is achieved although such effects are considered speculative. Chapter 14 (Socio Economics and Community) provides an assessment of the proposed Masterplan site on community facility provision and the effects on educational resources. The chapter assesses the effects as positive as there will be sufficient service capacity provided and there is potential for wider environmental and sustainability multiplier effects. Ensuring access to educational opportunities is vital to health and well-being. The provision of education facilities and services across the site is assessed as being appropriate and effects assessed as neutral.
Access to and Provision of Health Facilities and Services Based upon discussions with the Primary Care Trust and the results of the Community Facilities Audit, the Masterplan development includes provision of a GP Centre. The provision of health facilities and services across the site is, therefore, assessed as being appropriate and effects assessed as positive. The transport assessment, as discussed in the ‘Transport and Access’ section above also concludes that health facilities are accessible from the proposed Masterplan development.
13.7 Cumulative Effects The assessment of human health effects has considered the results of other chapters within the SER, as some of the effects they report have the potential to impact on human health either directly or indirectly. Therefore, the assessment presented within this chapter has inherently considered potential impact interactions and how they could cumulatively affect health status. There are likely to be a number of positive operational cumulative health impacts for the residents that will live at the proposed Masterplan development and potentially indirect benefits for other residents in the wider community if there are wider multiplier effects e.g. employment creation, improved cycle and walking links. During the construction phase, there is the potential for cumulative adverse health impacts as a result of noise and vibration, dust and visual amenity nuisance, as well as potential disruption to transport and access. Individually, each of these issues have been assessed as having a neutral effect on human health, although there is a risk that during the works there could be particularly intense periods of activity which could result in some concerns for local residents, although they are considered unlikely to result in significant adverse health effects with the implementation of the recommended mitigation measures. Such impacts will also be temporary. The use of NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 253
Construction Environmental Management Plans will help to manage such potential adverse effects.
13.7.1 Cumulative Effects with Other Developments The other developments that have the potential to have cumulative health effects with the proposed Masterplan development are presented in Table 17-1 and Table 17-2 of Chapter 17 (Interrelationships and Cumulative Effects). The assessment of the cumulative effects of these developments on human health during construction is uncertain as information is not available about the likely construction phasing. However, providing appropriate construction mitigation measures are implemented, such effects are unlikely to be significant. In the long-term, there is potential for long-term cumulative health benefits with the other developments as they will provide infrastructure benefits including the provision of new schools, new civic buildings, new housing and new employment opportunities that could all offer indirect health benefits. The provision of associated infrastructure including new cycling routes and transport improvements as part of these developments could also offer benefits for physical activity. Potential adverse effects could occur as a result of traffic generation and the associated effects on air quality and noise and vibration. These issues have been considered within the respective chapters of this SER and based upon current information are not assessed in detail. However, further assessment will be undertaken at the next stage of the application process.
13.8 Summary This chapter has assessed the potential effects on human health of the construction and operational phases of the Masterplan development. A number of mitigation measures have been incorporated into the design process to maximise potential health benefits and to minimise the likelihood of adverse health effects occurring. During the construction phase, health effects were assessed as positive with regard to the potential employment opportunities that will be created and the wider upskilling benefits that may be delivered. The impacts on the following health determinants were assessed as having a neutral effect on health outcomes: safety and security, physical environment and urban design, healthy lifestyles, transport and access, waste management and contamination, community and social infrastructure and access to and provision of health facilities and services. These assessments were informed by NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 254
the results presented in the other SER chapters and the likelihood of there being a change to health status. During operation the Masterplan development will generate a number of jobs and could potentially attract a significant amount of new investment within the immediate area. Therefore indirect positive health effects were predicted. Positive health effects are also likely to occur (both physical and mental) as a result of the commitment within the design to creating a site where walking and cycling are encouraged, the provision of community facilities that will provide opportunities for community engagement and interaction, the use of Secured by Design principles that will help to reduce levels of crime and control perceptions of fear of crime and as a result of the comprehensive green infrastructure strategy that will provide a high quality environment and areas for informal sport and recreation. Detailed air quality, noise and vibration and traffic and transport assessments will be undertaken at the next stage of the application process.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 255
14
Socio-Economics and Community
14.1 Introduction This chapter presents a high level assessment of the socio-economic and community impacts associated with the proposed North West Bicester Masterplan Site. The assessment:
Identifies the regulatory and policy framework and guidance for the topic;
Describes baseline conditions that are currently existing and those predicted to exist immediately prior to development;
Identifies and assesses the impacts of the Masterplan Site in relation to local businesses, industry and retail sectors;
Provides an assessment of the cumulative impacts of the proposal.
14.2 Regulatory and Policy Framework The following policies in Table 14-1 have been identified as relevant to this chapter. For each policy identified the requirements of that policy has been highlighted and considered in the context of the proposal. Table 14-1 Regulatory and Policy Framework
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
Bicester Masterplan Response
National Planning Policy (Planning Policy Statements and Guidance notes) Planning Policy Statement: eco-towns – A supplement to PPS1 (Ref 14-1)
A range of minimum standards which are more challenging and stretching than would normally be required for new development. The standards act to ensure that ecotowns are examplars of good practice and provide a showcase for sustainable living.
The proposal (whole site) will meet all of the minimum standards identified in the PPS1 supplement.
Standards include: Meeting the functional characteristics of a settlement and a minimum of 5,000 homes. Homes must achieve Building for Life Silver Standard and Level 4 Code for Sustainable Homes, provide 30% affordable housing. 40% of the eco-town total area should be allocated to green space, NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 256
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
Bicester Masterplan Response
of which at least half should be public. National Planning Policy Framework (2012) (Ref 14-2)
The National Planning Policy Framework (2012) sets out 12 core planning principles that should underpin decision taking. Those that apply to the development are:
The proposal (whole site) meets the applicable core principles and advice concerning development within the NPPF.
Proactively drive and support sustainable economic development to deliver the homes, business and industrial units, infrastructure and thriving local places that the country needs; Always seek to secure high quality design and a good standard of amenity for all existing and future occupants of land and buildings; Support the transition to a low carbon future in a changing climate, taking full account of flood risk and coastal change, and encourage the reuse of existing resources, including conversion of existing buildings, and encourage the use of renewable resources (for example, by the development of renewable energy). With regard to delivering large scale housing development the NPPF advises at para 52 that: The supply of new homes can sometimes be best achieved through planning for larger scale development, such as new settlements or extensions to existing villages and towns that follow the principles of Garden Cities. Working with the support of their communities, Local Planning Authorities should consider whether such opportunities provide the best way of achieving sustainable development. In doing so, they should consider whether it is appropriate to establish Green Belt around or adjoining any such development. With regard to promoting healthy NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 257
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
Bicester Masterplan Response
communities para 70 states that: To deliver the social, recreational and cultural facilities and services the community needs, planning policies and decisions should: Plan positively for the provision and use of shared space, community facilities (such as local shops, meeting places, sports venues, cultural buildings, public houses and places of worship) and other local services to enhance the sustainability of communities and residential environments.
Cherwell District Local Plan Submission Version (January 2014) (Ref 14-3) Planning applications that accord with the policies in the Local Plan (or other part of the statutory Development Plan) shall be approved without delay unless material considerations indicate otherwise.
The proposal accords with policy contained within the Local Plan.
Policy BSC 3 Affordable Housing
At Banbury and Bicester, all proposed development that include 10 or more dwellings (gross), or which would be provided on sites suitable for 10 or more dwellings (gross), will be expected to provide at least 30% of new housing as affordable homes on site.
The proposal meets the 30% quantum of affordable homes.
Policy BSC 4 Housing Mix
New residential development will be expected to provide a mix of homes to meet current and expected future requirements in the interests of meeting housing need and creating socially mixed and inclusive communities.
The proposal meets requirements for a social mix and inclusivity.
Policy BSC 10 Open Space, Outdoor Sport and Recreation Provision
The Council will encourage partnership working to ensure that sufficient quantity and quality of, and convenient access to open space, sport and recreation provision is secured through the following measures:
The proposal incorporates a range of open spaces, including village square, green links, allotments and community gardens. The proposal actively promotes partnership working for example a dual use of school sports provision as a
Policy PSD 1 Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development
Protecting existing sites; Addressing existing NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 258
Policy/Legislation
Requirements deficiencies in provision through qualitative enhancement of existing provision, improving access to existing facilities or securing new provision; and
Bicester Masterplan Response wider community facility.
Ensuring that proposals for new development contribute to open space, sport and recreation provision commensurate to the need generated by the proposals. Policy BSC 11 Local Standards of Provision – Outdoor Recreation
Policy Bicester 1 North West Bicester EcoTown Policy Bicester 7 Meeting the Need for Open Space, Sport and Recreation
Development proposals will be required to contribute to the provision of open space, sport and recreation, together with secure arrangements for its management and maintenance. The amount, type and form of open space will be determined having regard to the nature and size of development proposed and the community needs likely to be generated by it. A new exemplar zero carbon eco development will be developed on land identified at NW Bicester. Seek to establish an urban edge park around the outskirts of the town, by protecting the existing network of green spaces and securing new open spaces and linear route provision linked with public footways / cycleway, to create a circular route with connections to the town centre and the countryside beyond.
The proposal includes the provision of over 40% open space (including public and private space) which includes a range of sports and recreation provision such as games courts and hard play areas.
The policy relates directly to the development proposal. The proposal connects directly with the circular route around Bicester town and maintains the walking / cycling routes and access to the wider countryside. The proposal maintains a network of green spaces, including river corridors, a proposed Country Park, nature reserve, allotments and orchards.
14.3 Methodology 14.3.1 Introduction The assessment has involved a review and analysis of data from a variety of sources. The technical scope for this assessment has been defined by the nature of the proposal and the likely social and NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 259
economic receptors that may be impacted upon. A strategic, high level assessment has been made based on the following:
The collection and analysis of socio-economic statistics in order to create a profile of the local area. This has been from a range of data sources including the Office of National Statistics and Nomis web. Data from the preparation of other documents developed to support the Masterplan have also been used, notably the economic data prepared as part of the Economic Strategy for NW Bicester by SQW Consultants (Ref 14-4);
Feedback from consultations undertaken during the masterplanning process;
Identification of existing land uses within the Masterplan Site and of key social and economic facilities within a wider study area to help identify potential activity changes resulting from the proposed development; and
The identification and assessment of likely impacts of the Masterplan Site, including cumulative impacts.
14.3.2 Study Area The spatial scope for undertaking baseline research has taken into account the following considerations:
The location of the Masterplan Site in relation to surrounding electoral wards and settlements;
The wider Bicester settlement characteristics and strategic location;
The components of the proposal and their likely catchment area.
The assessment of potential socio-economic impacts has warranted consideration of the defined spatial areas as follows:
The five wards that form the settlement of Bicester (Bicester North, West, East, South and Bicester Town) are referred to as Bicester Town (this is consistent with the definition within the Economic Baseline Report (SQQ) (Ref 14-5));
The five wards making up Bicester Town, together with the three wards that surround it (Caversfield, Launton, and Amrosden and Chesterton) form the Bicester Wider Area (again, this is consistent with economic baseline data);
For a number of other socio-economic elements the relevant spatial scope would be wider – either at District Level (Cherwell) or County level (Oxfordshire).
The use of these spatial areas allows consideration of the potential local and regional impacts of the proposed development. NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 260
14.3.3 Establishment of Baseline Conditions Establishing the baseline conditions has drawn on a range of secondary information sources. Table 14-2 details the individual elements within the broader socio-economic and community together with their spatial focus (dependent on appropriateness and availability of datasets). Table 14-2 Baseline topic areas
Spatial Focus Baseline Topic
Details
Demography
Population change Age structure
Biceste r Wider Area
County or Distric t Level
+ +
+ + +
+
+ + +
Population forecast
Economy
Occupations Employment by sector
Housing
Industry of employment
+
Type, tenure
+
+ +
Demand
Education
Provision, capacity and quality
+
+
Other Community Facilities
Sports and recreational facilities
+
+
Crime
Crime rate
+
+
Community halls
Nature of crime
Tourism
Attractions
Walking/Cycling Links
Public rights of way
Other Development Proposals
Other significant development likely to generate cumulative impacts
Existing and proposed
+ + + +
14.3.4 Assessment of Effects Whilst there is no published or established guidance for assessing the significance of effects on human environment and land use for a mixed use development, Volume 11, Section 3, Parts 3, 8 and 12 of the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (Ref 14-6) does refer to guidance for assessing the impact on Land Use, Community Access and Policies and Plans respectively. Whilst this guidance has been produced in relation to proposed roads and bridges it nonetheless NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 261
provides a useful reference tool for consideration of any proposal in this context. In addition, the Town and Country Planning Association in conjunction with the Communities and Local Government have produced an ‘ecotowns economy worksheet’ (Ref 14-7) to support the development of an appropriate economic strategy for each eco-town to ensure a fully sustainable, competitive and prosperous future for the town. Section 4.1 of the worksheet refers to the development and analysis an economic baseline referencing a range of indicators and associated details. This assessment seeks to identify and assess the land use changes and changes in socio-economic activities, which may arise from the proposed development, with resultant impacts on material assets. Unlike other environmental topics, such as noise, the sensitivity of socio-economic receptors to the proposed development is not determined by reference to designations or an objective standard. Instead, it is the nature of the activity that the human receptor is undertaking that is most influential in determining sensitivity. Professional judgement has therefore been applied in the case of each category of receptor considered in this chapter, with the degree of change to the receptor arising from the proposal determining whether or not an effect is likely to be significant.
Impact Significance All predicted impacts have been classified into one of three significance categories labelled ‘Key Significant’, ‘Significant’ and ‘Not Significant’. Impact significance has been assessed by consideration of the following factors for each predicted impact:
The magnitude of the predicted impact.
The geographic extent of the impact.
The duration and reversibility of the impact.
The capacity of the local economy to absorb or adjust to the impact.
For an impact to be considered ‘Key significant’ it would need to display most or all of the following characteristics:
Major or moderate impact magnitude – i.e. a sizeable change in relation to the baseline
Affecting a wide geographic area e.g. of importance at local authority level rather than specifically the Bicester settlement
Permanent or irreversible
Presenting difficulties of adjustment for the local economy
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 262
‘Significant’ impacts would need to display at least two, of the above characteristics. Finally, for an impact to be considered ‘not significant’ it would be expected to have most or all of the following characteristics:
Slight or negligible impact magnitude
Affecting only a relatively small geographic area
Temporary or reversible
Presenting few difficulties of adjustment for the local economy
14.4 Description of Existing Baseline Conditions 14.4.1 Demography Table 14-3 sets out the current population total for Bicester Town, the Bicester Wider Area and comparative information for Cherwell District and Oxfordshire as a whole. Table 14-3 Population
Total Population 2011
Area Bicester (Town)
30,854
Bicester (Wider Area)
41,350
Cherwell District
141,868
Oxfordshire
653,798
In terms of population change, the Cherwell District has seen a total increase of 7.8% between 2002 and 2011, which is comparable with population change overall for Oxfordshire (ONS Mid-Year Population Estimates) (Ref 14-8). Tables 14-4 and 14-5 set out statistics relating to age and ethnicity. There is a high proportion of people aged between 0-14 years in both the Bicester Town and Bicester Wider Area than for Cherwell, Oxfordshire and England as a whole; similarly there is a lower proportion of residents aged 65 and over within the two Bicester areas compared to figures for Cherwell, Oxfordshire and England. Table 14-4 Age Structure
Area Bicester (Town)
0-14 Years
15-29 Years
20.5%
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
18.9%
30-44 Years 25.2%
45-64 Years 24.1%
65+ 11.3%
Page 263
Area
0-14 Years
15-29 Years
30-44 Years
45-64 Years
65+
Bicester (Wider Area)
20.3%
19.2%
24.9%
24.2%
11.4%
Cherwell District
18.8%
18.0%
21.8%
26.0%
15.3%
Oxfordshire
17.5%
20.9%
20.7%
25.0%
15.9%
England
17.7%
20.0%
20.6%
25.4%
16.3%
Source: 2011 Census Table 14-5 Ethnicity
Area
White
Mixed
Asian or Asian British
Black or Black British
Chinese or other
Bicester (Town)
93.3%
1.9%
3.2%
1.3%
0.3%
Bicester (Wider Area)
94.4%
2.0%
3.0%
1.8%
0.4%
Cherwell District
92.2%
1.8%
4.3%
1.4%
0.4%
Oxfordshire
90.9%
2.0%
4.8%
1.7%
0.5%
England
85.4%
2.3%
7.8%
3.5%
1.0% Source: 2011 Census
Population projections for the wider area (at district, regional and county levels) are shown in Table 14-6. Analysis of five year increments, as shown in Table 14-6, shows change over time between 2011 and 2031 for Cherwell District, the South East and for England as a whole. Table 14-6 Population Forecast
2011-2016
2011-2021
2011-2026
2011-2031
% change
% change
% change
% change
England
3.6
7.3
10. 9
14. 3
South East
3.9
8.0
12. 1
15. 9
Cherwell
3.7
7.5
11. 1
14. 4
Source: Office of National Statistics, Population Projections
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 264
14.4.2 Economy The existing economic function of the Masterplan Site is primarily agricultural and the impacts in this context are covered within Chapter 12 (Land Use and Agriculture). Home Farm, situated eat of the Site, includes the conversion and extension of its outbuildings into ‘The Courtyard’ which accommodates the following businesses:
Pea Green: Sports Physiotherapy Clinic
Hill Partnerships (Western) Ltd, an affordable homes provider
Teslayn Engineering, a specialist American car workshop
UKR Engineering Affairs Ltd, specialising in the application and management of national and international drugs licensing
An economic baseline has been prepared to inform the development of the Masterplan area of North West Bicester (SQW Consultants) (Ref 14-5); key findings from this baseline that are of particular relevance to this Strategic Environmental Report are summarised here.
Employment Table 14-7 sets out economic activity rates, showing that 88.2% of residents are economically active, which is higher than for the Bicester Wider Area, Cherwell District, Oxfordshire and for England as a whole. Table 14-7 Economic Activity Rates
Number of working age residents economically active
Percentage of total population economically active
Percentage of the working age population economically active
Bicester (Town)
18,225
59.1%
88.2%
Bicester (Wider Area)
23,841
57.7%
85.8%
Cherwell District
78,160
55.1%
85.2%
350,119
53.6%
81.8%
27,183,134
51.3%
79.2%
Oxfordshire England
Source: SQW Analysis of 2011 Census Data
Characteristics of the employment base are shown in Table 14-8. For both Bicester Town and Bicester Wider Area the greatest proportion of residents are found within the ‘Professional Occupations’ and ‘Associate Professional and Technical Occupations’ categories, although figures in the former category are lower than found at District, County and country wide level. Conversely, 10.3% of NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 265
Bicester Town residents work in the ‘Sales and Customer Service Occupations’ category, which is higher than the proportion found at other scales.
1. Managers, directors and senior officials
2. Professional occupations
3. Associate professional & technical occupations
4. Administrative & secretarial occupations
5. Skilled trades occupations
6. Caring, leisure & other service occupations 7. Sales & customer service occupations
8. Process plant & machine operatives
9. Elementary occupations
Table 14-8 Employment Characteristics
Bicester (Town)
11.1%
15.5%
13.8%
12.5%
11.2%
7.8%
10.3%
7.2%
10.7%
Bicester (Wider Area)
12.0%
15.5%
15.6%
12.1%
11.2%
7.6%
9.4%
6.6%
10.0%
Cherwell
11.6%
16.7%
13.1%
11.3%
11.8%
8.4%
8.8%
7.8%
10.6%
Oxfordshire
12.0%
22.7%
13.6%
10.3%
10.7%
8.3%
6.9%
5.7%
9.7%
South-East
12.3%
18.7%
13.8%
11.5%
11.1%
9.3%
7.9%
5.7%
9.7%
England
10.9%
17.5%
12.8%
11.5%
11.4%
9.3%
8.4%
7.2%
11.1%
Source: SQW Analysis of 2011 Census Data
Key findings identified by SQW as part of the economic baseline in relation to employment by sector are that:
Over-represented sectors in Bicester include manufacturing (11.82% of total employees), public administration and defence (10.71%) and wholesale and retail trade (22.47%);
Of those sectors identified as potential growth sectors, logistics currently represents 13% of total employment in Bicester Town (compared to 7% for Cherwell District, 5% for Oxfordshire and 6% for England as a whole).
Business Start-Up Activity Since 2008, business start-ups and closures have been shown through published statistics relating to business births, deaths and survival rates (previously statistics relating to VAT registrations and de-registrations was used). In relation to business start-up activity, SQW data shows that Cherwell District has 681.9 active enterprises per 10,000 working population and 64.9 enterprise births per 10,000 NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 266
working age population, which is comparable to the region (SouthEast) and County proportions. Figure 14-2 shows business survival rates for enterprises ‘born’ in 2006 – the figure shows that whilst the survival rate is lower for Cherwell than for Oxfordshire as a whole, the District still performs better than at wider region and country levels. The sub-region referred to in the figure is based on commuter flows and is explained in more detail within the Economic Strategy for NW Bicester (Ref 144). Figure 14-2 Five Year Business Survival Rates – Enterprises Born in 2006
14.4.3 Unemployment and Benefits The proportion of the working age population which is unemployed in Bicester Town is 2.41% (average rate across the five Town wards), compared to 4.4% for Cherwell District, 5.6% for Oxfordshire as a whole, 6.2% for the South East and 7.7% for the national average (2013 Annual Population Estimate. Figure 10-3 portrays the breakdown in types of benefit claims. Both the proportion of Job Seeker Allowance claimants, Employment Support Allowance claimants and incapacity Claimants are lower for the Bicester Wider Area than the average for Cherwell District and significantly lower than for England.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 267
Figure14-3 Benefit Claimants expressed as a proportion of the working age (16-64) within the Bicester Area, Cherwell District and Great Britain
6
Per cent of population
5 4 Bicester Wider Area 3
Cherwell England
2 1 0 Job seekers allowance
Incapacity
Disabled
Other income
Source: Claimant Count, May 2013, www.nomisweb.co.uk
Focusing specifically on Job Seekers Allowance (JSA) as an indication of unemployment, within the Bicester Wider Area, there has been a general increase in the number of people claiming this benefit for longer than six months: ninety claimants registered for longer than six months in December 11 and this number has decreased to fifty claimants in December 2013. In terms of residents within the Bicester Wider Area claiming for over twelve months, there has been a slight decrease in the number of people claiming for this period with twenty-five claimants registered for more than twelve months in December 2013 in comparison to thirty claimants in December 2011.
14.4.4 Housing The following points summarise accommodation type and tenure within the Bicester Wider Area in comparison to wider spatial areas as interpreted from Census Data 2001:
Bicester Wider Area includes a smaller proportion of flat/maisonette/apartments (7.9%), in comparison to 11.2% within Cherwell District and 16% for Oxfordshire.
There is a higher proportion of owner-occupied dwellings in the Bicester Wider Area (71.1%) in comparison to 69.3% for Cherwell District and 65.5% for Oxfordshire.
There is a lower proportion of socially rented housing within the Bicester Wider Area: 10.9% of housing is rented from the council
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 268
or other social landlords, in comparison to 12.1% within Cherwell District and 14.2% in Oxfordshire.
A lower proportion of privately rented housing within the Bicester Wider Area: 15.7% of housing tenure in comparison to 16.2% within Cherwell District and 17.5% within Oxfordshire.
Table 14-9 and Tableable 14-10 highlight quantities of housing type and tenure that have been included for the purposes of the impact assessment: Table 14-9 Housing Type
Bicester Wider Area (%) (Quantity in Brackets) Unshared accommodation House/bungalow
99.99 (16,274) 92.0 (14,976)
Flat/maisonette/apartment
7.9 (1,283)
Mobile/temporary structure
0.1 (21)
Shared accommodation
0.01 (2) Source: Census Data 2011
Table 14-10
Housing Tenure
Bicester Wider Area (%) (Quantity in Brackets) Owns outright
25.2 (3,977)
Owns with a mortgage/loan
45.9 (7,256)
Shared ownership
0.6 (88)
Rented from council
2.1 (327)
Other social rented
8..8 (1,398)
Private rented
15.7 (2,476)
Living rent free
1.8 (277) Source: Census Data 2011
Housing for the Elderly Cherwell’s Housing Strategy for Older People (2010-2015) (Ref 14-9) prioritises providing and supporting preventative support services, increasing the provision of older peoples’ specialist housing, improving the provision of information and advice and ensuring new housing developments meet the needs of older people now and in future.
Housing Need and Affordability A Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) (December 2012) (Ref 14-10) has been produced by B.Line Housing Information on NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 269
behalf of Cherwell District Council as part of the Housing Evidence Base that informs the emerging Cherwell Local Plan. The SHMA identifies the affordable housing requirement, including the level of need and type (size and tenure) of housing required in Cherwell District. The SHMA has been informed by a vast range of data including population projections, local salaries, employment statistics, house prices and housing register data. The SHMA builds upon the Housing Needs Estimates produced by B.Line Housing Information (June 2009) on behalf of Cherwell District Council and calculates the gross and net needs for affordable housing based on how prohibitive property prices and private rental costs were at the time of the study. Both of these statistics were compared against the affordable annual housing supply to provide the annual additional need estimated to be 1,017 properties (see Table 14-11).
Table 14-11
Estimated Net Housing Need per Year (2012) Annual Need
Gross need – based on entry level prices to buy
1,268
Affordable supply – general needs and supported lets and low cost sales
437
Gross need – based on costs of private renting
623
Affordable supply – general needs and supported lets and low cost sales
437
Total annual estimated need
831
186
1017 Source: Cherwell DC
14.4.5 Education Education services span from pre-school and nursery provision to universities and adult education.
Day nurseries Nursery and pre-school provision can broadly be split into two types of services. Provision for 0 to 2 year olds is mainly through the commercial sector. This can take place in a range of settings including child minders as well as part-time and full-time day care. Provision for 3 to 4 year olds involves part-time places within or associated with primary school, or service from the private sector. Day nursery provision within Bicester includes some seven private facilities together with eight of the primary schools in Bicester offering nursery classes. As well as day nurseries in Bicester town centre, there is also some provision in the settlements surrounding NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 270
Bicester including Fringford Pre-school Play Group in Fringford, and Chesterton Play Group in Chesterton.
Primary Schools There are twelve primary schools within the Bicester Wider Area (see ‘Education’ map Drawing 14-1), of which nine are within the settlement of Bicester itself. The closest of these to the Masterplan site are found within the wards of Bicester West and Bicester North, plus Chesterton Church of England Primary School which is located within the ward of Amrosden and Chesterton; nearest schools to the site are as follows:
King’s Meadow Primary School (Bicester West)
Brookside Primary School (Bicester West)
St Mary’s Roman Catholic Primary (Bicester West)
Southwold County Primary School (Bicester North)
Bure Park Primary School (Bicester North)
Chesterton Church of England Primary School (Amrosden and Chesterton)
According to Annual Schools Census data (2012), the primary schools listed above have a surplus capacity of 16% (equivalent to 318 places). Only one primary school in proximity to the site – Bure Park Primary School – is operating at full capacity. For primary schools within the Bicester Wider Area, there is a surplus capacity of 11% (equivalent to 422 spaces).
Secondary Schools Demand for secondary schools is usually spread across a wider area than that for primary schools and day nurseries. Secondary school aged pupils tend to travel further to school than those of primary school age. In addition, the range of specialist subjects taught in secondary schools naturally means that they are larger institutions with wider catchment areas than primary schools. Therefore, it is appropriate to consider secondary school capacity across Oxfordshire County as a whole as well as that of the nearest facilities to the site. For Oxfordshire as a whole, Annual Schools Census (2012) data shows there is a 16.5% surplus capacity across the thirty-three secondary schools. The closest secondary schools to the Masterplan site (shown on Drawing 14-1) are the Bicester Community College and Cooper School. Between them, these schools have a surplus capacity of 614 places. As well as local authority secondary schools, there are also several academies in Oxfordshire. The most recent data available shows: NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 271
the North Oxfordshire Academy which opened in 2007 has 19% surplus capacity (based on pupil admission numbers stated in Oxfordshire Council’s admissions information);
the Oxford Academy which opened in 2008 has surplus capacity of 35% (also based on pupil admission numbers stated in Oxfordshire Council’s admissions information);
the Culham European School Academy opened in September 2011 in Abingdon. The European School Culham was an existing school catering for children of staff at EU institutions and the children of fee paying bilingual and multinational families in South Oxfordshire that has been brought into the mainstream state funded English system as an innovative, co-educational Academy, as far as possible retaining the ethos of a European school. The academy specialises in Languages and Science, will provide education for 3 to 18 year olds, and has an overall capacity of 980 places. Admission numbers for Reception class and subsequent year groups was sixty pupils per year; admission numbers for Years 12 and 13 were planned at forty pupils, although ultimately Year 12 will have a capacity of 100 pupils.
Discussions with the Education Department of Oxfordshire County Council suggest there is a growing demand for school places at the primary level resulting from increases in fertility, and both at the Primary and Secondary as a result of the economic downturn of 2008-2009 increasing the proportion of families using state education. Discussions with the Education department of Oxfordshire County Council suggests there is a growing demand for school places at the primary level resulting from increases in fertility, and both at the Primary and Secondary as a result of the economic downturn of 2008-2009 increasing the proportion of families using state education.
14.4.6 Other Community Facilities Health Facilities Existing capacity and quality of provision is discussed in the Human Health Assessment (Chapter 13).
Sports and Recreation Drawing 14-2 shows sports and recreation venues within the Bicester Wider Area and those nearby that are likely to be affected by the proposal. The Bicester Sports Association provides sports facilities at Oxford Road, Bicester and nearby in nearby Chesterton. These facilities are used by local sports clubs who accommodate a wide range of ages in NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 272
their playing membership. The field sports include cricket, football (junior and senior) and rugby union. Built facilities include the Bicester Leisure Centre (formerly the Bicester and Ploughley Sports Centre (see Drawing 14-2). The centre has undergone refurbishment offering a wide range of facilities for casual and regular users such as a Health Fitness suite, 25 metre swimming pool, Play n’ Teach family pool with interactive water features, squash courts, activity halls and outdoor floodlit all-weather pitches. There is also a comprehensive keep-fit programme with over 30 classes to choose from. The centre also includes a registered creche and hosts a variety of sports clubs including martial arts, swimming and gymnastics. Further extension and refurbishment of the facility was undertaken in 2009 to including tenpin bowling. The Cooper School Sports Facility is used by Cooper School during the day and managed by Bicester and Ploughley Sports Centre in the evenings and at weekends. The facility is situated adjacent to the Cooper School (see Drawing 14-2) on Churchill Road and includes a performance hall with theatre-style tiered seating, outdoor floodlit all weather pitches and an activity hall. Other sports clubs located in Bicester include those at Garth Park, a 2.74 hectare site identified in the Open Space, Sport and Recreational Facilities Needs Assessment Audit and Strategy (2011) (PMP) (Ref 14- 11) as the only ‘park and garden’ in Cherwell providing opportunity for various informal recreation and community events. The Bicester Bowls Club and Bicester Tennis Club are both based in Garth Park. Other clubs within the Bicester Wider Area are Bicester Hockey Club (Coopers School) and Bicester Rugby Football Club, (adjacent to Kings End Hospital). Langford KEA Football is also located behind the KEA Social Club. Other outdoors sports associated with Bicester including hunting, fishing and golf. Bicester is an established hunting centre and Bicester with Waddesdon Chase hold an annual point to point and organises hunting trials and horse shows. In terms of fishing both the River Ray, the River Cherwell and other neighbouring rivers which flow down to the Thames can be fished and also some lakes. There is an established angling society at Bicester which rents six miles of stocked water of the River Ray. For golfers, the nearest venue in or around Bicester is the Bicester Country Club (see Drawing 14-2).
Play Areas Bicester Town Council is responsible for all the play areas and the majority of open spaces in the town. An Open Space, Sport and Recreational Facilities Needs Assessment Audit and Strategy prepared NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 273
by PMP (Ref 14-11) identifies fifty-eight facilities provided for children and young people in Bicester; this includes areas such as equipped play areas, ball courts, skateboard areas and teenage shelters with a primary purpose to provide opportunities for play and social interaction involving children and young people. The Audit also identifies single facilities near to Ardley, Stoke Lyne, Bucknell, near to Caversfield, Launton, Piddington and Wendlebury.
Community Centres There are four community centres in Bicester. These are: Bicester East Community Centre; Langford Village Community Centre, Southwold Community Centre, and West Bicester. These centres provide a location for a number of groups to operate from. For example, Bicester Community Church uses Bicester East Community Centre to run toddler groups and over 50s groups. As part of the Pioneer Square development in Bicester, a further community building is due to be opened by summer 2015. Bicester Library is the only library facility within the Bicester Wider Area. This facility is open six days a week and offers internet access. The next nearest libraries to the Masterplan site are 17 kilometres away in Deddington (to the north west) and 17 kilometres in Kidlington (to the south west).
Other Open Spaces There are a number of open spaces in Bicester, used both formally and informally, including Purslane Drive and Shakespeare Drive Woods which are in close proximity to the Masterplan Site. Collectively, these areas offer approximately 10ha of open space and both of these spaces are categorised as ‘natural/semi-natural greenspace’ in Cherwell District Council’s Green Space Strategy. The majority of open spaces surrounding the Masterplan Site are categorised as ‘natural and semi-natural space’ and include a number of footpaths.
14.4.7 Crime Crime levels for Bicester (Table 14-12) are average in comparison to national levels. Analysis of crime statistics highlight the crime rate in Bicester Town is significantly higher than the wider Bicester settlement area and the Rural North. This reflects a much higher registration of anti-social behaviour and a higher rate of vehicle crime and burglary, generally characteristic of the more urban areas.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 274
Table 14-12
Crime rate Bicester area
Crime per 1000 people Thames Valley Police Area
Violence
Antisocial behaviour
Burglary
All crime
Bicester Town
0.5
3.2
6.3
16.6
0
0.1
0.6
3.1
3.6
0.2
0.1
0
0.8
2.2
2.4
0.5
0
0.3
0.4
1.3
2.9
Robbery
Vehicle crime
0.9
0
Bicester East
0.5
Bicester West Bicester Rural North
Source: Crime Statistics: http://maps.police.uk/view/thames-valley/ (August 2010)
14.4.8 Tourism Bicester Village has strong international links with eight other associate outlet shopping villages in mainland Europe, all exponents of high-end retailing opportunities. Bicester Village has sought to connect with other high-end heritage attractions including Blenheim Place (29 kilometres northwest) and Waddesdon Manor (19 kilometres southeast), but also luxury accommodation such as Le Manoir aux Quatre Saisons (29 km southeast) and Shakespeare House (20 km northeast). The proximity of Bicester Village and other regional assets has ensured there is a strong provision of high value visitor attractions that generate significant economic stimulus. Bicester has a historic core with a good range of heritage building such as the Old Vicarage, Bicester House, and St Edburgs Church. Other buildings such as the Dovecote and the town’s old Lock-Up also add to the character of the town and its distinctive appeal. Collectively these offer a degree of visitor interest albeit more local in appeal. In addition the Market Square in the town still holds a traditional market-day every Friday, as well as a Farmer’s Market on the second Thursday of every month with other speciality markets throughout the year. Bicester Town Council host or support a number of other events, particularly through the Summer months. These include music and picnic events such as Proms in the Park and an annual Jazz Festival in Garth Park. There are a number of other established accommodation facilities (Table 14-7) within the Bicester area, serving both business and leisure tourism markets. These include hotels/inns, guesthouses and farmhouse bed and breakfasts and self-catered units:
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 275
Table 14-7 Visitor Accommodation
Accommodation Type
North Oxfordshire Registered Accommodation
Hotels and Inns
Bicester Hotel, Golf and Spa
Bignell Park Hotel
AVA House bed and breakfast
Weston Grounds Farm
Farmhouse Bed and Breakfasts
Manor Farm
Self-catered units
Grange Farm Country Cottages
Grooms Cottage
Stoke Lyne Farm Cottages
Guest Houses Bed and Breakfasts
(Source: www.visitnorthoxfordshire.com)
14.4.9 Public Rights of Way There are two PRoW that run through the Masterplan Site, which form part of the same path (path numbers taken from the Definitive Map are 148/4 and 129/9). The wider Bicester area has also been the subject of further investigative work by Oxfordshire County Council to retrofit a series of walking and cycling greenway routes. This includes proposed widening around Caversfield, widening through Bure Park Nature Reserve and plugging the walking cycling gaps to connect existing walking and cycling links.
14.4.10
Other Development Proposals
Bicester is an area of significant development interest with a number of urban development schemes proposed either within the existing settlement boundary or seeking to extend the urban area in other directions. Proposals include mixed use schemes, containing a mixture of housing and commercial land uses but significantly their own provision of community facilities and services to accommodate an anticipated increase in population. The need to consider the cumulative impacts of the construction and functional stages of the proposal must account for the wider development context, both on the potential pressures on local infrastructure and other supporting services and the potential employment demands from the locality. In terms of planned future development of the settlement, it is important to note the following significant schemes at various stages of the development process:
A strategic housing site of 1,631 homes at South West Bicester is under construction, including a health village, sports provision,
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 276
employment land, a hotel, a new secondary school, a community hall and a ‘local centre’.
A development of 1,900 homes and 104,000m2 employment land at Graven Hill has been approved subject to a s.106 agreement.
A planning application has been submitted for a 720 home development at SW Bicester.
Outline permission for a 46,200m2 employment site at Bicester Business Park, including relocation of a Tesco store was granted in 2010.
The first phase of Bicester town centre redevelopment has opened, including a superstore, cinema and smaller retail units. Phase 2 is proposed in the emerging Local Plan.
A 19,800m2 employment site has been identified in the emerging Local Plan at Bicester Gateway.
A 26,400m2 employment site has been identified in the emerging Local Plan at NE Bicester Business Park.
Bicester Village Phase 4 has been approved, subject to a s.106 agreement.
14.4.11
Sensitive Receptors
Construction There are a number of receptors which would be sensitive to the potential sources of impact resulting from the construction of the proposed development. Sensitive receptors include:
Residents within Bicester Town and Bicester Wider Area
Businesses within Bicester Town and Bicester Wider Are
Cyclists, walkers in proximity to the Masterplan Site
Businesses in both the Bicester Wider Area and the wider region.
It is important to stress that all impacts felt at this stage of the scheme would be short term and temporary in their nature, bringing few permanent adverse impacts to the social and economic environment. It is also likely that many of the potential impacts can be mitigated using best practice guidance. Potential mitigation measures are discussed further in Section15.5.
Operation There are a number of receptors which would be sensitive to the potential sources of impact resulting from the operation of the proposal. Sensitive Receptors include:
Local Residents
Local Businesses
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 277
Local Schools
Community facilities
14.5 Design and Mitigation A number of measures have been identified in order to minimise the potential adverse impacts but also maximise the potential benefits to be gained. These are discussed below. Mitigation measures to reduce potential visual impacts and impacts upon noise are discussed in Chapter 5 Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment and Chapter 9 Noise and Vibration respectively.
14.5.1 Construction A Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) would be implemented to ensure that disruption is kept to a minimum, and careful working practices would be administered during the construction phase. The measures discussed below would be included as part of a CEMP:
Traffic movements would be carefully phased and abnormal loads accompanied by the Police where necessary, to minimise any possible delays and disruption to regular road users, public access, community facilities, residences and businesses, particularly those used by vulnerable groups such as children.
Establish a point of contact for listening to and addressing complaints or problems that is communicated to the general public.
Produce a regular newsletter available in hard copy or via the internet to update the general public and businesses of construction progress. These mediums would also be used to forewarn public of impending construction activities.
A curfew policy would be adopted so as to minimise disturbance for school users, by ensuring construction traffic would not affect local schools during the morning drop off and afternoon collection times.
Any works to the existing highway network along the site access route would be conducted in a manner that would ensure access is maintained to residential properties, businesses and community facilities. Disruption would be kept to a minimum.
Establish pre-employment routes with construction firms to help connect the long-term unemployed with employment opportunities and access to the wider labour market.
Careful consideration would be given to the location and subsequent restoration of any areas of land required temporarily for access, storage and compounds, and other related facilities.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 278
Health and safety issues would be considered paramount during the construction phase.
Register with the Considerate Constructors Scheme.
Source contractors within the locality wherever possible.
Working times implemented on site to minimise impact on residential amenity.
14.5.2 Operation A number of potential sources of impact have been identified during the operation of the proposal. The following mitigation measures would be implemented during this stage:
Careful working practices and regular building maintenance to ensure potential impacts during the function of the development are minimised.
To ensure provision of education facilities within the proposal to accommodate the anticipated education demands of the resident population and positively contribute to the standard of education facilities within OCC as a whole.
To include provision of other community facilities that will promote community interaction, empowerment and community development.
To ensure the proposal includes opportunities for on-site business growth that is aligned to the eco-credentials of the site.
To promote home-working through appropriate infrastructure such as broadband speeds.
To ensure the safety of all user groups along the public routes, maintenance traffic using the access routes and internal roads would observe a low speed.
Planning Obligations: Community Benefit Strategy. A tariff contributions system for community infrastructure that would cover all of the normal S106 items but excludes provision of affordable housing.
Integration of the development with the local public transport network, providing information regarding transport availability in home owner’s/tenant’s start-up packs, and promoting public transport links in property sales.
14.6 Assessment of Effects At the outset of each section, potential sources of impact have been identified and then discussed in further detail. A summary table of impact follows each impact description. NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 279
14.6.1 Construction Effects The potential sources of impact on the socio-economic environment resulting from the proposal are identified as:
Construction disturbances and nuisances – residential amenity may be affected by the construction works;
A potential reduction in public safety due to construction activities;
Local amenity: those travelling into the town centre and passing the construction site may experience a reduction in amenity due to construction activities;
Construction employment generated locally;
Construction staff expenditure may provide new custom for local businesses, particularly accommodation facilities, eateries and convenience retail outlets;
Material sourcing; potential benefits to local suppliers of construction materials if sourced from the local economy;
Sustainable construction techniques and the use of local materials; and
Other Development considerations.
Disturbance and Nuisances There may be short term disturbance and nuisances within Bicester wider area during the construction phase of the proposal. These impacts are discussed in more detail in Chapter 10 (Noise and Vibration) and Chapter 6 (Landscape and Visual Impact), but in the socio-economic context, implies that local users may experience a temporary reduction in amenity. For example, slight increases in noise as a result of construction activities, increased traffic volumes and congestion associated with construction traffic. Table 14-13
Impact overview: Disturbance and Nuisances
Impact
Significance
Notes
Negative
Not significant
The impact on the local community is considered to be negligible, affecting only a relatively small geographic area and temporary in nature
Public Safety Construction works of any kind have the potential to effect public safety. Construction areas would need to be appropriately cordoned and signed to prevent public access and stipulate the necessary safety precautions if entering the site.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 280
Table 14-14
Impact overview: public safety
Impact
Significance
Notes
Negative
Not significant
The impact on the local community is considered to be negligible, affecting only a relatively small geographic area and temporary in nature
Local Amenity The proximity of the wider Bicester settlement means that during the construction phase, there is the potential impact on local amenity including existing walking and cycling routes that circumnavigate the town and the opportunity for informal recreation may contribute to a short-term reduction in amenity, due to construction traffic and site clearance and construction works. Table 14-15
Impact overview: amenity
Impact
Significance
Notes
Negative
Not significant
The impact on the local community is considered to be negligible, affecting only a relatively small geographic area and temporary in nature
Employment The construction of the proposal will provide construction jobs. Working on a basis of 0.7 person years per dwelling (HCA guidelines) (Ref 14-12) and at an indicative rate of 200 dwellings per year, this equates to 140 construction jobs. The Economic Strategy supporting the Masterplan states that ‘the 140 jobs have the potential to be long-term, as building out the Masterplan will provide ongoing future employment opportunities over a period of twenty years or more…the proportion of construction jobs that are long-term will be increased by apprenticeship and other training programmes.’ Table 14-16
Impact overview: employment
Impact
Significance
Notes
Positive
Significant
Job creation resulting from the construction resource demands of the proposal. The labour force that will benefit from this is likely to extend beyond the Bicester Wider Area to the Cherwell DC and beyond.
Local Expenditure The construction costs of the proposal would be significant, with a large proportion of this being made on local contracts. Construction works may also bring indirect benefits for local businesses, particularly eateries and accommodation providers, with local spend associated with site workers. NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 281
Table 14-17
Impact overview: local expenditure
Impact
Significance
Notes
Positive
Significant
Direct and indirect expenditure within the WIZ as a result of the proposal: direct expenditure on construction resources, indirect expenditure on local accommodation and conveniences by the workforce during construction.
Sustainable Construction Techniques In addition to the employment generation potential of the construction process, the design specification of the proposal is likely to encourage the broadening in the skills base of existing skilled construction workers. The Economic Development Strategy for the Masterplan states that ‘construction will provide a significant number of jobs specialising in niche eco building skills’. The proposal will allow existing and future apprentices to learn skills that could generate a step change in the demand for construction materials and the use of construction techniques for a new generation of workers. Table 14-18
Impact overview: skills
Impact
Significance
Notes
Positive
Significant
Potential for existing and future construction workforce to learn new construction skills and materials that can influence the wider construction sector.
14.6.2 Operational Impacts Potential impacts arising from the operational stage of the proposed development relate to the following areas:
Population
Industry of employment and economic growth.
Unemployment levels
Housing availability and type
Education provision
Other community facilities
Crime
Tourism
Open space provision
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 282
Population The NW Bicester Eco-Town Demographic Profile Report (Barton Willmore November 2013) (Ref 14-13) was prepared to provide a greater understanding of the demographic structure of the population that will settle in NW Bicester and how it will assimilate with the existing and wider town. The report uses the Chelmer model to forecast population change; the model results forecast a total change in population across the whole Bicester study area of approximately 19,000 people (2011-2052), representing a 44% increase in the population compared to 2011 Census levels. The population of NW Bicester is predicted to grow to 14,000 over this period (with up to a maximum of 6,000 dwellings by 2052). Average household size for NW Bicester is anticipated to reach 2.3 by 2053, compared to an overall Bicester average household size of 2.2 (Barton Willmore 2013). A second population model has been utilised by Oxfordshire County Council – this model, called Popcalc, has presented slightly different population scenarios for both NW Bicester and the wider study area. The two models are based on slightly differing assumptions, however are considered to both represent plausible scenarios for likely population change. The area of difference in terms of final population is in the order of 3%. Barton Willmore (2013) identify some degree of divergence in the projected population of specific age groups between outputs from each model – the Chelmer model projects a slightly higher overall population than Popcalc, with lower levels of population in younger age groups; the Chelmer model also forecasts a greater level of population decline following completion of the scheme. In addition to the above detailed comments regarding forecast population, it is observed that the eco-label for Bicester has the potential on its own to generate greater demand for living in this location and as such could be a contributing factor to further population increase. Table 14-22
Impact Positive
Impact Overview: Population
Significance
Notes
Significant
A significant permanent increase in the population of the Bicester Wider Area is likely to reinforce the vitality and viability of Bicester town centre.
Employment and Economic Growth In order to understand the potential impact on the defined industry of employment and occupation, the potential for employment generation needs to be considered in terms of on-site jobs (resulting from allocated land uses), population-derived jobs (resulting from estimated population increase) and additional potential employment (from home working). NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 283
On-site employment: In order to understand the likely impact on employment and economic growth, the potential for employment generation needs to be considered in terms of on-site jobs (resulting from allocated land uses), population-derived jobs (resulting from estimated population increase) and additional potential employment (from home working). On-site employment: The Masterplan makes provision for some 4,600 jobs to be created on-site, including: at the proposed business park in the SW of the site; local service jobs within the proposed community and business hubs; and home-based jobs. A full overview of the on-site employment generating potential is provided in the following table. Table 14-23
Onsite employment generation
On-site employment Business Park – B1 office
Business Park – B2/B8 commercial
Estimated Job Numbers 1,067
972
Eco-business Centre
99
Employment in hubs
1,033
Energy Centre Building
10
Secondary School
45
Primary School
62
Mixed use in existing farms Homeworking
Comments Assumes four to eight multi-occupied office buildings, sub-divided into a total of thirty units of varying size Assumes approximately thirty units of varying size
Includes office, retail/leisure employment, together with those employed in community roles (doctor, dentist, nurseries etc)
105 1,075
Total
4,468 Source: Economic Strategy for the Masterplan (February 2014)
In addition to on-site jobs, the Masterplan proposal has the potential to create off-site jobs that are still directly related to the ecodevelopment. The Economic Strategy for the Masterplan site refers to the Cherwell Economic Analysis Study (August 2012) (Ref 14-14), which estimates that 200 jobs are generated for every additional 1,000 population. For NW Bicester, therefore, where the site will NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 284
accommodate a population of approximately 14,000 people when fully developed (i.e. 6,000 homes), it can be expected to create – without additional stimulus – around 2,800 new consumer service jobs (NW Bicester Economic Development Strategy 2014). Whilst a number of these will be included in the community hub and service facilities provided as part of the eco-development, a significant proportion (approximately 1,000) will be created to serve the additional demand of the residents and businesses and may be located elsewhere in Bicester. In terms of employment creation, this has been summarised in the following table: Table 14-24
Total Employment Generation
Operational Employment
Number of Jobs
On-site jobs
Over 4,600
Local service jobs
1,000
Jobs in firms in target sectors
400
Source: Economic Strategy for the Masterplan (February 2014)
Table 14-25
Impact Overview: Employment
Impact
Significance
Notes
Positive
Key Significant
The proposal will generate a significant number of jobs within the Bicester Wider Area; both directly through employment-related land uses and the potential to offer home working and indirectly through population derived local service jobs. It is also reasonable to suggest that the proposal will generate a significant amount of new investment not just within the Bicester Wider Area but also further afield in Cherwell District, Oxfordshire and the wider subregion.
Unemployment Levels The proposal has the potential to generate employment for those registered unemployed and potentially the long-term unemployed. The proposal will generate a range of skill demands and the extent to which the proposal will positively impact on unemployment levels will depend on the connectivity between emerging businesses and the unemployed cohort. There is an opportunity to maximise the employment benefits through appropriate mitigation. Table 14-6 Impact overview: Unemployment
Impact
Significance
Notes
Positive
Significant
Potential to link those unemployed and in particular the long term unemployed with permanent employment opportunities.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 285
Housing Availability and Type The proposal incorporates a range of housing types and tenures. The mix of properties will be varied and include a full range of one, two, three, four and five bed housing; 30% of the housing stock will be affordable housing in line with Cherwell District Council policy and PPS1. Specialist housing (for example extra care accommodation) will be incorporated in the development where there is an identified need. Overall, the range of housing – from one bedroom flats to five bedroom dwellings – is considered to have a positive impact in promoting diverse, mixed communities. Further, the design specification for housing (minimum Code for Sustainable Homes Level 5) will increase the proportion of local housing stock. Table 14-28
Impact Overview: Housing
Impact
Significance
Notes
Positive
Significant
Expansion in the provision and range of affordable and private housing. Greater proportion of homes within the area of Code for Sustainable Homes, Level 5
Education The potential effect on local schools is dependent on the number of families to be attracted to the Masterplan Site and to the Bicester Wider Area as a result of the proposed development. Table 14-29 below sets out results of population modelling for NW Bicester in relation to primary and secondary school age children. The table sets out the results for the two population models that have been used (both the Chelmer model and Popcalc), shows the forecast peak year for each age group and shows numbers of children within each age group for both the baseline trajectory and upper range trajectory scenarios. Table 14-29
Primary (410)
Peak Year Number Secondary (1115)
Peak Years for Primary and Secondary Aged Children
Baseline Trajectory
Upper Range Trajectory
Chelmer Model
Popcalc
Chelmer Model
Popcalc
2050/51
2052/53
2040/41
2042/43
1,317
1,393
1,399
1,482
Baseline Trajectory
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Upper Range Trajectory
Page 286
Peak Year Number
Chelmer Model
Popcalc
Chelmer Model
Popcalc
2052/53
2052/53
2046/47
2047/48
885
1,019
915
1,114
Source: Barton Willmore 2013
Considering the capacity analysis of the schools within Bicester Town, the nearest secondary schools, consultation with the OCC’s education department, and other development considerations that have include an education component, the Masterplan proposal is likely to have a positive effect on the community. There will be sufficient capacity to accommodate the increase in children of pupil age, and the wider environmental and sustainability principles advocated by the proposal are likely to generate positive educational spin-offs to include behavioural change and a reduction in carbon emissions. Table 14-30
Impact overview: Education
Impact
Significance
Notes
Positive
Significant
Expansion in the capacity and quality of education facilities in the CIZ and WIZ. The education facility is likely to positively contribute to the education and wider development of young people attending the facilities on site.
Other Community Facilities The proposal includes other community facilities that are considered to generate a range of wider socio-economic benefits to its residents of the Masterplan Site but also to the wider community of the Bicester Wider Area. These are:
the provision of four new community halls
Development of two mixed-use community hubs including facilities such as pub, small supermarket and small-scale retail uses.
Table 14-31
Impact overview: Other Community Facilities
Impact
Significance
Notes
Positive
Significant
Community facilities designed primarily benefit residents within the Bicester Wider Area and specifically within the site itself but offer significant opportunity for maintaining and enhancing community well-being on a broader scale.
Crime The design of the proposal has been developed to minimise the risk of crime occurring. Involvement from the local constabulary in the development of the masterplanning process have resulted in the NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 287
impact of the proposal on overall crime levels not considered significant. Table 14-32
Impact overview: Crime
Impact
Significance
Notes
Neutral
Not significant
The potential for crime to occur has been minimised during the design development of the proposal.
Tourism The Masterplan development has the potential by itself to act as a tourist attraction – the Eco Bicester Demonstration Building at Garth Park has attracted over 3,000 visitors, making it one of the leading visitor attractions for Bicester. Table 14-33
Impact overview: Tourism
Impact
Significance
Notes
Positive
Significant
The proposal has the potential to generate for exemplar delivery of the eco-town concept but specifically through the eco-business centre activities.
Open Space and Play Areas The proposal incorporates a significant amount of open space, which includes:
A central green with play area and amenities
A network of local play areas
Green Loop ‘adventure’ walking and leisure routes
A Country Park
Enhanced river corridors
Nature Reserve
Public sports pitches
Allotments and orchards accessible to everyone
Open space included within the proposal will therefore result in a net gain for the wider Bicester area. Table 14-34
Open space
Impact
Significance
Notes
Positive
Significant
Net gain in the quantity of open space within the defined Bicester settlement boundary.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 288
14.7 Cumulative Effects Construction The baseline research identified a number of other significant housing and employment related developments within Bicester that should be taken into account as part of the cumulative assessment. Two of these developments have received planning permission and/or are under construction and would be relevant for inclusion here, namely:
a development of 1,900 homes and 104,000m2 employment land at Graven Hill has been approved subject to a s.106 agreement.
the strategic housing development of 1,631 homes at South West Bicester that is under construction, including a health village, sports provision, employment land, a hotel, a new secondary school, a community hall and a ‘local centre’.
Outline permission for a 46,200m2 employment site at Bicester Business Park, including relocation of a Tesco store was granted in 2010.
Bicester Village Phase 4 has been approved, subject to a s.106 agreement.
The above schemes, combined with the Masterplan proposal therefore have the potential to contribute to an adverse cumulative impact from a construction perspective in terms of disturbance and nuisance from construction activities, potential impact on key local amenities and potential demand and supply for construction materials and workforce. Table 14-35
Impact Overview - Construction
Impact
Significance
Notes
Negative
Significant
Potential for the proposal to generate an adverse cumulative impact if the construction programme of other significant developments is not taken into account or adequate mitigation measures not included.
Operation The prevalence of a number of other significant development proposals within and around Bicester will generate a significant combined increase in the critical mass of Bicester and the services and facilities that are contained within it. The Masterplan proposal includes for new nursery, school and community provision which would adequately cater for the education requirements of the NW part of Bicester; the strategic housing development at South West Bicester also includes school and community provision. NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 289
The provision of employment within the Masterplan site, together with that planned at Bicester Gateway, the NE Bicester Business Park and as part of the Bicester Village Phase 4 development will have a significant beneficial impact upon the local and wider area. The Economic Development Strategy for the Masterplan Site (Ref 14-4) emphasises that the planned scale and mix of jobs growth on site cannot be guaranteed and that over the course of the Masterplan build-out, jobs growth will naturally be subject to market forces. The Cherwell Proposed Submission Local Plan therefore ensures that there would be sufficient allocation at alternative sites. Table 14-36
Cumulative Impacts - Operation
Impact
Significance
Notes
Positive
Significant
Significant increase in critical mass and expanded provision in the provision of facilities and services.
14.8 Summary and Conclusion The above assessment has considered the potential impacts of the construction and operational stages of the proposal. It is important to recognise that the potential impacts identified during the construction phase of the proposal will, with the exception of employment (considered 70 FTE up until 2026) be short term and temporary in their nature. With the implementation of identified mitigation measures, the overall adverse impact of this phase would be minimised. Potential impacts during the function of the proposal will depend on the perception of those identified receptors. For this reason, all potential impacts have been identified and mitigation measures proposed to minimise these impacts. Overall, it is considered that with the appropriate mitigation measures, the potential impacts of the proposal on the defined social and economic environment would be positive.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 290
15
Waste
15.1 Introduction The proposed development will result in the generation of solid waste from demolition, excavation and construction (referred to this chapter as CD&E waste), and the operation of the site due to the residential and commercial uses of the site (referred to in this section as operational waste). Contaminated wastes are dealt with under Chapter 11, Contaminated Land.
Introduction to waste management Waste is defined in Article 3 of the European Framework Directive on waste (2008/98/EC) as “any substance or object which the holder discards or intends or is required to discard”, where the term:
‘waste holder’ is defined as the producer of the waste or the natural or legal person who is in possession of the waste
‘waste producer’ is defined as anyone whose activities produce waste (original waste producer) or anyone who carries out preprocessing, mixing or other operations resulting in a change in the nature or composition of this waste.
Waste can cause harm to the environment through its treatment and final disposal, and therefore, effective waste management should follow the principles of the waste hierarchy shown on Figure 15-1 below:
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 291
Figure 15-1
Waste Hierarchy
Source: Waste Management Plan for England, DEFRA, Dec 2013
The assessment will consider the impact on the environment as a result of the generation of this waste and will detail measures to mitigate these impacts. Demolition waste – The existing site is largely undeveloped land, however, it is anticipated that there will be a small amount of demolition of existing buildings present on site. Construction and excavation waste – As the existing site is largely undeveloped land, it is anticipated that material waste likely to arise from the construction and excavation phases will consist of hard and inert materials, soils and stones, plastics, packaging (wooden and plastic), insulation material, miscellaneous metals, canteen and office waste. Operational waste – As the development is predominantly residential, most waste generated during operation will be household waste, in addition to small quantities of waste from the commercial and public facilities. Two key documents will be submitted as part of the planning application and will be referred to in this Chapter:
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 292
Preliminary Site Waste Management Plan (SWMP) The Site Waste Management Plan (SWMP) is used to plan, implement, monitor and review waste minimisation and management on construction sites. As of 1st December 2013, the Site Waste Management Plans Regulations 2008 were repealed. However, the implementation of a SWMP remains industry Best Practice. A SWMP is also a requirement of PPS10: Planning for Sustainable Waste Management (Ref 15-1) and supports the requirements of PPS: Eco-Towns – A supplement to PPS1 (Ref 15-2). The SWMP is used to record how waste is reduced, reused, recycled and disposed of on a construction site. This effectively means:
Recording decisions taken to prevent waste through concept and design.
Forecast waste produced on site.
Plan how to reduce, reuse and then recover the forecasted waste.
Implement and monitor the planned activity.
Review the SWMP and record lessons learnt.
The SWMP is a live document and is updated regularly during the course of the project. Preparing a SWMP at planning stage facilitates the identification and implementation of waste minimisation at the design stage and reuse and recycling opportunities during on site operations, reducing the quantities of construction waste sent to landfill. Preparing a SWMP also encourages the review of current waste reduction and recovery practice levels, highlighting areas where Good and Best Practice can be achieved.
Sustainable Waste and Resources Plan (SWRP) Under ET 19.1 of PPS: Eco-Towns supplement to PPS1, Eco-town planning applications should include a sustainable waste and resources plan (SWRP).. This should cover both domestic and nondomestic waste, which:
Set targets for residual waste levels, recycling levels and landfill diversion, all of which should be substantially more ambitious than the 2007 national Waste Strategy targets for 2020*; it should be demonstrated how these targets will be achieved, monitored and maintained;
Establishes how the development will be designed so as to facilitate the achievement of these targets, including the provision of waste storage arrangements which allow for the
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 293
separate collection of each of the seven priority waste materials as identified in the Waste Strategy for England 2007 (Ref 15-3).
Provides evidence that consideration has been given to the use of locally generated waste as a fuel source for combined heat and power (CHP) generation for the eco-town.
Sets out how developers will ensure that no construction, demolition and excavation waste is sent to landfill, except for those types of waste where landfill is the least environmentally damaging option.
*Note: The Waste Strategy 2007 proposes national targets for waste for 2020 as follows:
Residual waste reduction per person (amount left after reuse, recycling and composting) – from 370kg in 2005 to 225 in 2020.
Household re-use, recycling and composting – from 27% in 2005 to 50% in 2020.
Residual waste recovery (recycling, composting and energy recovery) from 28% in 2005 to 75% in 2020.
15.2 Regulatory Framework The framework for the assessment is derived from a combination of national, regional and local waste and policies and measures of which the key elements are:
Meet and exceed the Landfill Directive diversion targets for biodegradable municipal waste.
Increase diversion from landfill of non-municipal waste.
Decouple waste growth (in all sectors) from economic growth and put more emphasis on waste prevention and re-use.
Details are listed in Table 15-2: Table15-2 Waste Regulatory and Policy Framework
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester development Masterplan Response
EU Landfill Directive (Directive 1999/31/EC on the landfill of waste)
Establishes a framework for the management of waste across the European Community. It also defines certain terms, such as 'waste', 'recovery' and 'disposal', to ensure that a uniform approach is taken across the EU. Furthermore, it is an instrument for driving waste up the hierarchy through waste minimisation and increased levels of recycling and recovery.
An assessment will be carried out against the context of the Schedule 10 of the Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations (EPR) 2010 (through
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 294
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester development Masterplan Response
Sets out a number of procedures and criteria for construction, excavation and operational waste acceptance at landfills, including targets for the progressive reduction of biodegradable municipal waste (BMW) being sent for disposal in landfill.
which the Landfill Directive is implemented) and will assume that at a minimum, the targets in this Schedule will be met.
The principles set up for the acceptance of hazardous and non-hazardous waste at relevant landfills includes ensuring that the waste will not endanger human health and the environment and satisfies the Waste Acceptance Criteria (WAC). They also set strict requirements for the acceptance of certain stable, non-reactive hazardous waste into non-hazardous waste landfills. The Waste Framework Directive (Directive 2006/12/EC on waste)
The Waste Framework Directive (WFD; Directive 2006/12/EC on waste) contains the definition of waste. This definition is used to establish whether a material is a waste or not. In December 2008, the new WFD (Directive 2008/98/EC) came into force, amending some articles of the current WFD. Member States have until December 2010 for implementing the new WFD; at that time, Directive 2006/12/EC (and others) will be repealed. Amongst others, changes that will come into place include:
Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2010
The setting of recycling targets for nonhazardous construction and demolition waste (70% by 2020).
A provision which would enable the European Commission to adopt EU-wide end-of-waste criteria for specified wastes. A waste specified in this way would cease to be waste when it has undergone a recovery operation and complies with the criteria set by the Commission.
The obligation for Member States to set up waste prevention plans within five years from the adoption of the Directive.
The Environmental Permitting Regulations (EPR) introduced a permitting and compliance regime, which deliver many of the requirements of the European Environmental Directives and of national
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Recommendations will be provided detailing the end destination of construction, excavation waste.
The WFD will be implemented through the Environmental Protection Act 1990 (as amended), the Duty of Care and Carriers and Brokers regimes and regulations and the Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2010.
A SWRP covering construction, excavation and operational waste will be produced. This will be carried Page 295
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester development Masterplan Response
policy.
out against the context of the Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2010.
The Schedules to the Regulations identify precise requirements, article by article, for each Directive which must be delivered through the permitting system. Each Directive covered by the Regime has a specific schedule. The most relevant for this project are:
The Hazardous Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2005, Statutory Instrument 2005 No. 894,
and 2009 amendment SI 507
Part A installations and Part A mobile plant (the Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control Directive) - Schedule 7.
Domestic Part B installations and Part B mobile plant - Schedule 8.
The Waste Framework Directive Schedule 9.
The Landfill Directive - Schedule 10.
The Hazardous Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2005 (HWR 2005) were amended on 6 April 2009. This principally widened the scope of the exemption from hazardous waste producer registration with the Environment Agency. Under the Hazardous Waste Regulations 2005, “it is an offence to produce hazardous waste at premises, or remove that waste from premises, unless those premises are either registered with the Environment Agency or are exempt.” Where subcontractors produce hazardous waste, it will be removed under the Hazardous Waste Premises Registration for that site. The Hazardous Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2005 require a Hazardous Waste Consignment Note (HWCN) to be produced for each consignment of hazardous waste removed from site. This may take the form of either:
The SWMP will include a classification of the estimated waste that will be produced on the site as inert, nonhazardous or hazardous. It will also include details (e.g. license number) of each waste carrier and each waste management facility the project intends to use. This will enable the project to ensure compliance with the regulations.
A “Standard Procedure” (single movement) HWCN, where waste is moved from one premises to a Consignee in a single journey. A “Multiple Collection” HWCN, (as defined in Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2011 Schedule 2)
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 296
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester development Masterplan Response
Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2011 SI 988
The Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2011 came into force on 29th March 2011.
A SWMP covering construction, demolition and excavation waste has been produced.
And 2012 amendment SI 1889 (transposes the Revised Waste Framework Directive)
These Regulations update some aspects of waste controls. The need for waste permits and authorisations for certain activities therefore does not change. In summary, the regulations implement the WFD and; require businesses to confirm that they have applied the waste management hierarchy when transferring waste and to include a declaration on their waste transfer note or consignment note
This has been carried out in accordance with the Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2011 SI 988.
require a new permit waste hierarchy permit condition and where appropriate a condition relating to mixing of hazardous waste introduce a two-tier system for waste carrier and broker registration, which includes those who carry their own waste, and introduces a new concept of a waste dealer products whilst include a small number of radioactive waste materials Note: these regulations replace:
The Environmental Protection (Duty of Care) Regulations, as amended
The Controlled Waste (Registration of Carriers and Seizure of Vehicles) Regulations, as amended, and
amends Hazardous Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2005 (Schedule 2)
Note: DEFRA launched a consultation on proposed amendments to the Regulations 9 December 2013 which will provide alternatives to waste transfer notes for some small businesses. The consultation closed on the 20 January 2014 and DEFRA are currently analysing the responses received. DEFRA have not announced when the proposed alternatives will be announced. The Clean Neighborhoods and Environment Act 2005
It is the responsibility of everyone working in the construction industry to ensure that all waste is disposed of properly. All employees need to be made aware that if they are tasked with waste disposal this
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
A SWMP covering CD&E waste has been produced. This has been carried out against the context
Page 297
Policy/Legislation
Waste Strategy for England 2007 (WSE 2007)
Requirements
NW Bicester development Masterplan Response
must be carried out in accordance with the law, or they risk being fined.
of the Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Act 2005.
This strategy builds on Waste Strategy 2000 and the progress since then but aims for greater ambition by addressing the key challenges for the future through additional steps.
The assessment will be carried out against the context of the Waste Strategy for England 2007.
The Government’s key objectives are to:
Decouple waste growth (in all sectors) from economic growth and put more emphasis on waste prevention and reuse.
Meet and exceed the Landfill Directive diversion targets for biodegradable municipal waste in 2010, 2013 and 2020.
Increase diversion from landfill of nonmunicipal waste and secure better integration of treatment for municipal and non-municipal waste.
Secure the investment in infrastructure needed to divert waste from landfill and for the management of hazardous waste.
Get the most environmental benefit from that investment, through increased recycling of resources and recovery of energy from residual waste using a mix of technologies.
Waste Strategy for England 2011
This strategy builds on the Waste Strategy 2000 and 2007.
(WSE 2011)
The report contains actions and commitments, which set a clear direction towards a zero-waste economy. The Waste Strategy 2011 presents the key principles in waste management policy: the waste hierarchy, the diversion of waste away from landfill, producer and consumer responsibility, the proximity principle and the concept of Best Practicable Environmental Option (BPEO).
Planning Policy Statement 1:
Whereas much of the guidance offered by PPS1 is of general or background relevance
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
The assessment will also apply the waste hierarchy with a focus on resource efficiency.
The assessment has been carried out against the context of the Waste Strategy for England 2011 and assumes that as a minimum, the targets in this Strategy will be met. The assessment also applies the waste hierarchy with a focus on resource efficiency. The ES chapter will have a section Page 298
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester development Masterplan Response
Delivering Sustainable Development (CLG 2005)
to the current proposals, the following specific points are noteworthy:
which considers the impact of waste in the development and will make recommendations to lesson that impact and for designing out waste.
Planning Policy Statement: ecotowns, A supplement to Planning Policy Statement 1 (CLG 2009)
Paragraph 3 of PPS1 identifies sustainable development as ‘the core principle underpinning planning’.
Paragraph 20 highlights that development plan policies should take account of environmental issues, such as the mitigation of the effects of and the adaptation to climate change, the protection of the wider countryside, the potential impact of the environment on proposed developments and the management of waste in ways that protect the environment and human health, including producing less waste and using it as a resource wherever possible.
Paragraph 27 addresses the impacts of climate change, the management of pollution, and natural hazards, the safeguarding of natural resources and the minimisation of impacts from the management and use of resources.
This Planning Policy Statement (PPS) provides the standards any eco-town will have to adhere to and the list of locations identified with the potential for an eco-town. Eco-town planning applications should include a sustainable waste and resources plan (SWRP), covering both domestic and non-domestic waste, which:
Sets targets for residual waste levels, recycling levels and landfill diversion, all of which should be substantially more ambitious than the 2007 national Waste Strategy targets for 2020; it should be demonstrated how these targets will be achieved, monitored and maintained.
Establishes how all development will be designed so as to facilitate the achievement of these targets, including the provision of waste storage arrangements which allow for the separate collection of each of the seven priority waste materials as identified in the Waste Strategy for England 2007.
Provides evidence that consideration has
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
A SWRP covering construction, excavation and operational waste will be produced. This will be carried out against the context of the Planning Policy Statement: ecotowns, A supplement to Planning Policy Statement 1.
Page 299
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester development Masterplan Response
been given to the use of locally generated waste as a fuel source for combined heat and power (CHP) generation for the eco-town.
Planning Policy Statement 10: Planning for Sustainable Waste Management 2005 [6] (CLG 2005)
Sets out how developers will ensure that no construction, demolition and excavation waste is sent to landfill, except for those types of waste where landfill is the least environmentally damaging option.
The publication of Planning Policy Statement 10; Planning for Sustainable Waste Management (PPS10) established decision making principles to which regional planning bodies and all planning authorities should adhere when preparing planning strategies. Paragraph 34 suggests that proposed new development should be supported by Site Waste Management Plans (SWMPs) to identify the volume and type of material to be demolished and/or excavated, opportunities for the reuse and recovery of materials and to demonstrate how off-site disposal of waste will be minimised and managed.
Strategy for Sustainable Construction (HM Government 2008)
This Strategy is aimed at providing clarity around the existing policy framework and signalling the future direction of Government policy. It aims to realise the shared vision of sustainable construction by:
Providing clarity to business on the Government’s position by bringing together diverse regulations and initiatives relating to sustainability.
Setting and committing to higher standards to help achieve sustainability in specific areas.
Making specific commitments by industry and Government to take the sustainable construction agenda forward.
A SWRP and a project specific SWMP will be prepared to identify the volume and type of material to be excavated, opportunities for the reuse and recovery of materials and to demonstrate that no construction and excavation waste is sent to landfill, except for those types of waste where landfill is the least environmentally damaging option. The assessment will be carried out to reduce construction, demolition and excavation (CD&E) waste to landfill compared to 2008 baseline.
To deliver the Strategy, Government and industry have devised a set of overarching targets related to the ‘ends’ and ‘means’ of NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 300
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester development Masterplan Response
sustainable construction. The ‘ends’ relate directly to sustainability issues, such as climate change and biodiversity; the ‘means’ describe processes to help achieve the ‘ends’. By 2012, a 50% reduction of construction, demolition and excavation (CD&E) waste to landfill compared to 2008.
Oxfordshire Joint Municipal Waste Management Strategy – Recycling Targets Oxfordshire Waste Partnership’s (OWP) vision to maximise waste prevention across the county until 2030 is set out in the OWP Joint Municipal Waste Management Strategy (Ref 15-4), which was adopted in 2007. There has been a subsequent update to the Strategy, adopted in 2013. Under the policies of the Strategy the OWP will:
encourage the efficient use of resources, reduce consumption and take responsibility for the waste that they produce;
lobby central government to focus on waste as an integral part of sustainable resource management;
help households and individuals to reduce and manage their waste in order to ensure zero growth or better of municipal waste per person per annum;
provide an integrated system of collection and processing of household waste which will achieve, as a minimum: o
By 31st March 2020: recycle or compost at least 65% of household waste
o
By 31st March 2025: recycle or compost at least 70% of household waste;
ensure that recycling facilities and services are available to all residents;
encourage businesses to reduce, reuse and recycle by providing good quality recycling services, information and advice;
minimise waste to landfill and recover energy from non-recyclable waste through the operation of the Ardley Energy from Waste facility with the council seeking no more than 5% of nonrecyclable household waste;
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 301
provide waste management services for specialised, potentially polluting material streams such as hazardous waste and waste electrical and electronic equipment, which as a minimum meet legislative requirements;
working with the Waste Planning Authority, will ensure that waste facilities are suitably sized and distributed with the aim of minimising the transport of waste. Facilities will be well related to areas of the population, given the environmental and amenity constraints and the availability of suitable sites;
assist the development of local markets for recovered materials; and
work together to improve local environmental quality through effective communications and enforcement activity.
As noted above, the strategy has agreed a recycling target for Oxfordshire of 70% by 2015. This target is an improvement on the EU waste Framework Directive recycling and composting target of 50% by 2020 which is the only municipal recycling target set out in the recent National Review of Waste Policies (DEFRA 2011) (Ref 155), Paragraph 32.
15.3 Methodology 15.3.1 Introduction The assessment will address potential impacts resulting from waste management and the use of resources associated with the works in the construction, excavation and operational phases of the development. Construction and excavation wastes will be dealt with separately to operational wastes. As noted above, the now repealed Site Waste Management Plan Regulations 2008 was previously the only legislative requirement governing the assessment of construction, demolition and excavation waste matters. However, the implementation of a SWMP remains industry Best Practice, is a requirement of PPS10: Planning for Sustainable Waste Management and supports the requirements of PPS: Eco-Towns – A supplement to PPS1. The framework for the assessment or operational waste is derived from a combination of national, regional and local waste and policies combined with expert judgement. The Waste Management Plan for England (2013) (Ref 15-6) confirms the UK’s commitment to meets its target under the Waste Framework Directive of recovering at least 70% by weight, of construction and demolition waste (Note: this relates to construction and demolition waste, excluding hazardous waste and naturally occurring material NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 302
falling within code 17 05 04 in Schedule 1 to the List of Wastes (England) Regulations 2005 (SI 2005/895)).
15.3.2 Study Area In addition to the NW Bicester Masterplan Site itself, the study area will comprise Cherwell District (as Cherwell District Council is the waste collection authority) and Berkshire, Buckinghamshire and Oxfordshire for CD&E waste (since data from Cherwell District Council is not available). The study area will also comprise any waste facilities that will receive waste arising from the CD&E and operational phases of the development. Whilst the study area will not include the operation of these facilities, it will be necessary to ensure that the facilities have the capacity and capability to support the NW Bicester development deliver on its waste objectives and targets.
15.3.3 Establishment of Baseline Conditions CD&E waste For the purpose of this assessment, the baseline conditions include the current waste management infrastructure in Berkshire, Buckinghamshire and Oxfordshire and the performance in terms of the proportion of construction waste recycled to produce graded and ungraded aggregates and soil, used for engineering and capping and used on exempt sites. Baseline conditions have been established through desk-top research, including the interrogation of key data bases such as Building Research Establishment (BRE) benchmarks and Environment Agency data tables.
Operational waste For the purpose of this assessment, operational waste refers to residential and commercial waste arisings. The baseline conditions are the existing waste management system in Cherwell District, the quantities of waste and recyclables collected, and the performance in terms of the proportion recycled/composted. Baseline conditions have been established through consultation with Cherwell District Council Environmental Services, and desk-top research, including the interrogation WasteDataFlow (the web based system for municipal waste data reporting by UK local authorities to government).
15.3.4 Assessment of Effects The assessment of effects from CD&E and operational waste has focused on the potential direct impact of waste arisings on the NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 303
existing local, regional, and national waste management infrastructure. At the current stage of outline design, the details (types, quantities, specifications, the construction methods and the suitability for reuse of excess site materials) are not known so it is not feasible to accurately determine the quantities of waste arisings during the construction and excavation phases. Therefore, benchmark information from the BRE has been used. The amount of demolition to be carried out on site and subsequent wastes arising from these demolitions are considered to be minimal. Additionally, it is expected that these materials will be able to be retained onsite for landscaping and base layers for new hard standing and roads. The likely types and quantities of operational waste arisings are estimated in Section 15.5.2 using data provided by Cherwell District Council and Industry benchmarks. A qualitative assessment has been carried out based on available knowledge and considers two impacts:
The potential impact the programme could have on the region, in terms of waste generation
The impacts additional waste management measures can have on the waste generated (e.g. legislative requirements, national strategy, regional waste targets, best practice).
Waste generation impact
The assessment classifies the impact the programme will have on waste generation in the regional and the effect it has on the waste treatment facilities within the surrounding local authorities. The classification for this impact is shown in Table 15-2. Table 155-1 Guidance for estimating the potential impact of waste generated by the development
Potential waste
Criteria
Impact classification (score) No Impact (1)
Waste volumes generated by programme are unlikely to require additional waste management measures beyond what are already present in the region.
Minor (2)
Waste volumes generated by programme are easily managed locally without significant increases in quantity (less than 1% of the total generation in the region.
Moderate (3)
Waste volumes generated by programme contribute to greater than 1% but less than 5% of the total generation in the region.
Major (4)
Waste volumes generated throughout the period
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 304
contribute to an excess of 5% of the total generation in the region. Recycling of waste is less than 50%.
Waste Management Measures
The requirement for additional waste management measures has also been considered to determine the overall impact of waste generated from the programme. The classification for this impact is shown in Table 15-3. Table 15-3 Guidance for estimating the impact of additional waste management measures
Waste management Impact classification (score)
Criteria
No impact (4)
No measures in place to mitigate the impact of waste generated by the programme (i.e. no requirements from legislation, policy and/or standards that results in changes to waste management)
Minor (3)
Limited impact from the requirements of legislation, policy and/or standards that results in changes to waste management practices For example, broad national targets, SWMP requirement
Moderate (2)
Moderate impact from the requirements of legislation, policy and/or standards that results in changes to waste management practices For example as stringent national targets, regional waste targets
Major (1)
Considerable impact from the requirements of legislation, policy and/or standards that results in changes to waste management practices For example, stringent regional waste targets, requirements for Eco-towns, implementing DoW principles for construction
Significance of impacts.
The significance of the two impacts (waste generation and waste management) is shown in the following matrix (Table 15-4). Table 15-4 Significance of effect
Waste management impact Major (1)
Potential waste impact No impact
Minor
Moderate
Major
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
Not adverse
Slight Adverse
(1)
(2)
Slight Adverse (3)
Slight Adverse (4)
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 305
Moderate (2)
Minor (3)
Slight Adverse
Slight Adverse
(2)
(4)
Slight adverse (3)
No impact (4)
Slight adverse (4)
Moderate Adverse
Moderate Adverse
(6)
(8)
Moderate Adverse
Moderate Adverse
Large Adverse
(6)
(9)
Moderate Adverse
Large Adverse
Large Adverse
(12)
(16)
(12)
(8)
The definition of each level of significance is shown in Table 15-5 below. Table 15-5 Definitions of significance of effect
Significance
Score
Not adverse
1
Slight adverse
2-4
Definitions No significant effects on waste management strategy No noteworthy or material impact on waste management strategy. Impact likely to be on a temporary basis
Moderate adverse
5-10
Noteworthy effects are of moderate magnitude and frequency. The impact on the current waste management strategy will be affected. Impact likely to be on a permanent basis
Large adverse
11 - 16
Significant change in environmental conditions. Effects are likely to be of a high magnitude and frequency and will impact on the existing strategy to deal with waste. Impact likely to be on a permanent basis
15.3.5 Consultation Consultation has been undertaken as part of the assessment to:
Define the targets in the new Oxfordshire Municipal Waste Management Strategy (currently under review).
Discuss waste management aspirations for the NW Bicester development and set targets.
Determine a formal position with regards to any future waste facilities in the region and implications on waste management at the development.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 306
Determine details of Cherwell DC waste and recycling collection systems (materials collected, receptacles provided, frequency of collection etc).
Further consultation will be required as the development progresses.
15.3.6 Meetings An Energy, Waste and Water Workshop was held on 16th July, 3rd August and 23rd September 2010 at the Cherwell District Council offices in Banbury. Present at the workshops were representatives from Hyder Consulting, CDC Environmental Services, A2Dominion, Terry Farrell Partners, Environment Agency and Thames Water. Waste management topics discussed:
Review of Oxfordshire waste management strategy updates.
Waste targets
Design Solutions for waste.
Current waste treatment facilities and plans for the NW Bicester development.
Waste contracts.
15.4 Baseline Conditions Construction, Demolition and Excavation (CD&E) waste Berkshire, Buckinghamshire and Oxfordshire have an estimated total C,D&E waste arisings of 4,233,432 tonnes in C,D&E Waste: Survey of Arisings and Use of Alternatives to Primary Aggregates in England (2005) (Ref 15-7). Of this total:
29% was recycled to produce graded and ungraded aggregates and soil (excluding topsoil) by the regions 25 recycling crushers;
41% entered licensed landfill sites (of this 28% was used for engineering and capping and 72% was waste); and
30% was used on exempt sites.
The Masterplan Site is largely undeveloped land. There is a very limited amount of demolition occurring on site. It is anticipated that only a small amount of materials would need to be considered for incorporation into the construction phase of the project. PPS1 requires that the Bicester NW Bicester development ensure that no construction, demolition and excavation waste is sent to landfill, except for those types of waste where landfill is the least environmentally damaging option. NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 307
Operational waste Waste management
Currently an alternating weekly collection system for the properties in the district is provided. In 2012 this represented 59,240 households. For households, residual waste is collected on one week and comingled dry recyclables and mixed organics are collected the following week. Table 15-6 Waste collections for households (kerbside collection)
Waste stream
Waste type
Collection arrangements
Co-mingled dry recyclables
paper, tins and drink cans, cardboard, magazines and newspapers, aerosols and plastic bottles and containers
Blue bins collected fortnightly with mixed organics
Mixed organics
food: waste cooked and uncooked, plants, leaves, grass cuttings, pet straw and sawdust, pruning waste and cut flowers
Brown bins collected fortnightly with co-mingled dry recyclables
Residual waste (i.e. anything cannot be recycled or composted)
disposable nappies, polystyrene and cling film
Green bins Collected fortnightly
Batteries and small WEE
toasters, hairdryers, kettles, irons, mobile phones and stereos
Kerbside collection weekly, placing the bag on one of the bins
Other
Glass, textiles and DVDs
Bring banks
Table 15-7 Waste collections for residents of flats (communal bin stores)
Waste stream
Waste type
Collection arrangements
Co-mingled dry recyclables
paper, tins and drink cans, cardboard, magazines and newspapers, aerosols and plastic bottles and containers
Blue bins collected fortnightly with mixed organics
Mixed organics
food: waste cooked and uncooked, plants, leaves, grass cuttings, pet straw and sawdust, pruning waste and cut flowers
Brown bins collected fortnightly with co-mingled dry recyclables
Residual waste (i.e. anything cannot be recycled or composted)
disposable nappies, polystyrene and cling film
Green bins Collected fortnightly
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 308
Glass
Glass bottles and jars
Black bins – on some developments only
Other
Batteries and small WEE, textiles and DVDs Glass (if black bins are not provided)
Bring banks
A chargeable bulky waste collections service is provided to all residents for items such as furniture and white goods. Most dry recyclables are currently delivered to Enstone Community Waste Materials Recovery Facility (MRF) in West Oxfordshire (approximately 90%). The other 10% to Cheshire transfer station from where it is transferred to UPM MRF in Deeside. Cherwell District Council rolled out food collection services in October 2009, with everyone in the district being served by April 2010. The mixed garden waste and food waste goes to an in vessel composting facility (IVC) at Ardley (operated by Agrivert). This is in year three of a 15 year agreement. Most residual waste goes to Ardley Landfill. Residual waste generated in the north of the district goes to Banbury Waste Transfer station and then to Calvert in Buckinghamshire. In March 2011, Oxfordshire County Council awarded a 25 year contract for residual waste treatment to Viridor Oxfordshire Ltd. From 2014/15 all residual waste will be burnt to produce electricity at the new £200m energy from waste facility being built at Ardley in north Oxfordshire which will:
have capacity to treat 300,000 tonnes of waste per year – sufficient to treat all of Oxfordshire’s residual municipal waste; and
divert at least 95% of Oxfordshire’s residual municipal waste from landfill.
Waste Statistics
WasteDataFlow is the web based system for municipal waste data reporting by UK local authorities to government. This resource has been interrogated to determine the current Cherwell baseline in terms of Household (HH) Waste, Residual Waste and Recycling Rates. Table 15-8 Cherwell DC waste arisings data and recycling rates
Metric
2006/0 7
2007/0 8)
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
2008/0 9
2009/1 0
2010/1 1
2011/1 2
2012/1 3
Page 309
Total HH waste (t)
59,130
59,205
58,604
57,598
57,255
57,018
57,378
Residual waste per household (kg)
572.4
537.94
509.36
480.46
418.18
412.99
439.32
32,741
31,106
29,502
28,018
24,329
24,367
26,078
47.46%
49.66%
51.36%
57.49%
57.26%
54.55%
Total residual HH waste (t) Total recycling %
44.63%
Source: WasteDataFlow
From the table above, you can see that Cherwell achieved a recycling rate of 54.55% in 2012/13. This performance is compared against regional and national performance in the table below. From this it is clear that Cherwell DC recycling rates are well above the England average. Table 15-9 Recycling rates Area
2008/9
2011/12
2012/13
CDC
50%
*57%
**54.5%
Oxfordshire
42%
59%
60%
England
38%
42%
45%
Source: WasteDataFlow Note *During this period both dry recycling and organic recycling saw no significant change. Dry recycling rates decreased marginally by 0.45% whilst organic recycling increased marginally by 0.24%. **For these two quarters of 201213, dry recycling decreased by 1% to 24% whilst organic recycling decreased by 2% to 30%.
15.5 Design and Mitigation 15.5.1 CD&E waste The potential waste types that could arise during the excavation and construction phases are summarised in Table 15-10 below: Table15-10
Potential waste sources during site construction
Construction phase
Potential wastes produced
Classification of waste
Excavation
Made ground, soil and sub-soils
Inert; and /or Non hazardous. Potentially hazardous if it contains sufficiently high levels of heavy metals.
Construction
Construction materials, such as concrete, bricks, plastics,
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Inert; and / or, Non hazardous; and / or, Page 310
Construction phase
Potential wastes produced
Classification of waste
metals, plasterboard, timber, paint, etc.
Hazardous.
Made ground, soil and sub-soils
Non hazardous, and hazardous if it contains sufficiently high levels of heavy metals.
Excavation waste At the time of writing, the foundation and building designs had not been carried out and so it was not possible to accurately estimate the volume of waste arising from the excavations. The geology identified at the site indicates that shallow spread foundations may be suitable for all anticipated low-load structures; therefore, the generation of spoil is expected to be minimal. It is anticipated that any spoil generated may be reused on site for landscaping or other purposes, therefore it is expected that only minimal volumes of material may require disposal off-site.
Construction waste The amount of waste produced during the construction phase will be affected by the types and methods of construction. At the time of writing, the types and methods of construction had not been decided and so it was not possible to accurately estimate the volume of waste arising from the construction. Using waste benchmarking data from the Buildings Research Establishment (BRE, May 2012) the amount of construction waste for the buildings has been forecasted. The forecasts are shown in Table 15-11 below: Table 15-11 Construction Type
Forecasted construction waste arisings from buildings Average waste (m3/100 m2)
Developm ent size (m2)
Forecaste d waste arising (m3)
Average waste (tonnes/100 m2) (BRE benchmarks)
Forecasted waste arising (tonnes)*
Residential Units
18.1
509,958
9,230,240
16.8
8,567,294
Secondary School
20.7
6,750
139,725
23.3
157,275
Primary School
20.7
13,320
275,724
23.3
310,356
Nursery
20.7
2,000
41,400
23.3
Care Home and Extra Care
18.1
24,570
444,717
Hotel
14.4
4,500
64,800
21.6
97,200
Eco business
19.8
1,650
32,670
23.8
39,270
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
16.8
a
46,600
412,776
Page 311
Offices
19.8
Commercial
13.0
23,424
463,795
36,250
471,250
23.8
b
12.6
c
456,750
a
101,750
Retail
20.9
3,700
77,330
27.5
GP Practice
19.1
25,212
25,212
12.0
Community Space
20.9
3,450
72,105
Energy Centre
13.0
1,900
24,700
Total
a
15,840
22.4
d
77,280
a
12.6
11,363,66 8
557,491
23,940
10,863,823
Notes: (a) in hubs (b) includes B1 office in hubs and B1 office (c) Listed as B2 B8 Commercial (d) Including Community Hall in hub and community rooms
The composition of construction waste arisings from buildings is likely to be similar to that shown in Table 15-12 below: Table 15-12
Key construction materials waste streams on typical new build
Waste material
Wastage percentage
Packaging (including wood pallets, plastic, cardboard, tins) Plasterboard
25 – 35 5 – 36
Rubble (including broken bricks, blocks, tiles)
35 – 40
Timber (excluding pallets)
15 – 25
Cement and plaster
10 – 17
Insulation Metal
6 – 15 3–9
Dry concrete products – blocks, slabs, etc.
2 – 12
Plastic products (excluding packaging)
1 -11
Ceramic material
1-8
The volume of waste arising from construction will depend on how the site is managed and the implementation of the Site Waste Management Plan.
Construction Waste Management Measures Produce a Site Waste Management Plan (SWMP) As noted above, the now repealed Site Waste Management Plan Regulations 2008 were previously the only legislative requirement governing the assessment of construction, demolition and excavation waste matters However, the implementation of a SWMP remains NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 312
industry Best Practice, is a requirement of PPS10: Planning for Sustainable Waste Management and supports the requirements of PPS: Eco-Towns – A supplement to PPS1. A Preliminary SWMP for the Masterplan Site is being submitted (Appendix 15A). This forecasts the type and quantity of waste that will be produced on the Exemplar Site and sets out how waste will be managed so that it is reused, recycled, or disposed of appropriately. The SWMP is a live document and will be updated during the duration of the project by the Client and the Principal Contractor to record the movements of waste, how it was managed and to encourage better waste management practices. Waste generated by the excavation works
The alignment, location, level and grading of the Masterplan Site development has been designed to minimise excavation volumes. It has also been designed to enable flexibility in the landscaping, so that it can accommodate the changes in spoil volumes that may arise when site conditions differ from those assumed during the design. Both these approaches should enable all excavation waste (except where contaminated) to be reused onsite where conditions allow. Managing wastes onsite
To reduce waste production during the construction phase the project will employ modern methods of construction such as prefabrication of units and products off site as described by WRAP (Ref 15-8). As part of the SWMP the Principal Contractor will have to monitor waste arisings and management practices. Auditing and measurement will enable more effective management of waste through the setting of performance targets for recycling and segregation and monitoring subcontractors on all the sites. The phasing of the proposed development allows the opportunity for the construction and excavation wastes to be reused or recycled onsite in subsequent stages of the development. The SWMP will ensure such opportunities are maximised as the preferred option for dealing with waste arising from the site.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 313
15.5.2 Operation The types of waste that will arise during operation are summarised in Table 15-13 below. Table 15-13
Types of waste generated during site operation
Waste stream
Constituents
Recyclable / reusable / non recyclable
Mixed organics
Food waste cooked and uncooked, prunings, pet straw and sawdust, grass cuttings, plants and leaves).
Recyclable
Dry recyclables
Food tins and drinks cans, plastic bottles and containers, newspapers, directories and magazines, paper and card and aerosol cans
Recyclable
Glass
All colours of glass jars and bottles
Recyclable
Bulky
Furniture, white goods
Recyclable / non recyclable
Textiles
Clothes and small pieces of material
Recyclable
Residual
Any of the above that has not been separated for recycling. Non recyclable food packaging, plastic film, disposable nappies
Recyclable / non recyclable
Based on recent WasteDataFlow returns and data provided by CDC, WRAP (Ref 15-9) and British Standard (Ref 15-10) data, it is estimated that approximately 13,873 tonnes of waste (including domestic and non-domestic waste) will be generated during operation of the site per annum. This figure represents the total operation of the site and doesn’t take into account of any proposed recycling or composting. If current recycling rates (46% 2012/13) for Cherwell are applied to this figure then an annual residual waste level of 6,342 tonnes of waste is projected. Current waste production levels and subsequent residual waste levels are used to present a worst case scenario of no improvement in both of these areas. Likely compositions are set out in TableTable 15-14 below. Table 15-14
Key operational materials waste streams
Waste material
Wastage rate (percentage)
Organics
49%
Dry recyclables
36%
Glass
8%
Wood
1%
Textiles
4%
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 314
Waste material
Wastage rate (percentage)
Bulky
1%
Other
1%
A number of waste management measures will be put in place to minimise the impacts of operational waste. These are outlined in Table 15-15 below: Table 15-15
Impact
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure
Extend the CDC recycling and waste collection system to the development.
Increased generation of waste
Comment The recycling and waste collection system provided by CDC achieves a high recycling performance. This successful system will be extended to the development to utilise existing waste infrastructure and a proven system to increase recycling and reduce waste. The system comprises an alternate weekly collection for co-mingled recyclables, mixed food and garden waste, and residual waste
Initial recycling/composting target of 70%
This is the target set out in the SWRP as a requirement under PPS1, and has been set in conjunction with the ‘Energy, Water and Waste Workstream’ working group, having been taken into consideration during the planning application.
Initial residual waste level target of 300kg/household
This is also set out in the SWRP as requirement under PPS1.
In addition to the mitigation measures above there are number of alternative initiatives that could be undertaken in the future, although no specific provision has been made within the Masterplan Site at present.
Community reuse centre (Bicester Green) - Compliant with the first two tiers of the waste hierarchy (prevention and preparing for reuse), the centre is an independent social exercise. Currently the centre’s main activities are repair and refurbishment of items, such as small electricals, wooden furniture and bicycles.
Community composting project - compliant with the third tier of the waste hierarchy (recycling) a community composting project could possibly be established.
Public Incentives Scheme - a scheme could be implemented to incentivise participation in recycling including performance based charging schemes.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 315
15.6 Assessment of Effects 15.6.1 CD&E waste Table 15-17 below summarises the potential impacts and the significance of the effects of waste arisings from the development prior to mitigation. The assessment is based on the following assumptions: The landfill capacity in Berkshire, Buckinghamshire and Oxfordshire in 2010 is shown in Table 15-16. Table 15-16 Site type
Inert Non-inert Total
Landfill capacity (2010 data, Environment Agency)
Landfill capacity (thousand m3) Berkshire
Buckinghamshir e
Oxfordshire
1,754
536
4,199
485
41,592
11,433
2,239
42,592
15,632
Potential waste generation
Waste arising from earthworks will potentially be high. Therefore the waste impact is assessed to be Major for earthworks.
It is assessed that the type of waste arisings from the construction and demolition phases of the project will be 10.9 million tonnes (Table). In addition, the timescale of the construction phase is a long term activity (20-30 years). Therefore the waste impact is assessed to be Major for construction and demolition.
Waste management impact
The impact of waste management measures for earthworks is assessed as Major since the volume of excavated material that will be reused on site, and therefore will generate negligible volumes of spoil requiring off-site disposal.
Currently there is capacity in the existing landfill sites. However, consideration must be given to the timescale of the construction phase which is a long term activity (20-30 years). As such, the impact has a potential to be long-term; this will require mitigation to prevent an adverse impact on the region over this period. It is assessed that the impacts of the waste management policy to be delivered by the development will be Major.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 316
Significance of Effect Excavation
The alignment, location, level and grading of the Eco-town development will be designed to minimise excavation volumes. It will also be designed to enable flexibility in the landscaping, so that it can accommodate the changes in spoil volumes that may arise when site conditions differ from those assumed during the design. Both these approaches should enable all excavation waste (except where contaminated) to be reused onsite where conditions allow. Taking both impacts into consideration, the excavation works should result in No Adverse effects (as defined in Table 15-5). Construction and Demolition Recycling all inert and non-hazardous waste onsite, adhering to the requirements of the SWRP and PPS1: Eco-Towns – A supplement to PPS1 and implementing the SWMP (Appendix 15A) will ensure that impacts of construction waste are minimised. Therefore, despite the high volumes of CD&E waste likely to arise from the construction of the development, the significance of effect on the Oxfordshire waste management infrastructure following mitigation is likely to be Slight Adverse. The significance of effects following mitigation are shown in Table 1517 below: Table15-17
Significance of Effects (Construction)
Development phase
Mitigation
Significance of effects
Excavation
Excavation volumes minimised through design
Neutral
All excavation materials to be reused onsite Construction and Demolition
No waste sent to landfill except where landfill is the least environmentally damaging option, as detailed in the SWRP and PPS: Eco-Towns – A supplement to PPS1
Slight adverse
Waste to be managed through the development SWMP (Appendix 15 A) Waste to be monitored and audited
15.6.2 Operation Prior to any of the mitigation measures identified in Section 15.5.2, waste arisings from the Masterplan development would contribute an additional 13,873 tonnes per annum of domestic and non-domestic waste and recyclables. Of this 13,873 tonnes, 5,631 tonnes (40.6%) are forecast to relate to domestic use. Note: this will be in addition NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 317
to the estimated. 59,000 tonnes per annum of domestic waste already being generated by Cherwell District. Effects of waste generated in the operational phase of the Eco-town development would be long-term effects. The assessment anticipates a significant volume of residual waste generated from the Eco-town development (6,342 tonnes) would be diverted away from landfill (most likely to the 300,000 tonnes per annum capacity Ardwell energy from waste facility) thereby resulting in low impact on this resource. Despite an increase of 9.5% of domestic waste caused by the Ecotown development, the capacity of the existing waste management infrastructure and waste disposal facilities to manage the wastes likely to arise from the development are considered to have a Major impact on the levels of waste produced by the development. In addition to this, the implementation of the mitigation measures detailed in the table below will result in a Slight Adverse significance of effects. The significance of effects following mitigation is shown in Table 1518 below: Table 15-18
Significance of Effects (Operation)
Development phase
Mitigation
Significance of effect
Operation
Implementation of SWRP, and specifically:
Neutral
Extend the CDC recycling and waste collection system to the development
An initial recycling/composting target of 70%
Initial residual waste level target of 300kg/household
Establish a community composting project
15.7 Cumulative Effects The cumulative impact on the waste arisings and management of the Masterplan Site in Cherwell District and Oxfordshire County have been reviewed. There are numerous developments planned for the surrounding area that will have a cumulative impact throughout the construction and operation of the development. Sufficient data is not currently available on the levels of construction and operational waste likely to arise from these developments. However, due to the design and mitigation measures being implemented as part of the Development, it is anticipated that Slight Adverse cumulative effects would occur during the construction and operational phases of the development. NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 318
15.8 Summary This Chapter has assessed the potential environmental impacts of waste materials in relation to the proposed development. Table 15-19 below provides a summary of significance of effects assuming implementation of these mitigation measures. Table15-19
Waste impact
Significance of effects (Summary)
Waste managem ent impact
Mitigation measure
Significanc e of effect
Waste generated from excavation Major
Major
Excavation volumes minimised through design.
No Adverse
All excavation materials to be reused onsite.
Waste generated from construction and demolition3 Major
Major
Waste to be managed through the SWMP.
Slight Adverse
Waste monitored and audited Implementation of targets and measures set out in SWRP
Waste generated from operation Major
Major
Implementation of targets and measures set out in SWRP
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Slight Adverse
Page 319
16
Transport
16.1 Introduction This chapter considers the potential impacts of traffic and transport associated with the Masterplan proposals and the predicted associated effects on sensitive receptors in the area. At the present time the results of modelling of the traffic impacts are the subject of on-going discussion with Oxfordshire County Council and the Highways Agency and thus the future year traffic figures are not yet available to be assessed. The chapter follows the assessment methodology set out in the document entitled, “Guidelines for the Environmental Assessment of Road Traffic” (Ref 16-1)( published by the Institute of Environmental Assessment (IEA) in 1994. The IEA is now known as the Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment (IEMA), so this document will be referred to as the ‘IEMA Guidelines’ throughout the remainder of this chapter.
16.2 Regulatory Framework 16.2.1 National and Local Policy This assessment has been undertaken in accordance with current legislation, national, regional and local plans and policies. Outlined below are those elements of current legislation, policy and guidance relevant to transport in the context of the proposed Masterplan Site development. A summary of the relevant legislation and policies, the requirements of these policies and NW Bicester Masterplan Site response is provided in Table 16-1 below. Table 16-1
Summary of Relevant Legislation and Policies
Policy/Legislati on
Requirements
Bicester Masterplan development Response
National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (2012)
The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (2012) streamlines national planning policy.
The masterplan access and travel strategy sets out the strategy for achieving all of these aims to maximise the use of sustainable travel modes, provide good accesiblity to faciltiies and services and minimise traffic impacts.
The NPPF sets out 12 core planning principles that should underpin decision taking. The principle which relates to transport planning, and in the turn the Development is:
Actively manage patterns of growth to make the fullest possible use of public
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
The location of the development as an extension to Bicester provides the opportunity to offer good
Page 320
Policy/Legislati on
Requirements transport, walking and cycling and focus significant development in locations which are or can be made sustainable.
Bicester Masterplan development Response accesibility and a range of transport options.
Chapter 4 ‘Promoting sustainable transport’ and specifically Paragraph 29 states that ‘the transport system needs to be balanced in favour of sustainable transport modes, giving people a real choice about how they travel.’ Paragraph 32 states that ‘decisions should take account of whether:
The opportunities for sustainable transport modes have been taken up depending on the nature and location of the site, to reduce the need for major transport infrastructure;
Safe and suitable access to the site can be achieved for all people; and
Improvements can be undertaken within the transport network that cost effectively limit the significant impacts of the development. Development should only be prevented or refused on transport grounds where the residual cumulative impacts of development are severe.’
Paragraph 34 states that ‘decisions should ensure developments that generate significant movement are located where the need to travel will be minimised and the use of sustainable transport modes can be maximised.’ Paragraph 35 states that ‘developments should be located and designed where practical to:
Accommodate the efficient delivery of goods and supplies;
Give priority to pedestrian and cycle movements, and have
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 321
Policy/Legislati on
Requirements
Bicester Masterplan development Response
access to high quality public transport facilities;
Create safe and secure layouts which minimise conflicts between traffic and cyclists or pedestrian, avoiding street clutter and where appropriate establishing home zones;
Incorporate facilities for charging plug-in and other ultra-low emission vehicles; and
Consider the needs of people with disabilities by all modes of transport.’
Finally, Paragraph 38 states that for larger scale residential developments in particular ‘key facilities such as primary schools and local shops should be located within walking distance of most properties.’ ‘A Supplement to Planning Policy Statement 1 - Ecotowns’
‘A Supplement to Planning Policy Statement 1 - Eco-towns’ was published by Communities and Local Government (C&LG) in 2009. Although Planning Policy Statement 1 was superseded by the NPPF upon its publication in 2012, the Eco-towns supplement is extant. This document was prepared with the intention that Eco-towns were considered as exemplar projects to achiever greener and low carbon developments.
The masterplan access and travel strategy sets out the strategy for achieving all of these aims to meet the PPS1 targets.
Section ET11 commencing on page 8 sets out the requirements with respect to transport. For convenience this has been reproduced below. “ET11.1 Travel in eco-towns should support people’s desire for mobility whilst achieving the goal of low carbon living. The town should be designed so that access to it and through it gives priority to options such as walking, cycling, public transport and other sustainable options, thereby NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 322
Policy/Legislati on
Requirements
Bicester Masterplan development Response
reducing residents’ reliance on private cars, including techniques such as filtered permeability. To achieve this, homes should be within ten minutes’ walk of (a) frequent public transport and (b) neighbourhood services. The provision of services within the eco-town may be co-located to reduce the need for individuals to travel by private car and encourage the efficient use of the sustainable transport options available. ET11.2 Planning applications should include travel plans which demonstrate: (a) How the town’s design with enable at least 50 per cent of trips originating in eco-towns to be made by non-car means, with the potential for this to increase over time to at least 60 per cent (b) Good design principles, drawing from Manual for Streets, Building for Life, and community travel planning principles (c) How transport choice messages, infrastructure and services will be provided from ‘day one’ of residential occupation, and (d) How the carbon impact of transport in the eco-town will be monitored, as part of embedding a long term lowcarbon approach to travel within plans for community governance. ET11.3 Where an eco-town is close to an existing higher order settlement, planning applications should demonstrate: (a) Options for ensuring the key connections around the ecotown do not become congested as a result of the development, for example by NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 323
Policy/Legislati on
Requirements
Bicester Masterplan development Response
extending some aspects of the travel plan beyond the immediate boundaries of the town, and (b) Significantly more ambitious targets for modal share than the 50 per cent (increasing to 60 per cent over time) mentioned above and for the use of sustainable transport. ET11.4 Where eco-town plans intend to incorporate ultra low carbon vehicle options, including electric car schemes to help achieve a sustainable transport system, planning applications should demonstrate that: (c) There will be sufficient energy headroom to meet the higher demand for electricity, and (d) The scheme will not add so many additional private cars to the local road network that these will cause congestion. ET11.5 Eco-towns should be designed in a way that supports children walking or cycling to school safely and easily. There should be a maximum walking distance of 800m from homes to the nearest school for children aged under 11, except where this is not a viable option due to natural water features or other physical landscape restrictions.”
DfT Circular 02/13
DfT Circular 02/13 sets out the way in which the Highways Agency will engage communities and the development industry to deliver sustainable development and, thus, economic growth, whilst safeguarding the primary function and purpose of the strategic road network. In relation to environmental impact, developers must ensure all environmental implications associated with their proposals, are adequately assessed and reported so as to
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
The masterplan access and travel strategy sets out the strategy for achieving all of these aims to maximise the use of sustainable travel modes, provide good accesiblity to faciltiies and services and minimise traffic impacts. The location of the development as an extension to Bicester provides the opportunity to offer good accesibility and a range of Page 324
Policy/Legislati on
Requirements
Bicester Masterplan development Response
ensure that the mitigation of any impact is compliant with prevailing policies and standards. It states that where a likely negative impact on the environment resulting from the proposals occurs outside of a highway boundary as a result of the proposals (for example air quality, visual impacts, artificial light or noise impacts at new housing affected by a road); any required mitigation measures must be located outside of the strategic road network’s highway boundary.
transport options.
The Circular requires developers to ensure adequate environmental information is provided at all stages of the planning process to satisfy the local planning authority and any other consenting authorities that the environmental impacts have been appropriately considered, that measures have been included within the proposals as required by relevant policies or otherwise, as fully as is reasonably possible, and to enable all residual impacts to be taken into account by the local planning authority in the development consent process.
Oxfordshire Parking Policy (2009)
Oxfordshire Parking Policy was published on 9th November 2009. This document has been prepared in accordance with the requirements of all local authorities in the county including Cherwell District Council. This data is also included within the ‘Residential Road Design Guide’, which forms the basis of site layout, priority of modal movement, and infrastructure.
Parking policy will be used as the basis for the detailed discussions on parking provision within the development.
Local Plan Submission Version (2014)
The Development Plan for Cherwell District Council, as an interim measure, comprises those saved policies contained in the Local Plan (Adopted 1996).
The masterplan access and travel strategy sets out the strategy for achieving all of these aims to maximise the use of sustainable travel modes, provide good
Cherwell District Council are NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 325
Policy/Legislati on
Requirements
Bicester Masterplan development Response
currently working on a new Local Plan which, when adopted, will become the Development Plan for the Local Planning Authority applicable to the Development. Cherwell District Council submitted their Local Plan Submission Version (2014) to the Planning Inspectorate in January 2014 and the Examination in Public is programmed for June 2014. Although the plan remains unadopted, work has now progressed to such a point at which policy contained in the plan can be considered material to the Development.
accesiblity to faciltiies and services and minimise traffic impacts. The location of the development as an extension to Bicester provides the opportunity to offer good accesibility and a range of transport options.
The Local Plan Submission Version sets out a number of Strategic Objectives for Ensuring Sustainable Development. Strategic Objective 13, SO13 is ‘to reduce the dependency on the private car as a mode of travel, increase the attraction of and opportunities for travelling by public transport, cycle and on foot, and to ensure high standards of accessibility to services for people with impaired mobility.’ Policy SLE 4: Improved Transport and Connections states that the Council will ‘support key transport proposals including…Transport Improvements at Bicester in accordance with the County Council’s Local Transport Plan and Movement Studies.’ Policy ESD 1 Mitigating and Adapting to Climate Change sets out a number of measures to mitigate the impact of development within the district on climate change which includes ‘delivering development that seeks to reduce the need to travel and which encourages sustainable travel options including walking, cycling and public transport to reduce dependence on private cars.’ NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 326
Policy/Legislati on
Requirements
Bicester Masterplan development Response
Policy Bicester 1 is a specific policy relating to the Development. The policy states key site specific design and place shaping principles including, of relevance to transport:
‘Infrastructure to support sustainable modes of transport will be required including enhancement of footpath and cycle path connectivity with the town centre, employment and rail stations.’
‘Maximisation of the sustainable transport connectivity in and around the site’
‘Contributions to improvements to the surrounding road networks, including mitigation measures for the local and strategic highway network, consistent with the requirement of the Eco-town PPS to reduce reliance on the private car, and a high level of accessibility to public transport services, improvements to facilities for pedestrians and cyclists and the provision of a Travel Plan to maximise connectivity with existing development.’
16.2.2 Best Practice Guidance In April 2008 the Department for Transport published, ‘Building Sustainable Travel into New Developments: A Menu of Options for Growth Points and Eco-towns.’ Communities and Local Government produced a, ‘Design to Delivery: Eco-towns Transport Worksheet Advice to Promoters and Planners’ in March 2008. This supplements the Department for Transport guidance stated above providing a menu of options, concentrating primarily on outcomes and a route map. Both documents are relevant to the proposed development being considered. NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 327
16.3 Methodology 16.3.1 Introduction As mentioned in Section 16.1 above, this chapter has been prepared using the assessment methodology set out in IEMA Guidelines. This chapter should be read in combination with the Access and Travel Strategy submitted with this application. Where appropriate crossreferences will be made to this document and its appendices and a summary of the relevant sections of these documents reproduced in this chapter for convenience.
16.3.2 Study Area The IEMA Guidelines set out two rules that are used to establish whether an environmental assessment of traffic effects should be carried out. They are set out below: Rule 1
Include road links where traffic flows will increase by more than 30% (or the number of heavy goods vehicles will increase by more than 30%)
Rule 2
Include any other specifically sensitive areas where traffic flows have increased by 10% or more.
In this instance it is considered that as the proposed development forms part of Eco Bicester and is proximate to sensitive residential areas and communities, the 10% threshold should apply. Oxfordshire County Council was consulted on the extent of the study area to be considered using the information from traffic studies and forecasts (described below) and agreed that the study area should include the entirety of Bicester for the purposes of initial assessment in order to be able to identify links where traffic levels are increased. The study area is illustrated below and encompasses the road network of Bicester within the twelve cordon locations (which are the points of entry/ exit to Bicester). Figure 16-1 Study Area
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 328
16.3.3 Establishment of Baseline Conditions Base Year 2012 Baseline conditions have been established using the Bicester SATURN model run by WYG on behalf of Oxfordshire County Council. The model currently has a base year of 2012 and the outputs from the model have been made available in February 2014 to provide a baseline for NW Bicester.
Future Year Baseline/Reference Case 2031 A future year / Reference Case have been developed by WYG for 2031 using the Saturn model. This includes all committed and planned developments which represents maximum growth of the town without NW Bicester. For the purposes of environmental assessment, this scenario is to be used as the Future Year Baseline against which the impacts of NW Bicester Masterplan will be assessed. Table 16-2 sets out committed development that has been considered as part of the 2031 reference year and Table 16-3 lists those developments included within the Submission Cherwell Local Plan. These tables are extracted from the Bicester Peripheral Routes Study NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 329
(WYG on behalf of OCC) as developments included within the model in 2031. Table 16-2 Committed Development
Project/ Development
Description
South West Development of residential accommodation Bicester consisting of 1,631 units, 3.91ha (06/00967/OUT) employment space, hotel, health village, secondary school and community hall.
Status Under Construction
This development is around 2.3 km from the Masterplan Site. Additional 100 houses currently being considered. Bicester 46,200 sqm employment development at Business Park Bicester Business Park, including relocation (07/01106/OUT) of Tesco store.
Planning Permission granted in 2010
This development is around 2.8 km from the Masterplan Site. Town Centre redevelopment
Has just opened, including superstore, cinema and smaller retail units.
Completed
Caversfield, Fringford Lane
200 dwellings.
Planning appeal pending
RAF Bicester (new houses in Caversfield)
197 dwellings from new build and conversion.
Under construction
Phase 1
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 330
Anticipated development within Bicester identified in the Submission Cherwell Local Plan Table 16-3
Policy
Strategic Site
Description
Policy Bicester 2
Bicester 2 Graven Hill
227.5ha predominantly brownfield site to the south of Bicester proposed for mixed use development of 1,900 dwellings, significant employment land providing for high quality job opportunities, associated services, facilities and other infrastructure including the potential for the incorporation of a rail freight interchange. This site is around 4 km south of the Masterplan Site. Approved subject to S106
Policy Bicester 3
South West Bicester Phase 2
Anticipated to accommodate 720 homes with associated services, facilities and other infrastructure within a 28.5ha site. This site is around 2.8 km south west of the Masterplan Site. Application going to Planning Committee imminently.
Policy Bicester 6
Bure Place Town Centre Redevelopme nt Phase 2
Anticipated to comprise the redevelopment at Bure Place to provide a new supermarket, cinema, restaurants, shops, car parking and bus interchange. CDC considering now that Phase 1 is open. This site is around 2.8 km south east of the Masterplan Site.
Policy Bicester 8
Former RAF Bicester
Development would support heritage tourism uses, leisure, recreation, employment and community uses associated with the development of a museum to RAF Bomber Command. The development of hotel and conference facilities would also be supported as part of a wider package of employment uses. Plans being drawn up. This site is around 1.6 km south east of the Masterplan Site.
Policy Bicester 10
Bicester Gateway
Knowledge economy employment development to the south of the existing retail area (Wyevale Garden Centre), adjacent to the A41 on a 15ha site. This site is around 4 km south of the Masterplan Site.
Policy Bicester 11
North East 8ha Business Park development for employment Bicester use. Business Park This site is around 2.7 km south east of the Masterplan Site.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 331
Policy
Strategic Site
Description
Policy Bicester 12
South East Bicester
A mixed use 40ha site for employment and residential development to the east of the ring road to the south east of Bicester. (800 houses/ 64,812sqm employment development) This site is around 4.3km south east of the Masterplan Site.
Personal Injury Accident Data Personal Injury Accident data has been obtained from Oxfordshire County Council for the key routes on the west side of Bicester, as shown in Appendix 16-A Bicester Accident Area. This takes into account all accidents between 1st January 2009 and 31st January 2014 and includes all accidents reported to the police during that time and will inform the baseline conditions.
16.3.4 Assessment of Effects The methodology for assessment of effects are set out in the ‘Guidelines for the Environmental Assessment of Road Traffic’ as:
People at home
People at work
Sensitive groups including children, elderly and disabled
Sensitive locations such as hospitals, churches, schools, and historical buildings
People walking
People cycling
Open spaces, recreational areas, shopping areas
Sites of ecological/nature conservation value
Sites of tourist/visitor attraction
The methodology for assessment of effects as set out in the ‘Guidelines for the Environmental Assessment of Road Traffic’ cover the following areas of concern:
Severance
Driver delay
Pedestrian delay
Pedestrian amenity
Fear and intimidation
Accidents and safety
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 332
Hazardous loads
Dust and dirt
The remaining headings in the IEMA Guidelines are discussed in other chapters within this Environmental Appraisal. They include noise and vibration (Chapter 8), air pollution (Chapter 9), visual effects (Chapter 5), ecological effects (Chapter 6), and heritage (Chapter 10). Severance occurs when there is difficulty experienced in crossing a heavily trafficked road. The guidance set out in Design Manual for Roads and Bridges Volume 11, Section 3, Part 8 Pedestrians, Cyclists, Equestrians and Community Effects suggests that changes in traffic flow of 30%, 60% and 90% are considered as ‘slight’, ‘moderate’ and ‘substantial’ changes in severance respectively. Driver delay is determined through junction capacity analysis using computerised junction assessment packages recognised by the Department for Transport. This analysis will be carried out during the peak periods for the purpose of assessing the traffic impacts. The IEMA Guidelines suggest that pedestrian delay is experienced at a lower threshold when pedestrians experience a 10 second delay crossing a carriageway with no crossing facilities for a two-way flow of 1,400 vehicles per hour. The upper threshold amounts to a 40 second delay, also where no crossing facilities exist. The pedestrian amenity threshold, as set out in the IEMA Guidelines to assess the significance of change, is where the traffic flow is doubled. Fear and intimidation can be established through a combination of traffic flow, speed and composition. The criteria from the IEMA Guidelines for assessing this have been set out in Table 16-4 below. Table16-4 IEMA Guidelines for Fear and Intimidation
Degree of Hazard
Average Total 18 Hour Traffic Flow Goods Vehicle over 18 Hour Flow Day (Vehicle/hour )
Average Speed over 18 Hour Day (Mile/hour)
Extreme
1800+
3000+
20+
Great
1200 - 1800
2000 – 3000
15 – 20
Moderate
600-1200
1000 - 2000
10 - 15
Accidents and safety is assessed using the personal injury accident data obtained from highway authority records. The IEMA Guidelines NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 333
recommend that professional judgement will be needed to assess the impacts. There are no hazardous loads associated with the development proposals so this section does not apply. Finally, dust and dirt should be considered for a distance of up to 50m from a site and the impact depends upon the adequacy of site management practices.
16.4 Description of Baseline Conditions 16.4.1 Key Roads within the Study Area M40 The M40 is a motorway connecting London to Birmingham from the M25 to the M40. It passes Bicester to the west in a south to north alignment providing access to High Wycombe to the south east and Warwick to the north west. Two junctions of the M40 can be used to access NW Bicester, namely junction 10 located 7.4km to the north west of the site and junction 9 located 6.1km south west of the site.
A41 The A41 connects the south west of Bicester to the M40 in the south west. It is a dual carriageway subject to the national speed limit. This segment of carriageway is predominantly bound by fields, with the exception of Wendlebury in the south west and Bicester Village (designer outlet) at the north east of the segment. The A41 changes alignment at Bicester Village, taking an easterly alignment towards Aylesbury.
B4100 Banbury Road The B4100 Banbury Road carriageway extends in a south to north alignment, from its convergence with Buckingham Road, Field Street and North Street via a 5-arm roundabout (southern extent) to its roundabout convergence with the A4095 Lord’s Lane and Southwold Lane and then past the NW Bicester. The northern section (north of the roundabout junction with the A4095) is predominately rural in character and subject to the national speed limit.
A4095 Lord’s Lane The A4095 Lord’s Lane is a single lane carriageway (in each direction) that extends between its roundabout junctions with the B4100 Banbury Road and Bucknell Road. The road is subject to a 50mph speed limit and street lighting is provided.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 334
Bucknell Road Bucknell Road connects the B4100 in the south to the roundabout between the A4905 Howes Lane and Lords Lane in a south east to north west alignment. It is a street lit single carriageway benefitting from footways on both sides of the road, providing access to a number of residential roads. North of the A4095 it becomes rural lane providing access to Bucknell village.
A4095 Howes Lane The A4095 Howes Lane is a single lane carriageway that extends from Bucknell Road to the junction with the B4030 Middleton Stoney Road. It is rural in character with a speed limit varying between 40 and 50mph, no lighting for the majority of its length and no footways or adjacent path.
B4030 Vendee Drive Vendee Drive connects the A41 to the south to Middleton Stoney Road and Howes Lane at a roundabout in the south western boundary of the site. It is a single carriageway road subject to a 50 mph speed limit.
B4030 Middleton Stoney Road Middleton Stoney Road is a single carriageway bounding the west of Bicester in a south east to north west alignment. It is subject to the national speed limit until a point east of the Howes Lane/ Vendee Drive roundabout where the route is proposed to be traffic calmed as part of the SW Bicester development, and will then become a 30 mph route. Residential dwellings exist to the north of Middleton Stoney Road, with fields and new development to the south.
Shakespeare Drive Shakespeare Drive is a single carriageway connecting Middleton Stoney Road to the A4095 Howes Lane, dissecting a residential area of Bicester. It is subject to a 30mph speed limit and benefits from street lighting and a continuous footway on the western extent of the road. HGVs are restricted from using this route except for access.
16.4.2 BaselineTraffic Flows Baseline flows for the peak hours on links across the study area have been obtained from the Bicester Saturn Model 2012 Base Year. This gives AM and PM peak hour flows and these have been factored to give 12 hour and 18 hour flows using a factor of 4.330 and 5.188 respectively on the total of AM plus PM peak hour flows. The factors have been derived from ATC data collected locally to NW Bicester for NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 335
the Exemplar development Transport Assessment. The flows are set out in Table 16-5. Table 16-5 Base Year 2012 Traffic Flows
Link Ref
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Link Description
A41 northbound, N of M40 J9 A41 southbound, N of M40 J9 A41 Oxford Rd, S of A41 junction Vendee Drive, W of A41 junction A41, N of Pingle Drive Middleton Stoney Rd, W of Kings End Middleton Stoney Rd, W of Howes Lane Howes Lane, N of Middleton Stoney Rd Howes Lane, E of Shakespeare Drive Lords Lane, E of Bucknell Road Lords Lane, W of Banbury Road Bucknell Road, N of Lords Lane Bucknell Road, S of Howes Lane Banbury Road, N of Lords Lane A4095 E of Banbury Road Banbury Road, S of A4095 Buckingham Road, S of Skimmingdish Lane Queens Road, S of Bucknell Road A41 E of A41 Oxford Road A4421 Neunkirchen Way A41, E of London Road roundabout A4421, E of Skimmingdish Lane Shakespeare Drive, S of Howes Lane M40 J10 northbound off slip road Ardley Road (E of B430) M40 J10 southbound on slip road (from A43) B430 M40 over bridge A4095 N of Chesterton
Base Year 2012
1493 1109 2490 249 1678 846
12 Hour Flows 11705 10021 21878 2607 13745 7864
18 Hour Flows 14024 12005 26211 3123 16467 9422
556
655
5244
6283
618
697
5695
6822
750 891 1108 247 540 1117 1885 457
848 1056 1215 192 833 1186 1886 634
6920 8431 10060 1901 5946 9973 16330 4725
8291 10101 12052 2278 7123 11948 19565 5660
717
842
6751
8088
1035 2129 1370 2293 1471 142 482 207
1454 2265 1661 2396 1688 152 599 195
10779 19028 13126 20306 13680 1273 4681 1741
12913 22797 15725 24327 16389 1525 5608 2086
658
354
4382
5250
2184 602
2170 553
18855 5002
22589 5992
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
1210 1205 2562 353 1496 970
16.4.3 Severance and Pedestrian Amenity The majority of Bicester is located within a two mile distance of the development and therefore accessible by cyclists and those on foot, particularly given the flat topography of the town. T A detailed audit of pedestrian and cyclist facilities has been undertaken and is reported in Appendix 2 of the Access and Travel Strategy. The NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 336
pedestrian provision in the immediate vicinity of the Masterplan area is described below. On Lord’s Lane there is a footway aligning the entire southern extent of the A4095 carriageway between its roundabout convergences with Bucknell Road (to the south west) and the A4421 to the south east. At the junction of Bucknell Road with Lord’s Lane and Howes Lane pedestrian movements are limited by the bridge under the railway. The eastern footway on Bucknell Road is very narrow whilst the western footway ends in a verge immediately under the railway bridge. A pedestrian refuge is provided to the south of the junction although pedestrians wanting to walk from Bucknell Lane to the eastern arm of Howes Lane would either need to use the narrow section of footway on the eastern side or cross under the bridge in the middle of the two junctions with limited visibility. Howes Lane (A4095) is a single carriageway with a 50mph speed limit. There is no provision for pedestrians and cyclists or crossing facilities, with the exception of a footway on the south side of the road between Shakespeare Drive and Bucknell Road. Current severance issues therefore exist for pedestrians crossing the A4095 close to the Banbury Road junction and walking alongside the Howes Lane corridor although demand for these movements is low given the mainly rural nature of existing uses on the NW side of the A4095 corridor.
16.4.4 Existing Driver Delay The existing driver delay for the 2012 Base Year will be assessed by examining the current performance of the existing junctions during the morning and evening peak hours. The junctions that will be assessed in the Base Year are junction numbers 1-7, 13, 14, 20, 23 and 26-28.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 337
Figure 16-2: Junction Reference Numbers
16.4.5 Pedestrian Delay The IEMA Guidelines suggest that pedestrian delay is experienced at a lower threshold when pedestrians experience a 10 second delay crossing a carriageway with no crossing facilities for a two-way flow of 1,400 vehicles per hour. The upper threshold amounts to a 40 second delay, also where no crossing facilities exist. Table 16-6 sets out each link and identifies where pedestrian delay is likely to be currently experienced based on hourly traffic flows and provision for pedestrians. Table 16-6: Base Year Traffic Flows and Pedestrian Delay Link Ref
Link Description
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
Pedestrian Delay Commentary Delays likely but pedestrian routes limited Delays likely but pedestrian routes limited
1
A41 northbound, N of M40 J9
1210
1493
2
A41 southbound, N of M40 J9
1205
1109
2562
2490
Delays likely
353
249
Delays unlikely
1496 970
1678 846
Delays likely Delays unlikely
3 4 5 6
A41 Oxford Rd, S of A41 junction Vendee Drive, W of A41 junction A41, N of Pingle Drive Middleton Stoney Rd, W of
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 338
Link Ref
Link Description
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
Pedestrian Delay Commentary
556
655
Delays unlikely
618
697
Delays unlikely
750
848
Delays unlikely
891
1056
10
Kings End Middleton Stoney Rd, W of Howes Lane Howes Lane, N of Middleton Stoney Rd Howes Lane, E of Shakespeare Drive Lords Lane, E of Bucknell Road
11
Lords Lane, W of Banbury Road
1108
1215
12
Bucknell Road, N of Lords Lane Bucknell Road, S of Howes Lane
247
192
Delays unlikely Delays likely as limited crossing facilities Delays unlikely
540
833
Delays unlikely
14
Banbury Road, N of Lords Lane
1117
1186
15
A4095 E of Banbury Road
1885
1886
16
Banbury Road, S of A4095 Buckingham Road, S of Skimmingdish Lane Queens Road, S of Bucknell Road
457
634
Delays likely as limited crossing facilities Delays likely as limited crossing facilities Delays unlikely
717
842
Delays unlikely
1035
1454
Delays likely
7 8 9
13
17 18
Delays likely but pedestrian routes limited Delays likely but pedestrian routes limited Delays likely but pedestrian routes limited Delays likely but pedestrian routes limited
19
A41 E of A41 Oxford Road
2129
2265
20
A4421 Neunkirchen Way
1370
1661
2293
2396
1471
1688
142
152
Delays unlikely
482
599
Delays unlikely
207
195
Delays unlikely
658
354
No pedestrian access
21 22 23 24 25 26
A41, E of London Road roundabout A4421, E of Skimmingdish Lane Shakespeare Drive, S of Howes Lane M40 J10 northbound off slip road Ardley Road (E of B430) M40 J10 southbound on slip road (from A43)
27
B430 M40 over bridge
2184
2170
28
A4095 N of Chesterton
602
553
Delays likely but pedestrian routes limited Delays unlikely
16.4.6 Fear and Intimidation Table 16-7 demonstrate that the traffic flows associated with the road links being considered for this chapter currently fall within the 1,800 vehicles over an 18-hour period where the impact of fear and intimidation could be considered to be extreme. Those links that are categorised as ‘great’ in terms of degree of hazard are the strategic highways where pedestrian movements will be generally limited by their character and design (the A41and the M40 Junction 10 over bridge). A number of links in the vicinity of the proposed development may present a current moderate fear and intimidation NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 339
hazard including Lord’s Lane, Banbury Road (north of the A4095) and the A4095 east of Banbury Road. Table 16-7: Base Year Traffic Flows and Fear and Intimidation
1
A41 northbound, N of M40 J9
Average Flow over 18 hours 779
2
A41 southbound, N of M40 J9
667
Moderate
3
A41 Oxford Rd, S of A41 junction
1456
Great
4
Vendee Drive, W of A41 junction
174
-
5
915
Moderate
523
-
349
-
379
-
461
-
10
A41, N of Pingle Drive Middleton Stoney Rd, W of Kings End Middleton Stoney Rd, W of Howes Lane Howes Lane, N of Middleton Stoney Rd Howes Lane, E of Shakespeare Drive Lords Lane, E of Bucknell Road
561
-
11
Lords Lane, W of Banbury Road
670
Moderate
12
Bucknell Road, N of Lords Lane
127
-
13
Bucknell Road, S of Howes Lane
396
-
14
Banbury Road, N of Lords Lane
664
Moderate
15
A4095 E of Banbury Road
1087
Moderate
16
314
-
449
-
18
Banbury Road, S of A4095 Buckingham Road, S of Skimmingdish Lane Queens Road, S of Bucknell Road
19
A41 E of A41 Oxford Road
20
A4421 Neunkirchen Way A41, E of London Road roundabout A4421, E of Skimmingdish Lane Shakespeare Drive, S of Howes Lane M40 J10 northbound off slip road
Link Ref
6 7 8 9
17
21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Link Description
Ardley Road (E of B430) M40 J10 southbound on slip road (from A43) B430 M40 over bridge A4095 N of Chesterton
Fear and Intimidation Commentary Moderate
717
Moderate
1266
Great
874
Moderate
1352
Great
911
Moderate
85
-
312
-
116
-
292
-
1255 333
Great -
16.4.7 Accidents and Safety Personal injury accident (PIA) data was provided by Oxfordshire County Council for the period 1st January 2009 and 31st January NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 340
2014. The PIA study area includes all roads in the vicinity of the site, as set outlined in Drawing 16.1 (map of PIA area). There have been a total of 114 incidents with the study are over the 5 year period between January 2009 and January 2014; 98 slight, 14 serious and 2 fatal in severity. Tables 16-8 and 16.9 provide an overview of casualties and their severity. Of the two fatal accidents; one occurred in 2012 along the B4030 Middleton Stoney Road in which a HGV travelling southeast hit a pedestrian who had been jogging east on the footway, who for unknown reasons went into the carriageway; the second fatal accident occurred along Bucknell Road when a vehicle travelling southeast lost control and exited the carriageway, hitting a tree and killing both driver and child passenger. Table 16-8: All Accidents by Severity 2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
Total
Fatal
0
1
0
1
0
0
2
Serious
3
0
3
3
5
0
14
Slight
14
10
33
20
18
3
98
Total
17
11
36
24
23
3
114
Table 16-9: Casualties by Severity 2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
Total
Fatal
0
2
0
1
0
0
3
Serious
3
0
6
3
5
0
17
Slight
17
15
43
31
26
4
136
Total
20
17
49
35
31
4
156
There have been a total of 14 pedestrian accidents over the five year study period. Table 16-10 provides an overview of pedestrian accidents and their severity. The fatal pedestrian accident within this study period is as stated above (Middleton Stoney Road). A total of four serious accidents occurred within the study period, of which two accidents occurred along Buckingham road. Table 16-10: Pedestrian Accidents by Severity 2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
Total
Fatal
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
Serious
2
0
1
1
0
0
4
Slight
1
0
5
0
3
0
9
Total
3
0
6
2
3
0
14
There have been a total of 9 Cycle accidents recorded over the five year study period. Table 16-11 provides an overview of cycle NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 341
accidents and their severity. The majority of cycle accidents (8 of 9) were slight with only one severe accident and no fatal accidents during the study period. Table 16-11: Cycle Accidents by Severity 2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
Total
Fatal
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Serious
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
Slight
0
1
3
2
2
0
8
Total
0
1
3
2
3
0
9
16.5 Design and Mitigation 16.5.1 Construction The construction phase of development is anticipated to commence in 2019 and build out over approximately a 20 year period. As a large proportion of the construction traffic is anticipated to be heavy goods vehicles it is essential that residential areas are avoided during the course of construction by heavy goods vehicle drivers associated with the proposals. It is therefore considered appropriate to have a lorry routing agreement to ensure drivers use the peripheral road/A4095 and will be prohibited from passing through the centre of Bicester unless they are transporting locally sourced materials/goods. It is anticipated that, over the life of the construction period, virtually all construction traffic for the development will use the A41/Vendee Drive from the M40 Junction 9 and the A4421 around the eastern side of Bicester. It is anticipated that, over the life of the construction period, virtually all construction traffic for the will use the A41/ Vendee Drive from the M40 Junction 9 and the A4421 around the eastern side of Bicester. Each application for planning will detail the impacts of construction and the measures to mitigate them.
16.5.2 Operation The Access and Travel Strategy for NW Bicester is set out in the separate document. It is aimed to minimise the traffic impacts and subsequent environmental effects by:
Limiting the need to travel through the provision of a full mix of land uses and encouraging home working
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 342
Providing high quality walking and cycling linkages within the Masterplan and connections to the town and wider area
Providing high quality public transport in the form of a frequent, accessible and high quality bus service
Promoting sustainable travel and vehicle choices through a comprehensive set of travel measures including personalised travel planning, a car club etc.
Mitigation measures in conjunction with OCC at key junctions to reduce delays to drivers
Provision for pedestrian and cyclist movements at junctions and links to reduce severance
Seeking to route traffic away from the most sensitive areas through highway measures
16.6 Assessment of Effects The assessment of effects will be undertaken once the traffic impact analysis has been carried out. It is anticipated that there will be adverse impacts from traffic on routes within the study area, as would be expected with a development of this scale and a range of mitigation measures are under discussion. Mitigation measures will prioritise addressing the most sensitive areas and conditions for vulnerable road users.
16.7 Summary This will follow subsequent to the assessment of effects.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 343
17
Interrelationships and Cumulative Effects
17.1 Introduction This chapter assesses the potential cumulative effects of the development of the Masterplan Site for Bicester NW Bicester development, located to the north west of Bicester, hereafter known as ‘the proposed Development’. This Chapter aims to ensure the incremental effects resulting from the combined effects of various actions are assessed. Even though the effects of each action, when independently assessed, are considered insignificant, incrementally, the effects could be significant. This Chapter will address three main areas where there is potential for cumulative effects: 1 Bicester NW Bicester development Masterplan Site with other local developments 2 In-combination effects of Bicester NW Bicester development Masterplan Site on specific receptors
17.2 Technical Assumptions and Method Legislation and Planning Policy Context EC Directive 85/337/EEC requires assessment of “the direct effects and any indirect, secondary, cumulative, short, medium and long term, permanent or temporary, positive and negative effects of the project”. EC Directive 97/11/EC selection criteria for projects to be assessed include the “cumulation with other projects” and the “existing land use”. Schedule 3(1) of the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) Regulations 1999 state that “the characteristics of development must be considered, having regard, in particular to …b) the cumulation with other development”, Schedule 3(20) “the existing land use” and Schedule 4(4) “description of the development on the environment which should cover….cumulative effects.”
Guidance Documents The DCLG (2006, page 40) Environmental Impact Assessment: A guide to good practice and procedures (Ref 17-1) states that: “In the context of EIA, cumulative effects could refer to the combined effects of different activities within the vicinity or those of different aspects of a single development on a particular receptor”. This document identifies two types of cumulative effects: NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 344
Cumulative effects from different developments
Cumulative effects from different environmental features
There is no specific UK guidance on cumulative effects assessment but the European Commission has published the Guidelines for the Assessment of Indirect and Cumulative Impacts as well as Impact Interactions in 1999 (Ref 17-2). These guidelines provide information on methods, the assessment process and information needed to assess the impacts.
Spatial Scope The spatial scope for the assessment has taken into consideration the following:
Cumulative effects with other developments
Combined effects from impact interactions
This required the analysis of cumulative effects at two spatial scales. The area wide assessment considered the cumulative effects of the:
Cumulative effects with other developments in the vicinity of the site
The SER considered impacts from construction and operation, where individual impacts have the potential to cause impact interactions.
Methodology The assessment of cumulative effects consisted of two elements: Combined Effects with Other Developments
Other developments considered in the vicinity of the Masterplan Site where the proposed Development has potential for cumulative impacts are set out in Table 17-1 below. The developments included have been based on Oxfordshire County Council’s Bicester Transport Modelling Report (Ref 17-1), which included land use developments that were to be included in the modelling. Combined Effects of Individual Impacts
The combined effects of individual impacts from the proposed Development on a particular receptor have been assessed using the methodology as outlined in the EC guidelines and good practice accepted methodology.
Assessment of Effects As discussed above, there is no established guidance in the UK for assessing the significance of cumulative effects. For cumulative effects assessment, the key is to focus on the receptor and consider its capacity to accommodate the changes that are likely to occur NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 345
because of the proposed Development. Sensitive receptors have been identified in the technical chapters (Chapters 6 to 17). The existing status of these receptors, current trends and existing regulatory requirements were established in defining the baseline.
Significance Criteria The terms used to define significance of cumulative and residual impacts are as follows:
Adverse detrimental or negative impacts to an environmental resource or receptor
Negligible imperceptible impacts to an environmental resource or receptor; and
Beneficial advantageous or positive impact to an environmental resource or receptor.
Where beneficial or adverse impacts have been identified, these have been assessed against the following scales:
Minor
slight, very short or highly localised impact;
Moderate limited impact (by extent, duration or magnitude) which may be considered significant; and
Major considerable impact (by extent, duration or magnitude) of more than local significance or in breach of recognised acceptability, legislation, policy and standards.
Limitations The construction programmes for the Masterplan Site and other developments were not available during the preparation of the SER. It was not possible to do any quantitative predictions because of the uncertainty of overlaps in construction periods. Also, the traffic modelling data was not available when this SER was prepared and so cumulative impacts relating to air quality and noise could not be predicted.
17.3 Baseline Conditions The baseline for assessing cumulative effects considered the other proposed developments in the vicinity which are likely to have in combination effects with the proposed Development. The baseline also established the policy and planning context for the development, which identified likely developments in the future. These are discussed in more detail below. For the assessment of combined impacts and impact interactions during construction, the baseline has been established in the technical chapters where potential cumulative impacts have been NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 346
identified. This chapter presents a summary and identifies any other impact interactions.
17.4 Mitigation and Enhancement Measures Construction Mitigation The potential cumulative effects during construction are due to the combined effect of traffic generation, noise, vibration, visual impact and dust, as well as generation of waste during construction. These impacts are likely to be temporary and occur in the immediate vicinity of the site. A Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) will be prepared, which would be likely to reduce these impacts. Mitigation measures identified in the technical chapters will help mitigate impacts.
Operational Mitigation The Access and Travel Strategy for NW Bicester contains measures to minimise traffic impacts and subsequent environmental effects. For ecology, mitigation measures have been proposed to ensure that there would be no residual impacts on habitats and species present within the Masterplan Site, The development of the Masterplan Site and other sites in the Bicester wastewater treatment works catchment area have the potential to result in a cumulative excessive demand on the treatment capacity of the works and or the ability of the receiving watercourses to dilute resulting discharges of effluent. Further work is being undertaken to assess the treatment required. Cumulative impacts are not anticipated for landscape, visual, cultural heritage, and agriculture. Mitigation relating to air quality and noise will be identified when traffic data becomes available, as part of future EIAs. Mitigation measures as identified in the Waste Chapter would help reduce the development’s cumulative impact on waste.
17.5 Assessment of Cumulative Effects This assessment has considered the potential cumulative effects with other developments in the vicinity of the Masterplan Site. In most cases, detailed consideration of the combined effects of the proposed development together with other developments will be limited to others that have been constructed, are being constructed or those that have been granted consent. The list of Consented Schemes is presented in Table 17-1. To fully assess cumulative effects, it is also necessary to consider other planned developments and these Planned Schemes are presented in Table 17-2, as identified within the Cherwell Local Plan.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 347
Table 17-1
Consented Schemes near Masterplan Site
Project/ Description Developmen t South West Bicester (06/00967/OUT )
Status
Development of residential accommodation Under consisting of 1,631 units, 3.91ha employment space, Construction hotel, health village, secondary school and community hall. This development is around 2.3 km from the Masterplan Site. Additional 100 houses currently being considered.
Bicester Business Park (07/01106/OUT )
46,200 sqm employment development at Bicester Business Park, including relocation of Tesco store. This development is around 2.8 km from the Masterplan Site.
Planning Permission granted in 2010
Caversfield, 200 dwellings approximately 300m from the Fringford Road Masterplan Site (13/01056/OUT )
Planning appeal pending
RAF Bicester (new houses in Caversfield)
Under construction
197 dwellings from new build and conversion approximately 1km from the Masterplan Site.
Table 17-2 Planned Schemes
Policy
Strategic Site
Description
Policy Bicester 2
Bicester 2 Graven Hill
227.5ha predominantly brownfield site to the south of Bicester proposed for mixed use development of 1,900 dwellings, significant employment land providing for high quality job opportunities, associated services, facilities and other infrastructure including the potential for the incorporation of a rail freight interchange. This site is around 4 km south of the Masterplan Site. Approved subject to S106
Policy Bicester 3
South West Bicester Phase 2
Anticipated to accommodate 720 homes with associated services, facilities and other infrastructure within a 28.5ha site. This site is around 2.8 km south west of the Masterplan Site. Application going to Planning Committee imminently.
Policy Bicester 6
Bure Place Town Centre Redevelopment Phase 2
Anticipated to comprise the redevelopment at Bure Place to provide a new supermarket, cinema, restaurants, shops, car parking and bus interchange. CDC considering now that Phase 1 is open. This site is around 2.8 km south east of the Masterplan Site.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 348
Policy
Strategic Site
Description
Policy Bicester 8
Former RAF Bicester
Development would support heritage tourism uses, leisure, recreation, employment and community uses associated with the development of a museum to RAF Bomber Command. The development of hotel and conference facilities would also be supported as part of a wider package of employment uses. Plans being drawn up. This site is around 1.6 km south east of the Masterplan Site.
Policy Bicester 10
Bicester Gateway
Knowledge economy employment development to the south of the existing retail area (Wyevale Garden Centre), adjacent to the A41 on a 15ha site. This site is around 4 km south of the Masterplan Site.
Policy Bicester 11
North East Bicester Business Park
8ha Business Park development for employment use.
Policy Bicester 12
South East Bicester
A mixed use 40ha site for employment and residential development to the east of the ring road to the south east of Bicester. (800 houses/ 64,812sqm employment development)
This site is around 2.7 km south east of the Masterplan Site.
This site is around 4.3km south east of the Masterplan Site.
Most of the developments are at a distance of 1km or more from the Masterplan Site, except the proposal at Fringford Road, Caversfield and the new houses in the RAF Bicester site in Caversfield, which have the potential cumulative effects relating to traffic.
In combination effects of the Masterplan Site on specific receptors It is considered that construction works have the greatest potential for impact interactions. The combination of noise, visual and air quality impacts (dust and emissions from increased vehicle traffic) have the potential to cause significant adverse cumulative effects. Construction Effects It is considered that the construction phase of the proposed Development could have the greatest potential to contribute to combined impacts and impact interactions. During construction, potential impacts exist for sensitive receptors. The receptors considered to be most sensitive during the construction phase are the new residents of the completed phase (such as those residents in the Exemplar site, residents of the early development while the mid development phase is being constructed, and the residents of the NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 349
early and mid development while the later development is being constructed), pedestrians on the surrounding roads and residents of nearby residential areas adjacent to the eastern and northern boundaries of the Exemplar Site and users of the local road network. Criteria for identifying those receptors that are potentially sensitive include the nature of the receptor, proximity to the works and extent of exposure to impacts and impact interactions. Potential impact interactions are mainly related to noise, vibration, dust and traffic. Interactions will occur during the construction phase, therefore will be temporary effects. Operational Effects The assessment of operational effects considers the effect of the Development with other future developments. Cumulative effects during operation are likely to be effects on traffic and transport and air quality. There will be a beneficial cumulative impact on employment.
Topic Specific Cumulative Effects The following sections provide an assessment of the potential cumulative effects associated with each environmental topic and their likely significance. Landscape and Visual Impact Other committed developments in the vicinity of Bicester are separated from the existing urban area or other infrastructure such that there would be no cumulative impacts on the local landscape or visual amenity of north west Bicester. Ecology Other developments of relevance to this assessment are detailed in Table 17-1. The closest of these are two housing developments: a proposal for 200 dwellings at Caversfield, along Fringford Road approximately 300m from the Masterplan site; and the other, for 197 dwellings at RAF Bicester, Caversfield, which is currently under construction. The impact assessment concluded that, assuming the effective implementation of the mitigation measures outlined above, there would be no residual impacts on habitats and species present within the Masterplan site. It is not envisaged that the developments listed in Table 17-1 would lead to any direct impacts on the habitats and species associated within the Masterplan site. Therefore, together with the other developments, there would be no cumulative impacts on species and habitats. NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 350
There is potential for traffic associated with the new developments to contribute to impacts associated with air quality. This would be fully reviewed as part of future impact assessments, once traffic data are available. Hydrology Development of the Masterplan site, together with other sites in the Bicester wastewater treatment works catchment area, has the potential to result in a cumulative excessive demand on the treatment capacity of the works and/or the ability of the receiving watercourse(s) to dilute resulting discharges of effluent. Further work is underway to assess the treatment requirement. Alternative on site measures to treat effluent from the NW Bicester development are also being considered and these may become available to the proposed Masterplan development site in the future. If these become available, there will be no cumulative impacts arising from the proposed development on the Bicester wastewater treatment works; otherwise the infrastructure modelling currently underway will assess the need for an infrastructure upgrade. Similarly, the cumulative effects of all potential developments may be significant in terms of water supply. However, there is an aspiration to attain water neutrality, i.e. reducing overall demand to allow new development within the existing supply, and Thames Water has a long term water supply strategy to ensure demand can be met without harm to the environment. As indicated in Sections 7.6.1 and 7.6.2, the development of the site will not have any other permanent adverse effects on the water environment. There will, therefore, be no cumulative effects arising from this development and others planned in the area. Air Quality Cumulative effects from the proposed Development and other developments may have potential effects on air quality during both the construction and operation phases. There are likely to be cumulative effects of construction dust on new residents in the Exemplar Site and those from the earlier development phases during the construction of the mid and later development phases. Other committed developments within 1km of the site are also likely to be affected. Implementation of the suggested mitigation will result in a minor adverse cumulative effect. During the operational phase, the scale of the Masterplan development means there is potential for significant traffic generation with associated vehicle exhaust emissions. However, since cumulative traffic data is not currently available, these will be NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 351
assessed in more detail during the detailed planning application stage. Similarly, the other developments identified around Bicester also have potential for significant traffic generation with associated vehicle exhaust emissions. Further assessment work would be needed in order to predict the cumulative effects once detailed traffic data is available. Noise There is potential for cumulative noise effects from other consented developments in the area. There is potential for minor adverse cumulative effects associated with construction from other developments within 1km of the Masterplan Site. These would include the RAF Bicester housing site and the Fringford Caverswell site. The RAF Bicester site is already under construction and it is unlikely that there would be cumulative construction noise impacts when considered with the proposed Development. Cumulative impacts are most likely from increase in road traffic associated with other developments. However, since cumulative traffic data is not currently available, these will be assessed in more detail during the detailed planning application stage. Cultural Heritage All committed development in the vicinity of Bicester is separated from the Masterplan Area and therefore would not have any cumulative impacts on the archaeological resource within the site. Built Heritage The NW Bicester Development could result in a minor adverse cumulative effect on the setting of listed buildings and non-listed buildings within the vicinity of the Development. The design of the proposed Development would be in sympathy with adjacent built heritage assets to minimise these adverse effects. Historic Landscape The masterplan for the NW Bicester Development should retain key landscape features such as the line of field boundaries. There would be no cumulative effects on historic landscape associated with other developments, due to their distance from the site. Soils and Contamination
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 352
No likely cumulative effects with NW Bicester development and with other developments have been identified. Agriculture and Land Use A number of other developments proposed in the vicinity of Bicester have potential to impact on agricultural land. These include South West Bicester, which will result in a total loss of approximately 60ha of agricultural land and the Bicester Business Park will also result in the loss of Grade 4 agricultural land. As such, it is considered that the potential for cumulative effects on best and most versatile land is unlikely to be more than Moderate Adverse. Human Health There is potential to generate long-term beneficial cumulative effects on human health with the Exemplar Site and NW Bicester NW Bicester developments. There will be opportunities to establish sustainable patterns of living, promote greater levels of physical activity and establish a strong sense of community spirit and wellbeing within the NW Bicester development. There is also potential for beneficial cumulative effects related to human health with other developments. These include indirect benefits from provision of new schools, new civic buildings, new housing and new employment opportunities. Provision of associated infrastructure, including new cycling routes and transport infrastructure could provide benefits to physical activity. There is potential for adverse cumulative effects associated with traffic generation, and resultant air quality and noise impacts, although they are not likely to be significant with regards to human health effects. Socio Economics Other significant housing and employment related developments, combined with the Masterplan proposal, have potential to contribute to adverse cumulative impacts. These include the developments at Graven Hill, South West Bicester, Bicester Business Park and Bicester Village. Potential cumulative impacts could result in terms of disturbance and nuisance from construction activities and potential impact on key local amenities and potential demand and supply for construction materials and workforce. The prevalence of a number of other significant development proposals within and around Bicester will generate a significant combined increase in the critical mass of Bicester and the services and facilities that are contained within it. This will also result in a major beneficial cumulative effect. Waste
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 353
The cumulative impacts on the waste arisings and management of the Masterplan Site in Cherwell District and Oxfordshire County have been reviewed. There are numerous developments planned for the surrounding area that will have a cumulative impact throughout the construction and operation of the development. Sufficient data is not currently available on the levels of construction and operational waste likely to arise from these developments. However, due to the design and mitigation measures being implemented as part of the Development, it is anticipated that Slight Adverse cumulative effects would occur during the construction and operational phases of the development. Traffic and Transportation The potential for cumulative effects associated with the NW Bicester development is not assessed as traffic data is currently unavailable for this development.
17.6 Summary This chapter has considered cumulative effects associated with the Masterplan Site. The baseline for the assessment included other future developments in the vicinity. The potential cumulative effects with other developments are likely to be during the construction phase on traffic and transport, air quality and noise and vibration associated with the combined effect of construction vehicles and operation of machinery. No likely cumulative effects are anticipated during the operational phase of these other developments. Combined or impact interactions are likely to occur during the construction phase. Each environmental chapter has identified mitigation measures to reduce impacts. Following implementation of these mitigation measures, there may still be combined effects of noise from construction vehicles and road traffic, and dust emissions from construction vehicles and construction activities. Other combined or impact interaction effects are considered to be mostly negligible.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 354
Abbreviations AADT
Annual Average Daily Traffic
AAWT
Annual Average Weekly Traffic
ABI
Annual Business Inquiry
ALC
Agricultural Land Classification
AQLVs
Air Quality Limit Values
AQMA
Air Quality Management Area
AQS
Air Quality Strategy
BAP
Biodiversity Action Plan
BBOWT
Berkshire, Buckinghamshire and Oxfordshire Wildlife Trust
BGS
British Geological Society
BLHS
Bicester Local History Society
BMV
Best and Most Versatile
BMW
Biodegradable Municipal Waste
BRE
Building Research Establishment
CDC
Cherwell District Council
CD&E
Construction, Demolition and Excavation
CDM
Construction and Design Management Regulations
CEMP
Construction Environmental Management Plan
CHP
Combined Heat and Power
CIZ
Central Impact Zone
C&LG
Communities & Local Government
COSHH
The Control of Substances Hazardous to Health
CTA
Conservation Target Areas
DBA
Desk-based Assessment
DEFRA
Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs
DMRB
Design Manual for Roads and Bridges
DMV
Deserted Medieval Village
EA
Environment Agency
EHO
Environmental Health Officer
EIA
Environmental Impact Assessment
EQS
Environmental Quality Standards
EPO
Environmental Protection Officer
EPR
Environmental Permitting Regulations
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 355
EPS
European Protected Species
EPUK
Environmental Protection UK
ES
Environmental Statement
ETBS
Eco-town Biodiversity Strategy
FTE
Full Time Employment
GP
General Practitioner
GSV
Gas Screening Value
HAP
Habitat Action Plan
HER
Historic Environment Record
HIA
Health Impact Assessment
HWCN
Hazardous Waste Consignment Note
IEEM
Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management
IEMA
Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment
IfA
Institute for Archaeologists
IMD
Index of Multiple Deprivation
IVC
In Vessel Composting
JSA
Jobs Seekers Allowance
LAeq
Equivalent Noise Level
LAQM
Local Air Quality Management
LAQM.TG(09)
Local Air Quality Management Technical Guidance
LAs
Local Authorities
LBAP
Local Biodiversity Action Plan
LDF
Local Development Framework
LNR
Local Nature Reserves
LSOA
Lower Super Output Areas
LWS
Local Wildlife Site
MAFF
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food
MPS 2
Minerals Policy Statement 2
MRF
Materials Recovery Facility
NEC
Noise Exposure Category
NGR
National Grid Reference
NHS
National Health Service
NMR
National Monuments Record
NO2
Nitrogen dioxide
NOx
Total oxides of nitrogen
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 356
OCC
Oxfordshire County Council
OOS
Oxfordshire Ornithological Society
OS
Ordnance Survey
PIA
Personal Injury Accident
PM10
Particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of less than 10µm
PPE
Personal Protective Equipment
PPGs
Pollution Prevention Guidelines
PPG
Planning Policy Guidance
PPS
Planning Policy Statement
PRoW
Public Rights of Way
RoWIP
Rights of Way Improvement Plan
SAC
Special Area of Conservation
SAP
Species Action Plan
SDA
Severe Disablement Allowance
SGV
Soil Guideline Values
SPA
Special Protection Area
SPOSH
Significant possibility of significant harm
SRP
Soil Resources Plan
SSSI
Site of Special Scientific Interest
SuDS
Sustainable Drainage System
SWMP
Site Waste Management Plan
SWRP
Sustainable Waste and Resources Plan
TA
Transport Assessment
TVERC
Thames Valley Environmental Records Centre
UKBAP
United Kingdom Biodiversity Action Plan
WAC
Waste Acceptance Criteria
WFD
Waste Framework Directive
WIZ
Wider Impact Zone
WRAP
Waste & Resources Action Programme
ZoI
Zone of Influence
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 357
Glossary 100- and 1000-year events A means of identifying a likelihood of flooding, giving an estimate of how frequently a flood level or flow could be expected to occur. A 100-year event has a 1 in 100 (or 1%) chance of occurring in any one year. Aberford Series Name given to the soil type present across the area. Alluvium
Sediment deposited by rivers on adjacent land.
Ambient sound The totally encompassing sound in a given situation at a given time, usually composed of sound from all sources near and far. ARCADY Traffic capacity modelling software for roundabouts Audible range The limits of frequency which are audible or heard as sound. The normal ear in young adults detects sound having frequencies in the region 20 Hz to 20 kHz, although it is possible for some people to detect frequencies outside these limits. Background noise The term used to describe the noise measured in the absence of the noise under investigation. It is described as the average of the minimum noise levels measured on a sound level meter and is measured statistically as the A-weighted noise level exceeded for ninety percent of a sample period. This is represented as the L90 noise level. Best and Most Versatile Land (BMV) Land falling into Grades 1, 2 and 3a as determined under the Agricultural Land Classification system Blackwater Foul drainage which is treated for domestic or commercial purposes to supplement or replace mains water supply Brashy Term used to describe soils containing a high proportion of loose broken rock Calcareous Soils developed on, for example, limestone rocks which contain calcium carbonate Code for Sustainable Homes An environmental impact rating system for housing in England & Wales, setting new standards for energy and water efficiency, beyond those required for building regulations. Contaminated Land Any area which appears to be in such a condition, by reason of substances in, on or under the land that significant harm is being caused, or there is a significant possibility of such harm being caused, or significant pollution of controlled waters is being, or is likely to be, caused. Land that has been polluted or contaminated will not necessarily fall within the above legal definition of contaminated land. For an area of land to meet the NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 358
definition of contaminated land, a significant pollutant linkage must be established. A pollutant linkage consists of three parts; A source of contamination in, on or under the ground; A pathway by which the contamination is causing significant harm (or which represents a significant possibility of such harm being caused) and a receptor (of a type specified in the regulations). Contaminated Land Report 11 The model procedures for the Management of Land Contamination, CLR 11, have been developed to provide the technical framework for applying a risk management process when dealing with land affected by contamination. The process involves identifying, making decisions on, and taking appropriate action to deal with land contamination in a way that is consistent with government policies and legislation within the UK. Controlled Waters Risk Assessment A staged approach to define the level of risk to controlled water as Land contamination can affect groundwater, freshwater and coastal waters. Groundwater is particularly vulnerable to contamination as it underlies many sites and is difficult to clean up once polluted. Cyprinid fishery An EC designated fishery capable of supporting coarse fish. Decibel [dB] The level of noise is measured objectively using a Sound Level Meter. This instrument has been specifically developed to mimic the operation of the human ear. The human ear responds to minute pressure variations in the air. These pressure variations can be likened to the ripples on the surface of water but of course cannot be seen. The pressure variations in the air cause the eardrum to vibrate and this is heard as sound in the brain. The stronger the pressure variations, the louder the sound is heard. The range of pressure variations associated with everyday living may span over a range of a million to one. On the top range may be the sound of a jet engine and on the bottom of the range may be the sound of a pin dropping. Instead of expressing pressure in units ranging from a million to one, it is found convenient to condense this range to a scale 0 to 120 and give it the units of decibels. Demography population.
Study of both quantitative and qualitative aspects of human
dB(A): A-weighted decibels. The ear is not as effective in hearing low frequency sounds as it is hearing high frequency sounds. That is, low frequency sounds of the same dB level are not perceived to be as loud as high frequency sounds. The sound level meter replicates the human response of the ear by using an electronic filter which is called the "A" filter. A sound level measured with this filter switched on is denoted as dB(A). Practically all noise is measured using the A filter. The sound pressure level in dB(A) gives a close indication of the subjective loudness of the noise. Early Medieval Period
AD410 to 1066
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 359
Eco-development In accordance with PPS1: Eco-towns, the ecodevelopment is a development based on sustainability principles. The ecodevelopment referred to in this Environmental Statement relates to the proposed Exemplar and NW Bicester developments. EC Designated fishery A watercourse identified as maintaining fish and for which regular monitoring and reporting is undertaken by the Environment Agency Employed Persons who are working full-time or part-time during a specified payroll period. Temporary employees and those on paid-leave are included in this definition Environmental Protection Act 1990, Part IIA set up a system for the regulation of contaminated land in England and Wales. The regime provides a framework for identifying and remediating (cleaning up) contaminated land. Contaminated land is land that poses an unacceptable risk to human health or the environment through its current use. The Part 2A regime did not apply to radioactive contaminated land until it was extended in 2006. Erosion Movement of soil materials by water or wind action Exemplar development The first element of NW Bicester Ecodevelopment being progressed by P3 Eco (Bicester) Ltd and A2Dominion Group. The Exemplar is assessed in this Environmental Statement and is the development being progressed with the associated planning application. A development description is available in Chapter 3 of the Environmental Statement. Flood Estimation Handbook (FEH) A best practice approach to estimating flood runoff based on national records and statistical methods. Flood Zone 1 An area where flooding from watercourses or the sea is expected to occur less frequently than once in a thousand years (has less than a 0.1% chance of occurring in any one year). Flood Zone 2 An area where flooding from watercourses is expected to occur between once in a hundred years and once in a 1000 years, or from the sea between once in a two hundred years and once in a 1000 years Flood Zone 3 An area where flooding from watercourses is expected to occur more frequently than once in a hundred years or from the sea more than once in a two hundred years. Free-Field Refers to a situation in which the radiation from a sound source is completely unaffected by the presence of any reflecting surfaces. Full Time Employment hours or more a week.
Working full-time is defined as working 31
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 360
Ground Gas Risk Assessment Land contamination can give rise to volatile contaminants which can pose a risk of harm to human health by asphyxiation or illness if inhaled. Vapours and gases such as methane may also pose a risk of fire or explosion. Good practice in gas hazard evaluation and risk assessment is to assess how to apply these to particular situations. Assessing the degree of risk posed by methane and other gases from the ground is a key step in the feasibility appraisal of new developments and of remedial works for existing ones. Health Impact Assessment A process of assessing the impact of a project, plan or programme on human health and wellbeing. Heavy goods vehicles (HGV) Assumed to be buses, rigid trucks and semi trailer trucks with a weight greater than 3 tonnes. Also heavy vehicles can be defined in terms of length as buses, or trucks with a length exceeding 5.25 metres. Hide A measurement of land for tax assessment used in the Domesday Book. Approximately 120 acres, depending on local variations. Housing Tenure Nature of an occupant's legal estate in a tract of land (freehold or leasehold) which indicates whether the occupant is an owner or tenant. Human Health Risk Assessment The human health risk assessment process is used to establish the risk to humans and aims to provide a methodology (consistent with CLR 7-11) that supports quantitative risk assessment by deriving site specific assessment criteria to assess chronic risks to human health from land contamination and the site is evaluated according to dither the existing use or to a proposed development. Land contamination can affect the health of people living, working, visiting or otherwise present on a site. Industry of Employment The sector of employment, defined by the Standard Industrial Classification of employment (2007) ISIS A computer modelling package used to estimate flows and flood levels in rivers. JFLOW A computer package used to give a broad estimate of flood levels Job Seekers Allowance JSA claimant count records the number of people claiming Jobseekers Allowance (JSA) and National Insurance credits at Jobcentre Plus local offices. People claiming JSA must declare that they are out of work, capable of, available for and actively seeking work during the week in which the claim is made. Ln noise descriptors. Because noise varies with time, a single noise value cannot adequately define the noise ambient. For this reason, the NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 361
acoustic environment is described using a number of noise level descriptors (as used in this report) as follows; L10 The sound pressure level that is exceeded for 10% of the time for which the given sound is measured. L90 The level of noise exceeded for 90% of the time. The bottom 10% of the sample is the L90 noise level expressed in units of dB(A). Leq Equivalent sound pressure level - the steady sound level that, over a specified period of time, would produce the same energy equivalence as the fluctuating sound level actually occurring. LAmax The maximum RMS A-weighted sound pressure level occurring within a specified time period. Leaching Movement of components of the soil to deeper depths as a result of water movement down through the soil Loamy A term used to describe soil texture when there is a mix of sand, silt and clay within the soil Loudness A rise of 10 dB in sound level corresponds approximately to a doubling of subjective loudness. That is, a sound of 85 dB is twice as loud as a sound of 75 dB which is twice as loud as a sound of 65 dB and so on. Microphone An electro acoustic transducer which receives an acoustic signal and delivers a corresponding electric signal. Main River A designated river where the Environment Agency has powers to carry out flood defence works Medieval Period
1066 to 1540
Modern period
1914 to present
Noise
Sound which a listener does not wish to hear.
NW Bicester The wider eco-development being progressed by P3 Eco and A2Dominion Group. This comprises a 416 hectare site to the north west of Bicester. NW Bicester is not a committed development at present, but is considered in the cumulative effects assessment in this Environmental Statement as a future development in the area. Occupation A person’s occupation is coded from the response to the question asking for the full title of the Main job and the description of what is done in that job. It is coded to the 2000 edition of the Standard Occupational Classification (SOC).
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 362
Ordinary watercourse A (usually small) watercourse which does not form part of a main river. Maintenance of an ordinary watercourse is the responsibility of the riparian owner but local authorities have permissive powers to carry out flood defence works Post-medieval period Prehistoric period
AD1540 to AD1914
Pre 30,000BC to AD43
Rainwater Harvesting Collecting, storing and using rainwater for domestic or commercial purposes to supplement or replace mains water supply Roman Period
AD42 to AD410
Salmonid fishery and similar fish.
An EC designated fishery capable of supporting trout
Sensitive Receptors People or places that have the potential to experience impacts. Shared Accommodation A house in multiple occupation Silage Fodder harvested whilst green and kept succulent by partial fermentation Soil Guideline Values are scientifically based generic assessment criteria to help evaluate long-term risks to human health from chemical contamination in soil. Soil Quality The ability of a soil to provide a given function or functions (such as supporting crop growth, allowing water infiltration and storage to mitigate flood risk etc.) Standardised Mortality Rate This rate is calculated by dividing the number of deaths by the actual local population in a particular age group multiplied by the standard population for that particular age group and summing across the relevant age groups. Suckler cows Cows belonging to a meat breed or born of a cross with a meat breed, and belonging to a herd intended for rearing calves for meat production Subsoil Lower layers of soil lying between the topsoil and the material (solid rock or sediment) on which the soil has developed Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) A sequence of water management practices and facilities designed to drain surface water in a manner that will provide a more natural and sustainable approach than what has been the conventional practice of routing run-off through a pipe to a watercourse. NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 363
Topsoil The upper layer of soil generally containing the majority of plant roots. Often distinguished from lower layers by colour. Unemployment A person is defined as unemployed if he or she is not in employment, is available to start work in the next 2 weeks and has either looked for work in the last 4 weeks or is waiting to start a new job. This is consistent with the International Labour Office (ILO) standard classification. Unshared Accommodation space
A dwelling consisting of one household
Waste Data Flow A waste analysis programme used by local authorities to log waste arisings within their district Worklessness Worklessness is a less familiar term than unemployment to describe those who are economically inactive. The economically inactive are people of working age who are not working, not in full-time education or training and are not actively seeking work.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 364
References Chapter 1: Introduction Ref 1-1 Department for Communities and Local Government, July 2009. Planning Policy Statement (PPS): eco-towns Ref 1-2
Department for Communities and Local Government, January 2005. Planning Policy Statement 1: Delivering Sustainable Development
Ref 1-3
Department for Communities and Local Government, July 2009. Eco-towns Location Decision Statement
Ref 1-4
Department for Communities and Local Government, March 2012, National Planning Policy Framework
Chapter 2: The Purpose of the Scheme Ref 2-1 Department for Communities and Local Government, July 2009. Planning Policy Statement (PPS): eco-towns Ref 2-2 Cherwell District Council, February 2010. Draft Core Strategy Ref 2-3 Cherwell District Council, August 2010. Eco Bicester – One Shared Vision Chapter 3: Alternatives Considered Ref 3-1
Department for Communities and Local Government, July 2009. Eco-towns Location Decision Statement
Chapter 5: Landscape and Visual Impact Ref 5-1
Council of Europe (2000); ‘European Landscape Convention’.
Ref 5-2
Department of Communities and Local Government (2012); ‘National Planning Policy Framework’.
Ref 5-3
Cherwell District Council (2014) ‘The Cherwell Local Plan Submission’.
Ref 5-4
Landscape Institute and Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment (2002); 'Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment: 2nd Edition', Spon Press.
Ref 5-5
Countryside Agency (1999); ‘Countryside Character’.
Ref 5-6
Cherwell District Council (1995); ‘Cherwell District Landscape Assessment’.
Ref 5-7
Oxfordshire County Council (2004); ‘Oxfordshire Wildlife and Landscape Study’.
Ref 5-8
WYG Planning & Environment (2013); Bicester Landscape Sensitivity and Capacity Assessment’.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 365
Ref 5-9
Countryside Agency and Scottish Natural Heritage (2002); ‘Landscape Character Assessment Guidance for England and Scotland’.
Chapter 6: Ecology Ref 6-1 Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the United Kingdom (version 7 July 2006), Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management, 2006 http://www.ieem.net/ecia/index.html Ref 6-2 Oxfordshire’s Biodiversity Action Plan and Conservation Target Areas. Oxfordshire County Council Ref 6-3 Protecting and Enhancing Cherwell’s Natural Environment Corporate Biodiversity Action Plan 2013–2014, Cherwell District Council North Oxfordshire Ref 6-4 http://magic.defra.gov.uk/About_MAGIC.htm Ref 6-5 British Red Data Books:2 Insects, JNCC, 1987 Ref 6-6 British Red Data Books:3 Invertebrates other than insects, JNCC, 1991 Ref 6-7 Royal Society for the Protection of Birds The population status of birds in England, RSPB, 2013 Ref 6-8 Designing for Biodiversity: a technical guide for new and existing buildings 2nd Edition, RIBA Publishing, 2013 Ref 6-9 The predation of wild birds in the UK: a review of its conservation impact and management RSPB Research Report no 23, RSPB, Sandy, 2007 Chapter 7: Flood Risk and Hydrology Ref 7-1
Hyder Consulting (2014) North West Bicester Eco-Town Flood Risk Assessment
Ref 7-2
Hyder Consulting (2014) North West Bicester Eco-Town Surface Water Drainage Strategy
Ref 7-3
Hyder Consulting (2014) North West Bicester Eco-Town Water Cycle Study Detailed Report
Ref 7-4
CH2M Hill (2013) ISIS River Modelling Software package
Ref 7-5
Institute of Hydrology (1999) Flood Estimation Handbook
Ref 7-6
Centre for Ecology and Hydrology (2006) Flood Estimation Handbook CD-ROM Version 3.0
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 366
Ref 7-7
Hyder Consulting (2010) NW Bicester development- Phase 1 Desk Study
Ref 7-8
Environment Agency Water Framework Directive interactive map (accessed via http://www.environmentagency.gov.uk/homeandleisure/37793.aspx)
Ref 7-9
Highways Agency (2009) Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) - Volume 11, Section 3, Part 10 Road Drainage and the Water Environment: HD 45/09
Ref 7-10 Environment Agency Flood Mapping (accessed via http://www.environmentagency.gov.uk/homeandleisure/37793.aspx) Ref 7-11 Environment Agency (2009) Thames River Basin Management Plan Ref 7-12 Environment Agency (various dates) Pollution Prevention Guidelines. Accessed via www.netregs.gov.uk Ref 7-13 CIRIA (2005) C650 Environmental Good Practice on Site and (2001) C532 Control of Water Pollution from Construction Sites Chapter 8: Air Quality Ref 8-1
The Air Quality Strategy for England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, DEFRA, 2007
Ref 8-2
Planning Policy Statement 23: Planning and Pollution Control, Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, 2004
Ref 8-3
Cherwell Local Plan, Cherwell District Council, 1996.
Ref 8-4
Guidance on the assessment of dust from demolition and construction, Institute of Air Quality Management, 2014.
Ref 8-5
Development Control: Planning for Air Quality, Environmental Protection UK, 2010.
Ref 8-6
Local Air Quality Management Technical Guidance, (TG09) DEFRA, 2009
Ref 8-7
Biomass and Air Quality Guidance for Local Authorities, Environmental Protection, UK, 2010
Chapter 9: Noise Ref 9-1
Policy Planning Guidance 24 – Planning and Noise (PPG 24). Department for Communities and Local Government.
Ref 9-2
BS 5228: 2009 - Noise and Vibration Control on Construction and Open Sites (2009) Part 1-Noise, Part 2 – Vibration HMSO
Ref 9-3
Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Volume 11, Section 3, Part 7 (HA 213/08).
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 367
Ref 9-4
BS 4142: 1997 Method for rating of industrial noise affecting mixed residential and industrial areas; (1997) HMSO
Ref 9-5
BS5672-1: 2008 ‘Guide to evaluation of vibration in buildings: Vibration sources other than blasting’
Ref 9-6
Department of Transport and Welsh Office Calculation of Road Traffic Noise (CRTN) HMSO, 1988
Ref 9-7
TRL Report ‘Converting the UK traffic noise index LA10,18-hr to EU noise indices for noise mapping’ (2002)
Ref 9-8
Guidelines for noise impact assessment’ (IEMA/IOA 2002)
Chapter 10: Cultural Heritage Ref 10-1 Code of Conduct. Institute for Archaeologists, Institute for Archaeologists. (2008a). Ref 10-2 Standards and Guidance for Desk-Based Assessment. Institute for Archaeologists (2008b). Ref 10-3 Standards and Guidance for Field Evaluation. Institute for Archaeologists (2008c), Ref 10-4 DMRB Volume 11, Section 3, Part 2 Highways Agency et al (2007). Ref 10-5 Cox (2010) Ref 10-6 Cherwell District Council Landscape Assessment (1995) Chapter 11: Contaminated Land Ref 11-1 Hyder Consulting (UK) Ltd., 2010. NW Bicester Eco-town. Phase 1 Desk Study. Report Number 2501-UA001881-UP33R-01. Hyder Consulting Ltd, Cardiff. Ref 11-2 Hyder Consulting (UK) Ltd., 2010. NW Bicester development. Geotechnical Interpretative Report - Masterplan. Report Number 2507-UA001881-UP33R-01. Ref 11-3 Hyder Consulting (UK) Ltd., 2013. NW Bicester NW Bicester development. Groundwater Supply : Feasibility Study, Technical Briefing Note. Report Number 5040-UA005241-UP31R-01. Ref 11-4 DEFRA 2012, “Environmental Protection Act 1990: Part 2A. Contaminated Land Statutory Guidance”, London: DEFRA Ref 11-5 DEFRA and Environment Agency, 2004, “Model Procedures for the Management of Contaminated Land. R&D Publication CLR 11”, Bristol: Environment Agency Ref 11-6 DEFRA and Environment Agency, 2002, “The Contaminated Land Exposure Assessment Model (CLEA): technical basis and NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 368
algorithms, R&D Publication CLR 10”, Bristol: Environment Agency. Ref 11-7 Land Quality Management (LQM) and Chartered Institute of Environmental Health (CIEH), 2007. Generic Assessment Criteria for Human Health Risk Assessment. Ref 11-8 The results of monitoring have been assessed using the current guidance document: CIRIA C665 “Assessing Risks Posed by Hazardous Ground Gases to Buildings”. Ref 11-9 BS8485:2007 “Code of Practice for the Characterization and Remediation from Ground Gas in Affected Developments”. Ref 11-10 HSE, 1991: Protection of workers and the general public during development of contaminated land, guidance. HMSO, London. Ref 11-11 BRE Report BR211: Radon – Guidance on Protective Measures for New Buildings. Chapter 12: Agriculture and Land Use Ref 12-1 Safeguarding our soils. A strategy for England, DEFRA, 2009. Ref 12-2 Construction Code of Practice for the Sustainable Use of Soils on Construction Sites, DEFRA, 2009. Ref 12-3 National Planning Policy Framework, DLCG, 2012. Ref 12-4 The Cherwell Local Plan, Cherwell District Council, 2014. Ref 12-5 Agricultural Land Classification of England and Wales. Revised guidelines and criteria for grading the quality of agricultural land. MAFF, 1988. Ref 12-6 Soil Survey of England and Wales 1:250 000 Soil Maps. Ref 12-7 National Soil Resources Institute Soils Site Report (prepared July 2010). Chapter 13: Human Health Ref 13-1 Scott-Samuel, Alex, Birley, Martin and Ardern, Kate (May 2001) The Merseyside Guidelines for Health Impact Assessment Ref 13-2 Department for Communities and Local Government. National Planning Policy Framework. March 2012 Ref 13-3 Oxfordshire County Council. Eco-Bicester One shared vision. December 2010 Ref 13-4 Cherwell District Council. The Cherwell Local Plan Proposed Submission. January 2014 Ref 13-5 Cherwell District Council. Cherwell Local Plan (1996) Saved Policies. NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 369
Ref 13-6 Cherwell District Council. Non-Statutory Cherwell Local Plan 2011 Ref 13-7 Cherwell District Council. Draft Core Strategy. February 2010. Ref 13-8 European Policy Health Impact Assessment – A Guide (May, 2004) Ref 13-9 Director of Public Health Annual Report for Oxfordshire, Annual Report VI (May 2013) Ref 13-10 Oxfordshire County Council, NHS Oxfordshire (March 2013) Joint Strategic Needs Assessment Ref 13-11 Hunt, Dobson, Stringer (October, 2010) NW Bicester, Social Infrastructure Provision Ref 13-12 Public Health England (September 2013) Cherwell Health Profile Ref 13-13 Neighbourhood Statistics http://www.neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk Ref 13-14 Department of Health (2004) At least five a week. Evidence on the impact of physical activity and its relationship to health. A Report from the Chief Medical Officer. London Ref 13-15 Diabetes UK. Diabetes in the UK 2014: key statistics on diabetes. A Report from Diabetes UK Ref 13-16 Director of Public Health Annual Report for Oxfordshire, Annual Report IV (June 2010) Ref 13-17 Department of Health (2009) Be Active: Be Healthy: A Plan for Getting the Nation Moving Ref 13-18 Department of Communities and Local Government (2007) Indices of Deprivation http://www.imd.communities.gov.uk/InformationDisplay.aspx Ref 13-19 Department for Transport (2012) Core Accessibility Indicators Ref 13-20 Cherwell District Council, Cherwell Green Spaces Strategy 2008 – 2016. Ref 13-21 Ferrie, JE, Shipley, MJ, Marmot, MG, Stansfield,S,A and Smith, GD (1998) An Uncertain Future: The Health effects of Threats to Employment Security in White-Collar Men and Women, American Journal of Public Health, Vol. 88, No. 7. Ref 13-22 London Councils (2006) The Control of Dust and Emissions from Construction and Demolition. Best Practice Guidance Ref 13-23 European Environment Agency (2010) Good Practice Guide on Noise Exposure and Potential Health Effects Ref 13-14 Barnes, G (January, 2005) A Health Impact Assessment of the A5225 Wigan Gateway Road Proposal, A Report for the NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 370
Director of Public health, Ashton, Leigh and Wigan Primary Care Trust and the Director of Engineering Wigan Borough Council Ref 13-15 The Marmot Review (February, 2010) Fair Society, Healthy Lives Ref 13-16 Stafford, M, Chandola, T and Marmot, M (2007) Association Between Fear of Crime and Mental Health and Physical Functioning, American Journal of Public Health, Vol. 97, No. 11. Ref 13-17 House of Commons Environmental Audit Committee (2010) Air Quality Fifth Report of Session 2009 – 2010 Ref 13-18 NHS Executive, AEA Technology (2000) On the Move, Informing Transport Health Impact Assessment in London. Ref 13-19 Maas, J et al (2006) Green space, urbanity and health: how strong is the relation? Journal of Epidemiology and Public Health, 2006, 60, 587-592. Ref 13-20 http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Healthcare/Mentalhealth/Publicmental healthandwellbeing /index.htm Ref 13-21 Sustrans.org.uk. National Cycle Routes. Accessed February 2014 Chapter 14: Socio-Economics and Community Ref 14-1 Planning Policy Statement Eco-towns – A supplement to PPS1 (2009) Ref 14-2 National Planning Policy Framework (2012) Ref 14-3 Cherwell Local Plan Submission Version (January 2014) Ref 14-4 NW Bicester Draft Economic Development Strategy (February 2014), SQW Consultants Ref 14-5 NW Bicester Draft Economic Baseline (August 2013), SQW Consultants Ref 14-6 The Design Manual for Roads and Bridges, Vol. 11, Highways Agency Ref 14-7 ‘Developing Effective Economic Strategies for Eco-Towns’ (2009), Town and Country Planning Association, Department of Communities and Local Government Ref 14-8 Office of National Statistics (ONS) Mid-Year Population Estimates Ref 14-9 Housing Strategy for Older People (2010-2015), Cherwell District Council Ref 14-10 Strategic Housing Market Assessment (December 2012), B.Line Housing Information NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 371
Ref 14-11 Open Space, Sport and Recreational Facilities Needs Assessment Audit and Strategy (2011), PMP Ref 14-12
HCA Guidelines
Ref 14-13 NW Bicester Eco-Town Demographic Profile Report, Barton Willmore, November 2013. Ref 14-14
Cherwell Economic Analysis Study (2012)
Chapter 15: Waste Ref 15-1 Waste Framework Directive, Directive [2008/98/EC] of the European Parliament and of the Council on waste. Ref 15-2 PPS 10: Planning for Sustainable Waste Management Ref 15-3 PPS: Eco-Towns – A Supplement to PPS1 Ref 15-4 Oxfordshire Joint Municipal Waste Management Strategy, Oxfordshire Waste Partnership (2007) Ref 15-5 National Review of Waste Policies, DEFRA (2011) Ref 15-6 Waste Strategy for England (2007) Ref 15-7 CD&E Waste: Survey of Arisings and Use of Alternatives to Primary Aggregates in England (2005). Ref 15-8 http://www.wrap.org.uk/swmp Ref 15-9 The Nature and Scale of Waste Produced by Schools in England, WRAP (June 2008) Chapter 17: Traffic and Transport Ref 16-1 Institute of Environmental Assessment (IEA), 1994. Guidelines for the Environmental Assessment of Road Traffic Ref 16-2 Department for Transport, 2008 Building Sustainable Travel into New Developments: A Menu of Options for Growth Points and Eco-towns. Ref 16-3 Communities and Local Government, 2008 Design to Delivery: Eco-towns Transport Worksheet Advice to Promoters and Planners. Ref 16-4 Oxfordshire County Council, 2011, Local Transport Plan Ref 16-5 Oxfordshire County Council, 2010, Oxfordshire Local Investment Plan
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 372
Chapter 17: Cumulative Effects Ref 17-1 DCLG (2006) Environmental Impact Assessment: A guide to good practice and procedures, A consultation paper. Ref 17-2 Hyder Consulting (1999) Guidelines for the Assessment of Indirect and Cumulative Impacts as well as Impact Interactions. Prepared for the European Commission, EC DG X1 Environment, Nuclear Safety and Civil Protection.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 373
Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited 2212959 Manning House 22 Carlisle Place London SW1P 1JA United Kingdom Tel: +44 (0)20 3014 9000 www.hyderconsulting.com
P3 Eco (Bicester) Ltd and A2Dominion Group Bicester Eco Development Masterplan Environmental Statement Volume 1: Main Text Author
Checker
Various compiled by Lourdes Cooper
Andrew Saunders
Approver
Andrew Saunders
Report No
5001-UA005241-UE31R-01
Date
March 2014
This report has been prepared for P3 Eco (Bicester) Ltd and A2Dominion Group in accordance with the terms and conditions of appointment for Masterplan Environmental Statement dated May 2010. Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited (2212959) cannot accept any responsibility for any use of or reliance on the contents of this report by any third party.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Environmental StatementStrategic Environmental Report - Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
CONTENTS
Volume 1: Main Text 1
2
3
4
5
6
Introduction .................................................................. 1 1.1
The Masterplan ............................................................... 1
1.2
Background and Context .................................................. 1
1.3
Purpose of the Strategic Environmental Report .................... 2
1.4
Structure of the Strategic Environmental Report .................. 3
The Masterplan Description ............................................. 4 2.1
Policy Background ........................................................... 4
2.2
Masterplan Objectives ...................................................... 4
2.3
Description of the Masterplan ............................................ 5
Alternatives .................................................................. 10 3.1
Introduction .................................................................. 10
3.2
Weston Otmoor NW Bicester Development Site ................. 10
3.3
Determining the Masterplan Site Boundary ....................... 10
3.4
Development of Site Layout ............................................ 11
Assessment Methods ..................................................... 12 4.1
Introduction .................................................................. 12
4.2
Scoping of Environmental Topics ..................................... 12
4.3
Consultation ................................................................. 12
4.4
Strategic Assessment General Methodology ...................... 13
4.5
Cumulative Effects ......................................................... 15
Landscape and Visual Impact .......................................... 16 5.1
Introduction .................................................................. 16
5.2
Regulatory and Policy Framework .................................... 16
5.3
Methodology ................................................................. 17
5.4
Description of Existing Baseline Conditions ....................... 21
5.5
Design and Mitigation ..................................................... 26
5.6
Assessment of Effects .................................................... 26
5.7
Cumulative Effects ......................................................... 28
5.8
Summary ..................................................................... 28
Ecology ........................................................................ 29 6.1
Introduction .................................................................. 29
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page i
6.2
Regulatory and Policy Framework .................................... 29
6.3
Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plans .............................. 35
6.4
Methodology ................................................................. 36
6.5
Description of Existing Baseline Conditions ....................... 40
6.6
Design and Mitigation ..................................................... 64
6.7
Assessment of Impacts .................................................. 80
6.8
Cumulative Effects ......................................................... 96
6.9
Monitoring and Management ........................................... 96
6.10 Summary ..................................................................... 96
7
8
9
10
Flood Risk and Hydrology ............................................. 100 7.1
Introduction ................................................................ 100
7.2
Regulatory and Policy Framework .................................. 100
7.3
Methodology ............................................................... 102
7.4
Description of Existing Baseline Conditions ..................... 106
7.5
Design and Mitigation ................................................... 112
7.6
Assessment of Effects .................................................. 114
7.7
Cumulative Effects ....................................................... 116
7.8
Summary ................................................................... 116
Air Quality .................................................................. 118 8.1
Introduction ................................................................ 118
8.2
Regulatory Framework ................................................. 118
8.3
Methodology ............................................................... 120
8.4
Baseline Conditions ...................................................... 126
8.5
Design and Mitigation ................................................... 131
8.6
Assessment of Effects .................................................. 132
8.7
Cumulative Effects ....................................................... 133
8.8
Summary ................................................................... 133
Noise and Vibration ..................................................... 134 9.1
Introduction ................................................................ 134
9.2
Regulatory Framework ................................................. 134
9.3
Methodology ............................................................... 140
9.4
Baseline Conditions ...................................................... 148
9.5
Design and Mitigation ................................................... 151
9.6
Assessment of Effects .................................................. 154
9.7
Cumulative Effects ....................................................... 159
9.8
Summary ................................................................... 159
Cultural Heritage ......................................................... 161 10.1 Introduction ................................................................ 161 10.2 Regulatory Framework ................................................. 162 10.3 Methodology ............................................................... 167 10.4 Baseline Conditions ...................................................... 172 10.5 Design and Mitigation ................................................... 186 10.6 Assessment of Effects .................................................. 189 10.7 Cumulative Effects ....................................................... 191 10.8 Summary ................................................................... 192
11
Contaminated Land ..................................................... 193 11.1 Introduction ................................................................ 193
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page ii
11.2 Regulatory and Policy Context ....................................... 193 11.3 Methodology ............................................................... 197 11.4 Description of Existing Baseline Conditions ..................... 200 11.5 Design and Mitigation ................................................... 204 11.6 Assessment of Effects .................................................. 204 11.7 Cumulative Effects ....................................................... 207 11.8 Summary ................................................................... 207
12
Agriculture and Land Use ............................................. 209 12.1 Introduction ................................................................ 209 12.2 Regulatory Framework ................................................. 209 12.3 Methodology ............................................................... 212 12.4 Baseline Conditions ...................................................... 214 12.5 Design and Mitigation ................................................... 215 12.6 Assessment of Effects .................................................. 217 12.7 Cumulative effects ....................................................... 218 12.8 Summary ................................................................... 218
13
Human Health ............................................................ 220 13.1 Introduction ................................................................ 220 13.2 Regulatory Framework ................................................. 220 13.3 Methodology ............................................................... 223 13.4 Baseline Conditions ...................................................... 227 13.5 Design and Mitigation ................................................... 239 13.6 Assessment of Effects .................................................. 243 13.7 Cumulative Effects ....................................................... 253 13.8 Summary ................................................................... 254
14
Socio-Economics and Community .................................. 256 14.1 Introduction ................................................................ 256 14.2 Regulatory and Policy Framework .................................. 256 14.3 Methodology ............................................................... 259 14.4 Description of Existing Baseline Conditions ..................... 263 14.5 Design and Mitigation ................................................... 278 14.6 Assessment of Effects .................................................. 279 14.7 Cumulative Effects ....................................................... 289 14.8 Summary and Conclusion ............................................. 290
15
Waste ........................................................................ 291 15.1 Introduction ................................................................ 291 15.2 Regulatory Framework ................................................. 294 15.3 Methodology ............................................................... 302 15.4 Baseline Conditions ...................................................... 307 15.5 Design and Mitigation ................................................... 310 15.6 Assessment of Effects .................................................. 316 15.7 Cumulative Effects ....................................................... 318 15.8 Summary ................................................................... 319
16
Transport ................................................................... 320 16.1 Introduction ................................................................ 320 16.2 Regulatory Framework ................................................. 320 16.3 Methodology ............................................................... 328
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page iii
16.4 Description of Baseline Conditions ................................. 334 16.5 Design and Mitigation ................................................... 342 16.6 Assessment of Effects .................................................. 343 16.7 Summary ................................................................... 343
17
Interrelationships and Cumulative Effects ....................... 344 17.1 Introduction ................................................................ 344 17.2 Technical Assumptions and Method ................................ 344 17.3 Baseline Conditions ...................................................... 346 17.4 Mitigation and Enhancement Measures ........................... 347 17.5 Assessment of Cumulative Effects .................................. 347 17.6 Summary ................................................................... 354
Abbreviations ..................................................................... 355 Glossary ............................................................................ 358 References ......................................................................... 365
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page iv
Volume 2: Drawings Drawing 1-1
Site Location
Drawing 2-1
Land Uses
Drawing 2-2
Green Infrastructure Masterplan
Drawing 2-3
SuDs Concept Plan
Drawing 6-1
Phase 1 Habitat Survey
Drawing 6-2
Badger Setts, Bat Roosts and Key Activity Corridors
Drawing 6-3
Ponds, Grassland, Woodland and Hedges Location
Drawing 7-1
Flood Risk
Drawing 8-1
Air Quality Monitoring Stations
Drawing 9-1
Noise Monitoring Locations
Drawing 9-2
Noise day time
Drawing 9-3
Noise night time
Drawing 12-1
Agricultural Land Classification Grades
Drawing 13-1
Location of Health Facilities
Drawing 13-2
Health Facilities
Drawing 14-1
Education Map
Drawing 14-2
Sports and Recreation Facilities and PROWs
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page ii
Volume 3: Appendices Appendix 6A-6I
Ecological Desk Based Assessment
Appendix 7A
Flood Risk Assessment
Appendix 9A
Noise Baseline Assessment
Appendix 11A
Desk Study Report
Appendix 11B
Preliminary Intrusive Ground Investigation
Appendix 11C
Ground Water Supply: Feasibility Study
Appendix 15A
Site Waste Management Plan
Appendix 16A
Bicester Accident Area
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page iii
1
Introduction
1.1
The Masterplan The A2Dominion Group is proposing to develop a North West Bicester development (NW Bicester) on land to the north west of Bicester in Cherwell District, as shown on Drawing 1-1 in Volume 2 of this Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report (SER). NW Bicester is intended to provide a new form of sustainable community within Cherwell District, and to extend the benefits of this community to the existing town of Bicester. The first part of the NW Bicester development was an Exemplar Site development located in the north west part which is currently under construction. This SER presents the findings of the high level environmental assessment for the proposed NW Bicester development. This SER describes the development, the baseline environment and the significant and non-significant environmental effects after mitigation.
1.2
Background and Context In July 2009, the Department for Communities and Local Government published ‘Planning Policy Statement (PPS): eco-towns’ (Ref 1-1) as a supplement to PPS1 Delivering Sustainable Development (Ref 1-2). The PPS1 supplement includes requirements on sustainability, waste reduction, zero carbon buildings and sustainable public transport. Within the PPS1 supplement, Eco-towns are defined as sustainable developments of at least 5,000 homes. In July 2009, four ‘first wave’ locations were identified with the potential to have an Eco-town; one of which was NW Bicester (Ref 1-3). The Eco-towns PPS outlines the Government’s objectives for planning that are set out in PPS1: 1. “To promote sustainable development by: ensuring that eco-towns achieve sustainability standards significantly above equivalent levels of development in existing towns and cities by setting out a range of challenging and stretching minimum standards for their development, in particular by: – providing a good quantity of green space of the highest quality in close proximity to the natural environment – offering opportunities for space within and around the dwellings – promoting healthy and sustainable environments through ‘Active Design’ principles and healthy living choices
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 1
– enabling opportunities for infrastructure that make best use of technologies in energy generation and conservation in ways that are not always practical or economic in other developments – delivering a locally appropriate mix of housing type and tenure to meet the needs of all income groups and household size, and – taking advantage of significant economies of scale and increases in land value to deliver new technology and infrastructure such as for transport, energy and community facilities. 2. To reduce the carbon footprint of development by: ensuring that households and individuals in eco-towns are able to reduce their carbon footprint to a low level and achieve a more sustainable way of living.” The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (Ref 1-4) published on 27 March 2012 replaced all the previous Planning Policy Statements. The NPPF no longer refers explicitly to eco-towns, however, the eco-towns supplement to PPS1 is still in existence. The NW Bicester development lies within the jurisdiction of Cherwell District Council (CDC), and the masterplan for the site is being progressed by A2 Dominion. A planning application (Ref: 10/01780/HYBRID) was submitted in December 2010 for the first part of the NW Bicester development, the Exemplar Site with an Addendum submitted in April 2011. The Exemplar Site is the first phase of the development of the Masterplan Site. This SER has been prepared in relation to this Masterplan Site development.
1.3
Purpose of the Strategic Environmental Report This SER will provide a high level assessment of the Masterplan site which will then feed in the more detailed Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA) to support future planning applications. The Masterplan site covers 379.88 hectares (ha). It is expected that EIAs will be required for future planning applications that collectively cover the Masterplan area. The main aims of the SER are:
To provide a description of the Masterplan proposal.
To provide high-level information regarding the likely main environmental effects of the proposals having taken into account the measures proposed to avoid, reduce and if possible remedy any predicted significant adverse effects on the environment or to enhance the beneficial effects of the proposals.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 2
1.4
To consider the likely cumulative effects of the development of the Masterplan Site and the schemes likely to be developed in the vicinity of the Site.
Structure of the Strategic Environmental Report The SER is structured as follows:
Volume 1 (this volume) explains the purpose of the SER (Chapter 1), describes the proposed development (Chapter 2), summarises alternatives considered (Chapter 3) and the overall approach to the high level impact assessment (Chapter 4). It presents the mitigation measures and draws together the significant environmental effects after mitigation for each environmental topic in Chapter 5 to 16. Cumulative effects are presented in Chapter 17 and also within some topic areas.
Volume 2 contains the SER drawings referred to in Volume 1 SER main text
Volume 3 contains the SER appendices referred to in Volume 1 SER main text
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 3
2
The Masterplan Description
2.1
Policy Background The land at NW Bicester is identified in the Supplement to PPS1 entitled ‘Eco-towns’ (July 2009) (Ref 2-1) as one of four locations for a potential Eco-towns. A2 Dominion Group is promoting the overall site for a mix use residential led development. Within the Cherwell Local Plan Submission (2014) (Ref 2-2) CDC has identified the area for development. The Local Plan Policy Bicester 1 – North West Bicester Eco-Town seeks to:
Provide a development of 5,000 homes.
Provide approximately 5,000 jobs (about 1,800 to be delivered by 2031)
Create a development that will be a zero carbon development as defined in the PPS and the Eco Bicester One Shared Vision (Ref 2-3).
Deliver a high quality local environment taking into account climate change adaptation.
Create homes that achieve Level 5 of the Code for Sustainable Homes.
Provide access to one employment opportunity for each new dwelling within easy reach by walking, cycling and / or public transport.
At least 50% of trips originating from the development should be made by means other than the car.
Provide 40% of the total gross site area as green space of which half will be public open space. These open spaces would be publicly accessible and consist of a network of well managed, high quality green/open spaces which are linked to the countryside.
The Masterplan for NW Bicester is intended to set out the framework for the future development of the area and will be used to help guide forthcoming planning applications.
2.2
Masterplan Objectives The Vision for NW Bicester development is “to achieve more sustainable ways of living through low carbon lifestyles”. The proposals will be developed around community hubs to provide facilities to meet the day to day needs of residents and opportunities for employment. The development will promote walking, cycling and use of public transport over the use of the private car. This vision will
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 4
be underpinned through a number of fundamental principles established for the Masterplan by the masterplan team in response to the CDC planning framework and Eco Bicester. The principles include:
2.3
Seeing a minimum of 5,000 homes built.
Ensuring a mix of affordable housing is included in line with CDC’s requirements.
Ensuring 40% of the overall area comprises open spaces and green landscape infrastructure.
Creating one job per home within a sustainable travel distance.
Ensuring homes are built to Code for Sustainable Homes Level 5 and BREEAM excellent standards.
Delivering zero carbon energy across all buildings
Allow for future climate change adaptation by incorporating forward thinking technologies and design within homes.
Providing real time energy and travel monitoring in every home.
Ensuring high levels of energy efficiency in the fabric of the buildings and their design.
Providing primary schools located within 800m of all homes.
Enabling and encouraging local food production.
Attaining a net gain in local biodiversity.
Striving towards water neutrality.
Creating a management program to ensure zero waste goes into landfill during construction
Making a commitment towards a Local Management Organisation.
Description of the Masterplan Development Context The town of Bicester lies approximately 24km to the north-east of Oxford, and 28km to the southeast of Banbury. The M40 runs approximately 2km to the southwest, with Junction 9 providing access to the town via the A41. Bicester is served by two railway stations; namely Bicester North and Bicester Town. Chiltern Railways operate services from Bicester North between Birmingham Snow Hill and London Marylebone. Branch line services to Oxford (via Islip) operate from Bicester Town. This lies to the south of the town and uses the old Varsity Line track between Oxford and Cambridge.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 5
The Site lies approximately 1.5km from the Bicester town centre. The site, shown on Drawing 2-1, currently comprises Grade 3a and Grade 3b agricultural land and contains a number of farmhouses and other buildings. The railway line runs in a north west to south east direction through the middle of the site. The villages of Bucknell and Caversfield are located to the north and east of the site respectively. Drawing 2-1 illustrates the site boundary for the Masterplan development. This site lies wholly within the area identified by CDC for the NW Bicester Eco development. The Masterplan Site boundary runs alongside the B4030, A4095 and B4100, and lies within the parish of Caversfield.
The Masterplan Site The Masterplan Site development proposals include the Exemplar Site, which provides for 393 homes. The Masterplan Site will include provision for the following:
Approximately 6000 residential units (5607 excluding Exemplar Site).
Community and Business Centres
Potential Water Treatment and Energy Centres.
Four primary schools.
A secondary school and sport pitches.
An extra care home.
Provision for 4,600 jobs on site including 2,000 jobs at the proposed business park in the south west corner of the Site
Means of access.
Car parking.
Landscape.
Amenity space.
Service infrastructure.
2.3.1 Masterplan Details Development Area The net residential developable area in the Masterplan comprises 159.1 ha. The net non-residential developable area (to be developed for commercial, social, community uses, green infrastructure and supporting infrastructure) in the Masterplan comprises 220.78 ha. The proposed Masterplan land uses are shown on Drawing 2-1.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 6
Green Infrastructure Forty percent of the total area of land at North West Bicester is to be allocated to green space of which half should be public spaces. A network of well-managed high quality green/open spaces which are linked to the wider countryside would be provided. Green spaces would be multifunctional: accessible for play and recreation, walking or cycling and supporting wildlife, urban cooling and flood management. The Green Infrastructure Masterplan is shown on Drawing 2-2. Land Uses Table 2-1 summarises the proposed land use across the Masterplan Development. Table 2-1
Proposed Land Uses of Masterplan Development
Use
Area (ha)
Housing – Mixed Use with Flats (excluding exemplar)
158.54
Secondary School (excluding green infrastructure)
10.5
Primary School (including green infrastructure)
7.6
Care Home/Hotel/Other
1.04
Commercial/Business (excludes green infrastructure)
9.965
Social/Community
1.81
Retail/Leisure
0.7
Energy Production
0.3
Green Infrastructure
156.97
Existing Farms Mixed Use
0,73
Existing Rail Corridor
6.25
Existing Bucknell Road
2.24
Existing Lords Lane
0.59
Existing Howes Lane
1.3
General Layout and Framework The development of the site shall accord with the general principles and layout set out on Drawing 2-1. The Masterplan has been designed with landscape as the key driver to the layout of the site. Care has been taken to preserve and enhance hedges and water courses within the development and for the natural landscape to be accessible for residents to enjoy. NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 7
Site Access The construction phase of the development will extend over approximately a 20 year period. It is anticipated that over the construction period, all construction traffic will use the A41/Vendee Drive from the M40 Junction 9 and the A4421 around the eastern side of Bicester. The Access and Travel Strategy for NW Bicester aims to minimise traffic impacts by promoting high quality walking and cycling linkages within the Masterplan and connection to the town and wider area. The internal site layout will be designed to facilitate the safe and convenient movement of vehicular, cycle and pedestrian traffic with priority given to non-car routes. In relation to vehicular traffic, the road system will be designed to control vehicle speeds for the benefit of road safety while the pedestrian and cycle routes will aim to provide a safe and permeable network for these travel modes. Street lighting will be provided within public areas and will incorporate, where appropriate, full cut-off luminaires together with use of timed and low energy systems. Parking Car parking will be provided up to the maximum provision set out in CDC's Local Plan. Based on these standards an average of 1 space is permitted for a 1 bedroomed dwelling while the maximum standard for 2 and 3 bedroomed dwellings is 2 spaces (although most will be 1 parking space). For 4 and 5 bed dwellings the maximum is 2 spaces. Surface Water Drainage Surface water drainage will be managed using a Sustainable Drainage System (SuDS). This will involve a combination of gravel-filled channels, underground storage facilities, above ground attenuation basins (some of which will support water for most of the year) and other wetland features. Those attenuation basins that will not hold water permanently will be specifically designed to do this to create habitats of value to wildlife. The proposed SuDs Concept Plan is shown in Drawing 2-3. Services There are no existing public utilities crossing the site however there are telecoms (BT), 11kv and LV Electricity supplies (SSE) and water mains (Thames Water) on the periphery of the site adjacent to Lords Lane (A4095) and Banbury Road (B4100) with existing gas mains and foul sewers to the west and south. The proposed utilities serving the proposed housing and other uses would be located in the spine footways and road ways. Reinforcement and interconnection with the existing utility infrastructure would be NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 8
required, however due to the size and reduced demand of the development this would be relatively small scale. The electricity system would incorporate supply connections from an on-site Energy Centre that would also supply the proposed district heating system. Although the Exemplar is phased ahead of the main NW Bicester development, the utility provision in this initial phase would be set out to allow connectivity with the future renewable energy strategy for the NW Bicester development. Phasing of Development The site shall be developed in phases for over a twenty year period, starting in 2019. Figure 2-1 presents the conceptual phasing and build out. The proposed phasing will consist of three phases: early development, mid development and later development. The early development work would cover areas nearest Howes Lane, Middleton Stoney Road and Banbury Road. This would be followed by the development of the area in the middle of the site. Then the rest of the site, mostly in the northern part would be developed. Figure 2-1 Conceptual Phasing and Build Out
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 9
3
Alternatives
3.1
Introduction This chapter summarises the main alternatives considered during the development of the proposals. This considers the evolution of the proposal from the time when a NW Bicester development was first shortlisted within Cherwell District, to the specific layout within the Masterplan Site boundary. This demonstrates the consideration of environmental impacts has been considered as an integral part of the design process.
3.2
Weston Otmoor NW Bicester Development Site Following publication of PPS1 – eco-towns, LPAs across the UK submitted applications for eco-towns to be considered within their local areas. Twelve locations were shortlisted, one of which was located within Cherwell District. The original location was near the village of Weston-on-the-Green; this proposal was known as Weston Otmoor. It comprised 15,000 dwellings, 15,000 jobs and a range of retail space, leisure facilities, primary and secondary schools, healthcare provision and community facilities. CDC objected to the Government’s proposal at Weston Otmoor, raising the suggestion of an alternative eco-town at NW Bicester. This concept was based upon Local Development Framework (LDF) work undertaken by CDC. The Eco-towns Location Decision Statement (Ref 3-1) stated ‘the [Weston Otmoor] site was considered not to demonstrate the potential to meet the sustainability and deliverability requirements for successful development as an eco-town at this time’. Some of the key sustainability issues of the site included being partially on the Oxford Green Belt, being located on high grade and versatile agricultural land (Grade 2), on a site incorporating Ancient Woodland, Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) and a Nature Reserve, being in an area of ‘serious’ water stress, and being close to a congested road junction on the M40 and A34 which could encourage commuting and exacerbate congestion.
3.3
Determining the Masterplan Site Boundary During the development of the Masterplan Site proposals, A2Dominion Group considered a number of alternative boundaries for the site. The environmental consultants advising the design team were consulted at all stages to comment on proposed land parcel selection, however the selected site boundary largely reflected the
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 10
result of negotiations with landowners and the shape of the land parcels available.
3.4
Development of Site Layout Previous Masterplan The masterplan produced for the 2010 consultation suggested a concept of four villages separated by green spaces. This concept required the green infrastructure to be subdivided to provide at least three areas separating villages. The resultant fragmentation of green areas did not relate well to the existing hedgerows and streams and the green space between housing areas were not of sufficient size to create a distinctive visual and environmental quality or to be suitable for green infrastructure uses. The residential catchment for four villages of 1000-1500 homes would have been below the optimum size of 2000-3000 needed to create viable convenience retail and a cohesive local centre with amenities.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 11
4
Assessment Methods
4.1
Introduction This SER presents the assessment of the environmental effects likely to result from the construction and operation of the Masterplan. This chapter sets out the methods used to assess the various environmental topics.
4.2
Scoping of Environmental Topics A scoping report was prepared in 2011 by Hyder Consulting, which has informed this SER. This identified that the Masterplan could potentially have significant environmental effects on the following topic areas:
Landscape and Visual Impact
Ecology
Flood Risk and Hydrology
Air Quality
Noise
Built Heritage and Archaeology
Contaminated Land
Agriculture and Land Use
Human Health
Socio-Economics and Community
Waste
Traffic and Transport
The Scoping Report provided an outline approach for the identification of potentially adverse and beneficial effects
4.3
Consultation From the outset, A2Dominion has had an open approach to information about the development and has made a substantial number of public and private presentations and ensured information is made available via www.nwbicester.co.uk.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 12
As well as through numerous ad hoc meetings and conversations, there has been structured contact through both the project workstream structure and formal periods of consultation. From 2008 to 2014, A2Dominion has consulted with the public and stakeholders through workshops, public engagements and roadshows, providing the local community with details of the 2008 masterplan and integrated the communities’ feedback into the current masterplan. The detailed work to produce the wider Masterplan and specific proposals for the Exemplar scheme began with an Open Planning Week which established local ambitions, context and concerns. Other events include: Bike Day 2013, 2011 exemplar model and consultation and masterplan stakeholder workshops in 2013. There is a significant level of active support for the proposed Masterplan from key groups, including elected representatives on Town, District and County councils and in consultation responses from the local parish – Caversfield. There has also been consistent support from Bicester Vision (the public-private partnership) and the Bicester Chamber of Commerce. Various other groups, including the Bicester Local History Society, the residents’ associations and individual business and community associations have shown consistent interest. A good level of awareness of the proposals for NW Bicester has been established and a significant amount of interest shown in information presented publicly. Primary concerns have centred on whether the development will reach the high expectations of sustainability and the impact of the additional population on traffic and other infrastructure.
4.4
Strategic Assessment General Methodology This SER is a strategic, high level assessment, which focuses on the potential impacts of the Masterplan, focusing on the cumulative impacts. The assessment covers the following elements: The Baseline: Baseline environmental conditions, including those that are predicted to exist immediately prior to construction and operation of the development as well as those currently existing, will be identified through a number of means. They can be determined through the use of existing data or through undertaking additional surveys, studies and modelling. Each environmental discipline has identified key resources and receptors that have been taken into account during the assessment process. Assessment Scenarios: For all topics, assessments have been made of the impacts with (Do-Something) and without (Do-Minimum) the proposed development. The Do-Minimum scenario represents a
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 13
baseline against which the environmental effects of the development can be measured. This takes account of the likely future baseline conditions, allowing for environmental trends and planned future development that has not yet been implemented. Spatial Scope: The area over which impacts could occur could be wider than the area of land directly taken by the proposals. It is inappropriate to define a single study area for the assessment, since the spatial scope varies depending on the topic under consideration. The study areas allow for the assessment of indirect as well as direct effects, including off-site works such as spoil disposal and routes for construction traffic. Temporal Scope: In considering the environmental effects of the development, it is necessary to identify impacts that may occur during construction or operation. Construction extends from the commencement of site works to the date immediately prior to opening of the development. Operation extends from immediately after opening of the development for the remainder of its life. In addition, it is recognised that some environmental design measures would take time to become established and effective. The assessment therefore considers impacts in Year 1 (Opening Year) and in Year 15 (Design Year), where appropriate. It is also recognised that some effects would be of a permanent nature whereas others would be temporary. Assessing Impacts: Impacts associated with the construction and operational stages of the proposed development will be identified. These will be considered in terms of their nature, the physical extent of their influence and the magnitude of their effects. In considering the nature and significance of the impacts, the effects will be assessed on the basis of whether they will be:
Direct or indirect
Temporary, short, medium or long term
Reversible or irreversible
Beneficial or adverse
Cumulative
Qualitative and quantitative techniques have been used to assess these impacts, as appropriate. However, as a high level assessment, most of the impacts have been assessed qualitatively. The SER identifies those elements of the development that have been introduced to mitigate potential adverse effects and assesses the significance of the impacts that remain after mitigation measures have been put in place (the “residual impacts”).
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 14
Determining Significance: The assessment will include determining the significance of potential impacts. In general, the significance of an impact reflects the importance or value of the affected resource or receptor, its sensitivity to change, and the magnitude of the predicted impact. The criteria for determining significance will vary from topic to topic but the general principle will be that higher magnitude impacts on important resources will be regarded as significant. Lower magnitude impacts on less important resources will not generally be regarded as significant.
4.5
Cumulative Effects Cumulative effects result from the incremental impacts of the development when added to other past, present and reasonably foreseeable future actions. The impacts from a single development may not be significant on their own but when combined with other impacts and other developments, these effects could become significant. Cumulative effects will be considered by describing and assessing the following:
Interaction of impacts from the development with those from other plans or activities, including the various phases of the redevelopment of this site.
Interaction of different impacts of the development, which affect the same resource or receptor.
Cumulative impacts are considered in each topic chapter as necessary, and summarised in Chapter 17, Cumulative Effects.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 15
5
Landscape and Visual Impact
5.1
Introduction This chapter considers the landscape and visual implications of the proposed development. Landscape is defined in the European Landscape Convention (Ref 5-1), as ‘...an area, as perceived by people, whose character is the result of the action and interaction of natural and/or human factors’.
5.2
Regulatory and Policy Framework This impact assessment has been undertaken in accordance with current international and national legislation, and national, regional and local plans and policies relating to landscape and visual amenity in the context of the proposed masterplan. A summary of the relevant legislation and policies, and the requirements of these policies together with the Masterplan Response have been provided in 5-1 below: Table5-1
Policy/Legislation
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester Development Masterplan Response
National Planning Policy Framework (Ref 5-2)
Landscape to be taken into account in the planning process through protection and enhancement of landscapes.
Development will respect and enhance local landscape character, securing appropriate mitigation where damage to local landscape character cannot be avoided. This will be achieved, in large part, through green infrastructure proposals and through design in response to the local vernacular
Cherwell District Council Submission: Policy ESD13 - Local Landscape Protection and Enhancement (Ref 5-3)
Opportunities will be sought to secure the enhancement of the character and appearance of the landscape, particularly in urban fringe locations, through the restoration, management or enhancement of existing landscapes, features or habitats and where appropriate the creation of new ones, including the planting of woodlands, trees and hedgerows. Development will be expected to respect and enhance local landscape
Development will respect and enhance local landscape character, securing appropriate mitigation where damage to local landscape character cannot be avoided. This will be achieved, in large part, through green infrastructure proposals and through design in response to the local vernacular
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 16
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester Development Masterplan Response
character, securing appropriate mitigation where damage to local landscape character cannot be avoided. Proposals will not be permitted if they would:
Cause undue visual intrusion into the open countryside;
Cause undue harm to important natural landscape features and topography;
Be inconsistent with local character;
Harm the setting of settlements, buildings, structures or other landmark features; or
Harm the historic value of the landscape.
Development proposals should have regard to the information and advice contained in the Council's Countryside Design Summary Supplementary Planning Guidance, and the Oxfordshire Wildlife and Landscape Study (OWLS) and be accompanied by a landscape assessment where appropriate.
5.3
Methodology
5.3.1 Introduction The assessment process has been carried out based on guidance entitled ‘Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment: Third Edition’, produced by the Landscape Institute and Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment, in 2011 (Ref 5-4).
5.3.2 Study Area The study area will cover the whole of the Masterplan Site and would consider the character areas as shown in Figure 5-1. At the strategic level, available landscape and character capacity studies together with project-level landscape character assessment (which take into NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 17
account perceptual/broad-scale visual considerations), for land to the north west of Bicester, form the basis for assessment.
5.3.3 Establishment of Baseline Conditions Relevant information has been obtained from Natural England, Oxfordshire County Council, CDC and Ordnance Survey, with field survey work during Summer/early Autumn 2010. Key information sources are as follows:
Cherwell District Council (2014); ‘Local Plan Submission’ (Ref 53).
Countryside Agency (1999); ‘Countryside Character’ (Ref 5-5)
Cherwell District Council (1995); ‘Cherwell District Landscape Assessment’ (Ref 5-6)
Oxfordshire County Council (2004); ‘Oxfordshire Wildlife and Landscape Study’ ( Ref 5-7)
WYG Planning & Environment (2013): ‘Bicester Landscape Sensitivity Capacity Assessment (Ref 5-8)
The following criteria have been used to assess sensitivity: Table 5-2
Assigning Sensitivity
Sensitivity
Description
Very High
Value: Typically of very high importance and rarity, international scale, and very limited potential for substitution (e.g. World Heritage Site). *Susceptibility to change: Landscape very unlikely to tolerate the change proposed, even with mitigation.
High
Value: Typically of high importance and rarity, national scale, and limited potential for substitution (e.g. National Park or Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty). *Susceptibility to change: Landscape very unlikely to tolerate the change proposed, even with mitigation.
Medium
Value: Typically of high or medium importance and rarity, regional scale, and limited potential for substitution (e.g. Registered Historic Park and Garden, Conservation Area). *Susceptibility to change: Landscape has the potential to tolerate the change proposed, with appropriate mitigation.
Low
Value: Typically of low or medium importance and rarity, local scale, such as undesignated landscape. *Susceptibility to change: Landscape likely to tolerate the change proposed, with appropriate mitigation.
Negligible
Value: Typically of very low importance and rarity, local scale, such as degraded landscape identified for enhancement in policies. *Susceptibility to change: Landscape likely to readily absorb the
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 18
Sensitivity
Description change proposed.
*The judgement concerning susceptibility to change is made by considering the nature/characteristics of the development and receiving landscape, following evaluation of value and prior to the assessment of effects.
5.3.4 Assessment of Effects The criteria and threshold matrices used to assess the magnitude of impact and significance of landscape and visual effects are set out below: Table 5-3
Assigning Magnitude of Landscape Impact
Magnitude Description of Impact Major Adverse
Loss of landscape character and/or quality and integrity of landscape designation; severe damage to key landscape characteristics, features and elements.
Major Beneficial
Large scale or major improvement of landscape quality; extensive restoration or enhancement; major improvement of landscape attribute quality.
Moderate Adverse
Loss of landscape character, but not adversely affecting the integrity of landscape designation; partial loss of/damage to key landscape characteristics, features or elements.
Moderate Beneficial
Benefit to, or addition of, key landscape characteristics, features or elements; improvement of landscape attribute quality.
Minor Adverse
Some measurable change in landscape attributes, quality or vulnerability; minor loss of, or alteration to, one (maybe more) key landscape characteristics, features or elements.
Minor Beneficial
Minor benefit to, or addition of, one (maybe more) key landscape characteristics, features or elements; some beneficial impact on landscape attribute or a reduced risk of negative impact occurring.
Negligible Adverse
Very minor loss or detrimental alteration to one or more landscape characteristics, features or elements.
Negligible Beneficial
Very minor benefit to or positive addition of one or more landscape characteristics, features or elements.
No Change
No loss or alteration of landscape characteristics, features or elements; no observable adverse or beneficial impact.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 19
Table 5-4 Determining the Significance of Effect
Sensitivity
Magnitude of Impact No Change
Negligible
Minor
Moderate
Major
Negligible
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral or Slight
Neutral or Slight
Slight
Low
Neutral
Neutral or Slight
Neutral or Slight
Slight
Slight or Moderate
Medium
Neutral
Neutral or Slight
Slight
Moderate
Moderate or Large
High
Neutral
Slight
Slight or Moderate
Moderate or Large
Large or Very Large
Very High
Neutral
Slight
Moderate or Large
Large or Very Large
Very Large
Note: Significance is derived as a product of Magnitude and Sensitivity, as set out above. Where more than one significance outcome is possible, professional judgement is used to determine that which is most appropriate, on a case by case basis.
Table 5-5
Definitions for Significance of Effect
Significance of Effect
Description
Very Large
Only adverse effects are normally assigned this level of significance. They represent key factors in the decision-making process. These effects are generally, but not exclusively, associated with sites or features of international, national or regional importance that are likely to suffer most damaging impact and loss of resource integrity. However, a major change in site or feature of local importance may also enter this category.
Large
These beneficial or adverse effects are considered to be very important considerations and are likely to be material in the decision-making process.
Moderate
Those beneficial or adverse effects may be important, but are not likely to be key decision making factors. The cumulative effects of such factors may influence the decision-making if they lead to an increase in the overall adverse effect on a particular resource or receptor.
Slight
These beneficial or adverse effects may be raised as local factors. They are unlikely to be critical in the decision making process, but are important in enhancing the subsequent design of the Project.
Neutral
No effects or those that are beneath levels of perception, within the normal bounds of variation or within the margin of forecasting error.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 20
5.4
Description of Existing Baseline Conditions
5.4.1 Landscape The site and immediate surroundings are not covered by any landscape designations. Natural England has produced a landscape character assessment of England entitled ‘Countryside Character’, 1999 (Ref 5-9). Land to the north west of Bicester is defined by the transition between National Character Areas 107 and 108, the ‘Cotswolds’ and ‘Upper Thames Clay Vales’, respectively. More locally, the area forms part of the ‘Oxfordshire Estate Farmlands’ Character Area identified in Cherwell District Landscape Assessment (1995) (Ref 5-6). This is broadly described as having a rolling landform, with underlying limestone geology, characterised by a distinctive pattern of woodlands and mixed farmland - much of which is associated with 18th Century parkland. Most recently, the Oxfordshire Wildlife and Landscape Study (2004) (Ref 5-7), places the site within ‘Wooded Estatelands’ Landscape Character Type, with the following key characteristics:
‘Rolling topography with localised steep slopes.
Large blocks of ancient woodland and mixed plantations of variable sizes.
Large parklands and mansion houses.
A regularly shaped field pattern dominated by arable fields.
Small villages with strong vernacular character.’
Within this Character Type, the land near Bicester is classified as ‘Middleton Stoney’ Landscape Character Area, described as follows: ‘The area is dominated by large arable fields and localised improved grassland. There are smaller grass fields around villages, particularly Bletchington and Kirtlington. Woodland is a strong landscape element, and large woodland blocks are associated with the parklands and estates. It is mainly ancient semi-natural woodland, with species such as ash, oak, hazel, and field maple, as well as mixed plantations. Throughout the landscape, there are belts of young mixed and coniferous plantations next to roadside hedges and they often function as field boundaries. Hedgerow trees such as ash, sycamore and occasionally oak are found in some roadside hedges, but they are sparser to the north where there is more intensive arable cropping. In parts there are dense corridors of willow and ash, belts of semi-natural woodland and poplar plantations bordering watercourses. Hedgerows vary from tall, thick species-rich hedges with shrubs such as wayfaring tree, dogwood, hazel, field maple, spindle and wild privet through to low, gappy internal field hedges. Parklands are a prominent feature throughout and they include NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 21
Middleton, Bignell and Tusmore Parks in the north and Kirtlington and Bletchington Parks in the south.’ The landscape strategy for the Wooded Estatelands, within which the Middleton Stoney area lies, is to safeguard and enhance the characteristic landscape of parklands, estates, woodlands, hedgerows and unspoilt villages.
Local Landscape Character In addition to the landscape character assessments outlined above, WYG Planning & Environment was commissioned by Cherwell District Council to produce ‘Bicester Landscape Sensitivity and Capacity Assessment’ (Ref 5-8) which forms part of the evidence base for the Cherwell Local Plan Submission. The landscape of the masterplan site is described as follows: ‘The site comprises a relatively flat landform ranging between 80m and 95m AOD. The area is dissected by the Bicester to Banbury railway line passing through the centre of it in a south east to north west orientation; Bicester Road/Bucknell Road runs parallel to the railway line and creates a wedge of land in the middle of the site which is isolated from the surrounding area by the railway line and road. There are a number of streams and drainage ditches passing through the northern area providing field drainage, some of these converge in the northern area of the site and pass through the adjacent housing area to the south east and feed into Bure Park Nature Reserve. This drainage network provides a slightly more varied topography to the north of the railway line than to the south. There is one Public Footpath passing through the area in a south east to north west orientation, again almost parallel with the railway line. This route enables views over the surrounding arable. lands to the south of the footpath although views north are truncated by the elevated alignment of the railway line. Views are available south as far as Himley Farm in the southern area of the site before the land falls slightly towards Bignell Park. The site is crossed by a number of low voltage transmission lines although these are primarily within the southern half of the site. Whilst these are detracting within the views, they are not dominantly visible due to the deciduous plantations which screen them in places.’ Broad-scale visual considerations are described as follows: ‘Visibility of the site comprises sensitive and non sensitive receptors. The residential area to the south east has glimpsed views into the area through the existing structure planting along the residential area boundary and roadside verge of the A4095 although these views are not prominent. The majority of viewers are users of the roads located on the site boundaries. These viewers receive intermittent sequential views through hedgerow vegetation and field gates over the arable NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 22
land. The railway line enables elevated views from the route as it passes through the centre of the site with most of the site area visible.’ The sensitivity and capacity assessment identifies the masterplan site has having medium-high capacity for residential, employment and recreation development, which is defined as the capacity to accommodate development as long as recognition is given to protect the landscape character and the visual resource of the site. Specifically, the assessment suggests maintaining the visual separation with outlying satellite settlements such as Bucknell. In terms of general landscape maintenance/management, the assessment suggests enhancement of the railway line as a wildlife corridor; development of improved structure planting along site boundaries; improvements to the water courses, including introduction of native species planting; and improved access through the area creating a series of footpaths from the adjacent housing estates. As part of the landscape impact assessment process for the NW Bicester development project, a landscape character assessment has been prepared for land to the north west of Bicester based on the principles set out in ‘Landscape Character Assessment Guidance for England and Scotland’, produced by the Countryside Agency and Scottish Natural Heritage, in 2002 (Ref 5-9). In line with this guidance, landscape character areas have been identified and key landscape characteristics defined for each. The sensitivity of each landscape character area to the masterplan has also been identified, based on the criteria set out in the methodology, above. Local landscape character areas that have been identified, each with a distinctive sense of place, in the form of key characteristics, as illustrated and described below. This provides the local landscape character context for the Masterplan Site:
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 23
Figure 6-1 Local Landscape Character Areas
Caversfield Valleys and Ridges
Distinctive valley and ridge landform.
Valleys defined by tree lined watercourses, woodland blocks and relatively steep fields predominantly laid to pasture.
Mixed farmland on ridges, with fields bounded by established hedgerows and woodland blocks.
Settlement comprising the historic, stone built village of Caversfield, including Home Farm and the Anglo-Saxon St Lawrence’s Church (Listed Buildings), with the church tower forming a visible element in the local landscape.
Generally strong sense of enclosure due to characteristic landform, vegetation and settlement edges.
Based on the criteria set out in Section 5.3 above, landscape value is considered to be low. The setting of St Lawrence’s Church and Home Farm are key considerations for any future development within this character area. This setting is currently defined in large part by undeveloped agricultural land with associated rural qualities, in turn allowing views from these areas to the church tower, such that built development without adequate open buffers would be incongruous. Development edges made up of soft landscape proposals and sensitively designed built form have the potential to conserve and NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 24
enhance the current setting of historic features and would respond well to the existing tree and woodland cover, described above. The strong landscape structure and general sense of enclosure across the landscape are such that with careful consideration for retention and enhancement of local features (described above) development could be accommodated without resulting in disruption to the local landscape pattern. Overall, taking into account the existing landscape and scope for mitigation, this landscape is considered to have a low sensitivity. Bucknell Ridge
Ridgeline defined by subtly raised landform, with land falling away to local watercourses and Bicester urban edge.
Large, rectilinear fields, predominantly in arable use.
Established hedgerows with hedgerow trees.
Settlement limited to scattered farmsteads of clustered farm buildings.
Open, expansive views framed by established hedgerow vegetation.
Based on the criteria set out in Section 5.3 above, landscape value is considered to be low. Development in this raised area has the potential to form an obtrusive element within the landscape. However, if new built form responds to the local pattern of clustered settlement, buffered by tree planting and separated by open land, development could occur without undue urbanising effects in the wider landscape. Overall, taking into account the existing landscape and scope for mitigation, this landscape is considered to have a low sensitivity. Bucknell Valley Corridor
Shallow valley depression, falling between local ridgelines.
Landscape pattern heavily influenced by linear communications and drainage features, with generally narrow, elongated fields separated by communications and drainage corridors.
Farmland comprising mixture of fields in arable and pastoral use, bounded by established hedgerows and copses.
Settlement defined by a mixture of scattered farmsteads and, nearer the urban edge, modern offices /depots.
Strong sense of enclosure due to vegetation cover, railway embankment and settlement edges.
This enclosed landscape offers limited views across the area and, with careful consideration for existing vegetation; development could be accommodated without resulting in significant disruption to the local NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 25
landscape characteristics. There is considerable scope to enhance communications/drainage corridors through landscape proposals that improve amenity value, particularly where there is currently/could be public access. Overall, taking into account the existing landscape and scope for mitigation, this landscape is considered to have a low sensitivity. Himley Farmland Slopes
Gently sloping farmland, predominantly in arable use, interspersed with woodland shelter belts.
Medium to large-scale fields bounded by established hedgerows with hedgerow trees.
Settlement limited to isolated farmsteads, including the historic Himley Farm buildings (the barns are Listed Buildings), connected by hedgerow lined tracks.
A number of overhead power lines, which form urbanising elements, traverse the area.
Based on the criteria set out in Section 5.3 above, landscape value is considered to be low. This gently sloping, enclosed landscape, offers limited views across the area, and with careful consideration for local features (described above), development could be accommodated without resulting in disruption to the local landscape pattern. Whilst Listed Buildings present a constraint, their setting could be respected through careful layout of proposals, retention of landscape features and structural planting, where appropriate. Overall, taking into account the existing landscape and scope for mitigation, this landscape is considered to have a low sensitivity.
5.5
Design and Mitigation The masterplan responds to landscape character, as expressed through landscape character assessments (set out above). This would be achieved in large part through built form in response to the locality and creating a network of multi-functional green space/infrastructure (including enhancement of public access, watercourses/drainage features and biodiversity). This would include provision of appropriate open land/landscape buffers at key locations, namely land around Caversfield and Bucknell and bordering the existing urban edge of Bicester along Howes Lane.
5.6
Assessment of Effects The proposed development would not lie within a valued landscape, as expressed through designation. However, as described above, the site is subject to planning policy in respect of landscape character and local landscape characteristics should therefore be taken into
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 26
account. The proposed development site falls at the transition between National Character Areas 107 and 108, the ‘Cotswolds’ and ‘Upper Thames Clay Vales’, and within the ‘Wooded Estatelands’ of the Oxfordshire Wildlife and Landscape Study. The landscape characteristics exhibited more locally relate to those of the character areas defined as part of this strategic assessment. The implications of the masterplan for each of these landscape character areas are set out below: Caversfield Valleys and Ridges Whilst farmland would be replaced with new settlement, landscape structure/enclosure would be retained/enhanced through greeninfrastructure proposals. In addition, vistas across the landscape to the tower of St Lawrence’s Church would be retained and the masterplan proposals would give increased public access to such vistas. As a result there would not be significant disruption to the local landscape. Bucknell Ridge Whilst farmland would be replaced with new settlement, a separation with Bucknell would remain in place, landscape structure/enclosure would be retained/enhanced, new built form would respond to the local pattern of clustered settlement, and views (particularly those from areas with public access, such as public rights of way near Bucknell) would be buffered by tree planting. As a result development would occur without undue landscape effects. Bucknell Valley Corridor The enclosed landscape offers limited views across the area such that development would be readily assimilated within the landscape, and communications/drainage corridors/watercourses would be enhanced through green infrastructure proposals. As a result development would occur without significant disruption to the local landscape characteristics. Himley Farmland Slopes The setting of historic buildings would be respected through careful layout of proposals and planted buffers. Where proposed employment uses, off Howes Lane, have the greatest potential to result in discordance with semi-rural landscape characteristics, appropriate buffers of open land/green-infrastructure would be in place to avoid or minimise such impacts. As a result development would occur without undue landscape effects. The analysis above illustrates that the proposals are consistent with the landscape strategy of the Oxfordshire Wildlife and Landscape NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 27
Study7, which identifies the need to safeguard and enhance characteristic woodlands, hedgerows and unspoilt villages, and Bicester Landscape Sensitivity and Capacity Assessment8, which suggests maintaining the visual separation with outlying satellite settlements such as Bucknell, enhancement of the railway corridor, development of improved structure planting along site boundaries, enhancement of water courses, and improved access through the area. Overall the magnitude of impact is considered to be minor adverse. The overall significance of landscape effects, taking account of the low sensitivity and adverse magnitude of impact, is considered to be neutral.
5.7
Cumulative Effects Other committed developments in the vicinity of Bicester are separated from the existing urban area or other infrastructure such that there would not be cumulative impact on the local landscape or visual amenity north west of Bicester.
5.8
Summary This chapter considers the implications of the masterplan for the local landscape. The masterplan site is not afforded protection through landscape designation and local landscape character is defined by a rolling topography, mixed farmland enclosed by woodlands and hedgerows, and villages exhibiting strong vernacular character, near the existing north western urban edge of Bicester. The masterplan responds to these characteristics and as a result it is considered that the masterplan would not result in significant landscape effects.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 28
6
Ecology
6.1
Introduction This chapter assesses the likely significant effects of the proposed development of the Masterplan in terms of Ecology and Nature Conservation. This chapter is supported by the reports presented in Appendix 6A to 6I. Appendices 6A to 6I presents the full baseline information relating to Ecology and Nature Conservation. The baseline against which the likely significant effects are to be assessed is the current environmental conditions at and surrounding, the study area, which comprises and area of land to the north west of Bicester, Oxfordshire. The Site boundary is illustrated on Drawings 61 to 6-3. The study area has been widened further to include particular species or species groups of conservation concern (see Appendix 6A for further details). This SER addresses the construction phase and the completed development, or operational phase. The impact assessment elements of this SER have been undertaken in accordance with the guidance set out in the Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management’s (IEEM) Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment (2006) (‘the IEEM Guidelines’) (Ref 6-1), in order to provide Cherwell District Council with “clear and concise information about the likely significant ecological effects associated with the project” (IEEM, 2006). It is noted that since publication of these guidelines IEEM has become Chartered and they are now known as the Chartered Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management. However, since the guidelines pre-date the change they are referred to as IEEM guidelines throughout this Chapter. The surveys that underpin the ecological impact assessment were undertaken during the period 2010 to 2013; see Appendix 6A for more details.
6.2
Regulatory and Policy Framework This impact assessment has been undertaken in accordance with current international and national legislation, and national, regional and local plans and policies relating to nature conservation in the context of the proposed Masterplan development. A summary of the relevant legislation and policies, the requirements of these policies and the proposed Masterplan development response has been provided in Table 6-1 below.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 29
Table 6-1
Ecology Regulatory and Policy Framework
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester Masterplan Response
Habitats Directive (92/43/EEC) as transposed into UK legislation by ‘The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010’
The Regulations provide for the designation of both Special Protection Areas (SPAs) (first established under the Birds Directive, 1979) and Special Areas for Conservation (SACs) as part of the Natura 2000 network of protected areas across Europe.
There are no Natura 2000 sites within 10km of the proposed Masterplan development, thus development on this site is unlikely to have any effects on sites of European importance. The ponds that support a breeding population of great crested newt are retained within the Masterplan Layout with buffer zones that are connected to green space. The Masterplan layout also retains the confirmed and possible bat roosts and the commuting routes and foraging corridors that link the confirmed and potential roost sites both on and off site. Otters are also EPS, but their presence on site has not been confirmed.
The Directive promotes the maintenance of biodiversity in Europe. The Regulations 2010 constitute the UK government’s implementation of the Directive in England and Wales.
The Wildlife and Countryside Act (1981), as amended This Act is the principle mechanism for the legislative protection of wildlife in Great Britain.
The Regulations also provide protection for European Protected Species (EPS) from the deliberate capture, killing or disturbance. It is also an absolute offence to destroy or damage the resting site or breeding site of an EPS.
The Act provides for the designation of Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), which are selected as the best national examples of habitat types, sites with notable species and sites of geological importance. Schedules 1-4 of the Act provide for the protection of wild birds. Schedule 5 of the Act details protection of other animal species. Full protection is given under Section 9 of the Act to certain animals listed on Schedule 5, including all species of bats and great crested newt. Partial protection under Section 9 is given to certain other species, including all common species of reptile. Badgers are listed on Schedule 6 of the Act which
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
There are no SSSIs within the Masterplan site. There are five SSSIs within 5km of the Masterplan site, and a further nine within 10km. Air quality impacts on all SSSIs within 10km of the proposed development arising from traffic and emissions from the Energy Centre(s) would be assessed as part of future impact assessments once data are available. Species protected by the Act recorded within the Masterplan site are great crested newt, common lizard, grass snake, bats, barn owl, and badgers. No protected plant or invertebrate species have been recorded within the Masterplan site. As identified above (with Page 30
Policy/Legislation
National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act 1949 Local Nature Reserves (LNRs) are designated by Local Authorities under Section 21 of this act as amended by Schedule 11 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006. Countryside Rights of Way Act (2000)
Requirements
NW Bicester Masterplan Response
outlaws certain methods of taking or killing animals, where necessary. Schedule 8 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act details protection for plants and fungi.
respect to the Habitats Directive) the Masterplan incorporates measures to safeguard the great crested newt and bat populations. The badger setts would be retained and protected, and mitigation measures that would be implemented during construction would ensure no reptiles would be killed or injured. Measures would be implemented during construction to ensure that nesting birds and in particular barn owls are not disturbed.
LNRs are places with a wildlife or geological interest of local value that are capable of being managed with the conservation of nature and/or the maintenance of public access as priority concerns.
The northern boundary of Bure Park LNR is 25m from the Masterplan site. The implementation of standard measures to protect water quality during construction and as part of the sustainable drainage system (SuDS) would also ensure that no adverse effects on the River Bure would arise as a result of the proposals.
This Act (2000) gives greater protection to SSSIs and strengthens wildlife enforcement legislation by the introduction of the offence of ‘reckless disturbance’. The Act also requires Government Departments to have regard to biodiversity and conservation; Section 74 of the Act required lists of habitats and species of Principal Importance to be produced, for which conservation steps should be taken or promoted. The requirement to prepare such lists of habitats and species was extended by the Natural
See response to Wildlife and Countryside Act (above) and the NERC Act (below).
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 31
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester Masterplan Response
Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006 (see below). Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act (2006)
The NERC Act places a duty upon public bodies to consider enhancement of biodiversity within all of their actions. Sections 40 and 41 of this Act superseded Section 74 of the CROW Act. Section 41 lists flora, fauna and habitats considered by the Secretary of State to be of Principal Importance for conserving biodiversity. In addition, this Act provides for those species that were previously identified within the UK Biodiversity Action Plan (UKBAP) and the relevant Local Biodiversity Action Plans (LBAPs) to be considered as biodiversity conservation priorities. The UKBAP has been superseded by the England BAP (for BAPs see Section 2.3 below).
The protection and enhancement of UKBAP and LBAP habitats and species have been considered as part of this assessment. Section 41 and UKBAP habitats and species of Principal Importance recorded within the Masterplan Site include: hedgerows; common lizard, great crested newts, brown hare, hedgehog, 13 bird species (see Table 6-2) and a number of bat species including noctule, soprano pipistrelle, and brown longeared bat.
Protection of Badgers Act (1992)
Badgers are extensively protected by the Protection of Badgers Act (1992) which consolidates the legislation specific to badgers. The Act makes it an offence to wilfully take, kill, injure or ill-treat a badger; to obstruct, destroy, or damage in any part, a badger’s sett; or to disturb badgers within a sett.
All of the badger setts recorded within the Masterplan Site would be retained and protected within areas of green space.
The European Water Framework Directive (WFD) (2000)
The European Water Framework Directive came into force in December 2000 and became part of UK law in December 2003.
The implementation of standard measures to protect water quality within the Masterplan site would ensure that no adverse effects on the River Bure would arise as a result of the proposals. SuDS would also ensure that water quality is protected once the site was
The purpose of the Directive is to establish a framework for the protection of inland surface waters, transitional waters, coastal waters and NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 32
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester Masterplan Response
groundwater.
operational. In addition the watercourses within the site would be maintained within a 60 metre-wide buffer of semi-natural vegetation that would enable the water to follow a natural path. These measures would ensure that the Masterplan does not conflict with the requirements of the WFD.
To meet the objectives of the WFD, Member States have established River Basin Districts and developed Plans and Programmes of Measures that detail the actions that need to be taken within each District. The overall aim is for the ‘water bodies’ and ‘protected areas’ within each River Basin District to achieve 'good ecological status' by 2015. The Hedgerows Regulations (1997)
The Hedgerows Regulations (1997) provide protection for ‘important’ hedgerows for which replanting is no substitute. The ‘importance’ of a hedgerow depends upon a number of archaeological, wildlife and landscape criteria.
There are 14 hedgerows within the proposed development, of which 11 are considered to be ‘important’ using the wildlife and landscape criteria. The design includes for the retention of the majority of the hedgerows including those that are ‘important’ within wide bands of seminatural vegetation.
Planning Policy Statement: Eco-towns. A Supplement to Planning Policy 1
Key features of PPS1 that seek to safeguard biodiversity include:
43% of the Masterplan Site has been allocated to green space.
ET14 Green Infrastructure sets that forty percent of the eco-town’s total area should be allocated to green space, of which at least half should be open to the public. Ecotown applications will also need to demonstrate a range of types of green space. These should be multi-functional, including the supporting of wildlife.
Off-site compensation would be provided to offset the impacts on farmland birds. Significant areas of green space would be created within the Masterplan site. Overall, this would deliver a net gain to biodiversity.
This policy sets out the minimum standards for Eco-town development to ensure that they are exemplars of good practice and provide sustainable, low carbon living. It states that the design of eco-towns should take full account of the impact on local eco-systems, mitigating negative impacts as far as possible and maximising opportunities to enhance their local environments
ET16 Biodiversity stipulates that the eco-town will need to demonstrate a net gain in local biodiversity and planning permission may not be granted for eco-town proposals which have a significant adverse effect on
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
No impact is envisaged on Internationally designated sites within 10km of the Masterplan site (as outlined above with respect to European designated sites). Air quality impacts on Nationally designated sites within 10km of the Masterplan site arising from traffic and emissions from the Energy Centre(s) would Page 33
Policy/Legislation
National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) The NPPF sets out how the planning system should protect and enhance nature conservation interests. Its intention is to consolidate previous planning guidance (including Planning Policy Statement 9 (PPS9), the previous guidance on the protection of biodiversity through the planning system) into a single document. Cherwell Local Plan 2014 Local plan policies that are of relevance to this site are contained within this Local Plan.
Requirements
NW Bicester Masterplan Response
internationally designated nature conservation sites or Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI). The ecotown development should include a strategy for conserving and enhancing local biodiversity, and this is to accompany the planning application.
be assessed as part of future impact assessments once data are available (as outlined above with respect to SSSIs).
A key function of the NPPF is to promote sustainable development whilst ensuring that planning decisions should protect, and try to improve, wildlife and the habitats they live in. The framework sets out nationally important issues whilst leaving other planning matters to be decided upon by local authorities and communities through the presumption of sustainable development.
The Masterplan retains and protects the most valuable features of the site; the hedgerows, River Bure and its tributaries, the mature woodlands, ponds, badger setts and bat roosts. There are also opportunities to enhance the value of the newly created areas of green space for biodiversity. Overall, the Masterplan together with the Biodiversity Offsetting will deliver a net gain in biodiversity.
In the Local Plan the Masterplan Site is known as Bicester 1, relevant sections of the policy that relates to this site are:
The Masterplan retains and protects the most valuable features of the site (see response to NPPF above).
Preservation and enhancement of habitats and species on site, particularly protected species and habitats and creation and management of new habitats to achieve an overall net gain in biodiversity, including the creation of a local nature reserve. Sensitive management of recreational access to open space provision to secure recreation and health benefits alongside
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
The proposals include the creation of significant areas of green space, including: a Nature Reserve supporting wetland habitats, trees, shrubs and grassland; a woodland fitness trail; a Country Park; SuDS features, and an wetland waste water treatment facility. Off-site compensation would be provided for farmland birds. The four key principals of retention, creation, enhancement and offsetting will ensure that a net gain in biodiversity is achieved.
Page 34
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester Masterplan Response
biodiversity gains.
A Landscape and Habitats Management Plan to be provided to manage habitats on site and to ensure this is integral to wider landscape management.
6.3
A Landscape and Habitats Management Plan would be produced as part of the detailed design.
Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plans
6.3.1 England’s Biodiversity Strategy The document entitled ‘Biodiversity 2020: A Strategy for England’s Wildlife and Ecosystem Services’ sets out England’s Biodiversity Strategy. Its aim is to halt the loss of biodiversity, support healthy well-functioning ecosystems and establish coherent ecological networks. It takes a large landscape scale approach to conservation on both the land and at sea. It identifies the need to establish Local Nature Partnerships to deliver the Strategy through community involvement. It supports the establishment of Nature Improvement Areas, measures to increase the number of SSSIs in favourable conservation status and the creation of a network of Marine Protection Areas. It also identifies that improvement and protection of the natural environment are part of the planning system and identifies that biodiversity offsetting will be piloted to deliver planning policy more effectively. It promotes flood and erosion management to conserve the natural environment and improve biodiversity. Whilst the Masterplan site is not within a Nature Improvement Area there will be opportunities as part of the development proposal to enhance the biodiversity value of the retained habitats within the Masterplan site and to create new habitats. Biodiversity offsetting will also be used to compensate for the impact on farmland birds.
6.3.2 Local Biodiversity Action Plans Local BAPs relevant to the proposed development are the Oxfordshire BAP and Cherwell BAP.
Oxfordshire BAP The Oxfordshire BAP (Ref 6-2) identifies Conservation Target Areas (CTAs) for the maintenance, restoration and creation of BAP habitats within the county. Those habitats relevant to the Masterplan include woodland, hedgerows and rivers. Biodiversity targets have been created for these habitats within the CTAs. The Masterplan Site is not within or in close proximity to any of the identified CTAs. There are NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 35
four CTAs located within 5km of the proposed development. The nearest CTA is the Tusmore and Shelswell Parks with Stoke Lyne Woodlands CTA located approximately 1km to the north west. This CTA is designated for its parkland, lowland mixed deciduous woodland (including ancient woodland), and associated habitats including large parkland lakes, ponds and wet woodland. The River Ray CTA, located approximately 2.5km to the south-east of the site, largely comprises lowland meadow and wet grassland habitats. Kirtlington and Bletchingdon Park and Woods CTA, is located approximately 3.9km south west of the site at its closest point. The area comprises parkland, lowland mixed deciduous woodland, fen, swamp and wet woodland and limestone grassland. Otmoor CTA is located 4.2km to the south of the Masterplan site and comprises floodplain grazing marsh, reedbed, hedgerows, ponds and woodlands.
Cherwell BAP The Cherwell Corporate BAP 2013-2014 (Ref 6-3) sets out how the District Council will fulfil its duties under the NERC Act and meet other biodiversity legislation. It identifies that biodiversity is an important consideration in the planning process and that this will be set out in the Local Plan. It also identifies that the CTA’s are important areas of high ecological value and supports the development of the Local Nature Partnership.
6.4
Methodology
6.4.1 Introduction The methodology used to carry out the impact assessment is based upon the IEEM Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment. In accordance with the IEEM Guidelines, an assessment has been carried out which collates all of the existing baseline information through a desk-based study and field surveys, and predicts all of the significant effects of the Masterplan development on ‘Key Ecological Receptors’, with mitigation. Where significant adverse effects are predicted, the assessment presents measures to mitigate these effects such that the residual impacts of the Masterplan would not be significant. In addition, measures have been developed to address the legislative and policy requirements associated with those protected species and valuable habitats for which significant effects are not expected, but which nevertheless warrant mitigation. Measures to enhance biodiversity in the area affected by the proposals and those which help to deliver Action Plan and local policy targets are also recommended. The Masterplan also provides opportunities for habitat creation and enhancement, incorporating ecological features of benefit to species already present with the Site, and habitats and species which have currently not been recorded but for which an NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 36
overall benefit can be provided. This together with Biodiversity Offsetting will ensure that a net gain in local biodiversity is provided by the Masterplan, and is key to its design. This approach is considered to represent best practice.
6.4.2 Consultations Consultations were undertaken with statutory and non-statutory nature conservation organisations, including: Natural England; the Environment Agency; Oxfordshire County Council; Cherwell District Council; the NW Bicester Eco-Town BioRegional Development Coordinator; Bicester Town Council; Thames Valley Police; and Berkshire, Buckinghamshire and Oxfordshire Wildlife Trust. Consultation meetings were held in 2013 on the 14th May, 8th July, 24th September and 12th November. A Site visit was undertaken on the 2nd December with representatives of these organisations to discuss the results of the ecological surveys, implications for the emerging Masterplan, and opportunities for habitat creation and enhancements. Measures that were discussed that have been incorporated into the Masterplan are identified below. Consultees agreed with the scope of the ecological surveys and desk study assessment that has been undertaken to inform the impact assessment. It was agreed that the habitats and features of greatest value to biodiversity within the Masterplan site should be retained with appropriate buffer zones as part of the proposals. Surveys have revealed that these habitats and features include: the hedgerows; watercourses; woodlands; ponds; badger setts; confirmed bat roosts and bat commuting routes/foraging corridors. Care has been taken to ensure that the hedgerows and watercourses continue to provide wildlife corridors that are linked to larger areas of green space. The principal of creating green spaces that are ‘inter-woven’ into the development was agreed. The need to provide dark corridors for nocturnal species was also identified to enable these species to cross the site safely. It was accepted at an early stage that the Masterplan site was of value to farmland birds and that these species could not be accommodated within the Masterplan design. Therefore, in order to achieve a net gain in biodiversity it would be necessary to enhance the value of land that is off-site for farmland birds. The Masterplan has sought to create a network of green spaces linked by green corridors that would support a range of native species in order to achieve a net gain in biodiversity. Consultees requested that areas be created for biodiversity. In response to this request, the Masterplan provides a Country Park and Nature Reserve; it also has space for a wetland waste water treatment facility, green burial sites, a woodland fitness trail and SuDS features that would provide benefits to biodiversity. NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 37
6.4.3 Study Area The baseline survey information has been established by combining the results of field surveys that were undertaken by Arup and Hyder. The Arup surveys were undertaken before the Masterplan site boundary was finalised and therefore the survey area that was adopted by Arup was larger than the final Masterplan site. It comprised the Masterplan site and the fields immediately adjacent (to the west and north west, extending up to 650 m). For great crested newts the survey area was increased further to include waterbodies that were within 500m of the extended Masterplan site boundary. Access was not available to all ponds within 500m of the site boundary; as such the suitability of ponds where access was not available was assessed using a combination of inspections from adjacent land and aerial photographs. For bats, the survey area was extended to include a known bat roost site at St Laurence Church, Caversfield. This church is north of the B4100 which is the minor road adjacent to the northern boundary of the Masterplan site. The desk study extended up to approximately 5km from the centre of the Masterplan site in order to identify records of protected species, species of conservation concern and non-statutory designated sites of nature conservation importance. A distance of up to 10km was searched for European and nationally designated sites. These survey/study areas make up the Zone of Influence (ZoI) for the Masterplan site. The ZoI describes the area over which the activities associated with the Masterplan could influence ecological resources in the wider area.
6.4.4 Establishment of Baseline Conditions The baseline conditions have been established through a desk-based assessment which obtained existing records relating to habitats and species of nature conservation concern both within the Masterplan Site and within the 5km search area defined on the basis of the ZoI for the development. Records were obtained from Thames Valley Environmental Records Centre (TVERC), Oxford Ornithological Society, Banbury Ornithological Society, and the Oxfordshire branch of the Barn Owl Conservation Network. The Oxfordshire Bat Group was also consulted with regard to likely bat species present in the local area. The invertebrate specialist consulted the County Butterfly and Moth recorders in order to obtain species records for the NW Bicester Eco-development and the wider area. In addition, the MAGIC website (Ref 6-4) was reviewed for designated sites within the ZoI. Detailed results of the desk-based assessment are included in Appendix 6A. Field surveys were also undertaken within the Masterplan Site and the surrounding habitats, including a Phase 1 Habitat and protected NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 38
species walkover survey undertaken in Spring 2010 to identify any habitats likely to be of conservation value, and to investigate the presence (or likely presence) of protected species of plants and/or animals. A survey to update the Phase 1 Habitat information was undertaken by Hyder Consulting staff in October 2013. The 2010 survey revealed the need for more detailed surveys to inform the assessment and the design of the Masterplan. Consequently, further surveys were undertaken for terrestrial and aquatic invertebrates, white-clawed crayfish, great crested newt, breeding birds, wintering birds, badgers (including a bait-marking study), bats (including emergence surveys of potential roost sites and bat activity surveys), dormice, water voles and otters. A botanical survey was also undertaken of the hedgerows, areas of grassland, and the mature woodlands. The additional field surveys were completed between May and October 2010, with further surveys undertaken in April and May 2011 to investigate the presence of great crested newt and in October 2012 to ascertain the quality of the water on site. Detailed methodologies and results for the various surveys can be found in Appendices 6B to 6I.
6.4.5 Assessment of Effects Valuation of Ecological Receptors In accordance with the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2011 (referred to as the ‘EIA Regulations 2011’), and the guidance set out in the IEEM Guidelines, it is considered inappropriate to attempt to investigate in detail all potential ecological issues in relation to the Masterplan Site. It is therefore necessary, under the Regulations, to focus on those activities that could potentially generate significant ecological effects on ‘Key Ecological Receptors’. In accordance with the British Standard BS42020:2013 Biodiversity- Code of Practice for Planning and Biodiversity this assessment has followed the IEEM guidelines. In order to determine the likelihood of a significant ecological effect, it is first necessary to identify whether a receptor is sufficiently valuable for a significant effect upon it to be material in decisionmaking. To achieve this, where possible, animal species and their populations have been valued on the basis of a combination of their rarity, status and distribution, using contextual information where it exists. Habitats and plant communities are evaluated against existing selection criteria, wherever possible (such as those developed to aid the designation of SSSIs or non-statutory designated sites). Only those receptors that it was considered could experience significant effects (i.e. impacts that could adversely affect the integrity of the habitat or the favourable conservation status of a species’ local population), and which were identified as being of sufficient value to NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 39
be material to decision-making (i.e. of ‘District/Borough’ level importance or above), have been classified as being ‘Key Ecological Receptors’ and have been considered in the impact assessment. The habitats and features within the ZoI are known as the ‘ecological receptors’. The nature conservation importance/value of each of the ‘ecological receptors’ considers the protected species and species of conservation concern that they may support, to avoid pseudoreplication. For example, the importance for species associated with the hedgerows (breeding birds, reptiles and hedgehogs) has been taken into account as part of categorising the overall importance/value of that habitat. The following geographic frame of reference has been used to determine the value of ecological receptors: International; National; County/Regional; District/Borough; and Parish/ Neighbourhood. Those sites, habitats and/or species classified at ‘District/Borough’ level and above are considered to be sufficiently valuable for a significant effect upon them to be material in decision making. Where habitats and species within the Masterplan Site do not constitute ‘Key Ecological Receptors’ based upon their nature conservation value, and have not formed part of the detailed assessment, they may still warrant consideration during the design and mitigation of the Masterplan on the basis of their legal protection, their implications for environmental (and related) policies and plans, or other issues such as animal welfare issues. Therefore, consideration has separately been given to these ‘Other ecological receptors requiring mitigation’. The results of the ecological valuation process are presented in Section 6.5 Description of Existing Baseline Conditions(below); this summarises the results of the desk study and field surveys, and identifies which of the resources are ‘Key Ecological Receptors’, which are ‘Other ecological receptors’ requiring mitigation, and those which have been scoped out of the assessment altogether. It is important to note that the selection of ‘Key Ecological Receptors’ has therefore been informed by an assessment not only of nature conservation value but also of the likely impacts upon them, the methodology for which is described below.
6.5
Description of Existing Baseline Conditions As described previously, a suite of surveys were undertaken within the Masterplan Site by Arup and Hyder, the results of which are presented in Appendices 6A to 6I and summarised below.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 40
6.5.1 Site description The Masterplan site comprised arable fields and fields supporting improved grassland. There were over 100 hedgerows within the Masterplan site, the majority of these were of high or very high ecological value and considered to be ‘important’ under the Wildlife and Landscape Criteria of the Hedgerows Regulations (1997). Several of the hedgerows supported mature trees. The mainline railway that links Bicester to Banbury divides the Masterplan site into two approximately equal areas. This railway line is on an embankment covered by trees and scrub. With the exception of the derelict buildings at Gowell Farm in the southern half of the Masterplan site, most of the farmsteads were occupied, with gardens that contained regularly mown (amenity) grassland, most also contained mature orchard trees. A number of semi-natural habitats were identified within the Masterplan site, these comprised: broadleaved woodland; speciesrich hedgerows; running water; and standing water. Bat and barn owl boxes had been installed on a number of trees, the majority of which were located on trees within the ownership of Home Farm. Several bat roosts were confirmed within trees and buildings (see Drawing 23). In 2010, a pair of barn owls was confirmed to be breeding within a nest box at the northern end of the site. In 2012 this nest box was relocated to a tree on the edge of woodland in the north of the Masterplan site. The hedgerows provide suitable foraging and commuting habitat for bats, and nesting habitat for birds, including species of conservation concern. The field margins were found to support common species of reptile, including small numbers of grass snakes and common lizards. These margins were found to be of limited value to invertebrates; however, two Nationally Scarce species, the Shaded Pug Moth and the Roesel’s Bush-cricket, were recorded within the field margins at the northern end of the site. Several large badger setts were recorded within the Masterplan site. Two of the ponds near Himley Farm were found to support great crested newts. The field surveys found no evidence of use of the hedgerows within or in close proximity to the Masterplan site by dormice. In summer 2010, the River Bure and tributaries which cross the proposed development did not hold water, and there was no evidence of use by protected species such as otters, water voles, or white-clawed crayfish. Water was recorded in these features subsequently and it appears that they are seasonally wet, more commonly holding water in the autumn/winter and into the spring, but largely dry in the summer months. The precise pattern of water flow is dependent on rainfall. More detail regarding particular receptors is provided below.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 41
6.5.2 Habitats The results of the air quality assessment that will be produced for the EIA will be used to determine whether the Energy Centre(s) and traffic associated with the development would have any effect on air quality on the statutory and non-statutory designated sites identified below. It is likely that mitigation would be provided to ensure that the Energy Centre(s) would not generate significant impacts on this receptor. The results of traffic modelling would also be required to assess whether there is the potential for impacts on these sites, and to assess the impact that the travel plan would have. In the absence of any information relating to impacts on air quality, these receptors have not been carried forward in the impact assessment for these reasons provided.
Ardley Cutting and Quarry SSSI At its closest point to the development, Ardley Cutting and Quarry SSSI are located approximately 370m from the boundary of the Masterplan Site. It is designated for its calcareous grasslands, woodland and wetland habitats which support a diverse invertebrate fauna including uncommon moth and butterfly species in Oxfordshire. The quarry ponds also contain significant populations of great crested newts. However, there is no public access to the railway land and the absence of hydrological links from the Masterplan Site to the features that support the newts. Other than air quality impacts that would be assessed during the EIA, it is not considered that the development proposal would have any effect on this SSSI and this site of National value has not been considered any further in this SER.
Ardley Trackways SSSI Ardley Trackways SSSI is located approximately 1.6km from the Masterplan Site boundary at its closest point, and is designated for its geological interest. There are no Public Rights of Way linking this SSSI to the Masterplan Site. It is considered unlikely that the proposals would have direct or indirect effects on this site of National importance. In the absence of any information relating to impacts on air quality, this SSSI has not been considered any further in this SER.
Stratton Audley Quarries SSSI and Local Wildlife Site (LWS) Stratton Audley Quarries SSSI, located approximately 1.9km from the Masterplan Site boundary, is designated for its geological interest. It has also been designated a Local Wildlife Site (LWS). Natural England assessments of this site have declared it destroyed through infilling with waste material and water. Given the absence of hydrological links, the absence of Public Rights of Way linking it to the Masterplan Site, and its nature as a geological SSSI, it is considered unlikely that NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 42
the proposals would have direct or indirect effects on this site of National importance. However, this would be dependent on the results of the air quality assessment (as outlined above). In the absence of any information relating to impacts on air quality, this SSSI has not been considered any further in this SER.
Weston Fen SSSI Weston Fen SSSI, located 4.6km south west of the Masterplan site boundary, consists of a small, species-rich, calcareous fen bordering a fast-flowing stream, together with adjacent willow carr, Hazel woodland, limestone grassland and marshy grassland habitats. The site is of particular interest for the flowering plant communities associated with the wetland habitats, and for its invertebrate fauna, which includes several rare beetles. The site is hydrologically linked to the Masterplan site and therefore there is the potential for adverse effects on water quality within this SSSI. However, it would be possible to avoid adverse impacts on water quality during both construction and operational phases of the development. Standard techniques to protect water quality within the watercourses would be implemented during the construction phase and the Masterplan incorporates SuDS; thus it is not envisaged that the Masterplan would have adverse effects on this SSSI. In the absence of any information relating to impacts on air quality, this SSSI has not been considered any further in this SER.
Wendlebury Mead and Mansmoor Closes SSSI Wendlebury Meads and Mansmoor Closes SSSI is located approximately 4.7km from the Masterplan boundary. This SSSI comprises a series of traditionally-managed unimproved neutral meadows and supports over 160 plant species. The site also supports a number of bird species including breeding snipe and curlew, and the meadows support large numbers of common butterflies, including meadow brown, hedge brown, small copper, common blue, green veined white and marbled white. The site is hydrologically linked to the Masterplan Site and therefore there is the potential for adverse effects on water quality within this SSSI. However, it will be possible to avoid adverse effects on water quality during both construction and operational phases of the development. Standard techniques to protect water quality within the watercourses will be implemented during the construction phase and SuDS form part of the Masterplan; thus it is not envisaged that the Masterplan would have adverse effects on this SSSI. There is also the potential for adverse effects associated with traffic but, this would be dependent on the results of the air quality assessment (as outlined above). In the absence of any information relating to impacts on air quality, this SSSI has not been considered any further in this SER.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 43
Other SSSIs within 10km of the Masterplan Site There are a further nine SSSIs within 10km of the proposed development: Arncott Bridge Meadows SSSI, located 6.5km to the south-east; Kirtlington Quarry SSSI, located 6.8km to the south west; Otmoor SSSI, located 8km to the south; Bestmoor SSSI, located 8.3km to the north west; Whitecross Green and Oriel Woods SSSI, located 8.6km to the south; Long Herdon Meadow SSSI, located 8.7km to the east; Murcott Meadows SSSI, located 9km to the south, Shipton-on-Cherwell and Whitehill Farm Quarries SSSI, located 9.5km to the south west; and Tingewick Meadows SSSI, located 9.5 km north-east. Of these sites, Otmoor SSSI is likely to be hydrologically linked to the Masterplan site; however, the implementation of standard measures to protect water quality and run-off rates within the Masterplan site would ensure that no adverse effects on this SSSI would arise as a result of the proposals. A sustainable drainage system (SuDS) would also ensure that water quality is protected once the site was operational. The results of the air quality assessment will be used to determine whether the Energy Centre(s) and traffic associated with the development would have any effect on air quality in proximity to these receptors. In the absence of any information relating to impacts on air quality, these SSSIs have not been considered any further in this SER.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 44
Bure Park LNR The River Bure and two of its tributaries flow through the Masterplan site before they enter Bure Park Local Nature Reserve (LNR). The LNR is located 25m south of the Masterplan site; it includes the River Bure, several ponds, mature hedgerows and trees, scrub, and meadow habitat. As the LNR is hydrologically linked to the Masterplan site there is the potential for adverse effects on water quality and quantity. However, it would be possible to avoid adverse effects on water quality through the implementation of standard techniques to protect water quality during the construction phase, and the creation of SuDS features to protect water quality during operation. Thus it is not envisaged that the development proposals would have adverse effects on this LNR. The residents associated with the Masterplan are likely to pass through the park on a regular basis and therefore there would be an increase in visitor numbers to the park, however, the park is already well used by the public and thus the habitats and species that it supports are already tolerant of high levels of disturbance. It is therefore considered unlikely that the increase in visitor pressure would have a discernable impact on habitats or species. The LNR will not be considered further in this SER.
Tusmore and Shelswell Parks with Stoke Lyne Woodlands CTA Tusmore and Shelswell Parks with Stoke Lyne Woodlands CTA is situated at a distance of approximately 1km from the Masterplan Site at its closest point. The CTA comprises the large parklands at Tusmore and Shelswell, together with large areas of mixed deciduous broadleaved woodland, including ancient woodland sites near to Stoke Lyne, and large parkland lakes. The CTA includes several Local Wildlife Sites (LWS): Twelve Acre Copse, Stoke Little Woods, Stoke Woods, and Stoke Bushes. Twelve Acre Copse LWS is a small area of ancient woodland set among arable fields. Stoke Little Wood LWS is an area of ancient woodland which supports a species-rich ground flora, with one ride and several wet areas. Stoke Woods LWS is an area of ancient woodland adjacent to Junction 10 of the M40 motorway, it supports a species-rich ground flora, and the eastern track and internal rides support a good butterfly population. Stoke Bushes LWS is an area of Oak-Ash woodland, with a field layer of Dog’s Mercury. It supports a diverse ground flora and there are a number of historical records of rare plant species for the site. Given the proximity of Masterplan site to the CTA and the LWSs within it, it is considered that the new residents may visit this area via existing Public Rights of Way; others may use the car park at Stoke Wood. It is envisaged that those residents that choose to walk to the CTA would keep to the existing footpath network and not have a significant effect on flora and fauna since the existing paths follow the woodland edge. The Masterplan provides for significant areas of NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 45
open space with opportunities for formal and informal recreation. It is therefore anticipated that the new residents would use the open space within the Masterplan site on a regular basis rather than choose to take the car to Stoke Wood. The Tusmore and Shelswell Parks with Stoke Lyne Woodlands CTA and associated LWS will therefore not be considered further within this SER.
Ray CTA The Ray CTA is located 2.5km to the south-east of the Masterplan site boundary, with Bicester town between the CTA and the site. The CTA comprises lowland meadow and wet grassland with species-rich and well-structured hedgerows. It includes several LWSs: Gavray Drive Meadows, Meadows NW of Blackthorn Hill, Cutter’s Brook Meadows, and Field by Beacon Hill Ditch. Although the watercourses within the Masterplan site are tributaries of the River Ray, they converge with this watercourse at a point which is downstream of the Ray CTA. It is therefore considered that the Masterplan would have no direct or indirect hydrological effects on the Ray CTA, a site of County importance. Whilst it is possible that the new residents may visit the farmland that comprises this CTA via the existing road and footpath network, the CTA does not support habitats or a landscape that is likely to attract large numbers of visitors. In addition, there are large parts of the CTA that are not accessible from public rights of way. The Masterplan includes large areas of open space for formal and informal recreation. For these reasons it is considered that the new residents are unlikely to visit the area on a regular basis. The Ray CTA will not be considered further within this SER.
Kirtlington and Bletchingdon Park and Woods CTA Kirtlington and Bletchingdon Park and Woods CTA is located approximately 3.9km south west of the Masterplan site at its closest point. The area comprises parkland, lowland mixed deciduous woodland, fen, swamp and wet woodland, and limestone grassland. Kirtlington Park Lake (north) LWS and Kirtkington Park proposed LWS are located within this CTA. Based on the distance of this CTA from the Masterplan site, and that it is separated from the site by the M40 motorway, it is not envisaged that the Masterplan would have adverse effects on this CTA.
Otmoor CTA Otmoor CTA is located 4.2km to the south of the Masterplan site and comprises floodplain grazing marsh, reedbed, hedgerows, ponds and woodlands. The area is likely to be hydrologically linked to the Masterplan site; as such there is the potential for adverse effects on water quality within this CTA. However, it will be possible to avoid adverse effects on water quality during both construction and operational phases of the development. Standard techniques to NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 46
protect water quality within the watercourses will be implemented during the construction phase and SuDS form part of the Masterplan; thus it is not envisaged that the Masterplan would have adverse effects on this CTA.
Other LWSs outside CTAs In addition to the LWSs located within the CTAs listed above, there are a further ten sites within 5km of the Masterplan site, as well as three proposed LWSs:
Trow Pool LWS: 1km from the Masterplan site, on the other side of the M40 motorway. Two shallow ponds formed by damming a small stream, the larger of which is used for fishing.
Bicester Airfield (and proposed LWS extension): an area of species-rich grassland located 1.4km to the east of the Masterplan site.
Stratton Audley Quarry LWS: 1.7km east of the Masterplan site. This site comprises a diverse mosaic of habitats which have developed on the former limestone quarry.
Bicester Wetland Reserve: This site is located 2.1km south of the Masterplan site. It is mostly maintained as wet grassland by outflow from the sewage works and includes a small area of reedbed, open water, wet ditches, banks with tall herb and a dry grassland field to the east. The margins around the open water have swamp vegetation and areas of wet grassland.
Graven Hill LWS: An area of mixes deciduous woodland, 3.1km south of the Masterplan site.
Upper Heyford Airfield (and proposed LWS extension): 3.4km north west of the Masterplan site. This large area of grassland ranges in diversity and includes some species-rich calcareous areas. The site supports a number of butterfly species and several bird species (including skylark, curlew, grey partridge and corn bunting) are thought to breed on the site.
Meadow east of Fringford LWS: 4.3km north-east of Masterplan site, an area of wet meadow in a small valley near Fringford with a rich variety of grassland wildflowers.
Warmough Copse: 4.6km south of the Masterplan site, a small fragment of ancient coppice woodland.
Hopyard Spinney LWS: This area of old broadleaved woodland, open wetland habitat and scrub is 4.7km north-east of Masterplan.
Pool Spinney LWS: an area of wet willow dominated woodland, 5km north-east of the Masterplan site.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 47
Skimmingdish Lane Fields - Proposed LWS: 2.3 km to the southeast of the Masterplan Site.
Jarvis Lane - Proposed LWS: 2.1 km to the east of the Masterplan site.
Ardley Fields Quarry - Proposed LWS: 3.2km to the north-east of the Masterplan site on the other side of the M40 motorway.
Given the close proximity of the Masterplan site to Bicester Airfield LWS and Stratton Audley Quarry LWS it is considered that the new residents may visit these areas via existing Public Rights of Way. However, it is envisaged that there would not be a significant effect on the flora and fauna of these sites, since the existing paths are limited to a small section of the northern area of Straton Audley Quarry LWS. As noted previously, the Masterplan provides for significant areas of open space with opportunities for formal and informal recreation. It is therefore anticipated that the majority of new residents would use the open space within the Masterplan site on a regular basis, rather than locations further afield. These LWS are not hydrologically linked to the Masterplan site. The LWSs will therefore not be considered further within this SER.
Hedgerows The majority of the hedgerows within the Masterplan site were species-rich, supporting five or more woody species. Many of the hedgerows were associated with dry ditches that were shaded by the hedgerow shrubs. The hedgerow ground floras were species-poor with few if any hedgerow species. Several of the hedgerows supported mature and semi-mature trees with Ash, Pedunculate Oak, Horse-chestnut and willow the most commonly recorded species. Many had been replanted with a diverse mix of native shrub species. More detail regarding the composition of the hedgerows that were subject to survey is presented in Appendix 6D; Drawing 2-2 shows the location of these hedgerows. The hedgerows provide habitat links across the Masterplan site. They were of value to foraging and commuting bats, common species of reptile, and breeding birds and likely to be of value to hedgehogs; these species are discussed in more detail below. Hedgerows are a Habitat of Principal Importance under the Section 41 of the NERC Act (2006); they are also an Oxfordshire LBAP habitat. Due to their nature conservation value and the species they support, the hedgerows within the Masterplan site are considered to be part of a hedgerow network of ‘District/Borough’ Importance.
The River Bure and tributary The River Bure and two tributaries of this watercourse cross the Masterplan site. The upper reaches of the tributaries are NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 48
winterbournes and were dry for large parts of the year. Where water was present, common wetland plants were recorded. The aquatic invertebrate surveys revealed that water quality within the River Bure was ’moderate’. The riparian habitats associated with the River Bure and its tributaries were found to be of value to commuting and foraging bats, foraging common reptile species such as grass snake, and also amphibians. However, given the ephemeral nature of these watercourses, they were considered to be of limited value to otter, water vole and aquatic invertebrates including white-clawed crayfish. Species associated with the watercourses are discussed in more detail below. Rivers are a Habitat of Principal Importance under Section 41 of the NERC Act (2006). They are also an Oxfordshire LBAP habitat. Given the scarcity of water within the Masterplan site, it is considered that overall these watercourses are of ‘District/Borough’ Importance.
Broadleaved plantation There was one block of semi-mature broad-leaved plantation woodland (close to Hawkwell Farm) and several belts of more recently planted broad-leaved plantation woodland (close to Himley Farm, Aldershot Farm and Home Farm). The block of more mature plantation woodland supported a restricted flora it, nevertheless, it supported mature trees and as such was considered to be of some intrinsic nature conservation value, and as such has been assessed as being of ‘District/Borough’ Importance. The narrow belts of recently planted woodland are considered to be of ‘Parish/Neighbourhood’ Importance.
Broadleaved semi-natural woodland Within the Masterplan site, there were two blocks of semi-natural broad-leaved woodland, west of Home Farm (see Drawings 2-1 and 2-2). Most of the canopy trees in these areas had been felled and replaced by recently planted Scots Pine and Norway Maple. The canopy comprised a small number of retained Ash trees, but the shrub layer of Hawthorn, Elm and Elder formed the main canopy of these woodlands. The ground flora largely comprised Dog’s Mercury and Common Nettle (for further details of other common plant species recorded in these woodlands see the quadrat data presented in Appendix 6B). These woodlands most closely resembled the NVC woodland plant community W8d Ash-Field Maple (Acer campestre) – Dog’s Mercury woodland Ivy (Hedera helix) sub-community. However, they had clearly been subject to disturbance associated with tree felling, replanting and historical use as a site in which to rear game birds. NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 49
The areas of semi-natural woodland did not support particularly diverse or valuable ground floras, and would not be classified as Habitats of Principal Importance under Section 41 of the NERC Act (2006); nor would they be priority habitats targeted for action in the LBAP. However, woodlands are a scarce resource in this part of the Cherwell District. Therefore these areas of broadleaved semi-natural woodland were considered to be of ‘District/Borough’ Importance.
Arable land and grasslands Within the Masterplan Site the arable fields are intensively managed. Arable field margins are a Habitat of Principal Importance under Section 41 of the NERC Act (2006), and a LBAP habitat; however, within the Masterplan site the arable field margins and arable fields did not support any notable or protected plant species, or any communities of high botanical value. The grassland habitats were classified as ‘improved’ and intensively grazed. They supported a limited diversity of common grass species of low nature conservation value, with very few forbs (non-grass species). The grasslands within the Masterplan site would not be classified as Habitats of Principal Importance under Section 41 of the NERC Act (2006); nor would they be priority habitats targeted for action in the LBAP. Both habitats are common and widespread in the locality and not considered to be of particular conservation value. Overall these habitats are considered to be of limited intrinsic nature conservation importance; nevertheless they are of value to farmland birds see section 2.5.3 below.
Ponds There were four ponds within the Masterplan site; the largest was next to Crowmarsh Farm, with two small ponds associated with Himley Farm, and one recorded to the north west of Hawkwell Farm. The pond at Crowmarsh Farm had a deep layer of silt at the bottom and supported a diverse wetland flora. The pond to the north west of Hawkwell Farm was small and supported few wetland plant species. The northern pond at Himley Farm was small (approximately 10m by 5m) and located within an arable field (Pond 14 on Drawing 2-2). In September 2011 the bottom of the pond was damp and vegetated, but held no water. This pond held water in spring 2011 and October 2013. The southern pond at Himley Farm was also small (approximately 20m by 4m), with an island in the middle (Pond 15 on Drawing 2-2). This pond was surrounded by an earth bank which was almost vertical along the southern edge. Common species of wetland plants were recorded at both ponds. Both the ponds near NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 50
Himley Farm were found to support great crested newts; this species is discussed further in section 2.5.3 below. Ponds are a Habitat of Principal Importance under Section 41 of the NERC Act (2006) and small field ponds are considered to be a scarce resource in the locality. Overall these habitats are considered to be of ‘District/Borough’ Importance.
6.5.3 Species Aquatic Invertebrates The River Bure and its tributaries were considered suitable for whiteclawed crayfish, at least at certain times of the year. However, North American signal crayfish have been recorded within the catchment, and a dead signal crayfish was found close to the pond at Crowmarsh Farm. Furthermore, the targeted surveys did not reveal the presence of white-clawed crayfish within the Masterplan site, or the wider survey area. Given the negative survey result, and the fact that signal crayfish and native crayfish rarely co-exist, it is considered extremely unlikely that white-clawed crayfish are present within the Masterplan site. The upper reaches of these watercourses are winterbournes and during the 2010 field surveys the channels within the Masterplan site were largely dry by June. Due to the ephemeral nature of these watercourses, surveys for aquatic invertebrate surveys were undertaken in October 2010 once flow of water had returned. The 2010 aquatic invertebrate surveys revealed that the pond at Crowmarsh Farm and the tributary of the River Bure which runs under the railway embankment supported a small number of common and widespread aquatic invertebrate species. The spring/ stream that fed the pond at Crowmarsh Farm supported only two species. The 2012 aquatic in vertebrate surveys revealed that the River Bure supported a limited diversity of common aquatic invertebrates and overall the river was assessed to be of ‘moderate’ water quality. The desk study revealed a single historical (1988) record of a Nationally Scarce (Notable B – Nb) (Ref 6-6) scavenger water beetle within a pond in Bucknell, approximately 300m away; if present on the Masterplan site it would be associated with the ponds. Although no uncommon or notable aquatic invertebrates were recorded, the presence of aquatic invertebrates in the watercourses and ponds does contribute to the valuation of these features as habitats of ‘District/Borough’ Importance.
Terrestrial invertebrates The desk study revealed a range of rare and uncommon moth and butterfly species from the area surrounding the Masterplan site. This included recent records of two Species of Principal Importance listed NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 51
under the NERC Act (2006); brown hairstreak from Bure Park, and records of white-letter hairstreak from the Whitelands Farm area to the south of the Masterplan site, and from habitats along the B4030 Middleton Stoney Road adjacent to the southern portion of the Masterplan site. The habitats within the Masterplan site that were of potential value to terrestrial invertebrates, and which were targeted for survey were the hedgerows and the more overgrown areas across the site (See Appendices 6A and 6F for more details). No legally protected invertebrates were recorded during the surveys. Nine moth species listed as Species of Principal Importance under Section 41 of the NERC Act (2006) were recorded during the invertebrate surveys: beaded chestnut, green brindled crescent, centre-barred sallow, small phoenix, ghost moth, dot moth, cinnabar moth and sallow. Eight of these species were recorded in the vicinity of Gowell Farm and five were recorded on the tree and shrub-lined lane leading to Lord’s Farm. A Red Data Book micro-moth species Ref 6-6was also recorded in a tree close to Gowell Farm. Five Nationally Scarce (Notable B - Nb) (Ref 6-5) invertebrates were also recorded during the invertebrate surveys. These were the shaded pug moth, recorded on the edge of an arable field in the northeastern corner of the Masterplan site, Roesel’s bush-cricket, also recorded in the north-east of the site and on the lane leading to Lord’s Farm, a bark beetle on the lane leading to Lord’s Farm, a micro-moth in the vicinity of Gowell Farm; and the blue and red leaf beetle, also recorded in the vicinity of Gowell Farm. It should be noted that Roesel’s bush-cricket has undergone a substantial increase in its range over recent years due to climate change, and is generally now generally considered to be a Nationally Local species rather than Nationally Notable. In addition, 21 Nationally Local invertebrates were recorded during the surveys, mainly within the habitats around Gowell Farm and the hedgerows. A complete account of the terrestrial invertebrates that were recorded during the targeted surveys is presented in Appendix 6F. Brown hairstreak butterfly eggs were identified during the targeted surveys and suitable habitat for this species (Blackthorn shrubs for egg-laying within the hedgerows, and mature trees for display and mating) was present across the Masterplan site. Elm, a foodplant of the white-letter hairstreak butterfly, was recorded in many of the hedgerows in the southern part of the Masterplan site. Given that these butterflies have been recorded in hedgerows close to the southern boundary of the Masterplan site, it would appear likely that this species would be present within the hedgerows on the Masterplan site.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 52
The Masterplan site as a whole comprises habitats with limited structural and botanical diversity that consequently support a limited diversity of terrestrial invertebrates. The parts of the site that were of greatest value to invertebrates were the hedgerows, the ‘weedy’ habitats associated with Gowell Farm, and the more mature trees and shrubs associated with the access track leading to Lord’s Farm. Overall, the value of the site as a whole for terrestrial invertebrates is considered to be of ‘Parish/Neighbourhood’ Importance. However, the presence of the hairstreak butterflies in the hedgerows does contribute to the valuation of these features as a habitat of ‘District/Borough’ Importance.
Fish Although targeted surveys for fish were not undertaken a shoal of roach were noted within the southern pond associated with Himley Farm (Pond 15 on Drawing 6-2). Three-spined stickleback were also recorded in the pond at Crowmarsh Farm (Pond 6 on Drawing 6-2). Fish species recorded incidentally during the aquatic invertebrate surveys of the River Bure included three-spined stickleback, tenspined stickleback, and bullhead; a species associated with good water quality. Overall the value of the site is considered to be of limited value to fish, but their presence in the watercourses does contribute to the valuation of these features as habitats of ‘District/Borough’ Importance.
Great crested newts A number of ponds within and close to the Masterplan site were identified as being potentially suitable for great crested newts. Targeted surveys identified a medium population of great crested newt within the two ponds associated with Himley Farm, within the Masterplan site boundary (Ponds 14 and 15 on Drawing 6-2). A population of great crested newt was also found to be present within four ponds at Bucknell, outside the Masterplan site boundary; Ponds 2, 5, 7 and 9 on Drawing 2-2. Ponds 2, 5 and 9 are over 500 metres from the Masterplan boundary and it is considered unlikely, given the distance, that the great crested newts associated with these ponds would regularly forage within the Masterplan site. Pond 7 is 240m from the western boundary of the Masterplan site. Great crested newts typically forage within 250m of their breeding pond; therefore there is the potential that newts associated with this pond may forage within suitable habitat on the edge of the Masterplan site. The arable fields on the edge of the Masterplan site represented sub-optimal habitat for foraging newts, and as such it is extremely unlikely that these fields would be of value to these newts, but they may forage along the bases of hedgerows. Great crested newts were absent from the other five ponds that were subject to survey. Smooth newts and/or common frog were recorded within 11 ponds (Ponds 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 13, 14 and 15 on Drawing 6-2). NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 53
Great crested newts are a Species of Principal Importance under Section 41 of the NERC Act (2006); individual great crested newts, their breeding sites and resting sites receive full protection under UK and European legislation. Two ponds within the Masterplan site support a medium population of great crested newts, and as such are considered to be of value to this species. The ‘District/Borough’ value that has been assigned to the ponds as a whole includes the value of these features for great crested newts and other amphibians.
Reptiles The targeted surveys for reptiles revealed the presence of small numbers of common lizards within suitable habitats across the site, including within the north-east area of the Masterplan site, the railway embankment, the pond at Crowmarsh Farm, Gowell Farm, a strip of ruderal vegetation parallel with Howes Lane, and on a field margin south of Aldershot Farm. Their presence was also confirmed from direct observation during the walkover surveys of the farmland around Himley Farm. It is considered likely that small numbers of common lizard would be present in other areas of suitable habitat (the unmanaged field margins and stream corridors) across the Masterplan site. There are historical records for grass snake at Himley Farm, and a grass snake was recorded on the northern boundary of the woodland to the west of Home Farm. It is considered likely that grass snakes would be present in other areas of suitable habitat, in particular, within the areas of grassland adjacent to the ponds and watercourses. With the exception of the south-facing railway embankment, the habitats within the Masterplan site were considered largely sub-optimal for use by slow-worm, and the desk study did not reveal any records for this species. All three common species of reptile are identified as Species of Principal Importance under Section 41 of the NERC Act (2006). They are also protected under UK legislation. The Masterplan site is considered likely to support a small population of reptiles within the field margins, riparian habitat along the River Bure and its tributary, and railway embankment. The value that has been assigned to the hedgerows and the watercourses takes into account their value to reptiles, the railway embankment would be largely unaffected by the Masterplan proposals, the remainder of the site is considered to be of ‘Parish/Neighbourhood’ Importance for reptiles.
Breeding birds Table 6-2 below provides a list of the bird species of conservation concern (listed as either Red or Amber RSPB Birds of Conservation Concern (BOCC)) (Ref 6-7) associated with the trees, farm buildings, NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 54
fields, and hedgerows within the Masterplan site that were recorded as breeding or probable breeding, during the 2010 and 2011 surveys. Table 6-2 Species recorded as breeding or probable breeding within the Masterplan site
Species
Conservation Status
Barn owl
Protected under Part 1, Schedule 1 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, Amber list BOCC
Yellow Wagtail
Red list BOCC, Species of Principal Importance NERC Act (2006)
Skylark
Red list BOCC, Species of Principal Importance NERC Act (2006)
Yellowhammer
Red list BOCC, Species of Principal Importance NERC Act (2006)
Linnet
Red list BOCC, Species of Principal Importance NERC Act (2006)
Starling
Red list BOCC, Species of Principal Importance NERC Act (2006)
Reed bunting
Amber list BOCC, Species of Principal Importance NERC Act (2006)
Stock dove
Amber list BOCC
Kestrel
Amber list BOCC
Common whitethroat
Amber list BOCC
Cuckoo
Red list BOCC, Species of Principal Importance NERC Act (2006)
Spotted flycatcher
Red list BOCC, Species of Principal Importance NERC Act (2006)
Marsh tit
Red list BOCC, Species of Principal Importance NERC Act (2006)
Songthrush
Red list BOCC, Species of Principal Importance NERC Act (2006)
Lapwing
Red list BOCC, Species of Principal Importance NERC Act (2006)
House sparrow
Red list BOCC, Species of Principal Importance NERC Act (2006)
Bullfinch
Amber list BOCC, Species of Principal Importance NERC Act (2006)
Dunnock
Amber list BOCC, Species of Principal Importance NERC Act (2006)
Swallow
Amber list BOCC
Green woodpecker
Amber list BOCC
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 55
Willow warbler
Amber list BOCC
Mistle thrush
Amber list BOCC
The field surveys recorded nine farmland specialist bird species breeding within the Masterplan site, one of which (yellow wagtail) is also listed within the ‘arable six’ species of concern. The ‘arable six’ species are those that the Higher Level Stewardship (HLS) specifically targets. Yellow wagtail were recorded nesting on the edge of the Masterplan site close to Crowmarsh Farm; another farmland specialist and ‘arable six ‘ species, grey partridge, was recorded overwintering, but not nesting on the site (discussed further below). The site also supported approximately 28 pairs of skylark and 64 pairs of yellowhammer. With the exception of linnet (where 28 pairs were recorded), the remaining farmland bird species (starling, stock dove, reed bunting, kestrel and common whitethroat) were recorded in low numbers. Barn owl, a species specially protected under Schedule 1 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act, has been recorded nesting within the Masterplan site. They were nesting in a specifically designed barn owl nest box located on a tree to the west of Home Farm. The barn owl nest box was relocated in 2012 to the area of broadleaved seminatural woodland in the north-east of the Masterplan site. Another two boxes were installed close by at this time, to provide alternative nest sites. In addition, the desk study also revealed records for two BOCC Red list (Ref 6-7) and Section 41 NERC Act species within the Masterplan site in previous years. These were corn bunting and grey partridge. Neither of these species was recorded during the 2010 and 2011 breeding bird surveys. For more details regarding the birds recorded on site see Appendix 6A; a full list of the birds recorded during the 2010 and 2011 surveys is presented in Appendix 6H.
Wintering Birds Eleven BOCC Red list (Ref 6-7) species were recorded overwintering within the Masterplan site: skylark, linnet, yellowhammer, herring gull, marsh tit, house sparrow, grey partridge, starling, redwing, song thrush and lapwing. Skylark, linnet, yellowhammer, herring gull, marsh tit, house sparrow, grey partridge, starling, song thrush and lapwing are also Species of Principal Importance under Section 41 of the NERC Act (2006), as are reed bunting and dunnock, which as identified below were also recorded during the wintering bird surveys. The wintering bird surveys revealed moderate numbers of yellowhammer (flocks of up to 150), skylark (flocks of up to 24), NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 56
redwing (flocks up to 50) and fieldfare (flocks of up to 150). Low to moderate numbers of other bird species of conservation concern that were recorded during the surveys included mallard, linnet, reed bunting, kestrel, herring gull, red kite, marsh tit, house sparrow, grey partridge, green woodpecker, dunnock, bullfinch, starling and song thrush (up to three birds). Grey partridge, a farmland specialist and ‘arable six ‘species, was also recorded overwintering on the site. The distribution of wintering birds reflected the field and hedgerow management, with stubble fields and the less heavily trimmed hedgerows supporting higher numbers. No barn owls were recorded within the Masterplan site during the surveys. For more details regarding the birds recorded on site see Appendix 6A with a list of the birds recorded during the 2011 wintering bird surveys, together with their conservation status is presented in Appendix 6I. As identified above, red kite (a species specially protected under Schedule 1 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act, whilst breeding) were observed flying over the site during the wintering bird surveys; but they were not recorded nesting on the Masterplan site during the breeding bird surveys. It is considered unlikely that red kite would nest within the small woodlands that are present within the Masterplan site since they require large trees for nesting, which are absent from the Masterplan site. Similarly, although both fieldfare and redwing were recorded on site during the wintering bird surveys and both species are listed on Schedule 1 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act and therefore specially protected whilst nesting, neither species would breed within the Masterplan site since they do not breed in southern Britain.
Breeding and over-wintering birds The hedgerows were found to be of value to nesting and foraging birds and the value of these features for both farmland and nonfarmland specialist species has been taken into account when assigning the value of ‘District/Borough’ Importance to the hedgerows. However, given that the Masterplan site as a whole has been found to support a diverse range of bird species, including nine specialist farmland species, species of conservation concern and Species of Principal Importance, the breeding and wintering bird assemblage on the Masterplan site as a whole is considered to be of ‘District/Borough’ Importance.
Bats The desk study revealed records for common pipistrelle, brown longeared and Natterer’s bat within 5km of the Masterplan site. There are also known common pipistrelle and brown long-eared bat roosts 1.5km south of the Masterplan site. The known roosts for Leisler’s bat and serotine are greater than 10km from the Masterplan site. NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 57
The presence of roosting bats was confirmed in two trees within the north-east of the Masterplan site; a small common pipistrelle bat roost within an artificial bat roosting box on a mature tree along the River Bure, and small numbers of common pipistrelle bats within a mature Ash tree on the edge of the woodland to the west of Home Farm. Levels of bat activity recorded close to two mature trees on the watercourse south of Hawkwell Farm may indicate that these trees could support a common pipistrelle roost. Similarly, the levels of bat activity close to Crowmarsh Farm indicate that bats may roost in the trees or buildings close to this property. Surveys revealed a small common pipistrelle bat roost within a modern farmhouse at Home Farm, and another within a barn at Himley Farm. Activity around the buildings associated with Lord’s Farm shortly after dusk indicated that the buildings may support a small common pipistrelle bat roost, although its location was not confirmed. The level of bat activity associated with Crowmarsh Farm may also indicate that these buildings supported a pipistrelle and/or Myotis bat roost, but once again the surveys were inconclusive. Although access to Lovelynch House was not provided, the activity surveys did not reveal large numbers of bats appearing close to this property shortly after dusk. It is therefore unlikely that this property (house to the south of Himley Farm) supports a large or significant roost. In addition, three additional bat roosts were confirmed outside of the Masterplan site boundary. These comprised individual common pipistrelle bats within two adjacent mature oak trees; and a roost of brown long-eared bats and another unconfirmed species within St Laurence Church, Caversfield. The locations of the confirmed bat roosts are shown on Drawing 6-3. The majority of the bat activity was associated with the stream corridors and largely comprised foraging and commuting common pipistrelle bats, but regular activity of soprano pipistrelle, brown longeared, serotine, noctule, Leisler’s and Myotis species were also recorded. A single Nathusius’ pipistrelle was recorded close to the pond at Crowmarsh Farm. A number of hedgerows were also revealed to be key features for foraging and commuting bats. The activity surveys that were undertaken in the land around Himley Farm revealed that small numbers of common and soprano pipistrelle bats were foraging along the hedgerows; other bats species recorded included noctule and Myotis. The value of the hedgerows and stream corridors as features of ‘District/Borough’ value has taken into account the value of these NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 58
features for foraging and commuting bats. The bat roosts themselves are also considered to be of ‘District/Borough’ value to bats.
Dormice No evidence of dormice was found during the targeted surveys undertaken within the Masterplan Site. No records of this species were obtained from TVERC and the links between the proposed development and suitable habitat for dormice offsite were limited. It is therefore considered unlikely that dormice would be present on site and therefore they have not been considered further within this SER.
Water voles There are records dating from 2010 for water voles on the River Bure downstream of the Masterplan site. However, the only suitable habitat for water voles within the Masterplan site was the upstream extent of the tributary of the River Bure near Crowmarsh Farm. No signs of water vole activity were recorded in this location during the surveys. Within the Masterplan site, the River Bure was considered at best, sub-optimal for use by water voles. Given the isolated nature, and the limited extent of suitable habitat it is considered unlikely that the tributaries of the River Bure support water voles and no signs of water vole activity were recorded during the targeted surveys. Water voles are therefore considered to be absent from the Masterplan site and have not been considered further within this SER.
Otters Desk study records of otter were provided close to the fishery at Trow Pool, located 1km west of the Masterplan site boundary, but not hydrologically linked. Within the Masterplan site, the tributaries appeared to hold very little water for most of the year and the River Bure appeared to support few fish and other prey items suitable for otters. It is therefore considered that these features would be of limited value to foraging otters. The river and its tributaries provided suitable resting sites for otters, and although it is considered likely that otters would use these features whilst travelling across their home range, no signs of otter activity were recorded during the survey. Otters are fully protected under UK and European legislation; they are also a Species of Principal Importance under the NERC Act (2006). Overall, based on the survey data and conditions on the site, the Masterplan site is considered to be of ‘Parish/Neighbourhood’ Importance for otters.
Badgers North of the railway line a ‘main’ badger sett was located on a tributary of the River Bure west of Home Farm. A further large sett (a NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 59
subsidiary sett) was located in the area of broadleaved semi-natural woodland 200m to the north west, with a further two small ‘outlying’ setts in between these two setts. South of the railway line two large setts that could represent small ‘main’ setts were identified; one to the south of Crowmarsh Farm along a field margin, the other further south on a field boundary to the west of, and outside, the Masterplan site boundary. Although protected, badgers are not a species of conservation concern and they are reasonably common within the wider area. Consequently, the Masterplan site is considered to be of ‘Parish/ Neighbourhood’ Importance for badgers.
Other mammals of conservation concern Brown hare Brown hares have been recorded within the proposed NW Bicester eco-development area but not within the Masterplan Site. Brown hares are a UKBAP Priority Species. It is possible that brown hares would forage and rear within the arable fields of the Masterplan Site; however, given the intensity of the grazing in the pasture fields it is considered unlikely they would rear young in those fields. Given the size of the proposed development and the availability of suitable habitat within the locality it is considered that the arable fields within the Masterplan Site would be of particular value to brown hare. Overall the proposed development is considered to be of no more than ‘Parish/Neighbourhood’ Importance for brown hare. Hedgehog Although targeted surveys for hedgehog have not been undertaken it is likely that they would be present within the proposed Masterplan development, but it is considered unlikely that the proposed development would be of particular value to hedgehogs. Hedgehogs are a UKBAP Priority Species. Overall the site is considered to be of no more than ‘Parish/Neighbourhood’ Importance for hedgehogs. Polecats Polecats are known to be present in the surrounding area and it is possible that they could be present within the Masterplan site; however the habitats present are sub-optimal for this species, which is more typically associated with woodland areas. Overall the site is considered to be of no more than ‘Parish/Neighbourhood’ Importance for polecats. Harvest mice Harvest mice could be present within the hedgerows associated with the Masterplan site; however, given that the intensity of the NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 60
management of the arable fields and grasslands the Masterplan site is considered to be sub-optimal for this species. Overall the site is considered to be of no more than ‘Parish/Neighbourhood’ Importance for harvest mice.
6.5.4 Selection of Key Ecological Receptors Table 6-3 summarises all ecological receptors that have been considered, and highlights those which have been selected as ’Key Ecological Receptors’ for further investigation in this assessment. The locations of these habitats and features and other known ecological constraints are illustrated on Drawings 6-1 to 6-3. Table 6-3
Ecological Receptor
Summary of Ecological Receptors
Associated species/habit ats
Nature Conservatio n Value
Potentially significant effect
Invertebrates (in particular hairstreak butterflies), foraging and hibernating great crested newts, foraging and hibernating reptiles, breeding and foraging birds, foraging bats, foraging and hibernating hedgehogs.
District/Borou gh
Fragmentation of hedgerows by access roads. Context of hedgerows altered since no longer adjacent to farmland.
River Bure and tributary
Aquatic invertebrates, reptiles, foraging and commuting bats, and otters
District/Borou gh
Ponds
Great crested newts, aquatic invertebrates
District/Borou gh
Potential for pollution or habitat degradation.
Barn owls
Trees, arable fields, grasslands
District/Borou gh
Potential for disturbance to nesting barn owls, which in turn could potentially affect breeding success.
Key Ecological Receptors Hedgerows (including breeding birds, reptiles, and hedgehogs)
Potential temporary loss of habitat for reptiles, great crested newts, and hedgehogs during construction. Potential for disturbance and mortality of nesting birds during hedgerow removal if undertaken during the breeding bird season Potential mortality of reptiles and hedgehogs if present during hedgerow removal.
Potential for pollution/degradation of watercourses. Fragmentation of stream corridors by access roads.
Loss of small areas of suitable foraging habitat. Breeding and overwinterin
Farmland, woodland and
District/Borou gh
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
The majority of the land that supports farmland specialist bird species would be
Page 61
Ecological Receptor
Associated species/habit ats
g birds
hedgerows
Nature Conservatio n Value
Potentially significant effect
lost. Domestic pets associated with new residents may also lead to an increase in predation of ground-nesting birds using the adjacent farmland.
Bat roosts
Mature trees, farm buildings
District/Borou gh
Potential for disturbance of bats though night-time lighting. Loss / fragmentation of foraging and commuting habitat.
Other ecological receptors requiring mitigation Reptiles
Stream corridor, hedgerows, grasslands
Parish/ Neighbourhoo d
Potential for mortality during construction included within hedgerow and River Bure receptors above. The remainder of the site not sufficiently valuable for significant impacts on reptiles to arise.
Badgers
Hedgerows, arable fields, grasslands.
Parish/ Neighbourhoo d
Potential disturbance of badger setts during construction.
Brown hares
Arable fields
Parish/ Neighbourhoo d
Habitat loss, but receptor not sufficiently valuable for significant effects to arise.
Hedgehogs
Hedgerows, tall grassland
Parish/ Neighbourhoo d
Potential for mortality during construction considered within hedgerow receptor above.
Loss/fragmentation of foraging habitat.
Ecological receptors not considered further Recent broadleaved plantation
Bats, invertebrates
Parish/
Invertebrate s
Arable field margins, hedgerows, mature trees
Parish/
Ardley Cutting and Quarry SSSI
Calcareous grassland, woodland, wetlands
National
No direct effects or no indirect effects predicted. Further assessment required to assess impacts on air quality.
Ardley Trackways SSSI
Geological interest
National
No direct effects or no indirect effects predicted. Further assessment required to assess impacts on air quality.
Stratton Audley Quarries
Geological interest
National
No direct effects or no indirect effects predicted. Further assessment required to assess impacts on air quality.
Neighbourhoo d
Neighbourhoo d
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Removal of an area of plantation in the north-east of the Masterplan site. Fragmentation of the retained woodland belts by access roads. Loss of habitat used by invertebrates during construction. Impacts on brown hairstreak and white-letter hairstreak considered under hedgerows.
Page 62
Ecological Receptor
Associated species/habit ats
Nature Conservatio n Value
Potentially significant effect
Weston Fen SSSI
Calcareous fen bordering a fastflowing stream, with willow carr, hazel woodland, limestone and marshy grassland habitats.
National
No direct effects or no indirect effects predicted. Further assessment required to assess impacts on air quality.
Wendlebury Meads and Mansmoor Closes SSSI
Unimproved neutral meadows, bird and butterfly assemblage
National
No direct effects. The implementation of standard mitigation techniques during construction to protect water quality within the River Bure will ensure no adverse effects on this SSSI. SuDS will ensure water quality is protected once the site is developed. Further assessment required to assess impacts on air quality.
Nine further SSSIs within 10km of proposed developmen t
Various
National
No direct or indirect effects predicted. Further assessment required to assess impacts on air quality.
Tusmore and Shelswell Parks with Stoke Lyne Woodlands CTA
Parkland, mixed broadleaved deciduous woodland
County/Region al
No significant direct effects or no indirect effects predicted.
Ray CTA
Lowland meadows, riparian habitat, hedgerows.
County/Region al
No direct effects or no indirect effects predicted.
Bure Park LNR
River, riparian, woodland, grassland, water voles
District/Borou gh
The implementation of standard mitigation techniques during construction to protect water quality within the Bure will ensure no adverse effects on the LNR, SuDS will ensure water quality is protected once the site is developed. Habitats sufficiently robust to cope with additional visitor pressure.
Arable land and grasslands
Invertebrates, reptiles, farmland birds, barn owls
Parish
Habitat loss, impacts on birds and barn owls considered under those ecological receptors.
SSSI
/Neighbourhoo d
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 63
Ecological Receptor
Associated species/habit ats
Nature Conservatio n Value
Potentially significant effect
Great crested newts
Riparian corridor, hedgerows
Negligible
No direct effects and no indirect effects predicted.
Dormice
Hedgerows
Negligible
No effects predicted as considered to be absent from the Site.
Water voles
River Bure and tributary
Negligible
No effects predicted as considered to be absent from the Site.
Otters
River Bure and tributary
Parish/
The site is not considered to be sufficiently valuable for otters for significant effects on their population to arise.
Hedgerows, River Bure and tributaries
Parish/
Arable fields, grasslands
Parish/ Neighbourhoo d
Polecats
Harvest Mice
6.6
Neighbourhoo d
Neighbourhoo d
The site is not considered to be sufficiently valuable for polecats for significant effects on their population to arise. The site is not considered to be sufficiently valuable for harvest mice for significant effects on their population to arise.
Design and Mitigation Around 42% of the Masterplan site comprises green space, which exceeds Policy ET14 in the guidance document PPS: Eco-towns (a supplement to PPS1). The green space will include the most valuable habitats: the riparian habitat along the River Bure and its tributaries, hedgerows, badger setts, ponds, and the confirmed bat roosts. It will also include the mature woodlands and the majority of the more recent broad-leaved plantations. As well as retaining the most valuable features, ecological corridors would be maintained and enhanced on site to provide important links to the green space beyond the site boundary. In particular to maintain links to Bure Park LNR (to the east), to Bignell Park (to the south), to Caversfield (to the north) and Bucknell (to the west). The links to the north, south and east are all severed by the existing road network, but the Masterplan has sought to create significant corridors of semi-natural vegetation through and around the site to facilitate the movement of species. Mitigation and enhancement measures that have been incorporated into design with respect to Key Ecological Receptors are identified below. Habitat enhancement and creation measures that form part of the design to ensure a ‘net gain in biodiversity’ in keeping with Policy ET14 and the Local Plan policy that relates to this site are also identified.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 64
42% of the proposed Masterplan development comprises green space, of which over 37% is public open space. This exceeds Policy ET14 in the guidance document PPS: Eco-towns (a supplement to PPS1). The green space will include the most valuable habitats: the riparian habitat along the River Bure and its tributaries, the hedgerows, the ‘main’ badger sett, and the confirmed bat roost. As well as retaining the most valuable features, ecological corridors will be maintained and enhanced on site to provide important ecological links from the River Bure and its tributary to Bure Park LNR to the south, and to habitats adjacent to Home Farm and Caversfield House in the north. Links are also provided from the tributary of the River Bure to riparian and woodland habitats to the west of the proposed development. Mitigation and enhancement measures that have been incorporated into design with respect to Key Ecological Receptors are identified below. Habitat enhancement and creation measures that form part of the design to ensure a ‘net gain in biodiversity’ in keeping with Policy ET14 are also identified.
Protection of hedgerows The Masterplan layout retains the majority of the hedgerows and has sought to minimise the number of times hedgerows are breached. Where sections of hedgerows require removal to permit access, the width of the removed section would be kept to a minimum. These features would be retained within buffer zones of semi-natural vegetation that extend a minimum of 10 metres either side. Although there would be pedestrian and cycle routes within these buffers no other built development or other land uses would take place in these buffers. Many of the hedgerows would be located alongside green space that would ensure that the value of these features for wildlife is maintained. As part of the detailed design the development layout would also seek to ensure that where development is located close to a hedgerow the development would face the hedgerow so that it is clearly part of an area of public open space and managed as such not part a private space. The 10 metre buffer would be extended to 20 metres where hedgerows are located within the dark corridor maintained for foraging and commuting bats. The retention of hedgerows and the maintenance of buffer habitats would maintain nesting opportunities and foraging resources for birds, and provide continued habitat and wildlife corridors for species such as invertebrates (including hairstreak butterflies), reptiles, hedgehogs and bats. The buffer and adjacent green spaces would also help to protect these species from disturbance arising from increased human presence, site traffic, noise and lighting during both the construction and the operational phase of the development. To avoid impacts on breeding birds, the works close to hedgerows would preferably be undertaken outside of the bird breeding season NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 65
(i.e. between the months of September and February, inclusive). Where this is not possible and hedgerow removal is required, to minimise the risk of killing and/or injuring birds, or damaging or destroying nests (all of which would be unlawful should they occur), specialist ecological supervision would be provided to confirm the absence of nesting birds prior to the removal, and ensure the protection of any confirmed nesting sites. Should the presence of nesting birds be established, works would cease in the locality until the young have fledged. In advance of construction, bird nesting boxes would be installed on some retained trees and in hedgerows, in suitable locations away from the construction. This would ensure alternative nesting opportunities are provided to mitigate for any temporary loss. New planting to create new links between hedgerows and to fill gaps in the existing hedgerows would ensure that in the long-term there is no net loss in the length of hedgerows within the Masterplan site. Prior to any removal of hedgerows, pre-construction checks for any species of conservation concern, such as reptiles and hedgehogs, would be undertaken. Any features of value to hibernating reptiles would not be disturbed during the reptile hibernation period (November through to March) similarly should nesting hedgehog(s) be found at this time, this, and surrounding vegetation, would be left until vacated. The development associated with the Masterplan would be phased and take place over a number of decades. It would be possible, therefore, to ensure that new planting takes place in advance of hedgerow removal. This would ensure that the planting has time to mature. In the early phases of the development where this would not be possible hedgerow translocation would be considered. Haul routes, storage compounds and staff facilities would be located away from retained hedgerows to minimise disturbance to the species they support. In addition, any night-time lighting would be kept away from retained hedgerows and limited only to those areas where absolutely necessary. In advance of site clearance and during construction retained hedgerows would be fenced with their buffers to ensure that they are not subject to accidental damage. This protective fencing would also ensure that the roots of the hedgerow trees and shrubs are not undermined during any excavation works. As part of the detailed landscape design buffers of diverse grassland areas would be created alongside the hedgerows so that they are suitable for invertebrates, including Roesel’s Bush-cricket; and proposed planting would incorporate plants favoured by the Shaded Pug moth, such as Field Scabious; thus retaining habitat for these species within the Masterplan site. The implementation of a NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 66
Landscape and Habitats Management Plan would ensure that the hedgerows maintain their value to hairstreak butterflies.
River Bure and tributary The Masterplan proposals retain all ephemeral watercourses; set within a 60 metre-wide buffer zone of semi-natural habitat. Construction site drainage would be carefully designed and controlled, with silt traps established at the outset of the works, such works would take place in accordance with the provisions of a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP). The construction site and operational drainage solutions would incorporate measures to ensure that all surface water runoff is treated and returned to the watercourses at greenfield runoff rates. All works would incorporate relevant legislation for the protection of surface and groundwater and implement codes of good practice, and best practice guidelines for works within or near water. Relevant guidance including Pollution Prevention Guidelines (PPGs) prepared by the Environment Agency and literature produced by CIRIA would form the basis for pollution control measures. Surface water drainage within the Masterplan site during operation would be managed using SuDS. This would involve a combination of gravel-filled channels, swales, open ditches, underground storage facilities and above ground attenuation basins (some of which would support water for most of the year). As part of the detailed design SuDS features within areas of green space would be specifically designed to create habitats of value to wildlife. This would include planting schemes that support native species to provide habitats for wildlife (invertebrates, amphibians and reptiles). Water quality samples would be collected and analysed from the River Bure and its tributaries in advance of construction to provide a baseline for water quality monitoring during and post-construction. On each watercourse samples would be collected from three locations: 1) upstream of construction works; 2) in proximity to the proposed location of construction works; and 3) downstream of construction works. Water quality samples would then be taken at regular intervals during construction and on completion to ensure that remedial actions can be taken if required to maintain water quality. Road and pedestrian/cycle bridges would be designed to minimise impacts on the watercourses and associated protected species, maintaining a dark corridor beneath the structures. Care would be taken to avoid damage to the banks and/or any sensitive features in close proximity, such as badger setts and mature trees. As discussed above, current best practice guidance would be followed to ensure water quality is protected during construction close to watercourses. If night-time construction lighting is required it would be kept away NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 67
from the watercourses. During the operational phase the bridges would be lit for safety reasons. However, to prevent illumination of the dark corridors the lighting would be shielded, the lighting column heights would be reduced, and road surface materials would comprise a low-reflective surface. The 60 metre-wide buffer zone that the watercourses would be retained within together with any leisure routes would not be lit this would ensure that the stream channels and their associated tree and shrub vegetation would not be illuminated. Care would also be taken with the detailed bridge designs to ensure that they provide safe crossings within/below the bridge for large mammals such as badgers and otters during peak water flows. This would include the use of culverts and/or mammal ledges or an open span structure that maintains access to the banks above typical flood levels. A pre-construction survey would be undertaken to ascertain the presence of badger setts, and/or any potential otter holts/resting sites and water vole burrows which would constrain the construction of the bridges over the watercourses.
Broadleaved semi-natural woodland and mature broadleaved plantation The blocks of broadleaved semi-natural woodland west of Home Farm and the more mature woodland associated with Hawkwell Farm would be retained within buffer zones of semi-natural habitats linked to larger areas of green space associated with the river Bure and its tributaries. This would protect the woodlands from encroachment from surrounding land uses. As part of the Masterplan design the footpaths and cycleways avoid these woodlands to protect them from excessive trampling and disturbance. In addition, there would be no night-time lighting in close proximity to avoid disturbance of nocturnal species. It may be considered appropriate, as part of the detailed design, to create a wildlife walk through these woodlands. This path would be appropriately surfaced with planting and signage used to discourage excessive trampling throughout. Bat boxes and bird boxes would be installed on suitable trees and additional planting undertaken to compensate for any disturbance and enhance the nature conservation value of these woodlands for these fauna. The boxes would be installed in advance of site clearance to compensate for the effects that this disturbance may have on nesting birds. The implementation of a Landscape and Habitats Management Plan would ensure that the woodlands maintain their value to nesting birds.
Ponds The ponds would be retained within an appropriate buffer linked to green space. Water quality within the ponds would be protected NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 68
through the implementation of standard mitigation techniques during construction (through the CEMP), and through the creation of SuDS during operation. Care would be taken in the detailed design to ensure that the retained ponds, and in particular the pond at Crowmarsh Farm and the ponds that support the great crested newts, only receive surface water run-off that is balanced and treated to ensure that water quality in these features is protected. Habitat links between the two ponds found to support great crested newts would be maintained to allow for the movement of newts between the ponds and to allow for continued access with the surrounding terrestrial habitats. The detailed design of the roads that are close to the ponds would ensure that the roads have culverts that enable newts and other amphibians to continue to be able to travel safely between the ponds and suitable foraging habitats. Site clearance within 500 metres of the great crested newt ponds would need to be overseen by an ecologist. Measures would need to be put in place during site clearance to ensure that no great crested newts are harmed. The removal of vegetation that represents a place of shelter or a breeding site for great crested newts would need to take place in accordance with Method Statements and under licence. New habitats of value to great crested newts to include ponds, tussocky grassland and scrub would need to be provided in proximity to the existing breeding ponds to maintain the favourable conservation status of the newt population, such measures would be required as part of a licence application. The success of any mitigation measures would also need to be monitored. The pond at Crowmarsh Farm would be retained within the Nature Reserve and the pond at Hawkwell Farm would be retained within a hedgerow buffer close to the Country Park. As part of the detailed design of these areas of open space it would be possible to create habitats of value to the wildlife (invertebrates, amphibians, bids and bats) associated with the ponds. This would enhance the value of these ponds which are currently surrounded by intensively managed arable land or closely grazed pasture.
Barn Owls The area of broadleaved semi-natural woodland to the west of Home Farm where three barn owl boxes are located would be retained with a 10 metre-wide buffer of semi-natural habitat. Development would take place within 250 metres of these boxes and therefore there is the potential that barn owls using these boxes would be disturbed. Before site clearance works take place in the vicinity of these boxes they would be moved to suitable locations on the edge of the Masterplan site where there is no potential for disturbance. Locations would be selected to ensure that the barn owls have access to suitable foraging habitat (ideally tussocky grassland but more likely NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 69
arable land). Any damaged boxes would be replaced before relocation. These boxes would also provide suitable nesting habitat for the kestrels that were recorded nesting within a barn owl box on the site. Existing nest boxes would only be moved once it has been confirmed, by an experienced, licensed ecologist, that they were not in use.
Breeding and overwintering birds The development would lead to the loss of arable land and grassland fields that supported bird species that are of conservation concern and Species of Principal Importance, this includes farmland specialist species. Domestic pets associated with new residents may also lead to an increase in predation affecting ground-nesting birds using the adjacent farmland. Habitats of value to nesting and foraging birds such as the hedgerows and woodlands would be retained within suitable buffers of semi-natural habitat, this together with the creation of large areas of open space on the edge of the Masterplan site that includes a Nature Reserve, a Country Park and a woodland fitness trail would reduce the scale of this impact on certain species. Nevertheless, there would be a residual effect on birds as habitats that are used by farmland specialists would not remain on the site. It is therefore proposed to compensate for this loss of habitat offsite. Funds would be provided to enhance local habitats for farmland birds through appropriate, proven management regimes to increase the carrying capacity of local habitats. It is considered that such enhancement measures would compensate for the loss of habitat for farmland birds. Measures that have been developed as part of HLS provide safe nesting sites, summer food and winter food for farmland birds. Those measures that could be adopted within local habitats include: the creation of in-field nesting habitat such as skylark plots and beetle banks; the provision of over-wintering seed food as a crop; the provision of bought seed to provide supplementary feeding in winter; the creation of insect-rich foraging habitat such as unharvested fertiliser-free conservation headland and uncropped, uncultivated margins for rare plants on arable land. This offsite compensation would also provide habitat suitable for other farmland specialist species such as brown hare and harvest mice. The requirement to deliver and monitor this off-site compensation would be delivered through a Section 106 or similar legal agreement. There would be a loss of nesting sites associated with the loss of hedgerows, and disturbance to birds within the hedgerows and woodlands. As indicated above with respect to hedgerows and woodland new nest boxes would be provided in advance of site clearance to compensate for habitat loss and/or disturbance. In addition, the provision of nest boxes within the areas of open space and within the areas of built development would lead to the creation NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 70
of new nest sites for certain species, this would include BOCC and Species of Principal Importance. The number of boxes would follow the guidance provided by the Bat Conservation Trust for zero carbon homes (Ref 6-8).
Bat roosts The two trees that supported roosting bats would be retained within areas that would not be lit. In addition, it is not proposed to alter the lighting around the existing farmsteads that either support roosting bats (Home Farm and Himley Farm) or have the potential to support roosting bats (Hawkwell Farm, Crowmarsh Farm and Lord’s Farm). A dark corridor suitable for foraging and commuting bats also forms part of the design. This corridor comprises the River Bure and its tributaries. This dark corridor would continue south following the line of existing hedgerows to provide a link from Crowmarsh Farm across the site to Bignell Park. The stream corridors would be retained within a 60 metre-wide band of semi-natural vegetation and the hedgerows would be retained within a 40 metre-wide band of vegetation. Not only would this ensure that a dark corridor would be maintained when the site is operational but it would also ensure that if the construction site is lit when bats are active the dark corridors would be maintained. As noted previously, during the operation phase, the road and pedestrian/ cycle bridges would need to be lit for safety reasons. However, sensitive lighting design and a low-reflective road surface would prevent light spilling onto the watercourse corridor below; thus ensuring the retention of a continuous dark corridor avoiding impacts on light-sensitive bat species such as brown long-eared bats. The road bridges will be designed to ensure that they do not represent a barrier to the movement of bats. The Masterplan site contained very few natural roost sites and only a few bat boxes had been installed. As part of detailed design the Masterplan proposals would include artificial roosting sites (bat bricks and bat boxes) would be incorporated into the development areas and installed on trees in the areas of open space. This would enhance the value of the Masterplan site for roosting bats. The number of boxes would be informed by the guidance published by the Bat Conservation Trust for Zero Carbon Buildings (Ref 6-8). As well as retaining the most valuable features for bats, a green network of ecological corridors would be created across the site and new habitats of value to foraging bats would be created across the site. This would include new woodland planting on the western edge of the site, the creation of a Nature Reserve that would include wetland habitats and habitats of value to the invertebrates that bats feed on and the creation of a Country Park that would also provide habitat suitable for foraging bats. NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 71
Habitat enhancement and creation measures (detailed below) that would improve the value of Masterplan site for invertebrates would also be of benefit to the bats that feed on them. Such measures include the creation of long grassland habitats, SuDS features supporting wetland vegetation, areas of diverse grassland and allotments.
CEMP A CEMP or similar document would be in place in advance of site clearance to ensure that measures are put in place to protect the environment. This would ensure that: 1. Appropriate measures are put in place to protect water quality in the watercourses and ponds on site. This would also protect downstream habitats. 2. Appropriate measures are put in place to control dust and other emissions that could affect air quality. 3. Protective fencing is put in place to protect the retained habitats and their associated buffer zones. 4. Site compounds, storage facilities and staff facilities are suitably bunded and located in places that would not have an adverse effect on the environment. 5. Protective fencing is installed to protect ecologically sensitive habitats (the watercourses ponds, mature trees, woodlands and hedgerows). 6. Protective fencing is installed to protect ecologically sensitive features such as badger setts and confirmed bat roosts. 7. Pre-construction surveys are carried out by an ecologist to confirm the nature and extent of any ecological constraints in advance of site clearance. So that appropriate mitigation measures including licences are in place in advance of site clearance. 8. An ecological clerk of works is in place to oversee site clearance, in particular any works that have the potential to disturb nesting birds, great crested newts, reptiles and/or hedgehog.
Other ecological receptors requiring mitigation Invertebrates Invertebrate boxes and other structures suitable for use by species such as ladybirds, lacewings and solitary bees, would be provided within suitable habitat to create shelter for these species within the Masterplan site. NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 72
Reptiles Hedgerow removal should ideally be undertaken during the autumn/winter to avoid disturbance to nesting birds. However, at this time reptiles would be entering into, or be within, their hibernating period (typically between the beginning October and early-April) and disturbing reptiles at this time can cause mortality. It is considered unlikely that hibernating reptiles would be present within the footprint of the small sections of hedgerows/vegetation to be removed; however, a check for features suitable for hibernating reptiles would be carried out by a suitably experienced ecologist as part of the preconstruction survey, prior to their removal. Any features considered likely to support hibernating reptiles would be identified and their removal left until the following April, in suitable warm weather conditions, to avoid killing or injuring reptiles. Should hedgerow/vegetation removal be carried out during the reptiles’ active period, a check for the presence of reptiles would be undertaken by an experienced ecologist. If suitable habitat for reptiles was present, habitat manipulation techniques would be employed to displace any reptiles into nearby retained areas of suitable habitat. If no such habitat occurred nearby, a small-scale translocation operation would be undertaken in advance of site clearance. This would involve moving any reptiles captured to a suitable area of retained habitat. In either case, reptiles would not be moved outside the area in which the small populations have already been found to exist. Therefore there would be no issues associated with introducing individuals to a different population, or creating new populations with small numbers of animals. Following the displacement and/or translocation of reptiles, destructive searches would be undertaken as appropriate to further avoid the incidental mortality of individuals. The need for reptileresistant fencing would be reviewed throughout the construction phase. Given the small areas of suitable habitat for reptiles that would be removed, this is considered unlikely to be a requirement at the early phases of development. The need for fencing during the later phases would depend on whether the site remains in agricultural production in advance of development. Reptiles would be expected to persist within the Masterplan site once the site is developed, as the hedgerows and riparian habitat would be maintained within suitable buffer zones of semi-natural vegetation. Badgers All of the badger setts located within the Masterplan site would be retained within areas of green space. All setts would be protected during construction through the use of temporary protective fencing to prevent damage from construction machinery or staff. Any works close to the badger setts would also be carried out under close NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 73
ecological supervision to minimise disturbance to badgers as far as possible. Badgers are afforded protection under the Protection of Badgers Act 1992. As a consequence, works close to active setts which would disturb badgers would be licensable, and there are seasonal restrictions associated with such works. Consequently works that could disturb badgers should not be undertaken during the badger breeding season, which is taken to be from the 1st December to the 30th June. The badger setts would be protected from accidental damage and destruction by being clearly marked out for the duration of works carried out in the vicinity of the setts. The installation of the bridge over the tributary to the River Bure would be undertaken in a sensitive manner to avoid potential damage to the nearby ‘main’ badger sett and to avoid disturbing any badgers present. The area around the ‘main’ sett would also be planted with scrubby vegetation, incorporating a high proportion of fruit-bearing trees and shrubs, to screen the sett from any works and discourage interference or disturbance of the sett. Hedgehogs Hedgehogs would be expected to persist within the Masterplan site once the site is developed, as the hedgerows and riparian habitat would be maintained within suitable buffer zones of semi-natural vegetation. Hedgehogs are also likely to benefit from the increased diversity of habitats within the areas of open space and gardens following construction compared to the habitats present on site prior to development. Measure to protect these species during hedgerow removal are discussed above. Brown hare To minimise impacts on brown hare, topsoil stripping of arable fields would be timed to avoid the brown hare breeding season, or when dependent young could be present. Pre-construction checks for this species would be undertaken by an experienced ecologist.
Habitat Enhancements The green infrastructure included within the Masterplan would lead to the creation of new habitats of benefit to biodiversity. The large areas of green space that have been incorporated into the Masterplan that would provide habitats of benefit to biodiversity are listed below: 1.
A Country Park;
2.
A Nature Reserve;
3.
Dry sustainable drainage features in the northern half of the site;
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 74
4.
A wetland waste water treatment facility; and
5.
A woodland fitness trail.
Country Park This would be created on the western edge of the site north of the railway line, and it would be designed to provide a space for informal recreation but also support habitats of value to biodiversity (trees, a variety of grassland types and scrub). Careful design of the Country Park layout would ensure that there would be areas for quiet contemplation that would provide conditions suitable for fauna that are more sensitive to disturbance. The Country Park would be linked to the stream corridor to the north by open space that is likely to contain allotments and tree planting. Other areas of green space most likely a waste water wetland treatment facility and a green burial ground would also link the Country Park to the stream corridor and the tree and shrub covered railway embankment. This area of green space would be linked to the developed area via the retained hedgerow network. It is therefore anticipated that the fauna associated with the retained hedgerows would colonise the new habitats in the Country Park. The majority of the Country Park would not be lit. Native planting would be used to create habitats of benefit to biodiversity and in particular the species that are already present on the site, to include invertebrates such as hairstreak butterflies, birds associated with woodland and scrub, reptiles, bats and badgers.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 75
Nature Reserve This would be created on the southern side of the railway corridor separated from the main site by the stream corridor. Its purpose would be to provide a site for wildlife that is also suitable for informal recreation. The reserve is likely to support wetland habitats, trees, shrubs and grassland. Access would be managed through the use of a defined footpath network with strategic planting to create a space for quiet contemplation. The native planting would be designed to replicate semi-natural habitats that can be managed by cutting, pruning and occasional vegetation removal. It is not envisaged that the Nature Reserve would be grazed by livestock. However, this will be kept under review as plans for the site develop. The aim of the reserve would be to create semi-natural habitats that support the flora and fauna that are on site and to encourage additional species associated with the newly created habitat to colonise. There is the potential for the existing farm buildings that would be within this Nature Reserve area to be adapted to provide a place of shelter for nesting birds including species of conservation concern such as barn owl, swift, swallow and house sparrow and also to provide suitable sites for roosting bats. Alternatively new structures could be created for this purpose. Dry Sustainable Drainage Features Two large drainage features would be created in the northern half of the site at the intersection of the river crossing and between the River Bure and Lord’s Lane. These features would provide flood storage capacity and be dry for most of the year. These areas will be designed to support native grassland herbs and shrubs. They will be designed and managed to provide habitats of value to biodiversity including the species associated with the hedgerows and stream corridors to which they would be linked. There would be numerous above ground SuDS features across the site most likely they would include swales, dry attenuation ponds, ephemeral ponds and wet ponds. Not only would these create wetland habitat that, with appropriate design, would support native flora and fauna; they would be located within the green infrastructure and within the green space with the developed areas and contribute to the value of these areas as wildlife corridors. The aim would be to create habitats of value to invertebrates, amphibians and reptiles, such as grass snakes. Waste Water Treatment Facility The detail for this facility has yet to be determined. However, it is known that waste water treatment would be required and it is anticipated that it would be dealt with on site. It is envisaged that an integrated wetland would be created to enable water to be discharged NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 76
to the existing stream network. Such a wetland facility would provide a range of wetland features and, although the primary function will be to treat waste water, it would also provide habitats that benefit biodiversity, particularly in association with the tertiary treatment before final discharge. This facility could support wet or damp woodland/scrub, swamp/reed bed habitats, damp/marshy grassland as well as dry habitats associated with the infrastructure buildings and access routes. Most of this area would not be publically accessible and therefore any habitats created would not be subject to regular human disturbance. It would be located alongside the railway corridor and provide additional habitat for the fauna associated with this feature. In the event that a wetland waste water treatment facility is not constructed then the area would support green space and incorporate habitats of value to biodiversity within its design. All planting in this area would comprise native species. Although it may be necessary to install security lighting around particular buildings it would not be necessary to illuminate the entirety of this area. Woodland Fitness Trail A woodland fitness trail would be created on the western edge of the site south of the railway line. The woodland would link into the existing site contours and comprise native tree and shrub species. The planting and design would create a habitat that would be of value to biodiversity and in particular invertebrates, birds, bats and badgers (the trail is located between two large badger setts). A pedestrian/cycle leisure route would pass through this area. Neither the fitness trail nor the leisure route would be lit at times of year when bats are active. This area would be linked to the retained hedgerow network and the dark bat corridor, the fauna associated with these retained features would be expected to colonise the new woodland as it develops. To the north the woodland fitness trail would be linked to the pond at Crowmarsh Farm and in turn linked to the new Nature Reserve by the stream corridor. To the south the woodland fitness trail would be connected to green space that is the potential location for the burial ground or allotments. As indicated previously the fitness trail would be linked to the bat corridor which would be connected to the stream corridor and a network of retained hedgerows. Other Measures Habitats of value to biodiversity would be created in other areas of green space across the site, either to maintain and enhance the biodiversity value of a retained habitat, as an incidental result of another site activity, or to enhance the value of the Masterplan site for biodiversity. Examples of this are provided below. NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 77
The hedgerow buffers would support long grass habitat to maintain and enhance the value of these features for invertebrates. Some buffers would be sown with a native plant mix that would be flower-rich so that it would be visually appealing to the local residents.
A mosaic of habitats of value to great crested newts would be created in the green space linking the two ponds that support the great crested newts. This would include new ponds, tussocky grassland and scrub. This would be required to facilitate the movement of newts between the ponds and maintain the favourable conservation status of the newt population.
The buffers to the semi-natural woodland would support scrub and tall grass habitat to provide a soft edge to these areas. Additional scrub planting would be used to screen the badger setts on the edge of the woodland.
A mosaic of grassland, tall herb, scrub, and woodland habitats would be created in the stream corridors and adjacent areas of green space to create habitats of value to the fauna recorded on the site.
New woodland would be created on the western edge on the northern half of the site to provide a screen between the Masterplan site and the village of Bucknell. This would also lead to the creation of habitat of value to biodiversity.
An incidental result of another site activity Although the primary function of a community farm (or similar facility), allotments, other food growing areas and the burial grounds would not be to provide habitat of value to biodiversity, these areas would nevertheless support a range of fauna. They would provide habitat that would be suitable to support invertebrates, reptiles, birds, bats, hedgehog and badger. If suitable ponds were created in these areas they would also provide habitat for breeding amphibians. The sports pitches that support amenity grass would provide suitable foraging habitat for hedgehog, badger and birds such as starlings. The areas of green space within the developed areas would also provide habitat for wildlife in particular invertebrates and birds. Similarly, there would be opportunities within the above ground SuDS to create habitat and features of value to biodiversity, both through the use of native planting and through design, particularly if features contain open water which was a scarce habitat on the site prior to development. Measures to enhance the biodiversity value of the built environment NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 78
The detailed design of the built development does not form part of the Masterplan. However, there would be opportunities within the site to encourage wildlife into the built area. These could include the use of artificial nest and roost boxes, and/or the incorporation of suitable features into the built design; the use of green/brown/blue roofs; street trees; green walls; and other planting that may not comprise native species but has a structure that provides shelter for fauna; linked gardens and community gardens that provide significant areas of green space; and the incorporation of native planting within areas of open space and SuDS features.
Habitat Management Management of the hedgerows would be relaxed to provide increased value for invertebrates and nesting birds. The buffer adjacent to the hedgerows would also be less intensively managed to encourage long grassland areas, which would support invertebrates and reptiles. The management including the replacement of nest/roost boxes would be controlled through a Landscape and Habitats Management Plan (see Section 6.9 below).
Climate Change The Masterplan includes within its design, elements which would increase the resilience of biodiversity to climate change and ensure it can adapt in the long term. Such elements include: measures to conserve existing biodiversity, such as the maintenance of existing key ecological habitats within the green infrastructure and the conservation of a variety of habitats, to ensure local species and habitats are maintained. It also includes large areas of green space where there is potential to increase habitat diversity and the availability of ecological niches within the Masterplan Site by creating new habitat types using native species. Retained habitats and newly created habitats would also form linear corridors allowing for the migration of species across the Site and into the wider countryside, to counteract isolation and potential loss of species. The Masterplan would also ensure that the River Bure and its tributary are retained, protected, and are given sufficient space to adapt, allowing for the natural processes of erosion and deposition. Retained riparian habitats together with planting within the buffers associated with these watercourses would also assist in soil retention and damage which may potentially arise from any future flood events. The provision of SuDS would also ensure that the water resources within the Masterplan site are controlled and maintained for the future. For example, the SuDS would hold back water following heavy rain, therefore allowing the watercourses to cope more effectively with extremes of weather than traditional piped drainage systems. NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 79
The system also has the potential to improve the quality of the riparian habitats. The retention and improvement of the riparian corridor, the hedgerows, the woodland and the ponds, together with the creation of interconnected green corridors within the built development would also help to reduce the heating effect created by built development. Planting that comprises native species would ensure that it thrives in the anticipated future climatic conditions. Non-native species may be selected in the built areas to cope with the stressed environment created when much of the surrounding area comprises hard surfaces. The provision of long grassland buffer areas and other semi-natural habitats in the hedgerow, woodland and stream buffers would also help to reduce any future droughting effects.
6.7
Assessment of Impacts
6.7.1 Impacts on Key Ecological Receptors Hedgerows (including breeding birds, reptiles and hedgehogs) Construction Impacts Habitat Loss Hedgerows are a Habitat of Principal Importance under Section 41 of the NERC Act (2006) and are also considered to be of intrinsic nature conservation value for the species they support, such as invertebrates, breeding/foraging birds, reptiles and hedgehogs. The hedgerows also form important boundary features and wildlife corridors across the site. Any loss and/or fragmentation would therefore have the potential to impact the associated species. Cumulatively, approximately 500 metres of hedgerow would be removed as a consequence of road access routes and gaps created for cycle and pedestrian routes. However, the Masterplan seeks to minimise the number of times that individual hedgerows are breached; and this hedgerow loss would be compensated for with new planting to ensure no net loss to biodiversity. The new planting would take the form of hedgerows and tree belts in green space, which would be managed to benefit biodiversity. None of the hedgerows have been found to support valuable ground flora plant species and therefore there would be no loss in plant species diversity associated with the loss of hedgerows. Consideration would be given to hedgerow translocation in the early phases of the development since new planting would not have time to mature before hedgerow sections are lost. However, it would be possible to provide new NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 80
planting in advance of hedgerow loss in the later phases of the development. Removal of hedgerow sections would result in the temporary loss of nesting and foraging habitat for birds, prior to the establishment of new areas of planting; however, the provision of additional nest boxes during the construction phase would mitigate for this temporary loss. To further avoid impacts on breeding birds, the removal of any hedgerows would preferably be undertaken outside of the bird breeding season, or under the supervision of a specialist ecologist where this is not possible. It is not envisaged that the hedgerow removal would have any impact on the confirmed bat roosts in trees, as these features would be retained and are not in close proximity to any of the removed sections of hedgerows. Habitat Degradation - Fragmentation Whilst the Masterplan has sought to reduce the fragmentation of the hedgerow network as far as possible, it would be an inevitable consequence of the development proposal that some hedgerows would be breached by access roads and the pedestrian/ cycle routes. The impact of these crossings would be reduced by minimising the width of crossings and the Masterplan has ensured that the crossings are at right angles wherever possible so that this would be feasible. To compensate for the effects of fragmentation, a network of interconnected green spaces would be created across the Masterplan site. This includes green corridors associated with: the railway line; the boundaries to the site; the streams; and the woodlands. Overall, it is considered that fauna (invertebrates, reptiles, birds, bats, hedgehogs and badgers) would continue to be able to cross the site using the retained hedgerows and the green corridors. The removal of sections of hedgerows during the construction phase may result in the disruption of foraging and commuting bats. Impacts on bats are discussed in more detail under the ‘Bat roosts’ receptor below. Road speeds throughout most of the Masterplan site would be reduced since it largely comprises residential development with areas of employment and local amenities. This would reduce the impact of road mortality. Corridors have been provided that would provide badgers with safe access to foraging habitat and culverts would be provided to provide great crested newts with safe crossing points. Habitat Degradation - Disturbance In addition to direct impacts associated with the removal of sections of hedgerows, there would be periods when they may be subject to disturbance from nearby construction works within the site. While all hedgerows and their associated buffers would be protected by NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 81
fencing, there may be some disturbance during the breeding bird season which may deter the use of the some areas of hedgerow by nesting birds, potentially resulting in a temporarily reduced breeding success of the species recorded on site. The provision of nest boxes in advance of site clearance would mitigate for this impact since large parts of the site would remain undisturbed by this large scale phased development. Residual impacts Assuming the implementation of effective mitigation described in Section 6.6, it is considered that the residual impact related to construction on this receptor would be Not Significant. Operational impacts Habitat Degradation - Disturbance Following construction, the context of the hedgerows would have changed as they would no longer be adjacent to arable or grazed farmland, which may change the nesting locations of bird species. However, the hedgerows within the Masterplan site would be retained within buffer zones of semi-natural vegetation that extend a minimum of 10 metres from either side of each feature. This buffer would be extended to a total of 40 metres where hedgerows are located within dark corridors to be maintained for foraging bats. The buffers would ensure that the retained hedgerows are protected from encroachment from adjacent land uses. The hedgerows are a feature of the Masterplan and have been incorporated into leisure routes, formal cycle/pedestrian routes and areas of green space. This secures their future retention and management. There would be no built development or other above ground land uses within the hedgerow buffers. Where hedgerows would be located alongside developed land the development would face the hedgerows, care would be taken in the detailed design to reduce the risk, as far as possible, that local residents would encroach onto these features. For example, care would be taken in the detailed design to ensure that the hedgerows do not form garden boundaries. Retaining hedgerows within wide buffers of semi-natural vegetation would reduce the effects of disturbance to wildlife. It is anticipated that birds nesting in the hedgerows would become habituated to the noise and visual disturbance associated with the development once built. It is predicted that there would be predation associated with domestic cats; however research published by RSPB (The predation of wild birds in the UK: a review of its conservation impact and management. RSPB Research Report no 23) (Ref 6-9) has shown that NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 82
this would be compensated by a boost in numbers associated with artificial nest sites and feeding associated with the new residents. Whilst artificial lighting can disrupt the behaviour of some nocturnal species, conversely it has also been found to be beneficial to species that require light to forage or, as in the case of pipistrelle bats, where the lighting attracts the prey items that the species feed on. It is envisaged that the fauna that would occupy the hedgerows once the site is developed would not be adversely affected where the site is illuminated by artificial light. Care would be taken in the detailed design to ensure that the hedgerows along the dark bat corridor would not be illuminated by artificial light. Habitat Degradation - Poor Management The hedgerows would be incorporated into the green space that would be managed to ensure that they maintain their value to biodiversity. Although the hedgerows would no longer support farmland birds, as a result of their change in setting, they would provide suitable nesting and foraging habitat for birds associated with built development and the urban fringe. These would include species such as house sparrow that are listed as a Species of Principal Importance under the NERC Act (2006). The hedgerows would be managed in accordance with a Landscape and Habitats Management Plan to ensure that they provide habitat suitable for the fauna that were recorded on site prior to development, in particular nesting birds (non-farmland specialists), mammals and invertebrates, including the hair-streak butterflies and other notable invertebrates. Residual impacts It is anticipated that the residual impact on the hedgerow network associated with the operational impacts would be Not Significant. In time, the habitat creation within the green infrastructure and the built development that would form part of the detailed design combined with appropriate management of these features in accordance with a Landscape and Habitats Management Plan, would be beneficial to some species.
River Bure and tributary The River Bure and its tributaries comprise a narrow stream channel that seasonally hold water. For most of their length the banks were tree and shrub lined. Few wetland plants and a restricted range of aquatic invertebrates were recorded in these features. These watercourses pass through fields supporting arable crops and improved grassland, with a small block of woodland present along a stretch of one channel. These watercourses and their adjacent habitats were found to support foraging and commuting bats, a confirmed bat roost within a tree along the River Bure, and a ‘main’ NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 83
badger sett. There was no evidence of use of these watercourses by white-clawed crayfish, water voles or otters, and only low numbers of widespread and common aquatic invertebrates were recorded during the surveys. Construction Impacts Habitat Loss The River Bure and its tributaries would all be retained; set within a 60 metre-wide buffer zone of semi-natural habitat. The creation of the new road crossings would lead to the loss of short sections of bankside habitat; the Masterplan seeks to minimise this impact by creating only three new road crossings, one cycle/pedestrian crossing and to make use of the existing bridge on Bucknell Road. The detailed design of the bridges would ensure that the fauna that currently travel along the stream corridor would continue to use this feature (principally, provision would need to be made to allow large mammals such as badgers and otters to pass under the bridge during times of peak water flows). Habitat Degradation - Disturbance Works close to the ‘main’ badger sett would be undertaken under close ecological supervision to ensure that disturbance to badgers is minimised as far as possible, and temporary protective fencing would be provided to prevent damage to the sett from site machinery or staff during construction activities. The need for works to proceed under licence to Natural England would also be reviewed, and methods of working devised to ensure that activities likely to cause disturbance were avoided if at all possible. A number of potential bat tree roosts are located along the banks of the River Bure, including one confirmed common pipistrelle bat roost. In addition, the bat activity transect surveys identified that the stream corridor was a valuable foraging area for bats. These trees would be retained within the River Bure corridor; however, their value for bats could potentially be reduced due to noise associated with construction. However, it is considered unlikely that this disturbance would have a significant impact on the local bat population since the streams and their associated trees would be retained within a substantial buffer of semi-natural vegetation and this buffer would be protected from site traffic by fencing. Habitat Degradation - Fragmentation As identified above with respect to habitat loss, the number of new stream crossings has been limited to three new road crossings with a further crossing for pedestrians and cycles. Careful design of the bridges would ensure that the fauna associated with these watercourses could continue to use the stream as a wildlife corridor. NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 84
This would include measures to ensure that a dark corridor would be maintained for bats, for example though careful design of lighting and the design of the structures to ensure that otters and badgers can travel along the bank at periods of peak water flow. Habitat Degradation - Pollution There is the potential for habitat degradation to occur as a result of polluted surface water runoff entering the watercourses during construction. The implementation of standard pollution control measures during construction would ensure the protection of water quality. Residual impacts Assuming the implementation of effective mitigation described in Section 6.6, the residual impact on the River Bure, its tributaries, or the associated species during construction would be Not Significant. Operational impacts Habitat Degradation - Pollution There is the potential for habitat degradation to occur as a result of polluted surface water runoff entering the watercourses when the site has been developed. The creation of SuDS would ensure that water quality within the watercourses is protected. Habitat Degradation - Trampling and other disturbance These watercourses are currently unlit, providing a dark foraging area and commuting route for nocturnal species such as bats and badgers. Lighting these previously dark corridors may render them less suitable for nocturnal foraging species, particularly light sensitive species such as brown long-eared bats, which are known to roost within St Laurence Church to the north of the Masterplan site. The riparian habitat along these watercourses provides a suitable dark link between the church roost and suitable habitat to the west of the Masterplan site; therefore, lighting could prevent bats from reaching foraging areas, thereby having a detrimental impact on the local population. Impacts on bats would be minimised through sensitive lighting design at the bridge crossings and not illuminating the streams and their associated buffers. This would maintain the existing dark corridor. In addition, sensitive lighting of the road bridge across the River Bure tributary would minimise adverse effects on the badgers within the ‘main’ badger sett close to this watercourse. Retaining the watercourses within a wide corridor of semi-natural green space and the careful design of the newly created semi-natural habitats within this corridor would reduce the impact of disturbance associated with NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 85
the new residents. Careful design of the newly created habitats within this buffer, and of the leisure cycle/pedestrian route would ensure that the effects on the retained bankside habitat would be minimal. It is considered unlikely that increased public access would result in significant impacts on the River Bure and its tributaries, or the protected species they support. Habitat Degradation - Poor Management The watercourses and their associated bankside habitats would be managed to benefit nature conservation in the longer-term, to ensure that these habitats retain their value for biodiversity. It is not proposed to create play areas, allotments or other similar amenity facilities within the stream corridor buffer areas across most of the Masterplan site. A play area will be created within the river corridor in the northern part of the site. Residual impacts Assuming the implementation of effective mitigation described in section 6.6, it is considered that during operation the residual impact on the River Bure, its tributary and associated species would be Not Significant. The creation of diverse semi-natural habitats within the riparian corridor as part of the detailed design for the Masterplan would ensure that in time there would be a beneficial effect on some species associated with this ‘Key Ecological Receptor’.
Broadleaved semi-natural woodland & mature broadleaved plantation Construction impacts Habitat Degradation - Noise and Visual Disturbance There would be periods when the woodland may be subject to disturbance from nearby construction works within the site. To minimise these impacts, these blocks of woodland would be retained within an appropriate buffer zone that extends a minimum of 10 metres from the woodland edge. The buffer zone would support seminatural habitats, and would be incorporated into larger expanses of green space that would also support areas of planted trees. While the woodland would be protected by fencing during construction, there may be some disturbance during the breeding bird season which may deter its use by nesting birds, potentially resulting in a temporarily reduced breeding success of the species recorded on site. The provision of nest boxes elsewhere on the site would mitigate for this disturbance. The woodlands would not be lit during construction and therefore it is not anticipated that this phase of the development would have any impact on bats that may roost or forage within the woodlands or on their periphery. NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 86
Residual impacts Assuming the implementation of effective mitigation described in Section 2.6, and due to the temporary nature of these impacts, it is considered that the residual impact related to construction on these woodlands would be Not Significant. Operational impacts Habitat Degradation - Trampling There is the potential for activities associated with the new residents to cause habitat degradation associated with trampling. To minimise such impacts, the footpath and cycle networks avoid the areas of semi-natural woodland. The creation of wildlife walk in the woodlands, the use of strategic tree and shrub planting and the use of signage would help to protect these habitats. Habitat management would ensure that the value of the woodland for wildlife would be maintained in the longer-term. Habitat Degradation - Noise and Visual Disturbance Noise and visual disturbance once the site was operational could affect birds nesting within the woodland; however, it is envisaged that the birds would have become habituated to the change in setting during the construction phase. The provision of a buffer zone and incorporation of the woodlands into larger areas of open space would be expected to reduce the scale of the impact on birds occupying these habitats and ensure that any impacts on roosting bats is avoided. The woodlands would not be lit when the site is operational. Residual impacts Assuming the implementation of effective mitigation described in Section 6.6, it is considered that the residual impact related to operation on these woodlands would be Not Significant.
Ponds All ponds within the Masterplan site, including the two which were found to support great crested newts would be retained within areas of open space and/or green corridors; with suitable buffers. Construction impacts Habitat Loss/Fragmentation To minimise the impacts of habitat loss and fragmentation the ponds would be retained within appropriate buffer zones. A link between the two ponds known to support great crested newts would be NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 87
maintained to allow movement of animals between the ponds. Culverts would be provided beneath the roads that are close to these ponds to enable the great crested newts and other amphibians to travel safely between these ponds during construction. The ponds would also be linked to green corridors to maintain access to suitable terrestrial habitats, with culverts provided where appropriate to maintain access. All works likely to affect great crested newts would need to be overseen by an ecologist and, where appropriate, in accordance with the provisions of a licence. Amphibian-proof fencing would also be used, where appropriate, to avoid harm to great crested newts during site clearance and construction. Habitat Degradation - Pollution There is the potential for habitat degradation to occur as a result of polluted surface water runoff entering the ponds during construction. The implementation of standard pollution prevention and control measures during construction would protect water quality during that phase of the development. Residual impacts Assuming the implementation of effective mitigation described in Section 6.6, it is considered that the construction phase residual impacts on ponds would be Not Significant. Operational impacts Habitat Loss/Fragmentation Care would be taken in the detailed design of access roads and the green space around the retained ponds that support great crested newts to ensure that great crested newts can travel between the ponds with culverts provided where appropriate. This would also ensure that access to open space suitable for foraging newts is maintained. Habitat Degradation - Pollution There is the potential for habitat degradation to occur as a result of polluted surface water run off entering the ponds when the site has been developed. The detailed design of the SuDS would protect the ponds when the site is occupied. Although the retained and newly created ponds may receive surface water run off care would be taken to ensure that they receive water that has been screened first so that pollutants and sediments have been removed to protect water quality in these features. Habitat Degradation – Poor Management NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 88
Habitat management linked to monitoring would be required to maintain the value of these habitats for the wildlife. The great crested newt population would be safeguarded since the ponds that support them would be retained within green space with green links and other measures put in place to maintain the favourable conservation status of this population. Residual impacts Assuming the implementation of effective mitigation described in Section 6.6, it is considered that the residual impact related to operation on ponds would be Not Significant.
Barn owls Barn owls were recorded nesting in a barn owl nest box west of Home Farm in 2010. This box together with two new boxes was moved to the edge of the woodland west of Home Farm in 2012. Construction Impacts Disturbance Should construction works be undertaken during the barn owl breeding season (March to August) it is possible that increased human presence in the area, site traffic, noise and lighting could disturb nesting barn owls. Works that take place within 250 metres of the nest boxes have the potential to cause disturbance, and potentially affect breeding success. The boxes would be moved in advance of site clearance to suitable trees in locations that would not be disturbed that also have access to suitable foraging habitat. Habitat loss The Masterplan site as a whole supported very little habitat that was of particular value to foraging barn owls; however, the development would result in the loss of grassland leys and cattle-grazed grassland fields, the rough grassy margins and borders of which may be part of the confirmed breeding pair of barn owls’ home range. A significant proportion of suitable foraging habitat would remain outwith the Masterplan site, including areas immediately to the north and west. Therefore, it is not considered that the Masterplan would remove valuable barn owl foraging resources.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 89
Residual impacts The potential exists for the construction of the proposed development to disturb nesting barn owls, however assuming the implementation of effective mitigation described in Section 6.6, the residual impact on barn owls associated with the construction phase would be Not Significant. Operational impacts Disturbance The increased public use of areas within the vicinity of the nest boxes, and noise and light impacts from the proposed development would be likely to disturb nesting barn owls. Disturbance from increased public use of the retained grasslands within the area is also likely to have a significant impact on barn owls, which may forage during the day at certain times of year, and are sensitive to disturbance at these times. As such, the barn owl nest boxes within the Masterplan site would be moved to suitable trees in locations that would not be susceptible to disturbance, with access to suitable foraging habitat. Residual impacts Assuming the implementation of effective mitigation described in Section 6.6, and that the nest boxes are moved to areas that would not be subject to disturbance the residual impact on barn owls would be Not Significant.
Breeding and overwintering birds Construction impacts Habitat loss The arable land and the majority of the improved grassland that was found to be of value to farmland specialist bird species would be lost within the Masterplan site. There is the potential that new habitats of value to some of these species would be provided within the Nature Reserve and Country Park; notwithstanding this, there would be a residual impact on farmland birds. As identified in Section 2.6 above, it is therefore proposed to provide habitats suitable for these species off site to compensate for this adverse impact. Given that the development within the Masterplan site would be phased over several decades it is envisaged that it would be possible to provide compensation in a similar timeframe to the impacts that are generated. There are tried and tested techniques for creating and enhancing habitats for the benefit of farmland birds, therefore it is envisaged that such measures could be instigated with a high degree of confidence of achieving success NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 90
The mature woodland and hedgerows that were also found to be of value to nesting and foraging birds would be retained with appropriate buffers linked to areas of open space as part of the green infrastructure strategy. These buffers would be protected with fencing during construction. Birds would become habituated to disturbance and it is therefore anticipated that many of the bird species associated with these habitats in particular those associated with the urban fringe and woodland habitats would continue to use these habitats within the Masterplan site during construction. As indicated above construction would be phased over a number of decades and as such large parts of the Masterplan site would be left undisturbed. The provision of nest boxes would provide nesting sites for the hedgerow and woodland birds that are displaced during construction. Residual impacts
Assuming the implementation of effective mitigation described in Section 6.6, it is considered that the residual impact on breeding and overwintering birds associated with the construction phase would be Not Significant. Operational impacts Increased predation of adjacent bird populations
Domestic pets associated with new residents may also lead to an increase in predation of ground-nesting birds using the adjacent farmland. As detailed in Section 2.6, it is anticipated that the proposals for offsite habitat creation and enhancements would help to bolster local farmland bird populations and compensate for any increases in predation as a result of the Masterplan. It is anticipated that the creation of significant areas of green space that would include a Nature Reserve, Country Park, a waste water treatment facility and woodland fitness trail together with new woodland and hedgerow planting would lead to the creation of habitats that are beneficial to some bird species. This, together with the provision of artificial nest sites and supplementary feeding from local residents, would lead to an increase in the number of urban fringe species that could include species of conservation concern and Species of Principal Importance like the house sparrow and starling. Disturbance to bird populations
It is anticipated that birds resident within the Masterplan site comprising both the built areas and the areas of open space would become habituated to the noise and visual disturbance associated with the development once the site is occupied. Within the Masterplan there would be areas that would be areas that are less regularly disturbed this would include areas within the Nature Reserve, the Country Park, green burial sites, the waste water NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 91
treatment facility and areas of woodland planting on the western edge of the site. As identified above the Masterplan would lead to the creation of new habitats of value to nesting and foraging birds and the establishment of a large number of artificial nesting sites. In addition, although residents would have access to the retained blocks of woodland the pedestrian and cycle paths avoid these habitats to reduce disturbance to woodland birds. Residual impacts Assuming the implementation of effective mitigation described in Section 6.6, and due to the temporary nature of these impacts, it is considered that the impact on breeding and over-wintering bird species associated with the operational phase would be Not Significant.
Bat roosts The proposed development design has ensured the retention of all confirmed bat roost trees. The key areas of the site for foraging and commuting bats were the woodland, along the River Bure and its tributaries and the associated hedgerow corridor in the southern half of the site, which would all be retained. The road and pedestrian/cycle bridges that cross the water courses would be appropriately designed and so that a dark corridor is maintained and to ensure that they do not represent a barrier to the movement of bats. Construction Impacts Disturbance Protective fencing associated with the protection of the watercourses and their associated buffers would ensure that the confirmed bat roosts in trees would be retained and protected from noise and visual disturbance during construction and site. The buildings associated with the confirmed and potential roost sites in the farmsteads would be retained together with the land immediately adjacent to them, this would ensure that the roosts would not be affected by noise and visual disturbance associated with site clearance.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 92
Habitats loss and/or degradation The removal of vegetation to install bridges over the River Bure and its tributaries would be kept to a minimum. Given that this watercourse links to areas containing larger gaps in vegetation (such as the B4100 separating the Masterplan site from the brown longeared roost at St Laurence Church), and that the majority of bats passes recorded using the Masterplan site were of common pipistrelle bats, it is unlikely that the creation of these gaps would deter the use of the Bure and its tributaries by foraging and commuting bats. The removal of hedgerows to create gaps for access roads would not have an impact on the confirmed bat roosts in trees, as these features are not in close proximity to any of the removed sections of hedgerows. The hedgerows provide valuable foraging and commuting habitat for bats; however, as noted above, it is considered unlikely that the creation of a small number of gaps (one or two) would deter the species present from using these features. The arable fields and grassland habitats which would be lost under the footprint of the proposed development were not considered to be of particular value to the bat species recorded within the activity and emergence surveys, and dark vegetated links would be retained across the site to link to suitable foraging habitat outside the Masterplan site boundary. This would be particularly important for more vulnerable species such as brown long-eared bats, which emerge after dark and prefer to fly in dark, cluttered environments. However, few brown long-eared bats were recorded during the surveys, and as discussed above, to reach these locations within the site they have to cross already existing gaps such as the B4100 and the less vegetated corridors to the west. It is therefore not considered likely that the loss of low value arable land and improved grassland would have a significant impact on the local bat population. Residual impacts Assuming the implementation of effective mitigation described in Section 6.6, it is considered that the residual impact on bats roost related to construction would be Not Significant. Operational impacts Disturbance The confirmed bat tree roosts would be retained in dark corridors within the Masterplan site and the bridges would be designed to ensure bats can continue to forage along the River Bure and its tributaries. However, as discussed under the River Bure and tributaries receptor above, there could be direct impacts on bats commuting or foraging along these corridors if the associated lighting for these new bridges is not installed in a sensitive manner. Should NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 93
lighting spill over from the bridges onto the riparian corridor, it may render them less suitable for light sensitive bat species such as brown long-eared bats. Commuting and foraging brown long-eared bats follow dark corridors; therefore, lighting these corridors could prevent them from reaching foraging areas, thereby having a detrimental impact on the local population. It is unlikely that lighting on the bridges or within Masterplan site itself would adversely affect other bat species recorded within the area such as pipistrelle, noctule and Leisler’s bats, as these species have been recorded foraging under certain artificial light sources, and are fast flying species that are not deterred from flying through lit areas. The design principles set on the Exemplar site would be followed on the Masterplan site to ensure that dark corridors are maintained. The confirmed and potential bat roosts in the farmsteads would be retained with their associated gardens. The hedgerows and stream corridors that link these buildings to the wider countryside would be retained. Although it is not proposed to alter the lighting in the vicinity of the farmsteads the roosts were occupied by pipistrelle bats that are not adversely affected by normal street lighting. It is not anticipated that development around the farmsteads would cause disturbance to these bat roosts. Residual impacts Assuming the implementation of effective mitigation described in Section 6.6, the residual impact on bat roosts would be Not Significant. The creation of significant areas of open space, that has the potential to support a diverse range of semi-natural habitats, would enhance the value of the Masterplan site for invertebrates and thus the bats that feed on them. The provision of artificial roost sites within the open space and in the built areas would also lead to the creation of more sites potentially suitable for use by roosting bats in the longer-term. Overall, the Masterplan could have a beneficial effect on some species of bats as the new habitats mature.
6.7.2 Impacts on Other Ecological Receptors Reptiles Small numbers of common lizard and a grass snake were recorded within the Masterplan site. These species would most frequently occur in the hedgerows and buffers associated with the River Bure and its tributaries; therefore, there is the potential risk of killing and/or injuring reptiles during the construction phase of the development, where potentially suitable habitat for these species is removed to create the access roads. All reptiles are protected from killing or injuring under the Wildlife and Countryside Act, 1981 (as amended); therefore measures outlined in Section 6.6 would be taken to avoid their incidental mortality during the removal of vegetation. NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 94
Badgers The Masterplan has been designed to allow the retention of all of the badger setts in situ and provides vegetated buffers surrounding the setts to minimise the impacts of construction activities in close proximity. There would be some loss of foraging habitat for badgers within the Masterplan site; however, the habitat within close proximity to the setts would be retained together with well-connected grassland and woodland habitat along the watercourses and hedgerows which would ensure links to other areas of suitable habitat within this badger social group’s territory. It is therefore not anticipated that this would significantly affect the badger population. Planting fruit trees within the areas of open space next to setts would also enhance the value of these areas for badgers on a seasonal basis. Underpasses for badgers and badger-resistant fencing are not considered necessary along the new access roads within the Masterplan due to the relatively low predicted speed of the traffic in proximity to the known setts. With regard to the badgers in the northern half of the site they are more likely to continue to forage along the river corridors travelling under the bridges to access suitable foraging habitat rather than crossing the roads themselves. The badger setts on the southern half of the site are close to the western boundary and it is anticipated that these badgers would forage within the newly created areas of green space associated in the Masterplan and not come into conflict with the access roads.
Brown Hares Given the low value of the Masterplan site for brown hare it is unlikely that they would be utilising the area; however, site clearance works could result in the mortality of dependent young brown hares (should they be present), if carried out during the brown hare breeding season. Therefore, topsoil stripping works would, as far as possible, aim to avoid unnecessary impacts on brown hares; either by taking place at appropriate times of year, or following a check by an experienced ecologist to confirm the absence of brown hares and dependent young. Brown hares are unlikely to utilise the site following operation due to disturbance from increased public use of area. Brown hares are also likely to be particularly sensitive to disturbance from exercising of dogs. Retained areas of suitable habitat would be present outside of the Masterplan site boundary. Brown hare would also be expected to benefit from the offsite compensation that would be provided for farmland birds.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 95
6.8
Cumulative Effects Other developments of relevance to this assessment are detailed in Table 17-1. The closest of these are two housing developments: a proposal for 200 dwellings at Caversfield, along Fringford Road approximately 300m from the Masterplan site; and the other, for 197 dwellings at RAF Bicester, Caversfield, which is currently under construction. The impact assessment concluded that, assuming the effective implementation of the mitigation measures outlined above, there would be no residual impacts on habitats and species present within the Masterplan site. It is not envisaged that the developments listed in Table 18-2 would lead to any direct impacts on the habitats and species associated within the Masterplan site. There is potential for traffic associated with the new developments to contribute to impacts associated with air quality. This would be fully reviewed as part of future impact assessments, once traffic data are available.
6.9
Monitoring and Management A programme of monitoring of the ‘Key Ecological Receptors’ would be developed covering the period during construction, and postcompletion of relevant phases of the development. As a minimum, monitoring is likely to be necessary to confirm: the continued use of retained badger setts; continued use of the confirmed bat roost and continued use of the watercourses by foraging bats; continued use of the ponds by great crested newts; use of the hedgerows and shrub areas by nesting birds; and biological water quality of the River Bure and tributary, both pre-, during and post-construction. The retained and newly created habitats would be managed in accordance with a Landscape and Habitats Management Plan (in keeping with local planning policy) to ensure the value to wildlife of the habitat and features is realised. Monitoring would form part of this plan to ensure that management is modified if required to ensure that its aims are achieved.
6.10 Summary The Ecology chapter of the SER has been informed by desk studies, the results of detailed and targeted ecological field surveys and consultations with the Eco-development’s Biodiversity team, comprising representatives from the statutory nature conservation organisations, the local authorities and the local wildlife trust. The results of this work has influenced the Masterplan to reduce impacts NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 96
on wildlife and habitats as far as possible, and to produce a design that incorporates habitat enhancement and creation measures that would result in a proposal that leads to a net gain in biodiversity, as required by statutory planning policies. Care has been taken to ensure that the habitats that have been retained and created as part of the proposed development are resilient to the anticipated effects of climate change. The field surveys revealed that the Masterplan site comprised arable fields and improved grassland. There were two small areas of broadleaved semi-natural woodland in the north-east of the site, used by foraging bats and the location of three barn owl nest boxes. There was one small area of mature broadleaved plantation. There were also areas of recently established plantation, comprising broadleaved trees within tall unmanaged grassland. There are three watercourses within the proposed development, the River Bure, and two tributaries. These watercourses are seasonally dry holding water in the winter months and during periods of high rainfall at other times of the year. One ‘main’ badger sett, one subsidiary sett, two outlier setts and two potential main setts were recorded within the Masterplan site, and several bat roosts were confirmed within trees and buildings within the Masterplan site. Two further bat roosts were identified in nearby buildings that are outside the proposed development area. Species-rich hedgerows form the field boundaries; these features together with the River Bure were found to be used by foraging bats. The River Bure and the linked hedgerows to the south were also found to be used by commuting bats. Common pipistrelle, soprano pipistrelle, Leisler’s, noctule, and an undetermined myotis bat were recorded on the proposed development site; however, the majority of passes recorded within the study area were of common pipistrelle bats. Several uncommon invertebrate species were recorded within the proposed development area, but the majority of the area supported few invertebrates. Small numbers of common lizards and grass snake were recorded on the field boundaries and it is likely that hedgehogs may also use these features. The Masterplan site was found to support ten bird species typically associated with the farmland habitats. Small numbers of birds were recorded nesting in the hedgerows, but the fields were found to be of limited value to nesting birds. Barn owls are known to have nested on the site recently and in the surrounding area. The nest boxes within the Masterplan site would be relocated to suitable habitat outside the development to ensure that barn owls are not disturbed by the proposals. The ponds within the Masterplan site would be retained one within the nature reserve one close to the Country Park and two that support great crested newts will be retained within buffers of semiNW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 97
natural vegetation. Culverts and corridors of vegetation would be provided to ensure that great crested newts can continue to travel between the two ponds and their terrestrial habitat. The proposed development would have no direct impacts on designated sites of nature conservation importance. The results of the air quality assessment will be used to determine whether the Energy Centre(s) and traffic associated with the development would have any effect on air quality in proximity to SSSIs within 10km of the Masterplan site. It is likely that mitigation would be provided to ensure that the Energy Centre(s) would not generate significant impacts on these receptors. The results of traffic modelling would also be required to assess whether there is the potential for impacts on these sites, and to assess the impact that the travel plan would have. The proposed development layout has ensured that the hedgerows are retained as far as possible. Where it is necessary to breach these features to provide access, or to create visibility splays, the affected areas would be moved and replanted nearby within the proposed development or replacement planting provided. This would ensure that the hedgerow network is retained and that there is no loss. Nest boxes would also be provided to maintain suitable nest sites in areas that would not be disturbed during construction. All hedgerows would be retained with an appropriate buffer zone of tall grassland habitat. Care has been taken to ensure that each watercourse is crossed once to provide access so that these natural wildlife corridors are retained. Sensitive lighting would be used on the bridges to ensure that dark corridors are retained to avoid disturbance to nocturnal species such as bats and badgers. Careful lighting design would also be used close to the hedgerows in order to maintain their value to wildlife. New habitats of value to wildlife would be created within a Nature Reserve, a County Park, sustainable drainage features, a woodland fitness trail and a waste water treatment facility. Large numbers of trees and shrubs would also be planted within the areas of open space including the residential areas. Whilst their primary function is to provide an attractive environment for people, this planting would also provide habitats for wildlife and help to offset impacts of climate change. Similarly, although the primary function of the allotments and other food growing areas is for the benefit of the residents, they would also contain habitats and features of value to wildlife. Bird nest boxes and boxes for roosting bats would also be provided as part of the proposed development. These features would be located on and within buildings and trees in unlit areas that have ready access to suitable foraging areas for these species and where they can also be accessed for maintenance. NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 98
A Landscape and Habitats Management Plan would be produced to ensure that the retained and newly created habitats are managed for wildlife in the long-term. This plan would be monitored to ensure that remedial action would be taken if required. Monitoring would also take place to ensure that water quality within the River Bure and its tributary is protected during construction. The proposed development would ensure that features of value to wildlife are retained (the hedgerows, woodland, ponds and watercourses) and that new habitats of value to wildlife would be created. It would not be possible to compensate for the loss of habitats used by farmland birds and habitats off site would be enhanced to benefit these species. The measures provided for in the Masterplan and the habitat enhancements offsite would ensure that there is a net gain in biodiversity as required by statutory planning policies. The proposed development will ensure that features of value to wildlife are retained (the hedgerows and watercourses) and that new habitats of value to wildlife will be created. The latter will ensure that there is a net gain in biodiversity as required by statutory planning policies.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 99
7
Flood Risk and Hydrology
7.1
Introduction This chapter considers the potential beneficial and adverse impacts on the water environment associated with the construction and operation of the North West Bicester Masterplan development. This chapter also describes:
The current baseline conditions of the water environment and considers the future baseline, immediately prior to the proposed development.
Measures that have been embedded into the Masterplan vision, and recommended additional mitigation measures to prevent, reduce or offset any potentially significant adverse effects to the water environment.
The likely residual effects after these measures have been implemented.
To assist the understanding of the principles of this subject and their particular application within the context of the proposed development, it is recommended that the reader refers to the associated Hyder Consulting Ltd. Flood Risk Assessment (Ref 7-1), Surface Water Drainage Strategy (Ref 7-2) and Water Cycle Study (Ref 7-3).
7.2
Regulatory and Policy Framework This impact assessment has been undertaken in accordance with current international and national legislation, and national and local plans and policies relating to flood risk and hydrology in the context of the proposed Masterplan development. A summary of the relevant legislation and policies, the requirements of these policies has been provided in Table 7.1 below. Table 7-1
Flood Risk and Hydrology Regulatory and Policy Framework
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester Masterplan Site Response
National Planning Policy Framework and Technical Guidance
Sets out Government policy on development and flood risk and provides explanation of the roles of all stakeholders in managing flood risk, with the goal of achieving sustainable development, from local planning bodies to developers and the Environment Agency.
A Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) has been completed in accordance with NPPF, in addition to the comprehensive Surface Water Drainage Strategy, which focuses on the sustainable management of surface water flood risk.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 100
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester Masterplan Site Response
The Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EEC)
The Directive provides a framework for the protection of surface (fresh) water, estuaries, coastal water and groundwater. The objectives of the Directive are to enhance the status, and prevent further deterioration, of aquatic ecosystems, promote the sustainable use of water, reduce pollution of water (especially by `priority' and 'priority hazardous' substances) and ensure progressive reduction of groundwater pollution. Among the main features of the Directive are that all inland and coastal waters within defined river basin districts must reach at least good status by 2015.
The proposed development will aim to attain the highest achievable water quality standards. This will be achieved with the incorporation of Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) into the design to improve the quality of the runoff from the Masterplan Site.
The Flood and Water Management Act 2010
The Flood and Water Management Act encourages the use of sustainable drainage in new developments and redevelopments. National Standards for the design, construction, operation and maintenance of SuDS are currently being drafted.
Through the preparation of the FRA and the Drainage Strategy, the proposed development has incorporated SuDS into the design. It has been concluded that the proposed development will not be exposed to an unacceptable degree of flood risk or increase flood risk to third parties.
Cherwell Local Plan Submission (2014) Policy ESD8 – Water Resources
This policy is aimed at maintaining water quality, ensuring adequate water resources and promoting sustainability of water use. It states that development that would adversely affect the water quality of surface or underground water bodies, including rivers, canals, lakes and reservoirs as a result of directly attributable factors will not be permitted.
The proposed development will aim to attain the highest achievable water quality standards, through embedded design and implementation of additional mitigation measures.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 101
7.3
Methodology
7.3.1 Study Area The study area consists of the proposed Masterplan Site, along with the catchment area of the two tributaries to the River Bure, to which the Masterplan Site drains, downstream to the mainline railway crossing in Bicester. The study area has been extended beyond the boundary of the Masterplan Site to include an area of the Bure catchment downstream, to ensure that the assessment of potential impacts on downstream water quality and flood risk to downstream third party lands is included. Baseline data has been gathered for the defined study area. However, where information is not available from within the study area, the best available information from outside the study area have been utilised where appropriate. In consultation with Natural England a hydrological link between the proposed Masterplan Site and Wendlebury Meads and Mansmoor Closes SSSI was highlighted. The study area was therefore extended to include this site.
7.3.2 Establishment of Baseline Conditions Flood risk from a wide range of sources has been assessed and is reported in the Masterplan FRA (Appendix 7-1, Volume 3). To inform this FRA a hydraulic model was developed representing the River Bure and three of its key tributaries which flow through the Site. The hydraulic model was developed in ISIS (Ref7-4), an industry standard hydraulic modelling package, which routes flow hydrographs that were estimated using UK Best Practice Flood Estimation Handbook (FEH) (Ref 7-5) techniques. A conceptual surface water drainage strategy has also been developed based on the principle of attenuating any additional post development runoff to equivalent greenfield rates to ensure that there is no increase in flood risk as a result of the development. The drainage strategy incorporates a suite of sustainable drainage techniques, with the aim of managing rainwater runoff close to its source, reducing flood risk and improving water quality. An assessment of the potential for water quality impacts has been undertaken using published information for local watercourses. In order to establish baseline conditions at the proposed Masterplan Site, the following data has been utilised:
Topographic survey (Drawing 7013)
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 102
Hydrological data for the River Bure derived from the FEH CDROM v3 (Ref 7-6)
Hydrological data from the Environment Agency’s River Bure model.
Information on ground conditions from the NW Bicester development- Phase 1 Desk Study, (Hyder Consulting, July 2010)
Water quality data from the Environment Agency collected for the Town Brook, downstream of the Masterplan Site development within Bicester (Ref 7-8).
Environment Agency online data sets accessed via http://maps.environment-agency.gov.uk/wiyby.
Information on private water supplies, provided in response to a request to Cherwell District Council Environmental Health team (September 2013).
Abstraction license data, water quality data and WFD monitoring data, provide in response to a request to the Environment Agency (July 2013).
7.3.3 Assessment of Effects The criteria used to assess potential impacts on the water environment are outlined below. These have been used to define the significance of the impacts associated with the proposed Masterplan development on the Bure and other features of the water environment within the study area. The method comprises the following stages and is based on guidance set out in the Design for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Volume 11: Environmental Assessment (Ref 7-9):
Assessment of baseline environmental importance (value)
Assessment of impact magnitude
Assessment of significance of effects
Key water resources/receptors within the study area have been assigned a value / importance based upon the criteria contained within Table 7-2. Table 7-2
Criteria for estimating the receptor value / importance of water features
Value / Typical Importan Descriptor ce s
Typical Example
Very High Attribute has Surface a high quality Waters: and rarity on NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
EC Designated Salmonid / Cyprinid fishery River Quality Objective (RQO) River Ecosystem Class RE1.
Page 103
Value / Typical Importan Descriptor ce s
Typical Example
a regional or national scale.
Watercourse achieving WFD Class ‘High’. Site protected under EU or UK wildlife legislation (SAC, SPA, SSSI, Ramsar site) Supports a public potable water supply to a large community Groundwater: Principal aquifer providing a regionally important resource or supporting a site protected under wildlife legislation Source Protection Zone (SPZ) I Flood Risk:
High
Attribute has Surface a high quality Waters: and rarity on a local scale.
Designated washland or a large and active floodplain where there is high potential for flooding of a large number (> 100) of residential properties and infrastructure Watercourse achieving WFD Class ‘Good’ Major Cyprinid Fishery Species protected under EU or UK wildlife legislation
Groundwater: Secondary A aquifer providing locally important resourced or supporting river ecosystem SPZII Flood Risk:
Medium
Flood plain or defence protecting between 1 and 100 residential properties or industrial premises from flooding.
Attribute has Surface Watercourse achieving WFD Class ‘Moderate’ a medium Waters: quality and Groundwater: Secondary B aquifer providing water for rarity on a agricultural or industrial use with limited local scale. connection to surface water SPZII Flood Risk:
Low
Attribute has Surface a low quality Waters: and rarity on Groundwater: a local scale. Flood Risk:
Flood plain or defence protecting 10 or fewer industrial properties from flooding Watercourse that is not a fishery, achieving WFD Class ‘Poor’ Non-productive strata Flood plain with limited constraints and low probability of flooding of residential and industrial properties.
The magnitude of changes on the baseline condition is then assigned considering the scale/extent of change and the nature and duration of the impacts. Definitions of magnitude are provided in Table 7-3.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 104
Table 7-3
Criteria used to determine the magnitude of impacts on water features
Magnitude of Potential Impact
Criteria
Major
Adverse
Results in loss of attribute and/or quality and integrity of the attribute
Beneficial
Results in major improvement of attribute quality.
Adverse
Results in effect on integrity of attribute, or loss of part of attribute.
Beneficial
Results in moderate improvement of attribute quality.
Adverse
Results in some measurable change in attribute’s quality or vulnerability.
Beneficial
Results in some beneficial effect on attribute or a reduced risk of negative effect occurring.
Moderate
Minor
Negligible
Results in effect on attribute, but of insufficient magnitude to affect the use or integrity.
The overall significance of the identified impacts is then assessed using a matrix which correlates the importance of the receptor/attribute against the magnitude of the impact. The matrix is reproduced in Table 7-4. Table7-4
Criteria for estimating the significance of effects on water features
IMPORTANT OF ATTRIBUTE
MAGNITUDE OF IMPACT Negligible
Minor
Moderate
Major
Very High
Neutral
Moderate/Large
Large/Very Large
Very Large
High
Neutral
Slight/Moderate
Moderate/Large
Large/Very Large
Medium
Neutral
Slight
Moderate
Large
Low
Neutral
Neutral
Slight
Slight/Moderate
Where a choice of two significance criteria is given in Table 7-4, professional judgement has been used to decide on the overall significance of impacts.
7.3.4 Consultation The Environment Agency has been consulted via telephone and email to gather the baseline data that has informed this SER and the associated Flood Risk Assessment. Oxfordshire County Council has been consulted to inform the Surface Water Drainage Strategy and relevant views expressed by Natural England have also been considered. NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 105
7.4
Description of Existing Baseline Conditions
7.4.1 Current Conditions Existing baseline conditions are described below. A summary is presented in Table 7-5, with further details provided in Sections 7.4.3 to 7.4.7. Consideration of how existing baseline conditions might change during the interim period from present day to immediately prior to commencement of the construction phase of the development is presented in Section 7.4.8.
7.4.2 Water Environment Features Table 7-5 Summary of key receptors, their attributes and assigned importance (value) Feature
River Bure, associated tributaries and ponds
Attribute
Quality
Importan ce
Recreation
Downstream of the proposed Masterplan Site High there is a green river corridor and park land on the banks of the Bure. This can be considered as being rare on the local (Bicester) scale
Dilution and removal of waste products
There are permitted discharges to the Bure and its tributaries, however, these are for low volumes of effluent, which do not require significant dilution, until the Bicester sewage treatment works discharge, located downstream of Bicester
Biodiversity
The River Bure and tributaries do not Medium support flowing water in the summer months and are therefore considered to be of limited value to aquatic invertebrates (including white-clawed crayfish), water voles and otters. However, these features provide a wildlife corridor of value to foraging and commuting bats.
Conveyance/st orage of flow
There are four watercourses, which are typically subject to ephemeral flow regimes, within the study area and a number of ponds and drainage ditches.
High
Floodplain
Conveyance of flow
Within the study area the narrow flood plain associated with the Bure provides attenuation and reduces the magnitude of the flooding within Bicester.
High
Groundwat er
Water supply/quality
The proposed Masterplan Site is underlain by a High Principal bedrock aquifer and localised superficial deposits are classified as a Secondary Aquifer. There are no groundwater source protection zones (SPZ) in the study
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Medium
Page 106
Feature
Attribute
Quality
Importan ce
area.
Springs
Water supply/quality
There are several springs within the proposed Masterplan Site, which are likely to support baseflow to the tributaries of the Bure that flow through the site and feed the existing ponds within the Site.
Medium
7.4.3 Surface Water Within the proposed Masterplan Site there are several water features, namely: the Bure and its associated tributaries, field drains, ponds and springs. The Bure (a main river) flows in a southerly direction from Caversfield House to a culvert beneath the A4095. Downstream of the culvert it flows in an open channel between Lucerine Avenue and Purslane Drive. A tributary flows in an easterly direction from Bucknell which converges with the Bure downstream of Home Farm, and the Langford Brook (an ordinary watercourse) flows in an easterly direction from Crowmarsh Farm which converges with the Bure at the A4095 culvert. There is a field drain south of Gowell Farm flowing in a southerly direction to a culvert under the A4095 and the downstream urban area. There are several ponds within the proposed Masterplan Site, most notably at Crowmarsh Farm and south of Himley Farm and a spring is shown to present east of Himley Farm. In addition to these most prominent water features, a number of ditches, such as the ditch adjacent to Howes Lane, and other smaller features drain individual fields and feed in to the network. Surface water runoff across the proposed Masterplan Site flows largely at greenfield rates to the Bure and its tributaries, according to the local topography, with the potential for localised ponding to occur in low lying areas.
7.4.4 Flood Risk Flood risk is considered in more detail in the Flood Risk Assessment report that has been prepared for the Masterplan Site (Appendix 7-1, Volume 3). The proposed Masterplan Site drains to the River Bure and its tributaries, which flow through the site before their confluence into a single channel the A4095 Lord’s Lane. The River Bure then flows into Bicester in a south-easterly direction, where it is split into the urbanised Back Brook and Town Brook through the town. The River Bure is a tributary of the Ray, Cherwell and ultimately the Thames. NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 107
Flood risk to the proposed Masterplan Site from the River Bure displayed on the online EA flood maps (Ref 7-10) are based upon a coarse DTM and JFLOW modelling and are not considered suitable to delineate the flood plain in sufficient detail to inform a FRA in support of a planning application. Therefore a hydraulic model has been constructed to confirm the floodplain extents across the Masterplan Site. An unsteady state ISIS model of the River Bure and associated tributaries and floodplains was constructed and is described more fully in the FRA. The model contains four watercourses and an outflow to the lake located downstream at Caversfield House, a summarised in Table 7-6. Table 7-6 Watercourses represented in the model
Watercours Name in model e Tributary 3 (T3) down to confluence with Tributary 2 (T2) down to River Bure confluence with Tributary 1 (T1) to downstream extent of model
Length of reach Upstream Downstream (metres) extent (NGR) extent (NGR)
1952
2588 Tributary 1 Tributary 1 (T1)
(to confluence with T2) 1510
Tributary 2 Tributary 2 (T2) Tributary 3 (Hawkswell Tributary 3 (T3) ) Lake outflow
(to confluence with T3) 93 260
Tributary 4 (T4)
(to culverted confluence with T3)
458174, 225414
457695, 223804
455409, 224548
457606, 224230
456707, 225662
457979, 224508
456973,22441 0
457050, 224381
458207, 225342
458100, 225070
Drawing 7-1 of Volume 2 shows the modelled flood extent across the proposed Masterplan Site for the 100-year and 1,000-year events (i.e. Flood Zones 3 and 2 respectively). This shows that flooding occurs predominantly on the flatter land around the confluence between the River Bure and the northernmost of the tributaries. Away from the confluence, flooding is confined to the relatively narrow valley of the watercourse. Drawing 7-1 of Volume 2 also shows that the flooding only impacts on green space within the proposed Masterplan development, and no NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 108
buildings or roads are affected by flood water. Where the bridges are required, these will be designed to cause no constriction to flow, and therefore will not increase flood risk to the proposed development. Built development within the Masterplan Site would therefore be placed entirely within Flood Zone 1, as is required for an ecodevelopment. The model predicts that floodwater is generally confined to the valleys in which the watercourses flow, with ponding occurring at confluences and upstream of constricting structures. The model does not predict any overland flow occurring. The model results have confirmed that the proposed development is predominantly located within the Low Flood Risk Zone (Zone 1), with small areas of Medium and High risk restricted to areas immediately adjacent to the watercourse corridors. All proposed development has been located within the areas of Low risk, and therefore the development is considered to be at low risk of flooding from fluvial sources.
7.4.5 Water Quality The Water Framework Directive (WFD) sets standards for water quality in rivers, estuaries, coastal waters and aquifers. River Basin Management Plans aim to protect and improve the water environment by identifying the main issues within a catchment, and outlining the means of achieving the targets set by the Directive.
Surface Water Quality Data has been collected from the Thames River Basin Management Plan (Ref 7-11) to define the existing water quality of the River Bure within the study area where, under the WFD, the Bure is referred to as the Town Brook. Available water quality data is presented in Table 7-7 below: Table7-7 WFD Data
Parameter
Value
Waterbody ID
GB106039030150
Waterbody Name
Town Brook at Bicester
Management Catchment
Cherwell
River Basin District
Thames
Typology Description
Low, Small, Calcareous
Hydromorphological Status
Heavily Modified
Current Ecological Quality
Moderate Potential
Current Chemical Quality
Does Not Require Assessment
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 109
2015 Predicted Ecological Quality
Moderate Potential
Status Objective (Overall):
Good by 2027
2015 Predicted Chemical Quality
Does Not Require Assessment
Overall Risk
At Risk
Protected Area
Yes
The Town Brook is classified as Heavily Modified Waterbody, as a result of urbanisation, with a target to achieve Good Ecological Potential. The waterbody is considered to currently achieve Moderate Ecological Potential, limited by the supporting element Phosphate, with a target to achieve Good Ecological Potential by 2027. The chemical status of this waterbody does not require assessment under the WFD, which means that priority substances and other specific pollutants are not discharged into this waterbody in significant quantities. The WFD requires no deterioration in the current status of the water body. It also includes an objective to ‘aim to improve’ any water body that is not presently a Good Status or Potential and defines how this should be achieved through the establishment of environmental objectives and ecological targets for surface waters.
Groundwater Quality The WFD groundwater underlying the study area is named the Bicester-Otmoor Combrash. Its current chemical quality is classified as Poor, failing its WFD status objective of Good, but with no apparent upward chemical trend. The quantitative quality of this groundwater body, which considers factors such as the impacts of abstraction and the water balance, is classified as Good and the target has been set to achieve Good overall status by 2027.
7.4.6 Water Supply A Detailed Water Cycle Study has been prepared for the Masterplan site, to ensure that the impacts of the development on water resources and the potable supply infrastructure are understood and mitigated. The statutory water undertaker for the area, Thames Water Utilities Ltd (TWUL), has submitted a 25 year resource development and demand management strategy for approval by its regulators, which will be accompanied by its own Strategic Environmental Assessment. This (currently draft) plan illustrates the demand management options TWUL intend to utilise in and around the Bicester area to avoid a supply demand deficit, and sustainably manage water resources. The Detailed WCS confirms that the potable water use NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 110
from the proposed development is well within the assumptions made by TWUL, and is hence deemed compliant with CDC Policy ESD 8. The Detailed WCS sets out water efficiency measures (such as the installation of water-efficient appliances) to reduce the potable water demand from the proposed development in line with the Code for Sustainable Homes Levels 3/4 (105 litres/head/day). In addition, the Detailed WCS has tested a range of property and neighbourhood level water reuse options (including rainwater harvesting and greywater recycling) to provide a non-potable supply to the proposed development, and hence limit the potable water demand to less than 80 litres/head/day. This level of demand is in line with the Code for Sustainable Homes Levels 5/6 and CDC Policy Bicester 1, and therefore assists with moving the development towards the aspiration of water neutrality. As part of the Detailed WCS, these options are being discussed with potential suppliers to ascertain their technical feasibility, economic viability and sustainability. It is considered that economically viable arrangements are available in the market to offer a separately piped non-potable supply to the developments, sourced from combinations of either locally collected rainwater, greywater, or reclaimed wastewater. These measures will ensure that the impact of the proposed Masterplan development on water resources is minimised.
7.4.7 Foul Water The Detailed WCS also considers the impact of wastewater discharges on the existing drainage infrastructure, and the receiving water environment. Early indications are that it is likely that there is insufficient capacity within TWUL’s existing infrastructure to service a large development, requiring the provision of additional off-site sewerage infrastructure to transmit flows to the existing TWUL Wastewater Treatment Works (WwTW) in Bicester. However, this infrastructure could be provided via a well understood requisitioning process under the provisions of the Water Industry Act. The commercial viability of such an option is being explored with TWUL. In addition, ongoing consultation with the Environment Agency and TWUL is underway to appraise the feasibility of treating and discharging the new foul water from the NWB Masterplan site at Bicester WwTW, taking account of other proposed development in the town, existing hydraulic and process capacity, planned capacity upgrades, and the water quality constraints imposed via the Urban Wastewater Treatment Directive and WFD.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 111
Innovative local treatment options are also being appraised in consultation with suppliers to identify if the treated effluent can be viably utilised as a local non-potable water resource, to assist in achieving CDC Policy Bicester 1, and moving the development towards the aspiration of water neutrality. To inform this approach, indicative environmental permit water quality standards are being determined in partnership with the Environment Agency, to ensure that any local effluent discharge would be compliant with the WFD, and explore if a phased permitting approach would allow environmental and financial risks to be minimised. Consultation with a range of suppliers suggests that the advanced treatment required is technically feasible, and that the integration of tertiary treatment processes with wetland treatment of surface water run-off offers opportunities to further enhance sustainability and amenity benefits.
7.4.8 Future Baseline Conditions Legislative drivers, such as the WFD are likely to yield improvements in future surface and groundwater quality. The potential impact of climate change on increased rainfall and river flows has the potential to increase the risk of flooding over time. The Flood Zone classification of the site however is likely to remain unchanged, with the majority of the site remaining in the low risk flood zone (from rivers and the sea), due to the site topography.
7.5
Design and Mitigation One of the stated aims of the Masterplan development is to reveal, enhance and integrate existing watercourses within the landscape of the Site. To achieve this, a number of measures are embedded into the Masterplan design. An outline of the measures that will be implemented during both the construction and operational phases is given below.
7.5.1 Construction During the construction phase, a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) will be prepared and implemented based upon Environment Agency (Ref 7-12) and CIRIA 2001 (Ref 7-13) guidance. This will set out method statements and protocols for activities such as excavation, storage of fuels, chemicals and oils, pollution control, and emergency contingency to ensure that best practice is employed and the water environment is safeguarded. Examples of these best practice methods include:
Soil stripping managed to ensure the minimum area of exposed soil at any one time
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 112
Provision made for water treatment to remove sediment before discharge to a surface water feature
Careful planning of materials storage and use to prevent accidental release of oils and other harmful contaminants
Regular monitoring to ensure pollution control measures are successful in managing water quality impacts
Design and installation of watercourse crossings to minimise flood risk effects
Waste management to avoid littering/ release of items which could cause blockages of bridges and culverts downstream
Management of groundwater, including dewatering
Control of potential contaminants which could harm groundwater
7.5.2 Operation The development will avoid the floodplain and there will be no change in the flood storage capacity of existing watercourse channels. The potential impacts arising from construction of built environment on an essentially greenfield site, will be managed using SuDS techniques, and are described in the Drainage Strategy Report (Ref 7-2). The widespread use of Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) and rainwater harvesting will provide sustainable storm water management ensuring that flood risk is reduced for areas downstream. The SuDS systems will comprise of chains of linked SuDS components which complement one another, such as; rain gardens, swales, permeable paving with storage, ponds and ditches. Attenuation measures would be located both amongst the built up areas at source, and within the public open spaces adjacent to the development areas. Building layouts and road geometry will also be minded to the natural topography to allow surface flow to be routed away from sensitive receptors. A variety of storage structures will be used, to provide attenuation storage, including ponds, basins and cellular storage. The use of SUDS promote good water quality standards and will also allow the creation of new wildlife spaces incorporating wetlands, ponds and a variety of vegetation, creating valuable open amenity areas whilst enhancing the local water environment. A variety of methods are proposed to be employed for different sources of runoff to remove hydrocarbons, metals, sediments and other impairments on water quality. Pre-treatment would be utilised to supplement filtration, bioremediation, detention and vegetative uptake processes.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 113
7.6
Assessment of Effects
7.6.1 Construction Recreation There are no water-based recreational facilities in the Masterplan Site development area itself and public access to the River Bure is currently limited. During the construction phase of the proposed development there will be no direct impacts on existing riverside recreational activities or users. Pollution control measures during construction will minimise the potential for indirect effects on downstream users of the River Bure Park. The magnitude of the impact on recreation is therefore judged to be Negligible, with an overall significance that is classified as Neutral.
Dilution and Water Quality Implementation of the CEMP will provide a means by which impacts on the water quality of the surface water features and groundwater will be minimised. Any residual impact will be limited and local and it is considered that no detriment to water quality would be discernable at the Wendlebury Meads and Mansmoor Closes SSSI, located seven kilometres downstream. There are also other SSSIs within 10km of the Masterplan Site and of these, Otmoor SSSI is likely to be hydrologically linked to the Masterplan Site; however, the implementation of standard measures to protect water quality and run-off rates within the Masterplan Site would ensure that no adverse effects on this SSSI would arise. Given the small size of the receiving watercourses on site (hence the limited potential for dilution of contaminants), the potential magnitude of residual impacts upon these receptors is considered to be Minor, with an overall significance that is classified as Slight Adverse
Flood Risk The CEMP will set out measures to minimise the potential flood risk impacts of the proposed Masterplan development, both on-site and to downstream areas. Following implementation of mitigation measures, the magnitude of the impact will be Minor and the overall significance of effect on the conveyance and flood risk features of the water environment is likely to be Slight Adverse.
Groundwater There is a Secondary A bedrock aquifer underlying the proposed Masterplan Site but there are no SPZ in the study area. The proposed development is unlikely to pose a high risk to groundwater quality, or flow dynamics as there is an intervening soil and unsaturated zone which could dilute releases of contaminants arising during the construction phase and measures detailed in the CEMP will be NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 114
implemented to safeguard groundwater. The superficial aquifer will be at greater risk of contamination, but is very limited in extent and restricted to areas adjacent to the watercourse channels where construction works will be very limited. The magnitude of the residual impacts on groundwater resources during the construction phase are therefore likely to be Negligible, with and overall significance that is classified as Neutral.
7.6.2 Operation Recreation Currently, there is no direct access for the public to the River Bure and its tributaries through the site. During the operational phase of the development the Bure will become a key landscape feature and there will be public stream side access for activities such as cycling, walking and jogging. In addition, existing features such as ponds, will be enhanced to provide increase value for biodiversity and to provide a resource for education and recreation. This will result in an impact with a magnitude that is judged as Major Beneficial and an overall significance that is classified as Large Beneficial.
Dilution and Water Quality SUDS will be installed to manage impacts arising from surface water drainage once the development is operational. The SUDS systems will provide treatment to surface runoff and enhance infiltration and provide an increase in low flow contributions to the on-site watercourses. Both of these impacts will be beneficial. However, the magnitude of any impact on dilution and water quality is judged to be Minor and localised with a resultant Slight Beneficial significance of effect.
Flood Risk Although the development itself is located in areas of relatively low flood risk, there are some limited areas of flood risk downstream in Bicester so any increase in peak flows in the River Bure could have an impact on flood risk downstream. The drainage strategy utilising SUDS measures will ensure that surface water runoff from the proposed Masterplan Site is maintained at or below greenfield rates. The hydraulic modelling undertaken to inform the Flood Risk Assessment has delineated the floodplain and has shown that no development is to occur within the predicted localised areas of floodplain. There will therefore there is no loss of floodplain up to and including the 1 in 1,000 year event. NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 115
As a result of the Masterplan design, the development will result in a Negligible magnitude of impact on flood risk, which will therefore have a Neutral significance of effect.
Groundwater Following installation of the SUDS drainage strategy, the magnitude of impacts on groundwater resources arising from the development is likely to be Negligible. The significance of effects on the underlying groundwater resources is therefore likely to be Neutral.
7.7
Cumulative Effects Development of the Masterplan Site, together with other sites in the Bicester wastewater treatment works catchment area, has the potential to result in a cumulative excessive demand on the treatment capacity of the works and/or the ability of the receiving watercourses to dilute resulting discharges of effluent. Further work is underway to assess the treatment requirement. Alternative on site measures to treat effluent from the NW Bicester development are also being considered and these may become available to the proposed Masterplan development in the future. If these become available there will be no cumulative impacts arising from the proposed Masterplan development on the Bicester wastewater treatment works, otherwise the infrastructure modelling currently underway will assess the need for an infrastructure upgrade. Similarly, the cumulative effects of all potential development may be significant in terms of water supply. However there is an aspiration to attain water neutrality, i.e. reducing overall demand to allow new development within the existing supply, and Thames Water has a long term water supply strategy to ensure demand can be met without harm to the environment. As indicated in Sections 7.6.1 and 7.6.2, the development of the Site will not have any other permanent adverse effects on the water environment. There will, therefore, be no cumulative effects arising from this development and others planned in the area.
7.8
Summary This high level assessment has concluded that development of the Masterplan Site could be undertaken without increasing construction or operational phase flood risk (from fluvial and surface water sources) to the development Site itself or downstream areas. This would be achieved through locating all new build development in Flood Zone 1 and maintaining surface water runoff at rates that equal or better existing greenfield rates, through the implementation of SUDS measures. The current Surface Water Drainage Strategy seeks
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 116
to provide attenuation at source, infiltration and treatment of surface water runoff through the SUDS management train and would result in a likely improvement in runoff quality compared to the existing scenario, when agricultural activities influence runoff quality. There is currently no access to water-based recreation along the Bure as it flows through the Masterplan Site, but this will be transformed by the development proposals, which sets the watercourse as a key landscape feature and asset, providing numerous riverside recreational opportunities. The likely effects of the proposed development are summarised in Table 7-8 below. Table7-8
Summary of Significance of Effects
Receptor/Water Feature Recreation
Importance
High
Significance of Effect with Mitigation
Neutral (Construction) Large Beneficial (Operation)
Dilution and Water Quality
Medium
Conveyance and Flood Risk
High
Groundwater
High
Slight Adverse (Construction) Slight Beneficial (Operational) Slight Adverse (Construction) Neutral (Operation)
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Neutral (Construction and Operation)
Page 117
8
Air Quality
8.1
Introduction This Chapter assesses the development’s potential to impact on air quality during both the construction and operational phase. Dust and emissions from the construction phase and operational emissions from traffic movements and on-site energy production associated with the development all have the potential to impact on local air quality.
8.2
Regulatory Framework
8.2.1 UK Air Quality Legislation Part IV of the Environment Act (1995) requires UK government to produce a national Air Quality Strategy (AQS) which contains standards, objectives and measures for improving ambient air quality. The most recent AQS (Ref 8-1) was published by DEFRA in July 2007. The AQS sets out Air Quality Objectives, which are maximum ambient pollutant concentrations that are not to be exceeded either without exception or with a permitted number of exceedences over a specified timescale. The ambient air quality standards and objectives are given statutory backing in England through the Air Quality (England) Regulations 2000, the Air Quality (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2002. The AQS Objectives were published in these regulations for seven pollutants. Table 8-1 below shows the AQS Objectives for nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and particulate matter (PM10), the pollutants considered within this assessment. Table 8-1
Air Quality Limit Values
Pollutant
Air Quality Limit Value Concentration (µg/m3)
Averaging Period
Nitrogen dioxide (NO2)
200
1-hour average; not to be exceeded more than 18 times a year
40
Annual average
Particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of less than 10µm (PM10)
50
24-hour average; not to be exceeded more than 35 times a year
40
Annual average
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 118
It is a requirement of the Environment Act (1995) that Local Authorities (LAs) review current and future air quality within their area of jurisdiction under the system of Local Air Quality Management (LAQM). Any areas of relevant exposure where the AQLVs are not, or unlikely to be, achieved should be identified. Where it is anticipated that an AQLV will not be met, it is a requirement that an Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) be declared. Where an AQMA is declared, the LA is obliged to produce an Action Plan in pursuit of the achievement of the AQS Objectives.
8.2.2 National Planning Policy The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) published in 2012 sets out the Government’s planning policies for England and how these are expected to be applied (Ref 9-2). The NPPF revokes forty four planning documents including: Planning Policy Statement 23: Planning and Pollution Control. The Conserving and enhancing the natural environment section (Section 11) of the NPPF considers air quality and pollution. In the NPPF pollution is described as: ‘Anything that affects the quality of land, air, water or soils, which might lead to an adverse impact on human health, the natural environment or general amenity. Pollution can arise from a range of emissions, including smoke, fumes, gases, dust, steam, odour, noise and light.’ The following paragraphs (paragraphs: 109 bullet point 4, 110, 120 and 124) from NPPF Section 11 consider air quality and pollution: ‘The planning system should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by: preventing both new and existing development from contributing to or being put at unacceptable risk from, or being adversely affected by unacceptable levels of soil, air, water or noise pollution or land instability; and’ ‘In preparing plans to meet development needs, the aim should be to minimise pollution and other adverse effects on the local and natural environment. Plans should allocate land with the least environmental or amenity value, where consistent with other policies in this Framework.’ ‘To prevent unacceptable risks from pollution and land instability, planning policies and decisions should ensure that new development is appropriate for its location. The effects (including cumulative effects) of pollution on health, the natural environment or general amenity, and the potential sensitivity of the area or proposed development to adverse effects from pollution, should be taken into account. ...’ NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 119
‘Planning policies should sustain compliance with and contribute towards EU limit values or national objectives for pollutants, taking into account the presence of Air Quality Management Areas and the cumulative impacts on air quality from individual sites in local areas. Planning decisions should ensure that any new development in Air Quality Management Areas is consistent with the local air quality action plan.’ The NPPF is also accompanied by Technical Guidance to the National Planning Policy Framework. This document does not include any specific guidance for the assessment of air quality impacts from road schemes.
8.2.3 Local Planning Policy The proposed new Cherwell Local Plan (2006-2031) was submitted to the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government for formal Examination on 31st January 2014. In the meanwhile saved policies of the Adopted Cherwell Local Plan 1996 are used when making planning decisions. Policy ENV1 of the Adopted Cherwell Local Plan 1996 states that ‘Development which is likely to cause materially detrimental levels of noise, vibration, smell, smoke, fumes or other type of environmental pollution will not normally be permitted’ and that the Council will ‘seek to ensure that the amenities of the environment, and in particular the amenities of residential properties, are not unduly affected by development proposals which may cause environmental pollution, including that caused by traffic generation (Ref 8-3).
8.3
Methodology
8.3.1 Introduction Construction impacts will primarily be related to dust emissions that can result in health effects and enhanced dust soiling which can, without adequate mitigation, temporarily affect amenity use and, potentially, commercial operations. It is recognised that dust from construction activity can also cause statutory nuisance under the Environmental Protection Act 1990. Exhaust emissions from on-site plant and from vehicles accessing the works may also affect local air quality; this will be in a similar way to that described for operational traffic effects. Construction dust and emissions are assessed following the Institute of Air Quality Management (IAQM) document ‘Guidance on the Assessment of the Impacts of Construction on Air Quality and the Determination of their Significance’ (Ref 8-4).
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 120
Operational impacts may be negative and/or positive and will arise from changes in exposure to traffic pollutants in response to new patterns of traffic flows on local road networks. This will give rise to local changes in concentrations of NO2 and PM10. Operational air quality impacts have been assessed in accordance with Environmental Protection UK guidance ‘Development Control: Planning for Air Quality’ (2010) (Ref 8-5) and Local Air Quality Management Technique Guidance (LAQM.TG (09)) (Ref 8-6). It is proposed to include an energy centre with a biomass boiler and two gas fired Combined Heat and Power (CHP) plants within the development. These will result in atmospheric emissions of combustion gases, including NO2 and PM10. Although the exact energy centre specification had not been finalised at the time of assessment, the preliminary energy strategy was reviewed in order to provide an indication of likely emissions. Potential impacts have been screened using the methodology outlined in LAQM.TG(09) and the Environmental Protection UK document ‘Biomass and Air Quality Guidance for Local Authorities’ (Ref 8-7).
8.3.2 Study Area Construction Dust The Institute of Air Quality Management ‘Guidance on the assessment of dust from demolition and construction’ (Ref 8-4) (2014) states that a construction dust assessment will normally be required where there is:
a ‘human receptor’ within 350 m of the boundary of the site; or 50 m of the route(s) used by construction vehicles on the public highway, up to 500 m from the site entrance(s).
an ‘ecological receptor’ within 50 m of the boundary of the site; or 50 m of the route(s) used by construction vehicles on the public highway, up to 500 m from the site entrance(s).
Should sensitive receptors not be present within the relevant distances then negligible impacts would be expected and further assessment is not necessary.
Road Vehicle Exhaust Emissions The study area assessed dependent on the change development. The proposed on existing receptors located
within the air quality assessment is in traffic flows as a result of the development has the potential to impact on roads affected by the development.
The criteria presented in the Environmental Protection UK guidance ‘Development Control: Planning for Air Quality’ (2010), has been used to determine which roads need to be included in the air quality NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 121
assessment. As traffic associated with the proposed development is likely to affect air quality, the following criteria have been used to define roads considered in the air quality assessment:
Roads with a traffic change in Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) flow of 10% or more as a result of the development (5% change if the roads affected reside within an AQMA).
Roads with a change in Heavy Duty Vehicle AADT flow of 200 or more as a result of the development.
The criteria above were applied to roads with a traffic flow of 10,000 AADT or more. In addition to existing receptors pollutant concentrations at locations of proposed receptors will need to be modelled to determine whether any mitigation measures need to be included in the scheme design in future EIAs.
8.3.3 Establishment of Baseline Conditions Baseline air quality conditions in Bicester have been defined from a number of sources. These include:
Review of CDC LAQM reports.
Review of the UK National Air Quality Archive (www.airquality.co.uk).
Review of the Department for Food, Environment and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) LAQM website (www.defra.gov.uk/environment/quality/air/airquality/local/inde x.htm).
In order to establish baseline conditions in the vicinity of the proposed development, a six month NO2 diffusion tube survey has been commissioned in agreement with the Environmental Protection Officer (EPO) at Cherwell District Council. The monitoring locations are shown in Drawing 8-1. This is being undertaken to establish background concentrations in the area and to identify a current baseline along roads where the proposed development will be, along roads in the vicinity of the proposed development and ultimately in order to verify the modelling. The results of this monitoring are presented in Table 8-5 of the baseline section. Background concentrations from the DEFRA air quality website have been obtained for this submission, see Table 8-4.
8.3.4 Assessment of Effects Construction Dust Emissions Construction works can affect local air quality through the generation and subsequent deposition of construction dust. Dust deposition on NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 122
windows, properties, and cars can result in complaints through surface soiling. The amount of dust generated from construction activities depends on:
the type of materials handled;
the length and scale of operation;
the type of activities performed on-site;
the weather conditions; and
the effectiveness of dust suppression measures.
Furthermore, the perception determined by factors such as:
of
dust
from
surface
soiling
is
the colour contrast between the dust and the surface on which it settles;
the nature of the illumination of the surface;
the presence of a nearby clean 'reference' surface against which comparisons can be made;
the personal experience and expectation of the observer; and
adverse publicity influencing the expectation of the observer.
The above factors mean that it is not possible to reliably predict the number of dust complaints that will occur during the construction phase of a Project. It is however possible to estimate the distance from dust generating activities over which dust complaints may occur. Studies of dust impacts from quarrying, waste disposal and construction operations indicate rapid fall-off in downwind dust concentrations with increasing distance from the source due to particle dispersion and deposition. In order to identify suitable mitigation measures for the control of construction dust emissions, risk assessment will be undertaken in accordance with the Institute of Air Quality Management (IAQM) document ‘Guidance on the Assessment of the Impacts of Construction on Air Quality and the Determination of their Significance’ (Ref 8-4).
Construction Vehicle Emissions The construction phase may also affect air quality as a result of vehicular emissions from construction worker and haulage vehicles. In terms of haulage vehicles, the construction phase is not expected to lead to an increase of 200 HGVs per day on the local road network and therefore construction traffic effects are not likely to be significant, as defined in the EPUK guidance (Ref 8-5), which stipulates that an assessment of construction vehicles is only required for: NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 123
“large, long term construction sites that would generate large HGV flows (greater than 200 movements per day) over a period of a year or more”. The construction vehicle numbers will be verified once further information regarding the development becomes available.
Road Vehicle Exhaust and Energy Centre Emissions Methodology For future EIAs, the impacts of road vehicle emissions on the exposure to NO2 and PM10 of existing and future receptors will be modelled using the dispersion model ADMS (Roads). The model uses detailed information regarding traffic flows on the local road network together with meteorological data to predict pollutant concentrations at specific locations selected by the user. The impacts of the proposed energy centre emissions on the exposure to NO2 and PM10 of existing and future receptors will be modelled using the using the United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) dispersion model, AERMOD. AERMOD is a development from the ISC3 dispersion model and incorporates improved dispersion algorithms and pre-processors to integrate the impact of meteorology and topography within the modelling output. AERMOD is routinely used throughout the world for the prediction of pollutant dispersion and results are accepted within the UK by the Environment Agency and DEFRA. The model utilises hourly meteorological data , it estimates the concentration for each source and receptor combination for each hour of input meteorology, and calculates user-selected long-term and short-term averages, for comparison with the relevant AQS Objectives.
Significance Criteria The significance criteria for predicted road vehicle exhaust and energy centre emissions are outlined in the Environmental Protection UK ‘Development Control: Planning for Air Quality (2010 update)’. The method for defining the magnitude of impact is outlined in Table 8-2. Table 8-2
Definition of Impact Magnitude
Magnitude of Change
Change in Annual Average NO2 or PM10 Concentration (µg/m3)
Change in Number of Days with PM10 Concentrations Greater than 50µg/m3
Large
Greater than 4.0
More than 4
Medium
2.0 – 4.0
2–4
Small
0.4 – 2.0
1–2
Imperceptible
Less than 0.4
Less than 1
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 124
The guidance also provides descriptors for potential impacts based on predicted concentrations and magnitude of change. These are outlined in Table 8-3. Table 8-3
Impact descriptors
Prediction with Development
Predicted Magnitude of Change Small
Medium
Large
Above AQLV
Slight
Moderate
Substantial
Slight
Moderate
Moderate
Negligible
Slight
Slight
Negligible
Negligible
Slight
Annual average greater than 40µg/m3
More than 35-days greater than 50µg/m3
Just below AQLV
Annual average 36 40µg/m3
32 to 35-days greater than 50µg/m3
Below AQLV
Annual average 30 36µg/m3
26 to 32-days greater than 50µg/m3
Well below AQLV
Annual average below 30µg/m3
Less than 26-days greater than 50µg/m3
Finally, the document provides guidance on determining the overall air quality significance of a proposed development. The following factors are identified for consideration by the assessor:
Number of properties affected by slight, moderate or major air quality impacts and a judgement on the overall balance.
Where new exposure is introduced into an existing area of poor air quality, then the number of people exposed to levels above the objective or limit value will be relevant.
The magnitude of changes and the descriptions of the impacts at the receptors.
Whether or not an exceedence of an objective or limit value is predicted to arise in the study area where none existed before or an exceedence area is substantially increased.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 125
Whether or not the study area exceeds an objective or limit value and this exceedence is removed or the exceedence area is reduced.
The extent to which an objective or limit value is exceeded e.g. an annual average NO2 concentration of 41µg/m3 should attract less significance than an annual average of 51µg/m3.
It should be noted that the determination of significance relies on professional judgement and reasoning should be provided as far as practicable.
8.4
Baseline Conditions A review of the CDC Air Quality Updating and Screening Assessment and Progress Report has been undertaken. CDC have declared one AQMA for exceedences of annual mean nitrogen dioxide concentrations at Hennef Way. CDC has also identified that an additional three other areas where an AQMA should be declared for exceedences of annual mean nitrogen dioxide concentrations following Detailed Assessments (Horsefair/North Bar, Banbury; Kings End/Queens Avenue, Bicester; and Bicester Road, Kidlington) in the district. The proposed AQMA at Kings End/Queens Avenue, Bicester is the closest AQMA to the proposed site at a distance of 1.5 km southeast of the development. All other pollutants apart from nitrogen dioxide have been found to be below the AQS Objectives. CDC has one continuous automatic monitor but this is located in Banbury, a significant distance from Bicester. CDC operates a network of 38 diffusion tubes in the district, including nine in the Bicester area, of which the 2006 to 2012 annual average results are presented in Table 8-4 and exceedances are highlighted in bold. Table 8-4 Annual Average bias-adjusted NO2 diffusion tube results in Bicester as managed by CDC
Location
Site type *
2006 (µg/m3 )
2007 (µg/m 3 )
2008 (µg/m3 )
2009 (µg/m3 )
2010 (µg/m3 )
2011 (µg/m3)
2012 (µg/
Villiers Rd
UB
-
-
-
-
26.8
19
20.5
Kings End West
K
-
-
-
-
36.5
30.1
31.1
Kings End S
R
-
-
-
-
51.3
49.5
49
Kings End N
R
-
-
-
-
46.2
43.9
46
Field St
K
-
-
-
-
46.2
42.9
41.6
North St
K
-
-
-
-
44.1
46.1
45.6
Queens
K
-
-
43.6
44.1
46
42.9
45
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 126
Site type *
2006 (µg/m3 )
2007 (µg/m 3 )
2008 (µg/m3 )
2009 (µg/m3 )
2010 (µg/m3 )
2011 (µg/m3)
2012 (µg/
Market Square
K
34.6
34.9
35.4
31.7
37.2
35.7
45.6
Tamarisk Gardens
UB
22.2
21.6
22.3
19.7
22.3
22.3
17.6
Location Avenue (Triplicate)
* UB = urban background, K = kerbside, R = roadside, RB = rural background ** All results provisional
The monitoring data suggests that exceedences of the annual average NO2 objective have occurred at six of the nine sites where monitoring was undertaken in 2012. Tamarisk Gardens monitoring location is closest to the proposed development, on the edge of Bicester with the diffusion tube located approximately 30 metres back from the A4095. This indicates that at background locations away from roads, the concentrations are significantly below the annual average objective for NO2. Site specific monitoring for NO2 was undertaken in 2010 and began in August 2010. The results are presented in Table 8-5 and monitoring locations illustrated in Drawing 8-1. Table 8-5 Six month nitrogen dioxide diffusion tube survey data
Mean NO2 concentration (µg/m3) Period Mean
Location
Site type *
Aug 2010
Sept 2010
Oct 2010
Nov 2010
Dec 2010
Jan 2011
B1
K
15.7
-
27.6
29.0
-
-
24.1
B2
R
16.1
21.8
26.6
30.7
30.8
35.1
26.9
B3
R
-
20.5
24.8
30.8
27.9
30.3
26.9
B4
R
18.5
24.0
29.1
35.3
38.1
31.1
29.4
B5
UB
19.9
23.7
30.6
29.7
39.2
36.2
29.9
B6
R
22.5
29.2
30.5
36.4
32.5
35.8
31.2
B7
RB
18.1
19.7
23.4
29.8
32.6
29.1
25.5
B8
RB
-
16.9
23.9
23.1
39.5
26.1
25.9
B9
RB
27.0
30.6
35.3
-
-
36.4
32.3
B10
R
36.1
37.0
48.9
37.9
49.7
58.9
44.8
B11
R
23.4
32.8
35.9
38.3
41.6
38.4
35.1
B12
UB
-
-
-
-
36.6
51.4
44.0
B13
R
23.6
27.2
36.3
40.4
35.5
37.0
33.3
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 127
Mean NO2 concentration (µg/m3) Period Mean
Location
Site type *
Aug 2010
Sept 2010
Oct 2010
Nov 2010
Dec 2010
Jan 2011
B14
R
21.3
29.3
33.9
35.2
39.0
39.6
33.1
B15
R
17.8
22.7
27.8
35.3
38.2
33.5
29.2
* UB = urban background, K = kerbside, R = roadside, RB = rural background
Due to the inherent bias associated with passive NO2 diffusion tubes it is necessary to utilise an adjustment factor obtained from the collocation with an automatic analyser which can be applied to the diffusion tube results. A factor of 0.91 was obtained from the National Diffusion Tube Bias Adjustment spreadsheet (version 3/11) available from DEFRA for the analytical laboratory used for the study, Staffordshire Scientific Services, and used for the bias adjustment of the raw monitoring data. In addition to bias adjustment, the NO2 concentrations presented in Table 8-7 are in essence a period mean. However, period means are not directly comparable with annual mean Air Quality Strategy (AQS) Objectives and therefore all monitoring results have been adjusted based upon the methodology contained within Local Air Quality Management Guidance LAQM.TG(09). The approach is based on the principle that patterns in pollutant concentrations are usually consistent across broad regions and therefore considers the relationship between period means and annual means at monitoring stations in the same region as the site of interest. Error! Reference source not found.Error! Reference source not found.Table 8-6 presents ‘urban background’ monitoring locations within the vicinity of the site and the relationship between period and annual mean NO2 concentrations. Urban background monitoring sites are characterised as urban locations distanced from sources and broadly representative of city-wide background concentrations. Data from these sites is considered by Local Air Quality Management Guidance LAQM.TG(09) to be suitable for the adjustment of shortterm diffusion tube monitoring survey results to annual mean concentrations. Table 8-6
Period to Annual Mean NO2 Concentration Factors
Monitoring Site
NO2 Concentration (µg/m3) 2010 Annual Mean
Period Mean
Ratio Annual: Period
Oxford St Ebbes
22.3
23.8
0.94
Reading New Town
25.0
30.5
0.82
Northampton
20.6
24.0
0.86
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 128
Monitoring Site
Leamington Spa
NO2 Concentration (µg/m3) 2010 Annual Mean
Period Mean
Ratio Annual: Period
28.4
30.0
0.95
Mean Value
0.89
Applying the calculated factor of 0.89 to the bias adjusted monitoring results provides an estimation of the 2010 annual mean NO 2 concentration, as shown in Table 8-7. Table 8-7
Adjusted Period to Annual Mean NOx, Concentrations
Location*
NO2 Concentration (µg/m3) Period Mean
Bias Adjusted Period Mean
2010 Annual Mean
B1
24.1
21.9
19.5
B2
26.9
24.4
21.8
B3
26.9
24.4
21.8
B4
29.4
26.7
23.8
B5
29.9
27.2
24.2
B6
31.2
28.3
25.2
B7
25.5
23.2
20.6
B8
25.9
23.6
21.0
B9
32.3
29.4
26.2
B10
44.8
40.7
36.3
B11
35.1
31.9
28.4
B12
44.0
40.0
35.6
B13
33.3
30.3
27.0
B14
33.1
30.1
26.8
B15
29.2
26.6
23.7
* See Drawing 8-1
As indicated in Table 8-9, the annual mean NO2 concentration at all diffusion tube monitoring locations was below the relevant AQS Objective of 40µg/m3. In addition to the monitoring data, background concentration from the DEFRA air quality website have been obtained corresponding to the location of the development itself. The highest and lowest background NO2 and PM10 concentrations over the proposed development are presented in Table 8-8. NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 129
Table 8-8 Highest and lowest background NO2 and PM10 concentrations over the proposed development
R e c e p t o r s
British National Grid Reference
Concentration (µg/m3)
Minimum background NO2
458500, 225500
10.43
Maximum background NO2
458500, 222500
14.04
Minimum background PM10
458500, 224500
15.31
Maximum background PM10
455500, 224500
16.96
The locations of the nearest sensitive receptors are shown in Table 89. These receptors could be impacted on by the proposed development and the impacts of the development on these receptors may be included as part of the detailed application assessment. Table 8-9
Nearby Sensitive Receptors
Receptor
Receptor type
Bure Park Primary School
Primary School
Kings Meadow County Primary School
Primary School
12 Derwent Road
Residential
Busy Bees Nursery
Nursery
14 Saffron Close
Residential
Lodge on B4100
Residential
72 Isis Avenue
Residential
British National Grid X Coordinate
British National Grid Y Coordinate
Distance from Development (metres)
457951
223802
518
456998
223422
178
456784
223358
50
458080
223807
577
457724
224207
55
457904
225371
39
456499
222903
46
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 130
8.5
Receptor
Receptor type
Bicester Community Hospital
Hospital
British National Grid X Coordinate
British National Grid Y Coordinate
Distance from Development (metres)
457982
222327
1611
Design and Mitigation
8.5.1 Construction The construction activities have the potential to impact on existing and proposed receptors. At this stage details of the construction activities are not available. Depending on the risk of dust impacts which would be assessed in the Construction Dust Impact Assessment, appropriate mitigation measures will be selected from the Institute of Air Quality Management (IAQM) document 'Guidance on the Assessment of the Impacts of Construction on Air Quality and the Determination of their Significance' (Ref 8-4). These might include using water as a dust suppressant where applicable and effective vehicle cleaning and specific fixed wheel washing on leaving site. A Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) detailing the proposed construction methods and mitigation measures will also be submitted to CDC prior to the commencement of construction. Monitoring of depositional and suspended dust will be undertaken during construction in order that trigger levels may be set where mitigation must be increased to protect the health and amenity of local residents. These monitoring requirements should be agreed in advance with the EPO at CDC.
8.5.2 Operation At this stage the operational impacts are unknown as the traffic data is not available to determine the development impacts. The impacts of the development will be determined during the detailed application stage. It is anticipated that measures will be incorporated into the development to reduce its impacts on air quality. This would include a Travel Plan which include measures designed to promote sustainable travel. The measures which are likely to be included are outlined below:
Land use containment
Working from home
Branding and Marketing/ Travel Awareness Promotions
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 131
Personalised Travel Planning
Individual Travel Plan – Primary School
Individual Travel Plans – Other Non Residential Uses
Parking Strategy
Car Club
Car sharing
Bus Service
Bus Infrastructure
Rail Linkages
New Occupant Travel Incentives
Walking Routes
Cycling Routes and storage
Cycle Purchase/ Hire and Facilities for Cyclists
In addition, the implementation of electric car charging points, assisted purchase of electric vehicles and the use of Hybrid buses will also reduce the emissions of pollutants from the type of vehicles used as part of the site.
8.6
Assessment of Effects
8.6.1 Construction The construction impact will be assessed during the detailed planning application. It is however worth noting that the potential dust impacts are considered to be, local, occasional, and temporary in nature. The impacts that are likely to occur throughout the construction phase are likely to be short-term as impacts will only occur during the construction phase. The impacts will be localised as impacts are not predicted to occur beyond 350m from the site boundary, occasional as impacts would only occur when specific activities and meteorological conditions combine to cause the predicted level of impact at sensitive locations, and temporary as there is unlikely to be any lasting impacts after construction is complete. It should be noted that the potential for impacts would depend significantly on the distance between the dust generating activity and receptor location. With the standard mitigation measures in place the developments impacts during construction will be reduced.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 132
8.6.2 Operation Road Vehicle Exhaust Emissions Operational phase traffic emissions will be assessed during the detailed application. It is therefore not possible at this stage to predict the magnitude of any impacts on local air quality. A detailed dispersion model ADMS (Roads) will be used to assess the operation impacts of the development.
Energy Centre Emissions An energy centre is proposed as part of the development. The impact of the energy centre will be assessed during the detailed application. The emission rates for both NOx and PM10 will be required in addition to the characteristics of the stack. A detailed dispersion model will be used to assess the energy centre impacts.
Waste Water Treatment Works A waste water treatment works (WwTW) will be built as part of the proposed development. This has the potential to impact on both existing and proposed receptors in relation to odour. The impact of the WwTW will therefore be assessed using a detailed dispersion modelling as part of the detailed application.
8.7
Cumulative Effects Cumulative effects could result from the effects of the development in combination with the effects from other developments. Potential cumulative effects on air quality during both the construction and operation phases will be assessed as part of the detailed planning application stage. This will include consideration of cumulative traffic data, which is currently not available.
8.8
Summary At this stage there is limited information on the potential impact of the proposed development in the context of air quality assessment. The impacts of the development will need to be assessed during the detailed application once the traffic data, emissions data and data relating to the WwTW is available. Given the size of the development it does have the potential to impact on local air quality as a result of increases in traffic using the local road network.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 133
9
Noise and Vibration
9.1
Introduction The purpose of the noise and vibration assessment is to identify potential noise and vibration impacts associated with the proposed Bicester Masterplan development and assess the suitability of the site for residential and other use. Operational noise impacts included an assessment of road traffic noise associated with the development and noise from operational plant to be installed on site. Further assessment of noise from operational plant would however be required once detail of the plant to be installed on site is known. A baseline noise and vibration survey has been carried out to establish existing conditions on site. The vibration baseline considered possible vibration impacts from the Chiltern main railway line on the Masterplan Site. The baseline noise assessment serves as a basis for assessing effects of construction noise and operational noise from the proposed development at receptors within the local area.
9.2
Regulatory Framework The noise and vibration assessment has been carried out in accordance with national legislation, policy and guidance as set out in Table 9-1 below. Table 9-1
Noise and Vibration Regulatory and Policy Framework
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester Masterplan Site Response
Noise Policy Statement for England (NPSE)
The Noise Policy Statement for England (published on 15 March 2010) sets out the long term vision of Government noise policy, which is to promote good health and a good quality of life through the management of noise within the context of Government policy on sustainable development.
Noise and vibration assessment protocol has been agreed with the Environmental Health Officer (EHO) and the assessment has followed recognised guidance to ensure that good health and quality of life have been promoted.
National Planning Policy (NPPF) formally published on 27 March 2012
The NPPF sets out core planning principles which "should underpin both planmaking and decision-taking. NPPF recognises that Noise pollution impacts negatively on people’s quality of life.
NPPF provides an overarching policy framework that has been embraced in assessing noise impacts.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 134
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester Masterplan Site Response
The Framework makes clear that planners must seek to avoid noise pollution as a result of new developments, and to protect tranquil areas prized for their peace and quiet. The NPPF does not provide prescriptive advice on how to achieve its principal objective, this being: “to avoid noise from giving rise to significant adverse impacts on health...” Footnote 27 of the NPPF mentions the Noise Policy Statement for England (NPSE)5. The NPSE does discuss health effects but does not provide any guidance in terms of noise limits or guideline values which would allow the assessment of impacts. Planning Policy Guidance Note 24 (PPG24)
PPG24 has been replaced by the NPPF. The NPPF does not however provide any guidance in terms of noise limits or guideline values which would allow the assessment of impacts. In the absence of noise limits in NPPF and NPSE, PPG24 remains the guidance to refer to when assessing noise impacts associated with new developments
Noise and vibration assessment protocol has been agreed with the EHO and PPG 24 assessment will inform site layout and location of residential components of the development.
PPG 24 gives guidance to local authorities in England on the use of their planning powers to minimise the adverse impact of noise and builds on the advice previously contained in DOE Circular 10/73. BS5228:1 2009 Code of practice for noise and vibration control
BS 5228 gives recommendations for basic methods of noise control
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
A Construction Environmental Management Plan would be developed and agreed with the
Page 135
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester Masterplan Site Response
on construction and open sites. Noise
relating to construction and open sites where work activities/operations generate significant noise levels, including industryspecific guidance.
EHO to ensure that construction noise is controlled using bestpractice methodologies.
BS 6472-1:2008: Guide to Evaluation of Human Exposure to Vibration in Buildings
BS 6472 provides guidance on predicting human response to vibration in buildings. Frequency weighting curves for human beings exposed to wholebody vibration are included, together with advice on measurement methods to be employed.
Noise and vibration assessment protocol has been agreed with EHO in accordance with this guide. Potential vibration impacts would inform site layout.
BS8223: 1999: Sound insulation and noise reduction for buildings –. Code of practice
BS8223 gives recommendations for the control of noise in and around buildings, and suggests appropriate criteria and limits for different situations. These criteria and limits are primarily
The suitable design range for good acoustic performance set out in BS 8233 would inform site layout and building design.
intended to guide the design of new or refurbished buildings undergoing a change of use Calculation of Road Traffic Noise 1988 (CRTN - ISBN 0 11 550847 3)
CRTN describes the procedures for calculating noise from road traffic. These procedures are necessary to enable entitlement under the Noise Insulation Regulations to be determined but they also provide guidance appropriate to the calculation of traffic noise for more general applications e.g. environmental appraisal of road schemes, highway design and land use planning.
Noise and vibration assessment protocol has been agreed with EHO in accordance with this guide. DMRB requires that the CRTN calculation methodology be used.
The Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB), volume 11, section 3, part 7
Advice Note provides guidance on the appropriate level of assessment to be used when assessing the noise and vibration impacts arising from all road
Noise and vibration assessment protocol has been agreed with EHO in accordance with this guide. Principles in DMRB have been used to assess road traffic noise impacts associated with the
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 136
Policy/Legislation
Cherwell Local Plan 1996
Requirements
NW Bicester Masterplan Site Response
projects, including new construction, improvements and maintenance.
development.
ENV3
Noise and vibration assessment protocol has been agreed with the EHO and PPG 24 assessment will inform site layout and location of residential components of the development.
Development sensitive to noise generated by road traffic will be i)
Refused where external noise levels exceed LAeq 16hr = 72 dB and LAeq 8hr = 66dB between 0700 and 2300 and 2300 to 0700 hours respectively
ii) Generally resisted where external noise levels between 0700 – 23 00 falls in the ranges LAeq 16hr = 63 to 72 dB and LAeq 8hr = 57 to 66dB respectively iii) Expected to achieve a specified internal acoustic environment when the external noise levels between 0700 to 2300 and 2300 to 0700 fall into the ranges LAeq 16hr = 55 to 63 dB and LAeq 8hr 45 to 57 dB respectively. ENV4 Development sensitive to noise generated by rail traffic will be i)
Refused where external noise levels exceed LAeq 16hr = 74 dB between 0700 - 2300 and LAeq 8hr = 66dB between 2300 to 0700 hours.
ii) Generally resisted where external noise levels between 0700 – 23 00 NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 137
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester Masterplan Site Response
falls in the ranges LAeq 16hr = 66 to 74 dB and LAeq 8hr = 59 to 66dB respectively iii) Expected to achieve a specified internal acoustic environment when the external noise levels between 0700 to 2300 and 2300 to 0700 fall into the ranges LAeq 16hr = 55 to 66 dB and LAeq 8hr 45 to 59 dB respectively. ENV5 Notwithstanding Policies ENV3 and ENV 4 Development sensitive to vibration will be resisted in locations where vibration levels are likely to affect material comfort of end users. 10.7 Government advice contained in PPG24 'Planning and Noise' states that noise sensitive developments should be separated from major sources of noise wherever practicable. The above policies seek to ensure that noise-sensitive developments such as new dwellings are not located in positions where they will be subject to severe noise pollution. Other classes of noise-sensitive development would include nursing homes, hostels, hospitals, hotels, residential colleges and schools. 10.8 Where there is a clear NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 138
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester Masterplan Site Response
need for noise sensitive development in a location satisfying the criteria described in clause (ii) of the above policies, development will be expected to achieve a constant specified internal acoustic environment, i.e.: the design is likely to have to incorporate acoustic mechanical ventilation. 10.9 Where individual noise events regularly exceed 82dB LAmax during the night-time period (23:00 - 07:00hrs) the criteria described in (ii) in the above policies shall apply. 10.10 The specific guidance contained in policies ENV3 and ENV4 must not be taken to mean that where noise levels are below those specified in clause (iii) of these policies, noise will not be a consideration. In these circumstances noise levels may be a material planning consideration depending on local circumstances and conditions and particularly where levels are approaching those specified in (iii) above. Control of Pollution Act 1974
The Control of Pollution Act 1974 Section 61 sets out procedures for those undertaking works to obtain ‘Prior Consent’ for construction works within
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Section 61 consent applications may be made to the local council to obtain prior consent for construction works and to agree noise limits for construction works. Page 139
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester Masterplan Site Response
agreed noise limits. The Noise Insulation Regulations 1975 (as amended 1988)
9.3
Regulation 5 provides relevant authorities with discretionary powers to provide noise insulation at dwellings to reduce the impact of construction noise.
Any requirements for Noise Insulation will be addressed once the detailed construction programme has been finalised.
Methodology
9.3.1 Introduction The noise and vibration assessment considers the suitability of the site for residential development in line with Policy Planning Guidance 24 (PPG 24) (Ref 9-1). The noise assessment also considers both construction and operational noise impacts associated with the proposed Masterplan Site development. The construction impacts were assessed in accordance with the provisions in BS 5228: 2009 +A1: 2014 (Ref 9-2). A baseline noise survey serves as a basis for the assessment of the suitability of the proposed Masterplan Site for development and for assessing construction and operational noise impacts. The operational impacts will arise from increased road traffic and from fixed plant and similar installations to be constructed on site. Operational traffic will be assessed during future EIAs using the provisions in the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Volume 11, Part 7, Section 3 Noise and Vibration (Ref 9-3). Noise from operational plant will be considered in accordance with the provisions in BS 4142: 1997 ‘Method for rating of industrial noise affecting mixed residential and industrial areas’ (BS4142) (Ref 9-4). The assessment of operational plant will be carried out once more detailed design information on plat to be installed on site is made available. The vibration assessment has considered the potential for vibration impacts from rail movements on human receptors in accordance with BS 6472 -1: 2008 ‘Guide to evaluation of human exposure to vibration in buildings: Vibration sources other than blasting’. (Ref 94).
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 140
9.3.2 Study Area In order to establish if the proposed Masterplan Development site would be suitable for residential use the extent of the study area covers all of the land within the boundary of the site. This is to ensure that noise levels across the site would comply with Planning Policy Guidance Note 24: Noise (PPG 24) (Ref 9-1). Baseline monitoring locations were agreed with Rob Lowther, the EHO for Cherwell District Council. It was agreed that noise measurements will be taken to reflect noise levels on a typical weekday. The LAeq,T; LA90; LA10; LAmin and LAmax were measured at all locations. Noise related terminology has been set out in the Appendices in Volume 3. To assess the operational impact due to road traffic noise, the study area has been extended to cover the local road network. The effects of increased traffic flows on roads within this study area have formed the basis for the assessment of noise impact upon existing receptors. An affected route is one where there is the possibility of a change of 1dB(A) or more between the ‘Do-Minimum’ or ‘Do-Something’ scenarios in the short-term or 3dB(A) or more in the long-term. This will be established once traffic data for the proposed development has been made available. To assess the impact from commercial activities (e.g. air conditioning plant) in accordance with BS 4142 (Ref 9-4) there would not be a study area as such but rather an assessment of the closest sensitive receptors to the noise sources in question.
9.3.3 Establishment of Baseline Conditions A full noise survey was undertaken at locations representative of the Masterplan Site. It was agreed that noise measurements would be taken to reflect noise levels on a typical weekday. In addition to the noise surveys, vibration measurements were taken at two locations along the railway line that passes through the site. The EHO for Cherwell District Council expressed concern that rail movements had the potential to generate noise and vibration levels that had the potential to impact on the Site. The measurement locations for the whole site are indicated in Drawing 9-1. An assessment of the site indicated that the dominant noise source across the site would be from road traffic noise. Noise monitoring was carried out at selected locations over a 24 hour period. The unattended (24 hour) monitoring locations were selected at the locations indicated on Drawing 9-1, denoted by the prefix LTN (Long Term Noise). NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 141
In addition, short term attended noise measurements (prefix STN) were taken along Bucknell Road and along the M40 motorway. The potential for noise impacts from the M40 were raised as a concern by Rob Lowther of Cherwell District Council. For the attended measurements daytime measurements were taken over a period of 3 hours and at night for 1 hour.
PPG 24 The assessment of whether the proposed site would be suitable for residual use was undertaken in accordance with Planning Policy Guidance Note 24 (PPG 24) (Ref 9-1). PPG 24 guides local authorities in England on the use of their planning powers to minimise the adverse impact of noise. It outlines the considerations to be taken into account in determining planning applications both for noise-sensitive developments and for those activities which generate noise. A recommended range of noise levels for different noise exposure categories (NECs) covering day and night-time periods in relation to road noise are provided in PPG 24. The NECs for road traffic sources are detailed in Table 9-2. Table 9-2 noise
Noise levels corresponding to the NEC for new dwellings relating to
Noise Exposure Category
Noise Source
Period
A
B
C
D
Day
<55
55-63
63-72
>72
Night*
<45
45-57
57-66
>66
Day
<55
55-66
66-74
>74
Rail Traffic
Night*
<45
45-59
59-66
>66
Mixed Sources
Day
<55
55-63
63-72
>72
[inc.industry]
Night*
<45
45-57
57-66
>66
Road Traffic
* when several events in any hour exceed 82 dBA Lmax "slow", the NEC should be "C" (unless it is already "D").
When considering an application in terms of noise, PPG 24 advises that local planning authorities should consider the advice presented in Table 9-3. Table 9-3
Significance of noise exposure category
NEC
Advice
A
Noise need not be considered as a determining factor in granting planning permission, although the noise level at the high end of the category should not be
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 142
NEC
Advice regarded as a desirable level.
B
Noise should be taken into account when determining planning applications and, where appropriate, conditions imposed to ensure an adequate level of protection against noise.
C
Planning permission should not normally be granted. Where it is considered that permission should be given, for example because there are no alternative quieter sites available, conditions should be imposed to ensure a commensurate level of protection against noise.
D
Planning permission should normally be refused.
To establish which relevant NEC the proposed site would fall into, noise monitoring was carried out as described above. The measured noise levels were corrected for distance from source to provide the sound pressure level at source. This data was inserted into IMMI, software for modelling and mapping noise from roads, railways, industrial, construction and other open sites, to produce noise contours for the site for both daytime and night-time that indicate the relevant NEC for various parts of the site.
Vibration Trains using the Chiltern main railway line have the potential to generate noise and vibration in the context of the Masterplan development Site. The vibration measurement locations are indicated as VIB 1 and VIB 2 on Drawing 9-1. The Network Rail Sectional Appendix for this rail route indicated that rail speed limits were uniform across the site. There is a major difference between the sensitivity of occupants of buildings when feeling vibration and the onset of levels vibration which are likely to cause damage to the building structure. Levels of vibration at which adverse comment is likely are below levels of vibration at which damage to the building is likely. Comments regarding building vibrations in residential situations are likely to arise from occupants when vibration levels are only slightly in excess of thresholds of perception. Vibration magnitudes that would normally result in adverse comment can sometimes be tolerated for temporary disturbances on infrequent, brief events such as a construction project. BS 6472 -1: 2008 (Ref 9-5) provides guidance on predicting the human response to vibration in buildings over the range 0.5 Hz to 80 Hz. The way in which people perceive building vibration depends on various factors, including the vibration frequency and direction. Perception thresholds for continuous whole body vibration vary widely NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 143
among individuals. BS 6472 states that the effect of building vibration on people is assessed by finding the appropriate vibration dose, and is best evaluated with the vibration dose value (VDV). BS 6472 sets out the threshold of vibration for humans together with the levels that are considered acceptable for the time of day and night and for the type of activity or building use. The values in Table 9-4 represent best judgement currently available and may be used for both vertical and horizontal vibration. BS 6472 sets out the criteria as ranges as members of the public are likely to exhibit differing susceptibility to vibration. Table 9-4 VDV ranges which may result in various probabilities of adverse comments within residential buildings (BS 6472)
Low probability of adverse comment m/s-
Adverse comment possible m/s-
Adverse comment probable m/s-
Residential buildings 16hour day
0.2 – 0.4
0.4 – 0.8
0.8 – 1.6
Residential buildings 8 hour night
0.1 – 0.2
0.2 – 0.4
0.4 – 0.8
Place and time
1.75
1.75
1.75
9.3.4 Assessment of Effects Traffic Noise Impacts Once traffic data for the proposed development has been made available, traffic noise impacts will be predicted using the technical memorandum issued by the Department of Transport and Welsh Office Calculation of Road Traffic Noise (CRTN) (Ref 9-6). CRTN was produced in 1975 and updated in 1988 and is still the standard method for calculating noise from a road in the UK. In the UK the standard index used for traffic noise is the LA10,18-hour level, which is quoted in decibels dB(A). DMRB HD213/11 provides classification for the magnitude of changes in road traffic noise. A change in road traffic noise of 1dB(A) in the short term (Do-Minimum to Do- Something in the baseline year) is the smallest that is considered perceptible. In the long term (Do-Minimum in the baseline year to Do-Something in the future assessment year) a 3dB(A) change is considered to be perceptible. The magnitudes of impact in the short and long term are therefore considered to be different. For road traffic noise the classification of magnitude of change is reproduced from HD213/11 for the short and long term respectively. The magnitude of noise impact from the project was be classified into levels of impact taken from DMRB as presented in Table 9-4 in order to assist with the interpretation of the project. NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 144
Table 9-4
Magnitude of Noise Change and associated impact
Magnitude of Change in the Short Term Noise Change LA10, 18 Hour
Magnitude of Impact
0
No Change
0.9
Negligible
1 - 2.9
Minor
3 - 4.9
Moderate
5+
Major
Magnitude of Change in the Long Term Noise Change LA10, 18 Hour
Magnitude of Impact
0
No Change
0.9
Negligible
1 - 2.9
Minor
3 - 4.9
Moderate
5+
Major
A noise model will be created using acoustic modelling software known as “IMMI” which calculated the noise level in terms of dB LA10 18 hour at each sensitive receptor at a default height of 1.5m. In accordance with DMRB simple assessment, a comparison between the following scenarios will be undertaken:
Do-minimum condition in the opening year against do-something condition in the opening assessment year.
Do-minimum condition in the opening year against do-something condition in the future assessment year.
Interim advice note 126/095 which was published by the Highways Agency in 2009 recommends that environmental receptor values are not used for road traffic noise assessments and that only magnitude is reported as currently the methodology has not been developed to assign a significance according to both the value of a resource and the magnitude of impact. Night-time Noise The prediction of Lnight, outside will be carried out in accordance with guidance provide in the TRL report ‘Converting the UK traffic noise index LA10,18-hr to EU noise indices for noise mapping’ (2002) (Ref 97). This report provides three methods for the prediction of Lnight, depending on the traffic data that is available.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 145
Method 1 is the preferred approach, and can be used where traffic data for each separate hour over the 24-hour period is available for each road link. Values of LA10,1-hour are calculated using CRTN, which can then be converted to LAeq,1hour values, and subsequently Lden values, using the relationships provided in the report. Method 2 can be used where detailed hourly traffic data is not available but traffic data is known for the relevant Lden time periods. The value of LA10,18-hour is calculated using CRTN, and converted to Lden time periods using the relationships provided. Method 3 is used where detailed hourly traffic data is not available. An ‘end-correction’ is applied to the CRTN calculated levels of LA10,18hour to convert to Lday, Levening and Lnight as required. For this Development method 3 has been used, based on the available traffic data. The relationship that is used to convert the calculated LA10,18-hour at each receptor to Lnight is presented in Equation 1. Equation 1:
LNight = 0.87 x LA10,18 Hour + 4.24
Operational Plant Noise impacts from operational plan to be installed on site will be assessed in accordance with British Standard BS 4142:1997. This is the standard used to determine the impacts of industrial noise upon residential units. The guidance provided within BS 4142 provides a method whereby the likelihood of complaints due to noise from industrial sources can be assessed. The standard advises that the existing background noise levels outside noise sensitive premises are compared with the rating noise levels from any nearby industrial activities. The rating noise level should include corrections for any acoustic character to the noise that makes it more readily discernible to a listener (e.g. whines, crashes, bangs etc). The background noise level (LA90) is the noise level that is exceeded for 90% of the monitoring period at the assessment location. For BS 4142 it is usual to measure the background noise level at the nearest noise sensitive receptor to the industrial noise source. The specific noise level is the LAeq produced by the noise source under investigation, measured as close as possible to the source, over a given reference time interval.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 146
The rating noise level is the specific noise level plus any adjustments for the acoustic characteristics of the noise as specified in clause 8.2 of BS4142. An adjustment of +5dB is applied when the specific noise has a discrete distinguishable tone or distinct impulsive characteristic. The greater the difference between rating level and background noise level, the greater the likelihood of complaints.
A difference of around +10 dB or more indicates that complaints are likely.
A difference of around + 5 dB is of marginal significance.
If the rating level is more than 10 dB below the measured background noise level then this is a positive indication that complaints are unlikely.
Construction Noise Construction noise impacts have been assessed in accordance with BS 5228: 2009 + A1:2004 (Code of practice for noise and vibration control on open and construction sites). BS 5228-1 gives recommendations for basic methods of noise control relating to construction and open sites. It applies to work activities and operations that generate significant noise levels. It also includes industry-specific guidance. BS 5228-2 deals with vibration control on construction and open sites. BS5228 also provides guidance concerning methods of predicting and measuring noise and assessing its impact on those exposed to it. The assessment of construction noise requires a detailed phasing of activities associated with preparation of the site and construction, including the duration of each phase. A detailed inventory of plant and equipment to be used during site preparation and construction would need to be provided, including plant and equipment used for temporary and permanent haul roads. Construction traffic movements would also need to be provided as well as an indication of likely routes for construction traffic movements. In the absence of the above information, assumptions were made regarding the type of plant that would typically be used for construction of this nature. Based on these assumptions noise impacts with distance from source were predicted in accordance with BS 5228. There are no legislative criteria for limiting noise levels from construction sites. Traditionally it was stipulated that noise levels between 07.00 and 19.00, outside the nearest window of the occupied room closest to the site boundary should not exceed 70 dB(A) in rural, suburban and urban areas away from main road traffic NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 147
and industrial noise; and 75 dB(A) in urban areas near main roads in heavy industrial areas. BS 5228: 2009 +A1: 2014, Annex E, sets out criteria for significance based upon noise change. The ABC method describes a threshold of significant effect at dwellings when the total noise level, rounded to the nearest decibel, exceeds a listed category value. If the total noise level (construction plus ambient pre-construction) exceeds the appropriate category value, then a significant effect is deemed to occur. The 2 – 5 dB(A) change method regards construction noise as significant if the total noise (pre-construction ambient plus construction noise) exceeds the pre-construction ambient noise by 5 dB or more, subject to lower cut-off values of 65 dB, 55 dB and 45 dB LAeq, Period, from construction noise alone, for the daytime, evening and night-time periods, respectively; and a duration of one month or more, unless works of a shorter duration are likely to result in significant impact. Criteria for assessing construction noise impacts have also been set out in the ‘Guidelines for Noise Impact Assessment’ (IEMA/IOA 2002) (Ref 9-8). Table 9-5
Criteria for the rating of noise impacts during construction
Significance Criteria
Noise Level dB LAeq
Substantial
Daytime noise levels at houses in excess of 75 dB LAeq (12 hour) or cause statutory nuisance to occur
Moderate
Daytime noise levels at houses in the range between 65 to 75 dB LAeq (12 hour)
Slight
Daytime noise levels at houses in the range between 55 to 65 dB LAeq (12 hour)
The criteria to be used for determining the significance of construction noise impacts will be agreed in consultation with the local EHO for Cherwell District Council once the construction strategy is determined by the contractor.
9.4
Baseline Conditions The assessment of whether the proposed Site would be suitable for residual use was undertaken in accordance with Planning Policy Guidance Note 24 (PPG 24).
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 148
PPG 24 guides local authorities in England on the use of their planning powers to minimise the adverse impact of noise. It outlines the considerations to be taken into account in determining planning applications both for noise-sensitive developments and for those activities which generate noise. An aerial overview of the site indicates that road traffic noise from the A4095 and B4100 would be the dominant noise source across the Masterplan Site. There are no dominant sources of industrial noise in close proximity to the site. The noise survey was carried out between 13th and 15th October 2010 at monitoring locations shown on Drawing 9-1. The noise measurements are summarised in Table 9-6. During monitoring, conditions were cloudy, with light winds at times. At no stage were wind speeds observed to have any influence on the noise measurements. All instruments were calibrated prior to measurement and again at the end of the survey period and zero drift was observed. Table 9-6
Date
Noise Survey Measurements
Location Period
LAmax
LAeq,T
LA90
LA10
Day 0700-2300
96.9
68.3
52.4
72.6
Night (23000700
86.6
61.6
39.0
64.9
Day 0700-2300
76.8
56.6
49.6
59.8
Night (23000700
67.8
51.6
44.7
54.7
Day 0700-2300
76.9
50.2
42.1
50.2
Night (23000700
76.8
46.6
38.3
45.8
Day 0700-2300
93.7
54.7
45.4
49.8
Night (23000700
90.7
60.9
40.4
46.2
Day 0700-2300
93.8
65.0
50.4
69.3
Night (23000700
80.4
56.2
36.6
59.4
Day 0700-2300
94.6
65.4
53.6
69.0
Night (23000700
83.8
57.7
47.9
59.4
Day
90.1
84.2
81.5
86.0
Night
86.6
73.6
55.8
78.1
24 Hour Measurements 13/10 to 14/10
13/10 to 14/10
13/10 to 14/10
13/10 to 14/10
13/10 to 14/10
13/10 to 14/10
LTN 1
LTN 2
LTN 3
LTN 4
LTN 5
LTN 6
Short Term Measurements 13/10/10 14/10/10
STN 1
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 149
Date
Location Period
LAmax
LAeq,T
LA90
LA10
14/10/10
STN 2
Day
78.1
58.8
43.5
63.2
Night
83.0
51.5
36.6
42.6
15/10/10
The noise measurements in Table 9-6 reflect noise levels close to sources such as roads. To accurately represent the noise exposure category (NEC) as set out in PPG 24, the measurements have been corrected for distance to source and IMMI has been used to produce noise contours across the Site. As an initial indication, the noise contours generated for the site have been compared against the criteria in BS 8233. BS 8233 describes a sound reduction of 10 to 15 dB for an open window. Assuming a worst case, with open windows in bedrooms during summer months, a sound reduction (Rw) of 10dB is likely. At night, noise levels on the majority of the site would be below 45dB. Taking the 10dB reduction into consideration, an indoor noise level of less than 35 dB is likely. According to the criteria in BS 8233, a design range LAeq,T of 35 dB would be regarded as Reasonable and 30 dB as Good. The fact that the site falls predominantly within NEC A and that the majority of the site is within the design range of Reasonable to Good in BS 8233 indicates that noise will not be considered as a determining factor in granting planning permission. High noise levels were recorded at short term noise monitoring location STN 1, along the M40 motorway. The noise contours generated in IMMI however indicate that motorway noise will not impact on the site due to distance from the motorway. Future noise levels will however be dependent on future traffic volumes taking into consideration any additional traffic associated with the proposed development and natural traffic growth.
Vibration The baseline vibration data collected at VIB 1 and VIB 2 on Drawing 9-1 is summarised in Table 9-7. Location VIB 1 was located approximately 10m from track side and is located on the same level of as the rail track. Location VIB-2 is located at the base of an embankment along an elevated section of the track. Table 9-7
Baseline Vibration Survey Data
Location
Period
X_VDV
Y_VDV
Z_VDV
VIB 1
Day (Average)
0.003108
0.00269
0.003312
Day (Max)
0.31267
0.28747
0.270625
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 150
VIB 2
Night (Average)
0.000164
0.000162
0.000214
Night (Max)
0.01327
0.01276
0.04189
Day (Average)
0.00115
0.001068
0.000678
Day (Max)
0.005555
0.00538
0.01592
Night (Average)
0.001132
0.00106
0.000543
Night (Max)
0.00353
0.0019
0.0109
The vibration data in Table 9-7 has been collected in 1 minute intervals to consider the vibration impacts from passing trains. He data has been presented as an average for both daytime and nighttime periods as well as the maximum or highest vibration level measured over 1 minute for both daytime and night-time. The recorded vibration data indicates that the 16-hour vibration levels are well below the 0.2 – 0.4 m.s-1.75 for daytime and the 0.1 to 0.2 m.s-1.75 for night-time that would indicate a low probability for adverse comment as set out in BS6472. Maximum 1-minute levels at VIB-1 are in the range of 0.2 -0.4m.s1.75 that indicates a low probability of adverse comment. It must however be remembered that the criteria are set for a 16 hour daytime and 8 hour night-time rather than for individual events. The 1-minute maximum vibration level at VIB-2 for daytime and night-time is below the criteria in BS6472 for a low probability of adverse comment.
9.5
Design and Mitigation
9.5.1 Construction Details regarding the construction methodologies are not currently available; therefore assumptions were made regarding typical plant that would be used for construction of this nature. Initial predictions indicate that the noise impact will be substantial adverse without mitigation at the receptors within 50 to 100m from source and moderate adverse for receptors beyond 300m. The following generic noise mitigation measures need to be implemented as appropriate for all works:
Construction activities would be confined to times of the day when they are least likely to be disturbing.
Careful selection of plant, construction methods and programming. Only plant conforming with relevant national or international standards, directives and recommendations on noise and vibration emissions would be used.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 151
Construction plant would be located, as far as is reasonably practicable, away from adjacent occupied buildings or as close as possible to noise barriers or site hoardings where these are located between the plant and the buildings.
Static and semi-static plant/equipment (e.g. compressors and generators) would be fitted with suitable enclosures where practicable.
Personnel would be instructed on best practice to reduce noise and vibration as part of their induction training and as required prior to specific work activities.
When plant is not being used, it would be shut down and not left to idle.
Vehicles would not wait or queue on the public highway or on the worksite with engines running.
Methods of work and vehicular routes would be selected with regard to minimising noise and vibration impact.
Where practicable, all audible warning systems and alarms would be designed to minimise noise. Broadband reverse alarms would be fitted to all vehicles.
With the phasing of construction, it is possible that certain areas of the development may be occupied while construction is still underway in adjacent areas. Where possible, the occupancy of completed phases of construction would be planned in such a way that there is a buffer between occupied areas and areas where construction is being carried out.
A noise monitoring programme would also be recommended to ensure that mitigation measures achieve the required results.
Vibration impacts would be minimised by selecting the most appropriate construction method and plant to be used. Should activities like piling be required, using vibro-piling instead of hammer piling would reduce vibration impacts.
A Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) would be developed to ensure that construction noise impacts are managed and that appropriate mitigation measures are implemented.
9.5.2 Operation Details regarding plant to be installed at the Energy Centre are not known but it is likely that plant such as fans, extractors, chiller units and air conditioning units will be installed at the commercial premises. At detailed design stage, further studies would be undertaken to agree noise limits for plant to be installed on site with the local EHO, and ensure that the design meets these limits. The key
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 152
issue would be to achieve a level below the night-time background (LA90) noise level. There are a number of generic methods that can be used to reduce plant noise on site, which would be utilised as appropriate to ensure that noise limits are met:
Screening can be an effective method in reducing noise from plant mounted on buildings. Reflective products like concrete have been the traditional material for noise barrier walls and HVAC screens and enclosures. Absorptive materials present a much more effective abatement option. Reflective products like concrete or brick simply bounce sound waves in different directions, while absorptive materials can significantly reducing overall noise.
Controlling the noise generated by an outdoor air conditioning unit can involve enclosing the unit within a frame and affixing outdoor sound blankets designed to prevent airborne noise from bleeding through. The frame may be constructed using a number of materials, including wood, steel or iron, as long as the structure is capable of supporting the heavyweight sound blankets that will be affixed to it.
Since air conditioning units cannot be completely enclosed, sound reduction treatments will not result in a complete deadening of the noise. However, such partial enclosure treatments are extremely effective at preventing transmission of a majority of the noise produced by an air conditioning unit. Results will vary depending upon the extent of the enclosure, but such treatments can affect an average 10-12 dB reduction in noise transmission.
Fan noise can be controlled through use of traditional techniques such as silencers and enclosures.
Select the appropriate low-noise equipment. In addition to the rational design of the air conditioning system, the use of advanced low-noise equipment, design of air ducts and the flow rate of chilled water are also key to reducing air-conditioning system noise.
Air conditioning units and ventilation systems can generate unacceptable noise within buildings if installed incorrectly. Air conditioning units can be fitted with damping spring to prevent structure borne noise. Soft connections and joints should be used for fan duct connection and water pipes.
Air conditioning ducts should be located next to building spaces that are less sensitive such as staircases and storage areas. Duct work is like an open channel to transmit sound. Addition of a baffle box and/or plenum that is lined with absorbing material to
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 153
both the trunk and return of the HVAC unit would serve to reduce noise levels
9.6
Assessment of Effects
9.6.1 Construction As discussed previously, assumptions have been made regarding the plant and equipment to be used during each phase of construction. The assessment has also assumed a free-field for propagation of noise across hard ground, thereby presenting a worst-case. The noise levels at the selected receptor locations have been predicted using the sound pressure levels for the plant as described in BS 5228: 2009 Part 1. The sound pressure levels in BS 5228 have been presented as a LAeq at 10m (Table 9-8). A high percentage ontime has been assumed so as to present a possible worst case. Table 9-8 List of construction plant and associated sound pressure level (LAeq) in dB at 10m.
Plant
BS5228 Table Reference
Percentage On Time
Lp at 10m (LAeq dB)
Road Planer
Table C.5 No.7
70
82
Tracked Excavator
Table C.5 No. 18
70
80
Dozer
Table C.5 No. 12
60
77
Dumpers
Table C4 No. 9
60
77
Vibratory Roller (22t)
Table C5 No. 28
60
77
Asphalt Paver
Table C5 N0. 33
60
75
Diesel Generator
Table C4 No. 84
100
74
Delivery Lorry
Table C.2 No.35
70
80
Tracked Mobile Crane
Table C4 No.52
60
75
Telescopic Handler
Table C4 No.54
75
79
Wheeled Loader
Table C2 No. 26
75
79
Tower Crane
Table C4 No.49
60
77
Concrete Saw
Table C4 N0. 71
10
85
Compressor
Table C5 No.5
80
75
Excavator
Table C5 No.34
75
82
Roller Compactor
Table C.5 No.29
60
76
Water Pump
Table C.2 No.45
75
65
Concrete Pump & Concrete mixer truck discharging
Table C.4 No. 28 80
79
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 154
Plant
BS5228 Table Reference
Percentage On Time
Lp at 10m (LAeq dB)
Poker Vibrator
Table C.4 No. 33
80
78
Percussion Drill
Table C4 N0. 69
40
85
Circular Saw
Table C4 No.72
40
79
Angle Grinder
Table C4 No.93
40
80
Welder
Table C3 No.31
40
73
The construction noise impacts have been calculated using the following formula as described in BS5228:
Where: Kh
=
the correction for propagation across hard ground
R
=
the distance to the receptor location
r
=
the distance of 10 m at which the SPL has been measured
A possible worst case has been presented by considering propagation across hard ground and by not considering screening afforded by topographical features, buildings or other structures. The predictions also assume that all the plant will run simultaneously, which is most unlikely. Once a detailed construction programme is available, the possible overlap of construction activities can be considered. Construction will commence with mobilisation to site, involving delivery of plant and equipment and the preparation of site compounds. The noise impacts associated with this activity are shown in Table 9-9. Table 9-9
Predicted noise levels (LAeq,1h) during mobilisation to site
Plant
Total Number SPL @ 10m
Delivery Lorry
4
Tracked Mobile Crane
1
Telescopic Handler
1
Wheeled Loader
1
Total SPL @ 20m
Total SPL @ 50m
Total SPL @ 100m
Total SPL @ 200m
Total SPL @ 500m
84.5
78.5
70.5
64.5
58.5
44.5
72.8
66.8
58.8
52.8
46.8
32.8
77.8
71.7
63.8
57.8
51.7
37.8
77.8
71.7
63.8
57.8
51.7
37.8
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 155
Plant
Total Number SPL @ 10m
Total SPL @ 20m
Total SPL @ 50m
Total SPL @ 100m
Total SPL @ 200m
Total SPL @ 500m
Dozer
1
78.8
72.7
64.8
58.8
52.7
38.8
Dumpers
2
77.8
71.8
63.8
57.8
51.8
37.8
Diesel Generator
1
74.0
60.0
60.0
54.0
48.0
26.0
87.6
73.6
73.6
67.6
61.6
39.7
Total
Site clearance would typically involve the use of earth moving equipment and dumpers. The associated noise impacts with distance from source are shown in Table 9-10. Table 9-10 Predicted noise levels (LAeq,1h) during site clearance
Plant
Quantity
Total SPL @ 10m
Total SPL @20m
Total SPL @ 50m
Total SPL @ 100m
Total SPL @ 200m
Total SPL @ 500m
78.5
72.4
64.5
58.5
52.4
38.5
77.5
71.4
63.5
57.5
51.4
37.5
Dumpers
2
Tracked Excavator
1
Lorry
1
78.5
72.4
64.5
58.5
52.4
38.5
Tower Crane
1
74.8
68.8
60.8
54.8
48.8
34.8
Dozer
1
74.8
68.8
60.8
54.8
48.8
34.8
Compressor
2
77.0
71.0
63.1
57.0
51.0
37.0
Diesel Generator
1
74.0
68.0
60.0
54.0
48.0
34.0
85.2
79.2
71.2
65.2
59.2
45.2
Total
A number of underground services will be installed on site, requiring excavation and trenching. The associated noise impacts with distance from source are indicated in Table 9-11. Table 9-11 Predicted noise levels (LAeq,1h) during installation of underground services
Plant
Quantity
Excavator
2
Telescopic Handler
1
Dozer
1
Total Total Total SPL @ SPL SPL @ 10m @20m 50m
Total SPL @ 100m
Total SPL @ 200m
Total SPL @ 500m
83.8
77.7
69.8
63.8
57.7
43.8
77.8
71.7
63.8
57.8
51.7
37.8
78.8
72.7
64.8
58.8
52.7
38.8
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 156
Plant
Quantity
Total Total Total SPL @ SPL SPL @ 10m @20m 50m
Total SPL @ 100m
Total SPL @ 200m
Total SPL @ 500m
Dumpers
2
77.8
71.8
63.8
57.8
51.8
37.8
Delivery Lorry
2
81.5
75.4
67.5
61.5
55.4
41.5
Roller Compactor
1
73.8
67.8
59.8
53.8
47.8
33.8
Water Pump
2
66.8
60.7
52.8
46.8
40.7
26.8
Compressor
2
77.0
71.0
63.1
57.0
51.0
37.0
Generator
1
74.0
68.0
60.0
54.0
48.0
34.0
88.0
81.9
74.0
68.0
61.9
48.0
Total
Plant that would typically be used during construction of roads on the development site and the associated noise level with distance from source is shown in Table 9-12. Table 9-12 Predicted noise levels (LAeq,1h) during road construction
Plant
Total Number SPL @ 10m
Road Planer
1
Tracked Excavator
1
Dozer (Spreading fill)
1
Dumpers
2
Vibratory Roller (22t)
1
Asphalt Paver
1
Diesel Generator
1
Total
Total SPL @ 20m
Total SPL @ 50m
Total SPL @ 100m
Total SPL @ 200m
Total SPL @ 500m
80.5
74.4
66.5
60.5
54.4
40.5
78.5
64.5
64.5
58.5
52.4
30.5
74.8
60.8
60.8
54.8
48.8
26.8
77.8
63.8
63.8
57.8
51.8
29.8
74.8
60.8
60.8
54.8
48.8
26.8
72.8
58.8
58.8
52.8
46.8
24.8
74.0
60.0
60.0
54.0
48.0
26.0
85.4
71.4
71.4
65.4
59.4
37.4
Noise impacts associated with the construction of buildings and other structures on site are shown in Table 9-13.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 157
Table 9-13 Predicted noise levels (LAeq,1h) during construction of buildings
Plant
Total Quantity SPL @ 10m
Total SPL @20m
Total SPL @ 50m
Total SPL @ 100m
Total Total SPL @ SPL @ 200m 500m
77.5
71.4
63.5
57.5
51.4
37.5
72.0
66.0
58.0
52.0
46.0
32.0
74.8
68.8
60.8
54.8
48.8
34.8
77.8
71.7
63.8
57.8
51.7
37.8
78.0
72.0
64.1
58.0
52.0
38.0
Tracked Excavator
1
Diesel Generator
1
Dumpers
1
Telescopic Handler
1
Concrete Pump & Concrete mixer truck discharging
1
Poker Vibrator
2
80.0
74.0
66.1
60.0
54.0
40.0
Tower Crane
2
77.8
71.8
63.8
57.8
51.8
37.8
Compressor
2
77.0
71.0
63.1
57.0
51.0
37.0
86.4
80.4
72.4
66.4
60.4
46.4
Total
Construction activities produce significantly high noise levels, particularly close to source. Construction noise tends to fluctuate and is usually of fairly short duration. The construction noise impacts will depend on the proximity of construction activities to nearby receptor locations. Also, some of the activities presented above could take place at the same time. The construction noise impacts predicted above indicate that the highest impacts occur within 100m of the works, and these may be substantial adverse. The predicted noise levels are based on a possible worst case scenario. Propagation across hard ground has been assumed and no screening from topographical features or other structures has been assumed. At distances of above 200m the construction noise impacts can be expected to be moderate. The construction noise impacts can however be largely mitigated through measures as set out in Section 9.5.1 such as limiting work hours or using acoustic screening. Considering that construction noise impacts are temporary in nature, with mitigation measures in place no residual impacts are expected. There is a potential for vibration to be generated during construction. This will depend on the construction method and the type of plant to be used. In the absence of a detailed construction programme predicting vibration impacts will be very difficult. Vibration impacts NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 158
will also depend on proximity to receptor locations and on local conditions such as ground conditions. Vibration impacts can be mitigated by selecting plant and equipment that will generate low levels of vibration. It will only be possible to predict vibration impacts once details of the plant to be used and the construction methods to be used have been finalised.
9.6.2 Operation Operational traffic associated with the proposed Masterplan Site will be assessed in accordance with DMRB, using traffic data for the Opening Year (and the Design Year) once traffic data has been provided. This will be undertaken for future EIAs.
9.7
Cumulative Effects This section considers the potential for cumulative noise effects from other consented developments in the area. The consented developments are detailed in Table 17.1 in Chapter 17 (Cumulative Effects Chapter). Cumulative impacts are most likely from increases in road traffic associated with other developments. There is potential for minor adverse cumulative effects associated with construction noise from other developments within 1km of the Development Site. There are other committed developments in the immediate vicinity of the Masterplan Site, but it is unlikely that cumulative construction noise impacts would be of concern given that other developments are located more than 1km from the Bicester Development Site.
9.8
Summary The noise and vibration assessment was carried out to identify and assess the suitability of the ambient noise and vibration levels across the proposed development for residential use and also assess the impact upon road traffic noise levels and the effects of construction noise at existing receptors within the local area. The noise and vibration assessment considers the suitability of the site for residential development in line with Policy Planning Guidance 24 (PPG 24). The noise assessment also considers both construction and operational noise impacts associated with the proposed development.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 159
A baseline noise survey serves as a basis for the assessment of the suitability of the site for development and for assessing construction and operational noise impacts. The noise baseline noise measurements indicate that the majority of the site falls within NEC A, which means that noise need not be considered as a determining factor in granting planning permission. The construction impacts were assessed in accordance with the provisions in BS 5228: 2009. Assumptions have been made regarding the construction plant that would typically be used for developments of this nature. The construction noise impacts will depend on proximity of the construction works to receptors, the nature or intensity of the construction, the type of plant being used and the time of day. Construction noise impacts are generally temporary, will be transient in nature and can be mitigated against. Operational road traffic noise impacts and operational plant noise impacts will be assessed once the required traffic data and operational plant design detail has been made available.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 160
10
Cultural Heritage
10.1 Introduction The objective of this chapter is to identify and assess the likely significant effects of the proposed NW Bicester Development on the archaeological, built heritage and historic landscape resource, collectively referred to as the Historic Environment. Cultural heritage assets are defined by the National Planning Policy as ““All aspects of the environment resulting from the interaction between people and places through time, including all surviving physical remains of past human activity, whether visible, buried or submerged and landscaped and planted or managed flora”. The PPS5 practice guide that provides guidance on the assessment of The Historic Environment within the planning framework classifies heritage assets as “A building, monument, site, place, area or landscape positively identified as having a degree of significance meriting consideration in planning decisions. Heritage Assets are the valued components of the historic environment they include Designated Heritage Assets and assets identified by the Local Planning Authority during the process of decision-making or through the plan-making process (including local listing).” World Heritage Sites, Scheduled Monuments, and Listed Buildings are all designated assets. The cultural heritage resource considered in this assessment comprises the totality of archaeological remains, historic buildings and historic landscapes. This chapter firstly describes the regulatory framework that the assessment will be produced within, it then details the methodologies used to assess the potential significant effects of the development during the construction and operation phases. Details of consultations undertaken are also provided. Baseline conditions are then explained. Design, mitigation and enhancement measures are then described, followed by an assessment of significant residual effects. A summary of the assessment is then provided, together with relevant conclusions. A list of references, appendices, abbreviations and a glossary completes the chapter. There is potential for considerable overlap with other chapters within this Environmental Statement and reference to the appropriate chapter is made where required. In this respect, information on landscape and visual impacts is provided in Chapter 6.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 161
10.2 Regulatory Framework This assessment has been undertaken in accordance with current legislation, national, regional and local plans and policies. Outlined below are those elements of current legislation, policy and guidance relevant to archaeology in the context of the proposed Masterplan Site development. A summary of the relevant legislation and policies, the requirements of these policies and NW Bicester Masterplan Site response is provided in Table 10-1 below. Table10-1 Summary of Relevant Legislation and Policies
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester Masterplan Response
Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979
The Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979 gives statutory protection to any structure building or work which is considered to be of particular historic or archaeological interest and regulates any activities which may affect such areas. Under the Act any work that is carried out on a Scheduled Ancient Monument must first obtain Scheduled Monument consent.
The nearest Scheduled Ancient Monuments to the site are at RAF Bicester and are not anticipated to experience significant impacts. Scheduled Monument Consent will not be required for any element of the Eco-town development
Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act
The Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 applies special protection to buildings and areas of special architectural or historic interest.
Consideration will be given for the potential for the Development to impact the listed buildings within the study area including their settings
Section 66 (1) of the act states that “In considering whether to grant planning permission for development which affects a listed building or its setting, the local planning authority or, as the case may be, the Secretary of State shall have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses”. The National Planning Policy Framework
The NPPF sets out the Government’s planning policies for England and how these are expected to be applied. The NPPF provides a framework within which local and neighbourhood plans can be produced. Planning law requires that applications for
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
The Cultural Heritage assessment will be produced in accordance with the requirements of the NPPF. In order to comply with policy 128 a programme of archaeological investigations is underway, these include Page 162
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester Masterplan Response
planning permission must be determined in accordance with the development plan. The NPPF must be taken into account in the preparation of local and neighbourhood plans, and is a material consideration on planning decisions.
Desk-based Assessment, Aerial Photograph Analysis, Geophysical Survey and Archaeological Evaluation. The results of all of these phases of investigation will be incorporated into the Environmental Impact Assessment.
Section 12 of the NPPF Conserving and enhancing the historic environment contains the government’s policies relating to the historic environment. Paragraph 126 states that local planning authorities should set out in their Local Plan a positive strategy for the conservation and enjoyment of the historic environment. In doing so they should recognise that heritage assets are an irreplaceable resource and conserve them in a manner appropriate to their significance. Paragraph 128 states that in determining applications, local planning authorities should require an applicant to describe the significance of any heritage assets affected, including any contribution made by their setting. The level of detail should be proportionate to the asset’s importance and no more than is sufficient to understand the potential impact of the proposal on their significance. As a minimum the relevant historic environment record should have been consulted and the heritage assets assessed using appropriate expertise where necessary. Where a site on which development is proposed includes or has the potential to include heritage assets with archaeological interest, local planning authorities should require developers to submit an appropriate Desk-Based Assessment and, where NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 163
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester Masterplan Response
necessary, a field evaluation. Planning Policy Statement: Eco-towns
The PPS sets out a range of Ecotown targets. ET15 deals with landscape and historic environment. It states: “Planning applications for ecotowns should demonstrate that they have adequately considered the implications for the local landscape and historic environment. This evidence, in particular that gained from landscape character assessments and historic landscape characterisation should be used to ensure that development complements and enhances the existing landscape character. Furthermore, evidence contained in relevant Historic Environment Records, should be used to assess the extent, significance and condition of known heritage assets (and the potential for the discovery of unknown heritage assets) and the contribution that they may make to the eco-town and surrounding area. Eco-town proposals should set out measures to conserve and, where appropriate, enhance heritage both assets and their settings through the proposed development.”
Cherwell Local Plan
The Cherwell Local Plan 2006 – 2031 was submitted in January 2014 The relevant policy in the Local Plan for this assessment is policy ESD16: The Character of the Built and Historic Environment. This policy states: “Successful design is founded upon an understanding and respect for an area’s unique built, natural and cultural context. New development will be expected to complement and enhance the character of its context through sensitive siting, layout and high
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
The ES chapter will have a section which considers the effect of the development on the historic environment and will make recommendations to lessen that impact. Aside from a small Pilot study in 1993 there is no Historic Landscape Characterisation for Oxfordshire therefore the assessment will concentrate on other sources such as the Oxfordshire HER and cartographic sources.
The assessment will consider all heritage assets and their settings which are located within the Study Area and consider all appropriate protection, enhancement and conservation measures. There are no Scheduled Ancient Monuments or nationally important remains within the study area. Desk-based Assessment and field evaluation will be carried out as part of the EIA
Page 164
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester Masterplan Response
quality design. All new development will be required to meet high design standards. Where development is in the vicinity of any of the district’s distinctive natural or historic assets, delivering high quality design that complements the asset will be essential. New development proposals should:
Be designed to deliver high quality safe, attractive, durable and healthy places to live and work in.
Development of all scales should be designed to improve the quality and appearance of an area and the way it functions
Deliver buildings, places and spaces that can adapt to changing social, technological, economic and environmental conditions
Support the efficient use of land and infrastructure, through appropriate land uses, mix and density / development intensity
Contribute positively to an area’s character and identity by creating or reinforcing local distinctiveness and respecting local topography and landscape features, including skylines, valley floors, significant trees, historic boundaries, landmarks, features or views, in particular within designated landscapes, within the Cherwell Valley and within conservation areas and their setting
Conserve, sustain and enhance designated and non designated ‘heritage assets’ (as defined in the NPPF) including buildings, features, archaeology, conservation
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 165
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester Masterplan Response
areas and their settings, and ensure new development is sensitively sited and integrated in accordance with advice in the NPPF. Proposals for development that affect non-designated heritage assets will be considered taking account of the scale of any harm or loss and the significance of the heritage asset as set out in the NPPF.
Regeneration proposals that make sensitive use of heritage assets, particularly where these bring redundant or under used buildings or areas, especially any on English Heritage’s At Risk Register, into appropriate use will be encouraged
Include information on heritage assets sufficient to assess the potential impact of the proposal on their significance. Where archaeological potential is identified this should include an appropriate desk based assessment and, where necessary, a field evaluation.
Respect the traditional pattern of routes, spaces, blocks, plots, enclosures and the form, scale and massing of buildings. Development should be designed to integrate with existing streets and public spaces, and buildings configured to create clearly defined active public frontages”
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 166
10.3 Methodology 10.3.1 Introduction This assessment has reviewed the archaeological, built heritage and historic landscape resource within the proposed Development and the surrounding study area through the collation of existing written, cartographic and electronic information in order to identify the likely character, extent, quality and significance of the known or potential heritage resource. The study was undertaken in accordance with the ‘Code of Conduct’ (Ref 10-1) and ‘Standards and Guidance for Archaeological Deskbased Assessments’ of the Institute for Archaeologists (IfA 2008a; IfA 2008b) (Ref 10-2 and Ref 10-3). The field evaluation was undertaken in accordance with the IfA’s Standards and Guidance for Field Evaluation (IfA 2008) (Ref 10-4).
10.3.2 Study Area The study area was defined by a 500m radius from the site boundary as set out in the scoping report for the Masterplan area. Since the scoping report the Masterplan area has been extended to include the field immediately to the noth of Home Farm known as Altitude Land. This area is located within the original study area. For the Historic Landscape assessment a wider study area influenced by the zone of visual influence was used where appropriate.
10.3.3 Establishment of Baseline Conditions The baseline conditions described below have been established through a search of the Oxfordshire Historic Environment Record (HER) and the National Monuments Record (NMR) for archaeological assets within the study area. Records of Listed Buildings within the study area were also obtained from the NMR. A selection of historic maps was also obtained from the Oxfordshire record office and Landmark Information Group. These included the 1853 Caversfield Tithe map and Ordnance Survey editions. Online sources were also consulted. The research was carried out in July 2010 and an updated search of the Oxfordshire HER was carried out in February 2014. Two site walkover surveys have been carried out. The Exemplar Site was visited on the 23rd July 2010 and the Masterplan Area (excluding Altitude land) was visited on the 2nd of September 2010. In addition, weekly site visits were made during the archaeological evaluations which took place between the 6th and the 24th of September 2010 for the Exemplar Site and the 12th of August and the 25th of October 2013 for the Masterplan Area. NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 167
An analysis of aerial photographs has been undertaken in order to identify areas of archaeological potential. Both the Exemplar Site and the Masterplan Area were also subject to Geophysical Survey and Archaeological Evaluation. The baseline conditions will be based on a combination of the data gathering exercise, cartographic analysis, aerial photograph analysis and the field evaluation. The area known as Altitude Land has not been supject to aerial photograph analysis, geophysical survey or archaeological evaluation as it was not part of the Masterplan area when these surveys were carried out.
10.3.4 Consultation The Planning Archaeologist for Oxfordshire Richard Oram and the Conservation Officer at Cherwell District Council Claire Sutton were consulted during the preparation of this document. The Planning Archaeologist for Oxfordshire was also consulted during the archaeological field evaluation carried out at the site and made a number of monitoring visits.
10.3.5 Assessment of Effects In the absence of any set guidelines the methodology used to assess the significance of the assets is based on the criteria set out in DMRB Volume 11, Section 3, Part 2 (Highways Agency et al, 2007) (Ref 105). In assessing the impacts of the proposals upon cultural heritage assets, it is necessary to consider the value of the resources, as well as the magnitude of impact. Professional judgement and a degree of flexibility are often required. In carrying out the assessment of effects in accordance with the criteria set out in DMRB the following tables will be used.
Estimation of Value Assessments of value considered how far the asset(s) contributes to an understanding of the past, through their individual or group qualities, either directly or potentially. These are professional judgements, but they were guided by legislation, national policies, acknowledged standards, designations, criteria and priorities. Table 10-2 presents the scale of values that was assigned to archaeological remains. Table10-2 Scale of values that were assigned to Archaeological Remains
Value Very High
High
Example
World Heritage Sites (including nominated sites)
Assets of acknowledged international importance
Assets that can contribute significantly to acknowledged international research objectives
Scheduled Monuments (including proposed sites)
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 168
Value
Example
Undesignated assets of Schedulable quality and importance
Assets that can contribute significantly to acknowledged national research objectives
Medium
Designated or undesignated assets that contribute to regional research objectives
Low
Designated and undesignated assets of local importance
Assets compromised by poor preservation and/or poor survival of contextual associations
Assets of limited value, but with potential to contribute to local research objectives
Negligible
Assets with very little or no surviving archaeological interest
Unknown
The importance of the resource has not been ascertained
Table 10-3 Scale of values that were assigned to historic buildings.
Value
Example
Very High
Structures inscribed as of universal importance as World Heritage Sites
Other buildings of recognised international importance
Scheduled Monuments with standing remains
Grade I and Grade II* Listed Buildings
Other Listed Buildings that can be shown to have exceptional qualities in their fabric or historical associations not adequately reflected in the listing grade
Conservation Areas containing very important buildings
Undesignated structures of clear national importance
Grade II Listed Buildings
Historic (unlisted) buildings that can be shown to have exceptional qualities in their fabric or historical associations
Conservation Areas containing buildings that contribute significantly to its historic character
Historic townscape or built up areas with important historic integrity in their buildings, or built settings (e.g. including street furniture and other structures)
‘Locally Listed’ buildings
Historic (unlisted) buildings of modest quality in their fabric or historical association
Historic townscape or built up areas of limited historic integrity in their buildings or built settings (e.g. including street furniture and other structures)
Negligible
Buildings of no architectural or historical note; buildings of intrusive character
Unknown
Buildings with some hidden (i.e. inaccessible) potential for historic significance
High
Medium
Low
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 169
Table10-4 Scale of values that were assigned to historic landscapes.
Value
Example
Very High
World Heritage Sites inscribed for their historic landscape qualities
Historic landscapes of international value, whether designated or not
Extremely well preserved historic landscapes with exceptional coherence, time-depth, or other critical factor(s)
Designated historic landscapes of outstanding interest
Registered battlefields
Registered parks and gardens
Undesignated landscapes of outstanding interest
Undesignated landscapes of high quality and importance, and of demonstrable national value
Well preserved historic landscapes, exhibiting considerable coherence, time-depth or other critical factor(s)
Designated special historic landscapes
Undesignated historic landscapes that would justify special historic landscape designation, landscapes of regional value
Averagely well-preserved historic landscapes with reasonable coherence, time-depth or other critical factor(s)
Robust undesignated historic landscapes
Historic landscapes with importance to local interest groups
Historic landscapes whose value is limited by poor preservation and/or poor survival of contextual associations
Landscapes with little or no significant historical interest
High
Medium
Low
Negligible
Magnitude of Impact The determination of magnitude of impact was based on the vulnerability of the study area, its current state of survival/condition and the nature of the impact upon it. The survival and extent of archaeological deposits is often uncertain and consequently, the magnitude of change can be difficult to predict with any certainty. Table10-5 Magnitude of impact criteria related to archaeological remains
Magnitude of Impact
Example
Major
Change to most or all key archaeological materials, such that the resource is totally altered Comprehensive changes to setting
Moderate
Changes to many key archaeological materials, such that the resource is clearly modified Considerable changes to setting that affect the character of the asset
Minor
Changes to key archaeological materials, such that the asset is slightly altered
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 170
Magnitude of Impact
Example Slight change to setting
Negligible
Very minor changes to archaeological materials, or setting
No Change
No change
Table10-6 Magnitude of impact criteria related to historic buildings
Magnitude of Impact
Example
Major
Change to key historic building elements, such that the resource is totally altered Comprehensive changes to the setting
Moderate
Change to many key historic building elements, such that the resource is significantly modified Changes to the setting of an historic building, such that it is significantly modified
Minor
Change to key historic building elements, such that the asset is slightly different Change to setting of an historic building, such that it is noticeably changed
Negligible
Slight changes to historic building elements or setting that hardly affect it
No Change
No change to fabric or setting
Table10-7 Magnitude of impact criteria related to historic landscapes
Magnitude of Impact
Example
Major
Change to most or all key historic landscape elements, parcels or components; extreme visual effects; gross change of noise or change to sound quality; fundamental changes to use or access; resulting in total change to historic landscape character unit.
Moderate
Changes to many key historic landscape elements, parcels or components, visual change to many key aspects of the historic landscape, noticeable differences in noise or sound quality, considerable changes to use or access; resulting in moderate changes to historic landscape character.
Minor
Changes to few key historic landscape elements, parcels or components, slight visual changes to few key aspects of historic landscape, limited changes to noise levels or sound quality; slight changes to use or access: resulting in limited changes to historic landscape character.
Negligible
Very minor changes to key historic landscape elements, parcels or components, virtually unchanged visual effects, very slight changes in noise levels or sound quality; very slight changes to use or access; resulting in a very small change to historic landscape character.
No Change
No change to elements, parcels or components; no visual or audible
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 171
Magnitude of Impact
Example changes; no changes arising from in amenity or community factors.
Significance of Effects Table 10-8 illustrates how information on the value of the asset and the magnitude of impact was combined to arrive at an assessment of the significance of effect. The matrix is not intended to ‘mechanise’ judgement of the significance of effect but to act as a check to ensure that judgements regarding value, magnitude of impact and significance of effect are reasonable and balanced. Where a combination of significance descriptors allowed for a choice of significance of effects, professional judgement was applied on case by case basis in order to determine which is the most appropriate significance of effects. Table10-8 Criteria for Determining the Significance of Effect on Archaeology, Built Heritage and Historic Landscape
Value
Magnitude of Impact No Change
Negligible
Minor
Moderate
Major
Very High
Neutral
Slight
Moderate/Large
Large or Very Large
Very Large
High
Neutral
Slight
Moderate/Slight
Moderate/Large
Large/Very Large
Medium
Neutral
Neutral/Sligh t
Slight
Moderate
Moderate/Large
Low
Neutral
Neutral/Sligh t
Neutral/Slight
Slight
Slight/Moderate
Negligible
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral/Slight
Neutral/Slight
Slight
10.4 Baseline Conditions 10.4.1 Archaeology Desk Based Assessment An archaeological and historical Desk-based assessment has been produced as part of the Cultural Heritage assessment. These were carried out in 2010 and a synthesis of the baseline presented in these reports is presented below. In addition an updated search of the Oxfordshire HER which was carried out in February 2014. All additional data added to the HER between 2010 and 2014 has been included in this assessment. In addition to the Desk-based Assessments further archaeological investigation were carried out. These comprised an aerial photograph analysis, geophysical survey NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 172
and archaeological field evaluation. The findings of these investigations are presented below. An archaeological and historical Desk-based Assessment has been produced as part of this assessment The Desk-based Assessments concluded that the site is located within an area that has remained undeveloped since at least the late 19th century and possibly before. The site has known potential for remains dating to the prehistoric period with records of a prehistoric ring ditch located approximately 350m to the north of Himley Farm (3), a possible curvilinear enclosure to the north west of Hawkwell farm (2) and other evidence of prehistoric activity within the study area suggesting a general potential for remains dating to this period to be present. The study area also have some potential for remains dating to the Roman period as demonstrated by the presence of Roman remains recorded to the south of the site (5). As it is likely that these remains are related to the settlement of Alchester to the south it is possible that the Roman activity in the area did not spread as far north as the application site. The Desk-based Assessments concluded that as the site has been agricultural land since at least the post-medieval period or possibly before there is the possibility that the development could impact on remains associates with this activity.
Updated Historic Environment data, February 2014 A geophysical survey was carried out at Whitelands Farm to the south of the development site. This survey identified traces of features that suggested early occupation of the site. Potential ditches were recorded within or close to a cropmark complex thought to represent a field system associated with an early farmstead. Clear traces of a former windmill were also detected, and immediately to the east, a number of less distinct anomalies which could reflect earlier mills, or possibly much earlier remains, such as barrows. Traces of a penannular enclosure were also observed, as well as ridge and furrow. An archaeological evaluation carried out of land south of Middleton Stoney Road found little of archaeological interest. A geophysical survey carried out at South Lodge Stables, Caversfield recorded a small number of positive linear anomalies. A geophysical survey and archaeological evaluation was carried out on land at Howes Lane, within the Masterplan Area. The geophysical survey identified a group of boundary and enclosure ditches of probable Iron Age or Romano-British date, and other features of less certain archaeological significance. The evaluation confirmed the NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 173
results of the geophysical survey, with the identification of a small group of Iron Age features, including a probable ring ditch and Romano-British ditches, probably representing enclosure systems. Pottery from the Romano-British features dated to the 1st to 4th centuries, indicating that activity here may have extended throughout the Roman period. The progress of the evaluation was severely hampered by wet ground conditions and flooded trenches.
Aerial Photograph Analysis Interpretation of aerial photograph data was undertaken in order to further define the potential for the proposed development to impact upon potential cultural heritage assets. The object of the aerial photograph interpretation was to provide information on the location and nature of any archaeological features or areas of archaeological potential visible on existing aerial photographs within the proposed development or the surrounding study area. The work was carried out by Air Photo Services. Evidence for fragmentary ditches and possible ditched enclosures was observed in the aerial photograph analysis. These features are located in the central and one of the northern fields of the Exemplar site (the eastern part of the Masterplan Site). These features are heavily masked by natural geological features and show as marks in crops on vertical aerial photographs. Immediately to the south of the Exemplar site development, outside of the site boundary, is a buried ditched sub rectangular enclosure. These features are all eroded and buried and are visible only via marks in crops where the plants grow more vigorously over the buried ditches in times of drought (Cox, 2010) (Ref 10-6). The aerial photograph analysis of the masterplan area recorded evidence of a complex and extensive area of buried ditches, pits, probable tracks and enclosures. These features show as distinctive marks in crops at Hawkswell Farm. This is the most intensive area of archaeological activity recorded by the AP analysis and may be indicating possible settlement activity. Just to the south of this area is a curvilinear feature of uncertain origin or function. It is possible that this feature could be related to agricultural activity in the area. A short distance to the south of this possible feature some slight ridges on the floodplain of a small watercourse are visible which may be either water meadows or Medieval cultivation or drainage. To the north of Hawkwell Farm, close to the Exemplar Site, is a buried ditched sub rectangular enclosure. There is also a subrectangular area of deeper soil which may be a place where local quarrying has been undertaken for stone extraction, then filled in when worked out. Close to the northern boundary of the application site and between the railway line and Bucknall Road the AP analysis recorded evidence of medieval and post-medieval fields and field boundaries. There is NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 174
also an oddly shaped cut feature which is now in filled located a short distance to the east of Bucknall Road. Most small quarries in this area are sub-rectangular or square, but this feature has a number of projections. Given the proximity of a local World War 2 airbase, this may possibly have been a bombing decoy which is now in filled, but it is not visible on photographs taken immediately after the War in 1946. Its origin is therefore uncertain. To the south of the railway line a series of ditches and enclosures centre upon Aldershot Farm and are visible as crop marks. Their type or origin is uncertain but they are likely to pre-date the modern farm buildings. They are underlain by complex geological features, and are visible on vertical aerial photographs which were taken in July 1975 when the weather was very dry. The fields to the north of Himley Farm contain buried ditches and pits which are visible on vertical aerial photographs as marks in crops, in addition to the underlying geological features in the area. This area also contains a buried ring ditch, indicative of a possible eroded Bronze Age funerary site. A circular feature, with some adjacent straight cut features was also visible at this site as a cropmark and its former function is unknown. The south eastern corner of the application site contains some very well defined crop marked buried features which may either be natural or archaeological. They cannot be well defined as either, therefore have been mapped as possible features which may require further investigation as appropriate. The area also contains some eroded traces of Medieval fields. This area also contains evidence for a complex of very clearly defined ditches, possible double ditched boundary, track way and enclosures (Cox 2010) (Ref 10-6).
Geophysical Survey A geophysical survey was carried out on the Masterplan Area between December 2011 and February 2012. The survey was successful in identifying archaeological features within much of the area. The geophysical survey confirmed and expanded upon the presence of features identified by the aerial photograph analysis. Particular concentrations of features were located in the north of the Masterplan Area. These included sub-rectangular and sub-circular ditched enclosures, curvilinear ditches and pits, likely to be of late prehistoric or Roman date. Other foci of archaeological features were detected in the north and west of the area. Of particular interest was a possible, long curving droveway or crowding alley in the west of the site.
Archaeological Evaluation Following on from the aerial photograph analysis a programme of archaeological field evaluation was carried out at the proposed NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 175
Exemplar Site development in September 2010 and the Masterplan Area in 2013. Exemplar Site A total of 70 trenches measuring 50m x 2m were excavated across the Exemplar Site, representing a 4% sample of the total area. The aim of the evaluation was to establish the presence/absence, extent, character, quality and date of any archaeological remains present. Six of the seventy trenches contained features worthy of further investigation. These were trenches 1 and 30, located in the two northern most fields of the Proposed Exemplar Site development and trenches 47, 52, 53 and 54 located in the two southern-most fields. Each of the trenches contained one feature which required investigation. Five of the features were linear in nature and the other was most likely a natural hollow. All of the linear features appeared to be of no archaeological significance and could have been the result of natural activity such as water runoff or geological formation. However the location of two of the features in a relatively flat area of the site means that it cannot be ruled out that it is possible that they may be the result of human activity, rather than natural processes (Dean 2010). The evaluation also demonstrated that the features identified during the aerial photograph analysis were not archaeological in nature. The only artefacts recovered from the investigations were two fragments of animal bone from the linear feature in trench 52. These fragments were recovered from the top of the fill of the feature and are likely to be intrusive resulting from ploughing activity (Dean 2010). The results of the evaluation suggested that there was very little potential for archaeological activity within the proposed Exemplar Site development. No evidence was recovered to link the features found during the evaluation to any other known archaeological activity within the study area such as the field systems and enclosures to the south west or the Deserted Medieval Village to the north east which were recorded in the Desk-based assessment. This suggests that activity within the proposed Exemplar Site development was limited to agrarian practices and did not result in partitioning the land. The nature of the geology in the area also indicates that there would have been no need for any drainage construction either. Masterplan Area A total of 529 trenches were excavated across the Masterplan Area representing a 2% sample. Of these trenches, 130 had features of archaeological origin, including 26 that had only furrows or modern features. NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 176
Evidence was found for activity from several periods. The earliest was represented by a single feature containing pottery sherds of middle Neolithic date (c. 3400-2500 BC). The presence of isolated features or small clusters features widely dispersed in the landscape is typical of this period. A number of archaeological features were recorded in a small valley on the eastern side of the site. While these were undated, the presence of burnt stones and charcoal forming low mounds sealed beneath a deposit of colluvium (hill-wash deposits) is significant. Such 'burnt mounds' are widely known (although unusual in Oxfordshire) and generally date to the Bronze Age (c. 2400-700 BC) and may be the remains of prehistoric saunas or, alternatively, specialised cooking sites. A number of pits and a sinuous ditch in the same valley may represent further activity of the same date. There were five widely-separated locations which produced substantial quantities of early-middle Iron Age pottery (c. 700100BC), as well as a number of other features which produced single sherds or features in which the pottery was found in association with later material. Such a dispersed pattern of activity is somewhat unusual for this period but may suggest that the site lies in the hinterland of a more substantial settlement located elsewhere. There were two main areas and one subsidiary area of Roman activity (AD 43-410) revealed by the evaluation. The two main areas of activity are typical of Roman rural settlements in Oxfordshire in terms of the types, features and range of artefacts present. They are potentially noteworthy in terms of their chronological range, spanning the whole Roman period. Such continuity, with some evidence of expansion in the late Roman period, can be considered to be unusual. The third, smaller area of activity contained material of largely early Roman date and may have been a small outlying farmstead. Human remains were found in all three areas. Geophysical anomalies suggesting the presence of ridge and furrow agriculture were fairly widespread across the site and furrows were also present in a number of trenches. This suggests that much of the site was under arable cultivation during the medieval period and later. No evidence of medieval or later settlement was recorded on the site, aside from the extant farmhouses themselves. There were a large number of undated features present across the site. Most of these were ditches and it is likely that these were boundary and drainage ditches associated with agricultural activity. It is most likely that they are of medieval or later date (Hughes 2013).
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 177
10.4.2 Built Heritage The following section sets out the built heritage baseline conditions for the study area. It identifies designated and undesignated buildings and structures within the study area and provides an assessment of them.
Listed Buildings There are five Listed Buildings within the study area. One is Grade II* listed and the others are Grade II listed. St Lawrence’s Church (Grade II* listed) (BH1) St Lawrence’s Church is located in the grounds of Caversfield House and has a Norman nave with later aisles, an Early English chancel with a north chapel and a gabled west tower. The earliest part of St Lawrence’s Church is the Anglo-Saxon tower which is built of courses rag-stone with dressed quoins. In the north and south faces of the tower are round-headed double-splayed windows of late Saxon date. The upper portion of the tower is modern. The rest of the church dates to the 10th, 11th, late 12th and 13th centuries and was restored and partially rebuilt in 1874 by Henry Woodyer. The church is located within well-defined grounds surrounded by mature planting. The tower of the church is visible from certain key vantage points in the surrounding area. The setting of St Lawrence’s Church is defined by its immediate environs and is characterised by its relationship with Caversfield House. The only point where the tower is visible is along the sightline stretching from the church to the south west corner of the site. This asset is considered to be of high value. Home Farmhouse (Grade II listed) (BH4) Home Farmhouse is located in a rural setting, but close to the urban development of Bicester. It is adjacent to the B4100. The farmhouse dates to the early/mid 17th century and was extended in the 18th or 19th century. The farmhouse is two storeys constructed of coursed squared limestone with ashlar dressings. It has an old plain-tiled roof with rebuilt brick gable stacks. This asset is considered to be of medium value. The farmhouse is surrounded by a number of nonlisted buildings which make up the farm complex and are now used for a variety of functions including office space and light industry. These assets are considered to be of low value. The setting of the farmhouse is defined by its function as a working farmhouse within a mainly rural location, however the setting of the farmhouse is significantly characterised by its proximity to the urban development of Bicester. The Farmhouse is partially screened from the proposed development by the high hedges which form the field boundaries on the south eastern boundary of the site. NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 178
Churchyard Cross (Grade II listed) (BH2) A churchyard cross is located in the churchyard of St Peter’s Church in Bucknall. The cross dates to the 13th or 14th century, however only the base remains from the original. The cross was restored in 1929 and now the medieval socket stands on a recent plinth of two steps and is set with a new shaft and lantern. A plaque in the porch of the church notes that the cross now covers the grave of a former lord and lady of the manor of Bucknall who were buried in the churchyard in 1929. The setting of the cross is defined by the churchyard which it sits within. The churchyard is located behind the church and is surrounded by walls and mature trees and as a result feels very secluded and inward looking. This asset is considered to be of Medium value. Two Barns at Himley farm (Grade II listed) (BH3) Two barns dating to the mid 18th century are located approximately 700m to the north east of Himley Farmhouse. The barns are constructed of coursed limestone with wooden lintels and corrugatedasbestos roofs. The barns have recently been converted into living accommodation. The barns are set within a gravelled yard with open access to and views over open farmland. The setting of these assets is defined by their located within an area of open farmland. This asset is considered to be of Medium value. Bucknell Manor House (Grade II listed) (BH5) The present manor house at Bucknall is constructed from stone and dates to approximately 1700. The house stands on the site of the medieval manor house which was at one point surrounded by a moat. Some traces of the moat remain visible. The manor house is basically H shaped in plane but has been subject to many additions and alterations since its original construction. The house is now an old people’s home.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 179
The manor house is located close to the church and is set within its own mature grounds. Beyond the ground to the south is open fields and to the north is the village of Bucknall. However the house itself is quite secluded due to a large amount of mature planting within its ground. The setting of the manor house is initially defined by its grounds but is also informed by its location within Bucknall and its proximity to the church. This asset is considered to be of Medium value.
Non-listed buildings There is one other non listed building of historical interest within the study area. It is recorded on the NMR. Caversfield House (BH6) Caversfield House was built in 1842 by CR Cockerall on the site of a former manor house. The House is located adjacent to the B4100 within a secluded area of mature planting and separated from the road by a wall. There is a large fish pond to the south of the house which separates it from the area to the south. The setting of the house is defined by its immediate environs and its relationship with St Lawrence’s Church. There are no apparent views between the house and the proposed development. This asset is considered to be of low value. No other structures are recorded either on the HER or NMR within the study area. However all of the farms within the application site, Lords Farm, Aldershot Farm, Hawkwell Farm, Gowell Farm, Home Farm and Himley farm are recorded on the 1885 OS map and therefore date to at least the late 19th century. The buildings at these farms are generally of the vernacular style. The setting of all these farm complexes is informed by the landscape of open farmland within which they are located.
10.4.3 Historic Landscape There has been no Historic Landscape Characterisation produced for Oxfordshire therefore this assessment of the historic landscape within the study area is based on an analysis of cartographic sources and available documentary sources. Exemplar Site The 1853 tithe map shows the proposed Exemplar Site development as open fields under either arable or grassland with a small coppice in the south west corner. The field boundaries are the same as the modern boundaries. There are some fieldnames recorded on the tithe award which indicate former activity within the site. For example the field to the north east of the area of woodland is named The Limekiln NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 180
Ground which may indicate there once was a limekiln in the vicinity. The small narrow field to the east of the woodland is named Stone Pit Pieces which could suggest quarrying activity in the area. The 1881 1:2,500 scale Ordnance Survey (OS) map shows there has been no change from the tithe map. The 1885 1:10,560 scale OS map shows the proposed Exemplar Site development as open fields set in a rural landscape and displays no real changes from the tithe map. Home farm is marked as is St Lawrence’s Church and Caversfield House, both of which are surrounded by woodland. The B4100 which forms the eastern boundary of the proposed Exemplar Site development is marked. The 1899 1:2,500 scale OS maps shows evidence of water management along the stream next to Home Farm with a sluice marked close to the farm buildings. The 1900 1:10,560 scale OS map shows little change. The site is still open fields although the area of woodland is now shown as being much less dense. The U shaped area of water to the south of Caversfield House is marked on this map as a fish pond. An old quarry is also marked just to the south of the fish pond. The 1022 1:2,500 scales OS map and the 1923 1:10,560 scale OS map shows the site remained relatively unchanged; however a filter bed is now marked to the north of Home Farm, just outside the site boundary. Further afield the expansion of Bicester is now visible with housing plots marked along the roads to the south of the site. There is no change on the 1938-1952 1:10,560 scale OS map, the 1955 1:10,000 scale OS map or the 1968 – 1976 1;2,500 scale OS map. By the time of the 1970 1:10,000 scale OS map the development of Bicester has spread up along Srimmingdish Lane to the Old Vicarage south of Home Farm. The 1999 1;10,000 scale OS map shows the proposed Exemplar Site development in its modern state and also demonstrates how Bicester has by this time expanded almost up to Caversfield House. There is no change up to the 2010 1:10,000 scale OS map. The cartographic sequence for the proposed Exemplar Site development indicated that it is an enclosed landscape of arable and pasture land with some small scale industry in the form of quarrying. There is also evidence for earlier landscape features in the area with the A421 following the route of the Roman Akeman Street The nearest settlement to the proposed Exemplar Site development is Caversfield to the east which is likely to have originated as a nucleated settlement as indicated by the presence of the Anglo-Saxon church and the Deserted Medieval Village to the east. After the NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 181
abandonment of the village to the east of the site Caversfield developed into a more dispersed settlement with comprising a church and manor house serving number of scattered farmsteads with the church possibly also serving the northern areas of Bicester as it expanded. The change in the nature of the settlement of Caversfield reflects what was happening across the Cherwell District around the same time with economic and social change leading to widespread desertion and contraction of late medieval villages. The south of the Cherwell district was particularly affected in this way with a third of villages disappearing and a further third exhibiting sign of shrinkage (Cherwell District Landscape Assessment, 1995) (Ref 10-7). The Cherwell District Landscape Assessment (1995) places the landscape around the Proposed Exemplar Site development within the Oxfordshire Estate Farmlands character area. This area runs from Bletchingdon in the south, around the north of Bicester and up to the county boundary with Northamptonshire and is characterised by a rolling landform and a pattern of woodland and mixed farmland. Much of the landscape is this character area is associated with estates linked to the extensive areas of remaining 18th century parkland and this is one of the special features of the character area. However there is no real evidence for parkland in the landscape around the Exemplar site where the local landscape has a much more agricultural quality. The Landscape Assessment characterises the local landscape around the Exemplar site as a rolling arable landscape with strong field patterns, copses and trees. The patchwork of arable and pasture is given definition by well maintained hedges. The Landscape Assessment draws out some of the key landscape elements of the area surrounding the Exemplar site but does not designate it as an area of high landscape value. As with other parts of Cherwell the area to the north of Bicester has been considerably affected by military development. Military airfields such as RAF Bicester are dominant features in the landscape when they occur. Other key features in the landscape of the Cherwell district are the small settlements. Many of these date to the Early Medieval and Medieval periods and a significant number of these settlement experienced abandonment or shrinkage as a result of social and economic change in the post-medieval period. Of the two closest villages to the Proposed Exemplar Site development, Caversfield has a church which dates to the Anglo Saxon Period and Bucknall is likely to have medieval or earlier origins. Both the villages experienced shrinkage in the post- medieval period with little remaining of Caversfield except for the church and the manor house. The predominant architecture in both Caversfield and Bucknall is of the vernacular style which is typical for the district.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 182
The Oxfordshire Wildlife and Landscape Study has characterised the landscape around the Proposed Exemplar Site development as Wooded Estate. The study states that this landscape type is characterised by arable farming and small villages with a strong vernacular character. The key characteristics of this landscape type are a rolling topography, large blocks of ancient woodland and mixed plantations, large parkland and mansion houses, regular field pattern dominated by arable fields and small villages with strong vernacular character (http://www.owls.oxfordshire.gov.uk/wps/wcm/connect/occ/OWLS ). The landscape which the proposed Exemplar Site development is situated in contains many of these characteristics including the arable fields and the small villages such as Bucknall to the north and Caversfield to the east. Overall the historic landscape which the proposed Exemplar Site development is located within can be described as fairly typical for the area. It is of a predominantly rural nature characterised by late 18th and early 19th century arable fields. The settlements close to the Exemplar site are also typical of the area. Overall the value of the historic landscape has been assessed as low. Masterplan Area The following presents an analysis of the cartographic sequence from the 1753 map of the manor of Bicester Market End and Kings End to the 2010 Ordnance Survey (OS) map. Part of the Masterplan Area falls into the area covered by Williams 1753 map of Bicester Market End and Kings End. This map shows that by this time the land within this area had been enclosed. The map also shows the enclosed fields divided into furlongs and single field was often farmed by many different people. In 1780 an enclosure award was created for the manor of Bucknall, unfortunately the accompanying map no longer survives. However the presence of the enclosure award demonstrated that the land within the application site which falls within the manor of Bucknall was likely to have been open fields until the late 18th century. The 1853 Caversfield Tithe map covers the north eastern third of the site. The map shows that at this time the B4100 which forms the eastern boundary of the site was part of a turnpike road. The map also shows that the field pattern at that time was very similar to the present day one. Generally the fields were under either pasture or arable cultivation. The 1885 1:10,560 scale Ordnance Survey (OS) map shows the field boundaries within the site have already achieved their present day layout by this time. Home Farm is shown, as is Lords Farm, Himley NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 183
Farm, Aldershot Farm, Gowell Farm and Hawkwells Farm. There is also a barn labelled Parkers Barn located one field to the south east of Himley Farm. The road which bisects the site is present and the road network to the east of the site has achieved its present day layout. Outside of the application site St Lawrence’s Church and Caversfield House are also marked. To the north the village of Bucknall as a small nucleated settlement centred around the Manor house and the church with a small cluster of buildings located to the each of the main area of settlement and separated by two small fields. The village had achieved its present day road pattern by this time. To the south east of the Masterplan Area Bicester is considerably smaller than in the present day. The Bicester Union Workhouse lies in open countryside approximately halfway between the site and the town along Bucknall Road. Slad farm, which became the site of a satellite landing ground during World War II is also marked a short distance to the south east of the application site. To the south of the site is a large house labelled Bignell House which is surrounded by fairly extensive grounds. The 1900 1:10,560 scale OS map shows the field pattern within the site remains unchanged. There is also no change to Bicester, Caversfield House or the village of Bucknall. To the south of the application site the ground of Bignall House have expanded to abut the southern boundary of the site and are now labelled Bignall Park. A significant number of tree have been planted within the park including a wide bank of trees, labelled as Bignall Belt, along the northern boundary of the park, which is adjacent to the southern boundary of the site. The only change to the north eastern section of the site shown on the 1923 1:10,560 scale map is that there is now a filter bed marked in the field immediately to the west of Home Farm. Across the rest of the site the field boundaries remains unchanged. The most important change on this map is that the railway line which bisects the site is marked for the first time. A number of quarries are marked on the map around the railway line in the southern section of the site and to the south of the site boundary. A pumping station, a tower and a lime kiln are also marked at the point where the railway line crosses the site boundary, where the Avonbury Business park is now located. Further afield, another notable change is that the urban development of Bicester has now begun to spread northwards along Hemmingford Lane towards the site. This is the beginning of what will become the modern village of Caversfield. The map shows no change to Bucknall. The 1938-1952 1:10,560 scale OS maps shows there have been no change to the site except for a small building which has been constructed adjacent to the B4030 approximately halfway along the southern boundary of the site. It is likely that this building is the one which is labelled as Lovelynch House on modern maps. By the time of NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 184
the 1952 map this building has been enclosed within its own plot. There also has been little change to Bucknall and no change to Caversfield House. Bignall House and Bignall Park to the south of the sire are shown as unchanged. However the development that was shown along Hemmingford Lane on the 1923 map is no longer marked. Outside of the application site the Bicester Union Workhouse has expanding considerably by the time of the 1938 map. This expansion is likely to be associated with its use at this time as a home for poor boys. The 1952 map show the workhouse is now called market End House. This map also shows the gradual expansion northwards of Bicester. The only change to the north east corner of the site on the 1955 1:10,000 scale OS map is that the filter beds close to Home Farm are no longer marked. The pumping station adjacent to the southern boundary of the site is also no longer marked. The map also shows little change to Bucknall. The 1960 1:10,000 scale OS map shows no change to the field pattern in the south west corner of the site. No change is shown on the 1966 1:10,000 scale OS map. The 1970 1:10,000 scale OS maps shows little change to the application site except that the building adjacent to the B4030 is labelled Himley Farm. Another small building has also been constructed towards the southern end of the track which links the original farm buildings at Himley farm with the B4030. The map also shows that the expansion of Caversfield has increased along Hemmingford Lane. The map also shows the considerable expansion of Bicester which happened at this time. The town has now achieved something close to its modern day shape to the north of the town centre although the area around Slad Farm remains undeveloped. The south east corner of the application site remains unchanged. The 1982-1988 1:10,000 scale OS map shows that a small building has been constructed adjacent to Bucknall Road within the site boundary. The plot that the new Himley Far building sits within has increased in size to its present day extent. Parkers Barn is no longer marked. The field pattern within the site remains unchanged. A small depot is marked adjacent to the southern boundary of the site, in the area now occupied by the Avonbury business park. Outside of the site boundary there has been further development to the north east around Brashfield House. To the north Bucknall remains relatively unchanged. By the time of the 1988 map Bicester has expanded even further with the north western limit of the town now abutting the south western boundary of the site. The 1996 1:10,000 scale OS map shows little change to the application site, except that the depot in the location of the Avonbury NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 185
Business park has expanded slightly and is labelled as a Police HQ. The map also shows that Bicester has almost reached its full extent by this time and the A4095 has been constructed. The area around Slad Farm remains undeveloped however. By the time of the 1999 1:10,000 scale OS map little has changed within the application site. Two small strips of plantation have been planted between Gowell Farm and Himley Farm and one of the fields in Himley Farm is now labelled as a piggery. The new building at Himley Farm is now labelled Lovelynch House and the small building adjacent to the access track for Himley Farm is now labelled Himley Farmhouse. Outside of the site boundary Bucknall has achieved its modern day layout, as has the modern day village of Caversfield, with the two separate areas of development along Hemmingford Land and around Brashfield House being joined together. The north east corner of the site remains unchanged. The 2006 1:10,000 scale OS map shows little change to the application site other than the piggeries at Himley Farm have moved one field to the west. Outside of the application site there has been further development at the Avonbury Business Park. The map also shows that the area around Slad farm has been developed by this time and Bicester is shown as having its modern day extent. The 2010 1:10,000 scale OS map shows that there has been a small amount of development at Lords Farm but shows no other changes to the site. There is no change to Bucknall on the 2006 map, nor the 2010 map. Overall the value of the historic landscape has been assessed as low.
10.5 Design and Mitigation 10.5.1 Construction Archaeology The investigations carried out as part of this assessment have demonstrated that there is little potential for archaeological remains to exist within the Exemplar site and therefore it was not necessary to recommend any changes to the design to reflect archaeological considerations. Consultation carried out with Richard Oram, Planning Archaeologist for Oxfordshire County Council after the conclusion of the field evaluation confirmed that, based on the results of the field evaluation no further archaeological investigations will be required at the Exemplar site; therefore no mitigation is required during the construction phase. The rest of the Masterplan Area however, has been demonstrated to contain archaeological remains of some significance and whilst the assessment and consultation process is currently ongoing it is highly NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 186
likely that the mitigation strategy will need to include archaeological excavation of the areas where the evaluation has recorded activity. The exact location and extent of the areas of excavation will be agreed through consultation with the Planning Archaeologist and will be carried out in accordance with a Written Scheme of Investigation which shall be agreed with the Local Planning Authority prior to commencing work. It is also recommended that archaeological investigations of a similar nature to those that have been carried out across the Exemplar Site and Masterplan area are extended into Altitude Land in order to determine the archaeological potential of this area.
Built Heritage This assessment has demonstrated that there are no Listed Buildings, or non-listed buildings within the boundaries of the Exemplar site itself. There will be a small visual impact upon the setting of the built heritage assets around the Exemplar site once the construction activity begins and the site is no longer arable farmland. However as this will be a temporary impact and the built heritage assets are at least partially shielded from the site by walls and hedgerows, it is not considered that there are any practical mitigation measures that can be implemented at this stage. On the basis of the built heritage assessment it is recommended that the proposed development of the Masterplan Area ensures it does not have any direct physical impacts on the designated and undesignated built heritage assets within the site. In addition, wherever possible, efforts should be made to preserve the setting of these assets. Specifically the efforts made during the design of the Exemplar site to preserve the line of sight from the north east corner of the wooded area in the north west corner of the site to St Lawrence’s Church should be continued, especially in the design for Altitude Land. This would significantly lessen the impact of the development of this area on this asset. It is also recommended that some open space is maintained between the Listed barns at Himley farm and the development and the development is screened from the asset through careful planning and maintaining the existing hedgerows. It is also recommended that the farm buildings within the site be retained as far as possible in their current layout and efforts be made during the masterplanning process to ensure that the proposed development does not detract too much from the understanding of the original function of these buildings. On a more general note sympathetic design of key structures within the development to compliment the historic structures in the area will allow the development to blend well with the existing historic structures allowing a greater sense of place connecting the new development with important buildings in the area. NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 187
It is also recommended that sympathetic design and preservation of green space in the areas closest to the listed buildings at Home Farm is included in the design for Altitude Land in order to avoid impacts to the setting of these assets. The character of any green space should reflect the current character of the fields in this area which are under pasture.
Historic Landscape During the construction of the development any construction activity in the vicinity of hedgerows to be retained would be managed to avoid causing damage to or removing the existing hedgerows as they contribute to the historic character of the field boundaries which are a key element of the Historic landscape in this area. Where practicable exclusion zones should be set up around the hedgerows to avoid accidental damage. Where removal of hedgerows is unavoidable then these would be translocated to as close to the original line as possible in order to preserve the line of the historic boundary.
10.5.2 Operation Archaeology As the investigations carried out as part of this investigation have shown that there is little potential for archaeological remains to survive within the Exemplar site, no mitigation measures are recommended during the operation phase.
Built Heritage As part of the design stage of this project a number of measures have been put in place in order to minimise any adverse impacts of the development on the built heritage assets in the vicinity of the Exemplar sites. The Grade II* listed St Lawrence’s Church currently commands views looking south west across the Exemplar site towards a small wooded area. By designing a gap in the centre development along the sightline from the church to the wood this view has been preserved within the development. The other built heritage assets within the study area, the listed and non-listed buildings at Home Farm and the non-listed Caversfield House are all separated from the Exemplar site. In the case of Caversfield House the B4100 runs between the Exemplar site development and the house and on the Exemplar site side it is bounded by high hedgerows which are to be retained as part of the development and on the opposite side of the road there is a high wall forming a boundary between the house and the area to west of the Masterplan site. The boundary of Exemplar site development stops a field’s length away from Home Farm so the setting of the built heritage assets at NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 188
the farm are preserved by a buffer of open fields between them and the development. The retention of hedgerows along the boundary of the Exemplar site is another design measure that will help to reduce any adverse impacts upon these built heritage assets.
Historic Landscape The design of the layout of the proposed development has sought to preserve the lines of the existing historic field boundaries where possible and the layout of the development is contained within the areas defined within these boundaries. In many places across the proposed development, the existing hedgerows are also preserved in whole or in part. In addition two of the existing farm tracks leading from Home Farm have be preserved in the design ensuring the continuation of historic routeways. This design has ensured that the historic landscape of the area remains visible despite the change in the character of the area from farmland to a residential and mixed use development. During the operation phase efforts would be made to maintain the hedgerows and preserve the lines of the historic boundaries when redevelopment proposals are considered.
10.6 Assessment of Effects A full impact assessment assessing the effects of the development of all Cultural Heritage assets identified as part of the baseline will be carried out as part of the Environmental Impact Assessment. The following presents a brief overview of what impacts are anticipated to occur to heritage assets following mitigation.
10.6.1 Construction Archaeology All impacts on the archaeological remains within the site will occur during the construction period. These impacts will be direct physical impacts and will occur as a result of the partial or total truncation of archaeological remains. These impacts are considered to be in the range of moderate to major. However the archaeological fieldwork that will be carried out as mitigation in advance of the development will add considerably to the knowledge of archaeological activity in this area.
Built Heritage All built heritage assets will experience impacts to their setting as a result of construction activity. However the majority of impacts will be experienced during the operation phase so they will be discussed in that section below. NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 189
Historic Landscape The proposed development is located within a historic landscape which is of low value. However the construction of the development will result in considerable changes to the use of the area and there will be visual changes within the landscape and changes in noise levels due to construction activity. This will result in impacts to the Historic Environment which are considered to be in the range of slight to minor taking into account the low value of the historic landscape resource.
10.6.2 Operation Archaeology No further impacts to archaeology is anticipated during the operation phase.
Built Heritage This assessment has concluded that the built heritage resource within the study area contains assets of high medium and low value. Any impacts which will occur will be on the setting of the assets. The buildings within the proposed Site development are to be constructed in various styles and with a variety of finishes including stone, brick, timber and render. The closest buildings within the proposed Exemplar Site development to St Lawrence’s Church and Caversfield House are to be constructed in styles which is likely to blend in well with the local buildings and they are to be finished with either brick or stone. The use of stone will help to connect the new development to the existing historic buildings and will allow for the creation of a coherent sense of place due to the similarity in building material and colour between the historic buildings and the new development. This effect is lessened slightly be the use of building design elsewhere in the proposed Exemplar Site development which is very different to the local style and the red brick finish of some of the buildings thus weakening the connection between the historic buildings and the new development. However these buildings are unlikely to be visible from either Caversfield House or St Lawrence’s Church. The development of Altitude Land will bring the development closer to the listed building at Home Farm. This will erode the setting of this asset further. However the green space within this area is closest to the farm buildings and thus helps to reduce the impact on their setting. The current setting of the listed and non-listed agricultural buildings within the site are informed by their location within a rural farmed NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 190
landscape. Overall some of this setting will be lost which will impact the setting of these assets. This assessment has concluded that the built heritage resource within the study area contains one asset of high value, two assets of medium value, and two assets of low value. There are no built heritage assets within the Proposed Exemplar Site development itself and therefore there will be no direct physical impacts on any built heritage assets from the operation phase of the development. Any impacts which will occur will be on the setting of the assets within the study area. Bucknell Manor House and the Churchyard Cross are not anticipated to experience any impacts to their setting.
Historic Landscape The proposed development is located within a historic landscape which is of low value. The key element of the historic landscape in this area has been identified as the historic boundaries as they inform the area’s historic use as farmland. The design and mitigation measures outlined in this assessment will ensure that either the field boundaries themselves or the line of them will be protected and retained during the construction of the proposed Exemplar Site development. Where possible it is recommended that this occurs in the Masterplan area as well. The development will result in considerable changes to the use of the area and there will be visual changes within the landscape and changes in the use of the landscape from agricultural to residential and amenity. This will result in impacts to the Historic Environment which are considered to be minor to moderate taking into account the low value of the historic landscape resource.
10.7 Cumulative Effects Archaeology The environmental assessment produced for the Exemplar site concluded that there is no potential for archaeological remains to occur within the proposed Exemplar development and the significance of effects of the development on the archaeological resource in the study area has been assessed as neutral. There is no potential for archaeological remains to occur within the Exemplar site, therefore there are no cumulative effects associated with either the NW Bicester development or other developments with regard to the archaeological resource. All committed development in the vicinity of Bicester is separated from the Masterplan Area and therefore would not have any cumulative impacts on the archaeological resource within the site. NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 191
Built Heritage The combination of the Exemplar site with the NW Bicester Development could result in a minor adverse cumulative effect on the setting of listed buildings and non-listed buildings within the vicinity of the development. The design of the proposed developments would be in sympathy with the adjacent built heritage assets to minimise these adverse effects.
Historic Landscape The masterplan for the NW Bicester Development should retain key landscape features such as the line of field boundaries. There would be no cumulative effects on historic landscape associated with other developments, due to their distance from the site.
10.8 Summary This assessment report has demonstrated that from the work carried out to date it is known that the Exemplar site has little potential to impact archaeological remains and no archaeological mitigation is proposed in this area. For the wider Masterplan Area, it is clear that there are concentrations of archaeological activity across the site and mitigation in the form of archaeological excavation is proposed. The archaeological remains across the Masterplan Area will be impacted by the proposed development and therefore it is important that they are fully identified and recorded. The built heritage resource within the study area includes a small number of Listed Buildings and a group of historic but undesignated farm buildings. All buildings within the site will experience impact to their setting as a result of the development. This assessment has concluded that the proposed development is located within a historic landscape which is of low value. The construction of the development will result in considerable changes to the use of the area and there will be visual changes within the landscape and changes in noise levels due to construction activity. Therefore there will be impacts experienced by the Historic Landscape resource.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 192
11
Contaminated Land
11.1 Introduction This chapter relates to the proposed development on the entire Masterplan Site (including the area known as the Exemplar site) of the NW Bicester Eco development and considers the potential associated risks to human health and controlled waters that development of the Site may represent. This chapter also describes:
The current baseline conditions at the Masterplan Site
Any potential impacts and the mitigation measures required to prevent, reduce or offset any potentially significant adverse effects
The likely residual effects after these measures have been implemented
To assist the understanding of the principles of this subject and their particular application within the context of the proposed development, it is recommended that the reader refers to the associated Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited Reports (Ref 11-1, 11-2 and 11-3), which have provided information for this chapter and copies of which are included in Appendix 11A, 11B and 11C.
11.2 Regulatory and Policy Context This assessment has been undertaken in accordance with current legislation, national, regional and local plans and policies. Outlined below are those elements of current legislation, policy and guidance relevant to contaminated land in the context of the proposed Masterplan Site development. A summary of the relevant legislation and policies, the requirements of these policies and NW Bicester Masterplan Site response is provided in Table 11-1 below. Table 11-1
Summary of Relevant Legislation and Policies
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester Masterplan Response
Environmental Protection Act
Government policy in relation to land contamination is outlined in DEFRA Circular 01/2006 ‘Contaminated Land’. The policy aims to both prevent new contamination and to address the inherited legacy of contaminated land. The primary legislation that covers historic land contamination is Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990, which was inserted by section 57 of
Local authorities are the main regulator and are required to publish a strategy for inspecting their areas. The Environment Agency is responsible for dealing with defined ‘special sites’ and monitoring and reporting on progress made. Both local authorities and the Environment Agency record
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 193
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester Masterplan Response
the Environment Act 1995. Part 2A provides a definition of contaminated land, focussing on risks in the context of the current use and circumstances of the land. It places specific duties on local authorities to inspect their areas to identify land falling within this definition and, where they do, to require its remediation in line with the ‘suitable for use’ approach.
certain prescribed information about their regulatory actions on a public register and local authorities maintain databases about potentially contaminated sites within their area.
Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 defines contaminated land as ‘Any land which appears to be in such a condition, by reason of substances in, on or under the land that: Significant Harm is being caused or there is a Significant Possibility of such harm being caused; or Pollution of Controlled Water is being, or is likely to be, caused’. The identification of contaminated land on the basis that there is a significant possibility of significant harm (SPOSH) being caused is set out in DEFRA Circular 01/2006. The identification of contaminated land, as defined in Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990, comprises a risk-based approach. For harm to the non-aquatic environment or pollution of controlled waters to occur, there must be a ‘pollutant linkage’. This linkage is based on the following being present:
Source contamination (hazard);
Pathway for the contaminant to move from source to receptor;
Receptor (target), which is affected by the contaminant. This includes humans, ecosystems, controlled waters, physical systems and built structures,
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
of
Page 194
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester Masterplan Response
which could be affected by the hazard. Waste Management Regulations
The Waste Management (England and Wales) Regulations 2006 states that excavated material generated by the development of land maybe subject to waste regulatory controls to ensure that waste does not harm human health or the environment. Waste disposal, deposit, recovery & recycling in England, Wales and Scotland is regulated primarily through Part 2 of the Environmental Protection Act and the Waste Management Licensing Regulations 1994. Under the legislation all controlled waste must be deposited, disposed of, recycled or recovered at a suitably licensed site, or a site that is registered as exempt from waste management licensing. In addition, controlled waste must be transported to a licensed (or exempt) site by an authorised waste carrier. It is an offence to deposit waste on land that does not have a waste management licence (or exemption) in force.
National Planning Policy Framework 2012
The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) was introduced in March 2012 to simplify planning and was written to help achieve sustainable development. Whilst containing only limited guidance on land affected by contamination the document does states that:
Licensing of waste disposal and treatment facilities, waste carriers and brokers and the monitoring of waste management activities is the responsibility of the Environment Agency in England and Wales.
Consideration will be given for the potential risks from pollution within the study area.
“To prevent unacceptable risks from pollution and land instability, planning policies and decisions should ensure that new development is appropriate for its location. The effects (including cumulative effects) of pollution on health, the natural environment or general amenity, and the potential sensitivity of the area or proposed development to adverse effects from pollution, should be taken into account. Where a site is affected by contamination or land stability issues, responsibility for securing a safe development rests NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 195
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester Masterplan Response
with the developer and/or landowner. ” Water Resources Act
The Water Resources Act 1991 provides regulation of contamination potentially impacting controlled waters and is enforced by the Environment Agency. This provides regulation separate from that within the planning framework.
Controlled Waters Risk Assessment (CWRA) has been undertaken and the potential impacts on water are included.
Control of Substances Hazardous to Health
The Control of Substances Hazardous to Health (COSHH) Regulations, 2002, and subsequent amendments and the Construction and Design Management (CDM) Regulations, 2007, require the developer to ensure that risks to the public and site workers, in relation to the likely presence of contaminated land, are minimised.
Human Health Risk Assessment has been undertaken as part of this SER.
Additional guidance is provided by DEFRA in their series of Contaminated Land Reports (CLR 1CLR 11). Cherwell Local Plan
The proposed new Cherwell Local Plan (2006-2031) was submitted to the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government for formal examination in January 2014. Upon adoption the plan will set out broadly how the district will grow and change in the period up to 2031. The Local Plan must set out the long term spatial vision for the District and contain policies to help deliver that vision. Within Section C of the new Local Plan (Policies for Cherwell’s Places), there is discussion about the development in and around the towns of Bicester and Banbury which will ensure that the housing growth the district needs is focused on the locations that are most sustainable and most capable of absorbing this new growth. Policy Bicester 1 provides details of the North West Bicester Eco-Town.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
In support of the submitted Local Plan, a series of evidence documents have been prepared under the headings of Economics, Environment & Energy, Heritage, Housing, Infrastructure, Leisure and Plan Wide. A Bicester Environmental Baseline Report (2013) is included within the Environment & Energy Evidence and where relevant, the information has been included within this chapter.
Page 196
11.3 Methodology 11.3.1 Study Area The study area for the contaminated land assessment is defined by the Masterplan Site boundary, as shown on Drawing 3-1. The assessment addresses the potential risks to human health and controlled waters that the development of the site may represent.
11.3.2 Establishment of Baseline Conditions The baseline conditions for the Masterplan Site have been determined based on the Phase 1 Desk Study Report (Appendix 11A) and from laboratory testing results obtained from a follow-up preliminary intrusive ground investigation undertaken on site in August 2010 (Appendix 11B). Details have also been taken from the Groundwater Supply: Feasibility Study (Appendix 11C).
11.3.3 Assessment of Effects The potential effects on the identified receptors from contaminants at baseline conditions at the Masterplan Site have been assessed under the headings ‘Human Health Risk Assessment’, ‘Ground Gas Risk Assessment’ and ‘Controlled Waters Risk Assessment’.
Human Health Risk Assessment The Statutory Guidance on Part IIA of the Environmental Protection Act 1990, as set out in DEFRA Circular 01/2006, and Contaminated Land Report 11 (CLR 11) form the basis on which this contaminated land assessment has been undertaken. Current legislation and guidance on the assessment of potentially contaminated sites acknowledges the need for a tiered risk based approach comprising:
Tier 1 Assessment: Comparison of site contaminant levels against generic standards and compliance criteria including an assessment of risk using a source-pathway-receptor model.
Tier 2 Assessment: Derivation of site-specific risk assessment criteria and calculation of site-specific clean-up goals.
The assessment has therefore been undertaken in a phased approach, focussing initially on the Tier 1 Assessment. The Tier 1 assessment includes the following stages, which were completed where applicable:
Zoning of data/site averaging areas;
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 197
Maximum Concentration Assessment - comparison of maximum detected concentrations against relevant Generic Assessment Criteria (GAC);
Mean and Maximum Value Statistical Analysis – consideration of statistical outliers and 95% Upper Confidence Levels (UCLs) against relevant GAC;
Risk Evaluation/Assessment of Significant Results; and
Identification of the need for Tier 2 Assessment and derivation of Site Specific Assessment Criteria (SSAC).
The current philosophy in the assessment and remediation of contaminated land in the UK is to adopt an ‘end use’ approach whereby the significance of contamination at a site is evaluated according to either the existing use or to a proposed development. For the Tier 1 Assessment, Environment Agency published generic Soil Guideline Values (SGVs) derived using the Agency’s CLEA model (Ref 11-6), was used. Where these are not available, GAC published by LQM/CIEH (Ref 11-7) were utilised. The assessment criteria relevant to the standard sensitive receptor setting within the CLEA model has been used i.e. a female receptor aged 1 to 6 years, a residential building (small terraced house) and a sandy loam soil with a pH7 and SOM 1%. Given the proposed site end use, the stringent “residential with plant uptake” land use scenario has been adopted.
Zoning of Data/Site Averaging Areas The development is expected to comprise predominantly residential properties, therefore the site has been considered to comprise one zone and averaging area for the purposes of this assessment.
Tier 1 Assessment In order to focus on the contaminants of potential concern (COPC), the laboratory testing results have been compared with the respective SGVs/GAC. The results and respective screening criteria are presented in the associated interpretative report, a copy of which is included within Appendix 11B. Any contaminants that exceed the SGVs/GAC are considered to be COPC. Those that do not exceed the respective SGVs/GAC are not considered to be COPC and do not require further assessment in relation to the proposed development of the site.
Ground Gas Risk Assessment It should be noted that, in accordance with current best practice and guidance, the number and frequency of ground gas monitoring NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 198
rounds is dependent on the sensitivity of the development and the generation potential of any ground gas source. In this case, the ground gas monitoring programme has been devised in order to establish a preliminary indication of the ground gas regime at the site. Monitoring of the ground gas regime was undertaken on between August and November 2010. The results of monitoring have been assessed guidance document: CIRIA C665 “Assessing Hazardous Ground Gases to Buildings” (Ref11-8) “Code of Practice for the Characterization and Ground Gas in Affected Developments” (Ref 11-9).
using the current Risks Posed by and BS8485:2007 Remediation from
Controlled Waters Risk Assessment The Controlled Waters Risk Assessment (CWRA) has been undertaken in accordance with the guidance suggested in the Model Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination (Contaminated Land Report 11, CLR 11) and comprised a staged approach (referred to as ‘Levels’). A Level 2 Assessment has been undertaken for the purposes of this CWRA. For information, all Levels (1 to 4) are summarised in Table 11-2 below. Table 11-2 Quantitative Risk Assessment Levels
Level Soil
Groundwater
1
Pore water contamination compared Not applicable directly to receptor target concentration
2
Attenuation in unsaturated zone and dilution at the water table
Groundwater below source - groundwater data is compared directly to target concentrations
3
Attenuation in the aquifer
Attenuation and down gradient receptor or compliance point – groundwater concentration at the receptor/compliance point is predicted using numerical modelling
4
Dilution in the receptor
Dilution in the receptor - dilution in a receiving watercourse or pumping abstraction borehole (only with approval of EA)
The basis for the screening criteria is to ensure that the selected screening values are protective of the identified receptor. For groundwater the general approach is to use an environmental standard as experience shows that remediation of contaminated groundwater to background quality is not achievable. The standard should be relevant to the current and future receptors and the standards compliance criteria should be considered. NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 199
Standards that are applicable to this study are:
UK Environmental Quality Standards (EQS) for the protection of aquatic life (in both freshwater and saline environments);
UK Water Supply (Water Quality) Regulations, 2000 and 1989.
The groundwater beneath the site is considered to be the receptor in the first instance and therefore the UK Drinking Water Standards (UKDWS) have been selected as the appropriate screening criteria for the Level 2 Assessment. The results and respective screening criteria are presented in the associated interpretative report (Appendix 11B).
Assessment Criteria In the assessment criteria used to define the significance of the effects, both adverse and beneficial, are:
Large Adverse/Beneficial – where the development would cause a large change to the existing environment
Moderate Adverse/Beneficial – where the development would cause a noticeable change to the existing environment
Minor Adverse/ Beneficial – where the development would cause a small change to the existing environment
Neutral – where no impact will occur on the environment
11.4 Description of Existing Baseline Conditions The Phase 1 Desk Study Report was undertaken for the Masterplan Site to determine likely soil, groundwater and contamination conditions. A summary of the findings from the Desk Study Report and ground investigation, as relevant to the Masterplan site, is as follows. Since the earliest available historical map of 1881 to the present day, the site has been dominated by agricultural activity and the railway line run through the centre of the Site. ‘B’ roads border the Site to the east and south – south west. The A4095 road and Bicester town border the Site to the south-east. Streams run through the Site and flow towards the South East to south south-east and join the River Ray seven km away, south of Bicester. Geologically, the Site is underlain by a thin cover of superficial deposits. At rock head, this is represented by the Combrash Formation, which primarily comprises bioclastic limestone. This is underlain by the Forest Marble Formation, which comprises grey calcareous mudstone with lenticular beds of bioclastic limestone.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 200
The geological sequence is generally confirmed by the ground investigations undertaken and the strata encountered are summarised as follows:
0-0.2m thickness of Topsoil;
0.2-0.6m (up to 0.8m deep in places) of Subsoil, comprising an orange/brown gravelly/sandy Clay or sandy clayey Gravel;
0.6m to 1.9m (up to 2.9m deep in places) of yellow sandy Gravel and in places yellow/grey Clay, grading to completely weathered Limestone (Cornbrash Formation);
From 1.9 to 7m depth, alternating Limestone and Clay bands of the Cornbrash Formation are represented.
The bedrock is designated as Secondary A aquifer. These are aquifers which are permeable layers capable of supporting water supplies at a local rather than strategic scale, and in some cases forming an important source of base flows to rivers. These are generally aquifers formerly classified as minor aquifers. The site is not located within a SPZ and there are no major potable water supplies (such as public water supply wells) within 5km of the Site centre. There are three groundwater abstractions recorded within the site boundary. All are registered to boreholes at Lord’s Farm for general farming and domestic purposes. Two abstractions are shown on the map at Hawkwell Farm in the centre of the Site, but these are not recorded in the EA database (from Envirocheck). Three historical wells have been located within the Masterplan boundary, but there are currently no private water supplies on the Site. From the site investigation groundwater was encountered between 0.6 to 2.6 m in trial pits TP7, TP8, TP9 TP10, TP13 and TP18 respectively (location plan in Hyder, February 2011) . The remaining trial pits were dry. Trial pits TP7 to TP10 and TP13 were carried out after a period of heavy rain. Groundwater monitoring, following completion of the ground investigation at the Masterplan site suggested that excavations for shallow foundations may encounter some groundwater flow in some areas, particularly after heavy rain. The groundwater strikes within the trial pits generally coincide with the top of the limestone (Cornbrash Limestone). A historic landfill is recorded as present on the Site at Gowell Farm. This is currently part of Avonbury Business Park. Records suggest that this location may have been previously quarried for limestone. Local Authority records contained within the Envirocheck Report state the deposited waste as being “ash, glass, brick, pottery”, which was likely used as fill for the old quarry on Site. We understand that a ground investigation is going to be done on this area to determine the NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 201
nature of the fill and any impact this may have on the surrounding proposed development. Plans showing the features detailed above are included within the Phase 1 desk study report (Appendix 11A) and Hydrogeological Report (Appendix 11C).
Human Health Risk Assessment Across the whole masterplan site, soil samples were analysed for a suite of metal and organic contaminants. From the assessment only one soil sample from TP13 at 0.6m depth had a concentration slightly above the respective SGVs/GAC for Arsenic. The concentration recorded was 36.2mg/kg which is marginally above the SGV of 32mg/kg for a residential with plant uptake scenario. On review of the log for TP13, this slightly elevated result was encountered within natural soils (very clayey sandy GRAVEL) and therefore it is possible that the Arsenic is from natural sources. Due to the depth that it has been encountered, residents are unlikely to come into day to day contract with this material, as long as site levels remain the same. All other samples analysed contained contaminants which were below the SGVs/GAC for a residential with plant uptake scenario. The risks posed to human health (i.e. site end users) are considered to be low. As only one sample of the 23 samples tested returned contaminant values greater that the respective SGVs/GAC, the soil that has been tested is deemed suitable for use in gardens (including growing edible plants) without the need for treatment or other remedial action. It should however be noted that samples have been taken from depths ranging from 0.2m to 1.2m below ground level. There has therefore been limited testing of shallow soils and very limited testing (if any) of topsoil across the site. It should be noted that the investigation undertaken to date, only covers provides limited spatial coverage due to access constraints at the time of the works. During site construction works, site workers should remain vigilant to the possible risk of encountering localised areas of contaminated soils. Should potentially contaminated soil be encountered, further testing will be required to assess the risks to the health and safety of site workers, site end users and other sensitive receptors. All persons engaged in site construction works should be made aware of the findings of the intrusive investigation and the hazards associated with handling potentially contaminated materials. It is recommended that all works are conducted in accordance with the Health and Safety Executive publication entitled “Protection of Workers and the General Public during the Development of Contaminated Land” (Ref 11-10). Gas Risk Assessment NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 202
In line with current guidance, Gas Screening Values (GSV) for methane and carbon dioxide have been calculated and the maximum values are shown in Table 11-3. The corresponding Characteristic Gas Situation (CGS) is also presented in this table. It is understood that the proposed development is to comprise mainly residential houses and therefore the CGS for ‘Situation A’, defined in the guidance as ‘all development types except those in Situation B’ has been considered (Situation B is defined as ‘low rise housing with a ventilated underfloor void’). Table 11-3 Maximum Gas Concentrations and G SVs
Borehole No.
Max. CH4 (v/v %)
Max. CO2 (v/v %)
Max. Flow Rate (l/h)
BH1
<0.10
2.5
0.2
0.0002
0.005
1
BH3
<0.10
1.0
<0.1
0.0001
-
1
BH5
<0.10
3.7
0.3
0.0003
0.011
1
BH10
<0.10
0.9
0.1
0.0001
0.001
1
BH11
<0.10
1.1
0.4
0.0004
0.004
1
Max. CH4 Characteristic Max. CO2 GSV Gas Situation GSV (l/h) (l/h) A
The results of the gas monitoring indicate a low risk in relation of ground gases (methane and carbon dioxide) for the proposed development. The above gas risk assessment does not account for Radon. A detailed BR 211 Radon Report was obtained from the British Geological Survey (BGS) as part of the Desk Study and states that the estimated probability of a property being above the Action Level for radon is 3-5% and therefore basic radon protection measures are required in the construction of new properties for the site. Details on the technical specifications for basic radon protection measures are given in document BRE Report BR211: Radon – Guidance on Protective Measures for New Buildings (Ref 11-11).
Controlled Water Risk Assessment Four water samples taken from the boreholes across the Masterplan site were analysed predominantly for metal contaminants. All the results were below the water quality screening values. As noted none of the contaminants tested returned values greater that the respective UKDWS, therefore the waters that has been tested indicate that no remedial action with regards to ground water is required. NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 203
11.5 Design and Mitigation 11.5.1 Construction A Construction Environmental Management Plan, CEMP will be prepared and implemented by the contractor during the construction phase of the Masterplan Site. Mitigation measures will be implemented during the construction phase to minimise potential effects. Measures will include the following:
Dust mitigation measures such as damping down, covering of stockpiles, use of wheel washes and covering of lorries during transportation. will be implemented as part of a general good site management plan to ensure that the potential effects associated with airborne dust are minimised.
Water mitigation measures - as previously stated, very low contaminant concentrations in the soil and groundwater have been measure in the explored areas of the site, therefore it is considered unlikely that the construction works will introduce new contamination from the shallow soil to the underlying Secondary ‘A’ Aquifer (Cornbrash Formation) and the two on-site streams.
Waste mitigation to minimise the impacts associated with waste arising from the site is discussed within Chapter 15.
Spillage mitigation measures will include the storage of chemicals and contaminative material in accordance with the Environment Agency guidance; regular servicing and inspection of vehicles used on-site; restriction of refuelling of vehicles to bunded areas underlain by hard standing, or other impermeable materials and the restriction of vehicle movements within close proximity of the surface watercourses.
11.5.2 Operation No mitigation measures are proposed for the operational phase of the Masterplan Site.
11.6 Assessment of Effects 11.6.1 Construction Effects likely to arise on-site through construction activities are outlined below. All construction works have the potential to generate the following potential effects relevant to this assessment:
Creation of areas of contamination e.g. through spillage
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 204
Waste generation
Dust generation
Risk to contamination of workers
Mobilisation of contamination and migration into controlled waters
As the contamination testing has not identified any COPC, it is not considered that construction work will lead to exposure of construction workers and members of the public to any existing contamination present within soils, nor is it expected that the work will mobilise existing contaminants into ground or controlled water (surface water and groundwater). However, the scale of the site is such that complete coverage of all land area during the ground investigation was uneconomical and impractical, and as such, there is always a possibility that contaminants may be present in previously unexplored areas. These possibilities are discussed below in the context of existing site conditions i.e. pre-remediation:
Dust Whilst likely not contaminated, dust and silt can result from ground disturbance during construction, which can lead to accidental ingestion, dermal contact or inhalation of particles by site workers and possibly the general public. In some cases, generation of dust and silt may also lead to deposition on nearby surface waters. As no significant contamination sources have been identified, the impact is assessed to be neutral to minor adverse.
Water Construction activities can result in the mobilisation of contaminants within the soil and the creation of a pathway for contaminants to migrate to underlying groundwater. Pathways can also be created for the transport of contaminants to surface water via airborne dust and through overland flow from poorly managed stockpiles. The impact is assessed to be neutral if mitigation measures are implemented.
Work in Previously Unexplored Areas In the event that construction activities are undertaken in areas where previously unknown contamination is encountered, a management strategy (“Watching Brief”) would be devised to ensure that any risks associated with its mobilisation are minimised. If required, suitable arrangements for stockpiling will be implemented to minimise the potential for the leaching of contaminated runoff of sediment through loading and exposure to rainwater. Mitigation measures will include stockpiling in bunded areas underlain by impermeable material away from watercourses. Stockpiles will be covered to prevent leaching of the material. NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 205
If excavation works are undertaken in areas where locally contamination water is identified, water may enter the excavations and lead to contaminants migrating vertically and horizontally. Abstraction of potentially contaminated water from excavations will need to be controlled to prevent cross contamination of soils and potential impact upon the Secondary ‘A’ Aquifer. Mitigation could include the abstraction and disposal of water to a foul sewer or to surface water following appropriate treatment (and with the appropriate consent in place). If contamination is encountered via visual or olfactory evidence, during the construction works, a suitably qualified Geoenvironmental Engineer should be contacted to ensure that samples are taken and analysed to determine the risks associated with the contaminants present and therefore the mitigation measures required. The impact is assessed as neutral to minor adverse.
Waste The geology identified at the site indicates that shallow spread foundations may be suitable for all anticipated low-load structures; therefore, the generation of spoil is expected to be minimal. It is anticipated that any spoil generated may be reused on site for landscaping or other purposes, therefore it is expected that only minimal volumes of material may require disposal off-site e.g. if contaminated. The impact is assessed as neutral to minor adverse depending on the final destination of the material i.e. reuse or disposal. Accidental Spillage of Construction Related Material During any construction work, there always some potential for accidental spillage/leakage from construction plant and materials stored on site, particularly fuel and lubricating hydrocarbons. The impact is assessed as neutral to minor adverse as long as mitigation measures detailed above are implemented. Overall, it is considered that the effect during construction will be neutral to minor adverse.
11.6.2 Operation For the proposed primarily housing end use, it is expected that receptors will come into regular contact with the soil, therefore potential for accidental ingestion, dermal contact or inhalation of dust particles exists. However, as no contaminant sources have been identified from the historical or current use of the site (confirmed by laboratory testing of the soil and groundwater) the impact is assessed as neutral. If contaminated material were discovered in previously NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 206
unexplored areas of the site, remedial measures would be implemented as appropriate for the end use of that area of development. There is a small landfill site located on the southern boundary of the site and is currently occupied by the Avonbury Business Park. The composition of the landfill site is unknown, however it is understood that a ground investigation is to be undertaken in this area to establish the nature of the landfill material. If contamination is present within this landfill area, there is the possibility of migration of leachate on to the surrounding land; however the majority of the site is upgradient from this feature. The limited gas monitoring has not recorded any significant quantities of ground gases, however it is noted that none of the boreholes are close to the landfill site. The impact is assessed as minor adverse to neutral. It is anticipated that a small proportion of the site may contain retail/leisure facilities. During operation, there may be limited potential for accidental spillage of potentially contaminating materials from delivery locations and plant operational locations. Due to the expected hard standing in these areas with appropriate drainage infrastructure and the adoption of standard materials handling and storage procedures, the impact is assessed as neutral. Overall, it is considered that the effect during operation would be neutral. The potential for impacts on ecology, hydrology and air quality are discussed separately in Chapters 6, 7 and 8 respectively.
11.7 Cumulative Effects There are no cumulative effects associated with the development of the Masterplan site with NW Bicester Eco-development or with other developments.
11.8 Summary The contaminated land assessment has been undertaken following the current guidelines set out to address the potential risks to human health and controlled water that the development of the Masterplan Site may present. The baseline conditions for the Masterplan Site and vicinity have been determined based on the Desk Study Report and from laboratory testing results obtained from the subsequent intrusive ground investigation undertaken on site in 2010. In those areas of the site covered by the intrusive ground investigation, no contaminated soil or groundwater was discovered when compared to appropriate screening values. The investigations NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 207
only covered a relatively small proportion of the site and therefore it is possible that some localised contamination may be encountered during the construction of the development. Based on the knowledge to date, the degree of contamination is not expected to be significant, and it is considered that the previously described mitigation measures would significantly reduce or completely mitigate any potential impacts. No residual effects are identified. Construction impacts are considered to be neutral to minor adverse and will be mitigated thorough the use of appropriate PPE and good site management practices. Operational impacts are considered to be neutral and therefore require no mitigation measures. Overall, the contamination risks associated with the masterplan site are considered to be very low, though the risks from naturally occurring radon gas require basic radon protection measures to be incorporated in the construction of new dwellings and extensions.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 208
12
Agriculture and Land Use
12.1 Introduction This assessment reviews the information currently available in relation to agriculture and soils (including the infrastructure utilised for agricultural purposes and the structure of the businesses engaged in farming and related activities) in relation to the proposals. The methodology used to identify the key receptors is described, followed by details of these receptors. Both the construction phase and operational phase impacts of the proposals are identified with detailed measures to mitigate these impacts, such that the residual effects of the proposals would not be significant, are presented. The baseline against which the likely significant effects have been assessed are the environmental conditions at, and surrounding, the site in March 2014.
12.2 Regulatory Framework Apart from the EIA Regulations, there are no legislative requirements governing the assessment of agricultural matters, and the framework of any assessment is derived from a combination of EU and national agricultural and land use policies and measures. The key elements of these can be summarised as:
The conservation of the best and most versatile (BMV) resources of agricultural land
Retention of a competitive and sustainable agricultural industry
The diversification of individual farm businesses into supplementary non-agricultural activities
The more positive engagement of individual farm businesses with the delivery of environmental benefits
A summary of the policy and legislation relevant to this assessment is set out in the following table: Table12-1 Land Use and Agriculture Regulatory and Policy Framework
Policy/ Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester Masterplan Response
The Strategy for England ; Safeguarding Our Soils (Ref 12-1)
The Strategy for England sets out the Government’s aims in relation to protecting agricultural soils and in relation to protecting the soil resource during construction and development. This includes a requirement that planning decisions take
An assessment has been made of the agricultural land grade and the potential impacts on this resource.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Recommendations have
Page 209
Policy/ Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester Masterplan Response
sufficient account of soil quality, particularly where significant areas of the BMV agricultural land are involved.
been provided detailing appropriate soil handling methodologies in line with the DEFRA Code of Practice.
The presence of best and most versatile agricultural land is stated to be a material consideration in planning decisions, but has to be taken into account alongside other sustainability considerations including: biodiversity, the quality and character of the landscape, accessibility to infrastructure, workforce and markets and maintaining viable communities. Within the Strategy there is an aim of encouraging better management of soils during the construction process. As part of this, a Code of Practice for the sustainable re-use of soils on construction sites, also published by DEFRA (Ref 12-2) to protect soil resources disturbed on construction sites. Whilst the Code is not legislatively binding, the wider benefits of following the guidance (in terms of sustainability, cost savings and waste controls) are clearly set out. National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF; Ref 123)
The NPPF sets out the Government’s planning policies for England and how these are expected to be applied. The NPPF provides a framework within which local and neighbourhood plans can be produced. Planning law requires that applications for planning permission must be determined in accordance with the development plan. The NPPF must be taken into account in the preparation of local and neighbourhood plans, and is a material consideration on planning decisions.
An assessment has been made of the agricultural land grade and the potential impacts on this resource.
Section 11 of the NPPF deals with conserving and enhancing the natural environment. This includes a requirement that the ‘local planning authorities should take into account the economic and other benefits of the best and most versatile agricultural land. Where significant development of agricultural land is demonstrated to be necessary, local planning authorities should seek to use areas of poorer quality land in preference to that of a higher quality.’ The local planning authority should also ‘put NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 210
Policy/ Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester Masterplan Response
in place policies to ensure …(safeguarding the long term potential of best and most versatile agricultural land and conserving soil resources) …’ The NPPF also has, as one of its core planning principles, the promotion of “mixed use developments, and encourage multiple benefits from the use of land in urban and rural areas, recognising that some open land can perform many functions (such as for wildlife, recreation, flood risk mitigation, carbon storage, or food production)”. The sustainable re-use of soil materials will support this objective.
Cherwell Local Plan (Ref 12-4)
Biodiversity and the Natural Environment) requires that the re-use of soils will be sought. In relation to the North West Eco-Town it is stated that “an assessment of whether the site contains best and most versatile agricultural land, including a detailed survey where necessary” will be required and that “a soil management plan may be required to be submitted with planning applications”.
An assessment has been made of the agricultural land grade and the potential impacts on this resource. The soil information available will form part of any soil management plan required to be submitted with planning applications.
12.2.1 Consultations As very limited detailed published Agricultural Land Classification (ALC) information was available for the site, which separates Grade 3 land into Grades 3a and 3b, Natural England was consulted on the requirements for further surveys. Their response stated that: “An agricultural land classification and soil survey of the land should be undertaken at a detailed level, e.g. 1 auger boring per hectare, supported by pits dug in each main soil type to confirm the soil physical characteristics of the full depth of soil resource, to determine the impact of the development on ‘best and most versatile’ agricultural land and on soil resources.” In addition, the landowners were interviewed (as detailed below) to gather information on the existing farm business.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 211
12.3 Methodology 12.3.1 Introduction The principal agricultural and related resources are the quality of the agricultural land and items of fixed farm and farm-related capital, as well as other items of capital associated with diversified activities on farms. Soil and ALC surveys have been undertaken in accordance with published guidelines (MAFF 1988) (Ref 12-5). As noted above, there are no legislative requirements governing the assessment of agricultural matters, and the framework of any assessment is derived from a combination of EU and national agricultural and land use policies and measures, combined with expert judgement.
12.3.2 Study Area The Study Area for the proposed development includes the land within the red line boundary, as well as adjacent land under the same ownership, such that a full assessment of the potential impact on farm viability could be undertaken.
12.3.3 Establishment of Baseline Conditions The baseline conditions comprise an assessment of the quality of the agricultural land, items of fixed farm and farm-related capital, as well as the agricultural practices used on the land. A range of information has been reviewed in order to assess the character of the site in terms of land use and soils. This has included:
Published soil maps (Ref 12-6)
Published ALC maps and more detailed survey information held by Natural England
LandIS Soils Site Report (Ref 12-7)
In addition, the landowners were interviewed in April 2011 where contact details were available and permission had been granted. As detailed above, as very limited published ALC information was available for the site separating Grade 3 land into Grades 3a and 3b, Natural England was consulted on the requirements for further surveys. Following their response, an ALC survey was undertaken, in accordance with MAFF (1988), in September 2010 and April/May 2011 (note that whilst the majority of the site has been covered by these surveys but some areas remain to be surveyed).
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 212
12.3.4 Assessment of Effects An assessment has been carried out of the likely effects of the proposals, both during the construction phase and in the longer-term. Where required, effects have been quantified and assessed in the wider context to evaluate the degree to which they may be considered significant. Effects have been based on the assumption that agricultural circumstances prevailing in March 2014 would continue to prevail. Current best practice and professional judgement are used to define significance criteria in relation to both agricultural land and to farming businesses. Significance criteria in relation to agricultural land and farm viability are shown below in Table 12-2 below. Table12-2 Significance Criteria for Assessing the Effect of the proposals on the National Agricultural Resource
Magnitude of Impact
Land resources
Large Adverse
The loss of more than 20ha of Best and Most Versatile (BMV) agricultural land. In some areas where BMV land is rare and of particular importance, lesser amounts might be classed as a large adverse impact.
Moderate Adverse
The loss of between 5ha and 20ha of BMV land, depending on the quantum and quality and its relative availability in a locality.
Slight Adverse
The loss of small areas (under 5ha) of BMV land. The loss of lower quality land where it is identified as having special agricultural significance in the locality.
Neutral
Where there is no net loss of agricultural land.
The criteria for assessing the impact on the farm businesses have been assessed in accordance with Table 12-3 below. Table12-3 Significance Criteria for Assessing the Effect of the Scheme on Farm Viability
Magnitude of Impact
Farm Businesses
Large adverse
Renders an existing full-time farm business (including any diversification enterprises) unviable.
Moderate adverse
A significant effect on the workability of a full time farm business (including any diversification enterprises) but where the continued viability is not prejudiced.
Slight adverse
Limited effects on workability and the economic performance of a farm unit (including any diversification enterprises) or the loss or a significant effect on the viability of a part-time farm business.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 213
Neutral
Where there would be no negative impact on the farm business (including any diversification enterprises).
12.4 Baseline Conditions Soils A Soils Site Report has been obtained for a 4km x 4km study area centred on the site (NGR SP56366 24621) (Ref 12-7). The soils are mapped as belonging to the Aberford Series across the whole site. These are described as shallow, locally brashy well drained calcareous fine loamy soils over limestone. These soils are relatively freely draining, but are identified as having a high leaching potential and thus little ability to retain non-adsorbed pesticides, which may therefore leach out of the soils and into surface or groundwater. It is not considered that the soils present any significant constraints with the exception of the high leaching potential and thus the need to ensure the protection of any groundwater resources. The land is shown as all falling within Grade 3 (under the Agricultural Land Classification scheme) from available published sources. Limited information is available showing the distinction between Grade 3a and 3b. Figure 12-1 shows an area of land around Gowell Farm as being Grade 3b. No other specific mapping is available for the rest of the site. Figure 12-1 Existing available detailed ALC mapping (the green shading shows areas of Grade 3b land). From www.natureonthemap.naturalengland.org.uk
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 214
The ALC survey undertaken as part of this assessment has shown the land that has been surveyed predominantly falls within Grade 3b, with some small areas of Grade 4 land and small areas (approximately 23ha, 8% of the agricultural land) classed as Grade 3a. The remaining area of the site will be surveyed, following the methodology outlined above, prior to submission of the full Environmental Statement. The major limitation on the Grade attributed to this land is soil depth, which is <30cm in total depth in all locations mapped as Grade 3b on Drawing 13-1. In the areas shown as Grade 3a on Drawing 13-1 the soil is up to 1m in depth. These areas include the small floodplain of the stream which runs through the eastern corner of the site, and thus these soils are likely to have been built up from alluvium. It is considered likely that the majority of the remainder of the site which has not yet been subject to a specific survey will also predominantly be Grade 3b, with the grade again limited by the shallow depth of the soil. As such, it is likely that the site will include approximately 33 ha of Grade 3a land.
Land Use The land within the red line boundary falls under eleven different ownerships. Land use across the site is a mix of arable and grazing (predominantly cattle but also including horse pasture). The grazing land is mainly associated with the central and eastern parts of the site, with arable dominating the western part of the site. Livestock include beef cattle, a dairy herd and suckler cows. The arable crops include wheat, oilseed rape, bean and barley. Fixed assets are mainly associated with the livestock businesses, including a parlour, stables and an important borehole which supplies one farm. Machinery is also owned by the businesses, including tractors, combines, loaders etc. The businesses report some level of disturbance, vandalism and incidents of arson, likely to be a result of this land forming the urban fringe.
12.5 Design and Mitigation 12.5.1 Construction Soils The sustainable re-use of the soil resource affected by the proposals would be undertaken in line with the Construction Code of Practice for the Sustainable Use of Soil on Construction Sites (Ref 12-2). This would be achieved by the development of a Soil Resources Plan (SRP) identifying the soils present, proposed storage locations and handling NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 215
methods and locations for re-use where possible. Measures which would be implemented include (but are not limited to):
Completion of a Soil Resources Survey and incorporate results into a SRP
Link SRP to the Site Waste Management Plan (SWMP)
Ensure soils are stripped and handled in the driest condition possible
Confine vehicle movements to defined haul routes until all the soil resource has been stripped
Protect stockpiles from erosion and tracking over
Ensure physical condition of the entire replaced soil profile is sufficient for the vegetation requirements
Approximately 40% (approximately 167 ha) will be set aside as open space (to include SuDS, hedgerows, a village green, allotments, community garden and the green link). The design will promote the retention of the Grade 3a land within these open spaces. Implementation of appropriate soil handling and use measures would ensure that the soils used across the site in these areas would be of the required characteristics and in the required condition to support a variety of specified activities. For example, surplus nutrient-poor soils (topsoils or subsoils) will be re-used in areas of habitat creation whilst surplus nutrient-rich soils will be prioritised for areas designated for food production or in areas of landscape planting. A limitation of these soils, identified above, is that they have little ability to retain non-adsorbed pesticides, and thus may also have a limited ability to retain other pollutants. This is, in part, due to the shallow nature of these soils and thus this will be taken into account in the creation of soil profiles within the SuDS to ensure they can provide the required functions.
Land Use The phasing of the development will take into account how each business operates, ensuring that the phasing does not, for example, lead to the severance of parts of an enterprise from the rest of the holding or lead to the undeveloped part of the enterprise becoming unviable for the period until it is brought into the development. A considerate construction approach would be used to minimise potential impacts on the agricultural enterprise. The potential impacts on the farm business, in particular the risks of disturbance to livestock and the risks of livestock getting out into adjacent areas, will be clearly highlighted to all construction staff during Toolbox Talks provided by the Environmental Coordinator or their recognised deputy. If there are likely to be periods of significant construction
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 216
activity close to the boundary with the undeveloped fields, the option to use temporary screening will be reviewed. All fencing around the proposed development will be sufficient to resist damage by livestock, and will be regularly checked and maintained in a suitable condition. Any damage to boundary fencing will be repaired immediately. During construction of the link between the two main areas of the proposed development the water pipe feeding the drinking troughs on the field margins to the north west will be protected from damage. Should it be damaged the pipe will be repaired immediately to ensure no disruption to drinking water supplies for livestock. The protection of the water supply from the borehole close to Lord’s Farm is dealt with in Chapter 11 Contaminated Land.
12.5.2 Operation There is provision, within the proposed development, for local food production from allotments, and additional potential for local food production from private or commercial gardens (with 40% of the development which will be set aside as open space). The use of areas of Grade 3a land for this purpose, and the appropriate construction techniques outlined above in relation to soil handling during the construction phase will ensure that the soils in those areas set aside for food production will be in a suitable condition to support this activity. It is also proposed that there will be advice provided locally to individuals or firms on soil management in order to maximise both productivity and sustainability.
12.6 Assessment of Effects 12.6.1 Construction The proposals for this site would result in the loss of approximately 33ha of BMV land from primary agricultural productivity. Whilst some of this land will be used for allotments in within the design, at a worst case it is considered that these proposals would have a Large Adverse impact on agricultural land, given the area of BMV land affected. During construction, there would be impacts on the agricultural enterprise. Land would be lost to the business as each field was brought into the proposed development, reducing the area available for grazing and fodder production. The measures outlined above will minimise disruption to on-going activities and minimise disturbance to remaining livestock. These should limit the likelihood of any of the enterprises becoming unviable. It is assumed that the phasing, and notice periods provided, will allow the enterprises to adapt or move NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 217
such that the economic performance of the business remains unaffected, and as such it is considered that there would be no more than a short-term Slight Adverse impact on farm viability as they adapt through the changes required. This will be confirmed through further discussions with the landowners once more information on the phasing of the development is available.
12.6.2 Operation There would be no additional impacts on the soil resource during the operational phase. It is considered that, once construction is complete the farm enterprises will have relocated totally and thus there will be no further impacts on these businesses. However, during operation there is the potential for impacts associated with disturbance and vandalism to occur outside the red line boundary (as in effect the development brings urban development closer to these areas). This is considered to be a minor issue currently, and thus it is assumed that at this level during the operational phase this would result in a Slight Adverse impact on the enterprises now adjacent or in closer proximity to the development.
12.7 Cumulative effects A number of other developments are proposed in the vicinity of Bicester which have the potential to impact on agricultural land. Some of these are at a significant scale, such as the South West Bicester development which reports a total loss of approximately 60 ha of agricultural land. However, the majority of this land has been assessed as being Grade 3b, with only a small amount of Grade 3a land (area not provided but likely to be <10% of the total area). The Bicester Business Park development states that the land to be lost is Grade 4. Provisional ALC mapping shows that the land surrounding Bicester is classed as Grade 3 or 4. Where more detailed mapping is available areas of Grade 3a land are limited in extent. As such, it is considered that the potential for cumulative impacts on best and most versatile land is limited, and unlikely to be more than Moderate Adverse.
12.8 Summary The soils across the site are fairly uniform, with approximately 8% being classed as Grade 3a (i.e. BMV land). The main limitation on land productivity relates to soil depth, and only where deeper alluvial soils are present can the land be classed as ‘Best and Most Versatile’ (BMV). Given the minimal area (approx. 33ha) of BMV land affected, it is considered that the proposals would have no more than a NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 218
Moderate Adverse impact on agricultural land. The proposal to include areas for local food production, and provide advisory support for residents in relation to soil management, will further mitigate the loss of this land. During construction, appropriate soil handling methodologies will be used, in line with current guidance, to ensure the sustainable re-use of soils and maximise the value of the soil resource within the proposed design. This will ensure the use of soils with the optimum characteristics are allocated for the given end use, such as food production, habitat creation of SuDS. Assuming that the phasing of construction and the notice periods provided will allow the enterprises to adapt or move such that the economic performance of the business remains unaffected, it is considered that there would be no more than a short-term Slight Adverse impact on farm viability as they adapt through the changes required. In addition, a considerate construction approach would be used to minimise potential impacts on the agricultural enterprises, which will focus on limiting disturbance to livestock and ensuring no restrictions to access and the ability of farmers to move livestock across the remaining areas of the landholding. As the land around Bicester is likely to predominantly be Grade 3b or lower (i.e. not BMV) the potential for cumulative impacts is limited.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 219
13
Human Health
13.1 Introduction This chapter provides an assessment of the likely significant effects of the proposed Masterplan development on human health. The World Health Organisation states that ‘health is a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity’ (Ref 13-1). This definition highlights that health status is affected by a wide-range of factors and this is reflected in the range of issues considered within this assessment. The cross-cutting nature of the human health assessment requires the use of results in other chapters of this Strategic Environmental Report (SER) including: Air Quality; Noise and Vibration; Landscape and Visual; Traffic and Transport; Contaminated Land; and Socio-Economic and Community Effects.
13.2 Regulatory Framework Table 13-1 presents the key regulatory and policy framework relevant to the assessment of human health effects. The regulatory and policy framework review provided in the Air Quality; Noise and Vibration; Landscape and Visual; Traffic and Transport; Contaminated Land; and Socio-Economic and Community Effects assessments are also relevant to consideration of human health effects. Table 13-1
Human Health Regulatory and Policy Framework
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
Bicester Masterplan development Response
UK Government Sustainable Development Strategy
The strategy identifies the five main priorities for delivering sustainable development: living within environmental limits; ensuring a strong healthy and just society; achieving a sustainable economy; promoting good governance; and using sound science responsibly. All of these factors are inherent to securing good levels of health and well-being for the UK population.
The design of the proposed Masterplan development includes provision for open space, accessibility, walking and cycling, thereby seeking to provide the infrastructure necessary to support the community and the pursuit of healthy lifestyles.
Planning Policy Statement: Eco-towns – A Supplement to Planning Policy Statement (PPS) 1.
The PPS identifies that the built and natural environment is an important component of health and well-being. Good urban design can help to support the pursuit of healthier and more active lifestyles and contribute
The design of the proposed Masterplan development has considered the need to provide the infrastructure and environment to enable residents to pursue healthy lifestyles. This has been
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 220
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
Bicester Masterplan development Response
to reducing health inequalities.
considered through the provision of green infrastructure, community facilities and the appropriate mix of housing.
The planning policies highlight that quality design is important as it contributes to the creation of sustainable communities. New housing developments should have layouts that meet the needs of residents, are visually attractive and make the most sustainable and efficient use of the land. The need for an appropriate mix of housing is also highlighted, as well as the provision of appropriate services and infrastructure.
Quality of design and housing mix are fundamental components of the proposed Masterplan development.
NPPF Planning Policy 4 Promoting sustainable transport
The planning policy states that the transport system needs to be balanced in favour of sustainable transport modes, giving people a real choice about how they travel. The siting of facilities needed on a day to day basis (shops, health centres, schools etc.) to ensure easy access by modes other than the private car is also highlighted. Encouragement should be given to solutions which support reductions in greenhouse gas emissions and reduce congestion.
The ability of future residents to utilise more active modes of travel is considered in the assessment, as well as the accessibility to facilities needed on a day to day basis. Accessibility has been considered in the design of the proposed Masterplan development.
NPPF Planning policy 8 Promoting Health Communities
The needs of local communities must be understood to ensure that sufficient high quality open space, sports and recreational facilities that meet local needs are provided.
As part of the design of the proposed Masterplan development the capacity of existing sport and recreation facilities has been considered and the provision of open space and green infrastructure is a fundamental component of the design. The development will retain 40% green space including community allotments to encourage outdoor lifestyles and nurture wildlife and biodiversity.
National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (Ref 13-2): Planning Policy 6. Delivering a wide choice of high quality homes Planning Policy 7. Requiring Good Design
When local authorities are deciding where to provide new recreational and community facilities consideration should be given to the accessibility to such developments by walking and cycling. The potential effects of such development on NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 221
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
Bicester Masterplan development Response
vibrancy and vitality and the wider effects of such development, for example on the existing built and natural environment and local residents must be considered.
Natural landscaping will be used to create safe play areas. Public transport and active travel options have been designed into the proposal. With specially designed cycle and pedestrian routes, a bus service within 400m of every home with live timetable updates in each house, charging points for electric vehicles and an electric car club, residents will be encouraged to adopt more sustainable modes of travel.
Eco-Bicester – One Shared Vision, December, 2010 (Ref 13-3)
The Vision highlights that NW Bicester will be designed to support healthy and sustainable environments and provide opportunities for residents to make healthy choices easily.
Providing opportunities to pursue healthy lifestyles has been an integral component of the proposed Masterplan development design.
Cherwell Local Plan (2006 – 2031) (Ref 13-4)
Policy BSC8: Securing Health and Well-Being. The policy tackles health inequalities through the provision of health facilities in sustainable locations, the provision of open space and by encouraging walking and cycling.
Providing opportunities to pursue healthy lifestyles has been an integral component of the proposed Masterplan development design.
Cherwell Local Plan (1996) Saved Policies (Ref 13-5)
Policy R12 – Provision of Open Space in association with New Residential Development requires that at least 2.43 hectares of public open space per 1,000 people should be provided within all new housing developments.
Provision of open space and green infrastructure has been an integral part of the proposed Masterplan development design.
Non-Statutory Cherwell Local Plan 2011
Chapter six of the Local Plan includes a number of policies that are relevant to the human health assessment. Policies TR8 and TR9 relate specifically to walking and cycling.
The ability of future residents to utilise more active modes of travel is considered in the assessment, as well as the accessibility to facilities needed on a day to day basis. This has also been an integral component of the design of the proposed Masterplan development.
Chapter seven addresses
Provision of open space and
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 222
Policy/Legislation
Cherwell Core Strategy – Draft (2010) (Ref 13-7)
Requirements
Bicester Masterplan development Response
recreation and community facilities. This section of the plan highlights the need for improvements to facilities and accessibility to them. The poor distribution of open space throughout Bicester town is identified.
green infrastructure has been an integral part of the proposed Masterplan development design. Accessibility to recreation facilities has also been an integral component of the assessment.
Strategic Objective 9 - To seek a balance between economic growth, the development of new homes and the provision of sufficient, good quality services, facilities and infrastructure including green infrastructure, to meet health, education, transport, open space, sport, recreation and other community needs.
The proposed Masterplan development is being designed in line with the Core Strategy requirements and has, therefore, considered potential for residents to be able to pursue healthy lifestyles and the requirement for new health facilities.
Policy NWB1 – Strategic Allocation 1: NW Bicester development outlines what the proposals will be expected to achieve.
13.3 Methodology 13.3.1 Introduction Health Impact Assessment (HIA) is a tool that can be used to assess the health impact of policies, plans and projects. A stand-alone HIA is not being undertaken for the proposed Masterplan development; rather the assessment of effects on human health is being integrated into the SER to ensure that the interrelationships between health and other environmental topics are holistically considered rather than being assessed in isolation. The methods proposed within the Merseyside Guidelines for HIA have been used to guide the assessment of effects on human health although they have been adapted to reflect the integration of human health considerations into the SER. The assessment uses a broad definition of health which recognises that health is affected by more than simply the presence or absence of disease and is influenced by a range of health determinants as illustrated in Figure 13-1.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 223
Figure 13-1 Main Determinants of Health (Source: European Policy Health Impact Assessment -A Guide, 2004) (Ref 13-8)
The assessment of effects on human health considers how the health determinants will be affected by the proposed Masterplan development which could result in a change in health outcomes. The following health determinants were considered in the assessment:
Employment and Economy
Safety and Security
Air Quality
Noise and Vibration
Physical Environment (focussing on built form and urban design)
Transport and Access
Waste Management and Contamination
Community and Social Infrastructure
Community Spirit and Engagement
Access and provision of healthcare and facilities and services
The cross-cutting nature of the human health assessment requires the use of results presented in other chapters of this SER to determine the potential effects of the proposed Masterplan NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 224
development on health outcomes. The results presented in other assessments are cross-referenced where appropriate.
13.3.2 Study Area The study area for human health covered Cherwell District as well as considering the wards in which the NW Bicester development are to be located and those within the immediate vicinity (Caversfield, Ambrosden and Chesterton, Launton, Fringford, Bicester West, Bicester North, Bicester East, Bicester South and Bicester Town). Drawing 13-1 shows the indicative boundary of these wards and the boundary of the proposed Masterplan development. This study area was selected to enable an understanding to be obtained of the existing health characteristics of the communities surrounding the site, as well as service and facilities provision. Reference was also made to the health status trends reported for Oxfordshire to provide appropriate contextual information and comparative statistics for the assessment. The assessment of human health effects has also utilised the results of other chapters in this SER. Some of these topics have used slightly different study areas to that defined above and this has been acknowledged in the assessment. Therefore, the study area has varied depending upon the health determinants being considered as part of the assessment.
13.3.3 Establishment of Baseline Conditions The baseline conditions have been established through desk –based research. Key data sources have included Neighbourhood Statistics, the Association of Public Health Observatories and the Clinical and Health Outcomes Knowledge Base. Reference has also been made to the Annual Public Health Report 2013 published by the Director of Public Health for Oxfordshire (Ref 13-9) and the Joint Strategic Needs Assessment 2013 (Ref 13-10). Reference has been made to Ordnance Survey mapping where relevant. Trends have been identified where historical data is available. No specific sites surveys have been undertaken for the assessment of human health effects. An Audit of Social Infrastructure Provision was conducted in October 2010 (Ref 13-11) and reference has been made in this SER Chapter. The report covered social infrastructure in the area surrounding the eco-town site to the north west of Bicester.
13.3.4 Assessment of Effects There is no widely accepted significance criteria used in the assessment of health effects and, therefore, the assessment NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 225
determines whether the aspects of the proposed Masterplan development are likely to result in positive or negative effects on health outcomes and the likelihood of such effects being realised. This is an approach typically adopted for HIAs. The level of detail presented in this assessment reflects the level of detail available about the proposed Masterplan development and its potential future population. The assessment identifies the effects likely to occur during the construction and the operational phases of the development. The health impacts are grouped by health determinant and the assessment identifies whether the health impact is positive or negative i.e. a health gain or a potential health loss, the likely geographical scale of the impact i.e. whether the impacts are likely to be local to the proposed Masterplan development or could potentially affect wider communities and the likelihood of the health impact occurring based upon the evidence available (both information about the proposed Masterplan development design and evidence in health literature about potential health cause and effect relationships). Tables 13-2 present the notation and definitions that used in the assessment. Table 13-1 Notation Used in the Matrix
Notation
Definition
Direction of Impact Positive Impact (+)
Aspect of the scheme is likely to result in a positive influence upon health determinants potentially resulting in long-term gains for health status or the scheme creates conditions that enable the pursuit of healthy lifestyles.
Neutral (0)
No potential change to health status likely.
Negative Impact (-)
This aspect of the scheme is likely to result in adverse effects on health determinants through health losses or creating conditions that do not enable the pursuit of healthy lifestyles.
Likelihood of Impact Occurring (for positive and negative impacts) Speculative
Considered unlikely to occur – limited supporting evidence available.
Possible
Likely to occur on the basis of evidence from a range of sources.
Probable
Very likely to happen with strong evidence from a range of sources.
The assessment was desk-based and primarily qualitative, although where modelling has been undertaken for other environmental topics, for example the noise and vibration assessment, the results have been used in the assessment. NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 226
13.3.5 Consultation Consultation has occurred with the Primary Care Trust to obtain details of existing health facilities in Bicester and their capacity to accommodate future growth. Consultation has also been undertaken with Oxfordshire County Council regarding the location of Public Rights of Way (PRoW), the availability of data about the use of PRoW and to obtain ward level health statistics used to inform the preparation of the Joint Strategic Needs Assessment. External consultation utilising focus groups and workshops specific to human health issues did not form a specific part of the methodology. However, stakeholder events have been undertaken as part of the proposed Masterplan development design process and the information from these events has been used to inform the assessment where appropriate.
13.4 Baseline Conditions 13.4.1 Existing Baseline The purpose of the baseline data gathering is to understand the existing health status of the population living in the vicinity of the proposed Masterplan development and Cherwell Borough as a whole. The coverage of the issues considered as part of the baseline is wider than just the existing health status of the population. Overall health and well-being, as demonstrated in Figure 13-1 is influenced by a range of factors and this is reiterated in the Director of Public Health for Oxfordshire Annual Report VI (Ref 13-9). The baseline description provides details about:
The health status of the population including life expectancy, mortality rates for leading causes of death and incidence of lifestyle related conditions such as obesity and type II diabetes.
Existing levels of deprivation across Cherwell district which can affect overall health status and life chances.
The location and provision of existing health care facilities servicing the population of Bicester and the capacity of these services to accommodate future growth, as well as their accessibility by walking, cycling and public transport.
The baseline data collated in other SER chapters is also of relevance to the assessment of effects on human health. When reading this chapter of the SER, consideration should also be given to the baseline data presented in the following chapters: Landscape and Visual Amenity (Chapter 5), Air Quality (Chapter 8), Noise and Vibration (Chapter 9), Contaminated Land (Chapter 11), Socio-Economic and NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 227
Community Effects (Chapter 14) and Traffic and Transport (Chapter 16) as they are of relevance to effects on human health.
13.4.2 Health Status The Cherwell Health Profile published in September 2013 (Ref 13-12) identifies that health in the district is generally better than the England average for a number of health indicators.
Life Expectancy at Birth Life expectancy at birth is an estimate of the number of years a new born baby would be expected to live, if they were to experience, throughout their lifetime, an area’s age specific mortality rates. Figures 13-2 and 13-3 present the trends for life expectancy at birth for males and females for districts across Oxfordshire compared to the England average. Both graphs indicate a positive upward trend for life expectancy that is above the England average. Between 2008 and 2010, female life expectancy at birth within Cherwell District was slightly higher than that in South East and Oxford, and lower than in South Oxfordshire, Vale of White Horse and West Oxfordshire. Male life expectancy in Cherwell District was the same as male life expectancy in Oxford, but lower than the other districts within Oxfordshire. Figure 13-2 Life Expectancy at Birth for Females (Source: Joint Strategic Needs Assessment 2013)
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 228
Figure 13-3 Life Expectancy at Birth for Males (Source: Joint Strategic Needs Assessment 2013)
Table 13-3 supplements both Figures 13-2 and 13-3 with the latest life expectancy at birth statistics for the period January 2007 to December 2009 and January 2008 to December 2010 which again indicates positive results for Cherwell. Table 13-3 Life Expectancy at Birth 2007 - 2010 (Source: Neighbourhood Statistics) (Ref 13-6)
Area
Life Expectancy At Birth (Females)
Life Expectancy at Birth (Males)
2007 - 2009
2008 - 2010
2007 - 2009
2008 - 2010
Cherwell District
83.7
83.6
78.8
78.9
South East
83.3
83.5
79.4
79.7
England
82.3
82.6
78.3
78.6
Whilst the results indicate that life expectancy is good across Cherwell District as a whole, there are disparities within the district. The Cherwell District Health Profile (2013) states that life expectancy is 10.7 years lower for men and 5.0 years lower for women in the most deprived areas of Cherwell than in the least deprived areas (Cherwell Health Profile).
General Health Status Table 13-4 presents data about the percentage of the population in each ward reporting their health status as good. The data was obtained during the last census (2011); it provides further context for the assessment. It is evident that self-reported health status is above the England average in all wards with the exception of Bicester Town. In addition, the population was asked whether they had a long-term NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 229
limiting illness, health problem or disability which restricted their daily activities or the work they are able to do. Table 13-4 demonstrates that health status is again better than the England and South East average for all wards, although there are disparities between the wards. Table 13-4 Standard of Reported Health (Source: Neighbourhood Statistics) (Ref 13-13)
Ward
Percentage of population that considered themselves to be in good health and very good health (2011)
Percentage of Population with a Long-Term Health Problems or Disability1 (2011)
Caversfield
86.4
12.6
Ambrosden and Chesterton
91
8.7
Bicester East
86
13.29
Bicester North
90.7
8.2
Bicester West
84.3
14.5
Bicester South
92.5
6.2
Bicester Town
79.3
19.3
Launton
85
15.9
Fringford
87.8
12
Cherwell Average
85
14.1
South East Average
83.6
15.7
England Average
81.4
17.6
Incapacity benefit is paid to people who have been medically certified as physically or mentally unable to work. Table 13-5 presents data regarding benefits claimants in Cherwell District compared to averages for the South East and England. The data demonstrates that total claimants within Cherwell District are below the South East and England averages and this trend is reflected in the more detailed breakdown by statistical group.
1
Includes the subcategories ‘day-to day activities limited a lot’ and ‘day-to-day activities limited a little’.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 230
Table 13-5 Key Benefits Claimants (Working Age Group) (Ref Office for National Statistics – Neighbourhood Statistics 2010) (Ref 13-13)
Cherwell (%) South East (%)
England (%)
9
11
15
Job Seekers
2
2
4
Employment and Support Allowance and Incapacity Benefits
5
7
4
Lone Parents
1
1
2
Carers
1
1
1
Others on income related benefits
0
0
1
Disabled
1
1
1
Bereaved
0
0
0
Total Claimants By Statistical Group
Mortality Figure 13-6 demonstrates that since 2001 there has been a steady decrease in the age-standardised rate of all age, all cause mortality for both males and females within Cherwell District, with the rate also being lower than the rate for England. The age standardised mortality rate for an area is the number of deaths, expressed per 100,000, that would occur in that area if it had the same age structure as the standard population and the local agespecific rates of the area applied. The rate is usually expressed per 100,000. Data sourced from Oxfordshire County Council demonstrates that there is a wide range in the age-standardised mortality rates for all ages for the wards within the study area.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 231
Figure 13-6 Mortality Rates for Males and Females (Health Profile for Cherwell, 2013) (Ref 13-12)
The mortality rates from coronary heart disease and stroke for each area are presented in Table 13-7. The mortality rate from heart disease in Cherwell is lower than regional and national levels; however, the rate is higher when compared to South Oxford and West Oxfordshire. The mortality rate from stroke is the second lowest of all Oxfordshire districts and lower than national rates. Table 13-7 Mortality Rates from Coronary Disease and Stroke (Source: Joint Strategic Needs Assessment 2013 (Ref 13-10)
Area
Mortality rate from coronary heart disease (2010)
Mortality rate from stroke (2010)
Oxfordshire
55.5
32.5
Oxford
67.3
30.0
South Oxford
46.4
36.3
Vale of White Horse
58.4
31.9
West Oxfordshire
54.1
34
Cherwell
55.6
31.0
South East
63.1
37.6
England
74.2
40.9
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 232
The prevalence of cancer in Cherwell is the second lowest of all Oxfordshire’s districts as demonstrated in Figure 13-5 below. Figure 13-5 Prevalence of All Cancers (Source: Joint Strategic Needs Assessment, 2009).
Mortality rate from cancer in Cherwell (106.6) is slightly lower when compared to England average (108.1) but not significantly different (Health Profile Cherwell 2013).
Mental Health Mental health rates are usually expressed per 1,000. Data sourced from Oxfordshire County Council demonstrates that there is a wide range of mental health indicators including number of people with neurotic disorders, panic disorders, anxiety and depression, etc. Data from 2006 show that the number of people with mental health disorders in Cherwell District is lower than national and regional figures.
Physical Activity and Lifestyle Habits The Chief Medical Officer’s report (Ref 13-14) states that physical activity is essential for good health and contributes to overall wellbeing. Physical activity has significant benefits in reducing coronary heart disease and in reducing other health impacts including diabetes, cancer and osteoporosis and, therefore, new developments should be well located in relation to public transport connections and provide opportunities for healthy lifestyles to be pursued where possible. If a more active population helps to reduce the number of people with poor health status this will also positively impact the local economy, helping to reduce the number of individuals claiming incapacity benefits. The following sections provide some details about NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 233
mortality from diseases that are associated with lifestyle habits and levels of physical activity. Physical Activity
Table 13-8 presents data showing levels of physical activity within Cherwell District (the percentage of the adult population participating in at least 30 minutes of sport and active recreation of at least moderate intensity at one session per week). The data demonstrates that activity levels in Cherwell are below the England average for the year 2012/2013 and are lower than in some other parts of Oxfordshire. Ward specific data is not available for this indicator. Table 13-8 Physical Activity Levels (Source: Active People Survey 7 June 2013)
Area
2010/11 (Percentage)
2011/12 (Percentage)
2012/13 (Percentage)
Cherwell
36.7
37.3
33.7
South Oxfordshire
36.0
46.8
38.4
Vale of White Horse
41.2
36.9
36.4
West Oxfordshire
37.3
41.5
37.2
Oxfordshire
36.9
40.2
36.5
South East
35.7
37.4
36.2
England
34.8
36.0
35.2
The 2010 Director of Public Health Annual Report for Oxfordshire (Ref 13-16), reports that almost three quarters of Oxfordshire’s population does not participate in enough physical activity. Since 2006, there has been a reported increase in activity levels although a lot more work needs to be done to improve activity levels further. People Diagnosed with Diabetes
The number of people diagnosed with Type 2 diabetes is increasing and the main contributory factor is increasing rates of obesity. Since 1996 the number of people diagnosed with diabetes in the UK has increased from 1.4 million to 2.6 million. The number of people in the UK who have been diagnosed with diabetes has reached three million for the first time, equivalent to 4.6 per cent of the UK’s population, according to new analysis carried out by Diabetes UK and Tesco (Ref 13-15). The figure represents an increase of 132,000 people diagnosed with diabetes over the last year. A further 850,000 people are thought to have undiagnosed Type 2 diabetes. By 2025 it is estimated that 4 million people will be living with diabetes in the UK (Ref 13-15). Modifying lifestyle behaviours and increasing levels of physical activity will therefore be very important NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 234
to prevent this as it is recognised that the risk of developing Type 2 diabetes can be reduced by making lifestyle changes. The Department of Health Strategy ‘Be Active: Be Healthy’ states that physically active people have a 33-50% lower risk of developing Type 2 diabetes compared with inactive people (Ref 13-17). Between 2011 and 2012, 5.1% of people in Cherwell on GP registers were recorded as being diagnosed with diabetes, which is below the England average of 5.8% but has increased over time from 3.1% in 2005/2006 (Ref 13-12). Obesity In 2010/12, 7.2% of children of school ages 4-5 within Cherwell District were considered to be obese, which is above the Oxfordshire County Council average of 7.0% and below the England average of 9.5% (Ref ONS, Oxfordshire City Council). This has decreased since 2008/2009, when the figure was 7.9%. Between 2011 and 2012, 24.0% of adults in Cherwell District were classed as obese, in comparison to 24.2% of England’s population. This has gradually fallen since 2006 and 2008, when the figure was 26.2% (Health Profile Cherwell 2013). The 2013 Director of Public Health Annual Report for Oxfordshire (Ref 13-9) states that with regards to obesity in adults the region is generally healthier than the national average. However, the fact remains that around 1 in 4 adults in this County (and rising) are obese. By 2020 obesity could lead to an additional 6,900 cases of diabetes in Oxfordshire alone. Increasing levels of activity and promoting opportunities for the pursuit of healthier lifestyles could help to reduce this issue in the long-term.
Deprivation The Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) 2010 is a measure of multiple deprivation experienced by individuals living in a particular area. The IMD 2010 combines seven dimensions covering income, employment, health and disability, education, skills and training, barriers to housing and services, living environment and crime and weights them to create a combined IMD score. Figure 13-6 taken from the Cherwell District Health Profile 2013 (Ref 13-12) presents the proportion of residents within England, the region and Cherwell District living in neighbourhoods belonging to each of the five national deprivation quintiles. The quintiles were derived by ranking all the Lower Super Output Areas (LSOA) in England in order of their deprivation scores and dividing them into five equal groupings. The graph demonstrates that around 5% of the population of Cherwell District lives in an LSOA in the 20% most deprived in England. Almost 40% of the population live in an LSOA in the least deprived quintile. NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 235
Figure 13-6 IMD Results for Cherwell (Source: Department of communities and Local Government Indices of Deprivation, 2010) (Ref 13-12)
The IMD includes the Health Deprivation and Disability Domain. A review of the results for each LSOA within the wards in the study area demonstrates that there are no significant health deprivation issues within these wards i.e. none of the LSOAs lie within the top 20% most deprived nationally. Figure 13-7 presents the IMD Data for the Health Deprivation and Disability Domain within LSOAs in Bicester.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 236
Figure 13-7 IMD Results for Bicester and surrounding LSOAs (Source: http://opendatacommunities.org/deprivation/map)
Cherwell District ranks 26,319 for the IMD Health Deprivation and Disability Domain (32,482 indicates the least deprived and 1 the most deprived).
13.4.3 Accidents Chapter 16 (Traffic and Transport) presents details of Personal Injury Accidents for the key roads in the vicinity of the Masterplan Site.
13.4.4 Location of Key Health Facilities The location of existing health facilities including doctor’s surgeries, hospitals and dentists in the vicinity of the proposed Masterplan development are shown on Drawing 13-2. The closest GP Practice to the site is the North Bicester surgery. The GP surgeries in Bicester are currently accepting new NHS patients and the average list size for the five GP surgeries in Bicester is 1,230 patients per GP which is in line with the average list size for the Oxfordshire Primary Care Trust (1,284 patients per GP). The dental practises, opticians and NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 237
pharmacies are primarily located in the town centre as shown on Drawing 13-2. The Bicester Community Hospital has only 12 beds and provides intermediate care and GP admissions. It also provides an out of hours service in a minor injuries unit. The Department for Transport Core Accessibility Indicators provide a number of measures of accessibility by public transport, walking and (where appropriate) cycling to different services types including GPs and hospitals. The purpose of the indicators is to assist Local Authorities develop their evidence base for their accessibility strategies. The data for Cherwell District for 2011 demonstrates that access to GPs is good for people living in Cherwell with individuals able to access more than one GP/health care centre within 15 minutes by either public transport, walking or cycling. Accessibility data by modes of transport is provided in Table 13-8. Table 13-8 Accessibility to Health Facilities (Source: Department of Transport, 2012) (Ref 13-13)
Indicator
Results
Travel time to nearest GP by public transport/walk
12 minutes
Travel time to nearest GP by cycle
7 minutes
Travel time to nearest GP by car
5 minutes
Number of GPs within 15 minutes by public transport/walk
2
Number of GPs with 15 minutes by cycle
4
Number of GPs within 15 minutes by car
5
The closest ambulance station to the proposed Masterplan development lies approximately 12km to the north in Brackley. Both a fire station and police station are situated in Bicester.
13.4.5 Accessibility to Recreation and Amenity Facilities Chapter 14 (Socio Economics and Community) of this SER presents details of the PRoW surrounding the proposed Masterplan Site with key routes shown on Drawing 14-2. Information regarding the levels of use of the PRoWs surrounding the proposed Masterplan NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 238
development is not currently held by Oxfordshire County Council and no specific surveys have been commissioned for this assessment. At present there are no cycle routes crossing the Masterplan Site. Traffic-free cycle routes located southeast of the Masterplan Site along Banbury Road and A4095 (Sustrans maps). On-road cycle routes on Shakespeare Road are connecting the Masterplan Site southwards (Ref 13-31). Walking as a low impact form of exercise can reduce the risk of strokes, osteoporosis, high blood pressure, bowel cancer, Alzheimer's disease, arthritis, anxiety and stress. In addition regular walking can improve a person’s mental health and well-being by increasing confidence, stamina, energy, weight control and life expectancy (Walking the Way to Health Initiative, 2004). Oxfordshire County Council has produced a Rights of Way Improvement Plan (RoWIP) which sets out their ambitions for the improvement of PRoW within the county in order to meet the Government's aim of better provision for walkers, cyclists, equestrians and people with mobility problems. There is scope for good connections to the PRoW to be provided to enable future residents of the proposed Masterplan development to pursue healthy lifestyles. The ‘Health Walks’ initiative is a national initiative that encourages individuals to improve their fitness by using their local countryside for walking. This initiative is run in Cherwell District and walks are regularly held in Bicester. The location of sports and recreation venues is shown on Drawing 142. Further discussion is also included in Chapter 14 (Socio Economics and Community) about the sports and recreation provision, play areas, community centres and open spaces in the vicinity of the proposed Masterplan development. The quality and availability of pedestrian and cycle facilities in the vicinity of the proposed Masterplan development and issues of severance are discussed in Chapter 16 (Traffic and Transport). As identified in the Cherwell Green Spaces Strategy (Ref 14-20), there is a need for more and better green spaces to be provided within both the urban and rural areas of Cherwell to accommodate the growing population.
13.5 Design and Mitigation A number of mitigation measures have been incorporated into the design process to reduce the potential adverse health effects and to maximise potential health gains offered by the proposed Masterplan
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 239
development. Mitigation measures relevant to the construction and operational phases are provided in the following sections.
13.5.1 Construction Construction best practice should be employed to minimise potential adverse health effects and maximise potential health benefits for the nearby community as well as those individuals undertaking the construction works. Measures that must be implemented comprise:
Traffic movements should be carefully phased to minimise any possible delays and disruption to regular road users, public access, community facilities, residences and businesses, particularly those used by vulnerable groups such as children.
Construction site compounds and areas for material/plant storage should be positioned away from sensitive views, wherever possible.
Careful management of retained vegetation at the site periphery, to provide visual screening.
All construction works should be undertaken in accordance with the health and safety legislation prevailing at the time of construction to ensure that all works are executed safely and to minimise risk of accidents.
The mitigation measures recommended in Chapter 8 (Air Quality) to control dust and air quality during construction.
Monitoring of depositional and suspended dust during construction in order that trigger levels may be set where mitigation must be increased to protect the health and amenity of local residents. These monitoring requirements should be agreed in advance with the Environmental Health Officer (EHO) at Cherwell District Council.
The mitigation measures recommended in Chapter 9 (Noise) to control construction noise and vibration. The use of a Section 61 consent should ensure that noise levels at the site are effectively controlled.
The mitigation measures recommended in Chapter 16 (Traffic and Transport).
Ensure regular dialogue and information provision to nearby residents who could potentially be affected by the construction works.
Encourage the contractors appointed for the construction works to register with the Considerate Constructors scheme.
In addition to the above, during the preparation of the Masterplan, work has already been undertaken to engage with local companies to secure maximum benefits for local residents and employees. NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 240
13.5.2 Operation The Masterplan Site has been designed in line with key project objectives, principally, in relation to human health, to provide green infrastructure, to ensure the appropriate provision of social and community facilities, to provide access to employment opportunities and to provide the necessary design and infrastructure to promote the use of walking, cycling and public transport use rather than the private car. The following mitigation measures have been included within the design as a result of the iterative design process and recommendations from the design and assessment teams:
Secured by design principles have been used to minimise the risk of crime occurring and the local constabulary has had the opportunity to comment on the design proposals.
The requirements of all sectors of the society have been considered to ensure the correct balance of services and amenities to serve the proposed Masterplan development. The detailed design and operation of the Energy Centre must be discussed with the EHO at CDC to agree appropriate noise limits and an Environmental Permit will be obtained from the Environment Agency. The Environment Agency will be required to review the health effects of the proposals as part of the permitting process.
The provision of community facilities that will promote community interaction, empowerment and community development. Provision has also been informed by a Community Facilities Audit.
Providing appropriate infrastructure to enable home-working (appropriate broadband speeds).
The proposed Masterplan development has been designed to facilitate easy movement by foot and cycle, thereby supporting the use of active modes of travel and the pursuit of healthy lifestyles. The objective is to provide a principal network of segregated footways and cycleways, some of these alongside roads or shared with vehicles. Traffic speeds within the development will be controlled accordingly in order to provide a safe environment for pedestrians and cyclists. The new road crossing under the railway creates the opportunity for a direct pedestrian crossing and bus only link between Bucknell Road and NW Bicester. The new urban boulevard which will be created in place of existing Howes Lane with a new alignment approximately 100 metres to the west, (with a new underpass crossing under the existing railway linking to Lords Lane) will provide a strong pedestrian priority and shared public space. Further details about the operational design of the scheme from
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 241
this perspective are provided in Chapter 16 (Traffic and Transport).
The provision of secure cycle parking and storage facilities will be incorporated into the residential areas, local centre and employment areas. Cycle parking and storage is to be provided in accordance with Cherwell District Council cycle parking standards.
The ‘centre’ of the proposed Masterplan development providing the community facilities has been located to ensure that it is highly accessible by foot and cycle to all areas of the site. For example, access to the primary school by foot has been a key consideration.
The development of a comprehensive green infrastructure strategy for the site that includes areas of public and private green space. The green infrastructure is 40% of the total site. The green infrastructure provides opportunity for interaction between children and young people and with their environment.
A new bus service is to be provided through the site and will enable all residents and occupiers of the site to be within 400m of a bus stop.
Allotments are included within the site to enable local food production, as well as local orchards.
Other mitigation measures that should be implemented to reduce potential adverse human health effects and to maximise potential health gains are:
Ensure ownership and responsibility for maintenance of external spaces and buildings are clearly defined. High levels of maintenance of, for example, areas of greenspace will encourage more active use which should help to reduce incidence of crime and associated perceptions of fear of crime.
Ensure provision of effective signage throughout the proposed Masterplan development to encourage walking and cycling to key facilities.
In the long-term, the ‘Health Walks’ initiative should be extended to include the proposed Masterplan development to further encourage the pursuit of healthy lifestyles amongst the new residents.
Develop opportunities to include public art within the proposed Masterplan development to provide a means of engaging with the community and to create a ‘sense of place’ and ‘ownership’.
As a result of the policy of connecting the site to the rest of Bicester by other means other than by road, a walking survey has been carried out in Bicester to identify the weaknesses in the current footpaths and cycle ways but also to establish the
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 242
distances and realistic times to travel the distances to the various destinations in the town. This information will be used to deliver wider off-site improvements.
13.6 Assessment of Effects The assessment of effects of the proposed Masterplan development on human health is presented in the sections below. The effects have been separated into construction and operational phase effects and have been grouped by health determinants.
13.6.1 Construction Phase Effects Employment and Economy During the construction phase, employment opportunities will be created and there will be potential indirect economic benefits for local businesses, for example, local accommodation providers, as a result of spending by the construction workforce (refer to Chapter 14, Socio-Economics and Community for further details). There are also opportunities for upskilling of the existing workforce as a result of the design specification for the Masterplan development. There is strong evidence documenting the health benefits of being in employment and the associated health benefits (mental and physical) (Ref 13-21). For this reason, health effects are assessed as positive. The likelihood of this impact occurring is considered possible as the health effects will depend upon a number of factors including: the types of jobs created, the status of those who will take the construction phase employment opportunities i.e. will they be those who are currently unemployed?, the income offered by the employment opportunities, the types of jobs that will be created and the types of contracts that employees will have - these are all factors that can ultimately influence the likely health benefits realised. To secure maximum health benefits as a result of the construction works, it is recommended that opportunities are sought to establish employment routes that enable those currently unemployed to benefit from the construction works and for local apprenticeships and training scheme providers to be engaged in the works to provide maximum upskilling benefits.
Safety and Security Construction works have the potential to adversely affect health and well-being, both to those working on the construction site, but also members of the public who may come into contact with the works. The mitigation measures clearly identify that all works will be undertaken in accordance with the health and safety legislation prevailing when the scheme is constructed and that the works will be securely cordoned off to prevent public access. Whilst adherence to NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 243
these legislative requirements will create a working environment that is conducive to safe working, the effects on health status are assessed as neutral. There is scope for further benefits to be delivered although this will depend upon the contractors appointed and the specific health and safety training they deliver to their employees, the hours that employees are required to work and any associated benefits that may be provided by the contractors that could benefit health.
Air Quality There is a large body of evidence which documents the health impacts of various pollutants and it is apparent that health effects of air pollution are greatest for ‘at risk’ groups including the elderly, people with chronic chest and heart disease and young children. Dust and particulate matter generated by construction sites has the potential to cause adverse health effects. Whilst dust cannot generally be ingested as the particle size is too large, it can cause eye, throat and nose irritation. PM10 is of more concern from a health perspective as it can enter the lungs causing respiratory difficulties and cardiovascular concerns in the long-term (Ref 13-22). The receptors most likely to be affected are listed in Table 8-9 of Chapter 8 Air Quality. They are most likely to be affected by dust particles of greater than 30 μm. There is also the potential for particles of size 10–30 μm to travel up to 500m and particles of less than 10 μm to travel 1,000m or more. Owing to the temporary nature of the effects and the proposed mitigation measures, including regular dust monitoring during the construction works and the establishment of trigger levels to ensure effective mitigation is implemented, the health effects are assessed as neutral as there should be no significant change to health status. Dust generation will also be intermittent during the construction works. The review of the existing health status of the population in Section 13.4 identified that the health of the population in Bicester is generally good and so they may be considered less vulnerable to adverse air quality effects than a population where there is a higher prevalence of existing respiratory and cardiovascular conditions.
Noise and Vibration It is well documented that noise can adversely affect health and wellbeing. Figure 14-8 depicts the adverse health effects that can be generated by elevated noise levels.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 244
Figure 14-8 Health Effects of Noise (Source: Babisch, W, 2002 cited in Good Practice Guide on Noise Exposure and Potential Health Effects, 2010) (Ref 13-23)
The key sensitive receptors that could be affected by elevated construction noise levels are:
Greenacres, Caversfield and the Lodge along the B4100
Residential properties adjacent to Lord’s Lane along A4095
Residential properties adjacent to Howes Lane along A4095
The construction noise assessment presented in Chapter 9 (Noise) states that with the implementation of mitigation there will be no significant noise impacts. Whilst, there may be some intermittent disturbance caused by certain, very noisy construction activities, they will not result in prolonged adverse effects and so it is assessed that there will be a neutral effect on human health as there will be no significant health improvement delivered and no significant health loss or deterioration caused. Through the use of a Section 61 consent during the construction period, it will be possible to ensure that noise levels are controlled in line with the recommendations outlined in Chapter 9 of this SER. Proactive engagement with the potentially affected receptors in advance of the construction works commencing will also be important to help manage any potential anxiety issues, as will the use and management of a complaints procedure during the construction works to ensure that any issues are promptly resolved.
Physical Environment and Urban Design During the construction works there will be changes to the built and natural environment within and adjacent to the site. Modifications to the physical environment have the potential to affect human health as a result of localised disturbance which may cause anxiety or as a result of emissions, such as dust emissions or increased levels of noise and vibration (the latter issues have been discussed above). NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 245
There may be temporary deterioration in amenity value for users of nearby paths and bridleways particularly those to the north and west of the proposed Masterplan development as shown on Drawing 14-2, such effects are not considered likely to have a significant effect on health status. Similarly, the changes to the amenity value of the environment as a result of the construction works are not considered to result in significant changes to health status and are also assessed as neutral.
Healthy Lifestyles Based upon the analysis provided in the ‘Physical Environment’ section above, the assessment for the construction phase is neutral as the ability of nearby residents and the wider community to pursue healthy lifestyles will not be affected by the construction works.
Transport and Access Traffic and transport is a significant source of stress but there is a lack of epidemiological research on the health impacts. However, there is evidence that transport related stress can cause sleep disturbance and increase blood pressure amongst drivers (Ref 13-24). At this stage of the assessment there is no estimate of construction traffic for the Masterplan Site. However, effects on traffic and transport during the construction phase will be assessed as part of the next EIA stage. For this reason, it is assessed that effects on human health will be unknown.
Waste Management and Contamination Chapter 11 (Contaminated Land) confirms that there are no contaminants present above the relevant human health and controlled waters assessment criteria. Therefore, there will be no significant health risks to site operatives during the works and effects are assessed as neutral. During construction works it is possible for pathways to be created allowing any potential contaminants to migrate to underlying groundwater which may then be used as a drinking water source. However, owing to the absence of contaminants such human health effects are assessed as neutral. Chapter 11 (Contaminated Land) identifies that naturally occurring radon is present and, therefore, basic radon protection measures will be required for the construction of new dwellings. The inclusion of this mitigation in the design means that health effects are assessed as neutral as there will be no residual risk to health status.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 246
Community and Social Infrastructure (including Community Spirit and Engagement) During the construction phase, there will be no adverse effects on community and social infrastructure. Effects are assessed as neutral from a human health perspective. The extent of an individual’s participation in their community and the added control that this may offer to their lives and health status is documented in literature (Ref 13-25). It will be important during the construction phase to communicate openly with the communities that may be affected such that they understand the works that are being undertaken and any potential disruption that it may cause to adequately manage any concerns and to reduce the risk of anxiety which can have adverse effects on mental health status.
Access to and Provision of Health Facilities and Services During the construction phase, there will be no adverse effects on the provision of health facilities and services as all existing facilities will continue to be operational and accessible. Effects are assessed as neutral.
13.6.2 Operational Phase Effects Employment and Economy Chapter 14 (Socio Economics and Community) identifies a positive significant impact on employment as the proposed Masterplan development will generate a number of jobs and could potentially attract a significant amount of new investment within the immediate area . These job opportunities could offer potential indirect positive health impacts. The likelihood of health benefits being realised is considered possible as the effects will depend upon who benefits from the employment opportunities and the types of jobs, pay and contracts offered (as identified in the discussion of potential construction effects). The Marmot Review (Ref 13-25) identifies that health inequalities arise because of inequalities in society. A key factor is being able to access good employment opportunities and, therefore, improving access to good jobs and reducing long-term unemployment across the social gradient will help to reduce health inequalities. Whilst health status is generally good across Cherwell District, there are inequalities between parts of the district and this is reflected in the differences in life expectancy. There are opportunities for such issues to be addressed by providing access to the employment opportunities for those who are currently unemployed. This can be secured by promoting long-term apprenticeships and initiatives and maximising the upskilling opportunities presented by the proposed Masterplan NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 247
development and in the future by the development of the rest of the NW Bicester development.
Safety and Security The proposed Masterplan development has been designed to minimise the risk of crime through the use of Secured by Design principles and this is assessed as having a potential positive health impact as the design will enable future residents and users of the site to pursue lifestyles that are not adversely affected by crime and fear of crime. The likelihood of this impact being realised is assessed as probable as there is a strong body of evidence that demonstrates the associations between urban design and incidence and fear of crime and the associated effects on health status and lifestyles. It has been identified that fear of crime may act as a barrier to physical (e.g. walking and cycling) and social activities (visiting places) that benefit health (Ref 13-26). The positioning of key walking and cycling routes through the site has been designed to ensure they benefit from natural surveillance. In the long-term, the effective maintenance of the proposed Masterplan development and its soft and hard infrastructure will also help to ensure that such positive impacts continue to be realised.
Air Quality The House of Commons Environmental Audit Committee Report (Ref 13-27) critically reviews current performance across Government in relation to the achievement of air quality targets. Transport in particular comes under heavy scrutiny with a significant shift in transport policy needed to ensure that air quality targets can be achieved. The onus is put upon local authorities to do more to tackle poor air quality and the need for Government to provide guidance about how to further develop local air quality strategies. With improved air quality there will be improved benefits to the economy and human health. The development of the proposed Masterplan development will result in changes to traffic flows and access which have the potential to affect air quality and, therefore human health. As mentioned previously in Chapter 8 Air Quality, operational phase traffic emissions will be assessed during the detailed application. It is therefore not possible at this stage to predict the magnitude of any impacts on local air quality and consequently on human health. However, it should be noted that the design has been focussed upon reducing travel by private car and encouraging the use of more sustainable modes of transport and use of active travel modes (walking and cycling). Chapter 8 (Air Quality) identifies that the proposed energy centre has the potential to cause air quality impacts as a result of combustion NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 248
emissions of NO2 and PM10 from the biomass boiler and gas Combined Heat and Power (CHP) plants. These will be emitted to atmosphere via dedicated stacks located on the roof of the energy centre. The impact of the energy centre will be assessed during the detailed application. The emission rates for both NOx and PM10 will be required in addition to the characteristics of the stack. A detailed dispersion model will be used to assess the energy centre impacts. Therefore, the emissions and health effects will be subject to further scrutiny during the detailed design process.
Noise and Vibration The suitability of the site to accommodate residential development in line with the requirements of Planning Policy Guidance Note 24 (PPG24) has been assessed in Chapter 9 (Noise). The noise contours produced for the site (using a combination of baseline monitoring and modelling) indicate that the site falls within Noise Exposure Category (NEC) A which states that ‘noise need not be considered as a determining factor in granting planning permission, although the noise level at the high end of the category should not be regarded as a desirable level’. On this basis the use of the site for residential development is deemed acceptable from a human health perspective and effects on the health of future residents is assessed as neutral. Studies suggest that the physiological and psychological impacts from transport related noise include speech interference, annoyance and sleep disturbance. Within the literature there is some debate about causal links between noise levels and particular health outcomes although it is acknowledged that transport is a major source of ambient noise levels and so could have health impacts but the quantification of such effects is problematic. Chapter 9 (Noise) assesses the noise effects of construction traffic but impacts can be mitigated through measures set out in Section 9.5.1. Health effects as a result of traffic noise caused by the proposed Masterplan development are assessed as neutral. Operational traffic noise associated with the Masterplan Site will be assessed once data has been provided. It is anticipated that this will be undertaken during future EIAs. The Energy Centre has the potential to generate noise nuisance and subsequent adverse health effects during its operation. Details about the plant to be installed and the potential noise effects are not known at this stage. Further studies will be undertaken to agree noise limits for plant to be installed on site with the local EHO and to ensure that the design meets these limits. The key issue will be to achieve a level below the night-time background (LA90) noise level However, providing the mitigation measures identified in Chapter 10 (Noise) are implemented then health effects are considered to be neutral. NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 249
Physical Environment and Urban Design Central to the design of the proposed Masterplan development has been the concept of minimising travel by private car, and encouraging walking and cycling. The mitigation measures outlined in Section 13.5 identify how these concepts have been incorporated into the design. All of the measures should help to promote the pursuit of active lifestyles which should offer long-term health benefits and, therefore, effects are assessed as positive. The health effects of greater levels of physical activity include reductions in the risk of coronary heart disease, reductions in obesity, diabetes, hypertension, cancer, osteoporosis, depression and anxiety21. The evidence documenting the health benefits of active lifestyles and exercise is very strong and the concepts used in the proposed Masterplan development design are intended to make this possible and a way of life for new residents. The baseline data review identified that there is a need to increase activity levels to tackle issues like obesity incidence. Therefore, the likelihood of health effects being realised is probable. The comprehensive green infrastructure strategy developed for the site is wide-ranging and has been designed to ensure that the requirements of PPS1 are achieved. The network of high quality, green spaces will provide opportunities for communities to interact, for residents to participate in physical activity and allow residents to engage with their wider environment, for example, through the development of the central riparian corridor that incorporates circular walks and through the inclusion of allotments. The provision within the Masterplan development for local food production from allotments is also assessed as offering potential health gains both physically and mentally. The provision of allotments offers the opportunity for local residents to grow vegetables which are essential to a healthy diet and also provide opportunities for social interaction which will offer mental well-being benefits. Health effects are assessed as positive as this is providing a proactive opportunity for healthier lifestyles to be adopted and the health benefits of a healthy diet are well documented. The likelihood of the effects being realised is possible. These aspects again contribute to positive health effects as opportunities are provided to allow the pursuit of healthier lifestyles. Whilst the health benefits of green space are frequently cited, there are relatively few epidemiological studies on the relationship between nature and health and the mechanisms that underpin this relationship. A recent study in the Netherlands (Ref 13-29)sought to investigate this link further and again concluded that green space has an important effect on health. Based upon this evidence and the comprehensive green infrastructure strategy, the likelihood of such effects being realised is considered probable. The importance of NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 250
ensuring sufficient green space provision has been further underlined by the shortfalls in parts of Cherwell District. The housing to be provided across the site will meet Code for Sustainable Homes Level 5 and will meet Lifetime Homes standards. The Lifetime Homes Standard enables the housing produced to meet the requirements of a wide range of households, for example those with children or those requiring wheelchair access. Therefore, the housing provided on the site should be appropriate for a variety of owners (this is considered important in view of the ageing population and the potential need in the future for accommodation to meet the needs of an older population).
Healthy Lifestyles Issues relating to the ability to pursue healthy lifestyles through physical activity and diet have been addressed in the ‘Physical Environment and Urban Design’ and ‘Transport and Access’ sections of the assessment.
Transport and Access The majority of Bicester is located within a radius of approximately 3.2km (or 2 miles) from the centre of the proposed Masterplan development; a distance considered as being a reasonable journey by foot given the relatively flat topography of the town. Whilst there are currently limited opportunities for local journeys to be undertaken on foot to/from the, the design of the site has been modified to ensure that connections within Bicester town are developed making the scheme accessible. The design of the site from a transport and access perspective has the potential to offer potential health gains if the design encourages greater levels of walking and cycling and, therefore, effects are assessed as positive. A range of off-site improvements to walking and cycling routes have the potential to further complement the measures that have been integrated into the design of the proposed Masterplan development, although it is not known when they will be implemented and, therefore, there is a greater level of uncertainty about whether such benefits will be delivered. The internal layout of the proposed Masterplan development is such that traffic speeds and flows will be low which ensures that issues of fear and intimidation will be minimised. Effects on accidents (both number and severity) are uncertain at this stage as a Road Safety Audit has not been completed. The provision of a bus service through the Masterplan development that connects with the facilities in Bicester town centre is also seen as a strength as it ensures that facilities are accessible for those parts of the community who may not be as able to walk and cycle such as the NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 251
elderly or those with physical disabilities. Further consideration of accessibility to different types of land use and facilities is provided in the Transport Assessment which concludes that the Masterplan development is well located for a range of educational, employment, retail and leisure facilities within achievable walking and cycling distances. There are also facilities in Bicester town centre and other leisure opportunities that are easily accessible by cycling and public transport.
Waste Management and Contamination Chapter 11 (Contaminated Land) concludes that whilst end users of the site (residents) will come into regular contact with soil therefore there is the potential for accidental ingestion, dermal contact of inhalation of dust particles. However, as there are no contaminant sources confirmed on the site, the potential health effects associated with this risk are assessed as neutral.
Community and Social Infrastructure (including Community Spirit and Engagement) Community participation, inclusion and the establishment of strong community networks can help to protect against ill health and positively contribute to levels of overall well-being. The Department of Health (Ref 13-28) highlights the need to develop connected communities that promote social networks and engagement to provide long-term mental well-being benefits. The development includes provision of a number of community facilities to support the local community that will live at the proposed Masterplan development. These facilities include: village shops, a primary school, a nursery, a community centre, and an eco pub and office space. These will provide opportunities for community interaction and engagement and provide an opportunity for healthier lifestyles to be pursued. Effects are, therefore, assessed as positive and the likelihood of the effect being realised is possible as effects will depend upon the extent to which the community facilities are used. A community governance strategy has also been developed for the proposed Masterplan development. This is considered a strength from a human health perspective as it sets the framework for community ownership, engagement and responsibility that will further benefit community spirit and cohesion and could indirectly benefit mental well-being in the long-term. This is likely to benefit the local community living at the site but could also assist those living in the vicinity of the Masterplan development as there is a clear commitment in the governance strategy to integration of existing properties with the new development. The potential health effects are assessed as positive, although the likelihood of the effect being realised is speculative. Further consideration should be given to the use of public art within key areas of open space to create a sense of NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 252
well-being and ownership within the development. This could offer positive health gains if a sense of well-being is achieved although such effects are considered speculative. Chapter 14 (Socio Economics and Community) provides an assessment of the proposed Masterplan site on community facility provision and the effects on educational resources. The chapter assesses the effects as positive as there will be sufficient service capacity provided and there is potential for wider environmental and sustainability multiplier effects. Ensuring access to educational opportunities is vital to health and well-being. The provision of education facilities and services across the site is assessed as being appropriate and effects assessed as neutral.
Access to and Provision of Health Facilities and Services Based upon discussions with the Primary Care Trust and the results of the Community Facilities Audit, the Masterplan development includes provision of a GP Centre. The provision of health facilities and services across the site is, therefore, assessed as being appropriate and effects assessed as positive. The transport assessment, as discussed in the ‘Transport and Access’ section above also concludes that health facilities are accessible from the proposed Masterplan development.
13.7 Cumulative Effects The assessment of human health effects has considered the results of other chapters within the SER, as some of the effects they report have the potential to impact on human health either directly or indirectly. Therefore, the assessment presented within this chapter has inherently considered potential impact interactions and how they could cumulatively affect health status. There are likely to be a number of positive operational cumulative health impacts for the residents that will live at the proposed Masterplan development and potentially indirect benefits for other residents in the wider community if there are wider multiplier effects e.g. employment creation, improved cycle and walking links. During the construction phase, there is the potential for cumulative adverse health impacts as a result of noise and vibration, dust and visual amenity nuisance, as well as potential disruption to transport and access. Individually, each of these issues have been assessed as having a neutral effect on human health, although there is a risk that during the works there could be particularly intense periods of activity which could result in some concerns for local residents, although they are considered unlikely to result in significant adverse health effects with the implementation of the recommended mitigation measures. Such impacts will also be temporary. The use of NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 253
Construction Environmental Management Plans will help to manage such potential adverse effects.
13.7.1 Cumulative Effects with Other Developments The other developments that have the potential to have cumulative health effects with the proposed Masterplan development are presented in Table 17-1 and Table 17-2 of Chapter 17 (Interrelationships and Cumulative Effects). The assessment of the cumulative effects of these developments on human health during construction is uncertain as information is not available about the likely construction phasing. However, providing appropriate construction mitigation measures are implemented, such effects are unlikely to be significant. In the long-term, there is potential for long-term cumulative health benefits with the other developments as they will provide infrastructure benefits including the provision of new schools, new civic buildings, new housing and new employment opportunities that could all offer indirect health benefits. The provision of associated infrastructure including new cycling routes and transport improvements as part of these developments could also offer benefits for physical activity. Potential adverse effects could occur as a result of traffic generation and the associated effects on air quality and noise and vibration. These issues have been considered within the respective chapters of this SER and based upon current information are not assessed in detail. However, further assessment will be undertaken at the next stage of the application process.
13.8 Summary This chapter has assessed the potential effects on human health of the construction and operational phases of the Masterplan development. A number of mitigation measures have been incorporated into the design process to maximise potential health benefits and to minimise the likelihood of adverse health effects occurring. During the construction phase, health effects were assessed as positive with regard to the potential employment opportunities that will be created and the wider upskilling benefits that may be delivered. The impacts on the following health determinants were assessed as having a neutral effect on health outcomes: safety and security, physical environment and urban design, healthy lifestyles, transport and access, waste management and contamination, community and social infrastructure and access to and provision of health facilities and services. These assessments were informed by NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 254
the results presented in the other SER chapters and the likelihood of there being a change to health status. During operation the Masterplan development will generate a number of jobs and could potentially attract a significant amount of new investment within the immediate area. Therefore indirect positive health effects were predicted. Positive health effects are also likely to occur (both physical and mental) as a result of the commitment within the design to creating a site where walking and cycling are encouraged, the provision of community facilities that will provide opportunities for community engagement and interaction, the use of Secured by Design principles that will help to reduce levels of crime and control perceptions of fear of crime and as a result of the comprehensive green infrastructure strategy that will provide a high quality environment and areas for informal sport and recreation. Detailed air quality, noise and vibration and traffic and transport assessments will be undertaken at the next stage of the application process.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 255
14
Socio-Economics and Community
14.1 Introduction This chapter presents a high level assessment of the socio-economic and community impacts associated with the proposed North West Bicester Masterplan Site. The assessment:
Identifies the regulatory and policy framework and guidance for the topic;
Describes baseline conditions that are currently existing and those predicted to exist immediately prior to development;
Identifies and assesses the impacts of the Masterplan Site in relation to local businesses, industry and retail sectors;
Provides an assessment of the cumulative impacts of the proposal.
14.2 Regulatory and Policy Framework The following policies in Table 14-1 have been identified as relevant to this chapter. For each policy identified the requirements of that policy has been highlighted and considered in the context of the proposal. Table 14-1 Regulatory and Policy Framework
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
Bicester Masterplan Response
National Planning Policy (Planning Policy Statements and Guidance notes) Planning Policy Statement: eco-towns – A supplement to PPS1 (Ref 14-1)
A range of minimum standards which are more challenging and stretching than would normally be required for new development. The standards act to ensure that ecotowns are examplars of good practice and provide a showcase for sustainable living.
The proposal (whole site) will meet all of the minimum standards identified in the PPS1 supplement.
Standards include: Meeting the functional characteristics of a settlement and a minimum of 5,000 homes. Homes must achieve Building for Life Silver Standard and Level 4 Code for Sustainable Homes, provide 30% affordable housing. 40% of the eco-town total area should be allocated to green space, NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 256
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
Bicester Masterplan Response
of which at least half should be public. National Planning Policy Framework (2012) (Ref 14-2)
The National Planning Policy Framework (2012) sets out 12 core planning principles that should underpin decision taking. Those that apply to the development are:
The proposal (whole site) meets the applicable core principles and advice concerning development within the NPPF.
Proactively drive and support sustainable economic development to deliver the homes, business and industrial units, infrastructure and thriving local places that the country needs; Always seek to secure high quality design and a good standard of amenity for all existing and future occupants of land and buildings; Support the transition to a low carbon future in a changing climate, taking full account of flood risk and coastal change, and encourage the reuse of existing resources, including conversion of existing buildings, and encourage the use of renewable resources (for example, by the development of renewable energy). With regard to delivering large scale housing development the NPPF advises at para 52 that: The supply of new homes can sometimes be best achieved through planning for larger scale development, such as new settlements or extensions to existing villages and towns that follow the principles of Garden Cities. Working with the support of their communities, Local Planning Authorities should consider whether such opportunities provide the best way of achieving sustainable development. In doing so, they should consider whether it is appropriate to establish Green Belt around or adjoining any such development. With regard to promoting healthy NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 257
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
Bicester Masterplan Response
communities para 70 states that: To deliver the social, recreational and cultural facilities and services the community needs, planning policies and decisions should: Plan positively for the provision and use of shared space, community facilities (such as local shops, meeting places, sports venues, cultural buildings, public houses and places of worship) and other local services to enhance the sustainability of communities and residential environments.
Cherwell District Local Plan Submission Version (January 2014) (Ref 14-3) Planning applications that accord with the policies in the Local Plan (or other part of the statutory Development Plan) shall be approved without delay unless material considerations indicate otherwise.
The proposal accords with policy contained within the Local Plan.
Policy BSC 3 Affordable Housing
At Banbury and Bicester, all proposed development that include 10 or more dwellings (gross), or which would be provided on sites suitable for 10 or more dwellings (gross), will be expected to provide at least 30% of new housing as affordable homes on site.
The proposal meets the 30% quantum of affordable homes.
Policy BSC 4 Housing Mix
New residential development will be expected to provide a mix of homes to meet current and expected future requirements in the interests of meeting housing need and creating socially mixed and inclusive communities.
The proposal meets requirements for a social mix and inclusivity.
Policy BSC 10 Open Space, Outdoor Sport and Recreation Provision
The Council will encourage partnership working to ensure that sufficient quantity and quality of, and convenient access to open space, sport and recreation provision is secured through the following measures:
The proposal incorporates a range of open spaces, including village square, green links, allotments and community gardens. The proposal actively promotes partnership working for example a dual use of school sports provision as a
Policy PSD 1 Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development
Protecting existing sites; Addressing existing NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 258
Policy/Legislation
Requirements deficiencies in provision through qualitative enhancement of existing provision, improving access to existing facilities or securing new provision; and
Bicester Masterplan Response wider community facility.
Ensuring that proposals for new development contribute to open space, sport and recreation provision commensurate to the need generated by the proposals. Policy BSC 11 Local Standards of Provision – Outdoor Recreation
Policy Bicester 1 North West Bicester EcoTown Policy Bicester 7 Meeting the Need for Open Space, Sport and Recreation
Development proposals will be required to contribute to the provision of open space, sport and recreation, together with secure arrangements for its management and maintenance. The amount, type and form of open space will be determined having regard to the nature and size of development proposed and the community needs likely to be generated by it. A new exemplar zero carbon eco development will be developed on land identified at NW Bicester. Seek to establish an urban edge park around the outskirts of the town, by protecting the existing network of green spaces and securing new open spaces and linear route provision linked with public footways / cycleway, to create a circular route with connections to the town centre and the countryside beyond.
The proposal includes the provision of over 40% open space (including public and private space) which includes a range of sports and recreation provision such as games courts and hard play areas.
The policy relates directly to the development proposal. The proposal connects directly with the circular route around Bicester town and maintains the walking / cycling routes and access to the wider countryside. The proposal maintains a network of green spaces, including river corridors, a proposed Country Park, nature reserve, allotments and orchards.
14.3 Methodology 14.3.1 Introduction The assessment has involved a review and analysis of data from a variety of sources. The technical scope for this assessment has been defined by the nature of the proposal and the likely social and NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 259
economic receptors that may be impacted upon. A strategic, high level assessment has been made based on the following:
The collection and analysis of socio-economic statistics in order to create a profile of the local area. This has been from a range of data sources including the Office of National Statistics and Nomis web. Data from the preparation of other documents developed to support the Masterplan have also been used, notably the economic data prepared as part of the Economic Strategy for NW Bicester by SQW Consultants (Ref 14-4);
Feedback from consultations undertaken during the masterplanning process;
Identification of existing land uses within the Masterplan Site and of key social and economic facilities within a wider study area to help identify potential activity changes resulting from the proposed development; and
The identification and assessment of likely impacts of the Masterplan Site, including cumulative impacts.
14.3.2 Study Area The spatial scope for undertaking baseline research has taken into account the following considerations:
The location of the Masterplan Site in relation to surrounding electoral wards and settlements;
The wider Bicester settlement characteristics and strategic location;
The components of the proposal and their likely catchment area.
The assessment of potential socio-economic impacts has warranted consideration of the defined spatial areas as follows:
The five wards that form the settlement of Bicester (Bicester North, West, East, South and Bicester Town) are referred to as Bicester Town (this is consistent with the definition within the Economic Baseline Report (SQQ) (Ref 14-5));
The five wards making up Bicester Town, together with the three wards that surround it (Caversfield, Launton, and Amrosden and Chesterton) form the Bicester Wider Area (again, this is consistent with economic baseline data);
For a number of other socio-economic elements the relevant spatial scope would be wider – either at District Level (Cherwell) or County level (Oxfordshire).
The use of these spatial areas allows consideration of the potential local and regional impacts of the proposed development. NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 260
14.3.3 Establishment of Baseline Conditions Establishing the baseline conditions has drawn on a range of secondary information sources. Table 14-2 details the individual elements within the broader socio-economic and community together with their spatial focus (dependent on appropriateness and availability of datasets). Table 14-2 Baseline topic areas
Spatial Focus Baseline Topic
Details
Demography
Population change Age structure
Biceste r Wider Area
County or Distric t Level
+ +
+ + +
+
+ + +
Population forecast
Economy
Occupations Employment by sector
Housing
Industry of employment
+
Type, tenure
+
+ +
Demand
Education
Provision, capacity and quality
+
+
Other Community Facilities
Sports and recreational facilities
+
+
Crime
Crime rate
+
+
Community halls
Nature of crime
Tourism
Attractions
Walking/Cycling Links
Public rights of way
Other Development Proposals
Other significant development likely to generate cumulative impacts
Existing and proposed
+ + + +
14.3.4 Assessment of Effects Whilst there is no published or established guidance for assessing the significance of effects on human environment and land use for a mixed use development, Volume 11, Section 3, Parts 3, 8 and 12 of the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (Ref 14-6) does refer to guidance for assessing the impact on Land Use, Community Access and Policies and Plans respectively. Whilst this guidance has been produced in relation to proposed roads and bridges it nonetheless NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 261
provides a useful reference tool for consideration of any proposal in this context. In addition, the Town and Country Planning Association in conjunction with the Communities and Local Government have produced an ‘ecotowns economy worksheet’ (Ref 14-7) to support the development of an appropriate economic strategy for each eco-town to ensure a fully sustainable, competitive and prosperous future for the town. Section 4.1 of the worksheet refers to the development and analysis an economic baseline referencing a range of indicators and associated details. This assessment seeks to identify and assess the land use changes and changes in socio-economic activities, which may arise from the proposed development, with resultant impacts on material assets. Unlike other environmental topics, such as noise, the sensitivity of socio-economic receptors to the proposed development is not determined by reference to designations or an objective standard. Instead, it is the nature of the activity that the human receptor is undertaking that is most influential in determining sensitivity. Professional judgement has therefore been applied in the case of each category of receptor considered in this chapter, with the degree of change to the receptor arising from the proposal determining whether or not an effect is likely to be significant.
Impact Significance All predicted impacts have been classified into one of three significance categories labelled ‘Key Significant’, ‘Significant’ and ‘Not Significant’. Impact significance has been assessed by consideration of the following factors for each predicted impact:
The magnitude of the predicted impact.
The geographic extent of the impact.
The duration and reversibility of the impact.
The capacity of the local economy to absorb or adjust to the impact.
For an impact to be considered ‘Key significant’ it would need to display most or all of the following characteristics:
Major or moderate impact magnitude – i.e. a sizeable change in relation to the baseline
Affecting a wide geographic area e.g. of importance at local authority level rather than specifically the Bicester settlement
Permanent or irreversible
Presenting difficulties of adjustment for the local economy
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 262
‘Significant’ impacts would need to display at least two, of the above characteristics. Finally, for an impact to be considered ‘not significant’ it would be expected to have most or all of the following characteristics:
Slight or negligible impact magnitude
Affecting only a relatively small geographic area
Temporary or reversible
Presenting few difficulties of adjustment for the local economy
14.4 Description of Existing Baseline Conditions 14.4.1 Demography Table 14-3 sets out the current population total for Bicester Town, the Bicester Wider Area and comparative information for Cherwell District and Oxfordshire as a whole. Table 14-3 Population
Total Population 2011
Area Bicester (Town)
30,854
Bicester (Wider Area)
41,350
Cherwell District
141,868
Oxfordshire
653,798
In terms of population change, the Cherwell District has seen a total increase of 7.8% between 2002 and 2011, which is comparable with population change overall for Oxfordshire (ONS Mid-Year Population Estimates) (Ref 14-8). Tables 14-4 and 14-5 set out statistics relating to age and ethnicity. There is a high proportion of people aged between 0-14 years in both the Bicester Town and Bicester Wider Area than for Cherwell, Oxfordshire and England as a whole; similarly there is a lower proportion of residents aged 65 and over within the two Bicester areas compared to figures for Cherwell, Oxfordshire and England. Table 14-4 Age Structure
Area Bicester (Town)
0-14 Years
15-29 Years
20.5%
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
18.9%
30-44 Years 25.2%
45-64 Years 24.1%
65+ 11.3%
Page 263
Area
0-14 Years
15-29 Years
30-44 Years
45-64 Years
65+
Bicester (Wider Area)
20.3%
19.2%
24.9%
24.2%
11.4%
Cherwell District
18.8%
18.0%
21.8%
26.0%
15.3%
Oxfordshire
17.5%
20.9%
20.7%
25.0%
15.9%
England
17.7%
20.0%
20.6%
25.4%
16.3%
Source: 2011 Census Table 14-5 Ethnicity
Area
White
Mixed
Asian or Asian British
Black or Black British
Chinese or other
Bicester (Town)
93.3%
1.9%
3.2%
1.3%
0.3%
Bicester (Wider Area)
94.4%
2.0%
3.0%
1.8%
0.4%
Cherwell District
92.2%
1.8%
4.3%
1.4%
0.4%
Oxfordshire
90.9%
2.0%
4.8%
1.7%
0.5%
England
85.4%
2.3%
7.8%
3.5%
1.0% Source: 2011 Census
Population projections for the wider area (at district, regional and county levels) are shown in Table 14-6. Analysis of five year increments, as shown in Table 14-6, shows change over time between 2011 and 2031 for Cherwell District, the South East and for England as a whole. Table 14-6 Population Forecast
2011-2016
2011-2021
2011-2026
2011-2031
% change
% change
% change
% change
England
3.6
7.3
10. 9
14. 3
South East
3.9
8.0
12. 1
15. 9
Cherwell
3.7
7.5
11. 1
14. 4
Source: Office of National Statistics, Population Projections
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 264
14.4.2 Economy The existing economic function of the Masterplan Site is primarily agricultural and the impacts in this context are covered within Chapter 12 (Land Use and Agriculture). Home Farm, situated eat of the Site, includes the conversion and extension of its outbuildings into ‘The Courtyard’ which accommodates the following businesses:
Pea Green: Sports Physiotherapy Clinic
Hill Partnerships (Western) Ltd, an affordable homes provider
Teslayn Engineering, a specialist American car workshop
UKR Engineering Affairs Ltd, specialising in the application and management of national and international drugs licensing
An economic baseline has been prepared to inform the development of the Masterplan area of North West Bicester (SQW Consultants) (Ref 14-5); key findings from this baseline that are of particular relevance to this Strategic Environmental Report are summarised here.
Employment Table 14-7 sets out economic activity rates, showing that 88.2% of residents are economically active, which is higher than for the Bicester Wider Area, Cherwell District, Oxfordshire and for England as a whole. Table 14-7 Economic Activity Rates
Number of working age residents economically active
Percentage of total population economically active
Percentage of the working age population economically active
Bicester (Town)
18,225
59.1%
88.2%
Bicester (Wider Area)
23,841
57.7%
85.8%
Cherwell District
78,160
55.1%
85.2%
350,119
53.6%
81.8%
27,183,134
51.3%
79.2%
Oxfordshire England
Source: SQW Analysis of 2011 Census Data
Characteristics of the employment base are shown in Table 14-8. For both Bicester Town and Bicester Wider Area the greatest proportion of residents are found within the ‘Professional Occupations’ and ‘Associate Professional and Technical Occupations’ categories, although figures in the former category are lower than found at District, County and country wide level. Conversely, 10.3% of NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 265
Bicester Town residents work in the ‘Sales and Customer Service Occupations’ category, which is higher than the proportion found at other scales.
1. Managers, directors and senior officials
2. Professional occupations
3. Associate professional & technical occupations
4. Administrative & secretarial occupations
5. Skilled trades occupations
6. Caring, leisure & other service occupations 7. Sales & customer service occupations
8. Process plant & machine operatives
9. Elementary occupations
Table 14-8 Employment Characteristics
Bicester (Town)
11.1%
15.5%
13.8%
12.5%
11.2%
7.8%
10.3%
7.2%
10.7%
Bicester (Wider Area)
12.0%
15.5%
15.6%
12.1%
11.2%
7.6%
9.4%
6.6%
10.0%
Cherwell
11.6%
16.7%
13.1%
11.3%
11.8%
8.4%
8.8%
7.8%
10.6%
Oxfordshire
12.0%
22.7%
13.6%
10.3%
10.7%
8.3%
6.9%
5.7%
9.7%
South-East
12.3%
18.7%
13.8%
11.5%
11.1%
9.3%
7.9%
5.7%
9.7%
England
10.9%
17.5%
12.8%
11.5%
11.4%
9.3%
8.4%
7.2%
11.1%
Source: SQW Analysis of 2011 Census Data
Key findings identified by SQW as part of the economic baseline in relation to employment by sector are that:
Over-represented sectors in Bicester include manufacturing (11.82% of total employees), public administration and defence (10.71%) and wholesale and retail trade (22.47%);
Of those sectors identified as potential growth sectors, logistics currently represents 13% of total employment in Bicester Town (compared to 7% for Cherwell District, 5% for Oxfordshire and 6% for England as a whole).
Business Start-Up Activity Since 2008, business start-ups and closures have been shown through published statistics relating to business births, deaths and survival rates (previously statistics relating to VAT registrations and de-registrations was used). In relation to business start-up activity, SQW data shows that Cherwell District has 681.9 active enterprises per 10,000 working population and 64.9 enterprise births per 10,000 NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 266
working age population, which is comparable to the region (SouthEast) and County proportions. Figure 14-2 shows business survival rates for enterprises ‘born’ in 2006 – the figure shows that whilst the survival rate is lower for Cherwell than for Oxfordshire as a whole, the District still performs better than at wider region and country levels. The sub-region referred to in the figure is based on commuter flows and is explained in more detail within the Economic Strategy for NW Bicester (Ref 144). Figure 14-2 Five Year Business Survival Rates – Enterprises Born in 2006
14.4.3 Unemployment and Benefits The proportion of the working age population which is unemployed in Bicester Town is 2.41% (average rate across the five Town wards), compared to 4.4% for Cherwell District, 5.6% for Oxfordshire as a whole, 6.2% for the South East and 7.7% for the national average (2013 Annual Population Estimate. Figure 10-3 portrays the breakdown in types of benefit claims. Both the proportion of Job Seeker Allowance claimants, Employment Support Allowance claimants and incapacity Claimants are lower for the Bicester Wider Area than the average for Cherwell District and significantly lower than for England.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 267
Figure14-3 Benefit Claimants expressed as a proportion of the working age (16-64) within the Bicester Area, Cherwell District and Great Britain
6
Per cent of population
5 4 Bicester Wider Area 3
Cherwell England
2 1 0 Job seekers allowance
Incapacity
Disabled
Other income
Source: Claimant Count, May 2013, www.nomisweb.co.uk
Focusing specifically on Job Seekers Allowance (JSA) as an indication of unemployment, within the Bicester Wider Area, there has been a general increase in the number of people claiming this benefit for longer than six months: ninety claimants registered for longer than six months in December 11 and this number has decreased to fifty claimants in December 2013. In terms of residents within the Bicester Wider Area claiming for over twelve months, there has been a slight decrease in the number of people claiming for this period with twenty-five claimants registered for more than twelve months in December 2013 in comparison to thirty claimants in December 2011.
14.4.4 Housing The following points summarise accommodation type and tenure within the Bicester Wider Area in comparison to wider spatial areas as interpreted from Census Data 2001:
Bicester Wider Area includes a smaller proportion of flat/maisonette/apartments (7.9%), in comparison to 11.2% within Cherwell District and 16% for Oxfordshire.
There is a higher proportion of owner-occupied dwellings in the Bicester Wider Area (71.1%) in comparison to 69.3% for Cherwell District and 65.5% for Oxfordshire.
There is a lower proportion of socially rented housing within the Bicester Wider Area: 10.9% of housing is rented from the council
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 268
or other social landlords, in comparison to 12.1% within Cherwell District and 14.2% in Oxfordshire.
A lower proportion of privately rented housing within the Bicester Wider Area: 15.7% of housing tenure in comparison to 16.2% within Cherwell District and 17.5% within Oxfordshire.
Table 14-9 and Tableable 14-10 highlight quantities of housing type and tenure that have been included for the purposes of the impact assessment: Table 14-9 Housing Type
Bicester Wider Area (%) (Quantity in Brackets) Unshared accommodation House/bungalow
99.99 (16,274) 92.0 (14,976)
Flat/maisonette/apartment
7.9 (1,283)
Mobile/temporary structure
0.1 (21)
Shared accommodation
0.01 (2) Source: Census Data 2011
Table 14-10
Housing Tenure
Bicester Wider Area (%) (Quantity in Brackets) Owns outright
25.2 (3,977)
Owns with a mortgage/loan
45.9 (7,256)
Shared ownership
0.6 (88)
Rented from council
2.1 (327)
Other social rented
8..8 (1,398)
Private rented
15.7 (2,476)
Living rent free
1.8 (277) Source: Census Data 2011
Housing for the Elderly Cherwell’s Housing Strategy for Older People (2010-2015) (Ref 14-9) prioritises providing and supporting preventative support services, increasing the provision of older peoples’ specialist housing, improving the provision of information and advice and ensuring new housing developments meet the needs of older people now and in future.
Housing Need and Affordability A Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) (December 2012) (Ref 14-10) has been produced by B.Line Housing Information on NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 269
behalf of Cherwell District Council as part of the Housing Evidence Base that informs the emerging Cherwell Local Plan. The SHMA identifies the affordable housing requirement, including the level of need and type (size and tenure) of housing required in Cherwell District. The SHMA has been informed by a vast range of data including population projections, local salaries, employment statistics, house prices and housing register data. The SHMA builds upon the Housing Needs Estimates produced by B.Line Housing Information (June 2009) on behalf of Cherwell District Council and calculates the gross and net needs for affordable housing based on how prohibitive property prices and private rental costs were at the time of the study. Both of these statistics were compared against the affordable annual housing supply to provide the annual additional need estimated to be 1,017 properties (see Table 14-11).
Table 14-11
Estimated Net Housing Need per Year (2012) Annual Need
Gross need – based on entry level prices to buy
1,268
Affordable supply – general needs and supported lets and low cost sales
437
Gross need – based on costs of private renting
623
Affordable supply – general needs and supported lets and low cost sales
437
Total annual estimated need
831
186
1017 Source: Cherwell DC
14.4.5 Education Education services span from pre-school and nursery provision to universities and adult education.
Day nurseries Nursery and pre-school provision can broadly be split into two types of services. Provision for 0 to 2 year olds is mainly through the commercial sector. This can take place in a range of settings including child minders as well as part-time and full-time day care. Provision for 3 to 4 year olds involves part-time places within or associated with primary school, or service from the private sector. Day nursery provision within Bicester includes some seven private facilities together with eight of the primary schools in Bicester offering nursery classes. As well as day nurseries in Bicester town centre, there is also some provision in the settlements surrounding NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 270
Bicester including Fringford Pre-school Play Group in Fringford, and Chesterton Play Group in Chesterton.
Primary Schools There are twelve primary schools within the Bicester Wider Area (see ‘Education’ map Drawing 14-1), of which nine are within the settlement of Bicester itself. The closest of these to the Masterplan site are found within the wards of Bicester West and Bicester North, plus Chesterton Church of England Primary School which is located within the ward of Amrosden and Chesterton; nearest schools to the site are as follows:
King’s Meadow Primary School (Bicester West)
Brookside Primary School (Bicester West)
St Mary’s Roman Catholic Primary (Bicester West)
Southwold County Primary School (Bicester North)
Bure Park Primary School (Bicester North)
Chesterton Church of England Primary School (Amrosden and Chesterton)
According to Annual Schools Census data (2012), the primary schools listed above have a surplus capacity of 16% (equivalent to 318 places). Only one primary school in proximity to the site – Bure Park Primary School – is operating at full capacity. For primary schools within the Bicester Wider Area, there is a surplus capacity of 11% (equivalent to 422 spaces).
Secondary Schools Demand for secondary schools is usually spread across a wider area than that for primary schools and day nurseries. Secondary school aged pupils tend to travel further to school than those of primary school age. In addition, the range of specialist subjects taught in secondary schools naturally means that they are larger institutions with wider catchment areas than primary schools. Therefore, it is appropriate to consider secondary school capacity across Oxfordshire County as a whole as well as that of the nearest facilities to the site. For Oxfordshire as a whole, Annual Schools Census (2012) data shows there is a 16.5% surplus capacity across the thirty-three secondary schools. The closest secondary schools to the Masterplan site (shown on Drawing 14-1) are the Bicester Community College and Cooper School. Between them, these schools have a surplus capacity of 614 places. As well as local authority secondary schools, there are also several academies in Oxfordshire. The most recent data available shows: NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 271
the North Oxfordshire Academy which opened in 2007 has 19% surplus capacity (based on pupil admission numbers stated in Oxfordshire Council’s admissions information);
the Oxford Academy which opened in 2008 has surplus capacity of 35% (also based on pupil admission numbers stated in Oxfordshire Council’s admissions information);
the Culham European School Academy opened in September 2011 in Abingdon. The European School Culham was an existing school catering for children of staff at EU institutions and the children of fee paying bilingual and multinational families in South Oxfordshire that has been brought into the mainstream state funded English system as an innovative, co-educational Academy, as far as possible retaining the ethos of a European school. The academy specialises in Languages and Science, will provide education for 3 to 18 year olds, and has an overall capacity of 980 places. Admission numbers for Reception class and subsequent year groups was sixty pupils per year; admission numbers for Years 12 and 13 were planned at forty pupils, although ultimately Year 12 will have a capacity of 100 pupils.
Discussions with the Education Department of Oxfordshire County Council suggest there is a growing demand for school places at the primary level resulting from increases in fertility, and both at the Primary and Secondary as a result of the economic downturn of 2008-2009 increasing the proportion of families using state education. Discussions with the Education department of Oxfordshire County Council suggests there is a growing demand for school places at the primary level resulting from increases in fertility, and both at the Primary and Secondary as a result of the economic downturn of 2008-2009 increasing the proportion of families using state education.
14.4.6 Other Community Facilities Health Facilities Existing capacity and quality of provision is discussed in the Human Health Assessment (Chapter 13).
Sports and Recreation Drawing 14-2 shows sports and recreation venues within the Bicester Wider Area and those nearby that are likely to be affected by the proposal. The Bicester Sports Association provides sports facilities at Oxford Road, Bicester and nearby in nearby Chesterton. These facilities are used by local sports clubs who accommodate a wide range of ages in NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 272
their playing membership. The field sports include cricket, football (junior and senior) and rugby union. Built facilities include the Bicester Leisure Centre (formerly the Bicester and Ploughley Sports Centre (see Drawing 14-2). The centre has undergone refurbishment offering a wide range of facilities for casual and regular users such as a Health Fitness suite, 25 metre swimming pool, Play n’ Teach family pool with interactive water features, squash courts, activity halls and outdoor floodlit all-weather pitches. There is also a comprehensive keep-fit programme with over 30 classes to choose from. The centre also includes a registered creche and hosts a variety of sports clubs including martial arts, swimming and gymnastics. Further extension and refurbishment of the facility was undertaken in 2009 to including tenpin bowling. The Cooper School Sports Facility is used by Cooper School during the day and managed by Bicester and Ploughley Sports Centre in the evenings and at weekends. The facility is situated adjacent to the Cooper School (see Drawing 14-2) on Churchill Road and includes a performance hall with theatre-style tiered seating, outdoor floodlit all weather pitches and an activity hall. Other sports clubs located in Bicester include those at Garth Park, a 2.74 hectare site identified in the Open Space, Sport and Recreational Facilities Needs Assessment Audit and Strategy (2011) (PMP) (Ref 14- 11) as the only ‘park and garden’ in Cherwell providing opportunity for various informal recreation and community events. The Bicester Bowls Club and Bicester Tennis Club are both based in Garth Park. Other clubs within the Bicester Wider Area are Bicester Hockey Club (Coopers School) and Bicester Rugby Football Club, (adjacent to Kings End Hospital). Langford KEA Football is also located behind the KEA Social Club. Other outdoors sports associated with Bicester including hunting, fishing and golf. Bicester is an established hunting centre and Bicester with Waddesdon Chase hold an annual point to point and organises hunting trials and horse shows. In terms of fishing both the River Ray, the River Cherwell and other neighbouring rivers which flow down to the Thames can be fished and also some lakes. There is an established angling society at Bicester which rents six miles of stocked water of the River Ray. For golfers, the nearest venue in or around Bicester is the Bicester Country Club (see Drawing 14-2).
Play Areas Bicester Town Council is responsible for all the play areas and the majority of open spaces in the town. An Open Space, Sport and Recreational Facilities Needs Assessment Audit and Strategy prepared NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 273
by PMP (Ref 14-11) identifies fifty-eight facilities provided for children and young people in Bicester; this includes areas such as equipped play areas, ball courts, skateboard areas and teenage shelters with a primary purpose to provide opportunities for play and social interaction involving children and young people. The Audit also identifies single facilities near to Ardley, Stoke Lyne, Bucknell, near to Caversfield, Launton, Piddington and Wendlebury.
Community Centres There are four community centres in Bicester. These are: Bicester East Community Centre; Langford Village Community Centre, Southwold Community Centre, and West Bicester. These centres provide a location for a number of groups to operate from. For example, Bicester Community Church uses Bicester East Community Centre to run toddler groups and over 50s groups. As part of the Pioneer Square development in Bicester, a further community building is due to be opened by summer 2015. Bicester Library is the only library facility within the Bicester Wider Area. This facility is open six days a week and offers internet access. The next nearest libraries to the Masterplan site are 17 kilometres away in Deddington (to the north west) and 17 kilometres in Kidlington (to the south west).
Other Open Spaces There are a number of open spaces in Bicester, used both formally and informally, including Purslane Drive and Shakespeare Drive Woods which are in close proximity to the Masterplan Site. Collectively, these areas offer approximately 10ha of open space and both of these spaces are categorised as ‘natural/semi-natural greenspace’ in Cherwell District Council’s Green Space Strategy. The majority of open spaces surrounding the Masterplan Site are categorised as ‘natural and semi-natural space’ and include a number of footpaths.
14.4.7 Crime Crime levels for Bicester (Table 14-12) are average in comparison to national levels. Analysis of crime statistics highlight the crime rate in Bicester Town is significantly higher than the wider Bicester settlement area and the Rural North. This reflects a much higher registration of anti-social behaviour and a higher rate of vehicle crime and burglary, generally characteristic of the more urban areas.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 274
Table 14-12
Crime rate Bicester area
Crime per 1000 people Thames Valley Police Area
Violence
Antisocial behaviour
Burglary
All crime
Bicester Town
0.5
3.2
6.3
16.6
0
0.1
0.6
3.1
3.6
0.2
0.1
0
0.8
2.2
2.4
0.5
0
0.3
0.4
1.3
2.9
Robbery
Vehicle crime
0.9
0
Bicester East
0.5
Bicester West Bicester Rural North
Source: Crime Statistics: http://maps.police.uk/view/thames-valley/ (August 2010)
14.4.8 Tourism Bicester Village has strong international links with eight other associate outlet shopping villages in mainland Europe, all exponents of high-end retailing opportunities. Bicester Village has sought to connect with other high-end heritage attractions including Blenheim Place (29 kilometres northwest) and Waddesdon Manor (19 kilometres southeast), but also luxury accommodation such as Le Manoir aux Quatre Saisons (29 km southeast) and Shakespeare House (20 km northeast). The proximity of Bicester Village and other regional assets has ensured there is a strong provision of high value visitor attractions that generate significant economic stimulus. Bicester has a historic core with a good range of heritage building such as the Old Vicarage, Bicester House, and St Edburgs Church. Other buildings such as the Dovecote and the town’s old Lock-Up also add to the character of the town and its distinctive appeal. Collectively these offer a degree of visitor interest albeit more local in appeal. In addition the Market Square in the town still holds a traditional market-day every Friday, as well as a Farmer’s Market on the second Thursday of every month with other speciality markets throughout the year. Bicester Town Council host or support a number of other events, particularly through the Summer months. These include music and picnic events such as Proms in the Park and an annual Jazz Festival in Garth Park. There are a number of other established accommodation facilities (Table 14-7) within the Bicester area, serving both business and leisure tourism markets. These include hotels/inns, guesthouses and farmhouse bed and breakfasts and self-catered units:
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 275
Table 14-7 Visitor Accommodation
Accommodation Type
North Oxfordshire Registered Accommodation
Hotels and Inns
Bicester Hotel, Golf and Spa
Bignell Park Hotel
AVA House bed and breakfast
Weston Grounds Farm
Farmhouse Bed and Breakfasts
Manor Farm
Self-catered units
Grange Farm Country Cottages
Grooms Cottage
Stoke Lyne Farm Cottages
Guest Houses Bed and Breakfasts
(Source: www.visitnorthoxfordshire.com)
14.4.9 Public Rights of Way There are two PRoW that run through the Masterplan Site, which form part of the same path (path numbers taken from the Definitive Map are 148/4 and 129/9). The wider Bicester area has also been the subject of further investigative work by Oxfordshire County Council to retrofit a series of walking and cycling greenway routes. This includes proposed widening around Caversfield, widening through Bure Park Nature Reserve and plugging the walking cycling gaps to connect existing walking and cycling links.
14.4.10
Other Development Proposals
Bicester is an area of significant development interest with a number of urban development schemes proposed either within the existing settlement boundary or seeking to extend the urban area in other directions. Proposals include mixed use schemes, containing a mixture of housing and commercial land uses but significantly their own provision of community facilities and services to accommodate an anticipated increase in population. The need to consider the cumulative impacts of the construction and functional stages of the proposal must account for the wider development context, both on the potential pressures on local infrastructure and other supporting services and the potential employment demands from the locality. In terms of planned future development of the settlement, it is important to note the following significant schemes at various stages of the development process:
A strategic housing site of 1,631 homes at South West Bicester is under construction, including a health village, sports provision,
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 276
employment land, a hotel, a new secondary school, a community hall and a ‘local centre’.
A development of 1,900 homes and 104,000m2 employment land at Graven Hill has been approved subject to a s.106 agreement.
A planning application has been submitted for a 720 home development at SW Bicester.
Outline permission for a 46,200m2 employment site at Bicester Business Park, including relocation of a Tesco store was granted in 2010.
The first phase of Bicester town centre redevelopment has opened, including a superstore, cinema and smaller retail units. Phase 2 is proposed in the emerging Local Plan.
A 19,800m2 employment site has been identified in the emerging Local Plan at Bicester Gateway.
A 26,400m2 employment site has been identified in the emerging Local Plan at NE Bicester Business Park.
Bicester Village Phase 4 has been approved, subject to a s.106 agreement.
14.4.11
Sensitive Receptors
Construction There are a number of receptors which would be sensitive to the potential sources of impact resulting from the construction of the proposed development. Sensitive receptors include:
Residents within Bicester Town and Bicester Wider Area
Businesses within Bicester Town and Bicester Wider Are
Cyclists, walkers in proximity to the Masterplan Site
Businesses in both the Bicester Wider Area and the wider region.
It is important to stress that all impacts felt at this stage of the scheme would be short term and temporary in their nature, bringing few permanent adverse impacts to the social and economic environment. It is also likely that many of the potential impacts can be mitigated using best practice guidance. Potential mitigation measures are discussed further in Section15.5.
Operation There are a number of receptors which would be sensitive to the potential sources of impact resulting from the operation of the proposal. Sensitive Receptors include:
Local Residents
Local Businesses
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 277
Local Schools
Community facilities
14.5 Design and Mitigation A number of measures have been identified in order to minimise the potential adverse impacts but also maximise the potential benefits to be gained. These are discussed below. Mitigation measures to reduce potential visual impacts and impacts upon noise are discussed in Chapter 5 Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment and Chapter 9 Noise and Vibration respectively.
14.5.1 Construction A Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) would be implemented to ensure that disruption is kept to a minimum, and careful working practices would be administered during the construction phase. The measures discussed below would be included as part of a CEMP:
Traffic movements would be carefully phased and abnormal loads accompanied by the Police where necessary, to minimise any possible delays and disruption to regular road users, public access, community facilities, residences and businesses, particularly those used by vulnerable groups such as children.
Establish a point of contact for listening to and addressing complaints or problems that is communicated to the general public.
Produce a regular newsletter available in hard copy or via the internet to update the general public and businesses of construction progress. These mediums would also be used to forewarn public of impending construction activities.
A curfew policy would be adopted so as to minimise disturbance for school users, by ensuring construction traffic would not affect local schools during the morning drop off and afternoon collection times.
Any works to the existing highway network along the site access route would be conducted in a manner that would ensure access is maintained to residential properties, businesses and community facilities. Disruption would be kept to a minimum.
Establish pre-employment routes with construction firms to help connect the long-term unemployed with employment opportunities and access to the wider labour market.
Careful consideration would be given to the location and subsequent restoration of any areas of land required temporarily for access, storage and compounds, and other related facilities.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 278
Health and safety issues would be considered paramount during the construction phase.
Register with the Considerate Constructors Scheme.
Source contractors within the locality wherever possible.
Working times implemented on site to minimise impact on residential amenity.
14.5.2 Operation A number of potential sources of impact have been identified during the operation of the proposal. The following mitigation measures would be implemented during this stage:
Careful working practices and regular building maintenance to ensure potential impacts during the function of the development are minimised.
To ensure provision of education facilities within the proposal to accommodate the anticipated education demands of the resident population and positively contribute to the standard of education facilities within OCC as a whole.
To include provision of other community facilities that will promote community interaction, empowerment and community development.
To ensure the proposal includes opportunities for on-site business growth that is aligned to the eco-credentials of the site.
To promote home-working through appropriate infrastructure such as broadband speeds.
To ensure the safety of all user groups along the public routes, maintenance traffic using the access routes and internal roads would observe a low speed.
Planning Obligations: Community Benefit Strategy. A tariff contributions system for community infrastructure that would cover all of the normal S106 items but excludes provision of affordable housing.
Integration of the development with the local public transport network, providing information regarding transport availability in home owner’s/tenant’s start-up packs, and promoting public transport links in property sales.
14.6 Assessment of Effects At the outset of each section, potential sources of impact have been identified and then discussed in further detail. A summary table of impact follows each impact description. NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 279
14.6.1 Construction Effects The potential sources of impact on the socio-economic environment resulting from the proposal are identified as:
Construction disturbances and nuisances – residential amenity may be affected by the construction works;
A potential reduction in public safety due to construction activities;
Local amenity: those travelling into the town centre and passing the construction site may experience a reduction in amenity due to construction activities;
Construction employment generated locally;
Construction staff expenditure may provide new custom for local businesses, particularly accommodation facilities, eateries and convenience retail outlets;
Material sourcing; potential benefits to local suppliers of construction materials if sourced from the local economy;
Sustainable construction techniques and the use of local materials; and
Other Development considerations.
Disturbance and Nuisances There may be short term disturbance and nuisances within Bicester wider area during the construction phase of the proposal. These impacts are discussed in more detail in Chapter 10 (Noise and Vibration) and Chapter 6 (Landscape and Visual Impact), but in the socio-economic context, implies that local users may experience a temporary reduction in amenity. For example, slight increases in noise as a result of construction activities, increased traffic volumes and congestion associated with construction traffic. Table 14-13
Impact overview: Disturbance and Nuisances
Impact
Significance
Notes
Negative
Not significant
The impact on the local community is considered to be negligible, affecting only a relatively small geographic area and temporary in nature
Public Safety Construction works of any kind have the potential to effect public safety. Construction areas would need to be appropriately cordoned and signed to prevent public access and stipulate the necessary safety precautions if entering the site.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 280
Table 14-14
Impact overview: public safety
Impact
Significance
Notes
Negative
Not significant
The impact on the local community is considered to be negligible, affecting only a relatively small geographic area and temporary in nature
Local Amenity The proximity of the wider Bicester settlement means that during the construction phase, there is the potential impact on local amenity including existing walking and cycling routes that circumnavigate the town and the opportunity for informal recreation may contribute to a short-term reduction in amenity, due to construction traffic and site clearance and construction works. Table 14-15
Impact overview: amenity
Impact
Significance
Notes
Negative
Not significant
The impact on the local community is considered to be negligible, affecting only a relatively small geographic area and temporary in nature
Employment The construction of the proposal will provide construction jobs. Working on a basis of 0.7 person years per dwelling (HCA guidelines) (Ref 14-12) and at an indicative rate of 200 dwellings per year, this equates to 140 construction jobs. The Economic Strategy supporting the Masterplan states that ‘the 140 jobs have the potential to be long-term, as building out the Masterplan will provide ongoing future employment opportunities over a period of twenty years or more…the proportion of construction jobs that are long-term will be increased by apprenticeship and other training programmes.’ Table 14-16
Impact overview: employment
Impact
Significance
Notes
Positive
Significant
Job creation resulting from the construction resource demands of the proposal. The labour force that will benefit from this is likely to extend beyond the Bicester Wider Area to the Cherwell DC and beyond.
Local Expenditure The construction costs of the proposal would be significant, with a large proportion of this being made on local contracts. Construction works may also bring indirect benefits for local businesses, particularly eateries and accommodation providers, with local spend associated with site workers. NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 281
Table 14-17
Impact overview: local expenditure
Impact
Significance
Notes
Positive
Significant
Direct and indirect expenditure within the WIZ as a result of the proposal: direct expenditure on construction resources, indirect expenditure on local accommodation and conveniences by the workforce during construction.
Sustainable Construction Techniques In addition to the employment generation potential of the construction process, the design specification of the proposal is likely to encourage the broadening in the skills base of existing skilled construction workers. The Economic Development Strategy for the Masterplan states that ‘construction will provide a significant number of jobs specialising in niche eco building skills’. The proposal will allow existing and future apprentices to learn skills that could generate a step change in the demand for construction materials and the use of construction techniques for a new generation of workers. Table 14-18
Impact overview: skills
Impact
Significance
Notes
Positive
Significant
Potential for existing and future construction workforce to learn new construction skills and materials that can influence the wider construction sector.
14.6.2 Operational Impacts Potential impacts arising from the operational stage of the proposed development relate to the following areas:
Population
Industry of employment and economic growth.
Unemployment levels
Housing availability and type
Education provision
Other community facilities
Crime
Tourism
Open space provision
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 282
Population The NW Bicester Eco-Town Demographic Profile Report (Barton Willmore November 2013) (Ref 14-13) was prepared to provide a greater understanding of the demographic structure of the population that will settle in NW Bicester and how it will assimilate with the existing and wider town. The report uses the Chelmer model to forecast population change; the model results forecast a total change in population across the whole Bicester study area of approximately 19,000 people (2011-2052), representing a 44% increase in the population compared to 2011 Census levels. The population of NW Bicester is predicted to grow to 14,000 over this period (with up to a maximum of 6,000 dwellings by 2052). Average household size for NW Bicester is anticipated to reach 2.3 by 2053, compared to an overall Bicester average household size of 2.2 (Barton Willmore 2013). A second population model has been utilised by Oxfordshire County Council – this model, called Popcalc, has presented slightly different population scenarios for both NW Bicester and the wider study area. The two models are based on slightly differing assumptions, however are considered to both represent plausible scenarios for likely population change. The area of difference in terms of final population is in the order of 3%. Barton Willmore (2013) identify some degree of divergence in the projected population of specific age groups between outputs from each model – the Chelmer model projects a slightly higher overall population than Popcalc, with lower levels of population in younger age groups; the Chelmer model also forecasts a greater level of population decline following completion of the scheme. In addition to the above detailed comments regarding forecast population, it is observed that the eco-label for Bicester has the potential on its own to generate greater demand for living in this location and as such could be a contributing factor to further population increase. Table 14-22
Impact Positive
Impact Overview: Population
Significance
Notes
Significant
A significant permanent increase in the population of the Bicester Wider Area is likely to reinforce the vitality and viability of Bicester town centre.
Employment and Economic Growth In order to understand the potential impact on the defined industry of employment and occupation, the potential for employment generation needs to be considered in terms of on-site jobs (resulting from allocated land uses), population-derived jobs (resulting from estimated population increase) and additional potential employment (from home working). NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 283
On-site employment: In order to understand the likely impact on employment and economic growth, the potential for employment generation needs to be considered in terms of on-site jobs (resulting from allocated land uses), population-derived jobs (resulting from estimated population increase) and additional potential employment (from home working). On-site employment: The Masterplan makes provision for some 4,600 jobs to be created on-site, including: at the proposed business park in the SW of the site; local service jobs within the proposed community and business hubs; and home-based jobs. A full overview of the on-site employment generating potential is provided in the following table. Table 14-23
Onsite employment generation
On-site employment Business Park – B1 office
Business Park – B2/B8 commercial
Estimated Job Numbers 1,067
972
Eco-business Centre
99
Employment in hubs
1,033
Energy Centre Building
10
Secondary School
45
Primary School
62
Mixed use in existing farms Homeworking
Comments Assumes four to eight multi-occupied office buildings, sub-divided into a total of thirty units of varying size Assumes approximately thirty units of varying size
Includes office, retail/leisure employment, together with those employed in community roles (doctor, dentist, nurseries etc)
105 1,075
Total
4,468 Source: Economic Strategy for the Masterplan (February 2014)
In addition to on-site jobs, the Masterplan proposal has the potential to create off-site jobs that are still directly related to the ecodevelopment. The Economic Strategy for the Masterplan site refers to the Cherwell Economic Analysis Study (August 2012) (Ref 14-14), which estimates that 200 jobs are generated for every additional 1,000 population. For NW Bicester, therefore, where the site will NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 284
accommodate a population of approximately 14,000 people when fully developed (i.e. 6,000 homes), it can be expected to create – without additional stimulus – around 2,800 new consumer service jobs (NW Bicester Economic Development Strategy 2014). Whilst a number of these will be included in the community hub and service facilities provided as part of the eco-development, a significant proportion (approximately 1,000) will be created to serve the additional demand of the residents and businesses and may be located elsewhere in Bicester. In terms of employment creation, this has been summarised in the following table: Table 14-24
Total Employment Generation
Operational Employment
Number of Jobs
On-site jobs
Over 4,600
Local service jobs
1,000
Jobs in firms in target sectors
400
Source: Economic Strategy for the Masterplan (February 2014)
Table 14-25
Impact Overview: Employment
Impact
Significance
Notes
Positive
Key Significant
The proposal will generate a significant number of jobs within the Bicester Wider Area; both directly through employment-related land uses and the potential to offer home working and indirectly through population derived local service jobs. It is also reasonable to suggest that the proposal will generate a significant amount of new investment not just within the Bicester Wider Area but also further afield in Cherwell District, Oxfordshire and the wider subregion.
Unemployment Levels The proposal has the potential to generate employment for those registered unemployed and potentially the long-term unemployed. The proposal will generate a range of skill demands and the extent to which the proposal will positively impact on unemployment levels will depend on the connectivity between emerging businesses and the unemployed cohort. There is an opportunity to maximise the employment benefits through appropriate mitigation. Table 14-6 Impact overview: Unemployment
Impact
Significance
Notes
Positive
Significant
Potential to link those unemployed and in particular the long term unemployed with permanent employment opportunities.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 285
Housing Availability and Type The proposal incorporates a range of housing types and tenures. The mix of properties will be varied and include a full range of one, two, three, four and five bed housing; 30% of the housing stock will be affordable housing in line with Cherwell District Council policy and PPS1. Specialist housing (for example extra care accommodation) will be incorporated in the development where there is an identified need. Overall, the range of housing – from one bedroom flats to five bedroom dwellings – is considered to have a positive impact in promoting diverse, mixed communities. Further, the design specification for housing (minimum Code for Sustainable Homes Level 5) will increase the proportion of local housing stock. Table 14-28
Impact Overview: Housing
Impact
Significance
Notes
Positive
Significant
Expansion in the provision and range of affordable and private housing. Greater proportion of homes within the area of Code for Sustainable Homes, Level 5
Education The potential effect on local schools is dependent on the number of families to be attracted to the Masterplan Site and to the Bicester Wider Area as a result of the proposed development. Table 14-29 below sets out results of population modelling for NW Bicester in relation to primary and secondary school age children. The table sets out the results for the two population models that have been used (both the Chelmer model and Popcalc), shows the forecast peak year for each age group and shows numbers of children within each age group for both the baseline trajectory and upper range trajectory scenarios. Table 14-29
Primary (410)
Peak Year Number Secondary (1115)
Peak Years for Primary and Secondary Aged Children
Baseline Trajectory
Upper Range Trajectory
Chelmer Model
Popcalc
Chelmer Model
Popcalc
2050/51
2052/53
2040/41
2042/43
1,317
1,393
1,399
1,482
Baseline Trajectory
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Upper Range Trajectory
Page 286
Peak Year Number
Chelmer Model
Popcalc
Chelmer Model
Popcalc
2052/53
2052/53
2046/47
2047/48
885
1,019
915
1,114
Source: Barton Willmore 2013
Considering the capacity analysis of the schools within Bicester Town, the nearest secondary schools, consultation with the OCC’s education department, and other development considerations that have include an education component, the Masterplan proposal is likely to have a positive effect on the community. There will be sufficient capacity to accommodate the increase in children of pupil age, and the wider environmental and sustainability principles advocated by the proposal are likely to generate positive educational spin-offs to include behavioural change and a reduction in carbon emissions. Table 14-30
Impact overview: Education
Impact
Significance
Notes
Positive
Significant
Expansion in the capacity and quality of education facilities in the CIZ and WIZ. The education facility is likely to positively contribute to the education and wider development of young people attending the facilities on site.
Other Community Facilities The proposal includes other community facilities that are considered to generate a range of wider socio-economic benefits to its residents of the Masterplan Site but also to the wider community of the Bicester Wider Area. These are:
the provision of four new community halls
Development of two mixed-use community hubs including facilities such as pub, small supermarket and small-scale retail uses.
Table 14-31
Impact overview: Other Community Facilities
Impact
Significance
Notes
Positive
Significant
Community facilities designed primarily benefit residents within the Bicester Wider Area and specifically within the site itself but offer significant opportunity for maintaining and enhancing community well-being on a broader scale.
Crime The design of the proposal has been developed to minimise the risk of crime occurring. Involvement from the local constabulary in the development of the masterplanning process have resulted in the NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 287
impact of the proposal on overall crime levels not considered significant. Table 14-32
Impact overview: Crime
Impact
Significance
Notes
Neutral
Not significant
The potential for crime to occur has been minimised during the design development of the proposal.
Tourism The Masterplan development has the potential by itself to act as a tourist attraction – the Eco Bicester Demonstration Building at Garth Park has attracted over 3,000 visitors, making it one of the leading visitor attractions for Bicester. Table 14-33
Impact overview: Tourism
Impact
Significance
Notes
Positive
Significant
The proposal has the potential to generate for exemplar delivery of the eco-town concept but specifically through the eco-business centre activities.
Open Space and Play Areas The proposal incorporates a significant amount of open space, which includes:
A central green with play area and amenities
A network of local play areas
Green Loop ‘adventure’ walking and leisure routes
A Country Park
Enhanced river corridors
Nature Reserve
Public sports pitches
Allotments and orchards accessible to everyone
Open space included within the proposal will therefore result in a net gain for the wider Bicester area. Table 14-34
Open space
Impact
Significance
Notes
Positive
Significant
Net gain in the quantity of open space within the defined Bicester settlement boundary.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 288
14.7 Cumulative Effects Construction The baseline research identified a number of other significant housing and employment related developments within Bicester that should be taken into account as part of the cumulative assessment. Two of these developments have received planning permission and/or are under construction and would be relevant for inclusion here, namely:
a development of 1,900 homes and 104,000m2 employment land at Graven Hill has been approved subject to a s.106 agreement.
the strategic housing development of 1,631 homes at South West Bicester that is under construction, including a health village, sports provision, employment land, a hotel, a new secondary school, a community hall and a ‘local centre’.
Outline permission for a 46,200m2 employment site at Bicester Business Park, including relocation of a Tesco store was granted in 2010.
Bicester Village Phase 4 has been approved, subject to a s.106 agreement.
The above schemes, combined with the Masterplan proposal therefore have the potential to contribute to an adverse cumulative impact from a construction perspective in terms of disturbance and nuisance from construction activities, potential impact on key local amenities and potential demand and supply for construction materials and workforce. Table 14-35
Impact Overview - Construction
Impact
Significance
Notes
Negative
Significant
Potential for the proposal to generate an adverse cumulative impact if the construction programme of other significant developments is not taken into account or adequate mitigation measures not included.
Operation The prevalence of a number of other significant development proposals within and around Bicester will generate a significant combined increase in the critical mass of Bicester and the services and facilities that are contained within it. The Masterplan proposal includes for new nursery, school and community provision which would adequately cater for the education requirements of the NW part of Bicester; the strategic housing development at South West Bicester also includes school and community provision. NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 289
The provision of employment within the Masterplan site, together with that planned at Bicester Gateway, the NE Bicester Business Park and as part of the Bicester Village Phase 4 development will have a significant beneficial impact upon the local and wider area. The Economic Development Strategy for the Masterplan Site (Ref 14-4) emphasises that the planned scale and mix of jobs growth on site cannot be guaranteed and that over the course of the Masterplan build-out, jobs growth will naturally be subject to market forces. The Cherwell Proposed Submission Local Plan therefore ensures that there would be sufficient allocation at alternative sites. Table 14-36
Cumulative Impacts - Operation
Impact
Significance
Notes
Positive
Significant
Significant increase in critical mass and expanded provision in the provision of facilities and services.
14.8 Summary and Conclusion The above assessment has considered the potential impacts of the construction and operational stages of the proposal. It is important to recognise that the potential impacts identified during the construction phase of the proposal will, with the exception of employment (considered 70 FTE up until 2026) be short term and temporary in their nature. With the implementation of identified mitigation measures, the overall adverse impact of this phase would be minimised. Potential impacts during the function of the proposal will depend on the perception of those identified receptors. For this reason, all potential impacts have been identified and mitigation measures proposed to minimise these impacts. Overall, it is considered that with the appropriate mitigation measures, the potential impacts of the proposal on the defined social and economic environment would be positive.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 290
15
Waste
15.1 Introduction The proposed development will result in the generation of solid waste from demolition, excavation and construction (referred to this chapter as CD&E waste), and the operation of the site due to the residential and commercial uses of the site (referred to in this section as operational waste). Contaminated wastes are dealt with under Chapter 11, Contaminated Land.
Introduction to waste management Waste is defined in Article 3 of the European Framework Directive on waste (2008/98/EC) as “any substance or object which the holder discards or intends or is required to discard”, where the term:
‘waste holder’ is defined as the producer of the waste or the natural or legal person who is in possession of the waste
‘waste producer’ is defined as anyone whose activities produce waste (original waste producer) or anyone who carries out preprocessing, mixing or other operations resulting in a change in the nature or composition of this waste.
Waste can cause harm to the environment through its treatment and final disposal, and therefore, effective waste management should follow the principles of the waste hierarchy shown on Figure 15-1 below:
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 291
Figure 15-1
Waste Hierarchy
Source: Waste Management Plan for England, DEFRA, Dec 2013
The assessment will consider the impact on the environment as a result of the generation of this waste and will detail measures to mitigate these impacts. Demolition waste – The existing site is largely undeveloped land, however, it is anticipated that there will be a small amount of demolition of existing buildings present on site. Construction and excavation waste – As the existing site is largely undeveloped land, it is anticipated that material waste likely to arise from the construction and excavation phases will consist of hard and inert materials, soils and stones, plastics, packaging (wooden and plastic), insulation material, miscellaneous metals, canteen and office waste. Operational waste – As the development is predominantly residential, most waste generated during operation will be household waste, in addition to small quantities of waste from the commercial and public facilities. Two key documents will be submitted as part of the planning application and will be referred to in this Chapter:
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 292
Preliminary Site Waste Management Plan (SWMP) The Site Waste Management Plan (SWMP) is used to plan, implement, monitor and review waste minimisation and management on construction sites. As of 1st December 2013, the Site Waste Management Plans Regulations 2008 were repealed. However, the implementation of a SWMP remains industry Best Practice. A SWMP is also a requirement of PPS10: Planning for Sustainable Waste Management (Ref 15-1) and supports the requirements of PPS: Eco-Towns – A supplement to PPS1 (Ref 15-2). The SWMP is used to record how waste is reduced, reused, recycled and disposed of on a construction site. This effectively means:
Recording decisions taken to prevent waste through concept and design.
Forecast waste produced on site.
Plan how to reduce, reuse and then recover the forecasted waste.
Implement and monitor the planned activity.
Review the SWMP and record lessons learnt.
The SWMP is a live document and is updated regularly during the course of the project. Preparing a SWMP at planning stage facilitates the identification and implementation of waste minimisation at the design stage and reuse and recycling opportunities during on site operations, reducing the quantities of construction waste sent to landfill. Preparing a SWMP also encourages the review of current waste reduction and recovery practice levels, highlighting areas where Good and Best Practice can be achieved.
Sustainable Waste and Resources Plan (SWRP) Under ET 19.1 of PPS: Eco-Towns supplement to PPS1, Eco-town planning applications should include a sustainable waste and resources plan (SWRP).. This should cover both domestic and nondomestic waste, which:
Set targets for residual waste levels, recycling levels and landfill diversion, all of which should be substantially more ambitious than the 2007 national Waste Strategy targets for 2020*; it should be demonstrated how these targets will be achieved, monitored and maintained;
Establishes how the development will be designed so as to facilitate the achievement of these targets, including the provision of waste storage arrangements which allow for the
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 293
separate collection of each of the seven priority waste materials as identified in the Waste Strategy for England 2007 (Ref 15-3).
Provides evidence that consideration has been given to the use of locally generated waste as a fuel source for combined heat and power (CHP) generation for the eco-town.
Sets out how developers will ensure that no construction, demolition and excavation waste is sent to landfill, except for those types of waste where landfill is the least environmentally damaging option.
*Note: The Waste Strategy 2007 proposes national targets for waste for 2020 as follows:
Residual waste reduction per person (amount left after reuse, recycling and composting) – from 370kg in 2005 to 225 in 2020.
Household re-use, recycling and composting – from 27% in 2005 to 50% in 2020.
Residual waste recovery (recycling, composting and energy recovery) from 28% in 2005 to 75% in 2020.
15.2 Regulatory Framework The framework for the assessment is derived from a combination of national, regional and local waste and policies and measures of which the key elements are:
Meet and exceed the Landfill Directive diversion targets for biodegradable municipal waste.
Increase diversion from landfill of non-municipal waste.
Decouple waste growth (in all sectors) from economic growth and put more emphasis on waste prevention and re-use.
Details are listed in Table 15-2: Table15-2 Waste Regulatory and Policy Framework
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester development Masterplan Response
EU Landfill Directive (Directive 1999/31/EC on the landfill of waste)
Establishes a framework for the management of waste across the European Community. It also defines certain terms, such as 'waste', 'recovery' and 'disposal', to ensure that a uniform approach is taken across the EU. Furthermore, it is an instrument for driving waste up the hierarchy through waste minimisation and increased levels of recycling and recovery.
An assessment will be carried out against the context of the Schedule 10 of the Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations (EPR) 2010 (through
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 294
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester development Masterplan Response
Sets out a number of procedures and criteria for construction, excavation and operational waste acceptance at landfills, including targets for the progressive reduction of biodegradable municipal waste (BMW) being sent for disposal in landfill.
which the Landfill Directive is implemented) and will assume that at a minimum, the targets in this Schedule will be met.
The principles set up for the acceptance of hazardous and non-hazardous waste at relevant landfills includes ensuring that the waste will not endanger human health and the environment and satisfies the Waste Acceptance Criteria (WAC). They also set strict requirements for the acceptance of certain stable, non-reactive hazardous waste into non-hazardous waste landfills. The Waste Framework Directive (Directive 2006/12/EC on waste)
The Waste Framework Directive (WFD; Directive 2006/12/EC on waste) contains the definition of waste. This definition is used to establish whether a material is a waste or not. In December 2008, the new WFD (Directive 2008/98/EC) came into force, amending some articles of the current WFD. Member States have until December 2010 for implementing the new WFD; at that time, Directive 2006/12/EC (and others) will be repealed. Amongst others, changes that will come into place include:
Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2010
The setting of recycling targets for nonhazardous construction and demolition waste (70% by 2020).
A provision which would enable the European Commission to adopt EU-wide end-of-waste criteria for specified wastes. A waste specified in this way would cease to be waste when it has undergone a recovery operation and complies with the criteria set by the Commission.
The obligation for Member States to set up waste prevention plans within five years from the adoption of the Directive.
The Environmental Permitting Regulations (EPR) introduced a permitting and compliance regime, which deliver many of the requirements of the European Environmental Directives and of national
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Recommendations will be provided detailing the end destination of construction, excavation waste.
The WFD will be implemented through the Environmental Protection Act 1990 (as amended), the Duty of Care and Carriers and Brokers regimes and regulations and the Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2010.
A SWRP covering construction, excavation and operational waste will be produced. This will be carried Page 295
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester development Masterplan Response
policy.
out against the context of the Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2010.
The Schedules to the Regulations identify precise requirements, article by article, for each Directive which must be delivered through the permitting system. Each Directive covered by the Regime has a specific schedule. The most relevant for this project are:
The Hazardous Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2005, Statutory Instrument 2005 No. 894,
and 2009 amendment SI 507
Part A installations and Part A mobile plant (the Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control Directive) - Schedule 7.
Domestic Part B installations and Part B mobile plant - Schedule 8.
The Waste Framework Directive Schedule 9.
The Landfill Directive - Schedule 10.
The Hazardous Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2005 (HWR 2005) were amended on 6 April 2009. This principally widened the scope of the exemption from hazardous waste producer registration with the Environment Agency. Under the Hazardous Waste Regulations 2005, “it is an offence to produce hazardous waste at premises, or remove that waste from premises, unless those premises are either registered with the Environment Agency or are exempt.” Where subcontractors produce hazardous waste, it will be removed under the Hazardous Waste Premises Registration for that site. The Hazardous Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2005 require a Hazardous Waste Consignment Note (HWCN) to be produced for each consignment of hazardous waste removed from site. This may take the form of either:
The SWMP will include a classification of the estimated waste that will be produced on the site as inert, nonhazardous or hazardous. It will also include details (e.g. license number) of each waste carrier and each waste management facility the project intends to use. This will enable the project to ensure compliance with the regulations.
A “Standard Procedure” (single movement) HWCN, where waste is moved from one premises to a Consignee in a single journey. A “Multiple Collection” HWCN, (as defined in Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2011 Schedule 2)
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 296
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester development Masterplan Response
Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2011 SI 988
The Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2011 came into force on 29th March 2011.
A SWMP covering construction, demolition and excavation waste has been produced.
And 2012 amendment SI 1889 (transposes the Revised Waste Framework Directive)
These Regulations update some aspects of waste controls. The need for waste permits and authorisations for certain activities therefore does not change. In summary, the regulations implement the WFD and; require businesses to confirm that they have applied the waste management hierarchy when transferring waste and to include a declaration on their waste transfer note or consignment note
This has been carried out in accordance with the Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2011 SI 988.
require a new permit waste hierarchy permit condition and where appropriate a condition relating to mixing of hazardous waste introduce a two-tier system for waste carrier and broker registration, which includes those who carry their own waste, and introduces a new concept of a waste dealer products whilst include a small number of radioactive waste materials Note: these regulations replace:
The Environmental Protection (Duty of Care) Regulations, as amended
The Controlled Waste (Registration of Carriers and Seizure of Vehicles) Regulations, as amended, and
amends Hazardous Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2005 (Schedule 2)
Note: DEFRA launched a consultation on proposed amendments to the Regulations 9 December 2013 which will provide alternatives to waste transfer notes for some small businesses. The consultation closed on the 20 January 2014 and DEFRA are currently analysing the responses received. DEFRA have not announced when the proposed alternatives will be announced. The Clean Neighborhoods and Environment Act 2005
It is the responsibility of everyone working in the construction industry to ensure that all waste is disposed of properly. All employees need to be made aware that if they are tasked with waste disposal this
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
A SWMP covering CD&E waste has been produced. This has been carried out against the context
Page 297
Policy/Legislation
Waste Strategy for England 2007 (WSE 2007)
Requirements
NW Bicester development Masterplan Response
must be carried out in accordance with the law, or they risk being fined.
of the Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Act 2005.
This strategy builds on Waste Strategy 2000 and the progress since then but aims for greater ambition by addressing the key challenges for the future through additional steps.
The assessment will be carried out against the context of the Waste Strategy for England 2007.
The Government’s key objectives are to:
Decouple waste growth (in all sectors) from economic growth and put more emphasis on waste prevention and reuse.
Meet and exceed the Landfill Directive diversion targets for biodegradable municipal waste in 2010, 2013 and 2020.
Increase diversion from landfill of nonmunicipal waste and secure better integration of treatment for municipal and non-municipal waste.
Secure the investment in infrastructure needed to divert waste from landfill and for the management of hazardous waste.
Get the most environmental benefit from that investment, through increased recycling of resources and recovery of energy from residual waste using a mix of technologies.
Waste Strategy for England 2011
This strategy builds on the Waste Strategy 2000 and 2007.
(WSE 2011)
The report contains actions and commitments, which set a clear direction towards a zero-waste economy. The Waste Strategy 2011 presents the key principles in waste management policy: the waste hierarchy, the diversion of waste away from landfill, producer and consumer responsibility, the proximity principle and the concept of Best Practicable Environmental Option (BPEO).
Planning Policy Statement 1:
Whereas much of the guidance offered by PPS1 is of general or background relevance
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
The assessment will also apply the waste hierarchy with a focus on resource efficiency.
The assessment has been carried out against the context of the Waste Strategy for England 2011 and assumes that as a minimum, the targets in this Strategy will be met. The assessment also applies the waste hierarchy with a focus on resource efficiency. The ES chapter will have a section Page 298
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester development Masterplan Response
Delivering Sustainable Development (CLG 2005)
to the current proposals, the following specific points are noteworthy:
which considers the impact of waste in the development and will make recommendations to lesson that impact and for designing out waste.
Planning Policy Statement: ecotowns, A supplement to Planning Policy Statement 1 (CLG 2009)
Paragraph 3 of PPS1 identifies sustainable development as ‘the core principle underpinning planning’.
Paragraph 20 highlights that development plan policies should take account of environmental issues, such as the mitigation of the effects of and the adaptation to climate change, the protection of the wider countryside, the potential impact of the environment on proposed developments and the management of waste in ways that protect the environment and human health, including producing less waste and using it as a resource wherever possible.
Paragraph 27 addresses the impacts of climate change, the management of pollution, and natural hazards, the safeguarding of natural resources and the minimisation of impacts from the management and use of resources.
This Planning Policy Statement (PPS) provides the standards any eco-town will have to adhere to and the list of locations identified with the potential for an eco-town. Eco-town planning applications should include a sustainable waste and resources plan (SWRP), covering both domestic and non-domestic waste, which:
Sets targets for residual waste levels, recycling levels and landfill diversion, all of which should be substantially more ambitious than the 2007 national Waste Strategy targets for 2020; it should be demonstrated how these targets will be achieved, monitored and maintained.
Establishes how all development will be designed so as to facilitate the achievement of these targets, including the provision of waste storage arrangements which allow for the separate collection of each of the seven priority waste materials as identified in the Waste Strategy for England 2007.
Provides evidence that consideration has
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
A SWRP covering construction, excavation and operational waste will be produced. This will be carried out against the context of the Planning Policy Statement: ecotowns, A supplement to Planning Policy Statement 1.
Page 299
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester development Masterplan Response
been given to the use of locally generated waste as a fuel source for combined heat and power (CHP) generation for the eco-town.
Planning Policy Statement 10: Planning for Sustainable Waste Management 2005 [6] (CLG 2005)
Sets out how developers will ensure that no construction, demolition and excavation waste is sent to landfill, except for those types of waste where landfill is the least environmentally damaging option.
The publication of Planning Policy Statement 10; Planning for Sustainable Waste Management (PPS10) established decision making principles to which regional planning bodies and all planning authorities should adhere when preparing planning strategies. Paragraph 34 suggests that proposed new development should be supported by Site Waste Management Plans (SWMPs) to identify the volume and type of material to be demolished and/or excavated, opportunities for the reuse and recovery of materials and to demonstrate how off-site disposal of waste will be minimised and managed.
Strategy for Sustainable Construction (HM Government 2008)
This Strategy is aimed at providing clarity around the existing policy framework and signalling the future direction of Government policy. It aims to realise the shared vision of sustainable construction by:
Providing clarity to business on the Government’s position by bringing together diverse regulations and initiatives relating to sustainability.
Setting and committing to higher standards to help achieve sustainability in specific areas.
Making specific commitments by industry and Government to take the sustainable construction agenda forward.
A SWRP and a project specific SWMP will be prepared to identify the volume and type of material to be excavated, opportunities for the reuse and recovery of materials and to demonstrate that no construction and excavation waste is sent to landfill, except for those types of waste where landfill is the least environmentally damaging option. The assessment will be carried out to reduce construction, demolition and excavation (CD&E) waste to landfill compared to 2008 baseline.
To deliver the Strategy, Government and industry have devised a set of overarching targets related to the ‘ends’ and ‘means’ of NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 300
Policy/Legislation
Requirements
NW Bicester development Masterplan Response
sustainable construction. The ‘ends’ relate directly to sustainability issues, such as climate change and biodiversity; the ‘means’ describe processes to help achieve the ‘ends’. By 2012, a 50% reduction of construction, demolition and excavation (CD&E) waste to landfill compared to 2008.
Oxfordshire Joint Municipal Waste Management Strategy – Recycling Targets Oxfordshire Waste Partnership’s (OWP) vision to maximise waste prevention across the county until 2030 is set out in the OWP Joint Municipal Waste Management Strategy (Ref 15-4), which was adopted in 2007. There has been a subsequent update to the Strategy, adopted in 2013. Under the policies of the Strategy the OWP will:
encourage the efficient use of resources, reduce consumption and take responsibility for the waste that they produce;
lobby central government to focus on waste as an integral part of sustainable resource management;
help households and individuals to reduce and manage their waste in order to ensure zero growth or better of municipal waste per person per annum;
provide an integrated system of collection and processing of household waste which will achieve, as a minimum: o
By 31st March 2020: recycle or compost at least 65% of household waste
o
By 31st March 2025: recycle or compost at least 70% of household waste;
ensure that recycling facilities and services are available to all residents;
encourage businesses to reduce, reuse and recycle by providing good quality recycling services, information and advice;
minimise waste to landfill and recover energy from non-recyclable waste through the operation of the Ardley Energy from Waste facility with the council seeking no more than 5% of nonrecyclable household waste;
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 301
provide waste management services for specialised, potentially polluting material streams such as hazardous waste and waste electrical and electronic equipment, which as a minimum meet legislative requirements;
working with the Waste Planning Authority, will ensure that waste facilities are suitably sized and distributed with the aim of minimising the transport of waste. Facilities will be well related to areas of the population, given the environmental and amenity constraints and the availability of suitable sites;
assist the development of local markets for recovered materials; and
work together to improve local environmental quality through effective communications and enforcement activity.
As noted above, the strategy has agreed a recycling target for Oxfordshire of 70% by 2015. This target is an improvement on the EU waste Framework Directive recycling and composting target of 50% by 2020 which is the only municipal recycling target set out in the recent National Review of Waste Policies (DEFRA 2011) (Ref 155), Paragraph 32.
15.3 Methodology 15.3.1 Introduction The assessment will address potential impacts resulting from waste management and the use of resources associated with the works in the construction, excavation and operational phases of the development. Construction and excavation wastes will be dealt with separately to operational wastes. As noted above, the now repealed Site Waste Management Plan Regulations 2008 was previously the only legislative requirement governing the assessment of construction, demolition and excavation waste matters. However, the implementation of a SWMP remains industry Best Practice, is a requirement of PPS10: Planning for Sustainable Waste Management and supports the requirements of PPS: Eco-Towns – A supplement to PPS1. The framework for the assessment or operational waste is derived from a combination of national, regional and local waste and policies combined with expert judgement. The Waste Management Plan for England (2013) (Ref 15-6) confirms the UK’s commitment to meets its target under the Waste Framework Directive of recovering at least 70% by weight, of construction and demolition waste (Note: this relates to construction and demolition waste, excluding hazardous waste and naturally occurring material NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 302
falling within code 17 05 04 in Schedule 1 to the List of Wastes (England) Regulations 2005 (SI 2005/895)).
15.3.2 Study Area In addition to the NW Bicester Masterplan Site itself, the study area will comprise Cherwell District (as Cherwell District Council is the waste collection authority) and Berkshire, Buckinghamshire and Oxfordshire for CD&E waste (since data from Cherwell District Council is not available). The study area will also comprise any waste facilities that will receive waste arising from the CD&E and operational phases of the development. Whilst the study area will not include the operation of these facilities, it will be necessary to ensure that the facilities have the capacity and capability to support the NW Bicester development deliver on its waste objectives and targets.
15.3.3 Establishment of Baseline Conditions CD&E waste For the purpose of this assessment, the baseline conditions include the current waste management infrastructure in Berkshire, Buckinghamshire and Oxfordshire and the performance in terms of the proportion of construction waste recycled to produce graded and ungraded aggregates and soil, used for engineering and capping and used on exempt sites. Baseline conditions have been established through desk-top research, including the interrogation of key data bases such as Building Research Establishment (BRE) benchmarks and Environment Agency data tables.
Operational waste For the purpose of this assessment, operational waste refers to residential and commercial waste arisings. The baseline conditions are the existing waste management system in Cherwell District, the quantities of waste and recyclables collected, and the performance in terms of the proportion recycled/composted. Baseline conditions have been established through consultation with Cherwell District Council Environmental Services, and desk-top research, including the interrogation WasteDataFlow (the web based system for municipal waste data reporting by UK local authorities to government).
15.3.4 Assessment of Effects The assessment of effects from CD&E and operational waste has focused on the potential direct impact of waste arisings on the NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 303
existing local, regional, and national waste management infrastructure. At the current stage of outline design, the details (types, quantities, specifications, the construction methods and the suitability for reuse of excess site materials) are not known so it is not feasible to accurately determine the quantities of waste arisings during the construction and excavation phases. Therefore, benchmark information from the BRE has been used. The amount of demolition to be carried out on site and subsequent wastes arising from these demolitions are considered to be minimal. Additionally, it is expected that these materials will be able to be retained onsite for landscaping and base layers for new hard standing and roads. The likely types and quantities of operational waste arisings are estimated in Section 15.5.2 using data provided by Cherwell District Council and Industry benchmarks. A qualitative assessment has been carried out based on available knowledge and considers two impacts:
The potential impact the programme could have on the region, in terms of waste generation
The impacts additional waste management measures can have on the waste generated (e.g. legislative requirements, national strategy, regional waste targets, best practice).
Waste generation impact
The assessment classifies the impact the programme will have on waste generation in the regional and the effect it has on the waste treatment facilities within the surrounding local authorities. The classification for this impact is shown in Table 15-2. Table 155-1 Guidance for estimating the potential impact of waste generated by the development
Potential waste
Criteria
Impact classification (score) No Impact (1)
Waste volumes generated by programme are unlikely to require additional waste management measures beyond what are already present in the region.
Minor (2)
Waste volumes generated by programme are easily managed locally without significant increases in quantity (less than 1% of the total generation in the region.
Moderate (3)
Waste volumes generated by programme contribute to greater than 1% but less than 5% of the total generation in the region.
Major (4)
Waste volumes generated throughout the period
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 304
contribute to an excess of 5% of the total generation in the region. Recycling of waste is less than 50%.
Waste Management Measures
The requirement for additional waste management measures has also been considered to determine the overall impact of waste generated from the programme. The classification for this impact is shown in Table 15-3. Table 15-3 Guidance for estimating the impact of additional waste management measures
Waste management Impact classification (score)
Criteria
No impact (4)
No measures in place to mitigate the impact of waste generated by the programme (i.e. no requirements from legislation, policy and/or standards that results in changes to waste management)
Minor (3)
Limited impact from the requirements of legislation, policy and/or standards that results in changes to waste management practices For example, broad national targets, SWMP requirement
Moderate (2)
Moderate impact from the requirements of legislation, policy and/or standards that results in changes to waste management practices For example as stringent national targets, regional waste targets
Major (1)
Considerable impact from the requirements of legislation, policy and/or standards that results in changes to waste management practices For example, stringent regional waste targets, requirements for Eco-towns, implementing DoW principles for construction
Significance of impacts.
The significance of the two impacts (waste generation and waste management) is shown in the following matrix (Table 15-4). Table 15-4 Significance of effect
Waste management impact Major (1)
Potential waste impact No impact
Minor
Moderate
Major
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
Not adverse
Slight Adverse
(1)
(2)
Slight Adverse (3)
Slight Adverse (4)
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 305
Moderate (2)
Minor (3)
Slight Adverse
Slight Adverse
(2)
(4)
Slight adverse (3)
No impact (4)
Slight adverse (4)
Moderate Adverse
Moderate Adverse
(6)
(8)
Moderate Adverse
Moderate Adverse
Large Adverse
(6)
(9)
Moderate Adverse
Large Adverse
Large Adverse
(12)
(16)
(12)
(8)
The definition of each level of significance is shown in Table 15-5 below. Table 15-5 Definitions of significance of effect
Significance
Score
Not adverse
1
Slight adverse
2-4
Definitions No significant effects on waste management strategy No noteworthy or material impact on waste management strategy. Impact likely to be on a temporary basis
Moderate adverse
5-10
Noteworthy effects are of moderate magnitude and frequency. The impact on the current waste management strategy will be affected. Impact likely to be on a permanent basis
Large adverse
11 - 16
Significant change in environmental conditions. Effects are likely to be of a high magnitude and frequency and will impact on the existing strategy to deal with waste. Impact likely to be on a permanent basis
15.3.5 Consultation Consultation has been undertaken as part of the assessment to:
Define the targets in the new Oxfordshire Municipal Waste Management Strategy (currently under review).
Discuss waste management aspirations for the NW Bicester development and set targets.
Determine a formal position with regards to any future waste facilities in the region and implications on waste management at the development.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 306
Determine details of Cherwell DC waste and recycling collection systems (materials collected, receptacles provided, frequency of collection etc).
Further consultation will be required as the development progresses.
15.3.6 Meetings An Energy, Waste and Water Workshop was held on 16th July, 3rd August and 23rd September 2010 at the Cherwell District Council offices in Banbury. Present at the workshops were representatives from Hyder Consulting, CDC Environmental Services, A2Dominion, Terry Farrell Partners, Environment Agency and Thames Water. Waste management topics discussed:
Review of Oxfordshire waste management strategy updates.
Waste targets
Design Solutions for waste.
Current waste treatment facilities and plans for the NW Bicester development.
Waste contracts.
15.4 Baseline Conditions Construction, Demolition and Excavation (CD&E) waste Berkshire, Buckinghamshire and Oxfordshire have an estimated total C,D&E waste arisings of 4,233,432 tonnes in C,D&E Waste: Survey of Arisings and Use of Alternatives to Primary Aggregates in England (2005) (Ref 15-7). Of this total:
29% was recycled to produce graded and ungraded aggregates and soil (excluding topsoil) by the regions 25 recycling crushers;
41% entered licensed landfill sites (of this 28% was used for engineering and capping and 72% was waste); and
30% was used on exempt sites.
The Masterplan Site is largely undeveloped land. There is a very limited amount of demolition occurring on site. It is anticipated that only a small amount of materials would need to be considered for incorporation into the construction phase of the project. PPS1 requires that the Bicester NW Bicester development ensure that no construction, demolition and excavation waste is sent to landfill, except for those types of waste where landfill is the least environmentally damaging option. NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 307
Operational waste Waste management
Currently an alternating weekly collection system for the properties in the district is provided. In 2012 this represented 59,240 households. For households, residual waste is collected on one week and comingled dry recyclables and mixed organics are collected the following week. Table 15-6 Waste collections for households (kerbside collection)
Waste stream
Waste type
Collection arrangements
Co-mingled dry recyclables
paper, tins and drink cans, cardboard, magazines and newspapers, aerosols and plastic bottles and containers
Blue bins collected fortnightly with mixed organics
Mixed organics
food: waste cooked and uncooked, plants, leaves, grass cuttings, pet straw and sawdust, pruning waste and cut flowers
Brown bins collected fortnightly with co-mingled dry recyclables
Residual waste (i.e. anything cannot be recycled or composted)
disposable nappies, polystyrene and cling film
Green bins Collected fortnightly
Batteries and small WEE
toasters, hairdryers, kettles, irons, mobile phones and stereos
Kerbside collection weekly, placing the bag on one of the bins
Other
Glass, textiles and DVDs
Bring banks
Table 15-7 Waste collections for residents of flats (communal bin stores)
Waste stream
Waste type
Collection arrangements
Co-mingled dry recyclables
paper, tins and drink cans, cardboard, magazines and newspapers, aerosols and plastic bottles and containers
Blue bins collected fortnightly with mixed organics
Mixed organics
food: waste cooked and uncooked, plants, leaves, grass cuttings, pet straw and sawdust, pruning waste and cut flowers
Brown bins collected fortnightly with co-mingled dry recyclables
Residual waste (i.e. anything cannot be recycled or composted)
disposable nappies, polystyrene and cling film
Green bins Collected fortnightly
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 308
Glass
Glass bottles and jars
Black bins – on some developments only
Other
Batteries and small WEE, textiles and DVDs Glass (if black bins are not provided)
Bring banks
A chargeable bulky waste collections service is provided to all residents for items such as furniture and white goods. Most dry recyclables are currently delivered to Enstone Community Waste Materials Recovery Facility (MRF) in West Oxfordshire (approximately 90%). The other 10% to Cheshire transfer station from where it is transferred to UPM MRF in Deeside. Cherwell District Council rolled out food collection services in October 2009, with everyone in the district being served by April 2010. The mixed garden waste and food waste goes to an in vessel composting facility (IVC) at Ardley (operated by Agrivert). This is in year three of a 15 year agreement. Most residual waste goes to Ardley Landfill. Residual waste generated in the north of the district goes to Banbury Waste Transfer station and then to Calvert in Buckinghamshire. In March 2011, Oxfordshire County Council awarded a 25 year contract for residual waste treatment to Viridor Oxfordshire Ltd. From 2014/15 all residual waste will be burnt to produce electricity at the new £200m energy from waste facility being built at Ardley in north Oxfordshire which will:
have capacity to treat 300,000 tonnes of waste per year – sufficient to treat all of Oxfordshire’s residual municipal waste; and
divert at least 95% of Oxfordshire’s residual municipal waste from landfill.
Waste Statistics
WasteDataFlow is the web based system for municipal waste data reporting by UK local authorities to government. This resource has been interrogated to determine the current Cherwell baseline in terms of Household (HH) Waste, Residual Waste and Recycling Rates. Table 15-8 Cherwell DC waste arisings data and recycling rates
Metric
2006/0 7
2007/0 8)
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
2008/0 9
2009/1 0
2010/1 1
2011/1 2
2012/1 3
Page 309
Total HH waste (t)
59,130
59,205
58,604
57,598
57,255
57,018
57,378
Residual waste per household (kg)
572.4
537.94
509.36
480.46
418.18
412.99
439.32
32,741
31,106
29,502
28,018
24,329
24,367
26,078
47.46%
49.66%
51.36%
57.49%
57.26%
54.55%
Total residual HH waste (t) Total recycling %
44.63%
Source: WasteDataFlow
From the table above, you can see that Cherwell achieved a recycling rate of 54.55% in 2012/13. This performance is compared against regional and national performance in the table below. From this it is clear that Cherwell DC recycling rates are well above the England average. Table 15-9 Recycling rates Area
2008/9
2011/12
2012/13
CDC
50%
*57%
**54.5%
Oxfordshire
42%
59%
60%
England
38%
42%
45%
Source: WasteDataFlow Note *During this period both dry recycling and organic recycling saw no significant change. Dry recycling rates decreased marginally by 0.45% whilst organic recycling increased marginally by 0.24%. **For these two quarters of 201213, dry recycling decreased by 1% to 24% whilst organic recycling decreased by 2% to 30%.
15.5 Design and Mitigation 15.5.1 CD&E waste The potential waste types that could arise during the excavation and construction phases are summarised in Table 15-10 below: Table15-10
Potential waste sources during site construction
Construction phase
Potential wastes produced
Classification of waste
Excavation
Made ground, soil and sub-soils
Inert; and /or Non hazardous. Potentially hazardous if it contains sufficiently high levels of heavy metals.
Construction
Construction materials, such as concrete, bricks, plastics,
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Inert; and / or, Non hazardous; and / or, Page 310
Construction phase
Potential wastes produced
Classification of waste
metals, plasterboard, timber, paint, etc.
Hazardous.
Made ground, soil and sub-soils
Non hazardous, and hazardous if it contains sufficiently high levels of heavy metals.
Excavation waste At the time of writing, the foundation and building designs had not been carried out and so it was not possible to accurately estimate the volume of waste arising from the excavations. The geology identified at the site indicates that shallow spread foundations may be suitable for all anticipated low-load structures; therefore, the generation of spoil is expected to be minimal. It is anticipated that any spoil generated may be reused on site for landscaping or other purposes, therefore it is expected that only minimal volumes of material may require disposal off-site.
Construction waste The amount of waste produced during the construction phase will be affected by the types and methods of construction. At the time of writing, the types and methods of construction had not been decided and so it was not possible to accurately estimate the volume of waste arising from the construction. Using waste benchmarking data from the Buildings Research Establishment (BRE, May 2012) the amount of construction waste for the buildings has been forecasted. The forecasts are shown in Table 15-11 below: Table 15-11 Construction Type
Forecasted construction waste arisings from buildings Average waste (m3/100 m2)
Developm ent size (m2)
Forecaste d waste arising (m3)
Average waste (tonnes/100 m2) (BRE benchmarks)
Forecasted waste arising (tonnes)*
Residential Units
18.1
509,958
9,230,240
16.8
8,567,294
Secondary School
20.7
6,750
139,725
23.3
157,275
Primary School
20.7
13,320
275,724
23.3
310,356
Nursery
20.7
2,000
41,400
23.3
Care Home and Extra Care
18.1
24,570
444,717
Hotel
14.4
4,500
64,800
21.6
97,200
Eco business
19.8
1,650
32,670
23.8
39,270
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
16.8
a
46,600
412,776
Page 311
Offices
19.8
Commercial
13.0
23,424
463,795
36,250
471,250
23.8
b
12.6
c
456,750
a
101,750
Retail
20.9
3,700
77,330
27.5
GP Practice
19.1
25,212
25,212
12.0
Community Space
20.9
3,450
72,105
Energy Centre
13.0
1,900
24,700
Total
a
15,840
22.4
d
77,280
a
12.6
11,363,66 8
557,491
23,940
10,863,823
Notes: (a) in hubs (b) includes B1 office in hubs and B1 office (c) Listed as B2 B8 Commercial (d) Including Community Hall in hub and community rooms
The composition of construction waste arisings from buildings is likely to be similar to that shown in Table 15-12 below: Table 15-12
Key construction materials waste streams on typical new build
Waste material
Wastage percentage
Packaging (including wood pallets, plastic, cardboard, tins) Plasterboard
25 – 35 5 – 36
Rubble (including broken bricks, blocks, tiles)
35 – 40
Timber (excluding pallets)
15 – 25
Cement and plaster
10 – 17
Insulation Metal
6 – 15 3–9
Dry concrete products – blocks, slabs, etc.
2 – 12
Plastic products (excluding packaging)
1 -11
Ceramic material
1-8
The volume of waste arising from construction will depend on how the site is managed and the implementation of the Site Waste Management Plan.
Construction Waste Management Measures Produce a Site Waste Management Plan (SWMP) As noted above, the now repealed Site Waste Management Plan Regulations 2008 were previously the only legislative requirement governing the assessment of construction, demolition and excavation waste matters However, the implementation of a SWMP remains NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 312
industry Best Practice, is a requirement of PPS10: Planning for Sustainable Waste Management and supports the requirements of PPS: Eco-Towns – A supplement to PPS1. A Preliminary SWMP for the Masterplan Site is being submitted (Appendix 15A). This forecasts the type and quantity of waste that will be produced on the Exemplar Site and sets out how waste will be managed so that it is reused, recycled, or disposed of appropriately. The SWMP is a live document and will be updated during the duration of the project by the Client and the Principal Contractor to record the movements of waste, how it was managed and to encourage better waste management practices. Waste generated by the excavation works
The alignment, location, level and grading of the Masterplan Site development has been designed to minimise excavation volumes. It has also been designed to enable flexibility in the landscaping, so that it can accommodate the changes in spoil volumes that may arise when site conditions differ from those assumed during the design. Both these approaches should enable all excavation waste (except where contaminated) to be reused onsite where conditions allow. Managing wastes onsite
To reduce waste production during the construction phase the project will employ modern methods of construction such as prefabrication of units and products off site as described by WRAP (Ref 15-8). As part of the SWMP the Principal Contractor will have to monitor waste arisings and management practices. Auditing and measurement will enable more effective management of waste through the setting of performance targets for recycling and segregation and monitoring subcontractors on all the sites. The phasing of the proposed development allows the opportunity for the construction and excavation wastes to be reused or recycled onsite in subsequent stages of the development. The SWMP will ensure such opportunities are maximised as the preferred option for dealing with waste arising from the site.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 313
15.5.2 Operation The types of waste that will arise during operation are summarised in Table 15-13 below. Table 15-13
Types of waste generated during site operation
Waste stream
Constituents
Recyclable / reusable / non recyclable
Mixed organics
Food waste cooked and uncooked, prunings, pet straw and sawdust, grass cuttings, plants and leaves).
Recyclable
Dry recyclables
Food tins and drinks cans, plastic bottles and containers, newspapers, directories and magazines, paper and card and aerosol cans
Recyclable
Glass
All colours of glass jars and bottles
Recyclable
Bulky
Furniture, white goods
Recyclable / non recyclable
Textiles
Clothes and small pieces of material
Recyclable
Residual
Any of the above that has not been separated for recycling. Non recyclable food packaging, plastic film, disposable nappies
Recyclable / non recyclable
Based on recent WasteDataFlow returns and data provided by CDC, WRAP (Ref 15-9) and British Standard (Ref 15-10) data, it is estimated that approximately 13,873 tonnes of waste (including domestic and non-domestic waste) will be generated during operation of the site per annum. This figure represents the total operation of the site and doesn’t take into account of any proposed recycling or composting. If current recycling rates (46% 2012/13) for Cherwell are applied to this figure then an annual residual waste level of 6,342 tonnes of waste is projected. Current waste production levels and subsequent residual waste levels are used to present a worst case scenario of no improvement in both of these areas. Likely compositions are set out in TableTable 15-14 below. Table 15-14
Key operational materials waste streams
Waste material
Wastage rate (percentage)
Organics
49%
Dry recyclables
36%
Glass
8%
Wood
1%
Textiles
4%
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 314
Waste material
Wastage rate (percentage)
Bulky
1%
Other
1%
A number of waste management measures will be put in place to minimise the impacts of operational waste. These are outlined in Table 15-15 below: Table 15-15
Impact
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure
Extend the CDC recycling and waste collection system to the development.
Increased generation of waste
Comment The recycling and waste collection system provided by CDC achieves a high recycling performance. This successful system will be extended to the development to utilise existing waste infrastructure and a proven system to increase recycling and reduce waste. The system comprises an alternate weekly collection for co-mingled recyclables, mixed food and garden waste, and residual waste
Initial recycling/composting target of 70%
This is the target set out in the SWRP as a requirement under PPS1, and has been set in conjunction with the ‘Energy, Water and Waste Workstream’ working group, having been taken into consideration during the planning application.
Initial residual waste level target of 300kg/household
This is also set out in the SWRP as requirement under PPS1.
In addition to the mitigation measures above there are number of alternative initiatives that could be undertaken in the future, although no specific provision has been made within the Masterplan Site at present.
Community reuse centre (Bicester Green) - Compliant with the first two tiers of the waste hierarchy (prevention and preparing for reuse), the centre is an independent social exercise. Currently the centre’s main activities are repair and refurbishment of items, such as small electricals, wooden furniture and bicycles.
Community composting project - compliant with the third tier of the waste hierarchy (recycling) a community composting project could possibly be established.
Public Incentives Scheme - a scheme could be implemented to incentivise participation in recycling including performance based charging schemes.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 315
15.6 Assessment of Effects 15.6.1 CD&E waste Table 15-17 below summarises the potential impacts and the significance of the effects of waste arisings from the development prior to mitigation. The assessment is based on the following assumptions: The landfill capacity in Berkshire, Buckinghamshire and Oxfordshire in 2010 is shown in Table 15-16. Table 15-16 Site type
Inert Non-inert Total
Landfill capacity (2010 data, Environment Agency)
Landfill capacity (thousand m3) Berkshire
Buckinghamshir e
Oxfordshire
1,754
536
4,199
485
41,592
11,433
2,239
42,592
15,632
Potential waste generation
Waste arising from earthworks will potentially be high. Therefore the waste impact is assessed to be Major for earthworks.
It is assessed that the type of waste arisings from the construction and demolition phases of the project will be 10.9 million tonnes (Table). In addition, the timescale of the construction phase is a long term activity (20-30 years). Therefore the waste impact is assessed to be Major for construction and demolition.
Waste management impact
The impact of waste management measures for earthworks is assessed as Major since the volume of excavated material that will be reused on site, and therefore will generate negligible volumes of spoil requiring off-site disposal.
Currently there is capacity in the existing landfill sites. However, consideration must be given to the timescale of the construction phase which is a long term activity (20-30 years). As such, the impact has a potential to be long-term; this will require mitigation to prevent an adverse impact on the region over this period. It is assessed that the impacts of the waste management policy to be delivered by the development will be Major.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 316
Significance of Effect Excavation
The alignment, location, level and grading of the Eco-town development will be designed to minimise excavation volumes. It will also be designed to enable flexibility in the landscaping, so that it can accommodate the changes in spoil volumes that may arise when site conditions differ from those assumed during the design. Both these approaches should enable all excavation waste (except where contaminated) to be reused onsite where conditions allow. Taking both impacts into consideration, the excavation works should result in No Adverse effects (as defined in Table 15-5). Construction and Demolition Recycling all inert and non-hazardous waste onsite, adhering to the requirements of the SWRP and PPS1: Eco-Towns – A supplement to PPS1 and implementing the SWMP (Appendix 15A) will ensure that impacts of construction waste are minimised. Therefore, despite the high volumes of CD&E waste likely to arise from the construction of the development, the significance of effect on the Oxfordshire waste management infrastructure following mitigation is likely to be Slight Adverse. The significance of effects following mitigation are shown in Table 1517 below: Table15-17
Significance of Effects (Construction)
Development phase
Mitigation
Significance of effects
Excavation
Excavation volumes minimised through design
Neutral
All excavation materials to be reused onsite Construction and Demolition
No waste sent to landfill except where landfill is the least environmentally damaging option, as detailed in the SWRP and PPS: Eco-Towns – A supplement to PPS1
Slight adverse
Waste to be managed through the development SWMP (Appendix 15 A) Waste to be monitored and audited
15.6.2 Operation Prior to any of the mitigation measures identified in Section 15.5.2, waste arisings from the Masterplan development would contribute an additional 13,873 tonnes per annum of domestic and non-domestic waste and recyclables. Of this 13,873 tonnes, 5,631 tonnes (40.6%) are forecast to relate to domestic use. Note: this will be in addition NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 317
to the estimated. 59,000 tonnes per annum of domestic waste already being generated by Cherwell District. Effects of waste generated in the operational phase of the Eco-town development would be long-term effects. The assessment anticipates a significant volume of residual waste generated from the Eco-town development (6,342 tonnes) would be diverted away from landfill (most likely to the 300,000 tonnes per annum capacity Ardwell energy from waste facility) thereby resulting in low impact on this resource. Despite an increase of 9.5% of domestic waste caused by the Ecotown development, the capacity of the existing waste management infrastructure and waste disposal facilities to manage the wastes likely to arise from the development are considered to have a Major impact on the levels of waste produced by the development. In addition to this, the implementation of the mitigation measures detailed in the table below will result in a Slight Adverse significance of effects. The significance of effects following mitigation is shown in Table 1518 below: Table 15-18
Significance of Effects (Operation)
Development phase
Mitigation
Significance of effect
Operation
Implementation of SWRP, and specifically:
Neutral
Extend the CDC recycling and waste collection system to the development
An initial recycling/composting target of 70%
Initial residual waste level target of 300kg/household
Establish a community composting project
15.7 Cumulative Effects The cumulative impact on the waste arisings and management of the Masterplan Site in Cherwell District and Oxfordshire County have been reviewed. There are numerous developments planned for the surrounding area that will have a cumulative impact throughout the construction and operation of the development. Sufficient data is not currently available on the levels of construction and operational waste likely to arise from these developments. However, due to the design and mitigation measures being implemented as part of the Development, it is anticipated that Slight Adverse cumulative effects would occur during the construction and operational phases of the development. NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 318
15.8 Summary This Chapter has assessed the potential environmental impacts of waste materials in relation to the proposed development. Table 15-19 below provides a summary of significance of effects assuming implementation of these mitigation measures. Table15-19
Waste impact
Significance of effects (Summary)
Waste managem ent impact
Mitigation measure
Significanc e of effect
Waste generated from excavation Major
Major
Excavation volumes minimised through design.
No Adverse
All excavation materials to be reused onsite.
Waste generated from construction and demolition3 Major
Major
Waste to be managed through the SWMP.
Slight Adverse
Waste monitored and audited Implementation of targets and measures set out in SWRP
Waste generated from operation Major
Major
Implementation of targets and measures set out in SWRP
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Slight Adverse
Page 319
16
Transport
16.1 Introduction This chapter considers the potential impacts of traffic and transport associated with the Masterplan proposals and the predicted associated effects on sensitive receptors in the area. At the present time the results of modelling of the traffic impacts are the subject of on-going discussion with Oxfordshire County Council and the Highways Agency and thus the future year traffic figures are not yet available to be assessed. The chapter follows the assessment methodology set out in the document entitled, “Guidelines for the Environmental Assessment of Road Traffic” (Ref 16-1)( published by the Institute of Environmental Assessment (IEA) in 1994. The IEA is now known as the Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment (IEMA), so this document will be referred to as the ‘IEMA Guidelines’ throughout the remainder of this chapter.
16.2 Regulatory Framework 16.2.1 National and Local Policy This assessment has been undertaken in accordance with current legislation, national, regional and local plans and policies. Outlined below are those elements of current legislation, policy and guidance relevant to transport in the context of the proposed Masterplan Site development. A summary of the relevant legislation and policies, the requirements of these policies and NW Bicester Masterplan Site response is provided in Table 16-1 below. Table 16-1
Summary of Relevant Legislation and Policies
Policy/Legislati on
Requirements
Bicester Masterplan development Response
National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (2012)
The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (2012) streamlines national planning policy.
The masterplan access and travel strategy sets out the strategy for achieving all of these aims to maximise the use of sustainable travel modes, provide good accesiblity to faciltiies and services and minimise traffic impacts.
The NPPF sets out 12 core planning principles that should underpin decision taking. The principle which relates to transport planning, and in the turn the Development is:
Actively manage patterns of growth to make the fullest possible use of public
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
The location of the development as an extension to Bicester provides the opportunity to offer good
Page 320
Policy/Legislati on
Requirements transport, walking and cycling and focus significant development in locations which are or can be made sustainable.
Bicester Masterplan development Response accesibility and a range of transport options.
Chapter 4 ‘Promoting sustainable transport’ and specifically Paragraph 29 states that ‘the transport system needs to be balanced in favour of sustainable transport modes, giving people a real choice about how they travel.’ Paragraph 32 states that ‘decisions should take account of whether:
The opportunities for sustainable transport modes have been taken up depending on the nature and location of the site, to reduce the need for major transport infrastructure;
Safe and suitable access to the site can be achieved for all people; and
Improvements can be undertaken within the transport network that cost effectively limit the significant impacts of the development. Development should only be prevented or refused on transport grounds where the residual cumulative impacts of development are severe.’
Paragraph 34 states that ‘decisions should ensure developments that generate significant movement are located where the need to travel will be minimised and the use of sustainable transport modes can be maximised.’ Paragraph 35 states that ‘developments should be located and designed where practical to:
Accommodate the efficient delivery of goods and supplies;
Give priority to pedestrian and cycle movements, and have
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 321
Policy/Legislati on
Requirements
Bicester Masterplan development Response
access to high quality public transport facilities;
Create safe and secure layouts which minimise conflicts between traffic and cyclists or pedestrian, avoiding street clutter and where appropriate establishing home zones;
Incorporate facilities for charging plug-in and other ultra-low emission vehicles; and
Consider the needs of people with disabilities by all modes of transport.’
Finally, Paragraph 38 states that for larger scale residential developments in particular ‘key facilities such as primary schools and local shops should be located within walking distance of most properties.’ ‘A Supplement to Planning Policy Statement 1 - Ecotowns’
‘A Supplement to Planning Policy Statement 1 - Eco-towns’ was published by Communities and Local Government (C&LG) in 2009. Although Planning Policy Statement 1 was superseded by the NPPF upon its publication in 2012, the Eco-towns supplement is extant. This document was prepared with the intention that Eco-towns were considered as exemplar projects to achiever greener and low carbon developments.
The masterplan access and travel strategy sets out the strategy for achieving all of these aims to meet the PPS1 targets.
Section ET11 commencing on page 8 sets out the requirements with respect to transport. For convenience this has been reproduced below. “ET11.1 Travel in eco-towns should support people’s desire for mobility whilst achieving the goal of low carbon living. The town should be designed so that access to it and through it gives priority to options such as walking, cycling, public transport and other sustainable options, thereby NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 322
Policy/Legislati on
Requirements
Bicester Masterplan development Response
reducing residents’ reliance on private cars, including techniques such as filtered permeability. To achieve this, homes should be within ten minutes’ walk of (a) frequent public transport and (b) neighbourhood services. The provision of services within the eco-town may be co-located to reduce the need for individuals to travel by private car and encourage the efficient use of the sustainable transport options available. ET11.2 Planning applications should include travel plans which demonstrate: (a) How the town’s design with enable at least 50 per cent of trips originating in eco-towns to be made by non-car means, with the potential for this to increase over time to at least 60 per cent (b) Good design principles, drawing from Manual for Streets, Building for Life, and community travel planning principles (c) How transport choice messages, infrastructure and services will be provided from ‘day one’ of residential occupation, and (d) How the carbon impact of transport in the eco-town will be monitored, as part of embedding a long term lowcarbon approach to travel within plans for community governance. ET11.3 Where an eco-town is close to an existing higher order settlement, planning applications should demonstrate: (a) Options for ensuring the key connections around the ecotown do not become congested as a result of the development, for example by NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 323
Policy/Legislati on
Requirements
Bicester Masterplan development Response
extending some aspects of the travel plan beyond the immediate boundaries of the town, and (b) Significantly more ambitious targets for modal share than the 50 per cent (increasing to 60 per cent over time) mentioned above and for the use of sustainable transport. ET11.4 Where eco-town plans intend to incorporate ultra low carbon vehicle options, including electric car schemes to help achieve a sustainable transport system, planning applications should demonstrate that: (c) There will be sufficient energy headroom to meet the higher demand for electricity, and (d) The scheme will not add so many additional private cars to the local road network that these will cause congestion. ET11.5 Eco-towns should be designed in a way that supports children walking or cycling to school safely and easily. There should be a maximum walking distance of 800m from homes to the nearest school for children aged under 11, except where this is not a viable option due to natural water features or other physical landscape restrictions.”
DfT Circular 02/13
DfT Circular 02/13 sets out the way in which the Highways Agency will engage communities and the development industry to deliver sustainable development and, thus, economic growth, whilst safeguarding the primary function and purpose of the strategic road network. In relation to environmental impact, developers must ensure all environmental implications associated with their proposals, are adequately assessed and reported so as to
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
The masterplan access and travel strategy sets out the strategy for achieving all of these aims to maximise the use of sustainable travel modes, provide good accesiblity to faciltiies and services and minimise traffic impacts. The location of the development as an extension to Bicester provides the opportunity to offer good accesibility and a range of Page 324
Policy/Legislati on
Requirements
Bicester Masterplan development Response
ensure that the mitigation of any impact is compliant with prevailing policies and standards. It states that where a likely negative impact on the environment resulting from the proposals occurs outside of a highway boundary as a result of the proposals (for example air quality, visual impacts, artificial light or noise impacts at new housing affected by a road); any required mitigation measures must be located outside of the strategic road network’s highway boundary.
transport options.
The Circular requires developers to ensure adequate environmental information is provided at all stages of the planning process to satisfy the local planning authority and any other consenting authorities that the environmental impacts have been appropriately considered, that measures have been included within the proposals as required by relevant policies or otherwise, as fully as is reasonably possible, and to enable all residual impacts to be taken into account by the local planning authority in the development consent process.
Oxfordshire Parking Policy (2009)
Oxfordshire Parking Policy was published on 9th November 2009. This document has been prepared in accordance with the requirements of all local authorities in the county including Cherwell District Council. This data is also included within the ‘Residential Road Design Guide’, which forms the basis of site layout, priority of modal movement, and infrastructure.
Parking policy will be used as the basis for the detailed discussions on parking provision within the development.
Local Plan Submission Version (2014)
The Development Plan for Cherwell District Council, as an interim measure, comprises those saved policies contained in the Local Plan (Adopted 1996).
The masterplan access and travel strategy sets out the strategy for achieving all of these aims to maximise the use of sustainable travel modes, provide good
Cherwell District Council are NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 325
Policy/Legislati on
Requirements
Bicester Masterplan development Response
currently working on a new Local Plan which, when adopted, will become the Development Plan for the Local Planning Authority applicable to the Development. Cherwell District Council submitted their Local Plan Submission Version (2014) to the Planning Inspectorate in January 2014 and the Examination in Public is programmed for June 2014. Although the plan remains unadopted, work has now progressed to such a point at which policy contained in the plan can be considered material to the Development.
accesiblity to faciltiies and services and minimise traffic impacts. The location of the development as an extension to Bicester provides the opportunity to offer good accesibility and a range of transport options.
The Local Plan Submission Version sets out a number of Strategic Objectives for Ensuring Sustainable Development. Strategic Objective 13, SO13 is ‘to reduce the dependency on the private car as a mode of travel, increase the attraction of and opportunities for travelling by public transport, cycle and on foot, and to ensure high standards of accessibility to services for people with impaired mobility.’ Policy SLE 4: Improved Transport and Connections states that the Council will ‘support key transport proposals including…Transport Improvements at Bicester in accordance with the County Council’s Local Transport Plan and Movement Studies.’ Policy ESD 1 Mitigating and Adapting to Climate Change sets out a number of measures to mitigate the impact of development within the district on climate change which includes ‘delivering development that seeks to reduce the need to travel and which encourages sustainable travel options including walking, cycling and public transport to reduce dependence on private cars.’ NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 326
Policy/Legislati on
Requirements
Bicester Masterplan development Response
Policy Bicester 1 is a specific policy relating to the Development. The policy states key site specific design and place shaping principles including, of relevance to transport:
‘Infrastructure to support sustainable modes of transport will be required including enhancement of footpath and cycle path connectivity with the town centre, employment and rail stations.’
‘Maximisation of the sustainable transport connectivity in and around the site’
‘Contributions to improvements to the surrounding road networks, including mitigation measures for the local and strategic highway network, consistent with the requirement of the Eco-town PPS to reduce reliance on the private car, and a high level of accessibility to public transport services, improvements to facilities for pedestrians and cyclists and the provision of a Travel Plan to maximise connectivity with existing development.’
16.2.2 Best Practice Guidance In April 2008 the Department for Transport published, ‘Building Sustainable Travel into New Developments: A Menu of Options for Growth Points and Eco-towns.’ Communities and Local Government produced a, ‘Design to Delivery: Eco-towns Transport Worksheet Advice to Promoters and Planners’ in March 2008. This supplements the Department for Transport guidance stated above providing a menu of options, concentrating primarily on outcomes and a route map. Both documents are relevant to the proposed development being considered. NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 327
16.3 Methodology 16.3.1 Introduction As mentioned in Section 16.1 above, this chapter has been prepared using the assessment methodology set out in IEMA Guidelines. This chapter should be read in combination with the Access and Travel Strategy submitted with this application. Where appropriate crossreferences will be made to this document and its appendices and a summary of the relevant sections of these documents reproduced in this chapter for convenience.
16.3.2 Study Area The IEMA Guidelines set out two rules that are used to establish whether an environmental assessment of traffic effects should be carried out. They are set out below: Rule 1
Include road links where traffic flows will increase by more than 30% (or the number of heavy goods vehicles will increase by more than 30%)
Rule 2
Include any other specifically sensitive areas where traffic flows have increased by 10% or more.
In this instance it is considered that as the proposed development forms part of Eco Bicester and is proximate to sensitive residential areas and communities, the 10% threshold should apply. Oxfordshire County Council was consulted on the extent of the study area to be considered using the information from traffic studies and forecasts (described below) and agreed that the study area should include the entirety of Bicester for the purposes of initial assessment in order to be able to identify links where traffic levels are increased. The study area is illustrated below and encompasses the road network of Bicester within the twelve cordon locations (which are the points of entry/ exit to Bicester). Figure 16-1 Study Area
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 328
16.3.3 Establishment of Baseline Conditions Base Year 2012 Baseline conditions have been established using the Bicester SATURN model run by WYG on behalf of Oxfordshire County Council. The model currently has a base year of 2012 and the outputs from the model have been made available in February 2014 to provide a baseline for NW Bicester.
Future Year Baseline/Reference Case 2031 A future year / Reference Case have been developed by WYG for 2031 using the Saturn model. This includes all committed and planned developments which represents maximum growth of the town without NW Bicester. For the purposes of environmental assessment, this scenario is to be used as the Future Year Baseline against which the impacts of NW Bicester Masterplan will be assessed. Table 16-2 sets out committed development that has been considered as part of the 2031 reference year and Table 16-3 lists those developments included within the Submission Cherwell Local Plan. These tables are extracted from the Bicester Peripheral Routes Study NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 329
(WYG on behalf of OCC) as developments included within the model in 2031. Table 16-2 Committed Development
Project/ Development
Description
South West Development of residential accommodation Bicester consisting of 1,631 units, 3.91ha (06/00967/OUT) employment space, hotel, health village, secondary school and community hall.
Status Under Construction
This development is around 2.3 km from the Masterplan Site. Additional 100 houses currently being considered. Bicester 46,200 sqm employment development at Business Park Bicester Business Park, including relocation (07/01106/OUT) of Tesco store.
Planning Permission granted in 2010
This development is around 2.8 km from the Masterplan Site. Town Centre redevelopment
Has just opened, including superstore, cinema and smaller retail units.
Completed
Caversfield, Fringford Lane
200 dwellings.
Planning appeal pending
RAF Bicester (new houses in Caversfield)
197 dwellings from new build and conversion.
Under construction
Phase 1
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 330
Anticipated development within Bicester identified in the Submission Cherwell Local Plan Table 16-3
Policy
Strategic Site
Description
Policy Bicester 2
Bicester 2 Graven Hill
227.5ha predominantly brownfield site to the south of Bicester proposed for mixed use development of 1,900 dwellings, significant employment land providing for high quality job opportunities, associated services, facilities and other infrastructure including the potential for the incorporation of a rail freight interchange. This site is around 4 km south of the Masterplan Site. Approved subject to S106
Policy Bicester 3
South West Bicester Phase 2
Anticipated to accommodate 720 homes with associated services, facilities and other infrastructure within a 28.5ha site. This site is around 2.8 km south west of the Masterplan Site. Application going to Planning Committee imminently.
Policy Bicester 6
Bure Place Town Centre Redevelopme nt Phase 2
Anticipated to comprise the redevelopment at Bure Place to provide a new supermarket, cinema, restaurants, shops, car parking and bus interchange. CDC considering now that Phase 1 is open. This site is around 2.8 km south east of the Masterplan Site.
Policy Bicester 8
Former RAF Bicester
Development would support heritage tourism uses, leisure, recreation, employment and community uses associated with the development of a museum to RAF Bomber Command. The development of hotel and conference facilities would also be supported as part of a wider package of employment uses. Plans being drawn up. This site is around 1.6 km south east of the Masterplan Site.
Policy Bicester 10
Bicester Gateway
Knowledge economy employment development to the south of the existing retail area (Wyevale Garden Centre), adjacent to the A41 on a 15ha site. This site is around 4 km south of the Masterplan Site.
Policy Bicester 11
North East 8ha Business Park development for employment Bicester use. Business Park This site is around 2.7 km south east of the Masterplan Site.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 331
Policy
Strategic Site
Description
Policy Bicester 12
South East Bicester
A mixed use 40ha site for employment and residential development to the east of the ring road to the south east of Bicester. (800 houses/ 64,812sqm employment development) This site is around 4.3km south east of the Masterplan Site.
Personal Injury Accident Data Personal Injury Accident data has been obtained from Oxfordshire County Council for the key routes on the west side of Bicester, as shown in Appendix 16-A Bicester Accident Area. This takes into account all accidents between 1st January 2009 and 31st January 2014 and includes all accidents reported to the police during that time and will inform the baseline conditions.
16.3.4 Assessment of Effects The methodology for assessment of effects are set out in the ‘Guidelines for the Environmental Assessment of Road Traffic’ as:
People at home
People at work
Sensitive groups including children, elderly and disabled
Sensitive locations such as hospitals, churches, schools, and historical buildings
People walking
People cycling
Open spaces, recreational areas, shopping areas
Sites of ecological/nature conservation value
Sites of tourist/visitor attraction
The methodology for assessment of effects as set out in the ‘Guidelines for the Environmental Assessment of Road Traffic’ cover the following areas of concern:
Severance
Driver delay
Pedestrian delay
Pedestrian amenity
Fear and intimidation
Accidents and safety
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 332
Hazardous loads
Dust and dirt
The remaining headings in the IEMA Guidelines are discussed in other chapters within this Environmental Appraisal. They include noise and vibration (Chapter 8), air pollution (Chapter 9), visual effects (Chapter 5), ecological effects (Chapter 6), and heritage (Chapter 10). Severance occurs when there is difficulty experienced in crossing a heavily trafficked road. The guidance set out in Design Manual for Roads and Bridges Volume 11, Section 3, Part 8 Pedestrians, Cyclists, Equestrians and Community Effects suggests that changes in traffic flow of 30%, 60% and 90% are considered as ‘slight’, ‘moderate’ and ‘substantial’ changes in severance respectively. Driver delay is determined through junction capacity analysis using computerised junction assessment packages recognised by the Department for Transport. This analysis will be carried out during the peak periods for the purpose of assessing the traffic impacts. The IEMA Guidelines suggest that pedestrian delay is experienced at a lower threshold when pedestrians experience a 10 second delay crossing a carriageway with no crossing facilities for a two-way flow of 1,400 vehicles per hour. The upper threshold amounts to a 40 second delay, also where no crossing facilities exist. The pedestrian amenity threshold, as set out in the IEMA Guidelines to assess the significance of change, is where the traffic flow is doubled. Fear and intimidation can be established through a combination of traffic flow, speed and composition. The criteria from the IEMA Guidelines for assessing this have been set out in Table 16-4 below. Table16-4 IEMA Guidelines for Fear and Intimidation
Degree of Hazard
Average Total 18 Hour Traffic Flow Goods Vehicle over 18 Hour Flow Day (Vehicle/hour )
Average Speed over 18 Hour Day (Mile/hour)
Extreme
1800+
3000+
20+
Great
1200 - 1800
2000 – 3000
15 – 20
Moderate
600-1200
1000 - 2000
10 - 15
Accidents and safety is assessed using the personal injury accident data obtained from highway authority records. The IEMA Guidelines NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 333
recommend that professional judgement will be needed to assess the impacts. There are no hazardous loads associated with the development proposals so this section does not apply. Finally, dust and dirt should be considered for a distance of up to 50m from a site and the impact depends upon the adequacy of site management practices.
16.4 Description of Baseline Conditions 16.4.1 Key Roads within the Study Area M40 The M40 is a motorway connecting London to Birmingham from the M25 to the M40. It passes Bicester to the west in a south to north alignment providing access to High Wycombe to the south east and Warwick to the north west. Two junctions of the M40 can be used to access NW Bicester, namely junction 10 located 7.4km to the north west of the site and junction 9 located 6.1km south west of the site.
A41 The A41 connects the south west of Bicester to the M40 in the south west. It is a dual carriageway subject to the national speed limit. This segment of carriageway is predominantly bound by fields, with the exception of Wendlebury in the south west and Bicester Village (designer outlet) at the north east of the segment. The A41 changes alignment at Bicester Village, taking an easterly alignment towards Aylesbury.
B4100 Banbury Road The B4100 Banbury Road carriageway extends in a south to north alignment, from its convergence with Buckingham Road, Field Street and North Street via a 5-arm roundabout (southern extent) to its roundabout convergence with the A4095 Lord’s Lane and Southwold Lane and then past the NW Bicester. The northern section (north of the roundabout junction with the A4095) is predominately rural in character and subject to the national speed limit.
A4095 Lord’s Lane The A4095 Lord’s Lane is a single lane carriageway (in each direction) that extends between its roundabout junctions with the B4100 Banbury Road and Bucknell Road. The road is subject to a 50mph speed limit and street lighting is provided.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 334
Bucknell Road Bucknell Road connects the B4100 in the south to the roundabout between the A4905 Howes Lane and Lords Lane in a south east to north west alignment. It is a street lit single carriageway benefitting from footways on both sides of the road, providing access to a number of residential roads. North of the A4095 it becomes rural lane providing access to Bucknell village.
A4095 Howes Lane The A4095 Howes Lane is a single lane carriageway that extends from Bucknell Road to the junction with the B4030 Middleton Stoney Road. It is rural in character with a speed limit varying between 40 and 50mph, no lighting for the majority of its length and no footways or adjacent path.
B4030 Vendee Drive Vendee Drive connects the A41 to the south to Middleton Stoney Road and Howes Lane at a roundabout in the south western boundary of the site. It is a single carriageway road subject to a 50 mph speed limit.
B4030 Middleton Stoney Road Middleton Stoney Road is a single carriageway bounding the west of Bicester in a south east to north west alignment. It is subject to the national speed limit until a point east of the Howes Lane/ Vendee Drive roundabout where the route is proposed to be traffic calmed as part of the SW Bicester development, and will then become a 30 mph route. Residential dwellings exist to the north of Middleton Stoney Road, with fields and new development to the south.
Shakespeare Drive Shakespeare Drive is a single carriageway connecting Middleton Stoney Road to the A4095 Howes Lane, dissecting a residential area of Bicester. It is subject to a 30mph speed limit and benefits from street lighting and a continuous footway on the western extent of the road. HGVs are restricted from using this route except for access.
16.4.2 BaselineTraffic Flows Baseline flows for the peak hours on links across the study area have been obtained from the Bicester Saturn Model 2012 Base Year. This gives AM and PM peak hour flows and these have been factored to give 12 hour and 18 hour flows using a factor of 4.330 and 5.188 respectively on the total of AM plus PM peak hour flows. The factors have been derived from ATC data collected locally to NW Bicester for NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 335
the Exemplar development Transport Assessment. The flows are set out in Table 16-5. Table 16-5 Base Year 2012 Traffic Flows
Link Ref
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Link Description
A41 northbound, N of M40 J9 A41 southbound, N of M40 J9 A41 Oxford Rd, S of A41 junction Vendee Drive, W of A41 junction A41, N of Pingle Drive Middleton Stoney Rd, W of Kings End Middleton Stoney Rd, W of Howes Lane Howes Lane, N of Middleton Stoney Rd Howes Lane, E of Shakespeare Drive Lords Lane, E of Bucknell Road Lords Lane, W of Banbury Road Bucknell Road, N of Lords Lane Bucknell Road, S of Howes Lane Banbury Road, N of Lords Lane A4095 E of Banbury Road Banbury Road, S of A4095 Buckingham Road, S of Skimmingdish Lane Queens Road, S of Bucknell Road A41 E of A41 Oxford Road A4421 Neunkirchen Way A41, E of London Road roundabout A4421, E of Skimmingdish Lane Shakespeare Drive, S of Howes Lane M40 J10 northbound off slip road Ardley Road (E of B430) M40 J10 southbound on slip road (from A43) B430 M40 over bridge A4095 N of Chesterton
Base Year 2012
1493 1109 2490 249 1678 846
12 Hour Flows 11705 10021 21878 2607 13745 7864
18 Hour Flows 14024 12005 26211 3123 16467 9422
556
655
5244
6283
618
697
5695
6822
750 891 1108 247 540 1117 1885 457
848 1056 1215 192 833 1186 1886 634
6920 8431 10060 1901 5946 9973 16330 4725
8291 10101 12052 2278 7123 11948 19565 5660
717
842
6751
8088
1035 2129 1370 2293 1471 142 482 207
1454 2265 1661 2396 1688 152 599 195
10779 19028 13126 20306 13680 1273 4681 1741
12913 22797 15725 24327 16389 1525 5608 2086
658
354
4382
5250
2184 602
2170 553
18855 5002
22589 5992
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
1210 1205 2562 353 1496 970
16.4.3 Severance and Pedestrian Amenity The majority of Bicester is located within a two mile distance of the development and therefore accessible by cyclists and those on foot, particularly given the flat topography of the town. T A detailed audit of pedestrian and cyclist facilities has been undertaken and is reported in Appendix 2 of the Access and Travel Strategy. The NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 336
pedestrian provision in the immediate vicinity of the Masterplan area is described below. On Lord’s Lane there is a footway aligning the entire southern extent of the A4095 carriageway between its roundabout convergences with Bucknell Road (to the south west) and the A4421 to the south east. At the junction of Bucknell Road with Lord’s Lane and Howes Lane pedestrian movements are limited by the bridge under the railway. The eastern footway on Bucknell Road is very narrow whilst the western footway ends in a verge immediately under the railway bridge. A pedestrian refuge is provided to the south of the junction although pedestrians wanting to walk from Bucknell Lane to the eastern arm of Howes Lane would either need to use the narrow section of footway on the eastern side or cross under the bridge in the middle of the two junctions with limited visibility. Howes Lane (A4095) is a single carriageway with a 50mph speed limit. There is no provision for pedestrians and cyclists or crossing facilities, with the exception of a footway on the south side of the road between Shakespeare Drive and Bucknell Road. Current severance issues therefore exist for pedestrians crossing the A4095 close to the Banbury Road junction and walking alongside the Howes Lane corridor although demand for these movements is low given the mainly rural nature of existing uses on the NW side of the A4095 corridor.
16.4.4 Existing Driver Delay The existing driver delay for the 2012 Base Year will be assessed by examining the current performance of the existing junctions during the morning and evening peak hours. The junctions that will be assessed in the Base Year are junction numbers 1-7, 13, 14, 20, 23 and 26-28.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 337
Figure 16-2: Junction Reference Numbers
16.4.5 Pedestrian Delay The IEMA Guidelines suggest that pedestrian delay is experienced at a lower threshold when pedestrians experience a 10 second delay crossing a carriageway with no crossing facilities for a two-way flow of 1,400 vehicles per hour. The upper threshold amounts to a 40 second delay, also where no crossing facilities exist. Table 16-6 sets out each link and identifies where pedestrian delay is likely to be currently experienced based on hourly traffic flows and provision for pedestrians. Table 16-6: Base Year Traffic Flows and Pedestrian Delay Link Ref
Link Description
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
Pedestrian Delay Commentary Delays likely but pedestrian routes limited Delays likely but pedestrian routes limited
1
A41 northbound, N of M40 J9
1210
1493
2
A41 southbound, N of M40 J9
1205
1109
2562
2490
Delays likely
353
249
Delays unlikely
1496 970
1678 846
Delays likely Delays unlikely
3 4 5 6
A41 Oxford Rd, S of A41 junction Vendee Drive, W of A41 junction A41, N of Pingle Drive Middleton Stoney Rd, W of
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 338
Link Ref
Link Description
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
Pedestrian Delay Commentary
556
655
Delays unlikely
618
697
Delays unlikely
750
848
Delays unlikely
891
1056
10
Kings End Middleton Stoney Rd, W of Howes Lane Howes Lane, N of Middleton Stoney Rd Howes Lane, E of Shakespeare Drive Lords Lane, E of Bucknell Road
11
Lords Lane, W of Banbury Road
1108
1215
12
Bucknell Road, N of Lords Lane Bucknell Road, S of Howes Lane
247
192
Delays unlikely Delays likely as limited crossing facilities Delays unlikely
540
833
Delays unlikely
14
Banbury Road, N of Lords Lane
1117
1186
15
A4095 E of Banbury Road
1885
1886
16
Banbury Road, S of A4095 Buckingham Road, S of Skimmingdish Lane Queens Road, S of Bucknell Road
457
634
Delays likely as limited crossing facilities Delays likely as limited crossing facilities Delays unlikely
717
842
Delays unlikely
1035
1454
Delays likely
7 8 9
13
17 18
Delays likely but pedestrian routes limited Delays likely but pedestrian routes limited Delays likely but pedestrian routes limited Delays likely but pedestrian routes limited
19
A41 E of A41 Oxford Road
2129
2265
20
A4421 Neunkirchen Way
1370
1661
2293
2396
1471
1688
142
152
Delays unlikely
482
599
Delays unlikely
207
195
Delays unlikely
658
354
No pedestrian access
21 22 23 24 25 26
A41, E of London Road roundabout A4421, E of Skimmingdish Lane Shakespeare Drive, S of Howes Lane M40 J10 northbound off slip road Ardley Road (E of B430) M40 J10 southbound on slip road (from A43)
27
B430 M40 over bridge
2184
2170
28
A4095 N of Chesterton
602
553
Delays likely but pedestrian routes limited Delays unlikely
16.4.6 Fear and Intimidation Table 16-7 demonstrate that the traffic flows associated with the road links being considered for this chapter currently fall within the 1,800 vehicles over an 18-hour period where the impact of fear and intimidation could be considered to be extreme. Those links that are categorised as ‘great’ in terms of degree of hazard are the strategic highways where pedestrian movements will be generally limited by their character and design (the A41and the M40 Junction 10 over bridge). A number of links in the vicinity of the proposed development may present a current moderate fear and intimidation NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 339
hazard including Lord’s Lane, Banbury Road (north of the A4095) and the A4095 east of Banbury Road. Table 16-7: Base Year Traffic Flows and Fear and Intimidation
1
A41 northbound, N of M40 J9
Average Flow over 18 hours 779
2
A41 southbound, N of M40 J9
667
Moderate
3
A41 Oxford Rd, S of A41 junction
1456
Great
4
Vendee Drive, W of A41 junction
174
-
5
915
Moderate
523
-
349
-
379
-
461
-
10
A41, N of Pingle Drive Middleton Stoney Rd, W of Kings End Middleton Stoney Rd, W of Howes Lane Howes Lane, N of Middleton Stoney Rd Howes Lane, E of Shakespeare Drive Lords Lane, E of Bucknell Road
561
-
11
Lords Lane, W of Banbury Road
670
Moderate
12
Bucknell Road, N of Lords Lane
127
-
13
Bucknell Road, S of Howes Lane
396
-
14
Banbury Road, N of Lords Lane
664
Moderate
15
A4095 E of Banbury Road
1087
Moderate
16
314
-
449
-
18
Banbury Road, S of A4095 Buckingham Road, S of Skimmingdish Lane Queens Road, S of Bucknell Road
19
A41 E of A41 Oxford Road
20
A4421 Neunkirchen Way A41, E of London Road roundabout A4421, E of Skimmingdish Lane Shakespeare Drive, S of Howes Lane M40 J10 northbound off slip road
Link Ref
6 7 8 9
17
21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Link Description
Ardley Road (E of B430) M40 J10 southbound on slip road (from A43) B430 M40 over bridge A4095 N of Chesterton
Fear and Intimidation Commentary Moderate
717
Moderate
1266
Great
874
Moderate
1352
Great
911
Moderate
85
-
312
-
116
-
292
-
1255 333
Great -
16.4.7 Accidents and Safety Personal injury accident (PIA) data was provided by Oxfordshire County Council for the period 1st January 2009 and 31st January NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 340
2014. The PIA study area includes all roads in the vicinity of the site, as set outlined in Drawing 16.1 (map of PIA area). There have been a total of 114 incidents with the study are over the 5 year period between January 2009 and January 2014; 98 slight, 14 serious and 2 fatal in severity. Tables 16-8 and 16.9 provide an overview of casualties and their severity. Of the two fatal accidents; one occurred in 2012 along the B4030 Middleton Stoney Road in which a HGV travelling southeast hit a pedestrian who had been jogging east on the footway, who for unknown reasons went into the carriageway; the second fatal accident occurred along Bucknell Road when a vehicle travelling southeast lost control and exited the carriageway, hitting a tree and killing both driver and child passenger. Table 16-8: All Accidents by Severity 2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
Total
Fatal
0
1
0
1
0
0
2
Serious
3
0
3
3
5
0
14
Slight
14
10
33
20
18
3
98
Total
17
11
36
24
23
3
114
Table 16-9: Casualties by Severity 2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
Total
Fatal
0
2
0
1
0
0
3
Serious
3
0
6
3
5
0
17
Slight
17
15
43
31
26
4
136
Total
20
17
49
35
31
4
156
There have been a total of 14 pedestrian accidents over the five year study period. Table 16-10 provides an overview of pedestrian accidents and their severity. The fatal pedestrian accident within this study period is as stated above (Middleton Stoney Road). A total of four serious accidents occurred within the study period, of which two accidents occurred along Buckingham road. Table 16-10: Pedestrian Accidents by Severity 2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
Total
Fatal
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
Serious
2
0
1
1
0
0
4
Slight
1
0
5
0
3
0
9
Total
3
0
6
2
3
0
14
There have been a total of 9 Cycle accidents recorded over the five year study period. Table 16-11 provides an overview of cycle NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 341
accidents and their severity. The majority of cycle accidents (8 of 9) were slight with only one severe accident and no fatal accidents during the study period. Table 16-11: Cycle Accidents by Severity 2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
Total
Fatal
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Serious
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
Slight
0
1
3
2
2
0
8
Total
0
1
3
2
3
0
9
16.5 Design and Mitigation 16.5.1 Construction The construction phase of development is anticipated to commence in 2019 and build out over approximately a 20 year period. As a large proportion of the construction traffic is anticipated to be heavy goods vehicles it is essential that residential areas are avoided during the course of construction by heavy goods vehicle drivers associated with the proposals. It is therefore considered appropriate to have a lorry routing agreement to ensure drivers use the peripheral road/A4095 and will be prohibited from passing through the centre of Bicester unless they are transporting locally sourced materials/goods. It is anticipated that, over the life of the construction period, virtually all construction traffic for the development will use the A41/Vendee Drive from the M40 Junction 9 and the A4421 around the eastern side of Bicester. It is anticipated that, over the life of the construction period, virtually all construction traffic for the will use the A41/ Vendee Drive from the M40 Junction 9 and the A4421 around the eastern side of Bicester. Each application for planning will detail the impacts of construction and the measures to mitigate them.
16.5.2 Operation The Access and Travel Strategy for NW Bicester is set out in the separate document. It is aimed to minimise the traffic impacts and subsequent environmental effects by:
Limiting the need to travel through the provision of a full mix of land uses and encouraging home working
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 342
Providing high quality walking and cycling linkages within the Masterplan and connections to the town and wider area
Providing high quality public transport in the form of a frequent, accessible and high quality bus service
Promoting sustainable travel and vehicle choices through a comprehensive set of travel measures including personalised travel planning, a car club etc.
Mitigation measures in conjunction with OCC at key junctions to reduce delays to drivers
Provision for pedestrian and cyclist movements at junctions and links to reduce severance
Seeking to route traffic away from the most sensitive areas through highway measures
16.6 Assessment of Effects The assessment of effects will be undertaken once the traffic impact analysis has been carried out. It is anticipated that there will be adverse impacts from traffic on routes within the study area, as would be expected with a development of this scale and a range of mitigation measures are under discussion. Mitigation measures will prioritise addressing the most sensitive areas and conditions for vulnerable road users.
16.7 Summary This will follow subsequent to the assessment of effects.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 343
17
Interrelationships and Cumulative Effects
17.1 Introduction This chapter assesses the potential cumulative effects of the development of the Masterplan Site for Bicester NW Bicester development, located to the north west of Bicester, hereafter known as ‘the proposed Development’. This Chapter aims to ensure the incremental effects resulting from the combined effects of various actions are assessed. Even though the effects of each action, when independently assessed, are considered insignificant, incrementally, the effects could be significant. This Chapter will address three main areas where there is potential for cumulative effects: 1 Bicester NW Bicester development Masterplan Site with other local developments 2 In-combination effects of Bicester NW Bicester development Masterplan Site on specific receptors
17.2 Technical Assumptions and Method Legislation and Planning Policy Context EC Directive 85/337/EEC requires assessment of “the direct effects and any indirect, secondary, cumulative, short, medium and long term, permanent or temporary, positive and negative effects of the project”. EC Directive 97/11/EC selection criteria for projects to be assessed include the “cumulation with other projects” and the “existing land use”. Schedule 3(1) of the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) Regulations 1999 state that “the characteristics of development must be considered, having regard, in particular to …b) the cumulation with other development”, Schedule 3(20) “the existing land use” and Schedule 4(4) “description of the development on the environment which should cover….cumulative effects.”
Guidance Documents The DCLG (2006, page 40) Environmental Impact Assessment: A guide to good practice and procedures (Ref 17-1) states that: “In the context of EIA, cumulative effects could refer to the combined effects of different activities within the vicinity or those of different aspects of a single development on a particular receptor”. This document identifies two types of cumulative effects: NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 344
Cumulative effects from different developments
Cumulative effects from different environmental features
There is no specific UK guidance on cumulative effects assessment but the European Commission has published the Guidelines for the Assessment of Indirect and Cumulative Impacts as well as Impact Interactions in 1999 (Ref 17-2). These guidelines provide information on methods, the assessment process and information needed to assess the impacts.
Spatial Scope The spatial scope for the assessment has taken into consideration the following:
Cumulative effects with other developments
Combined effects from impact interactions
This required the analysis of cumulative effects at two spatial scales. The area wide assessment considered the cumulative effects of the:
Cumulative effects with other developments in the vicinity of the site
The SER considered impacts from construction and operation, where individual impacts have the potential to cause impact interactions.
Methodology The assessment of cumulative effects consisted of two elements: Combined Effects with Other Developments
Other developments considered in the vicinity of the Masterplan Site where the proposed Development has potential for cumulative impacts are set out in Table 17-1 below. The developments included have been based on Oxfordshire County Council’s Bicester Transport Modelling Report (Ref 17-1), which included land use developments that were to be included in the modelling. Combined Effects of Individual Impacts
The combined effects of individual impacts from the proposed Development on a particular receptor have been assessed using the methodology as outlined in the EC guidelines and good practice accepted methodology.
Assessment of Effects As discussed above, there is no established guidance in the UK for assessing the significance of cumulative effects. For cumulative effects assessment, the key is to focus on the receptor and consider its capacity to accommodate the changes that are likely to occur NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 345
because of the proposed Development. Sensitive receptors have been identified in the technical chapters (Chapters 6 to 17). The existing status of these receptors, current trends and existing regulatory requirements were established in defining the baseline.
Significance Criteria The terms used to define significance of cumulative and residual impacts are as follows:
Adverse detrimental or negative impacts to an environmental resource or receptor
Negligible imperceptible impacts to an environmental resource or receptor; and
Beneficial advantageous or positive impact to an environmental resource or receptor.
Where beneficial or adverse impacts have been identified, these have been assessed against the following scales:
Minor
slight, very short or highly localised impact;
Moderate limited impact (by extent, duration or magnitude) which may be considered significant; and
Major considerable impact (by extent, duration or magnitude) of more than local significance or in breach of recognised acceptability, legislation, policy and standards.
Limitations The construction programmes for the Masterplan Site and other developments were not available during the preparation of the SER. It was not possible to do any quantitative predictions because of the uncertainty of overlaps in construction periods. Also, the traffic modelling data was not available when this SER was prepared and so cumulative impacts relating to air quality and noise could not be predicted.
17.3 Baseline Conditions The baseline for assessing cumulative effects considered the other proposed developments in the vicinity which are likely to have in combination effects with the proposed Development. The baseline also established the policy and planning context for the development, which identified likely developments in the future. These are discussed in more detail below. For the assessment of combined impacts and impact interactions during construction, the baseline has been established in the technical chapters where potential cumulative impacts have been NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 346
identified. This chapter presents a summary and identifies any other impact interactions.
17.4 Mitigation and Enhancement Measures Construction Mitigation The potential cumulative effects during construction are due to the combined effect of traffic generation, noise, vibration, visual impact and dust, as well as generation of waste during construction. These impacts are likely to be temporary and occur in the immediate vicinity of the site. A Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) will be prepared, which would be likely to reduce these impacts. Mitigation measures identified in the technical chapters will help mitigate impacts.
Operational Mitigation The Access and Travel Strategy for NW Bicester contains measures to minimise traffic impacts and subsequent environmental effects. For ecology, mitigation measures have been proposed to ensure that there would be no residual impacts on habitats and species present within the Masterplan Site, The development of the Masterplan Site and other sites in the Bicester wastewater treatment works catchment area have the potential to result in a cumulative excessive demand on the treatment capacity of the works and or the ability of the receiving watercourses to dilute resulting discharges of effluent. Further work is being undertaken to assess the treatment required. Cumulative impacts are not anticipated for landscape, visual, cultural heritage, and agriculture. Mitigation relating to air quality and noise will be identified when traffic data becomes available, as part of future EIAs. Mitigation measures as identified in the Waste Chapter would help reduce the development’s cumulative impact on waste.
17.5 Assessment of Cumulative Effects This assessment has considered the potential cumulative effects with other developments in the vicinity of the Masterplan Site. In most cases, detailed consideration of the combined effects of the proposed development together with other developments will be limited to others that have been constructed, are being constructed or those that have been granted consent. The list of Consented Schemes is presented in Table 17-1. To fully assess cumulative effects, it is also necessary to consider other planned developments and these Planned Schemes are presented in Table 17-2, as identified within the Cherwell Local Plan.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 347
Table 17-1
Consented Schemes near Masterplan Site
Project/ Description Developmen t South West Bicester (06/00967/OUT )
Status
Development of residential accommodation Under consisting of 1,631 units, 3.91ha employment space, Construction hotel, health village, secondary school and community hall. This development is around 2.3 km from the Masterplan Site. Additional 100 houses currently being considered.
Bicester Business Park (07/01106/OUT )
46,200 sqm employment development at Bicester Business Park, including relocation of Tesco store. This development is around 2.8 km from the Masterplan Site.
Planning Permission granted in 2010
Caversfield, 200 dwellings approximately 300m from the Fringford Road Masterplan Site (13/01056/OUT )
Planning appeal pending
RAF Bicester (new houses in Caversfield)
Under construction
197 dwellings from new build and conversion approximately 1km from the Masterplan Site.
Table 17-2 Planned Schemes
Policy
Strategic Site
Description
Policy Bicester 2
Bicester 2 Graven Hill
227.5ha predominantly brownfield site to the south of Bicester proposed for mixed use development of 1,900 dwellings, significant employment land providing for high quality job opportunities, associated services, facilities and other infrastructure including the potential for the incorporation of a rail freight interchange. This site is around 4 km south of the Masterplan Site. Approved subject to S106
Policy Bicester 3
South West Bicester Phase 2
Anticipated to accommodate 720 homes with associated services, facilities and other infrastructure within a 28.5ha site. This site is around 2.8 km south west of the Masterplan Site. Application going to Planning Committee imminently.
Policy Bicester 6
Bure Place Town Centre Redevelopment Phase 2
Anticipated to comprise the redevelopment at Bure Place to provide a new supermarket, cinema, restaurants, shops, car parking and bus interchange. CDC considering now that Phase 1 is open. This site is around 2.8 km south east of the Masterplan Site.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 348
Policy
Strategic Site
Description
Policy Bicester 8
Former RAF Bicester
Development would support heritage tourism uses, leisure, recreation, employment and community uses associated with the development of a museum to RAF Bomber Command. The development of hotel and conference facilities would also be supported as part of a wider package of employment uses. Plans being drawn up. This site is around 1.6 km south east of the Masterplan Site.
Policy Bicester 10
Bicester Gateway
Knowledge economy employment development to the south of the existing retail area (Wyevale Garden Centre), adjacent to the A41 on a 15ha site. This site is around 4 km south of the Masterplan Site.
Policy Bicester 11
North East Bicester Business Park
8ha Business Park development for employment use.
Policy Bicester 12
South East Bicester
A mixed use 40ha site for employment and residential development to the east of the ring road to the south east of Bicester. (800 houses/ 64,812sqm employment development)
This site is around 2.7 km south east of the Masterplan Site.
This site is around 4.3km south east of the Masterplan Site.
Most of the developments are at a distance of 1km or more from the Masterplan Site, except the proposal at Fringford Road, Caversfield and the new houses in the RAF Bicester site in Caversfield, which have the potential cumulative effects relating to traffic.
In combination effects of the Masterplan Site on specific receptors It is considered that construction works have the greatest potential for impact interactions. The combination of noise, visual and air quality impacts (dust and emissions from increased vehicle traffic) have the potential to cause significant adverse cumulative effects. Construction Effects It is considered that the construction phase of the proposed Development could have the greatest potential to contribute to combined impacts and impact interactions. During construction, potential impacts exist for sensitive receptors. The receptors considered to be most sensitive during the construction phase are the new residents of the completed phase (such as those residents in the Exemplar site, residents of the early development while the mid development phase is being constructed, and the residents of the NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 349
early and mid development while the later development is being constructed), pedestrians on the surrounding roads and residents of nearby residential areas adjacent to the eastern and northern boundaries of the Exemplar Site and users of the local road network. Criteria for identifying those receptors that are potentially sensitive include the nature of the receptor, proximity to the works and extent of exposure to impacts and impact interactions. Potential impact interactions are mainly related to noise, vibration, dust and traffic. Interactions will occur during the construction phase, therefore will be temporary effects. Operational Effects The assessment of operational effects considers the effect of the Development with other future developments. Cumulative effects during operation are likely to be effects on traffic and transport and air quality. There will be a beneficial cumulative impact on employment.
Topic Specific Cumulative Effects The following sections provide an assessment of the potential cumulative effects associated with each environmental topic and their likely significance. Landscape and Visual Impact Other committed developments in the vicinity of Bicester are separated from the existing urban area or other infrastructure such that there would be no cumulative impacts on the local landscape or visual amenity of north west Bicester. Ecology Other developments of relevance to this assessment are detailed in Table 17-1. The closest of these are two housing developments: a proposal for 200 dwellings at Caversfield, along Fringford Road approximately 300m from the Masterplan site; and the other, for 197 dwellings at RAF Bicester, Caversfield, which is currently under construction. The impact assessment concluded that, assuming the effective implementation of the mitigation measures outlined above, there would be no residual impacts on habitats and species present within the Masterplan site. It is not envisaged that the developments listed in Table 17-1 would lead to any direct impacts on the habitats and species associated within the Masterplan site. Therefore, together with the other developments, there would be no cumulative impacts on species and habitats. NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 350
There is potential for traffic associated with the new developments to contribute to impacts associated with air quality. This would be fully reviewed as part of future impact assessments, once traffic data are available. Hydrology Development of the Masterplan site, together with other sites in the Bicester wastewater treatment works catchment area, has the potential to result in a cumulative excessive demand on the treatment capacity of the works and/or the ability of the receiving watercourse(s) to dilute resulting discharges of effluent. Further work is underway to assess the treatment requirement. Alternative on site measures to treat effluent from the NW Bicester development are also being considered and these may become available to the proposed Masterplan development site in the future. If these become available, there will be no cumulative impacts arising from the proposed development on the Bicester wastewater treatment works; otherwise the infrastructure modelling currently underway will assess the need for an infrastructure upgrade. Similarly, the cumulative effects of all potential developments may be significant in terms of water supply. However, there is an aspiration to attain water neutrality, i.e. reducing overall demand to allow new development within the existing supply, and Thames Water has a long term water supply strategy to ensure demand can be met without harm to the environment. As indicated in Sections 7.6.1 and 7.6.2, the development of the site will not have any other permanent adverse effects on the water environment. There will, therefore, be no cumulative effects arising from this development and others planned in the area. Air Quality Cumulative effects from the proposed Development and other developments may have potential effects on air quality during both the construction and operation phases. There are likely to be cumulative effects of construction dust on new residents in the Exemplar Site and those from the earlier development phases during the construction of the mid and later development phases. Other committed developments within 1km of the site are also likely to be affected. Implementation of the suggested mitigation will result in a minor adverse cumulative effect. During the operational phase, the scale of the Masterplan development means there is potential for significant traffic generation with associated vehicle exhaust emissions. However, since cumulative traffic data is not currently available, these will be NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 351
assessed in more detail during the detailed planning application stage. Similarly, the other developments identified around Bicester also have potential for significant traffic generation with associated vehicle exhaust emissions. Further assessment work would be needed in order to predict the cumulative effects once detailed traffic data is available. Noise There is potential for cumulative noise effects from other consented developments in the area. There is potential for minor adverse cumulative effects associated with construction from other developments within 1km of the Masterplan Site. These would include the RAF Bicester housing site and the Fringford Caverswell site. The RAF Bicester site is already under construction and it is unlikely that there would be cumulative construction noise impacts when considered with the proposed Development. Cumulative impacts are most likely from increase in road traffic associated with other developments. However, since cumulative traffic data is not currently available, these will be assessed in more detail during the detailed planning application stage. Cultural Heritage All committed development in the vicinity of Bicester is separated from the Masterplan Area and therefore would not have any cumulative impacts on the archaeological resource within the site. Built Heritage The NW Bicester Development could result in a minor adverse cumulative effect on the setting of listed buildings and non-listed buildings within the vicinity of the Development. The design of the proposed Development would be in sympathy with adjacent built heritage assets to minimise these adverse effects. Historic Landscape The masterplan for the NW Bicester Development should retain key landscape features such as the line of field boundaries. There would be no cumulative effects on historic landscape associated with other developments, due to their distance from the site. Soils and Contamination
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 352
No likely cumulative effects with NW Bicester development and with other developments have been identified. Agriculture and Land Use A number of other developments proposed in the vicinity of Bicester have potential to impact on agricultural land. These include South West Bicester, which will result in a total loss of approximately 60ha of agricultural land and the Bicester Business Park will also result in the loss of Grade 4 agricultural land. As such, it is considered that the potential for cumulative effects on best and most versatile land is unlikely to be more than Moderate Adverse. Human Health There is potential to generate long-term beneficial cumulative effects on human health with the Exemplar Site and NW Bicester NW Bicester developments. There will be opportunities to establish sustainable patterns of living, promote greater levels of physical activity and establish a strong sense of community spirit and wellbeing within the NW Bicester development. There is also potential for beneficial cumulative effects related to human health with other developments. These include indirect benefits from provision of new schools, new civic buildings, new housing and new employment opportunities. Provision of associated infrastructure, including new cycling routes and transport infrastructure could provide benefits to physical activity. There is potential for adverse cumulative effects associated with traffic generation, and resultant air quality and noise impacts, although they are not likely to be significant with regards to human health effects. Socio Economics Other significant housing and employment related developments, combined with the Masterplan proposal, have potential to contribute to adverse cumulative impacts. These include the developments at Graven Hill, South West Bicester, Bicester Business Park and Bicester Village. Potential cumulative impacts could result in terms of disturbance and nuisance from construction activities and potential impact on key local amenities and potential demand and supply for construction materials and workforce. The prevalence of a number of other significant development proposals within and around Bicester will generate a significant combined increase in the critical mass of Bicester and the services and facilities that are contained within it. This will also result in a major beneficial cumulative effect. Waste
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 353
The cumulative impacts on the waste arisings and management of the Masterplan Site in Cherwell District and Oxfordshire County have been reviewed. There are numerous developments planned for the surrounding area that will have a cumulative impact throughout the construction and operation of the development. Sufficient data is not currently available on the levels of construction and operational waste likely to arise from these developments. However, due to the design and mitigation measures being implemented as part of the Development, it is anticipated that Slight Adverse cumulative effects would occur during the construction and operational phases of the development. Traffic and Transportation The potential for cumulative effects associated with the NW Bicester development is not assessed as traffic data is currently unavailable for this development.
17.6 Summary This chapter has considered cumulative effects associated with the Masterplan Site. The baseline for the assessment included other future developments in the vicinity. The potential cumulative effects with other developments are likely to be during the construction phase on traffic and transport, air quality and noise and vibration associated with the combined effect of construction vehicles and operation of machinery. No likely cumulative effects are anticipated during the operational phase of these other developments. Combined or impact interactions are likely to occur during the construction phase. Each environmental chapter has identified mitigation measures to reduce impacts. Following implementation of these mitigation measures, there may still be combined effects of noise from construction vehicles and road traffic, and dust emissions from construction vehicles and construction activities. Other combined or impact interaction effects are considered to be mostly negligible.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 354
Abbreviations AADT
Annual Average Daily Traffic
AAWT
Annual Average Weekly Traffic
ABI
Annual Business Inquiry
ALC
Agricultural Land Classification
AQLVs
Air Quality Limit Values
AQMA
Air Quality Management Area
AQS
Air Quality Strategy
BAP
Biodiversity Action Plan
BBOWT
Berkshire, Buckinghamshire and Oxfordshire Wildlife Trust
BGS
British Geological Society
BLHS
Bicester Local History Society
BMV
Best and Most Versatile
BMW
Biodegradable Municipal Waste
BRE
Building Research Establishment
CDC
Cherwell District Council
CD&E
Construction, Demolition and Excavation
CDM
Construction and Design Management Regulations
CEMP
Construction Environmental Management Plan
CHP
Combined Heat and Power
CIZ
Central Impact Zone
C&LG
Communities & Local Government
COSHH
The Control of Substances Hazardous to Health
CTA
Conservation Target Areas
DBA
Desk-based Assessment
DEFRA
Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs
DMRB
Design Manual for Roads and Bridges
DMV
Deserted Medieval Village
EA
Environment Agency
EHO
Environmental Health Officer
EIA
Environmental Impact Assessment
EQS
Environmental Quality Standards
EPO
Environmental Protection Officer
EPR
Environmental Permitting Regulations
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 355
EPS
European Protected Species
EPUK
Environmental Protection UK
ES
Environmental Statement
ETBS
Eco-town Biodiversity Strategy
FTE
Full Time Employment
GP
General Practitioner
GSV
Gas Screening Value
HAP
Habitat Action Plan
HER
Historic Environment Record
HIA
Health Impact Assessment
HWCN
Hazardous Waste Consignment Note
IEEM
Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management
IEMA
Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment
IfA
Institute for Archaeologists
IMD
Index of Multiple Deprivation
IVC
In Vessel Composting
JSA
Jobs Seekers Allowance
LAeq
Equivalent Noise Level
LAQM
Local Air Quality Management
LAQM.TG(09)
Local Air Quality Management Technical Guidance
LAs
Local Authorities
LBAP
Local Biodiversity Action Plan
LDF
Local Development Framework
LNR
Local Nature Reserves
LSOA
Lower Super Output Areas
LWS
Local Wildlife Site
MAFF
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food
MPS 2
Minerals Policy Statement 2
MRF
Materials Recovery Facility
NEC
Noise Exposure Category
NGR
National Grid Reference
NHS
National Health Service
NMR
National Monuments Record
NO2
Nitrogen dioxide
NOx
Total oxides of nitrogen
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 356
OCC
Oxfordshire County Council
OOS
Oxfordshire Ornithological Society
OS
Ordnance Survey
PIA
Personal Injury Accident
PM10
Particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of less than 10µm
PPE
Personal Protective Equipment
PPGs
Pollution Prevention Guidelines
PPG
Planning Policy Guidance
PPS
Planning Policy Statement
PRoW
Public Rights of Way
RoWIP
Rights of Way Improvement Plan
SAC
Special Area of Conservation
SAP
Species Action Plan
SDA
Severe Disablement Allowance
SGV
Soil Guideline Values
SPA
Special Protection Area
SPOSH
Significant possibility of significant harm
SRP
Soil Resources Plan
SSSI
Site of Special Scientific Interest
SuDS
Sustainable Drainage System
SWMP
Site Waste Management Plan
SWRP
Sustainable Waste and Resources Plan
TA
Transport Assessment
TVERC
Thames Valley Environmental Records Centre
UKBAP
United Kingdom Biodiversity Action Plan
WAC
Waste Acceptance Criteria
WFD
Waste Framework Directive
WIZ
Wider Impact Zone
WRAP
Waste & Resources Action Programme
ZoI
Zone of Influence
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 357
Glossary 100- and 1000-year events A means of identifying a likelihood of flooding, giving an estimate of how frequently a flood level or flow could be expected to occur. A 100-year event has a 1 in 100 (or 1%) chance of occurring in any one year. Aberford Series Name given to the soil type present across the area. Alluvium
Sediment deposited by rivers on adjacent land.
Ambient sound The totally encompassing sound in a given situation at a given time, usually composed of sound from all sources near and far. ARCADY Traffic capacity modelling software for roundabouts Audible range The limits of frequency which are audible or heard as sound. The normal ear in young adults detects sound having frequencies in the region 20 Hz to 20 kHz, although it is possible for some people to detect frequencies outside these limits. Background noise The term used to describe the noise measured in the absence of the noise under investigation. It is described as the average of the minimum noise levels measured on a sound level meter and is measured statistically as the A-weighted noise level exceeded for ninety percent of a sample period. This is represented as the L90 noise level. Best and Most Versatile Land (BMV) Land falling into Grades 1, 2 and 3a as determined under the Agricultural Land Classification system Blackwater Foul drainage which is treated for domestic or commercial purposes to supplement or replace mains water supply Brashy Term used to describe soils containing a high proportion of loose broken rock Calcareous Soils developed on, for example, limestone rocks which contain calcium carbonate Code for Sustainable Homes An environmental impact rating system for housing in England & Wales, setting new standards for energy and water efficiency, beyond those required for building regulations. Contaminated Land Any area which appears to be in such a condition, by reason of substances in, on or under the land that significant harm is being caused, or there is a significant possibility of such harm being caused, or significant pollution of controlled waters is being, or is likely to be, caused. Land that has been polluted or contaminated will not necessarily fall within the above legal definition of contaminated land. For an area of land to meet the NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 358
definition of contaminated land, a significant pollutant linkage must be established. A pollutant linkage consists of three parts; A source of contamination in, on or under the ground; A pathway by which the contamination is causing significant harm (or which represents a significant possibility of such harm being caused) and a receptor (of a type specified in the regulations). Contaminated Land Report 11 The model procedures for the Management of Land Contamination, CLR 11, have been developed to provide the technical framework for applying a risk management process when dealing with land affected by contamination. The process involves identifying, making decisions on, and taking appropriate action to deal with land contamination in a way that is consistent with government policies and legislation within the UK. Controlled Waters Risk Assessment A staged approach to define the level of risk to controlled water as Land contamination can affect groundwater, freshwater and coastal waters. Groundwater is particularly vulnerable to contamination as it underlies many sites and is difficult to clean up once polluted. Cyprinid fishery An EC designated fishery capable of supporting coarse fish. Decibel [dB] The level of noise is measured objectively using a Sound Level Meter. This instrument has been specifically developed to mimic the operation of the human ear. The human ear responds to minute pressure variations in the air. These pressure variations can be likened to the ripples on the surface of water but of course cannot be seen. The pressure variations in the air cause the eardrum to vibrate and this is heard as sound in the brain. The stronger the pressure variations, the louder the sound is heard. The range of pressure variations associated with everyday living may span over a range of a million to one. On the top range may be the sound of a jet engine and on the bottom of the range may be the sound of a pin dropping. Instead of expressing pressure in units ranging from a million to one, it is found convenient to condense this range to a scale 0 to 120 and give it the units of decibels. Demography population.
Study of both quantitative and qualitative aspects of human
dB(A): A-weighted decibels. The ear is not as effective in hearing low frequency sounds as it is hearing high frequency sounds. That is, low frequency sounds of the same dB level are not perceived to be as loud as high frequency sounds. The sound level meter replicates the human response of the ear by using an electronic filter which is called the "A" filter. A sound level measured with this filter switched on is denoted as dB(A). Practically all noise is measured using the A filter. The sound pressure level in dB(A) gives a close indication of the subjective loudness of the noise. Early Medieval Period
AD410 to 1066
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 359
Eco-development In accordance with PPS1: Eco-towns, the ecodevelopment is a development based on sustainability principles. The ecodevelopment referred to in this Environmental Statement relates to the proposed Exemplar and NW Bicester developments. EC Designated fishery A watercourse identified as maintaining fish and for which regular monitoring and reporting is undertaken by the Environment Agency Employed Persons who are working full-time or part-time during a specified payroll period. Temporary employees and those on paid-leave are included in this definition Environmental Protection Act 1990, Part IIA set up a system for the regulation of contaminated land in England and Wales. The regime provides a framework for identifying and remediating (cleaning up) contaminated land. Contaminated land is land that poses an unacceptable risk to human health or the environment through its current use. The Part 2A regime did not apply to radioactive contaminated land until it was extended in 2006. Erosion Movement of soil materials by water or wind action Exemplar development The first element of NW Bicester Ecodevelopment being progressed by P3 Eco (Bicester) Ltd and A2Dominion Group. The Exemplar is assessed in this Environmental Statement and is the development being progressed with the associated planning application. A development description is available in Chapter 3 of the Environmental Statement. Flood Estimation Handbook (FEH) A best practice approach to estimating flood runoff based on national records and statistical methods. Flood Zone 1 An area where flooding from watercourses or the sea is expected to occur less frequently than once in a thousand years (has less than a 0.1% chance of occurring in any one year). Flood Zone 2 An area where flooding from watercourses is expected to occur between once in a hundred years and once in a 1000 years, or from the sea between once in a two hundred years and once in a 1000 years Flood Zone 3 An area where flooding from watercourses is expected to occur more frequently than once in a hundred years or from the sea more than once in a two hundred years. Free-Field Refers to a situation in which the radiation from a sound source is completely unaffected by the presence of any reflecting surfaces. Full Time Employment hours or more a week.
Working full-time is defined as working 31
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 360
Ground Gas Risk Assessment Land contamination can give rise to volatile contaminants which can pose a risk of harm to human health by asphyxiation or illness if inhaled. Vapours and gases such as methane may also pose a risk of fire or explosion. Good practice in gas hazard evaluation and risk assessment is to assess how to apply these to particular situations. Assessing the degree of risk posed by methane and other gases from the ground is a key step in the feasibility appraisal of new developments and of remedial works for existing ones. Health Impact Assessment A process of assessing the impact of a project, plan or programme on human health and wellbeing. Heavy goods vehicles (HGV) Assumed to be buses, rigid trucks and semi trailer trucks with a weight greater than 3 tonnes. Also heavy vehicles can be defined in terms of length as buses, or trucks with a length exceeding 5.25 metres. Hide A measurement of land for tax assessment used in the Domesday Book. Approximately 120 acres, depending on local variations. Housing Tenure Nature of an occupant's legal estate in a tract of land (freehold or leasehold) which indicates whether the occupant is an owner or tenant. Human Health Risk Assessment The human health risk assessment process is used to establish the risk to humans and aims to provide a methodology (consistent with CLR 7-11) that supports quantitative risk assessment by deriving site specific assessment criteria to assess chronic risks to human health from land contamination and the site is evaluated according to dither the existing use or to a proposed development. Land contamination can affect the health of people living, working, visiting or otherwise present on a site. Industry of Employment The sector of employment, defined by the Standard Industrial Classification of employment (2007) ISIS A computer modelling package used to estimate flows and flood levels in rivers. JFLOW A computer package used to give a broad estimate of flood levels Job Seekers Allowance JSA claimant count records the number of people claiming Jobseekers Allowance (JSA) and National Insurance credits at Jobcentre Plus local offices. People claiming JSA must declare that they are out of work, capable of, available for and actively seeking work during the week in which the claim is made. Ln noise descriptors. Because noise varies with time, a single noise value cannot adequately define the noise ambient. For this reason, the NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 361
acoustic environment is described using a number of noise level descriptors (as used in this report) as follows; L10 The sound pressure level that is exceeded for 10% of the time for which the given sound is measured. L90 The level of noise exceeded for 90% of the time. The bottom 10% of the sample is the L90 noise level expressed in units of dB(A). Leq Equivalent sound pressure level - the steady sound level that, over a specified period of time, would produce the same energy equivalence as the fluctuating sound level actually occurring. LAmax The maximum RMS A-weighted sound pressure level occurring within a specified time period. Leaching Movement of components of the soil to deeper depths as a result of water movement down through the soil Loamy A term used to describe soil texture when there is a mix of sand, silt and clay within the soil Loudness A rise of 10 dB in sound level corresponds approximately to a doubling of subjective loudness. That is, a sound of 85 dB is twice as loud as a sound of 75 dB which is twice as loud as a sound of 65 dB and so on. Microphone An electro acoustic transducer which receives an acoustic signal and delivers a corresponding electric signal. Main River A designated river where the Environment Agency has powers to carry out flood defence works Medieval Period
1066 to 1540
Modern period
1914 to present
Noise
Sound which a listener does not wish to hear.
NW Bicester The wider eco-development being progressed by P3 Eco and A2Dominion Group. This comprises a 416 hectare site to the north west of Bicester. NW Bicester is not a committed development at present, but is considered in the cumulative effects assessment in this Environmental Statement as a future development in the area. Occupation A person’s occupation is coded from the response to the question asking for the full title of the Main job and the description of what is done in that job. It is coded to the 2000 edition of the Standard Occupational Classification (SOC).
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 362
Ordinary watercourse A (usually small) watercourse which does not form part of a main river. Maintenance of an ordinary watercourse is the responsibility of the riparian owner but local authorities have permissive powers to carry out flood defence works Post-medieval period Prehistoric period
AD1540 to AD1914
Pre 30,000BC to AD43
Rainwater Harvesting Collecting, storing and using rainwater for domestic or commercial purposes to supplement or replace mains water supply Roman Period
AD42 to AD410
Salmonid fishery and similar fish.
An EC designated fishery capable of supporting trout
Sensitive Receptors People or places that have the potential to experience impacts. Shared Accommodation A house in multiple occupation Silage Fodder harvested whilst green and kept succulent by partial fermentation Soil Guideline Values are scientifically based generic assessment criteria to help evaluate long-term risks to human health from chemical contamination in soil. Soil Quality The ability of a soil to provide a given function or functions (such as supporting crop growth, allowing water infiltration and storage to mitigate flood risk etc.) Standardised Mortality Rate This rate is calculated by dividing the number of deaths by the actual local population in a particular age group multiplied by the standard population for that particular age group and summing across the relevant age groups. Suckler cows Cows belonging to a meat breed or born of a cross with a meat breed, and belonging to a herd intended for rearing calves for meat production Subsoil Lower layers of soil lying between the topsoil and the material (solid rock or sediment) on which the soil has developed Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) A sequence of water management practices and facilities designed to drain surface water in a manner that will provide a more natural and sustainable approach than what has been the conventional practice of routing run-off through a pipe to a watercourse. NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 363
Topsoil The upper layer of soil generally containing the majority of plant roots. Often distinguished from lower layers by colour. Unemployment A person is defined as unemployed if he or she is not in employment, is available to start work in the next 2 weeks and has either looked for work in the last 4 weeks or is waiting to start a new job. This is consistent with the International Labour Office (ILO) standard classification. Unshared Accommodation space
A dwelling consisting of one household
Waste Data Flow A waste analysis programme used by local authorities to log waste arisings within their district Worklessness Worklessness is a less familiar term than unemployment to describe those who are economically inactive. The economically inactive are people of working age who are not working, not in full-time education or training and are not actively seeking work.
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 364
References Chapter 1: Introduction Ref 1-1 Department for Communities and Local Government, July 2009. Planning Policy Statement (PPS): eco-towns Ref 1-2
Department for Communities and Local Government, January 2005. Planning Policy Statement 1: Delivering Sustainable Development
Ref 1-3
Department for Communities and Local Government, July 2009. Eco-towns Location Decision Statement
Ref 1-4
Department for Communities and Local Government, March 2012, National Planning Policy Framework
Chapter 2: The Purpose of the Scheme Ref 2-1 Department for Communities and Local Government, July 2009. Planning Policy Statement (PPS): eco-towns Ref 2-2 Cherwell District Council, February 2010. Draft Core Strategy Ref 2-3 Cherwell District Council, August 2010. Eco Bicester – One Shared Vision Chapter 3: Alternatives Considered Ref 3-1
Department for Communities and Local Government, July 2009. Eco-towns Location Decision Statement
Chapter 5: Landscape and Visual Impact Ref 5-1
Council of Europe (2000); ‘European Landscape Convention’.
Ref 5-2
Department of Communities and Local Government (2012); ‘National Planning Policy Framework’.
Ref 5-3
Cherwell District Council (2014) ‘The Cherwell Local Plan Submission’.
Ref 5-4
Landscape Institute and Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment (2002); 'Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment: 2nd Edition', Spon Press.
Ref 5-5
Countryside Agency (1999); ‘Countryside Character’.
Ref 5-6
Cherwell District Council (1995); ‘Cherwell District Landscape Assessment’.
Ref 5-7
Oxfordshire County Council (2004); ‘Oxfordshire Wildlife and Landscape Study’.
Ref 5-8
WYG Planning & Environment (2013); Bicester Landscape Sensitivity and Capacity Assessment’.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 365
Ref 5-9
Countryside Agency and Scottish Natural Heritage (2002); ‘Landscape Character Assessment Guidance for England and Scotland’.
Chapter 6: Ecology Ref 6-1 Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the United Kingdom (version 7 July 2006), Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management, 2006 http://www.ieem.net/ecia/index.html Ref 6-2 Oxfordshire’s Biodiversity Action Plan and Conservation Target Areas. Oxfordshire County Council Ref 6-3 Protecting and Enhancing Cherwell’s Natural Environment Corporate Biodiversity Action Plan 2013–2014, Cherwell District Council North Oxfordshire Ref 6-4 http://magic.defra.gov.uk/About_MAGIC.htm Ref 6-5 British Red Data Books:2 Insects, JNCC, 1987 Ref 6-6 British Red Data Books:3 Invertebrates other than insects, JNCC, 1991 Ref 6-7 Royal Society for the Protection of Birds The population status of birds in England, RSPB, 2013 Ref 6-8 Designing for Biodiversity: a technical guide for new and existing buildings 2nd Edition, RIBA Publishing, 2013 Ref 6-9 The predation of wild birds in the UK: a review of its conservation impact and management RSPB Research Report no 23, RSPB, Sandy, 2007 Chapter 7: Flood Risk and Hydrology Ref 7-1
Hyder Consulting (2014) North West Bicester Eco-Town Flood Risk Assessment
Ref 7-2
Hyder Consulting (2014) North West Bicester Eco-Town Surface Water Drainage Strategy
Ref 7-3
Hyder Consulting (2014) North West Bicester Eco-Town Water Cycle Study Detailed Report
Ref 7-4
CH2M Hill (2013) ISIS River Modelling Software package
Ref 7-5
Institute of Hydrology (1999) Flood Estimation Handbook
Ref 7-6
Centre for Ecology and Hydrology (2006) Flood Estimation Handbook CD-ROM Version 3.0
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 366
Ref 7-7
Hyder Consulting (2010) NW Bicester development- Phase 1 Desk Study
Ref 7-8
Environment Agency Water Framework Directive interactive map (accessed via http://www.environmentagency.gov.uk/homeandleisure/37793.aspx)
Ref 7-9
Highways Agency (2009) Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) - Volume 11, Section 3, Part 10 Road Drainage and the Water Environment: HD 45/09
Ref 7-10 Environment Agency Flood Mapping (accessed via http://www.environmentagency.gov.uk/homeandleisure/37793.aspx) Ref 7-11 Environment Agency (2009) Thames River Basin Management Plan Ref 7-12 Environment Agency (various dates) Pollution Prevention Guidelines. Accessed via www.netregs.gov.uk Ref 7-13 CIRIA (2005) C650 Environmental Good Practice on Site and (2001) C532 Control of Water Pollution from Construction Sites Chapter 8: Air Quality Ref 8-1
The Air Quality Strategy for England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, DEFRA, 2007
Ref 8-2
Planning Policy Statement 23: Planning and Pollution Control, Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, 2004
Ref 8-3
Cherwell Local Plan, Cherwell District Council, 1996.
Ref 8-4
Guidance on the assessment of dust from demolition and construction, Institute of Air Quality Management, 2014.
Ref 8-5
Development Control: Planning for Air Quality, Environmental Protection UK, 2010.
Ref 8-6
Local Air Quality Management Technical Guidance, (TG09) DEFRA, 2009
Ref 8-7
Biomass and Air Quality Guidance for Local Authorities, Environmental Protection, UK, 2010
Chapter 9: Noise Ref 9-1
Policy Planning Guidance 24 – Planning and Noise (PPG 24). Department for Communities and Local Government.
Ref 9-2
BS 5228: 2009 - Noise and Vibration Control on Construction and Open Sites (2009) Part 1-Noise, Part 2 – Vibration HMSO
Ref 9-3
Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Volume 11, Section 3, Part 7 (HA 213/08).
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 367
Ref 9-4
BS 4142: 1997 Method for rating of industrial noise affecting mixed residential and industrial areas; (1997) HMSO
Ref 9-5
BS5672-1: 2008 ‘Guide to evaluation of vibration in buildings: Vibration sources other than blasting’
Ref 9-6
Department of Transport and Welsh Office Calculation of Road Traffic Noise (CRTN) HMSO, 1988
Ref 9-7
TRL Report ‘Converting the UK traffic noise index LA10,18-hr to EU noise indices for noise mapping’ (2002)
Ref 9-8
Guidelines for noise impact assessment’ (IEMA/IOA 2002)
Chapter 10: Cultural Heritage Ref 10-1 Code of Conduct. Institute for Archaeologists, Institute for Archaeologists. (2008a). Ref 10-2 Standards and Guidance for Desk-Based Assessment. Institute for Archaeologists (2008b). Ref 10-3 Standards and Guidance for Field Evaluation. Institute for Archaeologists (2008c), Ref 10-4 DMRB Volume 11, Section 3, Part 2 Highways Agency et al (2007). Ref 10-5 Cox (2010) Ref 10-6 Cherwell District Council Landscape Assessment (1995) Chapter 11: Contaminated Land Ref 11-1 Hyder Consulting (UK) Ltd., 2010. NW Bicester Eco-town. Phase 1 Desk Study. Report Number 2501-UA001881-UP33R-01. Hyder Consulting Ltd, Cardiff. Ref 11-2 Hyder Consulting (UK) Ltd., 2010. NW Bicester development. Geotechnical Interpretative Report - Masterplan. Report Number 2507-UA001881-UP33R-01. Ref 11-3 Hyder Consulting (UK) Ltd., 2013. NW Bicester NW Bicester development. Groundwater Supply : Feasibility Study, Technical Briefing Note. Report Number 5040-UA005241-UP31R-01. Ref 11-4 DEFRA 2012, “Environmental Protection Act 1990: Part 2A. Contaminated Land Statutory Guidance”, London: DEFRA Ref 11-5 DEFRA and Environment Agency, 2004, “Model Procedures for the Management of Contaminated Land. R&D Publication CLR 11”, Bristol: Environment Agency Ref 11-6 DEFRA and Environment Agency, 2002, “The Contaminated Land Exposure Assessment Model (CLEA): technical basis and NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 368
algorithms, R&D Publication CLR 10”, Bristol: Environment Agency. Ref 11-7 Land Quality Management (LQM) and Chartered Institute of Environmental Health (CIEH), 2007. Generic Assessment Criteria for Human Health Risk Assessment. Ref 11-8 The results of monitoring have been assessed using the current guidance document: CIRIA C665 “Assessing Risks Posed by Hazardous Ground Gases to Buildings”. Ref 11-9 BS8485:2007 “Code of Practice for the Characterization and Remediation from Ground Gas in Affected Developments”. Ref 11-10 HSE, 1991: Protection of workers and the general public during development of contaminated land, guidance. HMSO, London. Ref 11-11 BRE Report BR211: Radon – Guidance on Protective Measures for New Buildings. Chapter 12: Agriculture and Land Use Ref 12-1 Safeguarding our soils. A strategy for England, DEFRA, 2009. Ref 12-2 Construction Code of Practice for the Sustainable Use of Soils on Construction Sites, DEFRA, 2009. Ref 12-3 National Planning Policy Framework, DLCG, 2012. Ref 12-4 The Cherwell Local Plan, Cherwell District Council, 2014. Ref 12-5 Agricultural Land Classification of England and Wales. Revised guidelines and criteria for grading the quality of agricultural land. MAFF, 1988. Ref 12-6 Soil Survey of England and Wales 1:250 000 Soil Maps. Ref 12-7 National Soil Resources Institute Soils Site Report (prepared July 2010). Chapter 13: Human Health Ref 13-1 Scott-Samuel, Alex, Birley, Martin and Ardern, Kate (May 2001) The Merseyside Guidelines for Health Impact Assessment Ref 13-2 Department for Communities and Local Government. National Planning Policy Framework. March 2012 Ref 13-3 Oxfordshire County Council. Eco-Bicester One shared vision. December 2010 Ref 13-4 Cherwell District Council. The Cherwell Local Plan Proposed Submission. January 2014 Ref 13-5 Cherwell District Council. Cherwell Local Plan (1996) Saved Policies. NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 369
Ref 13-6 Cherwell District Council. Non-Statutory Cherwell Local Plan 2011 Ref 13-7 Cherwell District Council. Draft Core Strategy. February 2010. Ref 13-8 European Policy Health Impact Assessment – A Guide (May, 2004) Ref 13-9 Director of Public Health Annual Report for Oxfordshire, Annual Report VI (May 2013) Ref 13-10 Oxfordshire County Council, NHS Oxfordshire (March 2013) Joint Strategic Needs Assessment Ref 13-11 Hunt, Dobson, Stringer (October, 2010) NW Bicester, Social Infrastructure Provision Ref 13-12 Public Health England (September 2013) Cherwell Health Profile Ref 13-13 Neighbourhood Statistics http://www.neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk Ref 13-14 Department of Health (2004) At least five a week. Evidence on the impact of physical activity and its relationship to health. A Report from the Chief Medical Officer. London Ref 13-15 Diabetes UK. Diabetes in the UK 2014: key statistics on diabetes. A Report from Diabetes UK Ref 13-16 Director of Public Health Annual Report for Oxfordshire, Annual Report IV (June 2010) Ref 13-17 Department of Health (2009) Be Active: Be Healthy: A Plan for Getting the Nation Moving Ref 13-18 Department of Communities and Local Government (2007) Indices of Deprivation http://www.imd.communities.gov.uk/InformationDisplay.aspx Ref 13-19 Department for Transport (2012) Core Accessibility Indicators Ref 13-20 Cherwell District Council, Cherwell Green Spaces Strategy 2008 – 2016. Ref 13-21 Ferrie, JE, Shipley, MJ, Marmot, MG, Stansfield,S,A and Smith, GD (1998) An Uncertain Future: The Health effects of Threats to Employment Security in White-Collar Men and Women, American Journal of Public Health, Vol. 88, No. 7. Ref 13-22 London Councils (2006) The Control of Dust and Emissions from Construction and Demolition. Best Practice Guidance Ref 13-23 European Environment Agency (2010) Good Practice Guide on Noise Exposure and Potential Health Effects Ref 13-14 Barnes, G (January, 2005) A Health Impact Assessment of the A5225 Wigan Gateway Road Proposal, A Report for the NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 370
Director of Public health, Ashton, Leigh and Wigan Primary Care Trust and the Director of Engineering Wigan Borough Council Ref 13-15 The Marmot Review (February, 2010) Fair Society, Healthy Lives Ref 13-16 Stafford, M, Chandola, T and Marmot, M (2007) Association Between Fear of Crime and Mental Health and Physical Functioning, American Journal of Public Health, Vol. 97, No. 11. Ref 13-17 House of Commons Environmental Audit Committee (2010) Air Quality Fifth Report of Session 2009 – 2010 Ref 13-18 NHS Executive, AEA Technology (2000) On the Move, Informing Transport Health Impact Assessment in London. Ref 13-19 Maas, J et al (2006) Green space, urbanity and health: how strong is the relation? Journal of Epidemiology and Public Health, 2006, 60, 587-592. Ref 13-20 http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Healthcare/Mentalhealth/Publicmental healthandwellbeing /index.htm Ref 13-21 Sustrans.org.uk. National Cycle Routes. Accessed February 2014 Chapter 14: Socio-Economics and Community Ref 14-1 Planning Policy Statement Eco-towns – A supplement to PPS1 (2009) Ref 14-2 National Planning Policy Framework (2012) Ref 14-3 Cherwell Local Plan Submission Version (January 2014) Ref 14-4 NW Bicester Draft Economic Development Strategy (February 2014), SQW Consultants Ref 14-5 NW Bicester Draft Economic Baseline (August 2013), SQW Consultants Ref 14-6 The Design Manual for Roads and Bridges, Vol. 11, Highways Agency Ref 14-7 ‘Developing Effective Economic Strategies for Eco-Towns’ (2009), Town and Country Planning Association, Department of Communities and Local Government Ref 14-8 Office of National Statistics (ONS) Mid-Year Population Estimates Ref 14-9 Housing Strategy for Older People (2010-2015), Cherwell District Council Ref 14-10 Strategic Housing Market Assessment (December 2012), B.Line Housing Information NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 371
Ref 14-11 Open Space, Sport and Recreational Facilities Needs Assessment Audit and Strategy (2011), PMP Ref 14-12
HCA Guidelines
Ref 14-13 NW Bicester Eco-Town Demographic Profile Report, Barton Willmore, November 2013. Ref 14-14
Cherwell Economic Analysis Study (2012)
Chapter 15: Waste Ref 15-1 Waste Framework Directive, Directive [2008/98/EC] of the European Parliament and of the Council on waste. Ref 15-2 PPS 10: Planning for Sustainable Waste Management Ref 15-3 PPS: Eco-Towns – A Supplement to PPS1 Ref 15-4 Oxfordshire Joint Municipal Waste Management Strategy, Oxfordshire Waste Partnership (2007) Ref 15-5 National Review of Waste Policies, DEFRA (2011) Ref 15-6 Waste Strategy for England (2007) Ref 15-7 CD&E Waste: Survey of Arisings and Use of Alternatives to Primary Aggregates in England (2005). Ref 15-8 http://www.wrap.org.uk/swmp Ref 15-9 The Nature and Scale of Waste Produced by Schools in England, WRAP (June 2008) Chapter 17: Traffic and Transport Ref 16-1 Institute of Environmental Assessment (IEA), 1994. Guidelines for the Environmental Assessment of Road Traffic Ref 16-2 Department for Transport, 2008 Building Sustainable Travel into New Developments: A Menu of Options for Growth Points and Eco-towns. Ref 16-3 Communities and Local Government, 2008 Design to Delivery: Eco-towns Transport Worksheet Advice to Promoters and Planners. Ref 16-4 Oxfordshire County Council, 2011, Local Transport Plan Ref 16-5 Oxfordshire County Council, 2010, Oxfordshire Local Investment Plan
NW Bicester- Masterplan Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 372
Chapter 17: Cumulative Effects Ref 17-1 DCLG (2006) Environmental Impact Assessment: A guide to good practice and procedures, A consultation paper. Ref 17-2 Hyder Consulting (1999) Guidelines for the Assessment of Indirect and Cumulative Impacts as well as Impact Interactions. Prepared for the European Commission, EC DG X1 Environment, Nuclear Safety and Civil Protection.
NW Bicester – Strategic Environmental Report- Volume 1: Main Text Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited-2212959
Page 373
Related Documents
Chile 1pdf
December 2019 139
Theevravadham 1pdf
April 2020 103
Majalla Karman 1pdf
April 2020 93
Ser
April 2020 23
Ser
May 2020 22
Ser
October 2019 30More Documents from "Walter"
Sem-3.docx
April 2020 1
5001-ua005241-ue1r-01 Ser Volume 1.pdf
April 2020 0